Menu
New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Hey ! I'm AOC and I just cost New York 27 Billion in Tax dollars !

Nostra

Nostra

Governor
middleview said:
I'm pragmatic, you're dogmatic. I see that a million people losing their jobs on top of the millions who had already lost their jobs in 2008 would have been unacceptable.
.
Click to expand...
Your claim a million people would lose their jobs is complete bullshit..........GM could have just filed for bankruptcy like any other company and reorganized..............oh wait, they did............AFTER TAKING BILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS.

Oops!
 
middleview

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Raoul_Luke said:
So let me get this straight - no company can ever be allowed to go under? Should we all still be buying buggy whips? WTF kind of economic "logic" is that?

No one was stepping forward with bids (for bonds, stocks, assets, etc.) because the GOVERNMENT had stepped in and created uncertainty wrt to market prices. Again, you absolve government for its failed interventions while blaming markets for government's failures. Which is why you can not understand simple economics.
Click to expand...
You ignore the actual timeline. There was no private source of funds available to the automakers. After having reached the point of having no other alternatives they went to congress in the fall of 2008. "W" gave them a fraction of what they estimated they needed to stay in business. They came back in early 2009 with a new request.

If it had been a buggy whip maker, would a loan extend the life of a company producing a product with no future? No. Did GM's products have a future? Of course. People are still buying cars, right? WTF kind of logic compares obsolete products to a product that makes up a huge part of our economy?
 
middleview

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Nostra said:
Your claim a million people would lose their jobs is complete bullshit..........GM could have just filed for bankruptcy like any other company and reorganized..............oh wait, they did............AFTER TAKING BILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS.

Oops!
Click to expand...
Why did they go to congress to request money? Just filing bankruptcy for reorganization wasn't enough. If it had been the CEO of GM would not have accepted a deal that required he quit his job.

By early 2009 GM had already accepted billions. It wasn't enough...what part of that don't you get? Their run rate burned through that initial funding in just a couple of months.
 
Raoul_Luke

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
middleview said:
You ignore the actual timeline. There was no private source of funds available to the automakers. After having reached the point of having no other alternatives they went to congress in the fall of 2008. "W" gave them a fraction of what they estimated they needed to stay in business. They came back in early 2009 with a new request.

If it had been a buggy whip maker, would a loan extend the life of a company producing a product with no future? No. Did GM's products have a future? Of course. People are still buying cars, right? WTF kind of logic compares obsolete products to a product that makes up a huge part of our economy?
Click to expand...
And again you fail econ 101. If the "products have a future" then no one is going to let them disappear (unless everyone has woken up that day with shit for brains). As I keep telling you, someone with cash (or access to debt) would have bought GM assets in a either a chapter 7 or 11 bankruptcy - as long as Obama hadn't demanded that the UAW be kept whole and in place. This is just another example of you blaming the "free market" for a failure that resulted from government intervention.
 
Raoul_Luke

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
middleview said:
Why did they go to congress to request money? Just filing bankruptcy for reorganization wasn't enough. If it had been the CEO of GM would not have accepted a deal that required he quit his job.

By early 2009 GM had already accepted billions. It wasn't enough...what part of that don't you get? Their run rate burned through that initial funding in just a couple of months.
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting he wasn't trying to save his job (or more specifically, his equity stake)?

The fact that it didn't work doesn't mean that wasn't his aim.
 
Nostra

Nostra

Governor
The Dimwinger solution for everything: Throw taxpayer dollars at it.

GM still filed bankruptcy............and they think it was a success.
 
middleview

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Raoul_Luke said:
Are you suggesting he wasn't trying to save his job (or more specifically, his equity stake)?

The fact that it didn't work doesn't mean that wasn't his aim.
Click to expand...
If he could have continued as CEO, taking GM through chapter 11 and back to profitability...why would Wagoner choose to resign? How in hell would that have been better for him to go down as a failure?
 
middleview

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Nostra said:
Link to them filing bankruptcy to reorganize?
Click to expand...
They didn't. They filed bankruptcy for liquidation. They had no financing to stay in business. What part of that don't you understand? You have to have a source of funds to continue operation.
 
Drumcollie

Drumcollie

* See DC's list of Kook posters*
middleview said:
1. She wasn't in favor of the plan.
2. She is against government subsidies for corporations.
3. She had nothing at all to do with the cancellation of the project.

Other than that...what is your point?
Click to expand...
1-2. She is a Republican/Libertarian?
3. You think Amazon did not consider this fact? They looked at everything.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top