-
Payback Time
February 14, 2013 | 68 comments
-
Community Banks Face a Regulatory Cliff
November 21, 2012 | 120 comments
-
Happy Durbin Day
October 1, 2012 | 8 comments
-
Obamatax Apologists
June 29, 2012 | 146 comments
-
How Senate Dems and Scott Brown Failed ‘Maxine Waters’ Test
March 28, 2012 | 34 comments
Special Report
What’s Good for GM Is Now Terrible for America
An IPO offering that can only be regarded as a business-killing national disgrace.
(Page 2 of 2)
Numbers like “a million jobs” are thrown out, but unfortunately the bailout/takeover proponents use the same shoddy “saved or created” methodology used to justify the stimulus. No one knows what would have happened if the government would have stayed out. But during the same time, as I wrote in TAS at the time, some pretty big firms — such as the nation’s second largest shopping mall owner General Growth Properties — went through the bankruptcy process and reorganized without any government funding. Even if GM or Chrysler had to liquidate, portions of their businesses would likely have been bought out by rivals such as Ford, Hyundai, and Toyota, and some workers would have been reemployed, albeit with less generous benefits (the workers now have benefits more generous than most blue-collar and some white-collar workers).
In fact, as a whole, the auto rescue may result in net job losses, both because of the likely increase in the cost of capital from bondholder treatment, and because of the rapid shutdown of auto dealers that has cost tens of thousands of jobs. Some dealers would have and should have been closed in a normal bankruptcy, but the special inspector general for TARP (SIGTARP) found in a report that the extraordinarily “rapid pace” of dealer closings resulted in “tens of thousands of dealership jobs [that] were immediately put in jeopardy.”
The SIGTARP also found that “job losses at terminated dealerships were apparently not a substantial factor in the Auto Team’s consideration of the dealership termination issue.” In other words, the sales forces didn’t have the clout with the Obama administration that the UAW has.
So in this case, what was good for GM, Chrysler, and the UAW, put the screws to almost everyone else.
(This article is not intended to offer investment advice on the GMO IPO being offered on the backs of taxpayers, car dealership workers, and pension funds.)
CEI Research Associate Andrew Kwiatkowski contributed to this article.
About the Author
John Berlau is Senior Fellow for Finance and Access to Capital at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and blogs at OpenMarket.org.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (84) | Leave a comment
More Articles by John Berlau
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/11/18/whats-good-for-gm-is-now-terri
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Former IRS Commissioner Refused to Say That Targeting Conservative Groups is Wrong
Benjamin Brophy | 2:27PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Red Bubba| 11.18.10 @ 6:36AM
...and yet Americans still buy GMs and Chryslers. The colonists switched from tea to coffee, but apparently they were made of sterner stuff.
Old Soldier| 11.18.10 @ 8:04AM
Not me. Never again, ever. Not if they were selling flying Caddys for $5.
I won't touch their stock either.
Paul D| 11.18.10 @ 11:16AM
Yep, I'm a Ford man now.
TL| 11.18.10 @ 3:13PM
The UAW is source of the problem. I'll never buy any car built by the UAW. Sorry Ford.
LarsN| 11.20.10 @ 2:20PM
The problem is a surplus of very competent auto makers. GM is NOT one of them. A natural market shakeout was aborted by ObamaFeds for political support of the UAW. Obscene. I will also never buy GM, for political reasons.
Bob O'Day| 11.18.10 @ 6:08PM
Don't look too hard at Ford or you will find that buying a Ford isn't supporting US jobs or business. Made in Mexico or Canada (increasingly China and Asia). Toyota plants manufacture more in the US and employ more americans than Ford. They drive better, last longer and dealershiops don't hand out a load of crap when a repair is needed.
Brian Richard Allen | 11.18.10 @ 9:49PM
Me too.
I grew up in a ranching/farming/lumber-milling/trucking family that bought hundreds of GM vehicles and operated around 80+ at any given time.
And now I'm a Ford man, too.
RacerJim| 11.18.10 @ 11:26AM
Big DITTO, Old Soldier.
