Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The US and Canadian governments would initially own 72.5 per cent of the new GM, with the remaining 17.5 per cent held by a United Auto Workers union healthcare fund. Existing shareholders would be wiped out.
This really makes me angry!! It's the shareholders and bondholders that need that money the most!! They're real people! Some that depend on the money as a man stream investment. Like the United States government really needs to take a 72.5% stake in them, for what? I mean, yes, they loaned them all of those loans but does the government really want to run auto companies?
The U.A.W. owning a part of G.M. puzzles me, it has since the day that they announced it, but I guess nothing is suprising these days.
Um, as of friday GM was worth about 600 million. We're giving them 50 billion. My question is why doesn't the US taxpayer own 100%?
The shareholders and bondholders should be wiped out. That was the risk they took and their failure to change a management that had been failing for years.
It is outrageous that the taxpayer should be pumping $50 billion into GM. The market mechanism should have been allowed to operate and they should have been allowed to go bust. Its not like we don't have a good alternative in the other, better run, car companies.
The shareholders and bondholders should be wiped out. That was the risk they took and their failure to change a management that had been failing for years.
It is outrageous that the taxpayer should be pumping $50 billion into GM. The market mechanism should have been allowed to operate and they should have been allowed to go bust. Its not like we don't have a good alternative in the other, better run, car companies.
I agree the shareholders should be wiped out. Thats the way it works in the real world.
I also agree we shouldn't have bailed them out.
Did you think I was saying something else?
I just can't understand why I'm paying 100x more than this pig is worth and not even getting 100% of the company.
I thnik it should go into full bankrupsy with noraml return as per centage of debtholders.That would the governamnt and bondholders first.SAs uit is we haven't seen teh end to teh cost to taxpayers.UInliike the bnaks these loans would be paid back for decades ;if at all IMO.
GM will stop trading. May not even open on Monday. They should have been shut down already. Just think , a large cap stock , worth less than a penny stock.! Same thing happened with Enron , they let it run , .......even at the end , people were buying , hoping it would come back.
So , invest in a worthless stock .why? If you haven't cashed in by now , its way too late......Will the Government help any of the stock holders , bond holders ? maybe some , but not the little guy , he is screwed........sorry.
but does the government really want to run auto companies?
Run them, no. Control them, yes.
I also agree that they should have been allowed to go under from the start. The US Government has no business whatsoever throwing away billions in tax payers money on a company that should have under bust years ago.
GM doesn't have a prayer with the 535 A-holes on Capitol Hill running it.
It will be a captive company that sells cars at a loss. Similar to AmTrak.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
