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.
It wasnt a government takeover; it was a bankruptcy reorganization. The General Motors (GM) Chapter 11 case was filed at the height of the economic recession; and there were no banks or other commercial lenders that could provide the DIP (Debtor in Possession) financing necessary to continue business operations during the reorganization proceedings; and without the government assistance (and that of Canada as well) GM would have been DOA (dead on arrival) on the first day, forcing the liquidation of the company, and loss of thousands of jobs as happened in the Circuit City bankruptcy that cost over 35,000 jobs. The liquidation of GM would in turn precipitate the failure of hundreds of related industry manufacturers and suppliers resulting in a flood of business bankruptcy cases across the country, and loss of millions of jobs. And, as it turned out, the reorganization was a success; witness the profitability of the company today.
You do realize what,subprime is? People who cant pay. This is cooking the books. You know the mortgage crises
You are certainly the Libtard exception, then:
Liberal Democrats Most Likely to Drive Imports
Liberal Democrats Most Likely to Drive Imports | Be John Galt
so who should I thank for buying American?
Mitt Romney recently made a speech criticizing President Obama for the government bailout of General Motors. He would have preferred to see GM fail; which would have precipitated the failure of hundreds of industry related manufacturing and supply businesses, and the loss of millions of jobs. That's what Mitt Romney would do. Does that make good economic sense? Does it make any sense at all?
It is within living memory that it was said: "What is good for General Motors is good for America." President Obama was right to intervene in the GM bankruptcy reorganization; he did it for the good of the country; he did it to save American jobs. It says a lot about his leadership priorities. Mitt Romney says that he "likes being able to fire people. . . ." What does that say about him? Surely, it does not speak well.
The taxpayers are not out any money. The GM reorganization, which was one of the biggest bankruptcy cases in our history, was a huge success. Alternatively, letting GM fail would have been a catastrophic loss with consequential damage to the economy, and at the worst possible time. It was just not an option.
Many readers have asked us about the White House-touted news that General Motors, and Chrysler, repaid loan money from the Treasury Department, with interest, ahead of schedule. GM launched an ad boasting of the news, and President Obama talked about it in his weekly address on April 24.
We wrote about this, too, on April 26 in a review of the Sunday political talk shows. Heres the deal for those who missed that post:
■Yes, its true that GM paid back its loan from the Treasury Department, in full, ahead of schedule.
■But the debt was only part of the automaker bailout package. Through the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the Treasury gave GM $49.5 billion, most of which was converted into an ownership stake in the form of stock. Through this equity stake, the government still owns 61 percent of GM.
■Some Republicans, including Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa have pointed out that GM used TARP money to pay back its TARP debt. Thats true, but GM simply handed back TARP money it had been lent and hadnt used. Those funds had been sitting in an escrow account, should the automaker need them. (The company didnt borrow new money to pay back an older loan.)
Grassley has argued that this wasnt a "meaningful" repayment of a loan, since it didnt come from earnings. Thats an opinion, and well leave it to readers to agree or disagree with the senator. The TARP special inspector general, Neil Barofsky, has said the repayment was "good news," since it meant the automaker didnt need to use those funds held in escrow. In testimony before the Senate Finance Committee on April 20, Barofksy made it clear GM still was operating with government help:
As for Treasurys equity stake, worth $40 billion-plus, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said the Treasury wont fully recoup that money. The total automaker bailout, including TARP money given to Chrysler, CBO estimates, will cost taxpayers about $34 billion.
The taxpayers are not out any money. The GM reorganization, which was one of the biggest bankruptcy cases in our history, was a huge success. Alternatively, letting GM fail would have been a catastrophic loss with consequential damage to the economy, and at the worst possible time. It was just not an option.
You do realize what,subprime is? People who cant pay. This is cooking the books. You know the mortgage crisesYou are certainly the Libtard exception, then:
Liberal Democrats Most Likely to Drive Imports
Liberal Democrats Most Likely to Drive Imports | Be John Galt
so who should I thank for buying American?
You are certainly the Libtard exception, then:
Liberal Democrats Most Likely to Drive Imports
Liberal Democrats Most Likely to Drive Imports | Be John Galt
so who should I thank for buying American?
GM is alive. Bin Laden is dead.
Our 'Conservatives' are unhappy with both outcomes.
You are certainly the Libtard exception, then:
Liberal Democrats Most Likely to Drive Imports
Liberal Democrats Most Likely to Drive Imports | Be John Galt
so who should I thank for buying American?
Not me. I'll never buy a sleazy corrupt GM product. We bailed their asses out once and what did they do? They opened fucking plants in Mexico and China. I'll buy Toyota. They're built right here in America.
Mitt Romney recently made a speech criticizing President Obama for the government bailout of General Motors. He would have preferred to see GM fail; which would have precipitated the failure of hundreds of industry related manufacturing and supply businesses, and the loss of millions of jobs. That's what Mitt Romney would do. Does that make good economic sense? Does it make any sense at all?
It is within living memory that it was said: "What is good for General Motors is good for America." President Obama was right to intervene in the GM bankruptcy reorganization; he did it for the good of the country; he did it to save American jobs. It says a lot about his leadership priorities. Mitt Romney says that he "likes being able to fire people. . . ." What does that say about him? Surely, it does not speak well.
GM is alive. Bin Laden is dead.
Our 'Conservatives' are unhappy with both outcomes.
GM is alive. Bin Laden is dead.
Our 'Conservatives' are unhappy with both outcomes.
Baloney. We are happy Bin Laden is dead, we just don't alocate as much credit to the no-brainer decision that Obama made. The CIA did the painstaking work and planning, Obama happened to be in the White House.
As far as GM, I don't think any American is sad they are alive.
The difference is most conservatives would have nolt given them a bailout.
GM was in the shape they were due mainly to poor quality that over time drove more and more of it's customer base to other car manufacturers.
Most conservatives view the bailouts as rewarding poor business decisions.
GM is alive. Bin Laden is dead.
Our 'Conservatives' are unhappy with both outcomes.
Baloney. We are happy Bin Laden is dead, we just don't alocate as much credit to the no-brainer decision that Obama made. The CIA did the painstaking work and planning, Obama happened to be in the White House.
As far as GM, I don't think any American is sad they are alive.
The difference is most conservatives would have nolt given them a bailout.
GM was in the shape they were due mainly to poor quality that over time drove more and more of it's customer base to other car manufacturers.
Most conservatives view the bailouts as rewarding poor business decisions.
It wasnt a government takeover; it was a bankruptcy reorganization. The General Motors (GM) Chapter 11 case was filed at the height of the economic recession; and there were no banks or other commercial lenders that could provide the DIP (Debtor in Possession) financing necessary to continue business operations during the reorganization proceedings; and without the government assistance (and that of Canada as well) GM would have been DOA (dead on arrival) on the first day, forcing the liquidation of the company, and loss of thousands of jobs as happened in the Circuit City bankruptcy that cost over 35,000 jobs. The liquidation of GM would in turn precipitate the failure of hundreds of related industry manufacturers and suppliers resulting in a flood of business bankruptcy cases across the country, and loss of millions of jobs. And, as it turned out, the reorganization was a success; witness the profitability of the company today.
