• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What are the Cons going to say now that the GM bailout has been paid off

j-mac said:
Ok, first let's try again shall we...let's can the "faux news" crap, and discuss this like adults if you can. You are claiming that we gained more than $10 billion in tax revenue from the jobs saved, but you don't quantify it at all, just claim it...Let's see what you have to prove your claim.
Click to expand...

Okay let me try to break this down for you the best I can.. I know you Fox bots have a hard time understanding how the Economy works.. There was an estimated $284.4 billion in personal income preserved over 2009-2010 alone.. that's almost 300 BILLION dollars that was put into peoples pockets.. That's 300 Billion that gets put back into the economy when these people spend their money.. That's more business for business owners.. And that's not even including the tax revenue that would be gained from this money...

All in all, this Deal generated more money than it lost and it helped our economy. No matter how you try to spin it.
 
Last edited:
xxstevennnxx said:
Okay let me try to break this down for you the best I can.. I know you Fox bots have a hard time understanding how the Economy works.. There was an estimated $284.4 billion in personal income preserved over 2009-2010 alone.. that's almost 300 BILLION dollars that was put into peoples pockets.. That's 300 Billion that gets put back into the economy when these people spend their money.. That's more business for business owners.. And that's not even including the tax revenue that would be gained from this money...

All in all, this Deal generated more money than it lost and it helped our economy. No matter how you try to spin it.
Click to expand...

Wow! :shock: $284 Billion just in GM salaries? My god, no wonder I can't buy a new pick up for less than $30K...Could you post something credible that shows these claims?
 
I'd ask how'd Ford do it without the Govt?


xxstevennnxx said:
And is officially a success?

It's just been released that the Government has sold it's last share of the last stock in which it owned of GM. Didn't Faux news say it would never be paid off?

It is now official, Obama has saved the Auto industry in America.

"The Center for Automotive Research study -- called ''The Effect on the U.S. Economy of the Successful Restructuring of General Motors'' --€“ found that the controversial 2008-2009 bailout, saved 2.6 million jobs in 2009 alone and $284.4 billion in personal income was preserved over 2009-2010."

You're now free to give Obama a warm thank you and apologize for calling this bailout a failure.

Please begin.
Click to expand...
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Is "preserved" tax revenue anything like preserving your health care plan and/or your doctor?
Click to expand...

No, "preserved" tax revenue is tax revenue that would have been lost if Cons had their way
 
xxstevennnxx said:
Report: GM bailout saved 1.2 million jobs

An estimated 34.9 BILLION dollars was preserved in Tax Revenue from this bailout.. Only in a con bubble is a net gain of 25 BILLION dollars a bad thing
Click to expand...

I think your point is moot...From your own article...

"In a new report released Monday, the Center for Automotive Research (CAR) reckons that the federal government bailout of General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) saved 1.2 million U.S. jobs and preserved $34.9 billion in personal income and social insurance (Social Security, Medicare) payments. The bulk of those jobs and tax payments would have been lost in 2009 and 2010 and would have recovered (mostly) by now without federal intervention, but the U.S. auto industry would look considerably different had both GM and Chrysler been allowed to go under. ..."

Yeah, so....next.
 
xxstevennnxx said:
No, "preserved" tax revenue is tax revenue that would have been lost if Cons had their way
Click to expand...

IOW, it is just a prediction of what might have happened rather than a promise of what was supposed to happen, got it ...
 
j-mac said:
I think your point is moot...From your own article...

"In a new report released Monday, the Center for Automotive Research (CAR) reckons that the federal government bailout of General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) saved 1.2 million U.S. jobs and preserved $34.9 billion in personal income and social insurance (Social Security, Medicare) payments. The bulk of those jobs and tax payments would have been lost in 2009 and 2010 and would have recovered (mostly) by now without federal intervention, but the U.S. auto industry would look considerably different had both GM and Chrysler been allowed to go under. ..."

Yeah, so....next.
Click to expand...

Ford CEO on bail out- "If GM and Chrysler would've gone into free-fall, that could've taken the entire supply base into free-fall also, and taken the U.S. from a recession into a depression. That is why we testified on the behalf of our competitors even though we clearly did not need precious taxpayer money."

So, I suggest YOU try again..
 
j-mac said:
I think your point is moot...From your own article...

"In a new report released Monday, the Center for Automotive Research (CAR) reckons that the federal government bailout of General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) saved 1.2 million U.S. jobs and preserved $34.9 billion in personal income and social insurance (Social Security, Medicare) payments. The bulk of those jobs and tax payments would have been lost in 2009 and 2010 and would have recovered (mostly) by now without federal intervention, but the U.S. auto industry would look considerably different had both GM and Chrysler been allowed to go under. ..."

Yeah, so....next.
Click to expand...

Another point you seemed to miss..

"What U.S. taxpayers avoided, according to CAR, was the loss of about $105.3 billion in transfer payments plus the loss of personal and social insurance tax collections to the tune of 768% of the net investment of $11.8 billion in GM and $1.9 billion (none recovered) in Chrysler. Including jobs related to the auto industry, the federal bailout preserved 2.6 million jobs in the U.S. economy in 2009 alone and $284.4 billion in personal income in 2009 and 2010."
 
xxstevennnxx said:
Ford CEO on bail out- "If GM and Chrysler would've gone into free-fall, that could've taken the entire supply base into free-fall also, and taken the U.S. from a recession into a depression. That is why we testified on the behalf of our competitors even though we clearly did not need precious taxpayer money."

