GM filing would be risky, but looks likely

Bankruptcy for GM is inevitable. Let it go. Congress, Treasury Department and the President have to stop throwing US taxpayer dollars into a failed US corporation.

Government Managed Bankruptcy??? Then it is not really a true and lawful bankruptcy is it! Welcome to total Government control people. You were warned about Obama and everything they said was true a Marxist/Communist.

d burger - Take the Obama hating elsewhere. This is about GM, jobs, and the largest bankruptcy filing - if it happens - EVER in our history. This is huge and will impact people across the country. Your rants are not helpful.

Hope this works out and GM comes back to life. Good Luck.

I just wonder if they can make it. They have high MPG tech from Opel. But I don't know if they have even started importing that. We have the Volt debacle. Its doubled in price and halved its range in a year, but not one has rolled off the line. Its probably going to cost 60K and go 20 miles on battery. They came out with a new Camero, but if they sell 40K of them I'll be amazed. Chrysler has Fiat. GM has nobody. I just don't know if the execs have a clue yet. A new camero, as a short run boutique car could help with some cash issues. But until I see an GM car with a ecoFLEX motor, I just don't see them surviving.

Btco What is not helpful is the Administration ignoring the Law. Creating their own perverted version of the Law. GM should have gone into Bankruptcy from the beginning without Government interference. Our Government has no business putting our tax dollars to support the Auto Industry or the Gluttony of the Bankers. The Billions given to the Auto industry is gone forever and we will be paying for it forever. The Bankers have been feasting on Trillions of Dollars given to them by the Fed. Our Government no longer looks to the best interest of the American People. And by the way Companies go into Bankruptcy everyday and come out successful.

btco,

d burger makes a valid point since in the article it was stated that the Gov't will own a 70% stake in the company and UAW will own 17%. That only leaves 13%. Government owned and operated industry is what his comments were about and they were well within the scope of the article being discussed.

He has every right to state how he feels about this issue as do you. Why is it that when someone brings up the way obama is turning our country to communism all of the sheep get upset? Is it maybe because you see the writing starting to appear on the proverbial wall?

Hating on Obama and ranting about Marxism - how is that valid? Same ol' tin foil hat routine.

What a newsflash, GM could go into bankruptcy. No kidding, they've been on life support since Fall, thanks to Uncle Sam. No one else wants to throw their money down a rat hole. They were bleeding $75million a week, GM was crippled by union-won benefits/wages. Writing on the wall? Their demise was there, but the taxpayer still gets to pay - first for the worthless bailout, and next for the federal pension guarantee fund that will have to pick up retiree benefits - pennies on the dollar, but still huge.

GWB was the one who came out with the auto bailout. He gave them the 35B. Obama gave them a little more 7B and then realized they were run by morons and could never make the turn around with the Execs they had. He helped broker the deal with Fiat which is itself sad. They had to give away part of a company just to get the high MPG tech they should of had in the first place. It was like the Obese 3 were having a race on who could come out with the lowest MPG. I'm sure the Execs got kickers from big oil. Your on this Obama kick. Obama didn't run these companies into the ground. In fact they were failed before he took office. If you have to take government money as in GM and Chrysler to keep your doors opened, your a failed company.

It wasn't just wages. Americans wanted high mpg cars and they had none. You can't make a Geo Metro on an H2 line. Ultimately their problems are from the execs who couldn't see the writing on the wall or just ostriched saying we want our giant SUVs after credit thawed. And just kept making them even tho there was no market for them.

Addiem I agree with most of what you say. But I do not think you understand Socialism/Marxism . When in our history as a nation has our government given a loan to a company then declared they now own 70% of the company (a Private Company). Our Government now owns 80% of AIG. A Marxist government takes control of private business they say in the interest of the people. But it is in the interest of the Government. It appears that you understand what is going on you just do not want to believe that Obama could actually not be what you thought he was; but you are not alone. For your information Congress is attemting to control any and all businesses that have ever in the past taken a bailout or tax incentive. I find this a very scary proposition; don't you?

I so confused %( Democrats say there for the little guy yet they only help big business and even become the big business whilst accusing Republicans of being out for big Business and ignoring the little guy.Republicans say there for smaller Government and for freedom whilst accusing Democrats of being for big government and being socialist even though thats all they have been about .

Cant trust either party! Time for real change throw these bums out.

the suspense is killing me, and the economy.

It's long past time GM was allowed to go into bankruptcy, it should have been there this past winter and allowed to go through the painful, but ultimately necessary process of restructuring that could help it get healthy - rather than be manhandled by the government just to prop up a corrupt Union like the UAW at everyone elses expense.

d burger - this mess is bigger than an Obama mastermind plot. Government should never ever have bailed out any of these failed businessmen. This snowball is beyond control - looks like to me.

Yes, governments nationalizing businesses, usually vital ones, is a sign of bad times. But what is happening here is meddling, and the gov't was blindly trying to avoid another Great Depression. Maybe they will have. But the taxpayers' bill is so monumental - we will likely face stagflation, like Japan did for 10 years. There is no money in Communism, it failed in Russia, and China just pretends like they aren't anymore.

GM should have grown a pair and fixed their problems BEFORE they had to go to Chapter 11. It has cost them and the taxpayer too much! Get the ball rolling!

I own 4 GM products from '99 to '08. These are the last I ever intend to own. I do, however. want our money back. For my kids and future grandkids to have to pay back this slush money for the UAW is disgusting. So are the stupid barry defenders who refuse to admit he has no idea what he is doing. He does know he is handing America back to the lowest common denominator. What he is doing to the country longterm may be irreversible.

Just for once libs, pretend he is GWB. The media would be howling at this complete failure of bo policy.

Tim,

Bush was asked to give Chrysler and GM a lifeline at the request of Obama. It was widely publicized that PE Obama wanted to deal with this when he got into office.

d burger is correct that the Obama administration has circumvented bankruptcy law regarding the way bondholders have been treated in the Chrysler bankruptcy. Also, the initial US loan (issued under the Bush administration) was forgiven. The same plan is set for a GM bankruptcy. So, in effect, we are out the 35 Billion.

Chrysler is maintaining sales because effected dealers are offering below cost prices to get rid of their inventory before the June 9th deadline.

The bottom line is the American public has changed from its spending habits. Less demand means either a lower supply or lower price. This means the weakest manufacturer fails through lower sales or losses. Artificially propping up weak companies will not equate to greater sales. Unfortunately, the government meddling could cause the demise of Ford.

I hope other Americans will join me in boycotting GM and Chrysler in order to save Ford since they have stayed above the fray.

Bankruptcy? Didn't we, the taxpayers, just give them $4 billion more dollars less than a week ago? Aren't they supposed to recieve over a billion more after June 1st. Aren't they going to recieve over $7 billion more after that. Why, oh why isn't anyone mad about this? Why is the media ignoring it?

Sorry to anyone who thinks it's all just "Obama hating." Their comes a time when common sense has to rule and you have to ask yourself "Are the things Obama and his administration are doing really good for the economy and the taxpayers?" He's giving billions and billions of more taxpayer dollars to a company that is going into bankruptcy. How can anyone logically defend that action?

BTW. Dave, great post.

Many here are posting from a position of ignorance.

Addressing the costs of producing a vehicle, GM and the Government and actually the idiots in the media agree that labor costs add 10% to the price of a vehicle. Not much is it! No one is asking about the other 90% are they.

