Obama & General Motors

[Stephanie]

I wonder how the people of Michigan feel to be welfare queens?

Let's hope all those Michigan "welfare queens," on November 6, 2012, remember which polical Party supported the presidential candidates who favored "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt!"

You people crack me up..They don't have to let Detroit go Bankrupt...IT ALREADY IS.
you think propping up ONE company is going to change that..

you Obamabots are pathetic really

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I wonder how the people of Michigan feel to be welfare queens?

Let's hope all those Michigan "welfare queens," on November 6, 2012, remember which polical Party supported the presidential candidates who favored "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt!"

This is how stupid and financially illiterate you HAVE to be in order to support a President and political party that racks up annual trillion deficits.

 

[Misty]

Obama bailed out General Motors.

He gave them a bridge loan to get through a crisis.
Now they are making record profits.
The Republicans wanted to let GM die. Romney wanted to force GM into bankruptcy. He would have destroyed 1,000s of jobs and ended a great American company.
Guess what?
The Republicans are coming back in 2012, and they will once again have the power to kill our great industries.
God help us.(Bush was begged to burst the housing bubble before it got too big. He andGreenspan decided to let the market take care of it. Their "do nothing Hooverism" resulted in a much larger crash. Their mistake swallowed whole sectors of the American economy)

100% false information.

"By Paul A. Eisenstein, The Detroit Bureau
It has become one of the rare things that binds the two men, the controversial automotive bailout that was begun by former President George W. Bush and completed by his successor, President Barack Obama."

Bottom Line - Bush on auto bailouts: 'I'd do it again'

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Obama bailed out General Motors.

He gave them a bridge loan to get through a crisis.

Now they are making record profits.

The Republicans wanted to let GM die. Romney wanted to force GM into bankruptcy. He would have destroyed 1,000s of jobs and ended a great American company.

Guess what?

The Republicans are coming back in 2012, and they will once again have the power to kill our great industries.

God help us.

(Bush was begged to burst the housing bubble before it got too big. He and Greenspan decided to let the market take care of it. Their "do nothing Hooverism" resulted in a much larger crash. Their mistake swallowed whole sectors of the American economy)

How fucking clueless are you? First off, GM would have died due to shitty deals made by GM with the UAW. Blaming that on Republicans is retarded. Secondly Bush warned of the housing crisis and Dems called him a "racist".

Thanks for you lies... always helpful.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Obama bailed out General Motors.

He gave them a bridge loan to get through a crisis.
Now they are making record profits.
The Republicans wanted to let GM die. Romney wanted to force GM into bankruptcy. He would have destroyed 1,000s of jobs and ended a great American company.
Guess what?
The Republicans are coming back in 2012, and they will once again have the power to kill our great industries.
God help us.(Bush was begged to burst the housing bubble before it got too big. He andGreenspan decided to let the market take care of it. Their "do nothing Hooverism" resulted in a much larger crash. Their mistake swallowed whole sectors of the American economy)

100% false information.

"By Paul A. Eisenstein, The Detroit Bureau
It has become one of the rare things that binds the two men, the controversial automotive bailout that was begun by former President George W. Bush and completed by his successor, President Barack Obama."

Bottom Line - Bush on auto bailouts: 'I'd do it again'

Bush understood his legacy was at stake. He did what he did against the advice of the lassiez faire crowd which now dominates the GOP & the Libertarians. Extremism in the name of greed is a vice, don't forget it.

 

[Misty]

Here is a graph that shows once again both parties are responsible for our economic woes, backing up the argument that government should stay out of our lives

 

[Sallow]

Here is a graph that shows once again both parties are responsible for our economic woes, backing up the argument that government should stay out of our lives

That right..hence the ol' Tea Party mantra..

"Keep government out of my Social Security and Medicare"..

 

[Sallow]

Redneck Talk: Gun Control - YouTube

 

[Stephanie]

Here is a graph that shows once again both parties are responsible for our economic woes, backing up the argument that government should stay out of our lives

That right..hence the ol' Tea Party mantra..

"Keep government out of my Social Security and Medicare"..

they PAID into Social Security, didn't they?
so now you laugh..how cute.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Sure is a lot of dumb in this thread.

On BOTH sides.

First, there is absolutely noway of knowing if GM and Chrysler would have survived without the bailouts, so a blanket claim of "the bailouts saved them" is BS. What saved GM specifically was slimming down and restructuring legacy debt.

Do you realize that at one time GM was selling 1/2 as many cars in the US as Toyota but maintained 1/3 MORE dealerships? Sure closing some of those dealerships hurt some the people working at those dealerships , but when a person has gangrene they cut off the gangrene toe to save the rest of the body.

