Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
GM's Profits are Still a Huge Net Loss For Taxpayers - Megan McArdle - Business - The Atlantic
This is a good story and a very bad event.
The GOP is going to have a field day with this stuff in 2012
This has been covered.
Technically speaking, GM does not owe the government money. They have an ownership stake. Same as if you buy stock in Microsoft, Microsoft does not "Owe you money." It doesn't work that way.
If the government sold today they'd lose in the range of $6-$10B. But the purpose of the rescue was not to turn a profit. It was to save 200-some-odd thousand manufacturing jobs for the U.S. It appears the taxpayer will ultimately make a profit, but that wasn't the motivation.
The move was necessary and successful.
GM's Profits are Still a Huge Net Loss For Taxpayers - Megan McArdle - Business - The Atlantic
This is a good story and a very bad event.
The GOP is going to have a field day with this stuff in 2012
This has been covered.
Technically speaking, GM does not owe the government money. They have an ownership stake. Same as if you buy stock in Microsoft, Microsoft does not "Owe you money." It doesn't work that way.
If the government sold today they'd lose in the range of $6-$10B. But the purpose of the rescue was not to turn a profit. It was to save 200-some-odd thousand manufacturing jobs for the U.S. It appears the taxpayer will ultimately make a profit, but that wasn't the motivation.
The move was necessary and successful.
So a better outcome would have been having the auto industry collapse and having former tax payers on un-employment lines?
GM was not a solvent business and continues in insolvent business practices. A market depends on poor performers being weeded out just as much as upon solid performers thriving. In order to promote the UAW, trillions were looted from taxpayers. The result is a fascist conglomerate of the federal government (true fascism, for the democrats in the audience) and General Motors.
The best outcome for the economy would have been to let the taxpayers keep their money and GM to live within the realities of their business practices. Instead, trillions were added to the national debt, further undercutting the value of the American dollar on the world market whilst promoting inefficient and unsustainable business practices.
GM got a break with the Japan Earthquake, their competitors are severely damaged. This will give them breathing room. But the typical UAW practices will ensure that such respite is short lived.
GM paid back the loan. The government still has equity in the company.
^Neither of those is a lie.
Kind of like a pea and shell game, isn't it?
GM's Profits are Still a Huge Net Loss For Taxpayers - Megan McArdle - Business - The Atlantic
This is a good story and a very bad event.
The GOP is going to have a field day with this stuff in 2012
This has been covered.
Technically speaking, GM does not owe the government money. They have an ownership stake. Same as if you buy stock in Microsoft, Microsoft does not "Owe you money." It doesn't work that way.
If the government sold today they'd lose in the range of $6-$10B. But the purpose of the rescue was not to turn a profit. It was to save 200-some-odd thousand manufacturing jobs for the U.S. It appears the taxpayer will ultimately make a profit, but that wasn't the motivation.
The move was necessary and successful.
Untrue. GM received Bail Out Loans from the TARP funding.
No private investors had the means nor the inclination to do so.
Trillions? I thought the most GM got was 50 Billion?
This has been covered.
Technically speaking, GM does not owe the government money. They have an ownership stake. Same as if you buy stock in Microsoft, Microsoft does not "Owe you money." It doesn't work that way.
If the government sold today they'd lose in the range of $6-$10B. But the purpose of the rescue was not to turn a profit. It was to save 200-some-odd thousand manufacturing jobs for the U.S. It appears the taxpayer will ultimately make a profit, but that wasn't the motivation.
The move was necessary and successful.
Untrue. GM received Bail Out Loans from the TARP funding.
The loans are paid back.
Listen, folks. The facts in the case are not in question here.
Were there loans? Yes.
Was there a stock purchase? Yes.
Does the taxpayer own a portion of GM? Yes.
Have the loans been paid back? Yes.
If the government sold the stock today, would they lose money? Yes. To the tune of $6-$10 Billion.
but...
Does GM owe the government money? Answer: No. They do not.
If you're against the government owning private stock no matter what the circumstances, fine, that's one thing. But GM does not, by anyone's definition, 'Owe' the government anything.
The loans are paid back.
This has been covered.
Technically speaking, GM does not owe the government money. They have an ownership stake. Same as if you buy stock in Microsoft, Microsoft does not "Owe you money." It doesn't work that way.
If the government sold today they'd lose in the range of $6-$10B. But the purpose of the rescue was not to turn a profit. It was to save 200-some-odd thousand manufacturing jobs for the U.S. It appears the taxpayer will ultimately make a profit, but that wasn't the motivation.
The move was necessary and successful.
Untrue. GM received Bail Out Loans from the TARP funding.
The loans are paid back.
Listen, folks. The facts in the case are not in question here.
Were there loans? Yes.
Was there a stock purchase? Yes.
Does the taxpayer own a portion of GM? Yes.
Have the loans been paid back? Yes.
If the government sold the stock today, would they lose money? Yes. To the tune of $6-$10 Billion.
but...
Does GM owe the government money? Answer: No. They do not.