You just want to kick the union worker when he is down.

Where was your righteous indignation when Pres. Obama fired the CEO of GM?

Why is everyone carping about GM and the vehicles they produce? The truck line is/was their highest profit margin line. The Silverado 1/2 ton pickup was the #2 seller nationwide last year!

This is an attack on a way of life. The days of the coddled union factory worker have been long gone for some years now. A production worker has 2-3 times as many responsibilities (jobs) per vehicle, absenteeism and on the job drunkenness/drug use are not tolerated any more. Bonuses and cost of living adjustments, raises, have been done away with in favor of paying more and more toward our and retiree health care. The union won't even try to add up all of the money we have given up to help the company "pay for our benefits" since the 1980 contract. Jobs are being further combined in the skilled trades area's, only an electrician has his/her unique job classification and that is due to safety regulations (OSHA etc.).

Face it folks. The middle class is being made obsolete by our government! They are killing a way of life, and your job could be next. Why do I say this? Because the auto worker has become a target for every ill that exists. We are "lazy, overpaid, undereducated etc." The banker/credit company is a "greedy bastard" along with the oil companies. When the screwing of the auto worker is complete who will the next target for the entitlement crowd be? I sincerely hope it isn't one of you holier than people.

Anyone who thinks the government is not going Socialist is a fool. Value wise in the last 6 months "our" government has nationalized more business than Hugo Chavez, and there is no end in sight.

I too fear this government, and its propaganda wing MSNBC, ABC, NBC etc.

Colonel.

The answer is NO! Nobody can logically defend the actions of our Government! It is incredibly absurd and not in the best interest of the American People.

Chevsmark thank god other people can see what is going on. Scream it from the roof top.

justhowifeel. I believe you may be right. Why else would a company filing for bankruptcy be given billions more unless it was to for union payoffs? Anyone?

Thanks d burger. I KNEW I wasn't crazy...

Despite what the 'O' people keep telling me.

All hail the chief, Obama!. The recession is over job loss has peaked and the Messiah has fixed all-----OR HAS HE????

grant. Yes, I too saw that "the recession is over," but for some reason my business, which for the past 10 years has done most of it's business between the months of March and July, is completely dead right now and I have NO business what so ever (something that has never happened to me before) to such an extent that I'm getting scared (for the first time in 10 years). O.K. Obama, anytime you want to send that bailout check will be fine.

GM..... Government Motor...

Is anyone going to buy an American made Yugo?????

Like I said in another post, I'm getting a "Pelosi" because it always looks new (despite how old it gets).

But that damn talking GPS is always giving me wrong directions and then blaming someone else.

GM has historically had MPG models. This issue is one of price vs durability. GM has claimed durability, but consumers see the japanese offerings as more durable. I have rarely heard much about Japanese MPG (other than hybrids) from Americans, mostly durability.

I agree. The impact of letting Lehman go was underestimated and we are still printing money to rescue that disaster. GM is just as interconnected here and abroad. Do we have another trillion to roll out when the fallout of a GM bankruptcy begins to land here and around the world? At least the Republicans and Democrats will both be able to point to a disasterous decision from the Bush and Obama presidencies, respectively, while the American standard of living for the "middle class" continues to descend.

All you idiots rooting for the downfall of our last domestic industry because you don't like unions better hope GM survives.A depression might make some of the past 30 years' recessions seem like the good old days.As for the usual reliability and durability crap as someone paying the bills for an overhaul on a domestic car you might have a point.If I owned a 41 year old Japanese car I might not need an overhaul.Why? Because I'd need a whole f**king car.There's no such thing as a 40 year old Japanese car.Or 30 year old or even 20 year old.Once a Japanese car croaks it's an expensive proposition to restore it and very few people have the resources or skills to do it.On the other hand I can buy almost any part for my '68 Impala (the sources have only increased as the car has gotten older) and it's super easy to work on.Detroit needs to get back to the basics once this bankruptcy has run it's course.Shared components between different sizes of cars (almost all the motor parts interchange except for exhaust headers on my '68 with any other '68 except the Corvair) and durable,simple and affordable cars will get GM back on top.

Dave, w/r/t Chrysler sales, sale prices traditionally have been used to liquidate stale stock whether being sold at competitive retailers or closing outlets; so, that is nothing new. In this case, two factors are at play hurting the fix.

1. People will not/can not pay three, four, five or six months' net wages, or more, for transportation when the added financing multiplies the effective cost two, three or four fold. Buying an over-priced car with OPM is no longer a workable sales model for the general public.

A clue here is the fact that when you drive a $29,000 car off the lot and around the block, it comes back worth substantially less in dollars even though it is barely used. That reveals to the true value of the vehicle. Even the "used" value of that car is skewed because the underlying quality (which used to be the envy of the world) has been compromised by endless corporate missteps and unreasonable federal laws. (To see them working together to "fix" the industry is enough to drive anyone to other brands.)

2. Back in the 1970's when planned obsolescence was a design standard in Detroit is when the industry started heading for the dumper. At that point today's demise was manufactured and brought to the marketplace. It was toward the end of the '70's when Detroit no longer made what the public wanted. Class and style went out and generic looking vehicles came in. Federal controls skyrocketed and quality and value suffered. A government cannot run a business, especially a failed one; they should stay entirely out of the marketplace. If the fed would minded their own business, the manufactures would have/could have adopted as they have done traditionally. The professional politicians (the federal government) stymied that.

For some people, high mileage is the command for a car, new or used. For others, not. Which would you rather have, a $400/month payment for a high mileage vehicle for which you have to also buy $4.00 gas, or $300 per month in gas costs in a vehicle with no monthly payment but less mileage? You do not have be a NASA scientist nor a failing politician to work that out. If the government can build a $2500 car that gets 50+/mpg, let them give us call. Otherwise, they should get out and stay out of the marketplace. (Hint: the marketplace is not commerce despite what some intellectually challenged judges thought.)

Dave, it is agreed, "the American public has changed ... its spending habits." Note the recession. However, in the long run, less demand will mean both a lower supply and a higher price. The "day of the deal" is coming to an end; service will return as the deciding factor in the marketplace. Manufacturers will not sell at basement prices if they are only going to sell half of what they did in the past; just to maintain profits the price necessarily has to double. In business, status quo for sales revenue is not acceptable; a ten per cent per year increase is a minimum. (Not my idea, complain to the Havard Business School; they think they know business.)

Agreed: "Artificially propping up weak companies will not equate to greater sales." The whole bailout plan has been to throw good taxpayer money into failed and poorly run businesses. The only possible result can be a continuation of failure spread out longer over time, leaking into all phases of the economy. If there is a bad solution to be found, the fed will rally around it.

The bailout is a perfect snap shot of what the professional politicians call a "fix": throw huge amounts of taxpayer money at the problem and hope it goes away until the next guy is in office. Both parties have been operating in this manner for over 50 years. (This fix is not new; see where the past fixes have brought us.) Professional politicians are effective at one, and only one, job: getting elected. Otherwise they are clueless about work, running a government, budgets, the real world and common sense. Just look at their records...

Dave, I disagree somewhat with "Unfortunately, the government meddling could cause the demise of Ford." Continued government meddling in the marketplace can, is and will mean the complete demise of the US economy and the capitalist American society as we know it. One can see glimses of that now. As long as lemmings continue to support and vote these moronic professional politicians into office, the fall of the second empire is unavoidable and confirmed.