Me neither. Never, ever. Not even if they were selling a Bughatti Veyron Super Sport equivilent for $1.
No touchie their stock either. Screw General Motors stockholders, Obama's bad. Screw anyone who buys Government Motors stock, their bad.
Alan Brooks| 11.18.10 @ 4:22PM
You guys want free market auto corporations??
what a radical notion. Think what it could start.
These must be the End Times.
Alan Brooks| 11.18.10 @ 8:39PM
I'm still a super-moron.
Eliza| 11.18.10 @ 6:52AM
Not me, I will never by Government Motors.
Lawrence Boccardi| 11.18.10 @ 7:17AM
And, when they finally do collapse, where does one go for warranty service? The Post Office?
Melvin| 11.18.10 @ 7:44AM
No, not the Post Office, the Chinese. Mr. Good-wrench only speaks Mandarin.
The fake Chuck Norris| 11.18.10 @ 7:42AM
Yes, I still by GM. Punish the political hacks who instituted the failing policy. Gm only went to the government for debt funding, given the unprecendented failure in the financial system. -The white house instead came up with this innane policy to reward long time democrat supporters in the UAW. No reason to further punish the good decent Americans and yes, many conservatives, who worked for years, promised certain benefits & compensation, and then had the government redistribute those benefits to the UAW. -before making a blanket moral judgment against GM & what happened, remember this was caused by POLITICAL action. lets get a new president.
Old Soldier| 11.18.10 @ 8:09AM
For many years GM has been a cooperative effort between talentless management and shiftless labor to separate buyers and investors from their money. (Saw it first hand when I worked there.) Once that well ran dry, they called in their IOU's from politicians to force more money from our pockets.
I hope you feel disgust every time you look at you Government Motors cars.
Sheila| 11.18.10 @ 11:11AM
Those purported "good decent Americans . . . who worked for years" were the UAW workers who built lousy vehicles and priced their labor out of the market and expected all car buyers to fund their lavish retirement. Let UAW buy government motors; I don't.
ggoblue| 11.18.10 @ 7:50AM
beware gm stock....the old stock collapsed within 9 months of the new cafe regulations put out by the 2007 congress, they effectively outlawed everything we made....this is what killed gm and placed her in the fist of the tree hugging left.
only 2 weeks ago the epa announced their plan to do it again...outlaw large trucks by placing an insanely high mpg standard on them.
ps, do not assume that the membership shares the ideology of the leadership. the state of michigan just elected an entire slate of republicans by margins of 20%. try not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. we republicans dominate the shop floor, believe it or not.
Sam Vaughn| 11.18.10 @ 12:08PM
ggoblue, I hope what you say is true. It's time to stand up and be counted.
Jarhead| 11.18.10 @ 2:14PM
The vast majority of workers were closet Republicans when I worked for GM. We had NO say in what the union hierarchy did and many of us warned the union they were pricing us out of a job! GM was doomed by their unbelievably inept management and the UAW "leaders", NOT the folks working on the line.
dogface| 11.18.10 @ 11:25PM
Republican, Democrat, what's the difference? It was Bush who opened the floodgates for this fiasco. Then Obama piled on. Bush and the republicans had the chance to say NO to GM and that would have been the end of it. GM would have been forced to file for bankruptcy. But the republican namby-pambys were worried about the publicity. Our government, both parties, is united against the people.
Heywood| 11.18.10 @ 8:04AM
I'll make this article easier to understand. I loan you money so you can expand or upgrade your existing business--then when it comes time to pay me back, someone else comes along and you pay that other guy back what you owe me!
So why should anyone else come along and loan you money when you need to either expand or upgrade your business? Or bail you out when your business is failing?
MacDaddy| 11.18.10 @ 8:45AM
"This is America, after all, and we still have the rule of law here."
Well, we did anyway, until Barrack Obama showed up...now we have rule by executive fiat....
Reagan Loyalist| 11.18.10 @ 12:33PM
Here, here...
