BREAKING: Obama demands GM CEO resign

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Kevin, surely even YOU cannot be blind to the market panic that occurred when Lehamn Bros. filed for bankruptcy.

Compare the importance of Lehman Bros to a company like AIG or GM. Not even close. The market would be in negative value right now if the government had not stepped in and unemployment would be in the 20% range. We would be in another depression. Our economy would have collapsed and would have taken the world's economy with it. Thanks largely in part to the government stopping that from happening, we have not hit that point and we will not hit that point.

Your wish for the government to be asleep at the wheel of the economy and let things happen for themselves is a wish for us all to fail. Most if not all of us would be unemployed and poor. The FDIC would be insolvent and banks would fail everywhere.

This is what fiscal conservatives and fiscal libertarians want. Please think about that before associating your ideas with any of theirs.

No one is saying it would have been a pleasant experience to let the market correct itself, but propping up a phony economy for a little while longer is only going to bring about a bigger bust in the future. Eventually the government is not going to be able to step in and we'll have no choice but to take our medicine then, and we'll be wishing that we took it now.

You're talking about armageddon. There wouldn't an economy anymore. The United States of America would cease to exist. Yes, I would definitely call that an unpleasant experience.

This "sky-is-falling" rhetoric is nonsense. Look into the recession of 1920 - 1921 where the government essentially allowed the market to correct itself, and the recession only lasted about a year.

 

[dilloduck]

Kevin, surely even YOU cannot be blind to the market panic that occurred when Lehamn Bros. filed for bankruptcy.

Compare the importance of Lehman Bros to a company like AIG or GM. Not even close. The market would be in negative value right now if the government had not stepped in and unemployment would be in the 20% range. We would be in another depression. Our economy would have collapsed and would have taken the world's economy with it. Thanks largely in part to the government stopping that from happening, we have not hit that point and we will not hit that point.

Your wish for the government to be asleep at the wheel of the economy and let things happen for themselves is a wish for us all to fail. Most if not all of us would be unemployed and poor. The FDIC would be insolvent and banks would fail everywhere.

This is what fiscal conservatives and fiscal libertarians want. Please think about that before associating your ideas with any of theirs.

No one is saying it would have been a pleasant experience to let the market correct itself, but propping up a phony economy for a little while longer is only going to bring about a bigger bust in the future. Eventually the government is not going to be able to step in and we'll have no choice but to take our medicine then, and we'll be wishing that we took it now.

You're talking about armageddon. There wouldn't an economy anymore. The United States of America would cease to exist. Yes, I would definitely call that an unpleasant experience.

bullshit---pure bullshit.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Where does a business get money? Through private citizens. Where does the government get money? Through private citizens.

The government IS a corporation. The biggest one in the world. The CEO is Barack Obama and the board of directors is Congress.

There is nothing socialistic about the government loaning people money. We've been doing it since the 1960s when the SBA was founded to help loan money to small businesses.

Private citizens choose to buy from a private business, whereas the government forces them to pay taxes. There's no threat of being arrested and thrown in jail if you choose not to buy an iPod, or whatever.

A minor difference that has absolutely no bearing on this situation. The taxpayers do not have a constitutional right to decide how the government spends money.

The government does not have a constitutional right to bail out failed businesses, and the taxpayers have every right to demand that the government not spend their money unconstitutionally.

 

[Ravi]

That might be true of a "demand" but he can certainly ask! If he weren't a HYPOCRITE that is.

Really, Willow? So you've gone totally against state's rights because Obama is now president? You're the hypocrite.

No! there's not a damn thing from obamalama saying Schwartzie "I think" you should step down before accepting any taxpayer money.. but he could not say "Schwarzie I demand that you resign" there's a diff see? but never fear obamalama won't do that cause he's a HYPOCRITE. just like you

No, the president doesn't ask an elected official to step down unless the elected official is charged with some gross perversion...and even then, it is the duty of the party leaders or the state party leaders or the voters to ask that question. The president has no business in interfering with state or local elections. If you weren't so blind you could see that. However, a company that is run into the ground to the point of needing Federal taxpayer money is a valid reason to ask for a resignation.

I have NO DOUBT in my mind that you would be congradulating a republican for similiar actions.

 

[WillowTree]

Really, Willow? So you've gone totally against state's rights because Obama is now president? You're the hypocrite.

No! there's not a damn thing from obamalama saying Schwartzie "I think" you should step down before accepting any taxpayer money.. but he could not say "Schwarzie I demand that you resign" there's a diff see? but never fear obamalama won't do that cause he's a HYPOCRITE. just like you

No, the president doesn't ask an elected official to step down unless the elected official is charged with some gross perversion...and even then, it is the duty of the party leaders or the state party leaders or the voters to ask that question. The president has no business in interfering with state or local elections. If you weren't so blind you could see that. However, a company that is run into the ground to the point of needing Federal taxpayer money is a valid reason to ask for a resignation.