Americans should boycott all industries in which the government meddles until the fed gets out and stays out (that includes just about everything). Additionally, they must entrust their government and their futures to people who are not professional politicians---their friends, neighbors and local leaders. (That is the way this government was meant to be run.) Otherwise the people generally, not the rich or political royalty, will suffer greatly. Lemmings, it is your dream, your work, your life and the future of your children at stake; don't let the asses and pudgy pachyderms fritter it away...

doktorthomas,

I agree with all of your points. You have clearly provided more substance to my position.

LOL.. Wasn't this kid of like how we needed to give the banks trillions so they wouldn't fail and bring our way of life to its knees? Kind of like if the automaker went into bankruptcy we would all perish in soup lines?

ROFL.. government knows best right??? ROFL...

"Your age?" ask the bankruptcy judge.

"Well, I must be 35," answered the debtor.

"How's that?"

"I must be 35. Had the 7-year itch 5 times."

This is a trip...let our auto industry fail while the banking industry that go this mess going get tons of funding...lose thousands of jobs just to take the heat off congress and the financial industry and wall street.. If its so good to let the auto industry fail why not the banks that created the loans that started this stuff...it would not have hurt the smaller banks,.,,,they would have been ok since they were not a part of the banks such as B of A and the other banks got most all of the funding.

"The whole bailout plan has been to throw good taxpayer money into failed and poorly run businesses." This statement in it self is interesting and true, except that the businesses that should have failed have gotten all of our tax money....the auto industry had its problems but it has failed now because of the banking system not making car loans or any other kind of loan,,,but hey, they still got all the money and will continue too as long as they keep crying the blues and blaming the people that get stuck with the bad loans that the banking industry sold to them.

I'm not really sure that GM is a failed company as so many like to indicate. This is just a poorly managed entity that needs to have the fat trimmed that stuffed their pockets while grinding the company into debt. Until recently GM was the largest auto manufacturer in the world. Now I believe its Toyota because people seem to think they are better cars. I have owned several and when I bought my last car I compared models and while the GM's had near the same ratings by owners with many comparable models the repair costs on the same models and known issues were much easier to stomach. For example a Camry I compared to the vehicle I bought average $4000 repair in the first couple years of ownership.

GM basically has set labor costs. One of the strongest brand names in the world. So if GM is failing its because of poor liberal management that thinks they deserve huge paychecks and bonuses for operating a company so far in debt they have to borrow to pay for their own bonuses. That is why nearly all companies fail tons of debt because of poor management and not enough income to sustain the debt. Liberal business leadership at its best. Just like AT&T. Took a huge company and split it into four and sold off the peices.

One piece Implemented new untested billing systems twice, in back to back years, during critical business months of a very successful wireless company. In fact I believe it was number 2 carrier in the world at the time and one of the highest rated among customers. And then these liberal Seattle leaders were shocked when people buying christmas presents, that were effectively paper weights for months, were disenfranchised because the orders failed in nearly every phase of activation except the part were it immediately billed your card..Customers couldn't even get a refund or procees a return for 2-3 months in some cases. Effectively driving the stock they sold to employees for $27 a share to $3. To reward themselves CFO's, CEO's, CIO's got millions of options at the $3 price and then sold the company to Cingular for $15 a share. Effectively recieving $20- $25 million each for a job undone.

The management was crooked plain and simple.

GM has had in excess of 20 years to get it's act together and what did they do? Built and marketed SUV's. If GM hadn't let it's marketing department run the show they wouldn't have had nearly the problems they face now. They should have stayed out of the banking indusrty also. They have, or had, some great engineers in the past but like I said they let the marketing people take over. And 4thepeople, I don't think you can blame it on liberal management, I'm sure there are just as many conservative greedy managers on their team, though I do agree with you to a point.....upper management of GM and many other companies certainly don't earn or deserve the bonus's and compensation packages they get, let alone the huge salaries and that is a major problem with corporation in general. These guys seem to think that just because their bigshots with a big company they can do what they please and screw the customers. They made their bed and they should be forced to lay in it. As it stands now, however, they will sap as much money as they can out of the company and retire at a level most of us little folk can't even imagine. I say screw GM!

"if we were to see a cascading failure it could quickly spread to the rest of the economy."

Let's not overstate the problem. It won't lead to a "depression", because we're only talking about GM, not the whole industry. Actually, GM, even with "restructuring", probably will still not be viable because, with the government and the unions owning almost 88% of the company, and neither one of them interested in profits, the company will just die a very slow death, with taxpayers footing most of the bill as we subsidize it for the next 5 years or so until it finally dies.

Whose fault is it? I'm sure there's plenty of blame to go around, but the principal problems are poor management and union labor costs. I see a lot of people blaming management for continuing to build large gas guzzlers, but the reality is that these vehicles were the only ones that they could make money on because the excessive labor costs made producing a competitively priced economy car virtually impossible.

One thing I have to say for the UAW is that they were so successful in pushing for higher wage and benefit agreements that they managed to price themselves out of a job.

You can count on a government/union controlled company to put labor benefits and "social engineering" ahead of sound business practices, so the likelihood of GM surviving long-term is virtually nil.

Sadly, one of the side-effects of this will be to drive away prospective investors/bond-. holders from any company with a significant union pension issue, because they will consider themselves at much greater risk because of the government's shocking attempts to kick their priority claim on assets to one secondary to union claims. A prospective bondholder would be crazy to put their money at risk under these circumstances. This will make financing very difficult for companies that are highly unionized, making them even more vulnerable to non-union competitors. Also, any prospective stock buyers will also be disinclined to buy stock in these companies after seeing what happened to GM's stockholders. An unintended consequence of the type of "change" that this administration is promoting by changing the rules of the game.

This is the new reality for investors.

PS - I wonder how many of the GM bondholders are union pension funds of other public and private companies, who will enrich the UAW at their own union employees expense. LOL

addiem

"the taxpayer still gets to pay - first for the worthless bailout, and next for the federal pension guarantee fund that will have to pick up retiree benefits - pennies on the dollar, but still huge."

I suspect that this is a grossly overstated problem. Since the amount of union-pension investments is probably higher than the Federal Pension Guarantee Fund's potential liability, I suspect the taxpayer will be alright on this. Remember, the payment obligations under the federal guarantee would be far lower than what GM would have been liable for under the onerous pension plan they "negotiated" with the unions. The federal guarantee fund may actually benefit from taking over the pension assets.

The Colonel-964761

"He's (Obama) giving billions and billions of more taxpayer dollars to a company that is going into bankruptcy. How can anyone logically defend that action?"

It's simple. The money is taxpayer dollars flowing to the UAW for their support of him during the election. After "loaning" the money to GM and fleecing the bond-holders and stockholders, then they'll hand over ownership to the unions, and you'll get stuck with the bill.

Great for GM union members. Not great for the company and certainly the secured bond holders are getting the shaft. Talk about a windfall. The union walks away fat dumb and happy having never put anything on the table, having taken no risk on the production of cars (no skin in the game) and reeping the benfits of ownership ahead of secured bondholders who "by law" are guaranteed head of the line priority when seeking reimbursement. Instead the president comes out and says everyone involved will have to sacrifice. Everyone but the unions...who are the reason the company is in the position it is in. That about covers it I think. Worthless idiots....every Dem and Repub needs to be thrown out of office and then thrown in jail.

