News Focus
News Focus
icon url

n4807g

04/08/10 3:09 PM

#96330 RE: wbmw #96329

Obama took a majority share in the company because no one else stepped up to buy the company, even though the White House worked for a month trying to find a buyer.



I think you answered your own question. Who says GM won't eventually fail, they are still a frail corp. even after the infusion of nearly $100 billion? It would appear the midwest isn't much better off in spite of the WH action.

The obvious reason for the bailout was to satisfy the UAW.......
icon url

GEO928

04/08/10 3:29 PM

#96343 RE: wbmw #96329

ok...uncle, uncle....i gotta take a break....i can't pound the keys fast enough...i'll be back!!!!!!!
icon url

GEO928

04/08/10 4:58 PM

#96365 RE: wbmw #96329

wbmw....yes, I would have let GM fail....

and, with the millions out of work as a result of the bigger "crisis", I'm not sure that letting one manufacturer fail would have caused as much havoc as we were lead to believe...we'll never know....but, I do know, capitalism does not want "failing companies" in business.....

next topic: wall street:

They sure as hell ought to when those bonuses were coming directly from taxpayer funding! We bailed them out to stop a catastrophic meltdown of their own doing, and they gave themselves bonuses... and you support that and advocate for no govt interference?!



I don't support giving them bonuses from taxpayer money....if taxpayers are stupid enough to give crooks money...let them take the bonuses....the entire wall street debacle is all political "smoke and mirrors"....politicians with motives "sleeping" with the bad guys in business...because both the politicians and the business people involved are "the bad guys"...

as for the HC...we can agree to disagree.....the story is just beginning...let's let it unfold andsee what it brings.....