|
Post by tuff on Sept 25, 2012 14:59:04 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Sept 25, 2012 15:38:15 GMT -8
Obama success story... reported by Bloomberg Reports 79% of GM’s sales last month was government purchased! July 12th, 2012 Remember how Obama keeps telling us how he saved GM, and how our economy is getting better? It seems the car company he bought with our money is being saved by Govt employees using our tax money to buy new cars. 79% of GM’s sales last month was government purchased. GM’s sales figures for last month were the best since 2008 , up 16% for the month of June. YIPPEE! Well, o.k., then just hold on a minute. It seems that those rosy sales figures are due primarily to a 79% increase in fleet sales to the U.S. government in June. That’s right. Our tax dollars are being used to pump up GM’s sales figures ahead of next month’s quarterly report so that Dear Leader can point to Government Motors as a huge success. The incestuous relationship between GM, the UAW and the Regime has never been more glaringly apparent. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. GM is unsustainable without government subsidies and will ultimately go bust again, taking billions of taxpayer dollars down with it. We bailed out General Motors to the tune of $50 billion. $30 billion of this is effectively a loss, mostly sunk into fattening the United Auto Workers union—fierce Obama supporters—while the actual bondholders were shown the elevator shaft. Meanwhile, as News Busters reports, “We the Taxpayers are still stuck holding 500+ million shares of GM stock. Which we need to sell at $53 per. Which debuted post-bankruptcy at $33 per. And which is currently trading at just over $20 per. Meaning we’ll lose about $15 billion.” But it gets better. Despite the overwhelming negatives, the tiny bright spot of positive June sales numbers is being heralded by Obama and the leftist press as proof the auto bailout was a “success.” Obama is now campaigning on the “success” of – the government buying cars from…the government’s car company. With our money. Americanvision says That’s like you setting up a lemonade stand for your kids. You buy them the lemons, sugar, cups and pitchers – and then buy most of the lemonade yourself. The pressure is on Government Motors to appear financially strong as this may be the last earnings report before November elections and sets the stage for how “successful” GM is. One of GM’s past tricks to help fudge earnings numbers has been to stuff truck inventory channels. Old habits die hard at GM. According to a Bloomberg report, “GM said inventory of its full-size pickups, which will be refreshed next year, climbed to 238,194 at the end of June, a 135 days’ supply, up from 116 days at the end of May.” 135 days’ supply is huge, the accepted norm is a 60 day supply. The trick here is that GM records revenue when vehicles go into dealership If you post it, I know it is a lie.
|
|
|
Post by theman on Sept 25, 2012 18:18:50 GMT -8
Obama success story... reported by Bloomberg Reports 79% of GM’s sales last month was government purchased! July 12th, 2012 Remember how Obama keeps telling us how he saved GM, and how our economy is getting better? It seems the car company he bought with our money is being saved by Govt employees using our tax money to buy new cars. 79% of GM’s sales last month was government purchased. GM’s sales figures for last month were the best since 2008 , up 16% for the month of June. YIPPEE! Well, o.k., then just hold on a minute. It seems that those rosy sales figures are due primarily to a 79% increase in fleet sales to the U.S. government in June. That’s right. Our tax dollars are being used to pump up GM’s sales figures ahead of next month’s quarterly report so that Dear Leader can point to Government Motors as a huge success. The incestuous relationship between GM, the UAW and the Regime has never been more glaringly apparent. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. GM is unsustainable without government subsidies and will ultimately go bust again, taking billions of taxpayer dollars down with it. We bailed out General Motors to the tune of $50 billion. $30 billion of this is effectively a loss, mostly sunk into fattening the United Auto Workers union—fierce Obama supporters—while the actual bondholders were shown the elevator shaft. Meanwhile, as News Busters reports, “We the Taxpayers are still stuck holding 500+ million shares of GM stock. Which we need to sell at $53 per. Which debuted post-bankruptcy at $33 per. And which is currently trading at just over $20 per. Meaning we’ll lose about $15 billion.” But it gets better. Despite the overwhelming negatives, the tiny bright spot of positive June sales numbers is being heralded by Obama and the leftist press as proof the auto bailout was a “success.” Obama is now campaigning on the “success” of – the government buying cars from…the government’s car company. With our money. Americanvision says That’s like you setting up a lemonade stand for your kids. You buy them the lemons, sugar, cups and pitchers – and then buy most of the lemonade yourself. The pressure is on Government Motors to appear financially strong as this may be the last earnings report before November elections and sets the stage for how “successful” GM is. One of GM’s past tricks to help fudge earnings numbers has been to stuff truck inventory channels. Old habits die hard at GM. According to a Bloomberg report, “GM said inventory of its full-size pickups, which will be refreshed next year, climbed to 238,194 at the end of June, a 135 days’ supply, up from 116 days at the end of May.” 135 days’ supply is huge, the accepted norm is a 60 day supply. The trick here is that GM records revenue when vehicles go into dealership The Title of this Article is very misleading. The number of vehicles sold to the Govt. went up 79% in June over the previous month. Mostly due to the end of the fiscal year for most govt. agencies. The Sales for the Month were NOT 79% to the Govt. The total sales of Fleet buys, including Govt. sales, are closer to 15%. These results are published monthly by all the Auto Companies.