Sooooooooooooooooooooooo: Just where did all our money go. raotflmao Shhhhh: Don't talk about that.

We all do business with the government on a daily basis because we have no choice, and in many cases we do get great benefits from this arrangement. (A free society, good roads, clean air, Social Security, etc.)

However, I have no plans to do MORE business with the government. That would be like eating at Taco Bell ALL the time. I don't like to put all my eggs in one basket, so I don't think I'll be doing business with a government owned car dealer. It just doesn't seem, on a gut level, like a good thing.

" (A free society, good roads, clean air, Social Security, etc.)"

Too much KoolAid in your system friend. Good for you.

Navy - Sounds like you have no stake in this situation other than as a consumer with no taste.

btco, consumer w/no taste? shouldn't you go watch 'the view' about now?

on topic, it will be painful, but detriot will come out of this better off in the long run, as long as they don't just stagger down the same path again.

btco,

Who made the clothes you are currently wearing. How about the chair I assume you are sitting in right now. How about the computer you are currently using to post your insults.

You are painting yourself to be a buy only American kind of guy. If this is the case then stop using all of the things that are foriegn made or owned. Goodbye!

Now, back to the discussion with the intelligent people. You see, we can insult just like you, however, I would rather discuss the issues, all of the issues, at hand.

cmon,

I agree with you. GM and Chrysler need to embrace new tech. and come out of this changed. I am afraid as you are that once they get back on track financially they will go back to their old practices and fail again. I personally own 3 american autos and hope that they do succeed through bankrupcy. It worked for Chrysler years ago and can work again.

Also, does anyone know if there is a payback schedule for all of the money that these companies have been given? This money should be paid back before even one penny goes to profit or a UAW coffer.

Paid back? I doubt that anyone seriously has even considered that a possibility, I don't see it happening, don't expect GM to becomes a viable company again.

The only ones paying are us, the taxpayer, and that hasn't even kicked in yet - within two years I expect to see a hefty increase in Federal taxes - how else can this nightmare (not just auto but banks/financials) be paid for?

Jim - I do try to buy American where I can and if I have a choice. What is so wrong with that.

Not to mention that many of the cars and their parts are made in Canada and Mexico!

Buy what you want when you want thats freedom.The problem is not to many can buy because there broke unemployed and up to there necks in Debt so no amount of bail out will change that.Government can take over GM 100% Hows that going to increase buyers? No buyers means no Revenue no reason to manufacture So it is Bankruptcies just like us small business who can not sell a product or service.No Business is to large to fail and a large Government eventually will fail.

btco,

There is nothing wrong with that.

Dave. You are right that the Government builds road and infrastructure and so on. However, don't forget that you and I are the ones who make those things possible by paying taxes. The government is more like a CPA who takes your money and decides how it should be spent. Also, the Government does not provide you with a free society, we do that for ourselves by trying to keep their powers in check.

I think Government is forgetting that they work for us, not the other way around.

Embrace new tech? What rock have you folks been hiding under? Poor quality? Sorry but GM has more vehicles that top 30 mpg than ANY other company, and their quality has been consistantly high for the last 10 or so years. Back in the 80's we had trucks that ran on LP gas, but were made to convert them back. The trial market? California! The electric car? Was out, the trial market? California!

People wouldn't buy the damn things because they inconvenienced their lifestyles!

Get a clue FFS! You have been inhaling media produced anti American made methane for too long. Remove your head from its present location and get some fresh air please, we all will benefit from it!

If the Obama administration and his government will have a 70% stake in GM, does that mean that they will only be responsible for 70% of the new car warranty? Who will pay the other 30%? The UAW? I didn't think so. The lender? I didn't think so. The new car buyer? Probably not. The American taxpayer is my bet. That ought to really boost new car sales for GM, huh?

Chevs Mark,

There are 2 issues here

1) People read and side with the news media opinion, consumer and Government press. The majority of those people are liberal in nature, and there to "make a difference".

2) You on the other side, appear to be eat sleep and drink GM. There are other makes who do make comparable or better models.

Two years ago, I road in a late model Toyota Camry. it had 60,000 miles on it and a loud knock on the suspension. (Strut going bad). I also road in a late model malibu with 70,000 miles same thing. They guy with the Camry traded for newer Camry, they other guy traded for a New KIA. Sorry for both of them, I haven't had a vehicle that required strut/shock replacement before 100,000 miles, unless it set for 9 months and all mine have been American models

Greg, look at your examples of benefits. Not one isn't screwed up. The government you proffer is failed one. The disAssociated Press just hasn't noticed its death.

I owned a 1991 Ford Ranger that needed shocks at 70,000 miles (a little over a year).Good thing I didn't pu$$ out and sell it then,because it went another 230,000 miles before I sold it. I was gonna buy it back but it got totalled.The engine is still on the road at 500,000 miles (after a ring,bearing and gasket overhaul) and my current Ranger (also a '91) is still going strong at 175,000 miles and is very likely going across the country when I return home after a 3 and half year overseas tour.The Corolla I had needed a bunch of work at 100,000 miles.My current Ranger?When I bought it I put belts and tires on it (at 120,000 miles).Since than it's needed an alternator and clutch (if I'd been easier I think I could have babied it to 200,000 miles).I've owned 5 '68 Chevys and while the current one has been a problem child it was a race car (52,000 miles many an eighth or quarter at a time) that was half a$$ed back together for the street.Sadly the Playstation generation hasn't got a clue about working on today's (admittedly complex) cars.Too many people think a minor repair means a car is no good (shocks and struts? that's just sad if someone thinks it means anything is wrong with a car or truck for needing new ones) and as I said we've raised kids who can't make simple repairs or maintain their cars.I'll be supporting our domestic makers as much as I can (I'm stuck with my two rides for a year or so,then the truck gets retired to part time status).

I bought a new British Leland MG in 1974. Tell me about it.

Broke down once on I-94 between Madison and Milwaukee. The car was 2 years old. A radiator hose had split. A state trooper stopped to aid and called a tow truck. The tow truck arrived from Janesville, WI but the driver refused to tow me. You see, Janesville had a GM Assembly Plant. UAW members would have found out about the guy towing me. After about 30 minutes, he agreed to tow me but no work would be done by him once the car got the station. I bought a hose myself, he let me use his tools to make the repair. I went on my way.

DB Akron Please point me to these competitors because I researched many models pretty heavily and found that known repairs for many of these competitors exceeded those of GM vehicles. People gave three stars to some cars because they didn't like the style or handling. Yet they likely have never driven any other car in their life.

How owners of some of these cars can give them 4-5 stars because it has a Toyota, Lexus, or Honda on the hood is stupid. You look at the mechanical and their are known problems for the vehicles that can result in costs as as high as 30% of the original sticker price after only a few short years. I reasearch many cars and have owned 10 or more. I can tell you that the two or three none GM cars I owned by far required more repairs, ran worse, and quite frankly were not even close to the value the professed to be.

A gal at work was telling me about how much nicer her Lexus was than some gals Cobalt. Quiter she said blah blah... I said a Cobalt is like $12k and you paid $40k or more for your Lexus how can you compare the two. It's like comparing a Vespa to a Harley.