Career Soldier| 11.18.10 @ 8:46AM
Last nights MSM news report informed me that GM has generated large profits in the last 2 quarters. I couldn't help but think that if big gov'ment wiped out my debt, and instead of taking my money, gave me some, my balance sheet would look pretty damn good too!
Hey ggoblue; our meager gains in the US House are more than offset by our Michigan senators Levin and Stabenow, who have both shown that they are firmly under UAW control. We won't get back the "shop floor" until we replace them with persons of reason and fiscal responsibility!
Al| 11.18.10 @ 8:51AM
This gov't-sponsored shakedown was by far the biggest story of 2009, and it STILL doesn't register with the overwhelming majority of Americans
Pete| 11.18.10 @ 9:32AM
What is the standard liberal comeback to these events? I am not sure I have ever seen it. What could possibly justify breaking lawful contracts over naked political interest?
squalis| 11.18.10 @ 9:34AM
What makes you think they have any need or desire for a rational explanation?
squalis| 11.18.10 @ 9:32AM
Isn't there a mandate in the Patient Protection and Health Care Affordibility Act for all US citizens (illeagal aliens exempt) to buy GM or Chrysler?
A. C. Santore| 11.18.10 @ 10:00AM
Thanks for that post. Made me smile through the aggravation.
Answer to your question: "Wouldn't surprise me."
Conservative Teamster| 11.18.10 @ 9:39AM
Most of the cars I have purchased over the years have been GM. Not any more. I will but from Ford or from foreign companies (only cars they make here in the US). It is a shame what is happening to this country under this administration.
Tim the Enchanter| 11.18.10 @ 11:35AM
Buy Hondas. Made in Ohio and over 70% U.S.-made parts. You also get unmatched reliability and great resale value.
Nunya| 11.18.10 @ 6:31PM
Hyundai has a very large factory in Alabama as well. I don't know about the operation itself, but have driven past it on the Interstate a few times.
Trucker Redbeard| 11.19.10 @ 9:08AM
Don't forget Nissan, made in Tennessee. And Kia, made in Georgia IIRC. And another Asian company has a plant in Misissippi, can't remember which one though.
Trucker Redbeard| 11.19.10 @ 9:12AM
I'm ashamed to say I own a Freightliner, made by Daimler Trucks USA, which at the time was part of the same parent company as Chrysler. My next truck will be a Peterbilt, Kenworth, or Navistar International. Or maybe a Volvo.
Fairbanks99| 11.19.10 @ 3:32PM
Mercedes SUV's designed and made in Vance, Alabama. I like my ML320.
STEVEOHH| 11.18.10 @ 9:42AM
GM IS CRAP. CHRYSLER IS CRAP. OBAMA IS EVEN WORSE.
BUY FORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
justasimplepatriot| 11.18.10 @ 9:54AM
Jimmy Hoffa & Barack Hussein Obama - Soul Brothers.
Dustoff| 11.18.10 @ 9:56AM
This mornings news say's even with the stock offering. The gov still lost 9 Billion on GM.
Yeah what is 9 biliion to the gov anyway! 0-:
RCV| 11.18.10 @ 12:19PM
The government didn't "lose 9 billion" on GM. They're still holding stock worth at least that. They've recovered all the rest in the IPO, and will more than recover the balance over the next two years as the rest is gradually sold.
Mr. Shifty gear| 11.18.10 @ 1:13PM
Sounds to me you are a Gov Moto worker.
RCV| 11.18.10 @ 2:21PM
No, just someone who knows how to read.
dc| 11.18.10 @ 4:36PM
The only thing you're capable of reading and comprehending is People magazine. Read this, jackass (check National Review Online for the full writeup; Mr. Spruiell, unlike you, has done his homework). You may be happy to be a government slave, most of the rest of us are not.
