Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You are either short on facts or deliberately lying.
The bailout started with Bush and as I recall more than half the money was given out when Obama took office. From day one the government started taking stock in corporations to secure the bailout funds, so that GM bailout was started under Bush, when GM recieved bailout funds. GM needed more funds and the corporation went through a controlled bankrupcy. It came out of bankrupcy to become the largest automaker in the world. The bailout was passed for Bush by Democrats and it was a remarkable success. The Republicans didn't even support the efforts of their own President during the financial crisis.
I said stimulus, not bailout although I disagreed with that and have since admitted to being wrong about the positive effects the liquidity the bailouts had on the economy.
The GM bailout was described as loans, and we were told that it was desperately needed to keep GM out of bankruptcy - oops - GM went bankrupt anyway. Then some loans were repaid with further bailout money, others were converted to stock. All in all, the US taxpayers lost over $25 Billion to "save" GM and it hasn't produced enough to even match the government's valuation.
GM is not the largest automaker, Toyota is. That's without the government doing everything possible to save face.
GM should have been liquidated and re-oriented. That's how capitalism in a generally free market works. GM is just crony capitalism and it doesn't even work well then.
The government made money on the GM bailout and you did discuss the GM bailout that started with Bush. GM told the government it would need more money, so nothing that happened was a secret. The bailout involved loans secured with stock and interest was charged to these corporations, hence the government made money off the interest, warrants and stock that secured the loans.
You are running your mouth and just saying bullshit. It doesn't work well to save the largest automaker on Earth that provides tax revenue many times more than it received in bailout funds that it paid back with interest?
Post proof to prove your claims and not some bullshit from a right-wing blog.
Wed Apr 21, 2010
GM Chief Executive Ed Whitacre announced at a plant in Kansas that the automaker had fully repaid U.S. and Canadian government loans extended as part of its bankruptcy last year, and said there was "a real possibility" of an initial public offering this year.
Source: GM repays U.S. loan, government loss on bailout falls | Reuters
gm repays government - Bing
Where have you been?
GM is again the world's largest automaker - Los Angeles Times
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But once the government sells its shares, GM will still be tainted by the fact that it failed to pay back all the taxpayer money used to save it back in 2009. GM initially got $49.5 billion from the U.S. government, and it paid back $23.1 billion of that after its stock went public in 2010. That left $26.4 billion GM still owed the government.
GM's shares have been trading around $25. The buyback will occur at a share price of $27.50, or a total of $5.5 billion for 200 million shares. But for taxpayers to get their money back, the government would have to sell at an average price of about $52. So by simple math, the total break-even price for those first 200 million shares would be about $10.4 billion. The $5.5 billion sale price amounts to roughly a $5 billion loss for taxpayers.
Its $67 billion bailout also involved three companies, the old GM, the GM that emerged out of bankruptcy reorganization and auto financing arm GMAC, which is now Ally Financial.
The new company received $6.7 billion in secured loans. In April 2010, GM repaid them with interest and touted it had "repaid our government loan, in full, with interest, five years ahead of the original schedule." But billions of dollars more had been converted to a 61 percent stake in the new company, said James Cain, financial news manager for GM. That stake is now down to 32 percent of the companys common stock. The question is how much that stock will earn taxpayers to offset $27 billion not yet recouped from old and new GM. A third of GMs entire stock value as of March 19, 2012, was just $13 billion. (Check its current market capitalization.)
In mid-December of 2008, the Bush administration stepped in to lend General Motors and Chrysler billions to prevent impending bankruptcy. Subsequently, the Obama administration kept the two companies afloat as they filed for bankruptcy protection. See below for details on outstanding loans to each company.
General Motors Mich. Dec. 29, 2008 [amt received] $50,744,648,329 [amt recovered] $28,353,765,982
Q: Did General Motors repay its TARP loan from the Treasury with other TARP money?
A: Yes. GM repaid the loan portion of the automaker bailout ahead of schedule, with interest. It used TARP money it had already received but hadnt spent. And taxpayers are still stuck with GM stock that isnt worth what was paid for it.
When he showed himself to be the true far left liberal he is and not the moderate centrist he portrayed himself to be in the 2008 election. So when did you and the rest of the left wingers here decide you were going to worship and support Obama no matter what? Be honest,Clearly, this is directed to The Republicans and self-proclaimed Conservatives of USMB.
When, exactly, did you realize that you really didn't like Obama and were going to be against him no matter what?
