Government motors

by Aaron Sun May 31, 2009 3:08 pm

Since the government now owns 72% of GM and I pay 40% of my taxes (for now) to the government, does this mean I have a say in how GM is run or that I get an employee discount on a new car?

GM preparing for Monday bankruptcy
General Motors Corp. was making final preparations Sunday for its bankruptcy protection announcement after bondholders accepted a sweetened deal, smoothing the way for the company's reorganization.
By The Associated Press

DETROIT -- General Motors Corp. was making final preparations Sunday for its bankruptcy protection announcement after bondholders accepted a sweetened deal, smoothing the way for the company's reorganization.

A statement from a group of large, institutional bondholders Sunday said 54 percent of GM bondholders agreed to exchange their unsecured bonds for a 10 percent stake in a newly restructured company, plus warrants to purchase a greater share later. Their acceptance is seen as critical in moving the company through bankruptcy quickly.

GM and the Treasury Department, which has been guiding the Detroit automaker toward a rescue plan that will give taxpayers more than a 70 percent stake in the company, were quiet on the bondholders' decision.

story

by Cato Sun May 31, 2009 8:07 pm

That's wishful thinking

by SamCogar Mon Jun 01, 2009 5:57 am

GEEEEZE, dats wunderful news.

If General Motors Corp. files for bankruptcy protection today ..... and it is approved by the Feds, .......... then GM won't have to repay any of those BILLION$ of taxpayer dollars they were loaned over the past months.

Then when a working taxpayer decides to buy a new GM vehicle he/she will actually be paying ...... 2 or 3 times the actual "sticker" price for it.

He/she will pay "out-of-pocket" the sticker price ....... and the Government will increase his/her taxes more than enough to pay the rest of it.

Life under Obama's leadership will be good .................... lol!

.

by **ohio county** Mon Jun 01, 2009 6:44 am

Michael Barone argues that GM will never make a profit and, consequently, will never be asked to pay back the loans:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Will-Government-Motors-ever-make-money-46545607.html

by SamCogar Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:15 am

Barone won't get an argument from me.

GM will no longer pay back those loans ...... than will the US Treasury pay off/back the Interest due or the Principle of the Notes being held by the Social Security Trust Fund.

All that "paper" isn't worth the price of a roll of Charmin,

because nary a sheet of it is useful when it comes to cleaning up a job.

.

by SamCogar Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:50 am

ohio county wrote:Michael Barone argues that GM will never make a profit and, consequently, will never be asked to pay back the loans:

Yesterday on the News they were saying that GM's debt was around $190 BILLION.

How in the world did it last as long as it did without Wall Street relegating it to "junk stock" status several years ago?

That make it $140 Billion bigger than the Bernie Madoff $50 BILLION ponzie scheme.

.

by Aaron Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:27 am

In a good year, when all goes well, GM expects to make a "couple billion dollars" a year.

So it will only take 25 years to repay taxpayers if they pay 100% of their profits.

There is no way to describe this as a good deal.

by SamCogar Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:52 am

Aaron wrote:In a good year, when all goes well, GM expects to make a "couple billion dollars" a year.

But that was before their planned closing of 16+- manufacturing operations and bunches of Dealer Sales facilities.

.

by Hacker Tue Jun 02, 2009 9:15 am

When are we going to get "paid back" with the trillions we have invested in Iraq?
We can support the rest of the world, but not our own country..

by Aaron Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:13 am

Perhaps you should read the constitution Hacker. There is NO provision for the government entering into the manufacturing industry.

GM failed because GM was a horribly ran business and they have no one to blame but themselves. They should have reaped what they sowed without government intervention.

The only good that will come out of GM is in future educational classes on what not to do when operating a manufacturing business.

by Hacker Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:21 pm

"The only good that will come out of GM is in future educational classes on what not to do when operating a manufacturing business."

This is true, I agree with you. They should have followed Ford's "adjustment's" and foresaw the recession.

"They should have reaped what they sowed without government intervention."

The economy is going to get worse even with intervention. The trickle down effect could have been disasterous to this country without aid.

