Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Taxpayer Losses Tied To Auto Bailout Rise

3 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

stormwatch89

stormwatch89



In campaign stops through swing and auto industry states, President Obama repeatedly has touted his $85 billion auto bailout.

"The American auto industry has come roaring back, making us number one again," he told a cheering crowd in Pueblo, Colo., last Thursday.

But all the while, General Motors' stock has been nose-diving. It has fallen 39 percent since its initial public offering in November 2010. And on Friday, the Treasury Department announced that expected losses to taxpayers from the bailout would increase more than $3.3 billion to $25.1 billion -- up from $21.7 billion last quarter.

John Berlau of the Competitive Enterprise Institute argues the stock decline reflects the liability of the federal government picking winners.

"They're making the environmentally correct cars. The government, the Obama administration wanted them to make the Chevy Volt rather than some of their better-selling products like some of the GM trucks," Berlau said.

Berlau adds that GM's buy-out and bankruptcy broke with legal precedent. "In a standard bankruptcy, the court will give priority to lenders and then to bond holders and then to stockholders," he said. "Here, the United Auto Workers got priority not only over other bond holders, they got a higher stake in the new company than other bond holders that had the same unsecured status."

In a statement to Fox News Tuesday, Treasury Department spokesman Matt Anderson defended the bailout.

"The auto industry rescue helped save more than one million jobs throughout our nation's industrial heartland and is expected to cost far less than many had feared during the height of the crisis," he said.

Berlau questions those numbers. "I think there's some real fuzzy math going on there. At the same time, (Obama) put 100,000 jobs on the chopping block by closing more than 2,000 dealers in a matter of months."

Indeed, 2,200 dealerships were shut down as a part of the bailout -- a point Mitt Romney, who pushed for a managed bankruptcy of the auto industry, drove home in a recent TV ad that aired in the important swing and auto industry state of Ohio. The ad features the voice of former GM car deal Al Zarzour, interspersed with shots of an empty, locked showroom.

"I received a letter from General Motors. They were suspending my credit line. We had thirty-some employees that were out of work. My wife and I were the last ones there," Zarzour's voice-over says.

On Tuesday, GM's stock closed down at 20.20 on the NYSE. With the government still owning 500 million shares of GM stock, it would have to sell at $53 a share to break even -- more than double Tuesday's price.

Complicating GM's future is the bleak sales picture in Europe, where GM owns the Opel and Vauxhall brands. The sovereign debt crisis, high unemployment and a lack of consumer confidence there led to a 4.9 percent drop in GM sales in the first half of this year.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/14/taxpayer-losses-tied-to-auto-bailout-rise/#ixzz29w7H35S7






Guest


Guest

You'll probaly hear crickets from the left on this. its all they got except personal attacks and abortion.

This deal like so many that obama made was a monetary payoff to his voter base, the unions in this case.

2seaoat



The post is so patently stupid it is not crickets from the left, but the heavy lift of trying to have the truth impact the impregnable dense mass some call gray matter. First, where in the article has there been any mention of Chrysler.......gee what happen in May? Folks copy and paste and but few on these forums have the capability or education which allows for analysis other than regurgitating nonsense......so I will answer my question. Chrysler had until 2017 to repay the American and Canadian Government 8 billion.......so what happened in May......they paid it back in full.

So, for the tenth time......it really is getting tedious repeatedly trying to explain things to folks who really do not understand bankruptcy law....but here we go again. Romney wanted a straight up chapter 7 liquidation. This would have resulted in 3 billion less for the bondholders.......I have repeatedly posted the links from the New York bankruptcy courts where in fact the Chapter 11 and the debtor in possession governmental refinancing was a huge success. I have also acknowledged that the creditors committee could have extracted more concessions from the unions, but the truth of the matter is that the loss of one million jobs, and the destruction of the Automotive supply chain would have been a irrevocable collapse which would have cost this nation trillions.....not a few billion.

Simple minds and political hacks focus on the 20 billion repayment without looking at the multipliers and the resulting savings to government. Now if you want to point to Clunkers for cash....yes, a failed Obama policy, but the Auto bailout........it will probably be a top 10 heroic economic action in our American History. A huge success, but for the myopic vision of a few on these forums.....again the lift is too heavy.

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:The post is so patently stupid it is not crickets from the left, but the heavy lift of trying to have the truth impact the impregnable dense mass some call gray matter. First, where in the article has there been any mention of Chrysler.......gee what happen in May? Folks copy and paste and but few on these forums have the capability or education which allows for analysis other than regurgitating nonsense......so I will answer my question. Chrysler had until 2017 to repay the American and Canadian Government 8 billion.......so what happened in May......they paid it back in full.