So, I suggest YOU try again..
Click to expand...

What point are you trying to get across? Is it that you think we, as a nation, need a government to take care of our basic needs or what?
 
Thom Paine said:
My most recent info was we are taking a multi-million dollar bath courtesy of GM... no links = hogwash

But it is a great attempt at humor

Thom Paine
Click to expand...

You are right.... "your most recent info"..... and "no links = hogwash"..... ah, the irony!

PS - no one cares about "your most recent info".... we care about the facts.
 
xxstevennnxx said:
Another point you seemed to miss..

"What U.S. taxpayers avoided, according to CAR, was the loss of about $105.3 billion in transfer payments plus the loss of personal and social insurance tax collections to the tune of 768% of the net investment of $11.8 billion in GM and $1.9 billion (none recovered) in Chrysler. Including jobs related to the auto industry, the federal bailout preserved 2.6 million jobs in the U.S. economy in 2009 alone and $284.4 billion in personal income in 2009 and 2010."
Click to expand...

And you leave out some pretty important context to the article....

Next paragraph says:

"As we have already noted, the CAR report suggests that many jobs would have been recovered eventually, but the gains would have been made mostly in the southeastern United States, where foreign carmakers like Toyota Motor Corp. (NYSE: TM) have been building manufacturing capacity. The CAR report notes that the results of such a migration would have had severe consequences in the long term and that unemployment rates in the upper Midwestern states would likely still be in double digits."

And those jobs would have been non union. So, all your article does is bolster that the bailout was really little more than a union bolstering program....And in the long run, the country will pay for it in higher prices.
 
upsideguy said:
You are right.... "your most recent info"..... and "no links = hogwash"..... ah, the irony!

PS - no one cares about "your most recent info".... we care about the facts.
Click to expand...


:lamo The humor continues non-stop... :lamo :rofl


Thom Paine
 
Yes I'll admit the bailout of the unions seems to have worked. Were I to go back in time and reassess my position on the bailout (at the time I very much was against such action) I would not change a thing. The market is self correcting - GM would go into bankruptcy would come out of bankruptcy and be a better company for it or, fail miserably and a new car company would fill the void. I like my Charger and would buy another, but that doesn't change a thing.
 
j-mac said:
I think your point is moot...From your own article...

"In a new report released Monday, the Center for Automotive Research (CAR) reckons that the federal government bailout of General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) saved 1.2 million U.S. jobs and preserved $34.9 billion in personal income and social insurance (Social Security, Medicare) payments. The bulk of those jobs and tax payments would have been lost in 2009 and 2010 and would have recovered (mostly) by now without federal intervention, but the U.S. auto industry would look considerably different had both GM and Chrysler been allowed to go under. ..."

Yeah, so....next.
Click to expand...

How does that make the point moot? The facts are that while the govt lost $10B on the deal, they preserved $35B because of the deal making the gov come out $25B ahead because of this bailout
 
xxstevennnxx said:
Okay let me try to break this down for you the best I can..
Click to expand...

You better try again, and go search for some serious hard evidence to back up ANYTHING you have to say. For your claim of 284.4 billion in income yet again is more of the bogus number crap. Do the math, you claim that and 1.2 million jobs… that would average over 230k a job. Sorry, that's not the kind of money they are making up there.

FAIL.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
IOW, it is just a prediction of what might have happened rather than a promise of what was supposed to happen, got it ...
Click to expand...

You mean a prediction like if we do this stimulus plan, we will get back to 5% unemployment in no time?
 
I don't see why anyone would think differently about the bailout because of this.
 
sangha said:
How does that make the point moot? The facts are that while the govt lost $10B on the deal, they preserved $35B because of the deal making the gov come out $25B ahead because of this bailout
Click to expand...

The point is moot for a couple of reasons imho.

1. The reporting on this doesn't nuance it like demos are attempting here, it merely reports that the govt sold the last of the stock, and lost $10 billion.

2. As the report stipulates, although those jobs would have suffered in 2009, 10, they would have recovered. So, all regular people see as the end result is that Obama lost 10 billion again bailing out his union buddies...
 
xxstevennnxx said:
And is officially a success?

It's just been released that the Government has sold it's last share of the last stock in which it owned of GM. Didn't Faux news say it would never be paid off?

It is now official, Obama has saved the Auto industry in America.

"The Center for Automotive Research study -- called ''The Effect on the U.S. Economy of the Successful Restructuring of General Motors'' --€“ found that the controversial 2008-2009 bailout, saved 2.6 million jobs in 2009 alone and $284.4 billion in personal income was preserved over 2009-2010."

You're now free to give Obama a warm thank you and apologize for calling this bailout a failure.

Please begin.
Click to expand...

No, it's a deal that has cronyism written all over it. The government intervened to save the union, and now the union is still there, sucking the life out of the company, driving up costs for consumers, and keeping the cost of employment high such that new jobs can't be created.

And for what? Does the union do anything to improve the quality or lower the cost of vehicles? No, the union exists to feather its own bed and nothing more. They drag everyone else down. Oh, that, and vote for Democrats.

Had the company gone through regular bankruptcy they'd have been reorganized and would have been able to hire many more workers than they do now and put more quality into their cars.

The failure is evident when all the things that could have happened but didn't are considered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom