Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

GM heading for bankruptcy... again.

65 posts in this topic

Posted

So you are saying that Obama has been lying each time he takes credit? Idiocy indeed

No. I'm saying it's not just dems that supported it.

I'd like to know your thoughts on how Mittens claimed that he deserves the credit for the bailouts.

Talk about idiocy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Absolutely correct- the companies asked for government help in December 2008 while the Bush administration was still in the White House. Bush committed TARP funds before the companies filed for bankruptcy and his Congress was ready to hand over the entire amount until Obama was elected and brought what was supposed to be a complete and totally free handout to a screeching halt.

Thanks to Obama there were conditions and stipulations to the remainder of the money, otherwise nobody would have ever seen any of that money again and, at the very least, there's no longer be a "Big 3."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

"some of the tarp funds" are actually tens of billions of taxpayer dollars that will never be recovered because they were given to the auto industry just before they declared bankruptcy.

The Bush Administration should have recognized what was already widely held public knowledge, that GM and Chrysler did not have viable business structures to survive the downturn in the economy, much less pay back the loans.

Some of the tarp funds equals 13-17 billion that was given to GM. Thats not 10's of billions. Chrysler actually seems to be doing pretty well and they weren't included in the discussion, but then they didn't get saddled with as much interference as GM did, because they were bought out by Fiat.

And none of what you said disputes anything I said. Bush started out with a relatively small amount and Obama's admin pumped in significantly more, pushed them into bankruptcy and pushed down a lot of rules regarding the bailout and the way GM would move in the future. I of course, hope they don't fail,

but if they do, its Obama's baby, not GWB's, (and thats as it should be).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Are you folks on the left going to obsess with GWB as long as those on the right did with Jimmy Carter? It will be interesting to watch how much blame he gets if the economy goes into a recession 20 years from now.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I remember going through college and we did tons of discussions on Milton Friedman during Economics. I then became more of a free market thinker. Not always, but with something ran as shoddy as the car companies, there is no way we should have bailed them out. Was against the smaller portion from Bush and the bigger portion from Obama. Bush is definitely not a favorite of mine.

His spending was out of control. Obama has doubled down on spending and doubled the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Are you folks on the left going to obsess with GWB as long as those on the right did with Jimmy Carter? It will be interesting to watch how much blame he gets if the economy goes into a recession 20 years from now.

Obsessed? So the recession that happened under bush isn't partially his fault?

Riveting tale, chap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Some of the tarp funds equals 13-17 billion that was given to GM. Thats not 10's of billions. Chrysler actually seems to be doing pretty well and they weren't included in the discussion, but then they didn't get saddled with as much interference as GM did, because they were bought out by Fiat.

What your are saying is at best quibbling.

" Bloomberg News reported on June 1 that "before declaring bankruptcy, GM received $20.57 billion in U.S. Treasury loans, according to the court filing today.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ayuOHl_sWSt8&refer=home

That qualifies as 10s of Billions and doesn't include Chrysler's Billions from the Bush Administration.

“This is a step they should have taken more than a year ago, which could have put them in much better shape,” said Stephen Pope, chief global strategist at Cantor Fitzgerald in London.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ayuOHl_sWSt8&refer=home

The larger point is a Republican Administration provided 10s of Billions to the US Auto Industry knowing their was little chance of the funds being repaid.

Had the previous administration denied the funds, GM and Chrysler would have had to declared bankruptcy sooner saving the American Taxpayer 10s of Billions of dollars wasted in a futile attempt to avoid the inevitable.

Obama defends his administration as a reluctant and stern savior of an industry that's vital to the American economy.

"I refused to kick the can down the road," Obama said when he announced the bankruptcy details. "If GM and Chrysler and their stakeholders were willing to sacrifice for their companies' survival and success; if they were willing to take the difficult but necessary steps to restructure and make themselves stronger, leaner and more competitive, then the United States government would stand behind them."

http://mediamatters.org/research/2009/06/08/politico-disappears-bush-from-gm-bailout-histor/150982

Regardless of their ill advised efforts, the GOP leadership was for the bailouts before Obama became President.

Being against whatever President Obama is for describes the GOP political strategy for the last 3.5 years. Any concern for the American people's welfare is a distant second at best for the GOP.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Obsessed? So the recession that happened under bush isn't partially his fault?