I have NO DOUBT in my mind that you would be congradulating a republican for similiar actions.

And I have no doubt that when obamalama decides to ask a public official to step down you will back him 100% being the HYPOCRITE you are.

 

[Ravi]

No! there's not a damn thing from obamalama saying Schwartzie "I think" you should step down before accepting any taxpayer money.. but he could not say "Schwarzie I demand that you resign" there's a diff see? but never fear obamalama won't do that cause he's a HYPOCRITE. just like you

No, the president doesn't ask an elected official to step down unless the elected official is charged with some gross perversion...and even then, it is the duty of the party leaders or the state party leaders or the voters to ask that question. The president has no business in interfering with state or local elections. If you weren't so blind you could see that. However, a company that is run into the ground to the point of needing Federal taxpayer money is a valid reason to ask for a resignation.

I have NO DOUBT in my mind that you would be congradulating a republican for similiar actions.

And I have no doubt that when obamalama decides to ask a public official to step down you will back him 100% being the HYPOCRITE you are.

That's you Willow. The president does not have the right to ask for the resignation of state or local officials. Get back to me when it happens.

 

[xsited1]

i think this is a good thing because mr. obama has extensive experience working in the private sector.

Can't rep you for that right now...

 

[xsited1]

If a company thinks its necessary to ask for government help, why should the CEO stay?

In the private market, when a restructuring occurs, they usually fire the CEO and hire a new guy. How is this any different? Why should the taxpayer fund a management team that brought the company to the brink of insolvency?

If you want the government to act more like a private business, this is what private business does.

I had to read your post 3 times just to make sure I understood what you typed. Do you really believe this? Do you not see this as a huge power grab by the government? This is a war on Capitalism and the American way of life.

What, and asking for a bailout is part of capitalism and the American way of life? GM sticking out its hand and asking for billions in taxpayers money is a part of capitalism and the American way of life?

This is simple - If GM went to private investors to pony up the money they need, the investors would almost certainly fire the guy at the top. That most definitely is part of capitalism and the American way of life.

Frankly, there hasn't been enough people fired at the top who have lead their institutions to the brink of ruin.

When you make a deal with the Devil, this is what happens.

 

[DavidS]

No one is saying it would have been a pleasant experience to let the market correct itself, but propping up a phony economy for a little while longer is only going to bring about a bigger bust in the future. Eventually the government is not going to be able to step in and we'll have no choice but to take our medicine then, and we'll be wishing that we took it now.

You're talking about armageddon. There wouldn't an economy anymore. The United States of America would cease to exist. Yes, I would definitely call that an unpleasant experience.

This "sky-is-falling" rhetoric is nonsense. Look into the recession of 1920 - 1921 where the government essentially allowed the market to correct itself, and the recession only lasted about a year.

Nonsense? You still haven't admitted a known fact: The collapse of Lehman Brothers caused a massive market panic and sell off that brought our economy from a mild recession to a severe recession. Lehman Brothers is nothing compared to Citibank, AGI or GM. If one or more of them would have collapsed we would be in an economic depression right now.

Please don't compare the recession of World War 1, which was a mild recession due to an influx of soldiers returning home from WW1 and a lack of jobs, to the current major recession which was caused by mortgage backed securities failing and a housing market bubble bursting. That's like saying a paper cut is the same thing as a gunshot wound to the heart.

With just a Lehman Brothers collapse, we are in the worst economy since the Great Depression. Any other collapse of more important companies and all bets are off the table.

Waiting for the market to straighten itself out implies there still would be a market left. There wouldn't be one.

 

[DavidS]

Private citizens choose to buy from a private business, whereas the government forces them to pay taxes. There's no threat of being arrested and thrown in jail if you choose not to buy an iPod, or whatever.

A minor difference that has absolutely no bearing on this situation. The taxpayers do not have a constitutional right to decide how the government spends money.

The government does not have a constitutional right to bail out failed businesses, and the taxpayers have every right to demand that the government not spend their money unconstitutionally.

Constitutional right? Are you saying it is illegal for the government to loan money to private citizens and corporations? So every single Pell Grant, every single Student Loan, every single research grant, every single SBA loan that the government has made is illegal? Is that what you're saying?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You're talking about armageddon. There wouldn't an economy anymore. The United States of America would cease to exist. Yes, I would definitely call that an unpleasant experience.

This "sky-is-falling" rhetoric is nonsense. Look into the recession of 1920 - 1921 where the government essentially allowed the market to correct itself, and the recession only lasted about a year.

Nonsense? You still haven't admitted a known fact: The collapse of Lehman Brothers caused a massive market panic and sell off that brought our economy from a mild recession to a severe recession. Lehman Brothers is nothing compared to Citibank, AGI or GM. If one or more of them would have collapsed we would be in an economic depression right now.