So, for the tenth time......it really is getting tedious repeatedly trying to explain things to folks who really do not understand bankruptcy law....but here we go again. Romney wanted a straight up chapter 7 liquidation. This would have resulted in 3 billion less for the bondholders.......I have repeatedly posted the links from the New York bankruptcy courts where in fact the Chapter 11 and the debtor in possession governmental refinancing was a huge success. I have also acknowledged that the creditors committee could have extracted more concessions from the unions, but the truth of the matter is that the loss of one million jobs, and the destruction of the Automotive supply chain would have been a irrevocable collapse which would have cost this nation trillions.....not a few billion.

Simple minds and political hacks focus on the 20 billion repayment without looking at the multipliers and the resulting savings to government. Now if you want to point to Clunkers for cash....yes, a failed Obama policy, but the Auto bailout........it will probably be a top 10 heroic economic action in our American History. A huge success, but for the myopic vision of a few on these forums.....again the lift is too heavy.

WRONG AGAIN TURD FOR BRAINS.

While crysler may have paid back thier TARP loans, GM still owes 27 BILLION$$$ and GM's finacial arm Ally finacial still owes 14 Billion.

Note to Obama fans: GM did go bankrupt – filing for Chapter 11 protection against its creditors on June 1, 2009. It’s what happened next that the president can take credit for – a handout of $49.5 billion in taxpayer money to GM, some $27 billion of which remains outstanding, and another $17 billion to its financial arm Ally Financial, which still owes $14.7 billion.


Read more at http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2012/10/17/Obamas-Auto-Bailout-Was-Really-a-Hefty-Union-Payoff.aspx#veLg3JzD9ldeMSbF.99

stormwatch89

stormwatch89

2seaoat wrote:The post is so patently stupid it is not crickets from the left, but the heavy lift of trying to have the truth impact the impregnable dense mass some call gray matter. First, where in the article has there been any mention of Chrysler.......gee what happen in May? Folks copy and paste and but few on these forums have the capability or education which allows for analysis other than regurgitating nonsense......so I will answer my question. Chrysler had until 2017 to repay the American and Canadian Government 8 billion.......so what happened in May......they paid it back in full.

So, for the tenth time......it really is getting tedious repeatedly trying to explain things to folks who really do not understand bankruptcy law....but here we go again. Romney wanted a straight up chapter 7 liquidation. This would have resulted in 3 billion less for the bondholders.......I have repeatedly posted the links from the New York bankruptcy courts where in fact the Chapter 11 and the debtor in possession governmental refinancing was a huge success. I have also acknowledged that the creditors committee could have extracted more concessions from the unions, but the truth of the matter is that the loss of one million jobs, and the destruction of the Automotive supply chain would have been a irrevocable collapse which would have cost this nation trillions.....not a few billion.

Simple minds and political hacks focus on the 20 billion repayment without looking at the multipliers and the resulting savings to government. Now if you want to point to Clunkers for cash....yes, a failed Obama policy, but the Auto bailout........it will probably be a top 10 heroic economic action in our American History. A huge success, but for the myopic vision of a few on these forums.....again the lift is too heavy.


You and I have disagreed on this one for a long time, so I won't rehash.

I must, however, comment on your unabashed arrogance!

What has happened to you?????

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

2seaoat wrote:The post is so patently stupid it is not crickets from the left, but the heavy lift of trying to have the truth impact the impregnable dense mass some call gray matter. First, where in the article has there been any mention of Chrysler.......gee what happen in May? Folks copy and paste and but few on these forums have the capability or education which allows for analysis other than regurgitating nonsense......so I will answer my question. Chrysler had until 2017 to repay the American and Canadian Government 8 billion.......so what happened in May......they paid it back in full.

So, for the tenth time......it really is getting tedious repeatedly trying to explain things to folks who really do not understand bankruptcy law....but here we go again. Romney wanted a straight up chapter 7 liquidation. This would have resulted in 3 billion less for the bondholders.......I have repeatedly posted the links from the New York bankruptcy courts where in fact the Chapter 11 and the debtor in possession governmental refinancing was a huge success. I have also acknowledged that the creditors committee could have extracted more concessions from the unions, but the truth of the matter is that the loss of one million jobs, and the destruction of the Automotive supply chain would have been a irrevocable collapse which would have cost this nation trillions.....not a few billion.

Simple minds and political hacks focus on the 20 billion repayment without looking at the multipliers and the resulting savings to government. Now if you want to point to Clunkers for cash....yes, a failed Obama policy, but the Auto bailout........it will probably be a top 10 heroic economic action in our American History. A huge success, but for the myopic vision of a few on these forums.....again the lift is too heavy.

SeaOat, isn't it also true that while Romney has claimed he supported letting the auto industry go bankrupt, that at the time this was going on there were not adequate private investors interested in this idea? The federal government was the rescuer of last resort?

Here's another question too for you: What would have been the advantage and what groups would have benefited if the auto industry had been allowed to go bust? I'm looking for the villains who would have profited from such a situation.

