Actually, GM did file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in June 2009.

Yep, it was part of their ploy to get government money.

Saving a million jobs was a "ploy"?

No, the filing of bankruptcy was part of the ploy for my tax money. BTW, there is no way that a million jobs would have been lost. Many of the suppliers would simply have been selling more parts to other auto makers. You are smart enough to understand that aren't you?

To Chinese automakers? How does that work?

If GM had been sold to any Oriental car company, they would have bought it for one reason only, to sell it off and close it down. You simply don't understand how their market-share driven business model works, do you?

I understand it fine. What YOU do not understand is that if your socialists had not intervened to begin with, the US wouldn't be in this pickle.

Do you think that GM would have declared bankruptcy and then POOF, everything is in China. You are even more programmed than I thought. did you spend the weekend at one of B.O.'s ReEducation Camp's or something?

More likely if they had shut down, their contracted companies would be scrambling for customers. A lot of these outsourced companies SOLELY supply GM. Its hard to say strictly based on speculation...if an offshore company buys GM and continues all their models as is, mainly just changing the financial model upon which the company works then all of their subsidiary contracts would be fine. As soon as they start moving to more affordable labor/manufacturing (i.e. making Chevy Cherries or TaTas...) it shuts down all of those companies. Hard to say how it would have turned out--look at Chrysler and fiat. On the other hand, they've already paid back their loan and seems to be doing okay.

General Motors Repays $8.1 Billion in Government Loans - ABC News

Yes, and then they took other subsidies elsewhere. It was like getting anothe loan to pay off the first one, but then only publicly speaking about the one they paid off and not the one that they just took out.

It's funny to watch the GOPers try to explain why that is such a horrible thing. It's like trying to explain why getting out of Iraq is bad or how we should have been more aggressive in Lybia. Or is that less aggressive? It's hard to keep up.

Even a LOAN to private business is not what our government is supposed to be doing with our tax money. If GM were completely caught up on their debt to the US Govt. I wouldn't have as much problem with it. The sneaking around about it makes it even MORE sinister.

General Motors Will Never Repay Taxpayers - Reason Magazine

Fair point. Just because the GM thing may have worked out for the best doesn't mean that it was good policy. I still enjoy watching GOP politicos try to explain why GM should have been allowed to fail.

Don't forget about Bush Jr. It was GW who signed TARP into law and exteneded it to companies like GM by executive order to prevent the "collapse of the economy".


“It wasn’t that hard for me, just so you know. I made the decision to use your money to prevent the collapse from happening.”

– President George W. Bush, speaking at the University of Texas at Tyler

You probably have not read other threads where I condemn GW for the TARP just as much as B.O. for all his wasteful spending. The govt. shouldn't be using my tax money for ANY OF IT!

No I have not had the time to read all the other threads. I have read a few exchanges you've had with Kerry and they are pure gold.

So, here it is. Gingrich is calling for allowing people to put their withholding into private retirement accounts instead of paying it into social security. He says it will level the playing field, which is insane, and reduce costs, which is a fantasy. The administrative costs of social security are miniscule compared to the administrative costs of private investment accounts. I don't know why he thinks that is going to change.

I assume that the amounts that people save in their private retirement accounts will pass to their heirs. If so, then that is the end of social security. The only reason the system works so well is because some people die without ever collecting what they paid in. It's just the right dash of socialism in our capitalist system.

All that aside, what does he think he will accomplish? Under his plan people in their 20s and 30s will need to get out their crystal balls and decide which option will be better for them 30 or 40 years in the future. The ones with the best crystal balls will come out OK. The others, well, too bad. Why that is a superior moral position is not clear to me. Both groups will be compelled to pay their money into the system, but the ones that guess best will be better off in their old age. Whoopee.

See, Larry, my prediction was correct.

Seacoastonline.com | Latest News from the Associated Press

LOL...ok...pass.

Some boneheaded politicians using taxpayer's good name to secure debt because the government hasn't had sufficient revenues to cover debt consistently in 50 years or so.

Is the GOP still pushing privatizing social security? I thought with the collapse of the stock market due to the sub prime loan fiasco this lame idea had been put to bed....???

They never WERE pushing for total SS privatization. It was only 10% of it. Don't feel bad though. The left wing media did a great job of obscuring the truth about the proposal.

I now see the light... all things wrong are the fault of the left wing media...thanks for clearing that up for me Larry...

What they have been pushing for since 1935 is the elimination of Social Security. Partial privatization is how they hope to achieve it. To anyone unwilling to give the matter more than about 10 seconds of thought, partial privatization sounds fair. So far, thank goodness, the voters have seen through the GOP ruse. W got punished for trying the privatization angle at the beginning of his second term. He used up a good chunk of his political capital on that one. Let's hope the same thing happens here.

So how exactly were they going to choose which 10 percent they were going to apply that to ?

So if all our retirement funds could be put into the stock market the big firms could put all of that cash into high risk derivatives, take out insurance policies that pay the firms if the derivatives fail, and then sit back and watch the derivatives fail so they can collect the insurance?

Sounds like when the kids on South Park put their money in the bank. 'And.... It's gone!'

I wish that were true but I think Reagan dumped that plank from the Repo platform and nobody since has brought it back, the cowards.

Reagan knew a losing argument when he saw one.

Reagan was the master of saying something that sounded fine and doing something else. A quality exhibited by many in politics, and some with mastery to excess. Very few have the courage of any conviction and fewer still, willing to speak for them. Which is why I voted for Ron Paul in 2008. He speaks truth to power.