By Stephen Spruiell
Regarding the triumphalism attending GM’s IPO, let this post serve as a friendly reminder that GM still owes the U.S. government $43 billion; that its financing arm still owes $14.6 billion; and that its sick friend Chrysler still owes $8.2 billion. Before we start declaring GM an American success story, let’s keep in mind that the government lost $9 billion of taxpayers’ original investment on today’s partial stock sale. GM still has major problems stemming from its pension obligations. Yes, auto sales have rebounded, but that is thanks to a surge in light-truck sales, which are not the kind of clean, green machines that Obama wants GM’s customers to buy. And yes, China bought a 1 percent stake, but analysts are calling this “a diplomatic arrangement” made for the purposes of smoothing rocky U.S.-China relations.
RCV| 11.22.10 @ 7:04PM
China bought a large stake in GM because GM is the number one selling car company in China.
If you're a "slave" in the United States today, there are lots of "slaves" in history who'd give anything to trade places with you, you whining excuse for an adult citizen.
Warrior | 11.18.10 @ 5:53PM
I doubt you ever completed The Cat in the Hat.
RCV| 11.22.10 @ 7:05PM
I'll match my educational credentials, including three post-graduate years at Stanford, against yours any day.
Donna| 11.18.10 @ 10:01AM
At the end of the day, GM needed saving albeit not in the manner it was laid out by the Obama Admin. We need them for national defense. At the end of the day however, they will be owned by the Chicom’s in majority which is a disaster. After buying technology from IBM, they now have confiscated 30% of the Internet communications at the DoD, Homeland etc. The underlying security factor in this IPO is still a matter of national defense. How can one guy screw so much up? It’s just amazing the dereliction of duty to the US the President has exhibited.
RacerJim| 11.18.10 @ 11:35AM
Allow me to suggest that the entirety of what Obama has screwed up and his Dereliction of Duty is not amazing at all but, rather, his intent from the get-go.
Cato| 11.18.10 @ 6:01PM
When grandpa has to sell the farm, chances are it remains a farm. GM, or parts of it, would still be viable in the hands of competent management and a workforce lacking a sizable criminal element. But that didn't happen, did it? We had to preserve the bloodsucking union contracts, which would been dissolved in a REAL bankruptcy. So there was the 'soft landing' cushioned by the pensions of millions of Americans who thought they had their money in an honest investment. I'd rather do business with the Russians, at least you know where they're coming from.
Socializing the costs, privatizing the profits, not a bad day for crony capitalism, eh comrade? Bernie Madoff didn't steal this much.
cyberdog| 11.18.10 @ 10:04AM
Im sure all those GM investors that were shafted will rush in to buy GM again...NOT!
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Screw Government Motors and BHO
rainmaker1145| 11.18.10 @ 10:05AM
Knowing now that the government can step in at any time and use political considerations to abrogate contracts means that any institution that holds this stock is going to be subject to shareholder lawsuits the minute the price drops and the institution suffers a loss.
Al Adab| 11.18.10 @ 10:19AM
All of which leaves those of us who held our GM stock or the mutual funds still holding GM stock rather holding the bag as it were. Thank you federal government.
voted against carter| 11.18.10 @ 3:02PM
voted against carter| 11.18.10 @ 2:56PM
I lost a greater part of my life savings through the illegal obama GM & Chrysler stock restructure instead of allowing GM & Chrysler to declare bankruptcy in the "normal" way. There is NO WAY I would EVER trust the Government Motors again. EVER. I wouldn't take the stock if they gave it away for free. I will never buy a GM or Chrysler product again. NEVER. I do not care "how much they improve quality" or any other thing they do. "Fool me once shame on you, Fool me twice , shame on me." DO NOT BUY THIS STOCK. You will lose. I would buy ANY other car. Or auto stock. NOT GM OR Chrysler. Obama payed off the unions. He screwed the investors. Do you think he will do any thing different this time?
Stammon| 11.18.10 @ 10:22AM
In 1972 I bought a Maveric. In 1979 I bought a ford truck. All other cars have been MBZ or GM.
Now I just buy Volvo and Toyota. Both good cars, but more to the point, not tainted by our Government's stupidity.
By the way, I don't buy ford because their sharp castings cut up my hands. Come on ford, you can do better.