I'll answer the question in the reverse as an example. Some years ago, when Bush was first elected, I disliked him. I didn't like what he stood for, didn't like what he said, I didn't even like the way he sounded, he sounds dumb and he's proven himself to be such. Anyway, I wasn't totally or automatically against him. What turned me against him permanently, was what he did with the good will of The American People after the country was attacked.
He lied about the WMDs, he kept the country in state of constant fear, and he waged two unnecessary wars. To top it off, he didn't pay for it at the time and sent the bill to our kids and grandkids.
To be precise, from the instant he began that fear campaign war campaign, he lost me forever. I will NEVER forgive him for that.
So, when did you Republicans, Conservatives and other assorted RWers of USMB decide to be against Obama no matter what?
C'mon, be honest.
Saying that Obama is a far left liberal is ridiculous. The far left has been disappointed by Obama.
I think we need a TRUE conservative party.Do you think a two-party system is healthy or just a Democrat party running everything?
Not a radical reactionary party like the current crop of Republicans we have today.
Get your party, The Republicans, back to a respectable state and we'll be in agreement.
I never said I was a republican. Explain to me what makes a "respectable" conservative.
You lie.When he said "You didn't build that!!!!!"
How am I a hypocrite now?He FAILED to protect us.
I don't care if this plan was underway since Nixon or King Reagan, the FACT remains that Bush. did. not. keep. us. safe.
Period. Point blank. End-of-story.
Just in case anyone failed to grasp that your a complete moron and a partisan hypocrite.....
So your issue is mainly with this, "Chicago political machine" as you call it.I was against him since his run for the US Senate. It was obvious he was a product of the Chicago political machine.
Clearly, this is directed to The Republicans and self-proclaimed Conservatives of USMB.
When, exactly, did you realize that you really didn't like Obama and were going to be against him no matter what?
I'll answer the question in the reverse as an example. Some years ago, when Bush was first elected, I disliked him. I didn't like what he stood for, didn't like what he said, I didn't even like the way he sounded, he sounds dumb and he's proven himself to be such. Anyway, I wasn't totally or automatically against him. What turned me against him permanently, was what he did with the good will of The American People after the country was attacked.
He lied about the WMDs, he kept the country in state of constant fear, and he waged two unnecessary wars. To top it off, he didn't pay for it at the time and sent the bill to our kids and grandkids.
To be precise, from the instant he began that fear campaign war campaign, he lost me forever. I will NEVER forgive him for that.
So, when did you Republicans, Conservatives and other assorted RWers of USMB decide to be against Obama no matter what?
C'mon, be honest.
You wanna stick to the promise to fix it in four years, and would like to ignore the amount of years it took to get there...is that correct?No, my very impatient, friend...it's not getting worse. It's getting better.As I've been saying for 4 years now, if Obama's plan works he gets the credit and I'll admit to being wrong. For 4 years I've been told that the recovery is happening, it's gaining steam, it's just taking longer because it was worse than they originally thought.
And yet the economy is still in the dumpster - and getting worse.
Slowly, but it's getting better.
No need to fib my brother.
No fibbing required. GDP shrunk last quarter, unemployment ticked up last month all while more people left the labor force. Prolonged high unemployment is worse than a relatively short spike followed by a robust recovery. 4 years of unemployment above 7% is not a robust recovery. A shrinking economy after all the stimulus is not a robust recovery.
Impatient? It's been 4 years. Here's what was promised remember?
Reality looks nothing like that.
You wanna stick to the promise to fix it in four years, and would like to ignore the amount of years it took to get there...is that correct?No, my very impatient, friend...it's not getting worse. It's getting better.
Slowly, but it's getting better.
No need to fib my brother.
No fibbing required. GDP shrunk last quarter, unemployment ticked up last month all while more people left the labor force. Prolonged high unemployment is worse than a relatively short spike followed by a robust recovery. 4 years of unemployment above 7% is not a robust recovery. A shrinking economy after all the stimulus is not a robust recovery.
Impatient? It's been 4 years. Here's what was promised remember?
Reality looks nothing like that.
Clearly, this is directed to The Republicans and self-proclaimed Conservatives of USMB.
When, exactly, did you realize that you really didn't like Obama and were going to be against him no matter what?
I'll answer the question in the reverse as an example. Some years ago, when Bush was first elected, I disliked him. I didn't like what he stood for, didn't like what he said, I didn't even like the way he sounded, he sounds dumb and he's proven himself to be such. Anyway, I wasn't totally or automatically against him. What turned me against him permanently, was what he did with the good will of The American People after the country was attacked.