Guest


Guest

othershoe1030 wrote:
2seaoat wrote:The post is so patently stupid it is not crickets from the left, but the heavy lift of trying to have the truth impact the impregnable dense mass some call gray matter. First, where in the article has there been any mention of Chrysler.......gee what happen in May? Folks copy and paste and but few on these forums have the capability or education which allows for analysis other than regurgitating nonsense......so I will answer my question. Chrysler had until 2017 to repay the American and Canadian Government 8 billion.......so what happened in May......they paid it back in full.

So, for the tenth time......it really is getting tedious repeatedly trying to explain things to folks who really do not understand bankruptcy law....but here we go again. Romney wanted a straight up chapter 7 liquidation. This would have resulted in 3 billion less for the bondholders.......I have repeatedly posted the links from the New York bankruptcy courts where in fact the Chapter 11 and the debtor in possession governmental refinancing was a huge success. I have also acknowledged that the creditors committee could have extracted more concessions from the unions, but the truth of the matter is that the loss of one million jobs, and the destruction of the Automotive supply chain would have been a irrevocable collapse which would have cost this nation trillions.....not a few billion.

Simple minds and political hacks focus on the 20 billion repayment without looking at the multipliers and the resulting savings to government. Now if you want to point to Clunkers for cash....yes, a failed Obama policy, but the Auto bailout........it will probably be a top 10 heroic economic action in our American History. A huge success, but for the myopic vision of a few on these forums.....again the lift is too heavy.

SeaOat, isn't it also true that while Romney has claimed he supported letting the auto industry go bankrupt, that at the time this was going on there were not adequate private investors interested in this idea? The federal government was the rescuer of last resort?

Here's another question too for you: What would have been the advantage and what groups would have benefited if the auto industry had been allowed to go bust? I'm looking for the villains who would have profited from such a situation.

while you overlook the vilians who did profit from the situation. the union

seaoat is not going to be able to come on this post and tell you that GM has repaid its debt. thats already been proven a lie. He tried to be sneaky with the crysler repayment to make some thin brained ones think that was it. it wasnt.

seaoats large multiple synonym paragraphs cant change the facts of the GM bailout. No matter how eloquently he puts it.

2seaoat



The folks who think they understand bankruptcy law make this forum entertaining. Let me ask who pays the benefits for 1-3 million folks who would have been unemployed, lost their homes, and watched the negative multipliers begin as car part suppliers collapsed across america. To answer your question 1030......foreign manufacturers would have had a field day picking the bones of America.

First, the truth is simple. What Romney recommended was a straight 7. It would have cost America 10 fold what we could have possible lost by being the lender in a debtor in possession Chapter 11 filing. The funny thing is that the creditor committee and the Canadian government approved the plan and because of that the bondholders got 3 billion more than they would have received in a straight 7, yet these blogs use this as an attack on the president. Again, the auto bailout will be a top 10 heroic move by a president in American history. It is interesting to have discussions with folks who are entirely clueless about economics, bankruptcy law, and what costs the government would have borne had a liquidation happened like Romney wanted. When Orwellian doublethink can control the weak of mind, and turn a huge success into a marginal economic impact in those weak minds.....it becomes clear that a free democratic society is under duress.....

Guest


Guest

2seaoat wrote:The folks who think they understand bankruptcy law make this forum entertaining. Let me ask who pays the benefits for 1-3 million folks who would have been unemployed, lost their homes, and watched the negative multipliers begin as car part suppliers collapsed across america. To answer your question 1030......foreign manufacturers would have had a field day picking the bones of America.

First, the truth is simple. What Romney recommended was a straight 7. It would have cost America 10 fold what we could have possible lost by being the lender in a debtor in possession Chapter 11 filing. The funny thing is that the creditor committee and the Canadian government approved the plan and because of that the bondholders got 3 billion more than they would have received in a straight 7, yet these blogs use this as an attack on the president. Again, the auto bailout will be a top 10 heroic move by a president in American history. It is interesting to have discussions with folks who are entirely clueless about economics, bankruptcy law, and what costs the government would have borne had a liquidation happened like Romney wanted. When Orwellian doublethink can control the weak of mind, and turn a huge success into a marginal economic impact in those weak minds.....it becomes clear that a free democratic society is under duress.....

seems to me a free democratic society is under diress when our government decides to start pickin winners and losers in private bussinesses all the while purchasing shares of corporations with tax payer dollars.

This type of action can only be defined as totalitarianism.

I guess youre an advocate of the "too big to fail" policy.

Guest


Guest

but those workers tied their fate and futures to the unions... let the unions take care of them just as promised.

Guest


Guest

PkrBum wrote:but those workers tied their fate and futures to the unions... let the unions take care of them just as promised.

That's why they pay dues, of course the unions are spending big money to get their hero BHO reelected so perhaps their unemployment fund is a little dry right now.

Guest


Guest

Seaoat,

You defend the Kenyan-in-Chief as if your life depended upon it, but out of the other side of your neck, you worship Newt. You are truly in need of meds for your bi-polar issues.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum