GM to buy stake from Treasury; government may lose billions

Comments (25)
stpinckney wrote:

My calculator will not show the large amounts involved. How much will Uncle Sam need to receive per share for the remaining shares to recover its cost?

Dec 19, 2012 8:25am EST  --  Report as abuse
moxsee wrote:

Capitalism Failed. General Motors was and still is a viable company that creates thousands of jobs. Had they not received a bailout they would have gone under, taking those jobs with the ship. Where was the financial system to prevent GM from making this mistake? Where was the financial system to offer bridge a loan to GM? Either we need more transparent accounting or different banking investment guidelines. Nothing has still changed. We just chalk it ll aup as a bubble and put our heads back in the sand. Looks like making any real improvements to the financial system was just a good idea.

Dec 19, 2012 8:47am EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

Thank you Mr. President for saving GM when wealthy investors wanted GM destroyed, so they could buy it cheap and sell it to China for a huge profit.
Saving GM and all those jobs is a major reason why the MAJORITY of Americans elected you for a second term.

Dec 19, 2012 9:12am EST  --  Report as abuse
Rollo2 wrote:

Capitalism would work. GM is and was an inefficient behemoth that should have failed and has a good chance of doing so in the future. It was saved by taxpayer money and tax breaks being paid by working Americans. Had GM failed people would still buy cars and trucks and workers would still have jobs building them. Those jobs would be at companies that are more efficient, whose workers contributed to the success, and management and workers shared in the companies success. Capitalism rewards winners, government/socialism props up failures!

Dec 19, 2012 9:46am EST  --  Report as abuse
Trailfan1 wrote:

So GM will be ‘saved’ by taking a $20.9 billion taxpayer hit!?!?! Of course we also had to screw the bondholders, the old stockholders, the subsidiaries, the GM white collar workers pensions and thousands of small business that had to take a loss.

OK Mr. Obama, you got the UAW’s vote out of it, but note to UAW; I will never, ever buy a GM product again. You have only delayed the inevitable

Dec 19, 2012 10:25am EST  --  Report as abuse
tmc wrote:

I agree with Trailfan1. I will never buy a UAW product again. I get nauseous thinking that my hard earned money went to indirectly support UAW pensions.

Dec 19, 2012 11:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
lensmanb wrote:

“Moving to exit our investment in GM within the next 12 to 15 months is consistent with our dual goals of winding down TARP as soon as practicable and protecting taxpayer interests.”

So I guess that means it cost us, as taxpayers, 12 billion dollars to protect our interests? I’d like my share back.

Dec 19, 2012 11:48am EST  --  Report as abuse
brotherkenny4 wrote:

Anyone know how many jobs were saved? I ask, because it is very likely that the saved jobs also saved increased tax revenue which was likely much more than the cost to government. If you don’t get that point you need an education, or to stop protecting your wealthy masters. For instance, and I make some wild guesses on the numbers here, if 1 million jobs were save and the people were in a ten percent fed tax bracket, and on average made 80,000 dollars a year, that is 8 billion in saved tax revenues annually. Now, over the period since the bail out that’s approximately 32 billion dollars. What’s the projected loss? 20 billion?

Dec 19, 2012 12:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gitmojo wrote:

TAXPAYERS will lose BILLIONS! Add in the ADDITIONAL 45 BILLION in TAX
BREAKS that GM receives. How many votes did that money buy?

Dec 19, 2012 12:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xit007 wrote:

Brother Kenny – you are looking at every tax payer as a revenue generator for the government – with your thinking no business should be allowed to go bankrupt because it will cost the government revenue and someone will have to pay those costs. This is exactly why we are in the shape we are as a country – we just believe everything we send to the government is necessary and there is no limit to the spending. Have you ever wondered why we never get refunds when there are surpluses. Should GM have been rewarded with a bailout for not controlling costs? Look at all the European car companies that have changed hands – evil investors? No they struggled to find buyers – as would GM. But there would be someone to buy them and they would run it efficiently probably without unions as they do in the South. Unions are making the companies they serve obsolete in the marketplace. There will be no more bailouts – what the heck are they going to do – because the taxpayer cannot continue to subsidize the unions overreach.

Dec 19, 2012 1:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dogsail wrote:

This headline is misleading. The government’s investment GM will be profitable. Not sure who did the math here. It is the total TARP money where investment by Gov will result in loss.

Dec 19, 2012 1:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AttyJim wrote:

So, we lost a ton of money on the deal, GM is still a mismanaged dinosaur that produces crappy cars that no one wants, and now they are free to move the last of their factory jobs to Mexico, Brazil, India and China. Yay for the bailouts. When did we get to the point where we fear anything bad happening at all? If we had just let GM fall into bankruptcy, there would have been MANY MANY options, most of which could have resulted in a complete revitalization of the automotive industry, such as breaking GM up into smaller units or selling the assets off to new companies with fresh ideas and approaches. Instead, we institutionalized all of GM failings and made them the law of the land. Why is China’s automotive industry so scarey? Because they don’t have GM holding their entire industry hostage – they have dozens of car companies all fiercely competing with each other. They have capitalism while we have a Stalinistic five year plan.