Funny their keeping the Chevrolet and Cadallic lines. I've pretty much tried all of their cars and the one company that really honored their warranty was Pontiac and they dumped them. When I had Chevies they did everything they could to weasle out of their warranty commitments. My son bought a new GMC the beginning of last winter and the front bumper wasn't put on right. We compared it to others on the lot and showed their service manager who claimed it was supposed to be crooked in spite of us showing him the trucks still on the lot. The dealership was shut down a month ago. Now he's sweating any further warranty incidents but hey, Obama said the government will cover warranties for GM. As far as I'm concerned let them go down. Some other company can come in and do a hell of a lot better job than the jerks who ran them into the ground.

Reagan laid off the air traffic controllers because the nature of their job is considered vital - they are not allowed to stop work. But yes, if GM is going to just outsource jobs to China as has been bandied about, what is the point in all this bailing out?

(Social Security is a ponzi scheme, and while initially there were about 16 workers to every retiree, now there is like what, 4? Not sustainable, the "kitty" will dry up about 2017 last I heard.)

Ford didn't take any bailout money. So I highly doubt the government made them take it. The whole thing was wrong from the beginning. Government has no business bailing out private companies, be they banks, automakers, insurance companies, etc.

The government bail out fiasco, was only to delay the inevetable. GM, was bankrupt before they received the bail out, and they are bankrupt after they received the bail out. The problem now is, over one million jobs will be affected down the line. The only winner will be China I wonder how much lead they use in their paint?

All 3 automakers went to washington with their hands out (remember the fiasco of them flying there in corporate jets?). GM and Chysler took the money and now look at where they are. Ford saw the writing on the wall and decided to see if they could work it out themselves. Now all we hear about is GM and Chrysler in trouble with the government telling them what they can and cannot do. I owned a chevy truck back in 2000 and it was a decent truck (the only reason I sold it was due to my family getting bigger and I bought a ford cause I like the new styles of the trucks). Even if I still owned a Chevy, I would still be ticked off at the amount of money that govt is throwing away. Bush and Obama should have never taken us down this road. they should have gome into bankruptcy back at the end of 2008. Yeah, we'd have to pay for that, but it would have saved us 40 billion dollars. Now we wasted all that money and we will still have to pay for the bankruptcy.

Keep in mind. The original bailout effort in December 2008 would have made all entities share the pain equally. The union wouldn't accept this. This deal was weighted heavily in favor of the unions, which the creditors probably should not accept. Many of the creditors are people's 401k's.

Thats funny that you say that Jolie, Somehow I remember that the GM and Chrysler Execs were criticized for showing up in DC begging for money in private jets.

And I agree with the person that said that gm should be liquidated along with chrysler to pay back the govt since they are using tax payer dollars to move jobs to china and mexico. The Kenosha engine plant here in Kenosha, WI is moving to mexico next year. Chrysler and GM begged for money to save American jobs and instead is propping up the mexican and chinese economies.

Good for you Sharon!

We hear all the time that unions are to blame for the economic mess. It only takes a casual look at countries that don't have unions, or this country before unions, to see what would happen without them.

Some have suggested that $12 to $15 an hour would be a reasonable wage, that's only about $24,000 a year take home. To those people I say that's not enough to buy much of the products you help produce, and if you have a family your kids will suffer a substandard education, stifled opportunitys, gang influence, (you can't afford to live in a decent area) among other things.

A healthy economy is not measured by the fluctuations in the markets, but by main street job stability, and workers earning enough to be consumers.

By the way, the $24,000.00 a year that some expect others to live on is less than many excutives make in a week.

Sharon, the investers you are talking about run to about 60% peoples retirement funds, they are losing their retirement too and are not that concerned about a guy who considers 55 or 60 thous a year an average american paycheck.

This is about so much more than just the unions.

It is about more than the unions. But our unions do not have the mindset that allows them to compete with the working class of the third world countries. Therefore our country needs a government that passes laws designed to protect American businesses that employ Americans and ease up on trying to globalize everything.

This crap doesn't even get reported right. The article says Chrysler will be "led" by Fiat. Why can't they just say "owned" by Fiat

"But our unions do not have the mindset that allows them to compete with the working class of the third world countries."

Your right if we want to compete we need to all work for $1 an hour, no benifts what so ever and no safety oversight, it costs companies proffits.

Check the Williams act out, makes it kinda hard not to do biz with the UAW.

Really? How do Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi and BMW avoid the UAW in their US plants? Could it be better management? As bad as you think government leadership of GM will be, they couldn't possibly be worse than the typical business idiots who've been running US companies.

Certainly, it's better management.

Yes, the union is one of the big problems at GM. So, the Union contract had two signatures on it. It was the union's job to get all they could, it was the company's job to keep their costs down. Any problem in a manufacturing plant are management problems.

Not excusing the union, they see every one taking a licking and have not yet realized the party is over. Take it now, if it goes through bankrupyct, you lose any say so.

A pox on both of them, you save Gm with the present management and union, you get to do it again soon.

They should have already gone through bankruptcy.

I agree I'm changing to Ford, I have drove a Chevy all my adult life but no more will I buy from the great GM.

Ford mortgaged every single asset it had a couple of years ago. They are living on that credit line. If the recession continues or the economy doesn't rebound enough, Ford will be in trouble as well.

Your right they should cut those pensions for those 80 year olds who retired 20 years ago and let them eat cat food (what they can buy on SS) and freeze to death in their homes/apartments. They are a drag on the economy. Forget that most of those workers worked 25+ years and had no idea that when they were guarenteed a pension that they rely on, that just when they got old enough to not be able to work, it would get yanked away. Screw em! Right?

Amen brother,

I want no more of Government Motors cars. How could anyone possibly want a car built by the government. See how well they run social security , medicare , the postal service, should I go on? I will buy FORD from now on!!!!!!

Obama is great at "giving" two things. Speeches to the taxpayers and taxpayer money to failed industries.

Oh. And apologies to foreign enemies.

Obama is trying to save the 55,000 votes, in the UAW.

billyblog maybe you had better take your pension out of the banks because they got a lot more money than gm got. also we can help gm or we can pay all these people without work. i would just as soon pay them to work.

We will be paying them not to work anyway, GM and Chrysler are sending the jobs that were supposed to be saved with this money to china and mexico so it does not matter what we do we will be paying for these union slackers not to work anyway.

Great post greg ..I heard the same thing ..you just beat me to posting.

Seems to me..this is a slap in the face..to the taxpayers..give me your money and well see you later...riiiiiiiiiight.

We never should have gave them a dime..sorry about all the unemployed workers..its not there fault.

But the CEO's are nothing but politicans or theives ,

There is no other money available. Duh

btco Great use of the English Language. "Duh"

d burger - DUH It's a great word. It expresses my absolute disbelief whenever I read the parts of your posts that say we are now socialists. DUH !!!!!

btco To the best of my knowledge this is the first time that the government has owned major coporations. It may not be socialism yet but you can't say it's not a big step in that direction.

cs- Not a step at all and ownership will not be permanent I am sure.

Of course it's "gobblegoop" to someone who doesn't understand what they're reading.

Reminds me of when the "Big Three" execs came to Washington for hearings last Fall - in private jets, and man, did they get roasted. That was precious. Wiped the grins right off their faces. Look at them now, idiots.

The unrealistic pensions of the retirees of GM is drowning GM in debt as well. With a govt. takeover, these same retirees will see a "downsizing" of their pensions for sure. I fail to understand all of this socialist gobble-de-gook. We are in a recession...and could go to a depresssion like the '30's. I don't believe that socialism helped us out then....or will now. You are only speculating, dBurger, and your ideas are no better than the rest of ours as far as the future is concerned. Or are you hiding your crystal ball?

Yes yank those pensions away from those 80 year olds who rely on them and had no idea they would be taken away just when they reached an age where they were to old to work. Let them eat cat food and live on the street. Yeah, servers them right for working for that company for so many years.

just me.

If bankruptcy is "necessary and unavoidable" then why did we give them $4 billion a few days ago, and plan to give billions more next month if they're going into bankruptcy? I'm still not getting it.

Of course you don't get it. It's way over your head.

GMAC split from GM a while ago I think

BTCO: The quotation below is from GMAC's Investor Relations page on their web site. This is the premise for my curiosity!

"Founded in 1919 as a wholly owned subsidiary of General Motors Corporation (General Motors or GM), GMAC was originally established to provide GM dealers with the automotive financing necessary to acquire and maintain vehicle inventories and to provide retail customers the means by which to finance vehicle purchases through GM dealers. GM, through one of its wholly-owned subsidiary, continues to hold a significant equity interest in GMAC. FIM Holdings LLC, an investment consortium led by an affiliate of Cerberus Capital Management, L.P., also holds a significant equity interest in GMAC. On December 24, 2008, GMAC converted to a Bank Holding Company after approval from the Federal Reserve. "

Thanks Peggy !!!

A number of companies, insurance companies also, converted - so they too could line up at the trough.

Nope, you need to understand what is involved here before you hang Obama.

I'm not trying to "hang Obama", just looking for some clarification of a definition. Is bankruptcy considered a "failure" of a business, or just a normal everyday part of keeping a business going?

So what is involved here? A lot of short quips about how no one understands, but no lengthy discussion of the facts so we may all know.

No wonder the investors balked,get 10% for 27 billion,the union gets 17.5% for 9 billion worth of health care and pension, and the government gets 70% for what?

GM has been headed this way for quiet a while and as the saying goes"all good things must come to an end" time for GM to go the way of the Hudson and the Edsel.

btco it's not hard to understand stupied .

The Government is not letting GM fail they are stealing 70 percent of the Company. Welcome to Socialist America.

Stealing 70% of worthless paper. Sort of like the bailout of AIG. But GM isn't going to survive this, because they are unable to maintain market share, much less survive their expensive employee/retiree benefit/wage packages.

addiem - I have a feeling the white collar pensions will end up on the govt. Just like the airlines and steel plants who filed. The union pensions will go to the unions as far as I know.

I know car dealers here where I live who are having trouble getting and keeping the financing they have in place for their businesses. They are making money still and selling cars, just are unable to tap the usual credit lines available before this crisis. That's one of the main reasons these guys have been going under recently. Credit is still a bit tough to find for certain industries and I believe that is why the Govt is providing the $$$ and taking a stake.

I think if GM can shed some of their costs and restructure their business, they will go back to being one of the biggest players in the auto industry here and abroad. Just wait and see. That's all we can do right now. Gotta have a bit of faith.

btco - I'm sorry, but right now, faith is too much to ask for when the facts look so very bleak.

addiem - How about you just sit the next 8 years out while our country recovers from past mistakes and short sighted decisions made by the past administration. Then go vote for the next Bush clone.

Obama is not going to last 4 years silly socialist.

Rob - How about you go back to listening to Rush. Hoping the country fails. Just saying No the whole way back under your rock.

btco - I'd be happy if anything good happened in the next 8 months, much less 8 years. If the economy tanks worse - it'll be another Jimmy Carter - 4 and out. Next.

Well, come on get happy already for crying out loud !!!!!!! Life is too damn short to fret so much !!!!!!! The economy is already starting down the road to recovery !!!!!! - er sort of!!!!!!

btco. I have two questions:

1. In your opinion as an Obama supporter, how much time realistically should Obama be given before the general public would be allowed to make a judgement, good or bad, about his policies?

2. How much time should pass before it can realistically be said, Obama's policies are now determining the course of our economy and nation and Bush's policies are no longer relevent?

Thanks.

colonel - 1 - You have an opinion right now, you make judgments right now - just like everyone else, myself included. I'd say make any judgment you want now, later, whenever - it's up to each person.

2- As to when Obama's policies begin to determine our course, since he took office in Jan. 2009. Obama is working on issues that have been around for a while. A lot of things, I feel Bush ignored or failed on for sure. All of our problems didn't start with Bush though and all of them will not be fixed by Obama. Doesn't work that way. Bush, in my opinion, did a horrible job. That's my opinion and I'll bet yours is different.

btco doesn't matter whats involved. A liar is a liar.

You didn't answer either question. I was asking for your personal opinions on the timelines involved, you know something like a year, two years, four years. I looked at the questions again and they seem clear enough. I was not ambiguous at all. And I thought I was polite about it. Just questions. No need to get mad, dude.

All I need is your personal opinion as to a timeframe.

Colonel - Re-read my post. I think I answered your questions. At least I thought I did :)

Dont blame me, I voted for Ron Paul!

Amen! "Someone" said we couldn't allow this to happen! Wasn't very long ago, maybe December last year? I guess we couldn't allow it to happen, until the gov't owned GM. NOW, we can allow it to happen.

Here comes a 5 word quip or insult from btco. 10, 9, 8, 7, 6................

Now tha Barack The Great will have control of it ..... and now can appoint the board members..... They don't think it will crash the known universe anymore.

Jim

No need to wait for btco. I'll do it for him. You guys have no idea what you're talking about. The notion of government doing anything other than blowing things up is more than you can handle. It's just sad reading your silliness.

I say get rid of the pensions and let those to old to go back to work live on the streets. That is what they get for working for that company all those years!

Dom

Not all the investors wear suit & ties it also includes 401(k) which a lot of people have money in, not just suits but the working class as well.

The Monte Carlo is no longer in production.The 304 horsepower Camaro is now available with 6 spd. transmissions and 29 mpg. highway for $23,000.If I didn't want my next daily driver to be a 4 door,I'd put it at the top of my list.

The unions did not put GM in this position! The GM execs put GM in this position, and it's not a bad position to be in, for GM.

GM can get billions in taxpayer money, file for BK, while using their assets to build a large new factory and establish a booming market in China. GM broke records in China in April for car sales and profits, and is planning to produce cars over there to import here.

Some bad position eh? Bet you wish you were in trouble like that, eh? You should send the union a thank you card for holding the line as long as they did!

Unions have fixed rates and its the easiest way to control costs.. Rarely do they make much more that any more good none union workers and the non union shops aren't going out of business. As a teamster we had an option to bid another facility we offered a lower tier for that location. And in my union you didn't get the job done or did bad work you didn't need to worry about getting fired. But you sure as heck better hope your union brothers didn't get ahold of your lazy backside.

I get so sick of you crybabies blaming hard working individuals for the failures of poorly managed businesses.

If I buy a $6 million dollar home on $35k a year salary and assume my wages will increase enough to make the mortgage payment on and 50 year ARM then I would be the failure when I can't pay. And the clown that loaned the money in the first place should be in prison for fraud knowing that the payback would be impossible.

If I run a business and do not cater to individuals that can tolerate the cost of my business model than I am a failure. I have a fellow I used to work with that lost his pension as a Union employee that he earned while working over 20 years at a company because a judge gave the funds to executives for bonuses to retain them in order to keep the company afloat. All the execs got to keep their retirements and all the workers lost everything they earned. The worthless cowards went to all the meetings with three or 4 bodygaurds until the company was completely out of business.

Your right we are tired of your BS

How is it that GM is the top selling car maker in the U.S.,QMAN? I guess a few people must like them.If the G8 is rebadged as a Chevy (they sell them in the Middle East as Caprices) I'll consider it.

GM is the second largest auto maker in the world. And no one is buying them so somehow they are being stored in space then?. They built and built and stockpiled anticipating sales or to screw workers if they threatened to strike. Now they have payments for products built but not sold. Poor management not union demise.

When I worked at Cingular they tried to get us into the union to reduce our wages and control costs. We voted no because the union package would have cost people that hadn't been employees for several years more money, cost them vacation time, and lowered their potential earnings. In fact most of us were beyond the scale of the union, had 401k matching, a pension, and medical that was less out of pocket. So quit blaming the unions. It simply is not true. And BTW the union workers at Cingular were fired and couldn't do a thing about it. You had X number of sick, vaction, ect... if you used them too quickly in the first part of the year as a union employee you would be unemployed and I saw several people get the axe. When you left the company all accrued time off was lost. You quit december 29 you didn't get any of your vacation or paid time off. Its gone. Tell me that doesn't help the company.

I have met few union people in my life that did not earn their keep.

Good Post - I agree with everything and couldn't have said it better myself.

Hopefully all goes well.

It will be interesting to see when and if we ever understand the vital role good paying manufacturing jobs play in our society.

Robert,

Some GM models might be on par with comparable foreign made models, but, and this is from recent experience, GM has major trouble with providing a quality sales, financing and customer service experience. Their actions drove my fiancee, who's family has bought GM this side of forever to purchase another brand of car and vow to never purchase from them again.

The company can have a perfectly fine vehicle, but if I have to deal with unknowlegable, rude and arrogant salespeople, service shops that are constantly trying to find ways to charge me more for doing work covered by the warranty, miles of red tape and customer service reps who barely speak English at GMAC who make it impossible for me to get my payoff on a lease so I can consider buying the truck, then I am going to go with that comparable vehicle.

Quality is still very much lacking at GM.

Miss Anthony - Dealership problems are not the same as the maker. I owned one Toyota with major problems and the level of service I received was pretty terrible at the dealer level.

Robert. Your post is well thought out. Although I don't agree with all of it. But anyway, perhaps you can answer this for me. I have been searching for one and haven't gotten a logical one yet.

A few days ago the Treasury "loaned" GM about $4 billion and that the reasons will not be "publicly disclosed." GM will recieve another $2.6 billion by June 1st and said that they will need an aditional $7.6 billion after June 1st. This is on top of $15.4 billion they have already recieved. This will bring the total to over $30 billion thus far.

Question: Why is the Treasury giving an additional $14 billion to a company going into bankruptcy and how (you can speculate here) could it be justifiable not to "publicly disclose" why this much in taxpayer money is being given to a company going into bankruptcy?

The Colonel-964761,

The answer to your question about the money use not being "publicy disclosed", probably has to do with todays move. Today they are paying all the hourly workers ahead of schedule, and tomorrow they will pay salaried workers. Part suppliers are also being paid in advance, all this according to financial people is because once you file chapter 11, the court must approve all of these payouts. The parts people they are paying are most likely so they can keep the lines open that make needed vehicles, like the new Camaro, which is selling well, and because its new has no built up stock yet.

Why were Wall Street's empty suits allowed to pay themselves $18 billion in unearned bonuses (most of it while a Republican still occupied the White House)?I'm sick that all of the financial and auto sector bailouts seem to have gone to those who were responsible for the collapse of the economy and who deserve nothing other than a swift kick in the backside.At least the auto sector bailouts help preserve the last shred of our once great industrial sector and should prevent a depression.

Thanks robby. That does clear up things a little. They're trying to make pay-outs before the bankruptcy courts freeze the assets. Logical, and If it were the companies own liquidity I would have no problem with it, but I feel in this case it is unethical considering it is taxpayer money being used.

One thing I don't understand also. Obama essentially threatened Chrysler's creditors to accept .29 cents on the dollar or he would see that they suffered (by way of the White House Press Corps.). What's the difference here? Why did he take an almost blackmail approach to Chrysler, but is not doing that with GM? Does it have anything to do with the UAW? Anyone?

Laura-766785,

I have heard nothing of Fiats cold feet, they are in court today to get the assets sold to Newco, they company will will be getting all the assets, when all is done, this company will change its name to Chrysler.

Study a little harder >> "due" not "do."

Leaving MI - good idea. Coming to Cali with no education and no good job prospects? Don't do it. A house in a crappy area of SoCal will cost you $400k. Rent approaches $2k a month. Go to college/trade school, wait for Idol auditions to come near you - 16 is the minimum age.

Going to Cali to make it big is a bad idea, here is how my cousin did it from michigan to cali :) no car manufacturing involved I swear. do your drama thing at school, go to college and while acting,costuming, set building all of the above in the same production no less. get picked up by Second City, get picked up from there to go to Broadway from there get a job with Warner Brothers, thats where she is now and how she got there, It takes years of hard work and alot of brains ( talent to). Going strait to cali will have you waiting tables or less seamly work instead.

Brad-The economic destruction has been building up for years, not just under the Bush administration. It's just my opinion, but I think Bush and his advisors felt like they had to do something to keep the economy afloat until the new president , whoever it was going to be, and the newly seated congress could decide how they wanted to attempt to move things forward. The biggest burr in my saddle is I believe Bush listened to his economic advisors and took the wrong action. (Much the same way I believe he listened to his intelligence advisors years ago and jumped into Iraq using bad information). Regardless, you are correct that we don't know where all of the 350 billion went which wasn't actually doled out. To make matters worse, the money that has been doled out under President Obama's administration is equally unaccounted for.

I agree that is started under Bush it shouldn't have happened. But don't give Obama a free ride he is the President now taking ownership of Private business. 70% of GM and 80% of AIG this is Marxist.

What happened to Barny Frank and Chris Dodd? Their decision not to regulate Fannie and Freddie as suggested by the Bush Administration has cost us what...about 10 trillion dollars!

Well, about 80% of the companies - banks/financials (AIG, B of A, for ex.) have overseas bank accounts - Switzerland, the Carribean. The AP reported this earlier this year - and the admin asked for names and accounts - but were told "no". The implication was, the $350billion went to secret bank accounts. The second bailout had billions going to banks in German, France, and the like - they didn't want to get stuck with America's bag of worthless paper (ok, not worthless, 20-30 cents on the dollar). Oh well, we will likely never know all the details. Thanks to Paulsen (Treasury), Cox (SEC) and Bernanke (why is he still here??) - the last admin' 3 Stooges.

Now, no discrimination allowed here, Must add Obama and his administration also as the fourth stooge.

I really thought this man would be able to think for himself but it is evident that colleges teach you what to think instead of thinking for yourselve, the way it used to be. No one in government wants to be fically responsible. Let's bail out every big business that had poor management. Let's not hold anyone responsible in government or business for this mess.

If it weren't for colleges, Obama would be sitting at his computer (maybe could afford one), and blogging pro-union also.

