50 Billion dollars to GM is not real money

Sweden went through similar banking crisis in the early 90s. The govt bailed all the banks out by buying them/taking shares.

A few years later the shares were sold at a profit when the economy and banks recovered. I don't have the figures to show what the rate of return was, but even if it was low, wasn't that a small price to pay to prevent a far greater economic catastrophe?

Whilst our present crisis is greater, the solutions and outcomes can be similar.

The British govt (axpayer) now controls two major bank groups (one c. 40%, one c. 70%). I see no reason we the taxpayers may yet see a return for this huge investment. The govt is certainly working on this basis.

DAS

To send an e-mail directly replace "spam" with "schmetterling"

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling
Loading thread data ...

I'd say that both matter, i.e., are not mutually exclusive. Just because there's a new tyranny that didn't exist in Franklin's day doesn't mean the first threat doesn't exist anymore.

Reply to
Bill Putney

Why do you suppose the Feds want to take away guns? An armed and angry populace is not something the really wish to confront.

Reply to
labatyd

You paranoid? Relax, just curious. I'm not plotting against you. If "the Feds" wanted to take away guns, they'd pass the laws to do it. Looks to me like they aren't even trying. But the NRA, lobbyist for the gun manufacturers, sure has the suckers lining up to buy guns and ammo. I've heard ammo prices are way up. Pretty funny.

--Vic

Reply to
Vic Smith

Not paranoid yet. But I'll go out on a limb here and say that it will happen someday. Gun ownership still has strong support in the US backed by your constitution. It won't be easy to overcome but look how much has changed over the past century. Registration and restrictions will come first. Possible within the next term if Obama gets re-elected.

Reply to
labatyd

You're already paranoid, and don't have the facts. Here's a "carry law" graphic for you. Probably won't change your mind, though. Maybe drugs would work.

formatting link
Hey, come on down to the states. I got some ammo to sell you. But it ain't cheap.

--Vic

Reply to
Vic Smith

Supposedly about 20 states are working on a plan to have guns manufactured in their states, clearly marked as so, and sell them only in those states so that Federal laws which only apply to commerce done across state lines will not apply under Constitutional state's rights.

formatting link
And for those who only accept information if it comes from left-wing news sources:
formatting link
Of course this will only work if the Constitution is not completely done away with.

Reply to
Bill Putney

And just as occurs today, those 20 states will be sued as supply sources by states in which LEOs and rational legislators limit gun ownership.

Reply to
News

I am not sure of the math, but I saw one commentator figure that GM shares would have to increase in price to at least twice the historic high share price in order for the government to recover all the money they have sunk into GM. Now it may be that this is money well spent - or not. I suppose time will tell. Personally I think the money spent on GM was / is less offensive than all the money poured into banks that were running ponzi schemes....

Ed

Reply to
C. E. White

Pretty safe bet then the taxpayer will never see the money again. Did they work it out how much it costs each worker?

Keep in mind, of 330M people, they don't all work. In fact when you subtract retired, children, housewives, etc... even the 20% unemployed it is maybe 100M. Of that maybe 60% pay taxes in a signifigant way. So $50B with government GA is certianly a few car payments without the car.

Work it out to GM employees, would have been cheaper to make them millionaires.

Buying Chinese would be much cheaper.

Reply to
Canuck57

Laughable! Let's compare violent crime statistics of the pro-gun states with those with the (barf) "rational" legislators that limit, hinder, or just plain eliminate gun ownership of law abiding citizens, shall we? OK - so the more liberal "let's see if we can get some free money out of this by suing the other states" idiots do some frivolous lawsuits with lawyers of the John Edwards ilk rather than create a cultural and legal environment (you know - kind of like the Constitution says) that doesn't result in a black market for smuggled guns in their states.

I'd much rather have the legislators that are creating an environment of freedom, individual responsibility, and safety in their states than the ones who make their states ultimate hell holes by passing legislation and taking actions in the name of accomplishing safety and quality of life but in fact which actually create exactly the opposite.

Hmm - let's see. Live in a state that is free and values individual freedom and responsibility, *OR* live in a state that stifles same and creates a crime-ridden state in the name of doing just the opposite. Hmm - tough choice.

You have to ask what is the end result as far as freedom and safety and (again) abiding by the Constitution.

Reply to
Bill Putney

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.