As the Economist(hardly the liberal media) recently pointed out, an apology is due to President Obama on his bailout of GM. They even point out that there is a chance that, when we spin the stock that we own, we might even make a profit.
The lesson for American voters is that their president, for all his flaws, has no desire to own the commanding heights of industry. A gambler, yes. An interventionist, yes. A socialist, no.
The fact that GM is turning a profit again and has a good outlook has to really upset Congressmen Ryan and Sensenbrenner.
Actually form Dec 19 2008 CNN MONEY
President Bush announced a rescue plan for General Motors and Chrysler LLC Friday morning that will make $13.4 billion in federal loans available almost immediately.
So just like the surge that President Bush was responsible for in IRAQ and it was President Bush that actually saved GM.
What about the increased mandates he has already put on and wants to put on employers? Sounds like commanding the heights of industry to me.
“I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody” — Barack Obama, 2008. Sounds pretty socialist to me.
Wow nota, I had no idea what a great president George W was. Thanks for reminding me how groundbreaking he was. Unfortunately all the posts you bring in here just are not steeped in truth.
Cheney Acknowledges Passing The Buck On GM:
When announcing his $17.4 billion auto bailout in December 2008, Bush said that “bankruptcy now would lead to a disorderly liquidation of American auto companies.” Cheney is now saying that they were thinking about bankruptcy all along, but instead used billions of dollars of taxpayer money to push their problems onto the Obama administration.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/03/cheney-bush-gm/
The profit thing is only true in the bizarro world of politics. Sorry but when you’ve been given $50 billion of the government, without which you’d perish, profitable just isn’t a word that remotely applies. Sort of like the lie they were telling awhile back – that they had paid off their government loans. Which of course was also only true in a bizarro world where (much like spending more money than last year can be called a cut if the % of increase is reduced). They “repaid” those loans by grabbing the same amount in a new line of government credit just like a person transferring credit card balances around.
And yet, has anything changed at GM? Is their $41,000 Volt going to change the company? Granted, they got a reduction in one of the big problems, retiree health benefits (which the government will be paying for, costing taxpayers yet billions more that aren’t even included in the official numbers.)
Perhaps the most interesting thing to me – while GM is making decent cars, they really had improved their quality going back 5+ years before the worst of the financial struggles. But I’m amazed at how many people I know – friends & family who I’d consider apolitical – have vowed to not buy GM vehicles on principle.
Finally, even if GM does manage to succeed on some level, that’s doesn’t at all change the point most of us against their bailout have made all along. We have mechanisms in place to handle that – the company should have been broken apart in bankruptcy courts with the pieces sold to companies actually capable of running a productive business. Collectively, we’d all be better off.
What exactly is the principle of NOT buying a GM car? hate for the American worker? hate for your neighbors? hoping for more unemployment? trying to send the country into a full blown depression?
You are aware I am sure that were it not for “government Bailouts” and protectionism, Honda and Toyota would not be in business. SO unless they buy a Ford they are being unbelievably ignorant and hypocritical.
Are you being intentionally dense or just argumentative? They didn’t want the government spending billions of their tax dollars on the company. It’s not a tough concept to grasp.
Hate for the American worker? PP that’s just plain bull crap to twist it into meaning that and you know it. Just garbage.
In the eyes of most Americans, GM has been making crappy cars and that’s why they were failing. Personally, I find that somewhat unfortunate in that as I said, overall their quality had been on the rise for awhile – but perception trails reality and they were just still stuck paying with their reputation for the junk they made in the 80’s and early 90’s.
My problem with the bailout is that it is not government’s place to choose winners and losers. Providing necessary services and security, helping those most in need, I can get behind all that. But companies need to succeed and fail in the market. Giving GM and to a lesser extent, Chrysler, billions of dollars not only props up failing enterprises, but does so at the expense of the others.
Actually it is not crap, the only possible way to get out of our recession and get the economy rolling again is to increase our manufacturing. The Auto industry is one of our most important manufacturing industries, if not THE most important. As you are aware, it is not just the auto companies but the peripheral businesses also that employ hundreds of thousands American workers. I will grant you that there have been some quality problems but GM is not alone in that.
What I am pointing out is to say let the “free market” decide is bullshit and you know it. There is absolutely nothing free market about the auto industry. While the Big Three here in the us have been struggling and needing the bailout(GM and Chrysler) Honda and Toyota have been getting bailed out by their governments ever since they have been in existence. They also get protected internally by their government while our government leaves them to twist in the wind. I personally would of liked to have seen our government help the big three out even more than they did!!
What enterprises were hurt by Gm still being in business?
No, there’s a much better word for it, I just chose not to use it.
If you’re against the bailout, you hate the American worker. Hate for your neighbor, hoping for more unemployment.
That’s basically what you said, and it’s absolute and utter crap. If you won’t admit that & step it back – admit that that sort of hyperbole is a hacky straw man then it’s not worth my time debating the relative merits of the policies.
You prefer to make boogeymen of people who disagree with you – that alternative views can only be the result of greed or corruption. At some point, if you decide to grant that some one who disagrees with you on this (and a myriad of other things) wants what’s best for society and simply believes in a different approach, then your opinion might be of interest.
I dont prefer to make boogeymen of people who disagree with us, but I do find it amazing that someone would NOT drive a GM on “principle”. What would that principle be?
I grew up by Janesville and have seen the devastation of what closing the GM plant has done to all of Rock County! It bothers me that China and Japan get it while we dont!
Artificially subsidizing a failing entity is not good for the economy, because it inefficiently sucks resources, among other things. Japan’s economy is worse than ours. China is doing ok for now, maybe we should export our union bosses there. Might do some good.
“Collectively, we’d all be better off.”
Locke, 2010
Sounds pretty socialist to me.
Sorry, I couldn’t resist. 😉
The epitome of taking someone out of context. I’ll wait for that quote to show up in a negative campaign ad against Locke.
How is this different from the bailout that Lee Iacocca secured for Chrysler 30 years ago? Why wasn’t that socialist?
Iacocca came in and rebuilt the company from the ground up. Any evidence GM did that?
Also, in the case of Chrysler, the government only guaranteed the loans, not actually loaning the money or buying up shares of the company.
What makes me nervous about GM is the CEO leaving. The new CEO is not ‘run the company’ kinda guy, he’s a run up the debt, ipo the sucker into failure and run for the hills.
And the Chrysler ‘bailout’ is a total rip off for the tax payer…GM we have a chance of getting some money back and we saved some US jobs…but we handed Chrysler off to Fiat. If Mercedes couldn’t figure out how to make a profit at Chrysler, Fiat won’t be able to either.