If you're against the government owning private stock no matter what the circumstances, fine, that's one thing. But GM does not, by anyone's definition, 'Owe' the government anything.
Untrue. GM received Bail Out Loans from the TARP funding.
The loans are paid back.
Listen, folks. The facts in the case are not in question here.
Were there loans? Yes.
Was there a stock purchase? Yes.
Does the taxpayer own a portion of GM? Yes.
Have the loans been paid back? Yes.
If the government sold the stock today, would they lose money? Yes. To the tune of $6-$10 Billion.
but...
Does GM owe the government money? Answer: No. They do not.
If you're against the government owning private stock no matter what the circumstances, fine, that's one thing. But GM does not, by anyone's definition, 'Owe' the government anything.
THOSE LOANS HAVE NOT BEEN PAID BACK MAM
hell they used tarp money to pay the first 5 billion back
Why go to this level of denial?
Opinion
Did General Motors Really Repay Its Taxpayer Bailout?
By Sen. Charles "Chuck" Grassley
Published April 23, 2010
| FOXNews.com
Print Email Share Tweet
General Motors announced this week that it repaid its multibillion-dollar taxpayer-backed TARP loans. GM even bragged that it was able to repay the taxpayers in full, with interest, ahead of schedule, because more customers are buying [GM] vehicles. There was great fanfare, including expensive, around-the-clock GM TV commercials nationwide. But, the hype is not the reality. In fact, GM did not repay the loans with money it earned from selling cars. Instead, GM repaid the TARP loans with money it withdrew from another TARP fund at the Treasury Department.
The day before the GM story broke, Neil Barofsky, the government TARP watchdog, testified before the Senate Finance Committee. He explained that GM did not use earnings to repay its TARP debt. The April quarterly report to Congress from his office stated: The source of funds for these quarterly [debt] payments will be other TARP funds currently held in an escrow account.
GM filings with the SEC reveal that GM was paying 7 percent interest on a $6.7 billion TARP debt. The filings also confirm that the source of funds for GMs debt repayments was a multibillion-dollar TARP-funded escrow account at Treasury; that means it was taxpayer money not earnings.
Read more: Did General Motors Really Repay Its Taxpayer Bailout? - FoxNews.com
No, they are not. GM played a shell game with taxpayer money.
And they were allowed to keep tens of $millions of net operating losses (which should have been voided in the bankruptcy proceedings) meaning they aren't paying taxes.
What a great deal for the Ameri....errrr UNIONS!
Untrue. GM received Bail Out Loans from the TARP funding.
The loans are paid back.
Listen, folks. The facts in the case are not in question here.
Were there loans? Yes.
Was there a stock purchase? Yes.
Does the taxpayer own a portion of GM? Yes.
Have the loans been paid back? Yes.
If the government sold the stock today, would they lose money? Yes. To the tune of $6-$10 Billion.
but...
Does GM owe the government money? Answer: No. They do not.
If you're against the government owning private stock no matter what the circumstances, fine, that's one thing. But GM does not, by anyone's definition, 'Owe' the government anything.
No, they are not. GM played a shell game with taxpayer money.
And they were allowed to keep tens of $millions of net operating losses (which should have been voided in the bankruptcy proceedings) meaning they aren't paying taxes.
What a great deal for the Ameri....errrr UNIONS!
No. GM owes the tax payers nothing. The US Government bought a large amount of GM stock to infuse capital into the company.
Ah, not the taxpayer, but our rulers?
We are but assets to be used as Dear Leader sees fit, right?
It was the lack of supply chain that a collapse of GM would have created.
Further evidence that leftists have no concept of business.
So in your alleged mind, Ford and GM both go down to "Transmissions R Us" and pick up parts off the shelf to put cars together?
No, and..No. kthx.Also, do you think their is any chance Toyota, Hyundai or Ford might have actually bought GM? In fact, wasn't the REAL fear that Hyundai was going to buy them and run it as a non-union company?
The loans are paid back.
Listen, folks. The facts in the case are not in question here.
Were there loans? Yes.
Was there a stock purchase? Yes.
Does the taxpayer own a portion of GM? Yes.
Have the loans been paid back? Yes.
If the government sold the stock today, would they lose money? Yes. To the tune of $6-$10 Billion.
but...
Does GM owe the government money? Answer: No. They do not.
If you're against the government owning private stock no matter what the circumstances, fine, that's one thing. But GM does not, by anyone's definition, 'Owe' the government anything.
No, they are not. GM played a shell game with taxpayer money.
And they were allowed to keep tens of $millions of net operating losses (which should have been voided in the bankruptcy proceedings) meaning they aren't paying taxes.
What a great deal for the Ameri....errrr UNIONS!
I cannot imagine how any-one got to this level of denial
I know of no-one who has stated they have paid back any of it except the stocks that BHOinc sold when GM went public
The original 5 billion was tarp money, no-one tried to hide that after those idiots went on TV and said GM had paid the Govt back
GMAC got, well here
Y DON MILLER, Associate Editor, Money Morning
The U.S. government is negotiating to provide GMAC Financial Services with approximately $3.5 billion in bailout funds in addition to the $12.5 billion the company has already received, according to multiple reports.