Dec 19, 2012 2:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Crash866 wrote:

So it didn’t work out…good thing they did so all the voters in the midwest states would vote for Obama. Well played for the Democrats but ntr a good ending for America.

Dec 19, 2012 2:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

“GM to buy stake from Treasury; Tax Payers may lose billions”

I fixed it…

Dec 19, 2012 3:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@moxsee

“Capitalism Failed. General Motors was and still is a viable company that creates thousands of jobs. Had they not received a bailout they would have gone under, taking those jobs with the ship. Where was the financial system to prevent GM from making this mistake? Where was the financial system to offer bridge a loan to GM? Either we need more transparent accounting or different banking investment guidelines. Nothing has still changed. We just chalk it ll aup as a bubble and put our heads back in the sand. Looks like making any real improvements to the financial system was just a good idea.”

You fail to understand Capitalism. Capitalism does not guarantee a company will succeed. In a pure Capitalistic society, we let the companies fail. Bankruptcy is not the end of a company. The government rescuing GM and Chrysler did not save the companies. We will not know for 50 years if these two companies will survive or not.

We have rescued the airlines upteen times over the last 3 decades, they should have been allowed to fail. New companies will come into to take the place of companies lost. Government bailouts completely contradicts capitalism. Again, you fail at Capitalism.

Dec 19, 2012 3:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Kevin5069 wrote:

GM wins again, taxpayers lose yet again.

Government and Corporate America = friends helping friends (to your tax dollars)

Dec 19, 2012 3:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TruthSociety wrote:

From the sale will the government give the taxpayers back their money and put it back into the general fund to reduce taxes or will the proceeds go right back out to the unions or wasteful stimulus for cronyism payback?

Dec 19, 2012 4:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

“With $20.9 billion left from the original bailout, the government would have to sell its remaining shares at an average price of $69.72 to break even.”

Or just send GM a 21 billion dollar tax bill. That’ll wake ‘em up.

Dec 19, 2012 5:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Current total cost to U.S. taxpayers in foreign aid to Israel: 124 billion dollars.

Number of troops deployed by Israel to assist in Iraq and Afghanistan: 0.

When will we see a profit from that venture?

Dec 19, 2012 7:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USA4 wrote:

All the whining from the press about the bank “bail-outs” (which the government- i.e. taxpayers) made a handsome profit on. The press should truly be up in arms about this debacle which was nothing other than a vote buying stunt (GM would not have disappeared if it had gone through a traditional bankruptcy process- the difference is that GM’s creditors would have been treated fairly, and taxpayers wouldn’t be footing this bill which was nothing other than a political move and transfer payment to the UAW pension fund). Like many of the other contributors, I will never buy a UAW made car again.

Dec 19, 2012 10:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kevin2ia wrote:

Neither bailout was right, auto or bank. We are so far removed from any vestige of capitalism, we cannot longer even recognize it. GM did and still deserves to die, it has not changed and remains as bloated as it ever was – more morphine please for the dying patient.

Dec 19, 2012 10:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
igolfleft wrote:

Until the next time we have to bail out a company because the government feels like they should involve themselves where they shouldn’t. Companies fail, period. If GM would have failed that would have just made other US manufacturers stronger.. how is that fair to Ford or Chrysler?? I realize Chrysler got money too but they didn’t lose 12 billion of our taxpayer money.. It’s not really shocking that Reuters doesn’t report that but do the math.. to break even they would have to sell for 67.00+ it’s currently 28.. umm yah.. great investments by the US government.

I also will never even consider buying a GM product.. GM will fail because the company itself is flawed.. I give them 10 years tops.

Dec 20, 2012 8:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
igolfleft wrote:

Until the next time we have to bail out a company because the government feels like they should involve themselves where they shouldn’t. Companies fail, period. If GM would have failed that would have just made other US manufacturers stronger.. how is that fair to Ford or Chrysler?? I realize Chrysler got money too but they didn’t lose 12 billion of our taxpayer money.. It’s not really shocking that Reuters doesn’t report that but do the math.. to break even they would have to sell for 67.00+ it’s currently 28.. umm yah.. great investments by the US government.

I also will never even consider buying a GM product.. GM will fail because the company itself is flawed.. I give them 10 years tops.

Dec 20, 2012 8:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
igolfleft wrote:

USA4 BRAVO BRAVO!! Best comment on this news story.. (Other than mine of course) :)

Dec 20, 2012 8:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

There’s really nothing shocking about the GM bailout. That’s how China does it. And they’re winning. The hardest part for the free-market worshippers is finding out that their system doesn’t really happen that way. Anywhere. The real world operates in a combination of socialism and capitalism. Capitalism does not survive without socialism and socialism does not survive without capitalism. This is becoming more apparent every day.

Dec 20, 2012 11:45am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.