NEW GM: WHAT ABOUT THE RULES OF FREE ENTREPRISE?

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by diddiyo

so that means he's not allowed to have an opinion? you do realize GM sells cars all over the world right?


but wasn't that why they were pumping billions into GM for half a year already? to save them from going bankrupt in order to save jobs etc? everybody was like "ooooh we can't let them go bankrupt!!!" and now all of a sudden bankruptcy is the right thing to do?!

i really don't get it. what was all the money good for?

If the gov hadn't given them that money then GM would be just that much further in debt.

Not to say that in hind sight it would have been better for GM to file last year, before the loans.... But I'm not sure that they would be able to continue producing cars back then

I'm guessing, but I think the loans they got early on are allowing them to maneuver the bankruptcy process while continuing to produce cars and earn revenue...

My guess.

[GM-REX]

Originally Posted by dbotsfordtat

I'm glad the government stepped in because I think we would have been much worse off if they hadn't. That being said, I wish people would spend a moment and think before they parrot free market ideaology. The golden rule is simple but true, " those with the gold make the rules." An updated version would be written as "Those with the gold make and change the rules as necessary to maintain control of the gold." IMO.

[arozar]

Originally Posted by GatorBlue371

Gov. Is just looking to save a ton of jobs and keep the economy from getting worse. If GM had 300 employees it wouldnt be getting so much special attention. The Gov. is looking out for its own (the country's) best interest.

I call BS, they saw and opportunity to take over and took it. Plane as day, they nationalized it, even Hugo Chavez likes this move.

http://www.reuters.com/article/Obama...dChannel=10441

[arozar]

Originally Posted by GTAHVIT

If the gov hadn't given them that money then GM would be just that much further in debt.

Not to say that in hind sight it would have been better for GM to file last year, before the loans.... But I'm not sure that they would be able to continue producing cars back then

I'm guessing, but I think the loans they got early on are allowing them to maneuver the bankruptcy process while continuing to produce cars and earn revenue...

My guess.

So its better for my three year old to be in debt (the tax payer)? WTF!!

[Zhawk]

What's done is done. This is reality and we have to live with it.
We could say "what if..." all day and night long and not change a thing. What is important now is ensuring our ELECTED representatives (up to our president) know that we want GM to succeed and them to stay as much out of the car building business as possible. Then they need to sell off their stocks.

[arozar]

Originally Posted by 1320junkie

Are you a U.S. Citizen?..just wondering

Wouldnt he know more about how bad this is???

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by arozar

So its better for my three year old to be in debt (the tax payer)? WTF!!

You should be a little more carefule how you quote me.

read my reply in context to the post I was answering from Diddiyo.

You might find that you and I actually agree.

I said that in hind sight it may have been better for GM to go bankrupt a year ago...

Throttle back a bit..

[arozar]

Originally Posted by GTAHVIT

You should be a little more carefule how you quote me.

read my reply in context to the post I was answering from Diddiyo.

You might find that you and I actually agree.

I said that in hind sight it may have been better for GM to go bankrupt a year ago...

Throttle back a bit..

Hey, I'm not trying to piss you off, but I was screaming for this bankruptcy long ago. I don't know when bankruptcy was turned into such a bad thing, many companies have gone in and out, with out bailouts and survived. I think for the long run, it would be best for GM to go belly up, good execs build a new company with out the UAW and the Government. That would be the way it would have been done pre-1930, before the progressive movement started taking roots. I would much rather go through the great depression x10 now, so my kids and grand kids don't have too. But most people seem to want there kids to deal with our pain.

[1320junkie]

Originally Posted by arozar

Wouldnt he know more about how bad this is???

Nope because there are tons of citizens who spout off at the mouth and have no clue of which they speak. So being one and being aware of what is going on does not go hand in hand.

[dbotsfordtat]

Originally Posted by arozar

Hey, I'm not trying to piss you off, but I was screaming for this bankruptcy long ago. I don't know when bankruptcy was turned into such a bad thing, many companies have gone in and out, with out bailouts and survived. I think for the long run, it would be best for GM to go belly up, good execs build a new company with out the UAW and the Government. That would be the way it would have been done pre-1930, before the progressive movement started taking roots. I would much rather go through the great depression x10 now, so my kids and grand kids don't have too. But most people seem to want there kids to deal with our pain.

I don't have any kids and don't want to go through a depression for yours.

[BigRigMike]

Originally Posted by arozar

Hey, I'm not trying to piss you off, but I was screaming for this bankruptcy long ago. I don't know when bankruptcy was turned into such a bad thing, many companies have gone in and out, with out bailouts and survived. I think for the long run, it would be best for GM to go belly up, good execs build a new company with out the UAW and the Government. That would be the way it would have been done pre-1930, before the progressive movement started taking roots. I would much rather go through the great depression x10 now, so my kids and grand kids don't have too. But most people seem to want there kids to deal with our pain.

I am confused because if we go through a depression now and you have a kid now then that would mean that your kid would be going through a depression now. If a massive depression hit now that could leave you homeless and starving then he would be homeless and starving also.

[arozar]

Originally Posted by BigRigMike

I am confused because if we go through a depression now and you have a kid now then that would mean that your kid would be going through a depression now. If a massive depression hit now that could leave you homeless and starving then he would be homeless and starving also.

If we deal with a depresion now, yes my three year old son would know of hard times, but when he is 20, it would be over, and he would have the rest of his life to look forward too. And no, I would not be homeless, I am prepare. All of us should be.....

[arozar]

Originally Posted by dbotsfordtat

I don't have any kids and don't want to go through a depression for yours.

Sorry to here you don't have kids, there great! I don't think he should pay for your healthcare, retirement, and now thanks to nationalization, your cars.

[dbotsfordtat]

Originally Posted by arozar

Sorry to here you don't have kids, there great! I don't think he should pay for your healthcare, retirement, and now thanks to nationalization, your cars.

Why I pay taxes and taxes pay for his education, some of his healthcare, and you get a nice child tax credit each year from my tax dollars. We are social creatures, the rugged individual is a Hollywood myth. I bet you have benefited from somebody elses taxes many times over today, starting with the nice paved roads you drive on. Maybe we should all build our own roads instead of stealing money from people that don't own cars?