Please don't compare the recession of World War 1, which was a mild recession due to an influx of soldiers returning home from WW1 and a lack of jobs, to the current major recession which was caused by mortgage backed securities failing and a housing market bubble bursting. That's like saying a paper cut is the same thing as a gunshot wound to the heart.

With just a Lehman Brothers collapse, we are in the worst economy since the Great Depression. Any other collapse of more important companies and all bets are off the table.

Waiting for the market to straighten itself out implies there still would be a market left. There wouldn't be one.

The market's ability to make swift adjustments without much drama was vividly illustrated only a few weeks ago when the very large investment bank, Lehman Brothers, was allowed to go belly up. The world did not come to an end. Instead, this was a healthy development. A money loser was eliminated from the market. This freed up resources to promote growth.

One could have made the case that when Lehman was on the brink it was too big to fail — assets of $639 billion and employing over 26,000 people. Yet in a few days the market, once allowed to do the job, reallocated the good pieces of Lehman to various buyers and the bad parts have vanished. It was poetry.

The Rescue Package Will Delay Recovery - Frank Shostak - Mises Institute

As I said before, propping up a phony economy only causes more problems in the long run, and your Chicken Little act doesn't change that. The market must be allowed to correct itself or the next bust will be worse than this one, and so on until the government is finally unable to intervene and the correction that occurs then will be far worse than anything we could expect now. Also, there will always be a market, because people will always need things they don't have.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

A minor difference that has absolutely no bearing on this situation. The taxpayers do not have a constitutional right to decide how the government spends money.

The government does not have a constitutional right to bail out failed businesses, and the taxpayers have every right to demand that the government not spend their money unconstitutionally.

Constitutional right? Are you saying it is illegal for the government to loan money to private citizens and corporations? So every single Pell Grant, every single Student Loan, every single research grant, every single SBA loan that the government has made is illegal? Is that what you're saying?

Yes. Read the Constitution.

FindLaw: Cases and Codes: U.S. Constitution

 

[manu1959]

who is the new gm......anyone wanna bet they appoint some dude....pay him a dollar then call him up to the hill and insult him on national tv......

 

[manu1959]

The CEO won't care! He was working for nothing anyway.. If obamalama dosen't make the unions make concessions it will all be money pissed away. the American auto industry cannot comptete with the Asians.

leave it to the dingbat to think the problem is the unions.

cause the failed CEO's sure deserve their golden parachutes

every single union employee gets a golden parachute.....

 

[Agnapostate]

I had to read your post 3 times just to make sure I understood what you typed. Do you really believe this? Do you not see this as a huge power grab by the government? This is a war on Capitalism and the American way of life.

That's a stunningly ironic remark, considering the necessary role of government as a stabilizing agent in a capitalist economy. (As with the role of protection of infant industries as an element of strategic trade policies...which Toro hasn't seemed to understand.) But given the irritatingly prevalent "government=socialism" fallacy, such remarks should perhaps be expected.

 

[DiveCon]

If a company thinks its necessary to ask for government help, why should the CEO stay?

In the private market, when a restructuring occurs, they usually fire the CEO and hire a new guy. How is this any different? Why should the taxpayer fund a management team that brought the company to the brink of insolvency?

If you want the government to act more like a private business, this is what private business does.

but do you want the government telling corps who they should hire and fire?

because that is basicly what just happened

 

[DiveCon]

The CEO won't care! He was working for nothing anyway.. If obamalama dosen't make the unions make concessions it will all be money pissed away. the American auto industry cannot comptete with the Asians.

leave it to the dingbat to think the problem is the unions.

cause the failed CEO's sure deserve their golden parachutes

actually, its a combination of things, some the CEO's had no control over
and yes, the Unions also make it hard for companies to adjust

 

[elvis]

If a company thinks its necessary to ask for government help, why should the CEO stay?

In the private market, when a restructuring occurs, they usually fire the CEO and hire a new guy. How is this any different? Why should the taxpayer fund a management team that brought the company to the brink of insolvency?

If you want the government to act more like a private business, this is what private business does.

but do you want the government telling corps who they should hire and fire?

because that is basicly what just happened

If the govt is not a majority owner in the co, how does he call the shots?

 

[DiveCon]

Does this mean that as we continue to see piss poor financial management from our federal government and continue to see deficits drive our economy into the ground that we can expect Obama's resignation? I'm thinking that fair is fair and if our economy keeps tumbling then we should yank the leadership at the top.

Please make him take the congresscritters with him when he goes.

Why ?--he's doing all this without them.

but they are helping him do it

 

[DiveCon]

this a scary move. you blind bats on the left can't even see the implications of this....tell me...why doesn't obama ask elected officials who have run their state/local budgets below ground to resign? answer me that.....

curious....

He has no constitutional authority to do so.

he had no constitutional authority to ask GM's CEO to resign, he did it anyway