Save General Motors ?

Maybe Nissan should give us the option, after we take delivery of the LEAF, if we want the $99 credited back to our cards or if instead would we like to donate the $99 to one of the following government supported charities:
[] Save the whales
[] Save the polar bears
[] Save General Motors

I actually believe saving GM was absolutely the right thing for the U.S. government to do. You can't throw the baby out with the bath water in a time of crises. While I never forgave GM for killing the EV1 and I never will. They were simply too important to the economy and defense of the U.S. to let fail. GM will likely survive another decade or so before they finally fail for good. By then the entire automobile industry will have changed to the point you won't recognize it.

LOL! :lol:

From a purely economic viewpoint, "Save GM" is clearly the most important. Remember, we (i.e. US) have invested $50B in that company. If it goes under, our taxes will have to go up enough to make up the difference. ($50B is about $435 per household.)

It doesn't matter whether you think the investment was brilliant, stupid, necessary, or a total waste. That's water under the bridge. All that matters now is what the government can sell its shares for, and when.

It was unfortunate that save GM wasn't properly explained (by mass media, I guess).

GM & Chrysler going down would have taken with them so many ancilliary units, the government had no choice but to sav ethem. We (the fed govt) would have lost lot of more money in terms of health insurance for employees, unemployment benefit to all related employees and everyone else connected. Consider 50B cheap.

LpOther than the home mortgage industry, Uncle sam made money on every one they bailed out
Now we still have a few unresolved ones like gm AIG and a few banks. I guess we need to see how the IPO goes

DaveinOlyWA said:

Other than the home mortgage industry, Uncle sam made money onevery one theybailed out.

Now we still have a few unresolved ones like gm wig and a few banks. I guess we need to see how the IPO goes

Click to expand...

I always wondered if that was the fear from the right, the fact that socialism could actually prove to be profitable. Hey, that worked we should do more of that! All the sudden the US Treasury establishes a black pool VC fund!

indyflick said:

I always wondered if that was the fear from the right, the fact that socialism could actually prove to be profitable. Hey, that worked we should do more of that! All the sudden the US Treasury establishes a black pool VC fund!

Click to expand...

No. Ideology - after a while - has no reason. It is just a self-perpetuating meme - like religion.

Well, since this thread has gone completely off - I'll fork the thread.

Appears GM have discovered that South Korean's lack the allusive "range anxiety" gene. GM to test Chevrolet Cruze electric cars in S.Korea

I have range anxiety*. Last night my car's gauge went down to one bar and it notified me to "add fuel." But since it lacks a plug I couldn't recharge it overnight in my garage. The car's display doesn't tell me my remaining range, adding to my anxiety. I think one bar means I have one gallon of gasoline left, or it might be two. But I drove home on one bar, so what if I have only half a gallon left? A gallon might take me 40 or 45 miles, which is plenty of range to reach a hydrocarbon recharging station, especially if I drive in the opposite direction from my desired destination. But when the ICE is cold it only delivers 25 miles per gallon until it warms up. I might have as little as 12.5 miles of range remaining. I wonder if I can make it to a more convenient recharging station...

(*[tm] General Motors)

evnow said:

It was unfortunate that save GM wasn't properly explained (by mass media, I guess).

GM & Chrysler going down would have taken with them so many ancilliary units, the government had no choice but to sav ethem. We (the fed govt) would have lost lot of more money in terms of health insurance for employees, unemployment benefit to all related employees and everyone else connected. Consider 50B cheap.

Click to expand...

I agree with you here, evnow. The other side of the coin, though, and just as valid, is the unfortunate truth that GM has been legally 'fratriciding' those ancillary units since at lest the 1970s. The Flint that I grew up in in the 1960s and '70s no longer exists.

It's going to take some time to know for sure whether bankruptcy or bailout was the lesser evil.

AndyH said:

I agree with you here, evnow. The other side of the coin, though, and just as valid, is the unfortunate truth that GM has been legally 'fratriciding' those ancillary units since at lest the 1970s. The Flint that I grew up in in the 1960s and '70s no longer exists.

It's going to take some time to know for sure whether bankruptcy or bailout was the lesser evil.

Click to expand...

The slow hemmoraging of manufacturing jobs in the US ofcourse will not be solved by the bailout. That needs long term & permanent changes in some of our policies i.e. those that help manufacturing vs finance.

The bailout was like the ICU treatment. The fact that GM & US auto industry is still alive means the policy was successful. Collapse of GM/Chrysler would have undoubtedly pushed us into depression.

evnow said:

The bailout was like the ICU treatment. The fact that GM & US auto industry is still alive means the policy was successful. Collapse of GM/Chrysler would have undoubtedly pushed us into depression.

Click to expand...

