Bailing out GM vs. Banks

[Truthseeker420]

I'm often puzzled by those on the left. For example, those on the Occupy Wall Street side wish to destroy corporate America but favor larger governemnt. What do they want, do they want to destroy them so that the government can bail them out again?

Then there is GM. Everyone on the left supports bailing out GM, however, when you talk about bailing out the banks it makes their blood boil.

Why?

Trillions of dollars in welfare to wealthy bankers that didn't save any jobs vs a few billion in loans that saved millions of jobs.

 

[GHook93]

My blood never boils, but the answer is pretty simple. The banks were motivated by greed and dishonest deals, GM was, and is, a victim of the downturn caused by the banks, investment firms, and the rating industry.

So what then happened to Ford, Mitsubshi (cars made in US), Toyota (also in US), Honda (made in US), Hyundia (Made in US), Mazada (US), BMW, Audi, Kia etc. The UAW is there downfall, same with Chyrsler and they almost brought down Ford.

With all their faults, trade unions have done more for humanity than any other organization of men that ever existed"[/b] Clarence Darrow

There are many times in history that a group or item is good, but then becomes toxic! Unions are that. At first they were necessary and did some good. Eventually they got ripe with corruption and have caused more harm then good! Their powers need to be stripped. There should be no public unions and right to work should be the law of the land!

 

[Votto]

I'm often puzzled by those on the left. For example, those on the Occupy Wall Street side wish to destroy corporate America but favor larger governemnt. What do they want, do they want to destroy them so that the government can bail them out again?

Then there is GM. Everyone on the left supports bailing out GM, however, when you talk about bailing out the banks it makes their blood boil.

Why?

Trillions of dollars in welfare to wealthy bankers that didn't save any jobs vs a few billion in loans that saved millions of jobs.

Right. As we know, government creates jobs, so why bail out the banks?

Could Obama be a Zionist Jew?

 

[Underhill]

As has been pointed out, Ford never received a bail out. In fact, this is not the first time GM has been bailed out.

Those on the left make it sound as if the workers at GM are more righteous than the workers at the banks. This is idiotic. Granted, the upper management may be criminals but why take that out on all the workers and why prop up that criminal management with a bail out?

It has nothing to do with the workers and everything to do with what they produce.

Auto companies are one of the few remaining industries we have in this country. They create massive amounts of wealth. Banks do not create anything.

And I find it funny that conservatives fail to see the difference as it's the exact same line they draw between private industry and the government. The only real difference between government (at least as it should be) and the banks, is their motivation.

Banks don't create wealth? That is absurd. They feed great many workers and make profits to boot. So they don't make cars, so what? I would like to see GM try to function without the help of banks. That would be comical.

I didn't say that don't serve a purpose. But they do not create wealth any more than the government does. They simply move money around in attempt to make money on the work of others, including the auto industry.

Do you understand what I mean by wealth creation? You start with a hunk of wood and create a chair. The $10 hunk becomes a $50 chair.

Banks simply move money where it can make the most money via other peoples work. Necessary yes, but no wealth creation. Essentially the same as the government who takes money from some and gives it to others who spend it. Does it do good? Of course, but it doesn't create wealth in and of itself.

 

[Votto]

It has nothing to do with the workers and everything to do with what they produce.

Auto companies are one of the few remaining industries we have in this country. They create massive amounts of wealth. Banks do not create anything.

And I find it funny that conservatives fail to see the difference as it's the exact same line they draw between private industry and the government. The only real difference between government (at least as it should be) and the banks, is their motivation.

Banks don't create wealth? That is absurd. They feed great many workers and make profits to boot. So they don't make cars, so what? I would like to see GM try to function without the help of banks. That would be comical.

I didn't say that don't serve a purpose. But they do not create wealth any more than the government does. They simply move money around in attempt to make money on the work of others, including the auto industry.

Do you understand what I mean by wealth creation? You start with a hunk of wood and create a chair. The $10 hunk becomes a $50 chair.

Banks simply move money where it can make the most money via other peoples work. Necessary yes, but no wealth creation. Essentially the same as the government who takes money from some and gives it to others who spend it. Does it do good? Of course, but it doesn't create wealth in and of itself.

I think I understand. So companies like GM use up our valuable finite resources to produce an item that immediately starts to depreciate in value and ends up as waste in a junk yard somewhere. Nice.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

My blood never boils, but the answer is pretty simple. The banks were motivated by greed and dishonest deals, GM was, and is, a victim of the downturn caused by the banks, investment firms, and the rating industry. The loss of the regulatory structure has caused greed to run rampant. And while GM needs to manage it assets and its wage and retirement benefits better, GM contributes to America because a great deal is still made here. Now the question becomes why do Americans not support America by buying American? The Japanese and Koreans support their businesses through collaboration etc, but the right wing in America hates the government so much they will screw the American worker to somehow or someway get back at government, a paradoxical situation.

Have you ever even once heard a right wing newscaster praise America and its workers? Have you ever heard a right wing conservative, republican, or conservative libertarian say buy American? Have you? Why not? Buy American - support all Americans, including yourself.

