1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

General Motors = Government Motors?

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by asur, Apr 27, 2009.

  1. asur

    asur New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,100
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If the restructing plan is accepted by Obama the Treasury will own GM.
    It's said that Obama has never liked Pontiacs.

    Another 21000 jobs will be lost thanks to Obama by next year.

    I though Obama was trying to save jobs?

    I guess its all about trying and not doing

    Obama is causing the loss of thousands upon thousands of jobs. I don't know, maybe somewhere in the neighborhood of 600,000 jobs a month.

    "You can't blame it on the Bush administration anymore," said John Boyd, head of the National Black Farmers Association"
     
  2. marklutroni

    marklutroni New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2009
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The "restructuring plan" would take several years for the economic crisis to improve.
     
  3. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Well the last two economic crisis didn't take several years to improve. Which begs the question: Why is this one going to take so long?

    I suggest the answer is: Government involvement.
     
  4. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Lets not have done anything, and then see how many more jobs would be lost. The number is probably exponentially higher.
    Pontiac going away is inevitable, whereas GM going under would have caused much more pain.
     
  5. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    We probably could have recovered from the shock that created a bit more quickly than blowing billions and still firing everyone.
     
  6. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Pontiac going away is inevitable? You do realize that Pontiac was the third best selling brand GM had, right? How does "third best selling brand" equal inevitable going away?

    Moreover, I find it amazing that people always claims that "well it would have been worse if we had done nothing". Do you have any evidence of this?

    In fact, I read recent column by an economist which said that government is doing the worst thing possible right now. If there had been no bailout, GM would have simply filed chapter 11, and the contracts and units causing a loss of money, would have been re-negotiated. By bailing them out, the sources of the problems are not being dealt with.

    In short, it's dragging out the unavoidable. Look at AIG. Did government save any jobs? No, the company is still imploding. The CEO recently said that within 5 years or something, the company will no longer exist. Then what the heck were we doing giving them money?

    "Oh will if we had done nothing, more jobs would be lost"

    How can you lose more jobs than the entire company disbanding? Look at Bear Stearns. We bailed them out, and they still went bankrupt. Even the GM CEO himself, the one put there by Obama, said that GM may still go bankrupt. So Bunz... how many failure on failures do you need before you come to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe, the bailouts did nothing of value?
     
  7. asur

    asur New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,100
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The US Government now owns GM along with UAW

    The United Auto Workers union and the federal government may wind up with an 90 percent equity stake in GM for exchanging a combined $20 billion of their debt to equity.

    It really is Government Motors since UAW is really the Democratic Party, hook, line and sinker.

    Here is the statement from advisers to ad hoc committee of GM bondholders:

    We are deeply concerned with today’s decision by GM and the Obama task force to offer only a small, inequitable percentage of stock to its bondholders in exchange for their bonds.

    We believe the offer to be a blatant disregard of fairness for the bondholders who have funded this company and amounts to using taxpayer money to show political favoritism of one creditor over another.

    Today’s posturing makes it clear that the company and the Obama task force would rather discount the thousands of individual investors and retirees who own GM bonds than undergo earnest negotiations.

    The current offer is neither reasonable nor adequate. Both the union and the bondholders hold unsecured claims against GM. However, the union’s VEBA would receive a 50 percent recovery in cash and a 39 percent stake in a new GM for its $20 billion in obligations; while bondholders, who own more than $27 billion in GM bonds and have the same legal rights as the unions, would only receive a mere 10 percent of the restructured company and essentially no cash.

    The offer was made unilaterally, without any prior discussion or negotiation with bondholders and in spite of repeated calls for dialogue.
     
Loading...

Share This Page