Where did all that money go?
A federal report says the U.S. government will loan General Motors Corp. up to $5 billion more to make it through June 1, and Chrysler LLC could get up to $500 million more by April 30.
The report on the bank bailout program released Tuesday by a special inspector general says the money will be made available for working capital as both companies try to meet government restructuring demands.
GM already has received $13.4 billion in government loans, while Chrysler has received $4 billion.
The report on the bank bailout program released Tuesday by a special inspector general says the money will be made available for working capital as both companies try to meet government restructuring demands.
GM already has received $13.4 billion in government loans, while Chrysler has received $4 billion.
The Obama administration toadies are such slaves to their union masters that there is no length to which they will not go in order to preserve various union's thuggish control over their respective labor forces.
Where did the first $17.5 billion go? Directly into executive bonuses and union coffers where it will be returned to the Obama reelection campaign fund as donations. See how that works? Obama doles out money to favored groups who then promise to give some of it back as political donations. It's practically money laundering.
The three absurdly inefficient, American auto companies needed to die 10 years ago...all of them. But Obama doesn't want that to happen on his watch, because it might cost him otherwise reliable union votes come election time. So there is no amount of money stolen from taxpayers that he won't throw at these utter failures to preserve their political support. Another $5.5 billion down the toilet, give me a break!
6 comments:
At some point, ability becomes a liability and need becomes an asset...
I agree, these companies should have died years ago. The argument that they are "saving jobs" holds no water, since:
1. Demand for vehicles and parts will remain relatively constant.
2. If these companies go under, some other manufacturer will buy the brand for its intrinsic value.
3. Due to consistent demand, someone still needs to make these vehicles, so "displaced" workers will be re-employed.... albeit at a level more conducive to market rather than the inflated wage instigated by the union.
For example: We need need x number of cars in total across the country. Company A produces y% of them while Company B produces z%. Were Company A to close, Company B must then produce 100% (or, Company C may start up operations) so many workers from Company A would most likely eventually be "appropriated" by Company B (and/or Company C) in order to meet the needs (DEMAND) of the industry.
It's called a win-win situation.
PS: The same goes for banks, healthcare institutions, and anyone else who has had their hand out for "bailout" funds...
You don't even want to get me started on the "stimulus."
Right you are Angie. If market variables are left subject to free market forces, they quickly and efficiently get allocated and the owners, laborers, and consumers all win. When the market is allowed to operate freely, the only loser is the government. That explains completely Obama's desire to control the market.
I'd be willing to bet you Angie that 100% of the people who don't have 1/10th grasp of market dynamics that you do, voted for The One, and think it's a good idea for government to be bullying it's way into banking, autos, mortgage, Wall Street, and healthcare, business.
They're gonna get a crash course, right quick. Personally, I don't feel the least bit sorry for them.
My 14-year-old and I were talking about the deficit and debt back when Barry's stimulus nonsense was busy being passed without anyone in Congress reading it. I explained that in order to finance the deficit (and ultimately the debt), they are essentially using a giant credit card: Borrowing against the productivity of future generations - not the MONEY of our children and grandchildren but their PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY. "So let me guess," he says. "I'm the one that's going to be working to pay for this shit, right?" At FOURTEEN, he understood, and he was not happy.
And pay for it he will. There's no telling what his generation will be taxed for, and at what rate, when all's said and done. He's up to his eyeballs in debt already and it's only 100 days into what will probably be an 8 year term.
Every time I think about what my kids are walking into, I feel bad for them. Seriously, I want to feel good about their futures, but I honestly don't.
I about choked on my drink, laughing and holding my guts when I read this:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_051509/content/01125108.guest.html
RUSH: So what you're saying is, let's look at this as a matter of market economics. You're saying the American people -- and let's assume here that at some point the economy is going to come back and this recession is going to slow and we're going to start growing again. So you're saying that an average American economic year, X-number of cars are going to be sold, X-number of cars are going to be bought, new cars.
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: So if you take a bunch of Chryslers and Chevys and Cadillacs and take them off the market, a bunch of Chryslers off the market, you've got a vacuum of cars that Americans are still going to buy because of the agreed-to number earlier that they buy per annum.
CALLER: Right.
Post a Comment