The U.S. Treasury told the company to raise additional capital as part of government-led stress tests of large banks conducted earlier this year. The tests were designed to identify banking firms that would need more capital to continue lending if the economy faltered in 2009 and 2010.
While the government views GMAC's survival as critically important to the revival of the auto industry, the company's financial troubles are actually linked to its mortgage lending unit Residential Capital LLC, or ResCap.
this has never been paid back back either as far as I can find
GMAC to Receive Additional $3.5 Billion TARP Bailout - Money Morning
The loans are paid back.
Listen, folks. The facts in the case are not in question here.
Were there loans? Yes.
Was there a stock purchase? Yes.
Does the taxpayer own a portion of GM? Yes.
Have the loans been paid back? Yes.
If the government sold the stock today, would they lose money? Yes. To the tune of $6-$10 Billion.
but...
Does GM owe the government money? Answer: No. They do not.
If you're against the government owning private stock no matter what the circumstances, fine, that's one thing. But GM does not, by anyone's definition, 'Owe' the government anything.
THOSE LOANS HAVE NOT BEEN PAID BACK MAM
hell they used tarp money to pay the first 5 billion back
Why go to this level of denial?
Opinion
Did General Motors Really Repay Its Taxpayer Bailout?
By Sen. Charles "Chuck" Grassley
Published April 23, 2010
| FOXNews.com
Print Email Share Tweet
General Motors announced this week that it repaid its multibillion-dollar taxpayer-backed TARP loans. GM even bragged that it was able to repay the taxpayers in full, with interest, ahead of schedule, because more customers are buying [GM] vehicles. There was great fanfare, including expensive, around-the-clock GM TV commercials nationwide. But, the hype is not the reality. In fact, GM did not repay the loans with money it earned from selling cars. Instead, GM repaid the TARP loans with money it withdrew from another TARP fund at the Treasury Department.
The day before the GM story broke, Neil Barofsky, the government TARP watchdog, testified before the Senate Finance Committee. He explained that GM did not use earnings to repay its TARP debt. The April quarterly report to Congress from his office stated: The source of funds for these quarterly [debt] payments will be other TARP funds currently held in an escrow account.
GM filings with the SEC reveal that GM was paying 7 percent interest on a $6.7 billion TARP debt. The filings also confirm that the source of funds for GMs debt repayments was a multibillion-dollar TARP-funded escrow account at Treasury; that means it was taxpayer money not earnings.
Read more: Did General Motors Really Repay Its Taxpayer Bailout? - FoxNews.com
That article is over a year old. And I'm a dude.
Everything you need to know is right here.
PolitiFact Ohio | Rep. Jim Renacci's GM stock claim crashes on accuracy
As I said, the facts of the case are not in question. I'll stipulate that we overpaid for the stock in the newly re-organized company. For the sake of argument, I'll even stipulate that they used the TARP money that bought the stock to pay back the loans they recieved from TARP (although I think it's moot, as money is fungible).
By definition, the entity doesn't owe the government *ANYTHING.* The government has an ownership interest in the company.
Like I said, when you buy stock, the company does not then "Owe you money."
WASHINGTON The emergency bailout of General Motors and Chrysler announced by President Bush on Friday gives the companies a few months to get their businesses in order, but hands off to President-elect Barack Obama the difficult political task of ruling on their future.
The plan pumps $13.4 billion by mid-January into the companies from the fund that Congress authorized to rescue the financial industry. But the two companies have until March 31 to produce a plan for long-term profitability, including concessions from unions, creditors, suppliers and dealers.
In February, another $4 billion will be available for G.M. if the rest of the $700 billion bailout package has been released.
Bush Aids Detroit, but Hard Choices Wait for Obama - NYTimes.com
Stopgap auto bailout to help GM, Chrysler - Dec. 19, 2008
Bush: "Preventing disorderly bankruptcy"
During brief remarks at the White House, President Bush said in normal times he would have not been in favor of preventing a bankruptcy of the two companies. But the current state of the economy and credit markets left him no choice but to act.
"Government has a responsibility to safeguard the broader health and stability of our economy," he said. "If we were to allow the free market to take its course now, it would almost certainly lead to disorderly bankruptcy and liquidation for the automakers."
"In the midst of a financial crisis and a recession, allowing the U.S. auto industry to collapse is not a responsible course of action," Bush added.
It was the lack of supply chain that a collapse of GM would have created.
Further evidence that leftists have no concept of business.
So in your alleged mind, Ford and GM both go down to "Transmissions R Us" and pick up parts off the shelf to put cars together?
No. And if you somehow read that into my post you're even dumber than I imagined.
No, and..No. kthx.Also, do you think their is any chance Toyota, Hyundai or Ford might have actually bought GM? In fact, wasn't the REAL fear that Hyundai was going to buy them and run it as a non-union company?
