Guess what? GM's restructuring worked

Onceler said:
No "fear mongering" necessary w/ the failure of GM. Even most opponents of the bailout for them acknowledged that it would be a short-term disaster for the economy in terms of jobs lost & the market sinking much further than it did.

You act like it's a big mystery what would have happened. For people who understand economics & industry, it really isn't.

And you love those one-day snapshots when they are bad news. Unemployment is a continuing problem, but the idea that we'd be in a better place today without a restructured, profitable GM is pretty much crazy.
Click to expand...
The country is literally bankrupt ....NOW!
Unemployment is killing what is left of the middle class....10%...and this admin. is telling us "it will get worse befor its gets better".....
Freddie and Fannie Mae will still require billions more of taxpayer money to survive....
People have received 99 weeks of unemployment checks and are demonstrating as we speak for MORE....2 years of checks and they demand more.....

but you think we,re having a recovery....your stupidity and ignorance and gullibility is astounding.....
 
Topspin said:
Bondholders get paid first
Click to expand...


Uh, no. Bondholders are unsecured creditors. Secured claims get paid first. Then, if there is anything left over, the bondholders and other unsecured creditors share what is left. Shareholders get whatever is left over after paying of secured and unsecured claims, typically nothing or mere cents on the dollar.

In short, the bondholders and shareholder would likely have been fucked had GM gone through liquidation.
 
NigelTufnel said:
Uh, no. Bondholders are unsecured creditors. Secured claims get paid first. Then, if there is anything left over, the bondholders and other unsecured creditors share what is left. Shareholders get whatever is left over after paying of secured and unsecured claims, typically nothing or mere cents on the dollar.

In short, the bondholders and shareholder would likely have been fucked had GM gone through liquidation.
Click to expand...

Crap.


There goes the "Let's let the auto companies collapse, and NO worries!" argument.

I wonder who would have been left on the hook for paying GMs retirees' pensions?

My educated guess, is the US taxpayer, through the U.S. Pension Guarantee Corporation.


Surprisingly, the more I think about it, the more ridiculous the "Let GM collapse, and everything will still be cool!" babble sounds!
 
bravo said:
The country is literally bankrupt ....NOW!
Unemployment is killing what is left of the middle class....10%...and this admin. is telling us "it will get worse befor its gets better".....
Freddie and Fannie Mae will still require billions more of taxpayer money to survive....
People have received 99 weeks of unemployment checks and are demonstrating as we speak for MORE....2 years of checks and they demand more.....

but you think we,re having a recovery....your stupidity and ignorance and gullibility is astounding.....
Click to expand...

Your melodrama is the really astounding part.

You know what you have stated on this thread? You have stated that no matter what the results of Obama's policies, you will spin them in a negative way, because that's what you do. I didn't even think this thread would be very controversial; GM back in the black is a good thing, for anyone who cares about jobs or the economy.

But, you found a way. It's a real credibility nosedive.
 
Onceler said:
Your melodrama is the really astounding part.

You know what you have stated on this thread? You have stated that no matter what the results of Obama's policies, you will spin them in a negative way, because that's what you do. I didn't even think this thread would be very controversial; GM back in the black is a good thing, for anyone who cares about jobs or the economy.

But, you found a way. It's a real credibility nosedive.
Click to expand...
Melodrama?....Its the truth....

Gm is in the black...ain't that just super duper...
At what cost....?
In Feb of 2009 GM said it would require 56 billion dollars to stay afloat through 2012..
So what has it cost the taxpayer to give the UAW 20% of an auto company?
What will GM's "electric lemon" cost the taxpayers in the future....

Even the GM payback to the government is a fraud, but you'll never accept that fact either....
 
bravo said:
Melodrama?....Its the truth....

Gm is in the black...ain't that just super duper...
At what cost....?
In Feb of 2009 GM said it would require 56 billion dollars to stay afloat through 2012..
So what has it cost the taxpayer to give the UAW 20% of an auto company?
What will GM's "electric lemon" cost the taxpayers in the future....

Even the GM payback to the government is a fraud, but you'll never accept that fact either....
Click to expand...

You are 100% economically illiterate. I hope you continue though, because it's entertaining.

The cost to the taxpayer would have been exponentially beyond that if GM failed, and all of those additional jobs were lost.

You avoided my question about how all of those workers would have just been hired back by American companies (your theory), because consumers would just switch to other American cars.

Please - continue; this is fascinating.
 