Ralph| 11.18.10 @ 10:55AM
The only difference I see between the old GM and the new one is the new one is smaller in the ways to produce profit: dealerships, market share, products. From my experience working for a midsized retail firm, the thought process of closing locations and serving a larger geographic base, never worked out. Wtithout exception, we lost the area we closed facilities. I suspect GM and Chrysler my experience less loss because their products are more unique and destination oriented, but younger consumers are not the loyal customers of brand names their parents and grandparents were. Conservatives buy more domestic than liberals, and liberals seem to be wealthier with more job security today, so for what it worth, how much more can politicians and fellow travelers do in the long run to prop up the facade?
The only way I can see that the taxpayer gets paid back is if the profit per unit is higher than it was before bankruptcy, which seems doubtful.
Richard| 11.18.10 @ 12:09PM
We need to examine the existence of labor unions. Public employee unions are not needed at all and can be easily (I believe) disbanded by executive order. As for UAW, etc. the whole post FDR relationship of government and business to labor unions need to be re-examined with an eye to decreasing union power.
What do you think?
David T.| 11.18.10 @ 1:32PM
I agree--public employee unions are superfluous. Let's get rid of them along with the Dept. of Labor and Dept. of Commerce. They are all relics of a by-gone era.
Dave| 11.18.10 @ 2:34PM
The likelihood of BHO doing anything to disband a union is somewhere between nil and none.
somnolence| 11.18.10 @ 12:54PM
I'm more than satisfied with my 2004 Hyundai Sonata and regular savings accounts, which are drawing less than paltry interest thank you. The last Chevy I owned was a 1978 Chevette. Government Motors holds no attraction for me, and I will watch Ford with a wary eye.
mames| 11.18.10 @ 1:12PM
fascist, immoral, tyrannical - shame on anyone who buys the stock and those who are now running the place.
Marty| 11.18.10 @ 1:23PM
It's really simple. There wasn't enough value left at GM and Chrysler to meet all the obligations, so someone was going to lose. The Administration stepped in to keep the UAW whole and make everybody else lost.
Not the emplyees, who for the most part would have been offered jobs working at the same plants when others bought them as part of the bankruptcy. Probably making a bit less than they do, now, but working for real firms with real futures. But those workers would no longer have been UAW.
UAW get to keep control over pension and health/welfare funds, and dues including those dues used to support political activity.
That's really the whole story, everything else, all the details, is just commentary.
I will NEVER buy GM or Chrysler again. Anyway, I got stuck with a rental Malibu last summer and for all the "Car of the Year" hype it was a total POS. Drove like an overweight pig, interior was cheap cheap cheap. And I'm comparing it to my 2001 Ford Escape.
desotobill| 11.18.10 @ 1:35PM
Don't buy Ford either. They didn't stand behind their warranty on a 1998 Crown Victoria. Had several problems. After seeing 6 different dealers it was clear the problem wasn't a bad dealer it was systemic failure from Ford's lack of support for the dealer network. Called the Ford hotline and they told me they could care less whether I bought any more cars from them because I was just one customer and they had millions of them so they didn't need my business. I had bought Fords exclusively for over 30 years spending over $300,000 over that time frame. I now buy Honda, Toyota or Lexus exclusively. Ford doesn't care about their customers. I don't care about Ford anymore.
Intelligent Design| 11.18.10 @ 1:37PM
If the federal government were directly issuing common stock with the ticker symbol USA, would anyone buy it? $13.7 trillion in debt, incompetent management, monstrous unfunded liabilities, poor product line, losing market share, workers hooked on socialist mentality ....... No way! So why buy GM?
WallyG| 11.18.10 @ 1:41PM
I'm curious about the amount of the issue purchased by the entitities that got TARP money and any under the table threats by the administration. How can this pass the smell test when GM's books were in question to begin with? Where is the SEC? There is no way considering the accounting restatements and adjustments pre takeover that this issue should even come to market.
Perusha The Offender| 11.18.10 @ 1:48PM
Maybe it’s too late, now that GM is (claims to be) profitable, but since the UAW is still there, and firmly in control, instead of just complaining about the whole bad Obama law breaking, why not---
SELL GM short.
