Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy2010
I understand what you are saying and that point was griped about the most when the loans / stock purchases were approved. I personnally had a very big problem with it. It is very shady if not done correctly (the potential is there to defraud the taxpayer and will most likely happen); but it can be done fairly as long as the government sells the stock for what it paid plus what the money would have brought with interest. Anything less is equal to taxpayers subsidizing GM, a private company. As some others have noted, the taxpayer could actually benefit, but I think it is highly unlikely in this case.
|
How can the US and Canadian government sell back stock for what they paid for it when they didn't exactly pay for it? Or are you saying that they need dictate the selling price on what would be a publicly traded company?
Anyway, the tax payers have already came out ahead on the loans made to General Motors Company. The total value returned depends on the value of MLC and the selling price of the new GM stock. If GM is in as good of shape as they appear, then we should stand to make money when the stock is sold.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy2010
The loss of jobs and layoffs would have been temporary or short term. If there is a demand for a certain number of cars, the demand does not change because a company went out of business. What would have happened is the other car company sales would have increased, causing them to need to expand and hire. Who would they have hired? Most likely the same people who got layed off because they have the experience and would not need as much investment / training. Sure, it would have taken time for the markets to adjust, but adjust they would have. Ford probably would have been the ultimate winner (in the long run). Would there have been a price for the adjustment? Sure. Catastrophe? No.
|
The danger wasn't explicitly the loss of GM's manufacturing, is the complete collapse of the suppliers in North America. Many suppliers supply to GM, Ford, and Chrysler as well as the transplants from other manufacturers. According to most industry experts the loss of GM and Chrysler would cripple these suppliers, and by crippling the suppliers end entire industry collapses. Ford understood that, as did Toyota, and every other major automaker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alrox
Nothing regarding GM's financials is good news. They lose money selling cars still. The business is still unprofitable.
You should notice how short all those 'feel good' articles are on details. They did not get this money from selling cars. If you knew the details you would realize the massive fraud that is Standard Operation Procedure of the US government and *everyone* that accepts money from them is a player in the fraud and deception.
|
You've seen their Q1 2010 numbers? Care to share them with us? And how did their costs go up in the last 6 months? Last I checked, their costs went down as of January 1, 2010 and they were making money selling cars. Sure, they lost money by doing things like paying out billions to their VEBA fund and other large expenses