He lied about the WMDs, he kept the country in state of constant fear, and he waged two unnecessary wars. To top it off, he didn't pay for it at the time and sent the bill to our kids and grandkids.
To be precise, from the instant he began that fear campaign war campaign, he lost me forever. I will NEVER forgive him for that.
So, when did you Republicans, Conservatives and other assorted RWers of USMB decide to be against Obama no matter what?
C'mon, be honest.
I said stimulus, not bailout although I disagreed with that and have since admitted to being wrong about the positive effects the liquidity the bailouts had on the economy.
The GM bailout was described as loans, and we were told that it was desperately needed to keep GM out of bankruptcy - oops - GM went bankrupt anyway. Then some loans were repaid with further bailout money, others were converted to stock. All in all, the US taxpayers lost over $25 Billion to "save" GM and it hasn't produced enough to even match the government's valuation.
GM is not the largest automaker, Toyota is. That's without the government doing everything possible to save face.
GM should have been liquidated and re-oriented. That's how capitalism in a generally free market works. GM is just crony capitalism and it doesn't even work well then.
The government made money on the GM bailout and you did discuss the GM bailout that started with Bush. GM told the government it would need more money, so nothing that happened was a secret. The bailout involved loans secured with stock and interest was charged to these corporations, hence the government made money off the interest, warrants and stock that secured the loans.
You are running your mouth and just saying bullshit. It doesn't work well to save the largest automaker on Earth that provides tax revenue many times more than it received in bailout funds that it paid back with interest?
Post proof to prove your claims and not some bullshit from a right-wing blog.
Source: GM repays U.S. loan, government loss on bailout falls | Reuters
gm repays government - Bing
Where have you been?
GM is again the world's largest automaker - Los Angeles Times
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The government did NOT make money on GM.
It's Official: Taxpayers Will Lose Big on the GM Bailout - Rick Newman (usnews.com)
That's just the loss on the stock. There's more:
PolitiFact | President Barack Obama campaign video says auto companies 'repaid their loans'
In mid-December of 2008, the Bush administration stepped in to lend General Motors and Chrysler billions to prevent impending bankruptcy. Subsequently, the Obama administration kept the two companies afloat as they filed for bankruptcy protection. See below for details on outstanding loans to each company.
General Motors Mich. Dec. 29, 2008 [amt received] $50,744,648,329 [amt recovered] $28,353,765,982
Q: Did General Motors repay its TARP loan from the Treasury with other TARP money?
A: Yes. GM repaid the loan portion of the automaker bailout ahead of schedule, with interest. It used TARP money it had already received but hadnt spent. And taxpayers are still stuck with GM stock that isnt worth what was paid for it.
FactCheck.org : General Motors? Debt
On 12/21/2012, Treasury sold 200,000,000 shares of common stock at $27.50 per share pursuant to a letter agreement. Following settlement, the net proceeds to Treasury were $5,500,000,000. The sale further reduced Treasury's equity stake in GM to 21.97 percent.
I didn't.Clearly, this is directed to The Republicans and self-proclaimed Conservatives of USMB.
When, exactly, did you realize that you really didn't like Obama and were going to be against him no matter what?
I'll answer the question in the reverse as an example. Some years ago, when Bush was first elected, I disliked him. I didn't like what he stood for, didn't like what he said, I didn't even like the way he sounded, he sounds dumb and he's proven himself to be such. Anyway, I wasn't totally or automatically against him. What turned me against him permanently, was what he did with the good will of The American People after the country was attacked.
He lied about the WMDs, he kept the country in state of constant fear, and he waged two unnecessary wars. To top it off, he didn't pay for it at the time and sent the bill to our kids and grandkids.
To be precise, from the instant he began that fear campaign war campaign, he lost me forever. I will NEVER forgive him for that.
So, when did you Republicans, Conservatives and other assorted RWers of USMB decide to be against Obama no matter what?
C'mon, be honest.
When, exactly, did you decide that bombing random children in the name of America is a great idea? When did you decide that it was fine if he lied to justify attacking a country that had done nothing to us?
In response to 'Uncensored2008'
I do not believe that you are very educated on this subject. This is a very general statement, and it makes a bad name for republicans like myself. I do believe however, that you are correct. The Demacrates of America are very liberal and slightly crazy, though not in the ways you desecribed.