Place a bet that the stock will go down!
Nunya| 11.18.10 @ 6:41PM
Short selling an IPO isn't allowed for some period of time (I don't remember how long, but it seems like it's something like a few days). Most IPO shares fall in price after a few days anyway, the SEC knows this which is why they forbid short selling initially.
Regardless, you are absolutely correct, I don't see a viable future for GM with the UAW having so much power--it's akin to a fox watching a hen house--at some point one runs out of hens.
WallyG| 11.21.10 @ 8:15PM
You can't short sell a new issue because the shares can't be borrowed. To sell short you have to have a good "locate" and make delivery on settlement date. But, it's GM and since there are no rules any more, maybe you can short sell and oversell the entire issue. Who knows any more?
Oldefarte| 11.18.10 @ 2:46PM
The bailout of the car manufacturers was/is simply governmental welfare provided to the labor unions [who provided political/financial support to candidate Obama] at taxpayers' expense. There was absolutely no economic/financial reason to grant same, other than his/Democrats corruption and fraud [and impeachment charges should be issued because of same]. The one/only industry that should have been bailed out was banking [and that was essentially necessary for the economic/financial survival of the country, and also to save/preserve the private accounts of depositors contained within same]. The country would have gone bankrupt if the big banks had not be given financial assistance by the government. The granting of money to the car companies [to maintain labor union employment in Detroit etc] was political corruption, just as was his/their spending taxpayers' money on their so-called stimulus whose disguised purpose was simply to maintain employment to state/local labor union employees [teachers, governmental workers etc]. He/they also lied that the intended purpose of same was infrastructure repairing/rebuilding on shovel-ready construction jobs. American taxpayer-voters must simply now recognize and understand that he/they are nothing but LIARS and fraudent CROOKS!!!!
Nunya| 11.18.10 @ 7:09PM
Oldfarte, you are wrong on your statement about the "country would have gone bankrupt if the big banks had not be given financial assistance by the government." That is a lie that the media and Obozo wants everyone to believe.
Just look at who they bailed out, it was a sweetheart deal for their buddies, and is some of the worst corruption in the history of our country.
Intelligent Design| 11.18.10 @ 8:09PM
"Too big to fail" is a bogus argument. If Citigroup failed (strictly a hypothetical example), multiple bidders would buy up the pieces. It's called "creative destruction".
The USSR failed, and the world is far better as a result.
voted against carter| 11.18.10 @ 2:56PM
I lost a greater part of my life savings through the illegal obama GM & Chrysler stock restructure instead of allowing GM & Chrysler to declare bankruptcy in the "normal" way. There is NO WAY I would EVER trust the Government Motors again. EVER. I wouldn't take the stock if they gave it away for free. I will never buy a GM or Chrysler product again. NEVER. I do not care "how much they improve quality" or any other thing they do. "Fool me once shame on you, Fool me twice , shame on me." DO NOT BY THIS STOCK. You will lose. I would buy ANY other car. Or auto stock. NOT GM OR Chrysler. Obama payed off the unions. He screwed the investors. Do you think he will do any thing different this time?
Macolm Throckmorton XII| 11.18.10 @ 4:24PM
Me, I only buy Bently or Rolls. Actually, my business manager purchases them, and my chaffeur drives them. I especially enjoy the trips to my private airfield, where my Lear awaits in pristine condition. And unlike Sir John Kerry (he loves it when I call him that), the taxes on my transportation are fully paid.
KML| 11.18.10 @ 6:23PM
This whole GM deal was a load of fecal matter. Obama said if the government didn't step in and rescue GM, then GM would close their doors and everyone (banks, vendors, employees, etc) would be finished. Is our president truly so uneducated? I believe he truly believed this nonsense. That is not what would happen at all. Bankruptcy examines all of the debts held by a company, and through a legal process, makes adjustments to, ultimately, save the company. Look at the airline industry and how many players have gone through bankruptcy - they don't close their doors the following day. Delta, Air Canada, United to name a few, have gone through bankruptcy and are still doing business today. Obama did this all for the unions. The unions did not want their contracts re-negotiated, and since the unions gave hundreds of millions of dollars to see Obama elected, this is one of the many ways they were rewarded. Union pensions, pay rates, anything union would not be touched (everything else would be) as long as the government came to the rescue. This whole affair was a travesty and an insult to the people of this country.
