Nov 16, 2011 Political
The US Government used bailout money to help General Motors and other auto companies. The stated goal was to rescue companies that are too big to fail but the reality is that the government used the money to pay off union backers while screwing over investors. We were told that a profit would be turned and that we should not worry because they are the government and they are there to help.
Looks like the estimate of making money is turning out to be a lie told to us by politicians hell bent on robbing us blind. It is not a lie to those of us who said it would not happen and to those of us who realized the lies the auto companies told when they said they paid back the money. They took stimulus money to pay back the loans…
The estimated losses in the auto bailout have risen to 23.6 BILLION dollars, 9 BILLION more than the last estimate because GM stock is not doing well.
The government has expressed its position in this way:
In its monthly report to Congress, the Treasury Department now says it expects to lose $23.6 billion, up from its previous estimate of $14.33 billion. Detroit News
Herein lies the problem. The Treasury is not going to lose any money. Let me express the sentence so it has the truth; In its monthly report to Congress, the Treasury Department now says it expects TAXPAYERS to lose $23.6 billion, up from its previous estimate of $14.33 billion.
Government seems to forget whose money this is. The money that was spent to bailout the unions and the union workers came from taxpayers. All money that government spends comes from some other entity (most of it through taxes) which means the Treasury (as is true with all government agencies) cannot lose money. All it can do is lose money that belongs to the taxpayer.
I did not agree with the Wall Street bailouts but at least those folks paid the money back (some after being FORCED to take the money in the first place). If those Occupy morons want to protest they should be marching at GM and at the union shops.
Of course they should also be protesting in DC.
We have to call these people on this kind of stuff. This has been going on for far too long in that the government acts as if it spends and loses its own money when it is in fact spending, wasting, and losing OUR money.
Never surrender, never submit.
Jun 8, 2011 Political
General Motors received a lot of money from the US taxpayer under both George Bush and Barack Obama. Despite Obama’s claims (and his fuzzy math) about car companies paying back the money, they still owe the taxpayer billions of dollars that we will likely never see. GM CEO Dan Akerson said he was grateful that the government rescued GM but wants the government out of the company in the next 6 to 12 months. Newsflash for Mr. Akerson, the government did not rescue your company, the taxpayer did through coercive tax policies that allow the government, under threat of force, to extract money from people who earn it and spend it on companies like yours. Companies that are poorly managed and spend unwisely. The taxpayer was forced to rescue your company because it was mismanaged and we had no say in the matter.
How does Mr. Akerson want to repay the taxpayer who rescued his company? He is in favor of raising the federal gas tax by as much as a dollar a gallon in order to compel people to buy more fuel efficient cars. GM just happens to make a few models of fuel efficient cars so his company will benefit from the tax increase (at least that is what he wants). What we have here is a company that was bailed out by people who are having trouble making ends meet wanting to screw those very people.
No good deed (if anyone would call bailing out a company a good deed) goes unpunished.
How are people who are having trouble making ends meet supposed to buy a new car? How will forcing them to pay more for fuel make their lives any easier when they can’t afford a new, fuel efficient car but will be forced to pay the higher fuel tax for the fuel consumed by their older cars? This takes into consideration that people still have cars in the first place. Most who still have them are probably still paying for them so they will be severely underwater if they trade in for a fuel efficient car. Those cars can run about 40,000 dollars. Those who have paid off their cars will likely pay the fuel tax rather than go into debt to save at the pump.
And what about people who have no use for the little boxes of fuel efficiency? What about those who must have SUVs and pick-up trucks? Some of us must report to work no matter what so my Jeep is a better option than a car that will not make it in the snow. When that little car can get me to work in the snow and haul 800 pounds of stuff then I will consider it. The people who must have the larger vehicles will end up paying more at the pump.
This is a fine thank you to the American taxpayer for rescuing GM. Mr. Akerson.
How about the next time you need money we just say no?
Better yet, how about we decide not to buy GM vehicles?
Never surrender, never submit.
Jun 1, 2011 Political
After George “we have to abandon capitalism to save it” Bush started lending money to companies like GM, Barack Obama took control and doubled down. He bailed out General Motors and his pals in the unions at the expense of the investors who should have been compensated first. When Obama, with his vast experience in economics, discussed the GM bailout he assured us that it was a good investment and that we would end up making money on the deal.
“American taxpayers are now positioned to recover more than my Administration invested in GM.” — President Obama, November 18, 2010.
“I think the government’s investment is well placed and I think they’ll make a lot of money.” — then Obama appointee GM C.E.O. Ed Whitacre, January 11, 2010. Pajamas Media (which links to the source articles)
It looks like that is not quite right as the same Obama who told us we would profit is now telling us that we will lose 14 BILLION dollars. That means, ladies and gentlemen, that the 50% of us who pay taxes will lose 14 BILLION dollars because Obama invested our money unwisely.