"Perhaps you should read the constitution Hacker. There is NO provision for the government entering into the manufacturing industry."

I have read the constitution a couple of times, and your right, there is NO provision for the government entering into the manufacturing industry....

by Aaron Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:46 pm

Hacker wrote:The economy is going to get worse even with intervention. The trickle down effect could have been disasterous to this country without aid.

Perhaps you should also read some history. FDR prolonged the pain with his government interventions in the 30's and in the end, it took a world war to end the depression.

Is that what it's going to take to save GM, making more Humvee's to be blown?

But even if you are right and it would have been worse without aid, then that aid should have went to parts suppliers and vendors who supplied by GM, not directly to GM.

Had the government not intervened with Chrysler in the 70's, perhaps we wouldn't have the gluttony of auto manufacturing we have and much of these problems wouldn't be as severe as they are.

by Hacker Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:11 pm

Aaron: If we didnt have the auto manufacturers, we wouldnt need parts suppliers & vendors., and neighborhoods built around these factories & restaurants & hospitols, doctors, nurses & etc...etc
We need the manufacturing base in the United States.

by Aaron Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:31 pm

One of the biggest problems we face right now is over capicity in our production. And that's not just the so called Big 3 which ceased being the "THE" American automotive industry years ago.

Even if GM failed (as they should have) there are plenty of other manufacturing facilities that could and will take up the slack for parts manufactures and suppliers when production is needed to meet demand.

All giving GM $50B did was prop up a terribly mismanaged company with production capicities that demand does not need right now and hurts other viable American automotive companies such as Ford, Toyota, Nissan and Honda.

That and it waste $50B taxpayer dollars because GM won't be able to repay the loans or raise the money to purchase back the stock our government has forced Americans to purchase.

by SamCogar Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:09 am

Aaron wrote:One of the biggest problems we face right now is over capicity in our production. And that's not just the so called Big 3 which ceased being the "THE" American automotive industry years ago.

Even if GM failed (as they should have) there are plenty of other manufacturing facilities that could and will take up the slack for parts manufactures and suppliers when production is needed to meet demand.

All giving GM $50B did was prop up a terribly mismanaged company with production capicities that demand does not need right now and hurts other viable American automotive companies such as Ford, Toyota, Nissan and Honda.

That and it waste $50B taxpayer dollars because GM won't be able to repay the loans or raise the money to purchase back the stock our government has forced Americans to purchase.

AAAAAAWWWW, Aaron, ........ why are you painting such a bleak picture of the Government takeover and controlling the operation of our newly reorganized Government Motors?

Why everyone knows our Government has a great "track record" of success when it is forced to do such things.

And the proof is in the pudding, ....... just look at their success with Amtrak.

All of Amtrak's preferred stock is owned by the U.S. federal government. The members of its board of directors are appointed by the President of the United States and are subject to confirmation by the United States Senate.

Amtrak commenced operations in 1971 with $40 million in direct Federal aid, $100 million in Federally insured loans, ….

Federal aid … in 1981 of $1.25 billion.

By 1986, Federal support .. of $601 million, ….

in 1997 Congress authorized $5.2 billion for Amtrak over the next five years

In fiscal 2004 and 2005, about $1.2 billion for Amtrak ….

In 2006, Amtrak received $1.4 billion …..

2008. The bill appropriates $2.6 billion a year in Amtrak funding through 2013.

And Amtrak will receive $1.3 billion in Obama stimulus money to expand passenger rail capacity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amtrak

The newly acquired Government Motors will be a good deal for the taxpayers.

Government motors 33948

/

by Aaron Wed Jun 03, 2009 7:15 am

It takes about a tank and a half of gas for me to go back and forth between Cincinnati meaning it cost about $30.00 a weekend to go home. I called Amtrak figuring that since they're owned by the government I would get a decent rate. The ticket was $27.00 on way and the trip takes 2 hours longer each way.

No wonder Amtrak is failing.

by Sponsored content

Government motors

Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors

Re: Government motors