WHY do the democratic dough heads think the people are so stupid as to be taken in by their lies?

NOTE to the dough heads: It was NOT the bailouts and government interference that turned the trick. It was the RESTRUCTURING (ie: they went BANKRUPT - which is what the bailout idiots claimed would cause world wide havoc) that saved the company. The bail outs did nothing but waste massive amounts of tax payer money.

Yet the liberal pundits and their vacuum skulled followers scream about how the bailouts worked so well. Hint, dipshits: if the bailouts had worked, GM would not have gone bankrupt. But they DID go bankrupt, and the bailouts were a wash. And, just as most conservative economists predicted, bankruptcy did not hurt GM. They restructured their debt load which allowed them to continue manufacturing and selling automobiles which brought them back into the black. It is the very intent of ch11 bankruptcy.
 
Good Luck said:
WHY do the democratic dough heads think the people are so stupid as to be taken in by their lies?

NOTE to the dough heads: It was NOT the bailouts and government interference that turned the trick. It was the RESTRUCTURING (ie: they went BANKRUPT - which is what the bailout idiots claimed would cause world wide havoc) that saved the company. The bail outs did nothing but waste massive amounts of tax payer money.

Yet the liberal pundits and their vacuum skulled followers scream about how the bailouts worked so well. Hint, dipshits: if the bailouts had worked, GM would not have gone bankrupt. But they DID go bankrupt, and the bailouts were a wash. And, just as most conservative economists predicted, bankruptcy did not hurt GM. They restructured their debt load which allowed them to continue manufacturing and selling automobiles which brought them back into the black. It is the very intent of ch11 bankruptcy.
Click to expand...

Ya may wanna go back in history (it's not too far back) and see what the impetus for that "restructuring" you refer to was....
 
NigelTufnel said:
What specific uncertainty is Obama creating? Uncertainty about what? How is he doing that? Mucking around with what exactly?
Click to expand...

It's uncertainty. It's not specific. If it were specific it would not be uncertain.

No one knows what he will nationalize, bailout or subsidize next and many people are sitting on their hands until they figure out what the impacts are.

Active government in a recession is the worst thing for investment. Obama is making the same mistakes FDR did and they are leading to the same negative results.

http://reason.com/blog/2010/08/12/reasontv-brian-calle-interview
http://www.businessinsider.com/cisco-ceo-unusual-uncertainty-in-the-market-2010-8
 
RStringfield said:
It's uncertainty. It's not specific. If it were specific it would not be uncertain.

No one knows what he will nationalize, bailout or subsidize next and many people are sitting on their hands until they figure out what the impacts are.

Active government in a recession is the worst thing for investment. Obama is making the same mistakes FDR did and they are leading to the same negative results.

http://reason.com/blog/2010/08/12/reasontv-brian-calle-interview
http://www.businessinsider.com/cisco-ceo-unusual-uncertainty-in-the-market-2010-8
Click to expand...


Please, String. Horseshit. I watched 4 minutes of that shit and threw up a little in my mouth. What crap. And it doesn't support your "uncertainty" claim.

What specific policies from Obama have created uncertainty and how?
 
Onceler said:
You are 100% economically illiterate. I hope you continue though, because it's entertaining.

The cost to the taxpayer would have been exponentially beyond that if GM failed, and all of those additional jobs were lost.

You avoided my question about how all of those workers would have just been hired back by American companies (your theory), because consumers would just switch to other American cars.

Please - continue; this is fascinating.
Click to expand...
The cost to the taxpayer would have been.....
would have been
could have been
might have been

Your imagination runs your inactive brain....you make up ' would have been' scenarios and they become reality for you with absolutely no proof...

Thats like the created or saved nonsense you swallowed like a giant river sucker....
Thats what makes you a fool....your gullibility knows no bounds....
 
bravo said:
The cost to the taxpayer would have been.....
would have been
could have been
might have been

Your imagination runs your inactive brain....you make up ' would have been' scenarios and they become reality for you with absolutely no proof...

Thats like the created or saved nonsense you swallowed like a giant river sucker....
Thats what makes you a fool....your gullibility knows no bounds....
Click to expand...

:hand::hand:


Nicely played, and outstanding retort!

I find the assertions and guesses of you and the NeoCon faction that if GM went bankrupt, all the workers would have easily found jobs with other car companies; that there was no risk to the US taxpayer, and that the collapse of the world's largest manufacturing entity would have had negligible, and perhaps even only infinitesimal, affects on the economy, to be sound, compelling, and robust guesses...ahem, I mean conclusions!