You're spot on. I believe in destructive capitalism, however I also know there are times when panics set in and capitalism can begin to feed on itself. It's at those points when the government must act, moral hazard be damned. I also believe it was poor government policy (which GM lobbied hard for) which got GM in deep trouble. They made a lot of profit on Hummers and big trucks, with all of the government business incentives, during the boom times. I was really hoping the GM execs would have learned a lesson from their failure, but I don't think they actually did. They've changed a lot, but not enough. I know Lutz is gone now, but I don't think he learned a damn thing. He's been involved in other train wrecks in his career and those didn't change him either. It's as though he lacked a feedback mechanism.

There was an article which listed the liability the feds would have had to fund had GM/Chrysler went down (health insurance etc for retired employees) - which itself was higher than the bailout money !

GM woes have been a long time in the making. Both the corporate leaders & union leaders bargained future benefits for today's profitability. So, GM made a lot of money early on and as future liabilities turned to present liabilities over the decades, GM was in big trouble. The 2008 recession and auto market contraction just dealt the final blow. There was a nice article by Nate Silver on this sometime back.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/03/gms-problems-are-50-years-in-making.html

This issue is wrongly portrayed by both the liberal and the conservative media as one of management versus labor, when really it is a battle between General Motors past and General Motors present. In the 50s, 60s and 70s, everyone benefited: GM and its shareholders got the benefit of higher profit margins, and meanwhile, its employees benefited from GM's willingness to cut a bad deal -- for every dollar they were giving up in salary, those employees were getting a dollar and change back in retirement benefits. But now, everyone is hurting.

Click to expand...

ps : Look out for similar problems with various cities / counties. They all have the unfunded retirement benefits problem.

I disagree that the Federal money given, loaned or traded for equity was a good idea.
GM should have been allowed to enter bankruptcy and exit or liquidate without the money given from the federal government.

Same for the insurance giant and the "too big to fail" banks.

Of course we will never actually know what would have been better.

smkettner said:

I disagree that the Federal money given, loaned or traded for equity was a good idea.
GM should have been allowed to enter bankruptcy and exit or liquidate without the money given from the federal government.

Same for the insurance giant and the "too big to fail" banks.

Of course we will never actually know what would have been better.

Click to expand...

Lemme guess, you never studied the great depression did you?

evnow said:

AndyH said:

I agree with you here, evnow. The other side of the coin, though, and just as valid, is the unfortunate truth that GM has been legally 'fratriciding' those ancillary units since at lest the 1970s. The Flint that I grew up in in the 1960s and '70s no longer exists.

It's going to take some time to know for sure whether bankruptcy or bailout was the lesser evil.

Click to expand...

The slow hemmoraging of manufacturing jobs in the US ofcourse will not be solved by the bailout. That needs long term & permanent changes in some of our policies i.e. those that help manufacturing vs finance.

The bailout was like the ICU treatment. The fact that GM & US auto industry is still alive means the policy was successful. Collapse of GM/Chrysler would have undoubtedly pushed us into depression.

Click to expand...

Yes - the bailout was like intensive care.

GM US has been going down the tubes for many years as has already been pointed out. I have family ties to folks that used to work for GM, for Delphi, and others - they're all doing other things.

Even if GM/US died in its sleep, that would still leave GM/Canada, and GM/Mexico and Europe and China. Hell - GM sells more cars in China than in the US - that market's going thru the roof.

I just have to wonder if the fallout from GM/US would really have been as bad as the politicians, GM brass, and UAW folks led us to believe.

Did anyone really stop to see if the patient had a do not resuscitate order on file?

AndyH said:

Did anyone really stop to see if the patient had a do not resuscitate order on file?

Click to expand...

Ya, it was filed under "EV1".

I feel GM will fail for good within the next 15 to 20 years. But it will be orderly, rather than as part of an economic panic. Other manufactures will capture GMs market share and the auto industry will thrive. Capitalism doesn't function well during times of panic. A lot of irrational behavior occurs simply out of fear. Do you really want to risk losing one of the largest manufactures in the U.S. during a panic? That would only exacerbate the panic as GMs dealerships and supply chain vendors collapsed in its wake.

GM did go bankrupt and is not out of business. I am saying they could have just as easily gone through BK without government money.
Maybe the union would not have gotten the retirees medical fund fully funded and certainly others would have lost more.
Just the same this country is turning to communism more every year. It is a drug mentality that every economic sector that drops a little needs some sort of drug induced boost just to get through the day in the form of some tax payer funded benefits. The day when the government gets out of meddling with the economy and just provides what the government should be doing our country will be getting back on the right track.

It is a different world today than the 1930s. The government has ton of back stop support already in place that did not exist in the great depression.

smkettner said:

GM did go bankrupt and is not out of business. I am saying they could have just as easily gone through BK without government money.

Click to expand...

Really? And where were the bridge loans and the resulting cash flow going to come from? Recall the credit market froze up and shut down during the crises. Credit didn't slow down, it shut down. Without billions of capital injection from the U.S. government, the GM bankruptcy would have been chapter 7 instead of chapter 11 restructuring. Your argument is akin to saying a person had cancer, received chemotherapy and survived is alive today. So, because they are alive today, they really didn't need chemotherapy.

Come from? Maybe skip the funding of the union trust fund?