You can quote the person just by clicking quote on the person's post and get yourself an avatar! A nice cane from google images would do.
Obama.This, right here, tells me that there's no Democrat in the world that could ever earn your support.
Which puts you deep and comfortably in the far right wing radical fringe.
The only thing I can do for you, at this point, is to thank you for your honesty.
So Marc, which conservative have you voted for?
That's interesting seeing as how Obama
1. Governs as a moderate Repubican
2. That the Republicans seemed to have no problems with Sarah Palin's short resume. Aside from that, only in far right wing circles was it considered the case that Obama had a short resume. His many years as a community organizer and his previous experience in Chicago and national politics worked fine for the average American thinker, as was evident in the election.
3. That's a silly talking point of the far RW...What the heck is "the Chicago machine?" As if politics every where else is lily white pure as the driven snow. Get a grip.
4. What nonsense is this about "well-documented antipathy?" Under Obama's governership gun rights have actually EXPANDED. What President BEFORE him allowed carriers to have their weapons while at a rally with him? Again...get a fletchin GRIP dude...seriously.
What you call a "list of truths" is essentially a generic list of partisan RW talking points. Now this is just a hunch, but I suspect that you're in the RW bubble.So your belief is basically that after a Democrat wins, he should immediately pander to and act like a Republican.
Is that it?
What were your thoughts and feelings about the Republican Party's meeting and plan to stop Obama during the inaugaration?
The Immoral Minority: New book reveals that Republicans held secret meeting deciding to obstruct EVERYTHING President Obama tried to do the DAY he was inaugurated. By a show of hands who did not already suspect that?
Do you think that Jim Demint's language of "we must break him?" bi-partisan?
Sen. Jim DeMint calls defeating Obama like Waterloo - YouTube
How about the GOP's goal, led by Mitch McConnell that their number one goal is to defeat President Barack Obama and make him a one-term President...
Republican leader says GOP's number one goal is defeating Obama in 2012 - National Political Buzz | Examiner.com
Were you upset at all by any of the above check-list idealogical path?
If he campaigned that he would work across the aisle, then he should demonstrate that promise during his presidency, not demean his opponents and divide our nation even further than it already has been.
Apparently you weren't upset when Obama failed to live up to his hope and change promises to make the economy his top priority (moving instead to bog down Congress with Obamacare over jobs) or that spending to increase our debt and leave the burden "to every man, woman, and child, is inexcusable, it's unpatriotic" to use Obama's own words?
At least you wouldn't see a Republican going around the country making speeches during the worst economic disaster in this nation's history. And yes Obama is out of touch if he chooses laughing it up with the rich over at Martha's Vineyard over taking his vacation to help those struggling businesses effected by the oil spill, a great demonstration of a democrat president who looks out for the middle class.
Sorry if my list of truths hit a sore spot for you, but if he campaigned on hope and change instead of "politics as usual" ( as he called it ) he might have left a positive mark on his presidential legacy. and this country might have benefitted from its historic moment. All we have now is broken promises, great speeches, and no real growing economy to speak of.
You wanna stick to the promise to fix it in four years, and would like to ignore the amount of years it took to get there...is that correct?No, my very impatient, friend...it's not getting worse. It's getting better.
Slowly, but it's getting better.
No need to fib my brother.
No fibbing required. GDP shrunk last quarter, unemployment ticked up last month all while more people left the labor force. Prolonged high unemployment is worse than a relatively short spike followed by a robust recovery. 4 years of unemployment above 7% is not a robust recovery. A shrinking economy after all the stimulus is not a robust recovery.
Impatient? It's been 4 years. Here's what was promised remember?
Reality looks nothing like that.
The government made money on the GM bailout and you did discuss the GM bailout that started with Bush. GM told the government it would need more money, so nothing that happened was a secret. The bailout involved loans secured with stock and interest was charged to these corporations, hence the government made money off the interest, warrants and stock that secured the loans.
You are running your mouth and just saying bullshit. It doesn't work well to save the largest automaker on Earth that provides tax revenue many times more than it received in bailout funds that it paid back with interest?
Post proof to prove your claims and not some bullshit from a right-wing blog.
Source: GM repays U.S. loan, government loss on bailout falls | Reuters
gm repays government - Bing
Where have you been?
GM is again the world's largest automaker - Los Angeles Times
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The government did NOT make money on GM.