Buy American = "Because Ford, GM and Chrysler conduct far more of their research, design, engineering, manufacturing and assembly work in the U.S. than foreign automakers do, buying a Ford, GM, or Chrysler supports almost three times as many jobs as buying the average foreign automobile. Some comparisons are even more striking. Buying a Ford supports 3.5 times more jobs than buying a Hyundai. Comparing a Honda and a Hyundai? Buying a Honda supports more than 2 times more jobs." The Level Field Institute

"With all their faults, trade unions have done more for humanity than any other organization of men that ever existed" Clarence Darrow

.

Sweet Jesus this is a whole lot of garbage.
GM - victims???
So what your saying is if a company has union members and they fail - they are victims.
But if they do not - they are evil bastards...got it.

And only "rightwing nuts" are buying foreign goods???????? What a pile of steamy excrement you are disemboweling today.

Wow...

 

[Underhill]

Banks don't create wealth? That is absurd. They feed great many workers and make profits to boot. So they don't make cars, so what? I would like to see GM try to function without the help of banks. That would be comical.

I didn't say that don't serve a purpose. But they do not create wealth any more than the government does. They simply move money around in attempt to make money on the work of others, including the auto industry.

Do you understand what I mean by wealth creation? You start with a hunk of wood and create a chair. The $10 hunk becomes a $50 chair.

Banks simply move money where it can make the most money via other peoples work. Necessary yes, but no wealth creation. Essentially the same as the government who takes money from some and gives it to others who spend it. Does it do good? Of course, but it doesn't create wealth in and of itself.

I think I understand. So companies like GM use up our valuable finite resources to produce an item that immediately starts to depreciate in value and ends up as waste in a junk yard somewhere. Nice.

And that has what to do with the conversation? The question was asked, what is the difference. I explained.

Banks are a dime a dozen. They provide nothing a dozen other banks couldn't also provide. GM and the auto industry are important assets to our economy.

 

[Votto]

I didn't say that don't serve a purpose. But they do not create wealth any more than the government does. They simply move money around in attempt to make money on the work of others, including the auto industry.

Do you understand what I mean by wealth creation? You start with a hunk of wood and create a chair. The $10 hunk becomes a $50 chair.

Banks simply move money where it can make the most money via other peoples work. Necessary yes, but no wealth creation. Essentially the same as the government who takes money from some and gives it to others who spend it. Does it do good? Of course, but it doesn't create wealth in and of itself.

I think I understand. So companies like GM use up our valuable finite resources to produce an item that immediately starts to depreciate in value and ends up as waste in a junk yard somewhere. Nice.

And that has what to do with the conversation? The question was asked, what is the difference. I explained.

Banks are a dime a dozen. They provide nothing a dozen other banks couldn't also provide. GM and the auto industry are important assets to our economy.

I could care less how many banks and auto makers there are out there. Who cares? I could also care less how negatively they would effect the economy if they went under, because this is just pure speculation.

I still fail to realize why we should bail out GM and let everyone else go under.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

It still amazes me no matter how many times you say bankruptcy does NOT mean a company goes out of business -- people still think that is what it means.
The ONLY reason the Obama administration bailed out GM was to save the UAW. If GM went into bankruptcy, the courts would have dismissed any union contracts. (obviously)
And THAT is why this administration prevented them from going broket.

 

[saveliberty]

Most things depreciate, did you have a point Votto? How much better is using $85 billion a month to prop up the banking system? That is another important difference. The subsidies to the auto industry have ended. The ones to banks continue.

 

[Caroljo]

My blood never boils, but the answer is pretty simple. The banks were motivated by greed and dishonest deals, GM was, and is, a victim of the downturn caused by the banks, investment firms, and the rating industry. The loss of the regulatory structure has caused greed to run rampant. And while GM needs to manage it assets and its wage and retirement benefits better, GM contributes to America because a great deal is still made here. Now the question becomes why do Americans not support America by buying American? The Japanese and Koreans support their businesses through collaboration etc, but the right wing in America hates the government so much they will screw the American worker to somehow or someway get back at government, a paradoxical situation.

Have you ever even once heard a right wing newscaster praise America and its workers? Have you ever heard a right wing conservative, republican, or conservative libertarian say buy American? Have you? Why not? Buy American - support all Americans, including yourself.

Buy American = "Because Ford, GM and Chrysler conduct far more of their research, design, engineering, manufacturing and assembly work in the U.S. than foreign automakers do, buying a Ford, GM, or Chrysler supports almost three times as many jobs as buying the average foreign automobile. Some comparisons are even more striking. Buying a Ford supports 3.5 times more jobs than buying a Hyundai. Comparing a Honda and a Hyundai? Buying a Honda supports more than 2 times more jobs." The Level Field Institute

"With all their faults, trade unions have done more for humanity than any other organization of men that ever existed" Clarence Darrow

.

Highlighted above is BS! You actually think they're a VICTIM? Lol!

I know this is from 2011, but it's no different today.....

Less than two years after getting a U.S. government bailout, General Motors is handing out bonuses that, in some cases, could exceed 50% of workers' salaries.

GM received a bailout of $50 billion by the U.S. government, starting in early 2009, a plan that included giving the government a 61% stake in the company.