Riveting tale, chap.

I just ask if you guys were going to continue to be obsessed with Bush jr. You are the only one who said anything about whose fault the recession was. But since you brought it up.

Recessions generally aren't the "fault" of any specific president. In fact, given the size of the US and World economy, in most cases blaming the president is simplistic and mostly a result of bombastic partisan politics. There are a few cases in which specific policy decisions by a president or the government led to a recession (for example the recession of 1937) but for the most part, they happen for a number of reasons, most of which have very little to do with government policy. George W Bush didn't cause the recession of 2008. He played a role, just as many others (republican, democrat, or none of the above) did, but it was a relatively small one. The forces that caused the 2008 recession had been building longer than many of the posters on this board have been alive.

People like to say that the crisis was caused by shortsightedness, stupidity, and greed. They may be partially right, but those conditions are always with us, and its highly unlikely that they were any worse from 1990-2007 than during previous times in our history.

IMO, it was just part of the economic cycles that have been occurring since our country got started. Worst than many, but certainly not the worst. And while many want the government to try to legislate recessions into history (and Obama is certainly trying), IMO thats impossible and we are always going to have them. They come, we rebound eventually and do well for a while, only to see it all happen again.

You should read a book called This Time its Different.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What your are saying is at best quibbling.

http://www.bloomberg...WSt8&refer=home

That qualifies as 10s of Billions and doesn't include Chrysler's Billions from the Bush Administration.

http://www.bloomberg...WSt8&refer=home

The larger point is a Republican Administration provided 10s of Billions to the US Auto Industry knowing their was little chance of the funds being repaid.

Had the previous administration denied the funds, GM and Chrysler would have had to declared bankruptcy sooner saving the American Taxpayer 10s of Billions of dollars wasted in a futile attempt to avoid the inevitable.

Obama defends his administration as a reluctant and stern savior of an industry that's vital to the American economy.

http://mediamatters....t-histor/150982

Regardless of their ill advised efforts, the GOP leadership was for the bailouts before Obama became President.

Being against whatever President Obama is for describes the GOP political strategy for the last 3.5 years. Any concern for the American people's welfare is a distant second at best for the GOP.

We were talking about GM, not the entire US auto industry. The Bush admin gave them 13+ million, everything after that is on Obama.

Its the american people that are going to call it the Obama bailout of GM. In fact, they already do. Republicans don't even have to. And thats because he is primarily responsible for most of it. Once again, like it or not, its his. And thats coming from the media, and not just Fox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm not a republican. Because I say something that counters some libs doesn't mean I'm that. Gm got taxpayer money and then went into bankruptcy. That's not a wise move. It also can't be compred to tarp because one was localized while the other was global and commerce directed. While we are here can some of you genius libs tell me why freddie mac and fannie mae have yet to pay ANY tarp money back?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

"Gm got taxpayer money and then went into bankruptcy."

Actually, GM received Treasury loans before they declared bankruptcy.

In reality, Obama mandated the stipulations because there was going to be taxpayer money used at some point. Had he not done so, the original GWB plan was to simply give them the money, no questions asked, no repayment required.

And I'm no "genius lib," just an Independent who's been around for awhile. I voted for Nixon in 72, Carter, John Anderson, Ross Perot and would have voted John McCain if the RNC would not have shoved that idiot Sarah Palin down his throat.

There is one thing I'd like people to consider before they fully commit to the Romney bandwagon. The Republican party would love nothing more than to let everyone forget what happened for the 8 years preceding Obama when it comes to the economy. They would appreciate it if you'd forget how good things were during the Clinton years and how quickly that all changed within GWB's first term.

Is it sheer coincidence or part of the plan that former President GWB, former Presidential candidate John McCain, former VP running mate Sarah Palin, former VP Dick Cheney, political terrorist Karl Rove, former SecDef Donald Rumsfeld, former Chairman JCS Colin Powell.... and the list goes on.... were not in attendance at the convention?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm not a republican. Because I say something that counters some libs doesn't mean I'm that. Gm got taxpayer money and then went into bankruptcy. That's not a wise move. It also can't be compred to tarp because one was localized while the other was global and commerce directed. While we are here can some of you genius libs tell me why freddie mac and fannie mae have yet to pay ANY tarp money back?

Because they don't have any money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites