• 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!

GM bankruptcy plan eyes quick sale to gov't

Renae

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
By Chelsea Emery and Tom Hals

NEW YORK, May 19 (Reuters) - General Motors Corp's (GM.N) plan for a bankruptcy filing involves a quick sale of the company's healthy assets to a new company initially owned by the U.S. government, a source familiar with the situation said on Tuesday.

The source, who would not be named because he was not cleared to speak with the media, did not specify a purchase price. The new company is expected to honor the claims of secured lenders, possibly in full, according to the source.

The remaining assets of GM would stay in bankruptcy protection to satisfy other outstanding claims.
Click to expand...
CORRECTED - UPDATE 1-GM bankruptcy plan eyes quick sale to gov't | Deals | Mergers & Acquisitions | Reuters

No, Obama doesn't want the GOVERNMENT to make our cars.. no of course not right?

Right?
 
The board of the new company would be established with the tacit approval of the government. Fritz Henderson, who took the helm of GM earlier this year after the government pushed out Rick Wagoner, would likely head the new company, the source said.
Click to expand...

I think(and hope) that the government is just a stakeholder, with an aim of propping up GM, and that they would not make active management decisions for GM. If they stay entirely out of making management decisions, this is not horrible, though I would prefer that the government did nothing except help mediate the restructuring.
 
When I think of the Federal Government making and maintaining cars I think back to when Sears had all those problems back in the early 90s with putting wrong parts in cars which they got sued for by the way.
 
chevydriver1123 said:
When I think of the Federal Government making and maintaining cars I think back to when Sears had all those problems back in the early 90s with putting wrong parts in cars which they got sued for by the way.
Click to expand...

Sears put the wrong parts in cars? I missed that story. What happened?
 
The article says that the company was "initially" owned by the government. Is the company still owned by the government now?
 
Someday we will learn the government screws up just about everything.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I disagree, most won't learn that.
Click to expand...

Someone figured it out a few times.



A revolution (from the Latin revolutio, "a turn around") is a fundamental change in power or organizational structures that takes place in a relatively short period of time. Aristotle described two types of political revolution:

Complete change from one constitution to another
Modification of an existing constitution.[1]
Revolutions have occurred through human history and vary widely in terms of methods, duration, and motivating ideology. Their results include major changes in culture, economy, and socio-political institutions.

Scholarly debates about what does and does not constitute a revolution center around several issues. Early studies of revolutions primarily analyzed events in European history from a psychological perspective, but more modern examinations include global events and incorporate perspectives from several social sciences, including sociology and political science. Several generations of scholarly thought on revolutions have generated many competing theories and contributed much to the current understanding of this complex phenomenon.
 
akyron said:
Someone figured it out a few times.



A revolution (from the Latin revolutio, "a turn around") is a fundamental change in power or organizational structures that takes place in a relatively short period of time. Aristotle described two types of political revolution:

Complete change from one constitution to another
Modification of an existing constitution.[1]
Revolutions have occurred through human history and vary widely in terms of methods, duration, and motivating ideology. Their results include major changes in culture, economy, and socio-political institutions.

Scholarly debates about what does and does not constitute a revolution center around several issues. Early studies of revolutions primarily analyzed events in European history from a psychological perspective, but more modern examinations include global events and incorporate perspectives from several social sciences, including sociology and political science. Several generations of scholarly thought on revolutions have generated many competing theories and contributed much to the current understanding of this complex phenomenon.
Click to expand...

Do you think that behavior will present itself presently?
 
FlappyTheKinkajou said:
How in favor of a revolution are you?
Click to expand...

Not at all. I still have some delusional hope left we can overcome the media bombardment and vote a lot of these bastards out.

Education is the key.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom