Here’s a post from Nick Gillespie at Reason (who says he’s a mostly satisfied Buick owner), bouncing off this story in the WaPo. The news is that GM stock would have to bounce back to higher than it’s ever been in history for taxpayers to get their “investment” back from GM. Since the government seems to conceive of its job as pressuring GM to make cars consumers don’t much want to buy (unless gas goes above $5 a gallon or so), prospects don’t look so hot.
Tell me again why we didn’t let GM go the way of Montgomery-Ward?
That money is gone-bye bye.
We should have never bailed out ANY of these private sector businesses- including the banks.
The BK courts were the place to work their problems out, not the taxpayers wallet.
Montgomery-Ward wasn’t the host organism of a powerful political lobby.
Don’t think of this as funding GM, think of it as a Democratic campaign contribution! (With acceptable deductions for UAW leadership and GM executive bonuses, of course.) Your dollars (and mine) are funding more of the fine, progressive leadership that’s steering the country towards a brighter, more energy-efficient future of warm green sunshine!
Cypren says:
June 30, 2009 at 1:05 pmMontgomery-Ward wasn’t the host organism of a powerful political lobby.
Don’t think of this as funding GM, think of it as a Democratic campaign contribution!
============================
Can I ask you something-who was the one who started the bailout and where did that money go?
Hint-it was not a democratic president and it did not go to the public unions.
This was/is not a dem/repub problem. Big money from unions and big business are both responsbile for this mess. While the poor and middle class keep getting worked over.
Nothing in my comment should be read to endorse Republicans. Despite how badly both parties may want it to be so, our ballots are not yet true/false tests with 100% required completion.
The subject here was the auto bailouts. If we’d been talking Wall Street I would have had equally harsh words for Bush and his cronies.
I do find it telling however that the best defense anyone seems to mount of Obama is “well, Bush did it too!” Congratulations, you’re defending a failure by holding him to the standards of another failure! What leadership and innovation.
I agree 100 percent. This bailout was nothing more than an appeasement to the UAW. I find it interesting that Ford refused the money, and is rapidly moving toward solvency. The average quality of its vehicles now matches that of Toyota and Honda.
I do find it telling however that the best defense anyone seems to mount of Obama is “well, Bush did it too!” Congratulations, you’re defending a failure by holding him to the standards of another failure! What leadership and innovation.
================
if you think im defending Obama please re-read my first post here (top one).