But the other side is being stupid to. The government in fact hasn't lost any money at this point. They still hold the stock, and yes that's a gamble , but it's way too early to say we've lost any money. And look at this way, if that money hadn't been spent on GM stock, it would have been spent by Obama on something else anyway. Think of the stock as a way of keeping the money out of his reach.

It will probably be ten more years before we know if this calculated risk by Bush/Obama pays off for both the taxpayers and GM; but what we DO now know is that the US COTUS does not authorize the federal government to be venture capitalists . Whether the move worked or not, you liberals just can't deny that simple fact.

 

[Robert_Stephens]

Obama bailed out General Motors.

He gave them a bridge loan to get through a crisis.

Now they are making record profits.

The Republicans wanted to let GM die. Romney wanted to force GM into bankruptcy. He would have destroyed 1,000s of jobs and ended a great American company.

Guess what?

The Republicans are coming back in 2012, and they will once again have the power to kill our great industries.

God help us.

(Bush was begged to burst the housing bubble before it got too big. He and Greenspan decided to let the market take care of it. Their "do nothing Hooverism" resulted in a much larger crash. Their mistake swallowed whole sectors of the American economy)

Easy now, easy. Isn't that a little knee jerk extreme for a blanket statement-post. Are you certain on this........??

Robert

 

[Sallow]

Here is a graph that shows once again both parties are responsible for our economic woes, backing up the argument that government should stay out of our lives

That right..hence the ol' Tea Party mantra..

"Keep government out of my Social Security and Medicare"..

they PAID into Social Security, didn't they?
so now you laugh..how cute.

Both are government run programs that the ultra right wing want to kill.

I know..the Irony of that statement escaped you.

 

[Sallow]

Sure is a lot of dumb in this thread.

On BOTH sides.

First, there is absolutely noway of knowing if GM and Chrysler would have survived without the bailouts, so a blanket claim of "the bailouts saved them" is BS. What saved GM specifically was slimming down and restructuring legacy debt.

Do you realize that at one time GM was selling 1/2 as many cars in the US as Toyota but maintained 1/3 MORE dealerships? Sure closing some of those dealerships hurt some the people working at those dealerships , but when a person has gangrene they cut off the gangrene toe to save the rest of the body.

But the other side is being stupid to. The government in fact hasn't lost any money at this point. They still hold the stock, and yes that's a gamble , but it's way too early to say we've lost any money. And look at this way, if that money hadn't been spent on GM stock, it would have been spent by Obama on something else anyway. Think of the stock as a way of keeping the money out of his reach.

It will probably be ten more years before we know if this calculated risk by Bush/Obama pays off for both the taxpayers and GM; but what we DO now know is that the US COTUS does not authorize the federal government to be venture capitalists . Whether the move worked or not, you liberals just can't deny that simple fact.

Of course there was a way to know what would happen had we let GM go south. Some 50K Factories shuddered their doors and left the country during the reign of George W. Bush. Additionally..the favorable tax code that he implemented during that time for the "GotBucks Job Creators" created jobs overseas. Apple should be a shining example of Bush policy. Take an American grown innovation..and give it away to foreign nations to sell back to US customers. The problem with conservatives is that they feel it's hunky dory to run the government like a business. That's why they put up a failed CEO as POTUS. And the problem with running a government like a business..is that business is self interested. And will extract wealth from an economy. Thats why the "COTUS" not only provides a means to build business..but also provides a means for everyone to share in it's profit. That's why the "COTUS" mandates..yes mandates..taxes.

That's why the "COTUS" also gives government broad powers over the economy. So when greedy assholes like Rick Wagoner run a company into the ground..a company that is important to both the health and security of the country..the government can intervene and save it.

And that's just what happened.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Sure is a lot of dumb in this thread.

On BOTH sides.

First, there is absolutely noway of knowing if GM and Chrysler would have survived without the bailouts, so a blanket claim of "the bailouts saved them" is BS. What saved GM specifically was slimming down and restructuring legacy debt.

Do you realize that at one time GM was selling 1/2 as many cars in the US as Toyota but maintained 1/3 MORE dealerships? Sure closing some of those dealerships hurt some the people working at those dealerships , but when a person has gangrene they cut off the gangrene toe to save the rest of the body.

But the other side is being stupid to. The government in fact hasn't lost any money at this point. They still hold the stock, and yes that's a gamble , but it's way too early to say we've lost any money. And look at this way, if that money hadn't been spent on GM stock, it would have been spent by Obama on something else anyway. Think of the stock as a way of keeping the money out of his reach.