John Bailo | 11.18.10 @ 6:41PM
We should just elect Bernie Madoff POTUS and be done with it -- since the job seems to be more and more promoting a pump and dump on the American people (in lieu of taxes...that the Tea Party is now outlawing, Government goes to the Wall Street well to bilk the public).
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 11.18.10 @ 6:51PM
GM borrowed 65 billion from the taxpayers.
The taxpayers lost 9 billion in the IPO.
GM still owes 43 billion of the original amount.
Their financing arm owes 14 or more.
That comes to about 63 billion and most likely more that GM still owes taxpayers.
That means they are bankrupt, the taxpayers are screwed and the politicians who passed this are a sleazy group of scum at best. God Damn Them!
JmsA| 11.19.10 @ 1:14AM
I heard The One on the radio this morning claiming his administration's investment was beginning to pay off, yet nary a word about those whose money was actually used to do so--the taxpayers.
mm| 11.19.10 @ 2:30AM
i had my fill of GM dealers when they charged me a thousand dollars to replace a brake caliper rather than an hours labor and 38 dollars for the rubber seals that looked like 2 bucks of value......following the cheaper to replace than repair idiom that had become mantra of an economic time gone by....rip offs....
JimmyT| 11.19.10 @ 12:36PM
When it comes to the destruction of companies in this country, I give management 70% of the credit and unions 30%. Union leaders were doing their job. Management could have, and should have, held the line on wages and benefits from the beginning. I was in the middle of this debacle in the 60's and 70's. Now it's government screwing the pooch. Unions should be forced to fully fund union pensions BEFORE they can spend one dime on political contributions. Unless things have changed since I was a union member, the members should also be held accountable for who they vote for to run the union.
Eric Rasmusen| 11.19.10 @ 2:04PM
I may well be confused, but I think the GM bondholders, unlike the Chrysler lenders, were not ripped off by Obama and in fact received several billions from the taxpayers. Is the following correct? GM owed the Treasury $58 billion as senior debt, and bondholders 27 billion as junior debt (8-K filing, http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/.....40/d8k.htm). GM's equity is worth $50 billion in November 2010 (http://moneycentral.msn.com/companyreport?symbol=GM). Does that mean that if Treasury hadn't made the bailout deal, bondholders would have gotten zero in a neutral,nonpolitical bankruptcy? The bondholders publicly agreed to the bailout deal, which gave them a lot more than $0. I think they got 10% of GM's equity plus some warrants (8-K filing, http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/.....40/d8k.htm).
Supreme Galooty| 11.19.10 @ 11:28PM
"God Damn Them All, I was told
we'd cruise the seas for American gold.
We'd fire no guns, shed no tears
Now I'm a broken man on a Halifax pier
The last of Barrett's privateers"
Stan Rogers
I will NOT support American UNION jobs of any stripe. To hell with the UAW, the SEIU, and most especially the NEA. Neither will I ever vote for any Democrat, and neither will I honor their right to free speech. I am no longer courteous toward them - not in the slightest.
MoeBlotz| 11.20.10 @ 7:29AM
With a proper bankruptcy,the sorry assembly line workers at Chrysler could have gone to the park to smoke reefer and drink beer all day instead of just during lunch.
ironhorzmn| 11.20.10 @ 2:26PM
I bought a Chevy HHR before the bottom fell out.
It was made in Mexico. No UAW there, I'll wager.
Maybe those of us who still favor GM products could choose based on country of manufacture.
TRherald| 11.20.10 @ 7:45PM
Someone during all of this auto bailout crap made the comment that countries do not let their auto industry g0 under. They must have forgotten about British Leyland in the late 70's. British Leyland was not able to file for bankruptcy, they closed their doors. GM should have gracefully gone the way of BL. Ironically, I drive an MG.