Let us break this down. Obama (following Bush) told us that GM needed to be bailed out and then he used our money to bail them out. He then told us it was a good deal and we would see a profit on our money. Now he is telling us that we will lose 14 BILLION dollars.
So somebody tell me why Bernie Madoff is in jail and Obama is not?
Will those of us who pay taxes be allowed to write off this bad investment? Can we reduce our tax burden by 20% (the percentage of our money that the government lost)?
How can anyone claim that this program was a success when it cost us 14 BILLION dollars?
How come GM is not forced to keep paying us from its profits until the debt (plus interest) is paid? How dare the Democrats cry about oil companies getting over on us when GM is bending us over big time?
GM and Chrysler should have been allowed to fail. Ford made it and is in a stronger position.
I, along with many others, will never buy a GM or Chrysler product again (which is a shame because I love my Jeep).
Perhaps this is why Obama and his toadies want to win the individual mandate case in Obamacare. If the courts rule they can force us to buy a product will it be very long before they force us to buy GM products?
Good luck with that. You will need it.
Never surrender, never submit.
May 20, 2011 Political
Thanks to US taxpayers General Motors became Government Motors as taxpayer money was used to bailout the failing auto company. It should have been allowed to fail but Barack Obama had to bail out the company in order to save his union supporters and his puppet master at union headquarters.
Barack Obama took OUR money and without our permission used it to help a failing auto company by allowing the government to become a part owner in the enterprise. This all happened as private investors were screwed over in favor of union thugs. We were told that there would be a profit for us out of this (as if those of us paying the bills would actually see any of it) but there was no profit and the government is selling its shares in the company at a loss. GM did not pay the money back as any money paid back came from stimulus money. In other words, GM took the name Government Motors seriously and paid its debt to us with money it borrowed from us.
Given all this, one would think that GM would be beholden to the US taxpayers. One would think that since our money was confiscated from us and used to keep that company from failing that we would be rewarded, not individually but as a collective. In other words, one would think that since the country did something good for GM that GM would do something good for the country.
One would be wrong for thinking that because GM has decided to spend 540 million dollars (no doubt taxpayer money) to produce two low emission motors in Mexico. The project will create (directly and indirectly) about 1000 jobs. Since 2006 GM has invested about 5 BILLION dollars in Mexico.
I would think that GM would produce the motors in the US. In fact I would require them to. As the NLRB tells Boeing where it can use ITS OWN MONEY to build planes, the government is silent about a company partly owned by taxpayers fleeing to Mexico to build its product. It is not bad enough that GM is screwing the people who saved its sorry butt but the company has been investing in Mexico, at the expense of jobs here, since 2006.
So tell me, why didn’t GM go to the Mexican government when it needed to be bailed out?
And why is the Obama regime not stopping our employees (yes people at GM, we own you and you work for us now) from going out of the country.
I think Detroit could use a new plant and the workers that come with it. I would imagine that the 5 BILLION spent in Mexico could have helped Detroit quite a bit.
Then again, Detroit is run by liberals and GM is a union company. Either is bad but combined they are a recipe for disaster and failure which is why GM needed to be bailed out and Detroit is a wasteland.
GM went from General Motors to Government Motors and now it is just Gone Mexican.
So folks, how do you feel about being taken advantage of like this?
I said it before and I will iterate it here. I will never buy a GM vehicle (and yes, I have owned GM in the past).
Heh, when Barack Obama gave us his simplistic approach to the jobs problem by telling businesses that they needed to hire I guess he forgot to tell his toadies that they needed to hire INSIDE the country…
Perhaps we should rename GM to BOHICA Motors.
Bend Over, Here It Comes Again…
And maybe their next car should be the Chevy Bolt since they bolted across the border…
Never surrender, never submit.
Feb 24, 2010 Political
Barack Obama and his government own General Motors (or as GM now means, Government Motors). It must be nice to work for Obama:
After resigning as president and CEO of General Motors in December, Fritz Henderson might have gone into hiding or decided to sit out the harsh Michigan winter on a Florida beach.
Instead, here he is popping up again, this time as a consultant to GM on international operations at the very fancy fee of $59,090 a month for 20 hours of work a month. That works out to almost $3,000 an hour for a CEO who was ousted after just eight months on the job. Money.CNN
3000 dollars an hour is good work if you can get it. And where can I get a job where I get that kind of money and only have to work for 20 hours a month.
Yep, the government took over GM. Does anyone actually think it will make money? Not when it does stuff like this.
But the government is doing a good job bashing Toyota in order to help out GM. Talk about a conflict of interest…