It took way more than one presidency to bust the economy, many problems go back to Clinton, and some of the roots go back even farther. And since laws are passed by congress and the senate finding the actual names means reading reams of paper that I doubt anyone here has a copy of.

Bush initiated the first bailout. Are you saying he supported unions?

Bush did start them with the approval of then president elect Obama. Bust most important of all is that all this had to be approved by congress, democrats in control of that(not a shot at them just the facts). I think it's it time we stop asking who to blame (enough of that for everyone in DC) and start asking who will stop it.

I don't understand. Are you saying that Bush was a coward who only did what Obama told him to do? I guess Cheney was in his "undisclosed location" and unavailable.

Gee Sandy, do you really believe all that? A handfull of global corporations together with some shady congressmen and admin. officals stole your money and plundered your kids future, and you really think the unions did it?

Can you say bloated legacy costs? How many people get a pension this day and age? Tighten your belt like the rest of us and quit whining.

Tighten you belt like the rest of us??? Let's see you are an auto worker making $25.00 an hour and you retire after 30 years. You get $1400 a month from GM for your Golden years. Then you pay taxes on that!!

How do you tighten your belt on $1400 a month, Mr. Nincompoop.

Thx for the spelling help, Positive Me. I know its spelled thanks but sometimes I just get too used to internet spellings talking to friends. My folks keep warning me and I try not to do it. Even actresses and singers need good English and spelling, right? I also dont like being called a Michi or anything else "gander." Another reason to escape to California. Isnt a gander a goose or something like that? It sounds weird.

Carol Ann - You retired at like 48-50 years old?? Good grief! Is the life expectancy really that low in MI? Well, in another 15 years or so, your Social Security MAYBE will kick in to your pension. I am astounded at this sense of entitlement at such a young, not Spring Chicken, but still young, age. I hope to work until 70, my dad was 72 (of course, as a surgeon, he loved his job).

Keep in mind that defined pensions, not so far in our past, were the norm. People planned for retirement around them and count on them. This is not about pulling up your bootstraps and working til you drop. This is about having the rug pulled out from underneath you and your retirement. It is hard to go back to work at 75 or 80 or to just survive on SS. I bit of compassion for retired folks is in order here.

Awww, only $1400 plus Social Security. Try just living on just Social Security like a lot of people.

ladyhw poor baby it's all about you,what happend to our 401k's,suck it up.

Someone who is 75 - even 65, lots of compassion. Someone who went to work at age 18 or 20, and now wants to retire after 30 years??? At age 48 -50? You cannot be serious, I would be retired now, that's nuts! (And only on $1400 a month, even in MI, that must be pretty low.) Is this common for union workers? Because if it is, it speaks volumes to demise of the auto industry. Good grief.

addiem - My better half is a retired sailor. He put in 20 years and now gets a defined pension from the Govt. Should we take that from him as well? Would that be acceptable? You work hard, play by the rules and the rules say you get a pension. This is how it was in America. The auto companies are the last of the manufacturing sector to not shed these costs. You can't be serious. Good grief.

You should get a pension when you turn 65 or 67, depending on your age and the cutoff, not the minute you retire. That is not sustainable, the cost of these benefits - whether a government pension or private sector - it is why most businesses switched to the 401k. That's how it WAS in America is correct, but are you going to ask your grandkids to pay for it?? Oh wait, we already are.

Even Social Security is a ponzi scheme. I do not count on it, SS runs out in about 2017, so they say. Some high school drop out who did fast food/retail for say, 40 years - maybe got food stamps to help feed their kids, they were so poor - think they have anything saved for retirement? No. They count on Social Security - and that's a BIG problem. At least GM workers socked away their high wages, paid off their under $100k houses, got discounted cars, etc. - they won't be destitute.

United retirees had to eat a 2/3 pay cut to keep that company afloat what makes GM's former work force so special that the entire population has to eat thier retiment pay but not United workers? Pay cuts happen when companies fail, the whole reason for SS in the first place was as a response to this problem in the 30's.

addiem - A Military pension that starts after 20 yrs of service to our country should not kick in until you are 65 or so?

That pisse$ me off.

We are talking about GM, not the military - but pensions should start at retirement - not an entitlement for someone who is a strapping adult - America is broke. 500,000 Cali families with small children - many single mothers - are about to have their assistance cut. Do you think Uncle Sam is going to care more than the Governator?? And our grandkids having to pay for all these costs - that should tick you off.

btco as i said before your as dumb as a rock, put your life on the LINE FOR 20 YEARS for ,to protect your dumb azz,for crap pay,24-7 not knowing where you will be from one hour to the next ,just so you can make the big bucks,you are a fken FOOL.YOU SPINLESS bastaeerd.

btco

There is no minimum retirement age in this country. You can retire whenever you choose you just can't collect SS until 67 i think it is now. 401k can be taken from at 59 1/2. Many state workers can retire at 20 years regardless if age. Just because you can't doesn't mean they should not ba able to. And before you ask, no I don't have one of those jobs and it's gonna be a long while befor I can retire.

Nope - you have it wrong. Pensions for the military start the day you retire and end when you die. If you retire with 20 yrs of military service at the age of 38, you start getting your pension at the age of 38. That's the way is should/ is and needs to be, end of discussion.

As for someone who worked hard all their lives and were told they were getting a pension from GM or hell even McDonalds at the end of their service, those folks should get one too. No matter ehat their age or health status. Again way it should be.

As for who pays, that's why I am more than happy to pay my share of taxes. If some of my money goes to help out with SS for a retired person or to pay my better half's military pension, that's fine by me. Should be fine by you too. I am more than willing to kick in my share and save for my own retirement in the mean time. This grand kid crap is just that, crap.

cs - I understand that and I am in the same boat as you. I am not pleased with comments from folks who don't feel that is the way it should be, that's all. In fact, I find it offensive.

e raw - Wow, go back to the corner and put the dunce cap back on your head. Now, right now. You are scaring the other children.

up yours!!!

raw - If you read the above posts, you may be able to understand the simple fact that you have misunderstood what I was saying in response to another post. Until then, put your cap back on and get back in the corner already. Save your snappy dialog for another day.

btco

Ever been shot at?

Ever shot someone?

Ever lose a limb?

Ever lose your vision?

Ever lose your mobility?

Ever command someone to go into harms way, only not to return?

Ever spend an average of 280 days a year for 20 years away from you loved ones ?

Ever lived in a tent with no hot or cold running water, no hot food, no shower, no contact with the real world and at the same time have incoming ?

Ever cradled your best friend in your arm with his intestines exposed?

Ever administered a tourniquet on a severed limb?

Ever have to endure 72 hour days with no food or water?

No matter who is in office, we willingly go where you will not; we bear your fears, your terrors, and your weaknesses all for the sake of freedom.

I could go on but am glad that you have the right to speak you mind. Without us you would not have this right. Too bad you cannot see that. I can only hope that your off spring may someday come to appreciate our sacrifices.

To all of those who can understand and appreciate our sacrifice to God and Country.

“Semper Fi”

Sorry btco,

I was referring to the other comment about military retirees. I apologize....

I did not see the question mark at the end of your comment. I was too worked up......

Did not mean to offend you.

rpmranch - Yeah, I was not real clear. No Problem. I was kinda upset that another person here had the gall to suggest that a military pension - hell - any pension for that matter - should not be given until that person reaches a certain age and not the date they retire and are eligible to receive it. Read post 25-10.