RIGHT OR WRONG? Detroit News Journalist BelievesFeds Have No Right Telling GM What To Do

Sorry people - While the feds are no example of how to be prudent spenders. You have to realize that if you take money to bail you out of a self created jam there are rules and stipulations.

Especially if the person you promised to pay back is losing billions on a "loan" that turned into a "gift".

Lets not forget that contrary to standard bankruptcy process the Democratic Congress and Obama White House bailed out GM on the backs of regular normal everyday folk shareholders who lost everything when cronism paid off Union pensions and everyone else got squat. Those shareholders should get paid before any 1%-er at GM gets a bonus. Thank God for Republicans.

I didn't buy the too big to fail mentality.

Yes it would have hurt, but the vehicle sales would have gone to the competition. Most of these vehicles are built in the US or would soon be, so the supply chain would divert to there. Look at how many "foreign" vehicles are made here. The UAW would have lost major ground in that scenario and the production would have shifted to the south or Mexico.

You don't know how things would go. That's coming out of thin air. Free markets are better than a Fed acting on ideology. The less ground the UAM thugs have the better America and freedom is."

If the bailout didn't happen, GM would have sunk with all hands aboard, and the stockholders still wouldn't have gotten anything. The salvage/business value was nil. The half million jobs saved don't appear to matter to some folks here.

I would never knowingly take out a loan from a bank and then complain about the terms later. I knew what I was getting into, and they were taking the risk not me.

Let the hate-Obama rants begin........

We have a common organized crime syndicate fouling the White House now. With a government that operaates like a Chitcago street crime syndicate, what did you expect in the way it bungles and ineptly bosses business?

Is this the same "Detroit News" journalist who stayed silent during GM's 12-year demise?

Is this the same "Detroit News" journalist who had nothing to say while GM's managers continued to poor billions of dollars into marketing and pensions instead of R&D?

Is this the same "Detroit News" journalist who applauded the revolutionary plug-in Volt platform and stunning concept, then had little or NO criticism to offer of the idiotic managers at GM who later ruined it, turning it into a $40,000 hybrid Stratus?

As far as I am concerned, "Detroit News" journalists have NOTHING TO SAY. Adios.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. ~George George Santayana
-
I think it would have been far simpler for "the Feds" to let GM, AIG and others like them who were considered "too big to fail" to go under if these companies and financial institutions couldn't fix their problems themselves. Unfortunately in US politics money talks; it's all about getting "political contributions" to fund media campaigns that reelect themselves as well as new members of their political pursuasion so they can push through whatever agenda they may have as well as any legislations favorable to their big contributors. If anyone says differently they are blind. The average American ends up with the short stick.

Congress passed the Glass–Steagall Act (1933) and the Commodity Exchange Act (1936) to help minimize financial transgressions that contributed to the (stock market) Crash of 1929. In 2000 Congress passed a heavily banking industry influenced Commodity Futures Modernization Act that changed the law so that most over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives transactions between “sophisticated parties” would not be regulated as “futures” or as “securities”. These changes would be at the heart of the financial crisis of 2008 and the subsequent 2008–2012 global recession.

I think José Maria de Eça de Queiroz said it best:
"Politicians and diapers should be changed frequently and for the same reason."