|
|
|
Post by theman on Sept 25, 2012 18:27:39 GMT -8
Do you know anything about bankruptcy law. We have been over this time and again. I have lost patience with you so you will have to learn something on your own or remain ignorant. No, we have not. If we have, produce the threads and I will reread them. In the mean time it appears I have annoyed you. Wonderful. ;D GM Bondholders got screwed by Obama's plan because it put the Unions interest ahead of the creditors of GM. The Government's debtor in possession investment was OK, that money takes priority but putting the Unions interest ahead of other creditors screwed the Bondholders. Many of those Bondholders were retired folks depending on the interest on their bonds to supplement their Income. They lost no only their interest payments, but their principal invested was usurped by Obama's desire to secure the votes and minds of Union members. That, in many peoples mind, was a blatant disregard for creditor rights in a bankruptcy proceeding.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Oct 7, 2012 21:04:02 GMT -8
The basic problem here is that bailouts are not a good idea. The genius of the capitalist market place is that it is self-correcting. It's not a perfect system, no system is. Or, rather, there is no rational way to define "perfect" in this context since there will always be persons who suffer as businesses rise and fall.
Those persons will demand to the government that political motivations should take precedence over business considerations. Therefore, the feds bail out GM, but the bondholders, many of whom are ordinary folks, get screwed. When was the last time that Pres.Obama apologized to those cheated bondholders? Never, of course.
Companies that are failing should be allowed to fail. It's messy and lots of people either lose their jobs or their investments. But by allowing badly run firms to limp along a few years more prevents the corrections in the free market that are essential.
Let's take Chrysler. It was bailed out once, yet three decades later the company is there with it's hand outstretched waiting for more taxpayer money. Chrysler, which was a solid company up until about the '60s or early '70s, went down hill fast. It proved that it was not capable of competing and should have been allowed to expire. Instead, we basically bribed Fiat to the turkey off our hands.
Look at what happened to American Motors (the product of the Nash and Hudson merger) and Studebaker Packard (the product of the Studebaker and Packard merger). They could not, ultimately, compete in the market place and went out of the car business. It was rough on a lot of people in Kenosha and South Bend, but the alternative would have meant wasting billions of taxpayer dollars keeping the companies going. All those dollars would have been better spend in the private economy to help successful old companies or promising new ones.
Or I could mention Kaiser Motors, formerly Kaiser-Frazer. The Frazer make was discontinued after 1951 and in 1953 the company bought Willys-Overland of Toledo, maker of Jeeps and some small cars. The Kaiser make, arguably the nicest looking automobile of the early 1950s, ended in '55, but the company continued to produce Jeeps. What happened to this company is instructive. The Kaiser cars ultimately failed, but the Jeep brand has continued to this very day. Now, even if GM had been liquidated, do you think that the whole company would have disappeared? No. The profitable makes (Chevy, Cadillac, perhaps Buick and GMC) would have survived, just as Jeep did. But we would not have wasted billions trying to save the corporation in its 2008/9 form, one that was and had been dysfunctional for decades (read Brock Yates book on the fall of the American auto industry).
Now GM still exists, but it has a total and expensive failure, the Volt, hung around its neck as it tries to figure out how the hell it is going to create a whole new generation of vehicles to meet the draconian CAFE standards about to kick in. It will not have enough money to do that and, again, the taxpayer will be asked to bail out the company.
If you have a bad infection in a leg, the doctor may say that the leg will have to be amputated. You can yell all you want that you don't want to lose the leg, but the alternative is losing your life. Moribund companies, from Woolworth stores to Borders, die off and are replaced by other companies that will have a better chance to thrive. Remember, every dollar taken from citizens in the form of taxes, is one less dollar that can be invested in the next Apple Computer or Southwest Airlines.
AzWm
|
|