GM's 60-Day Money Back Guarantee?

[BLAZER PROPHET]

The Chrysler bailout in the 80s worked because they were government-backed loans. Chrysler knew it had to get its act together and under Iacocca did a decent job of cutting costs and improving its product. The current bailouts of GM and Chrysler were nothing more than transfers of wealth from the taxpayers to the UAW. GM is just continuing to piss money down a rathole. As for Chrysler, how soon before Fiat tries to renegotiate the deal? Fix It Again Tony has its balance sheet firmly attached to the US Government teet and it's not going to let go.

Good intentions have killed the US auto industry.

Rep that post.

 

[barfo]

The bailout money basically a sunk cost (which I think is generally what Barfo is saying) and we won't have to ADD money because of this program.

The question PapaG and BTown seem to be wanting to answer is: How do you make the best moves to get what you can back and the most benefit from that cost?

I would think the conservative's answer to this question is, government keeps it's nose out of GM and lets GM do whatever it thinks best. Which in fact seems to be what's happening now.

My personal opinion is that even if GM returns to profitability and our shares become worth something, the government will just look at any money coming back as appearing out of thin air and spend it on their pet projects.

You are correct, there's no doubt about that.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Also, barfo is absolutely incorrect in the UAW pensions being dissolved with what used to be GM stock. Protecting those retirement funds was a part of the "bail-out" and was basically a hand-out to the UAW.

I don't recall saying that they lost their pensions. In fact I don't recall mentioning pensions at all.

barfo

 

[barfo]

So how do "we the people" benefit from the new GM stock that "we the people" are paying for?

As per post 41,

If, someday, GM actually becomes a success again, then we can either do an IPO and sell our stake or sell it to a private equity group or another car company.
If it continues to suck, we'll never get the money back.

barfo

 

[PapaG]

As per post 41,



barfo

So the government reaps the rewards by using tax dollars to prop up GM. Gotcha.

 

[PapaG]

How can one become involved in the conversation then? Must he ask permission?

I think him crafting an apology for me was unnecessary and rather douchey, so I replied to his "advice".

 

[yakbladder]

I think him crafting an apology for me was unnecessary and rather douchey, so I replied to his "advice".

Well I think you never admitting you're wrong is more than a bit "douchey" so I provided you with some helpful feedback. I also think your attitude towards barfo is a bit "douchey". In fact, I think the whole discussion is "douchey". Do you just have like a dictionary from the 80's opened on your desk when you write your posts?!?!?!

 

[PapaG]

Well I think you never admitting you're wrong is more than a bit "douchey" so I provided you with some helpful feedback. I also think your attitude towards barfo is a bit "douchey". In fact, I think the whole discussion is "douchey". Do you just have like a dictionary from the 80's opened on your desk when you write your posts?!?!?!

I admit I'm wrong, but I'm not wrong in this thread. The bookie analogy lacked the basic "vig", which is how the bookie makes his profit. It's also a standard business practice, unless interest-free loans are now commonplace.

Do you have a How to Give Unsolicited Advice on the Internet book open on your desk?

 

[yakbladder]

I admit I'm wrong, but I'm not wrong in this thread. The bookie analogy lacked the basic "vig", which is how the bookie makes his profit. It's also a standard business practice, unless interest-free loans are now commonplace.

Do you have a How to Give Unsolicited Advice on the Internet book open on your desk?

Actually I do, page 47.

 

[yakbladder]

Actually I do, page 47.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Hahahahaha!! Rep'd!