GOVERNMENT SELLS OUT

[dartman51]

I guess this flew under the radar for the MSM, since I didn't see anything here.

U.S. taxpayers no longer own any of automaker General Motors. The Treasury sold the last of its remaining 31.1 million GM shares today. It started with 500 million shares in 2010.

The taxpayer loss on the GM bailout is $10.5 billion. The Treasury department said it recovered $39 billion from selling its GM stake, and had put $49.5 billion of taxpayer money directly into the GM bailout.

So much for the LYING commercials, where the, then, GM chief said that all the money had been paid back. :lol:


http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/12/09/government-treasury-gm-general-motors-tarp-bailout-exit-sale/3925515/

[mostpost]

I guess this flew under the radar for the MSM, since I didn't see anything here.

U.S. taxpayers no longer own any of automaker General Motors. The Treasury sold the last of its remaining 31.1 million GM shares today. It started with 500 million shares in 2010.

The taxpayer loss on the GM bailout is $10.5 billion. The Treasury department said it recovered $39 billion from selling its GM stake, and had put $49.5 billion of taxpayer money directly into the GM bailout.

So much for the LYING commercials, where the, then, GM chief said that all the money had been paid back. :lol:


http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/12/09/government-treasury-gm-general-motors-tarp-bailout-exit-sale/3925515/
From your link:
A study announced today by the Center for Automotive Research at Ann Arbor, Mich, says the federal rescue of GM saved 1.2 million jobs and preserved $34.9 billion in tax revenue.

According to every math course I ever took, $34.9 billion is more than $10.5 billion.

Just another example of a link provided by a conservative poster roving the opposite of what he thinks it proves.

[NJ Stinks]

From your link:

According to every math course I ever took, $34.9 billion is more than $10.5 billion.

Just another example of a link provided by a conservative poster roving the opposite of what he thinks it proves.


And, I think it's worth noting that the War With Iraq cost the U.S. about $10B a month for 105 months.

[Clocker]

From your link:

According to every math course I ever took, $34.9 billion is more than $10.5 billion.

Just another example of a link provided by a conservative poster roving the opposite of what he thinks it proves.

The link you reference says:
In a new report released Monday, the Center for Automotive Research (CAR) reckons that the federal government bailout of General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) saved 1.2 million U.S. jobs and preserved $34.9 billion in personal income and social insurance (Social Security, Medicare) payments. The bulk of those jobs and tax payments would have been lost in 2009 and 2010 and would have recovered (mostly) by now without federal intervention, but the U.S. auto industry would look considerably different had both GM and Chrysler been allowed to go under. ...

That is, of course, nonsense. Saying that the bulk of 1.2 million jobs would have been lost almost immediately assumes that GM and Chrysler would have "been allowed to go under", which would not have happened. Both companies could have been restructured under a bankruptcy court, probably with new private funds and new management. The companies would not have been shut down and would not have been liquidated.

Big corporations often go bankrupt without a minute of lost operations. Most of the major airlines in this country have been through bankruptcy, and remained in operation without federal bailouts.

The big difference is that the restructure of airlines and similar corporations required concessions from the unions. The Obama administration and the DNC could not afford to alienate the UAW and other unions by making them give concessions, so the government stepped in with the money, screwed the bond holders, and handed the companies to the unions.

[Clocker]

And, I think it's worth noting that the War With Iraq cost the U.S. about $10B a month for 105 months.

So the federal government should stick to taking over private corporations rather than taking over countries, because it is so much cheaper? :rolleyes:

[JustRalph]

Funny nobody seems to mention the bond holders when these stories pop up. They lost their ass so Obama could save the unions.

This was a gift to the UAW plain and simple.

http://www.dailywealth.com/2125/gm-americas-biggest-bankruptcy

[Tom]

GM was stolen from its rightful owners.
No discussion here.
The law was violated.

[Saratoga_Mike]

GM was stolen from its rightful owners.
No discussion here.
The law was violated.

I assume you're referring to the creditors? The equity was worthless.

[Saratoga_Mike]

The link you reference says:


That is, of course, nonsense. Saying that the bulk of 1.2 million jobs would have been lost almost immediately assumes that GM and Chrysler would have "been allowed to go under", which would not have happened.1) Both companies could have been restructured under a bankruptcy court, probably with new private funds and new management. The companies would not have been shut down and would not have been liquidated.

Big corporations often go bankrupt without a minute of lost operations. Most of the major airlines in this country have been through bankruptcy, and remained in operation without federal bailouts.

The big difference is that the restructure of airlines and similar corporations required concessions from the unions. The Obama administration and the DNC could not afford to alienate the UAW and other unions by making them give concessions, so the government stepped in with the money, screwed the bond holders, and 2) handed the companies to the unions.

1) They did - both went through bankruptcy proceedings, just as Mitt Romney suggested.

2) While the treatment of the unions may have violated the treatment of the priority of claims, the unions, at least GM's unions, were not handed the companies.

Your post seems to imply that little restructuring took place. According to Street estimates, GM should generate $14.4 billion and $3.4 billion in 2013 EBITDA and free cash flow, respectively. Even with the rebound in SAAR to about 15 mm (from a low of 9.5 mm or so), I don't think those numbers would be possible without serious restructuring.

[JustRalph]

The Government picked the winners and losers

This is not the business of government. They paid off their cronies.

Bush was guilty of it too. He originally floated the plans.

[BlueShoe]

According to every math course I ever took, $34.9 billion is more than $10.5 billion.
And how much more than that is the Obama administration spending on various sharply increased social and welfare programs, including giving food stamps to just about anything that moves?

[Clocker]

2) While the treatment of the unions may have violated the treatment of the priority of claims, the unions, at least GM's unions, were not handed the companies.



It was a figure of speech. The union got 17.5% of the company. In my book, that's giving away the store.

Your post seems to imply that little restructuring took place.

I meant to say nothing about the details of restructuring. The point I was making was that the companies could have been restructured without the government taking over, just as many other bankrupt companies in this country have been restructured without shutting down and liquidating. The article cited seems to assume that the companies would have disappeared without the government intervention.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I meant to say nothing about the details of restructuring. The point I was making was that the companies could have been restructured without the government taking over, just as many other bankrupt companies in this country have been restructured without shutting down and liquidating. The article cited seems to assume that the companies would have disappeared without the government intervention.

Generally agree, except DIP financing was all but non-existent at the time.

[Tom]

The bond holders were bypassed in favor of the union, who was a huge part of why they went broke in the first place.

Additionally, the idea of millions of jobs lost doesn't hold water. The demand for cars would not have shrunk, so other car companies, probably transplants, would have filled the void and the jobs would have continued. Suppliers would not have closed up shop across the country.