Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The fact they've been saying "we;re going to sell off the GM stock" has been well-known. The timing is what is somewhat of a surprise, and the idiots in the government literally dumped it, selling all the stock in a two-week time frame, rather than rationing out the sale over several months, which wouldn't have caused the stock price to bottom like it has since mid-November. This is yet one more good reason for the idiots in Washington not to be involved in bail-outs, because they don't know how to manage the funds in the aftermath.
Huh?? "2.6 million jobs"??? How you figure that? GM employes 205,000 people, indirectly (through suppliers) another 300,000, and about 27,000 through dealerships. That's no where near 2.6 million.
There's that number again, which is inaccurate.
None of it seems reasonable to me, and the loss is more like $20 billion, given that no accounting for government management of the bailout is given, and only estimates can be made as to how much was spent administering that utter failure of a program. We would have had less loss letting GM go under.
The Times is wrong. The two companies combined employ directly or indirectly about 800,000 people, and in contemplating the situation since my last post, I'd say less than half those jobs were actually in jeopardy. Had GM and Chrysler been forced to close their doors, some other company would have swooped in and bought off the pieces, and many would have kept their jobs, though perhaps not at the pay levels to which they had become accustomed. More idiocy from the liberal media, "championing" the Great Pretender while ignoring the fact it was George W. Bush who proposed the idea in the first place. I'll give the idiot in the White House "credit" for spending far more than Bush was willing to spend, and thereby losing money, whereas the Bush plan didn't involve buying GM stock or putting the U.S. in the car business. Way to go, Pretender!! Hoo-ahh!
Post proof or shut up.
No Ford does not. Mulally nowhere expresses regret Ford didn't take federal money. Interestingly, your same article (not surprisingly) fails to tell the rest of the narrative from Mulally.
That wouldn't have been the case had Ford joined in glomming onto taxpayer-funded handouts. Once again, you deliberately misrepresent the facts trying to prove your lies as truth.
I didn't miss the point. You did. The U.S. lost money in this bailout. If the idiot in the White House had left the Bush proposal alone and simply followed through, that wouldn't have happened. But the Great Pretender/Naked Emperor/Big Zero/Empty Suit took it upon himself to put the U.S. in the car business. Now, four and a half years later, here we are, net loss of $10.5 billion, GM smaller and less productive that it was -- but probably right where it would have been had it simply been allowed to go into bankruptcy.