It will probably be ten more years before we know if this calculated risk by Bush/Obama pays off for both the taxpayers and GM; but what we DO now know is that the US COTUS does not authorize the federal government to be venture capitalists . Whether the move worked or not, you liberals just can't deny that simple fact.

Of course there was a way to know what would happen had we let GM go south. Some 50K Factories shuddered their doors and left the country during the reign of George W. Bush. Additionally..the favorable tax code that he implemented during that time for the "GotBucks Job Creators" created jobs overseas. Apple should be a shining example of Bush policy. Take an American grown innovation..and give it away to foreign nations to sell back to US customers. The problem with conservatives is that they feel it's hunky dory to run the government like a business. That's why they put up a failed CEO as POTUS. And the problem with running a government like a business..is that business is self interested. And will extract wealth from an economy. Thats why the "COTUS" not only provides a means to build business..but also provides a means for everyone to share in it's profit. That's why the "COTUS" mandates..yes mandates..taxes.

That's why the "COTUS" also gives government broad powers over the economy. So when greedy assholes like Rick Wagoner run a company into the ground..a company that is important to both the health and security of the country..the government can intervene and save it.

And that's just what happened.

Apple is now a Chinese company? Do you want to double check that and get back to us?

 

[Stephanie]

That right..hence the ol' Tea Party mantra..

"Keep government out of my Social Security and Medicare"..

they PAID into Social Security, didn't they?
so now you laugh..how cute.

Both are government run programs that the ultra right wing want to kill.

I know..the Irony of that statement escaped you.

Well we all know the Guberment can RUN it better than us little people could with our OWN money.
do you people get tired of repeating the same stupid stuff?

 

[Sallow]

Sure is a lot of dumb in this thread.

On BOTH sides.

First, there is absolutely noway of knowing if GM and Chrysler would have survived without the bailouts, so a blanket claim of "the bailouts saved them" is BS. What saved GM specifically was slimming down and restructuring legacy debt.

Do you realize that at one time GM was selling 1/2 as many cars in the US as Toyota but maintained 1/3 MORE dealerships? Sure closing some of those dealerships hurt some the people working at those dealerships , but when a person has gangrene they cut off the gangrene toe to save the rest of the body.

But the other side is being stupid to. The government in fact hasn't lost any money at this point. They still hold the stock, and yes that's a gamble , but it's way too early to say we've lost any money. And look at this way, if that money hadn't been spent on GM stock, it would have been spent by Obama on something else anyway. Think of the stock as a way of keeping the money out of his reach.

It will probably be ten more years before we know if this calculated risk by Bush/Obama pays off for both the taxpayers and GM; but what we DO now know is that the US COTUS does not authorize the federal government to be venture capitalists . Whether the move worked or not, you liberals just can't deny that simple fact.

Of course there was a way to know what would happen had we let GM go south. Some 50K Factories shuddered their doors and left the country during the reign of George W. Bush. Additionally..the favorable tax code that he implemented during that time for the "GotBucks Job Creators" created jobs overseas. Apple should be a shining example of Bush policy. Take an American grown innovation..and give it away to foreign nations to sell back to US customers. The problem with conservatives is that they feel it's hunky dory to run the government like a business. That's why they put up a failed CEO as POTUS. And the problem with running a government like a business..is that business is self interested. And will extract wealth from an economy. Thats why the "COTUS" not only provides a means to build business..but also provides a means for everyone to share in it's profit. That's why the "COTUS" mandates..yes mandates..taxes.

That's why the "COTUS" also gives government broad powers over the economy. So when greedy assholes like Rick Wagoner run a company into the ground..a company that is important to both the health and security of the country..the government can intervene and save it.

And that's just what happened.

Apple is now a Chinese company? Do you want to double check that and get back to us?

2/3 of Apple employees live overseas. They aren't American citizens either. And some are just "Dying" to get out of the harsh working conditions.

SEE: Foxconn.

 

[Sallow]

they PAID into Social Security, didn't they?
so now you laugh..how cute.

Both are government run programs that the ultra right wing want to kill.

I know..the Irony of that statement escaped you.

Well we all know the Guberment can RUN it better than us little people could with our OWN money.
do you people get tired of repeating the same stupid stuff?

You mean like Ayn Rand?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Of course there was a way to know what would happen had we let GM go south. Some 50K Factories shuddered their doors and left the country during the reign of George W. Bush. Additionally..the favorable tax code that he implemented during that time for the "GotBucks Job Creators" created jobs overseas. Apple should be a shining example of Bush policy. Take an American grown innovation..and give it away to foreign nations to sell back to US customers. The problem with conservatives is that they feel it's hunky dory to run the government like a business. That's why they put up a failed CEO as POTUS. And the problem with running a government like a business..is that business is self interested. And will extract wealth from an economy. Thats why the "COTUS" not only provides a means to build business..but also provides a means for everyone to share in it's profit. That's why the "COTUS" mandates..yes mandates..taxes.

