After Emerging From Bankruptcy Washington Wants To Know Why GM Is Jumping Back Into High Risk Loans

Duh to sell more and more cars. People with bruised or banged up credit still need a car to take the kids to school and go back and forth to work with. This will give GM a broader reach of customers and in turn move more cars.

Bad loans were a big reason they had issues and GMAC.

Ah grasshopper that was the home mortgage arm mostly, and today there are new loan hurdles set in place to make sure those deserving of credit can get it sub-prime or prime.

This is a money maker for GM

GMAC occupies 15 floors of the building I am in. They took a blood bath on home mortgages, that is true. But they also took one on their "if you are breathing, we will give you a loan" programs they had before the big collapse.

No. No. And No.

The reason is that risky loans are very profitable for the lender. GM used to make a handsome profit on its loan business.

That is, until the risky loans piled up and bankrupted the company. Otherwise, selling high risk loans is a great idea.

In regards to "if you are breathing, we will give you a loan" GMAC had no such loans. As a dealer from the years of 2000 to 2004 I can tell you from experience that about 30% of or cars where sold through secondary financing. Meaning we being in a GM town attempted to get the customer "bought" through GMAC first and if that was a no go then we would try banks or credit unions.GMAC was not bending over backwards to loan money.
Most customers that could not be bought through those methods usually bought from a "B" lot or "Buy here and pay here lot" The money is so good in financing that the buy here and pay here lots will not sell you a car for cash. Just Google right way auto.

It's a good move because half of the buying public do not have good or prime credit scores(as in over 700).This was one of the main reasons the car market tanked in the US. Because of the "Mortgage" debacle lending became tight on "all" loans. Car makers need the sub prime lending business in order to sell enough cars like it or not.Congress should not compare "Bad" mortgages to subprime car loans. First of all the risk is on a much smaller level. 2nd if a vehicle get's repoed is does not affect an entire car market.

And your comment is fact-less and fictitious. you have no clue what UAW health care cost because all of you knowledge comes from an old article from 2007 planted by southern republicans that lied a little less than your favorite brand Toilyota did this year.

If they had $30 Billion cash on hand, why did they ever get a bailout?

We could listen to uaw_lax spew some propoganda, but it is just bs. The bailout was never for the company, it was a union bailout plain and simple.