My God, for all we know Obama's auto loans actually made things worse! Far, far worse!

Well done!
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
:hand::hand:


Nicely played, and outstanding retort!

I find the assertions and guesses of you and the NeoCon faction that if GM went bankrupt, all the workers would have easily found jobs with other car companies; that there was no risk to the US taxpayer, and that the collapse of the world's largest manufacturing entity would have had negligible, and perhaps even only infinitesimal, affects on the economy, to be sound, compelling, and robust guesses...ahem, I mean conclusions!

My God, for all we know Obama's auto loans actually made things worse! Far, far worse!

Well done!
Click to expand...
No one claimed ALL the workers would have easily found jobs with other car companies.....what is fact is that Ford Motor Co. made more money that GM and no other auto companies seem to have been even at risk....

Ford is re-hiring....business lost by GM certainly would have benn picked up by other auto manufactures....
and Chapter 11 by GM would have prevented liquidation of the company and re-structuring would have taken place anyway....with no loss of tax payer money and gov. take over of the co. and the give away of 20% to a union.....
 
bravo said:
No one claimed ALL the workers would have easily found jobs with other car companies.....what is fact is that Ford Motor Co. made more money that GM and no other auto companies seem to have been even at risk....

Ford is re-hiring....business lost by GM certainly would have benn picked up by other auto manufactures....
and Chapter 11 by GM would have prevented liquidation of the company and re-structuring would have taken place anyway....with no loss of tax payer money and gov. take over of the co. and the give away of 20% to a union.....
Click to expand...


All you're doing is guessing, hypothesizing, and pulling crap out of thin air.

Life is about risk management.

You NeoCons proclaimed there was no risk to letting the world's largest manufacturing entity go belly up.

I contend that the risk to the US taxpayer, and the ripple effects on the economy were clear and present, and they had to be mitigated. I personally think that's the more prudent risk-management option.
 
Cypress said:
All you're doing is guessing, hypothesizing, and pulling crap out of thin air.

Life is about risk management.

You NeoCons proclaimed there was no risk to letting the world's largest manufacturing entity go belly up.

I contend that the risk to the US taxpayer, and the ripple effects on the economy were clear and present, and they had to be mitigated. I personally think that's the more prudent risk-management option.
Click to expand...

and Obama and yourself were doing what, if not guessing? How's that 8% unemployment doing?
 
bravo said:
No one claimed ALL the workers would have easily found jobs with other car companies.....what is fact is that Ford Motor Co. made more money that GM and no other auto companies seem to have been even at risk....

Ford is re-hiring....business lost by GM certainly would have benn picked up by other auto manufactures....and Chapter 11 by GM would have prevented liquidation of the company and re-structuring would have taken place anyway....with no loss of tax payer money and gov. take over of the co. and the give away of 20% to a union.....
Click to expand...

Hey...isn't that one of those "would haves" you were talking about before?

Can you hear yourself?

You're a total fool. Again - you feel pretty sure that people would have given their business to other AMERICAN car companies? Or just other car companies?

Sorry that GM doing well is such bad news for you, bravo...
 
Annie said:
and Obama and yourself were doing what, if not guessing? How's that 8% unemployment doing?
Click to expand...


I get it. You wanted the world's largest manufacturing entity to go belly up.

You wanted to invade and bomb a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us, on the basis of the flimsiest, feeblest, and most circumstantial of evidence. But you are comfortable proclaiming that you saw no evidence of risk to the taxpayer and the economy if america's largest manufacturer cratered?

I supported Bush's bail out of the banks, and the Obama GM bailout. But, I'm the partisan?

That's hilarious Annie. I suggest you not accuse other people of partisanship.
 
Onceler said:
Hey...isn't that one of those "would haves" you were talking about before?

Can you hear yourself?

You're a total fool. Again - you feel pretty sure that people would have given their business to other AMERICAN car companies? Or just other car companies?

Sorry that GM doing well is such bad news for you, bravo...
Click to expand...

You're right...a bad choice of words....business lost by GM certainly WAS picked up by other auto manufactures.
No....It is the reason Ford is 1 billion dollars more profitable than GM now....picking up the business lost by "worried" would be GM customers.....

{probably all the car co. have seen more sales in the past few months...(now that is just a guess....)}

And I didn't say 'other' or 'only' AMERICAN car companies did I....?
Just read what is posted not what you imagine I post.....
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top