That's why the "COTUS" also gives government broad powers over the economy. So when greedy assholes like Rick Wagoner run a company into the ground..a company that is important to both the health and security of the country..the government can intervene and save it.

And that's just what happened.

Apple is now a Chinese company? Do you want to double check that and get back to us?

2/3 of Apple employees live overseas. They aren't American citizens either. And some are just "Dying" to get out of the harsh working conditions.

SEE: Foxconn.

So you're doubling down on a losing bet AND proud of a POTUS that racks up a deficit bigger than Reagan needed to run the entire government? How many Vegas casino are fighting for your business right now?

 

[Londoner]

Yup and you forgot his payback to the Unions who contributed millions to his election campaign.

Oh yeah. He looked out for the Unions, hosed the investors in GM and Chrysler and left the taxpayers on the hook for billions.

The point of Unions was to create an American middle class where the family could be supported by just one wage earner. America didn't want to be like the 3rd world where workers lived in sewage. INCLUDING The American Family in national prosperity was seen as an extra-market value that needed to be protected and ensured like national defense. Put simply: America created a wage structure that enabled parents to have the time to raise their children. They didn't leave something this important to the market any more than they would leave national defense to the market. The postwar wage structure was fundamental to the family because it allowed the mother to stay at home and raise the kids. This is why the 50s - a time of record Union membership and high union wages - was the heyday of Conservatism. Conservatism wants families to be together. They don't want children to be raised by MTV and gangs. They want the mother to have the time to spend with the kids because the family is the sacred vessel of socialization and morality.

Reagan was put in office by big business,which was sick of paying high wages to support American families. Big business wanted 3rd world labor costs. Once Reagan took office, he systematically destroyed the postwar wage structure; he did this by waging war against unions and also through globalization, which forced American workers to compete with sweatshop workers. The result was that families started making less and less money. The mother had to join the work force; she could no longer raise the kids. The family was torn apart (but, big business got their cheap labor). What did the family do when it lost its high wages and benefits? Answer: debt. Morning in America was actually driven by historic levels of borrowing. It got so bad, that Americans were literally broke by the time Bush 43 took over. They lacked the wages to consume, and their credit cards had no more space left. This is when the Bush administration turned the American Home into an ATM. Starting in 2003. Americans re-financed and took out home equity loans at a rate higher than at any other time in history. Middle class consumption was literally being sustained by the housing sector. Everything Bush and Greenspan did was designed to make it easier for Americans to borrow against their homes. [It makes sense why they did this. They spent 30 years undermining American wages, so they need to develop ever more creative ways for Americans to borrow the money needed for consumption]

Borrowing can't go on forever. Eventually the credit system dies. Which it did!

When will America learn? If the middle class does not make high wages (like during the heyday of unions), than they will have to borrow to maintain living standards - to consume and keep the economy alive (-FYI: the American economy is based on consumption. This choice was made when we shipped manufacturing jobs to the 3rd world, that is, we went from being a nation of producers to a nation of consumers. We paid for that consumption with credit cards and home equity loans. Morning in America was a credit hoax).

Worse: If the middle class stops borrowing, the economy dies (because consumption economies require constant consumption). But it's a double edge sword. If the middle class keeps borrowing in order to drive consumption, eventually they go bankrupt. Borrowing never works. Meaning: we cannot fix the economy until the middle class has actual wages and thus real money to spend. This is not going to happen any time soon because the Reagan Revolution gave business the opportunity to shop the globe for the cheapest labor market - that is, Reagan gave capital the power to bypass the middle class in favor of Chinese sweatshops. Now, the only way jobs can return to America is if our labor markets under-bid the 3rd world. This means that the jobs which return won't pay enough to support a first world family. This means that vigorous consumption will not return with the new paradigm of 3rd world American jobs. The economy will stay mired in its dependence on credit because workers won't have the wages to maintain consumption. This is is a disaster, and it explains why no president will be able to fix the economy without restoring high union wages and benefits.

Thanks Ronnie

 

[KissMy]

GM is sucking hind tit in sales gains.

Toyota Motor reported a 60 percent sales gain over a year ago.

Chrysler Group did even better than its two Detroit-based rivals, with June sales up 20 percent over the same month a year ago.

General Motors, is only up 16 percent over a year ago.

It's just sad that they still can't compete.