Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

GM heading for bankruptcy... again.


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#16 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,517 posts

Posted 01 September 2012 - 05:04 PM

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.

#17 stirs

stirs

    I Reckon So

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,526 posts

Posted 01 September 2012 - 05:13 PM

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.

#18 SZ James (banned)

SZ James (banned)

    The loud atheist minority drummed Tim Tevo out of the NFL.

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,304 posts

Posted 01 September 2012 - 05:50 PM



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.

#19 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,944 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 01 September 2012 - 06:45 PM

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 "[b]before declaring bankruptcy, GM received $20.57 billion in U.S. Treasury loans, according to the court filing today.

http://www.bloomberg...WSt8&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...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.

"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....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.

#20 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,517 posts

Posted 01 September 2012 - 10:06 PM

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.

#21 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,517 posts

Posted 01 September 2012 - 10:09 PM

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.

#22 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,172 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 01 September 2012 - 10:19 PM

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?

#23 Anybodyhome

Anybodyhome

    USN Retired

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,159 posts
  • LocationWherever I May Roam

Posted 01 September 2012 - 10:31 PM

"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?

#24 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,944 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 02 September 2012 - 02:26 AM

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?

#25 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,944 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 02 September 2012 - 02:47 AM

For all of you that worship Ronald Reagan he also thought it was worth while to bail out an automotive company. So President Bush and President Obama are in good company.

Ever hear of CONRAIL? You can thank Presidents Nixon and Ford for that government intervention in our failing railroads. Why that is four Republican Presidents and President Obama doing government bailouts in the last 40 years.

Don't get me started on all the Taxpayer assisted buyouts of failed financial institutions, over the last several decades, that allowed NCNB/Nationsbank to become TBTF.

#26 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,517 posts

Posted 02 September 2012 - 08:30 AM

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?

Sorry, but if you disagree with them, you are republican and evil, thats all there is to it. :)

#27 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,944 posts
  • LocationAlaska

Posted 03 September 2012 - 02:03 AM

Sorry, but if you disagree with them, you are republican and evil, thats all there is to it. :)


If you are Democratic President and embrace conservative Republican policies as your own, the GOP will abandon those positions just so they can call you a European Socialist that doesn't understand America. :rolleyes:

Mitch McConnell, on the day of your inauguration, declares his number one objective is to see you fail as President and refuses to negotiate in good faith despite your best efforts and the critical need for bipartisanship to solve the worst economic crisis in 70 years. :(


I'll return to the GOP fold when they actually try and balance our Federal budget (to include our grossly bloated Defense Dept) and stop trying to legislate what is morally acceptable for Americans do in the privacy of their own homes (how can you claim to want smaller government and do this?). :blink:

Until then they are little more than lap dogs of the powerful few, winning elections by feeding on the worst fears and biases of WASPs and demonstrating their hate of the democratic process by limiting the voting rights of minorities in every conceivable way :angry: .

#28 thatlookseasy

thatlookseasy

    Death to pennies

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,950 posts

Posted 03 September 2012 - 08:50 AM

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.


Pretty good points, but I'm gonna disagree with you on a couple. Yes, the economy is cyclical, and the POTUS gets WAY too much blame/ credit for economic conditions.

But while our economy (and in particular the housing market) may have always been headed for a downturn, the financial crisis was hardly due to a cyclical economy. For gods sake, there were major US banks with trillions of dollars tied up in completely unregulated subprime mortgage derivatives.

Oh but I forgot, those derivatives were given AAA ratings by the credit agencies, so those were completely safe investments, even though anyone with rational thinking capabilities could tell you that if the housing market drops or even stays flat those are very risky investments.

Just because the economy has its ups and downs doesnt mean we cant improve it

#29 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,517 posts

Posted 03 September 2012 - 10:31 AM

Pretty good points, but I'm gonna disagree with you on a couple. Yes, the economy is cyclical, and the POTUS gets WAY too much blame/ credit for economic conditions.

But while our economy (and in particular the housing market) may have always been headed for a downturn, the financial crisis was hardly due to a cyclical economy. For gods sake, there were major US banks with trillions of dollars tied up in completely unregulated subprime mortgage derivatives.

Oh but I forgot, those derivatives were given AAA ratings by the credit agencies, so those were completely safe investments, even though anyone with rational thinking capabilities could tell you that if the housing market drops or even stays flat those are very risky investments.

Just because the economy has its ups and downs doesnt mean we cant improve it



I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said. The point I was making to James was that blaming any specific president or admin policies for a recession is usually wrong. You seem to back that up.

Regarding what you said about the banks, I agree, and they were stupid. But its a stupidity that has been repeated time and time again, albeit under different circumstances. We may be able to improve it to an extent, but I don't think we will ever be able to prevent things like 2008, because all the legislation in the world can't overcome stupidity and complacency.

#30 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,819 posts

Posted 03 September 2012 - 10:46 AM

Normally the President does not have a lot of control over the economy.

However, Bush took the unprecedented steps of taking a surplus and instead of saving it, decided to just cut taxes instead. He then started 2 very large wars without funding them, as well as a pretty giant Medicare project. This is more of a deficit spending issue than an "total economy" one but to conservatives, they are somehow one in the same. I think it can be easily argued that Bushes deficits were ones of choice, while Obamas were mostly ones of necessity. Cue Keynesian doubters -

When the housing crash happened and all the banking tricks were exposed, we had nothing in reserve so it was deficit spending to save the economy or let it crash. Bush and Obama saved it, but for some reason Obama is the one getting hit as some kind of big spender.

But hey we can't blame anyone now, its all water under the bridge, unless you are a Muslim Socialist who engineered all this to allow Islamic Fundamentalists to take over the country.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com