It's Official: Taxpayers Will Lose Big on the GM Bailout - Rick Newman (usnews.com)
That's just the loss on the stock. There's more:
PolitiFact | President Barack Obama campaign video says auto companies 'repaid their loans'
FactCheck.org : General Motors? Debt
Fact #1: GMAC is an entirely different corporation than GM.
Fact #2: The bailout money and TARP money are exactly the same thing. TARP is just the name of the so-called bailout program
Troubled Asset Relief Program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fact #3: The Treasury was owed $49.5 billion ($13.4 billion from Bush and $36.1 billion from Obama). The Treasury was repaid $6.7 billion in loan repayments, $2.1 billion in a Preferred Stock Repurchase, $0.8 billion in interest and dividends and it had 912 million shares of GM common stock which was reduced to 500 million shares to get the Net IPO Proceeds of $13.5 billion. That means the stock was sold at $32.77 per share. The current price of GM stock is $28.17, so I don't know where you get your numbers. That would be valued at $14.085 billion on today's market or probably about 50% more than that if someone tried to buy a controlling interest in the GM corporation at one shot. However on 12/21/12, the Treasury sold 200 million shares of GM stock.
On 12/21/2012, Treasury sold 200,000,000 shares of common stock at $27.50 per share pursuant to a letter agreement. Following settlement, the net proceeds to Treasury were $5,500,000,000. The sale further reduced Treasury's equity stake in GM to 21.97 percent.
General Motors | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
A total of about $26.4 billion of the TARP GM money wasn't returned, until that recent sale reduced it to around $20.9 billion and 300 million shares.
Fact #4: The amount of revenue the federal government received for bailing out GM is estimated at over $90 billion.
It may be in the interest of the right-wing to allow hugh corporations to fail and they certainly know how to make an economy do it, but it isn't in the interest of the federal government and the American people. The far right-wing position is part of the "Starve the Beast" strategy of intentionally destroying the American economy, while the elite buy up assets at cheap prices. Having a failed economy has been the direction of the Republican Party since the days of the Clinton surpluses.
If you want success navigating the economic highway, ask the Republicans for directions and do the exact opposite. Sure they know business and that's why they are so good at fucking it up!
The government did NOT make money on GM.
It's Official: Taxpayers Will Lose Big on the GM Bailout - Rick Newman (usnews.com)
That's just the loss on the stock. There's more:
PolitiFact | President Barack Obama campaign video says auto companies 'repaid their loans'
FactCheck.org : General Motors? Debt
Fact #1: GMAC is an entirely different corporation than GM.
Fact #2: The bailout money and TARP money are exactly the same thing. TARP is just the name of the so-called bailout program
Troubled Asset Relief Program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fact #3: The Treasury was owed $49.5 billion ($13.4 billion from Bush and $36.1 billion from Obama). The Treasury was repaid $6.7 billion in loan repayments, $2.1 billion in a Preferred Stock Repurchase, $0.8 billion in interest and dividends and it had 912 million shares of GM common stock which was reduced to 500 million shares to get the Net IPO Proceeds of $13.5 billion. That means the stock was sold at $32.77 per share. The current price of GM stock is $28.17, so I don't know where you get your numbers. That would be valued at $14.085 billion on today's market or probably about 50% more than that if someone tried to buy a controlling interest in the GM corporation at one shot. However on 12/21/12, the Treasury sold 200 million shares of GM stock.
On 12/21/2012, Treasury sold 200,000,000 shares of common stock at $27.50 per share pursuant to a letter agreement. Following settlement, the net proceeds to Treasury were $5,500,000,000. The sale further reduced Treasury's equity stake in GM to 21.97 percent.
General Motors | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
A total of about $26.4 billion of the TARP GM money wasn't returned, until that recent sale reduced it to around $20.9 billion and 300 million shares.
Fact #4: The amount of revenue the federal government received for bailing out GM is estimated at over $90 billion.
It may be in the interest of the right-wing to allow hugh corporations to fail and they certainly know how to make an economy do it, but it isn't in the interest of the federal government and the American people. The far right-wing position is part of the "Starve the Beast" strategy of intentionally destroying the American economy, while the elite buy up assets at cheap prices. Having a failed economy has been the direction of the Republican Party since the days of the Clinton surpluses.
If you want success navigating the economic highway, ask the Republicans for directions and do the exact opposite. Sure they know business and that's why they are so good at fucking it up!
What's your source for fact #4?