The government recouped much of this money when it sold GM shares during the automaker's successful initial public offering in November. But about $27 billion in bailout funds remain unpaid.
GM Bonuses To Exceed 50% Of Some Salaries

So why the bonus's when they still owe the government back? Why should anyone get bonus's until they're out of debt?

They're no better or worse than the banks....where their big shots get paid high dollars no matter what.

Do you know how we could have gotten the economy going again? If Obama had taken ALL that bailout money, including everyone, not just GM.....and given it to every taxpayer in the country. They could have gotten out of debt (most anyway) and money would have started flowing again. But now we'll never know....

 

[saveliberty]

GM was the vicitim of bad management that let unions create an unsustainable retirement and benefit scheme. That and over capacity. It was self inflicted completely.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

GM et al were not victims of anything but, their own mgt.


Their poor mgt. , an adversarial workforce and poor design and marketing all of which at the end of the day fall on managements shoulders.

They gave in to the UAW time after time, poor car design, craftsmanship, slack and in fact stupid financing rules ( example- GMAC now Allied) etc. .

In my time here there have been any number of unsupported declarations from both sides of the aisle. One set of idiots is determined to believe Clinton was a liberal instead of the ReagaNUT his official record proves him to be, while Halfwit America will go to their graves convinced Reagan was a conservative instead of the New Dealer his record proves him to be.

But the cluelessness evident in NOT connecting GM's collapse to the collapse of faith in America's bankers by people who matter (no, that isn't anyone posting here) is almost exotic in its absolute lack of understanding of both finance and business.

Carry on. This is almost as funny as Faux News.

 

[Trajan]

And let me add, any references to GM as profitable etc. are illusions.

The government just sold a bunch more GM stock for a huge loss!

I know.


also, consider-

When I look through recent disclosures made by General Motors, I think of Monty Python’s John Cleese in the famous “dead parrot” sketch:

Looking at available “facts”, General Motors today is not technically “dead”—however, alarm bells are ringing off the hook.

In 2012, consolidated Automotive revenues grew by slightly less than 1 % from $ 148.9 billion to $ 150.3 billion. Automotive gross margin fell from a puny 12.4% in 2011 to 6.7%, in 2012. Operating income before goodwill impairment charges fell from $ 6.9 billion to an operating loss of $ 3.2 billion. Pretax income after all charges plummeted from $ 6.0 billion to a staggering loss of $ 30.3 billion. Moreover, these consolidated results were produced while the largest unit, GM North America, increased its capacity utilization rate from 95.6% to 97.5%.

No manufacturing business is viable at such levels for long and few American businesses have already been as coddled by various governments.

If you cannot sell/lease vehicles when money is essentially free, how can you hope to do so as rates correct back up as they have started to do since July 2012?

Analysis that is more complete will have to wait until the first week of March when GM releases its Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Rest assured that informed investors will not be celebrating even if entrenched unions, managers and politicians dare to gloat.

Bailing out a structurally challenged vehicle producer using borrowed taxpayer funds, without fully addressing competitive weaknesses has not restored the fortunes of General Motors.

Read more: Presidents Day: Government vacations, Islamists flourish, GM flounders | Washington Times Communities
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter

 

[Votto]

So will the taxpayers bail out GM a third time or will they finally see the light and just let the go peacefully this go round?

 

[Trajan]

the taxpayers won't have squat to say about it....and probably, yes.

 

[AmyNation]

I highly doubt GM will get another bailout.

However I think we need to remember that we aren't isolated, and our companies must compete not just with other American companies but other countries as well. Does that mean we should bailout every struggling company? No. But it's a fine line we walk in insuring our companies play on a level field and compromising our own principals.

 

[PaulS1950]

If GM has to file for bankruptcy the the union contracts will be renegotiated, management will get an overhaul and the business will have start making real profit or it will be sold or disolved.
The only thing that can keep GM alive is to market a product that is as good as the others for a price that is comparable and do so at a profit. If they can't do that then they don't have the support it takes to stay in business. The people who work there will find some jobs with the other manufacturers and others will have to find something else to do. The other manufacturers will have to make up for the volume of cars that GM was selling so their businesses will grow.

 

[Trajan]

If GM has to file for bankruptcy the the union contracts will be renegotiated, management will get an overhaul and the business will have start making real profit or it will be sold or disolved.
The only thing that can keep GM alive is to market a product that is as good as the others for a price that is comparable and do so at a profit. If they can't do that then they don't have the support it takes to stay in business. The people who work there will find some jobs with the other manufacturers and others will have to find something else to do. The other manufacturers will have to make up for the volume of cars that GM was selling so their businesses will grow.

yup...creative destruction.


and not every co. does or is meant to or should survive 100 years.....I read somewhere that there were only 45 older than 40 years.....whats that say?

 

[Votto]

I highly doubt GM will get another bailout.

However I think we need to remember that we aren't isolated, and our companies must compete not just with other American companies but other countries as well. Does that mean we should bailout every struggling company? No. But it's a fine line we walk in insuring our companies play on a level field and compromising our own principals.

I'm not only certain that they will need another one, I'm certain that they will get one.