Gm ipo

[Mikesatx]

Wait, are you really asking me if I follow the government blindly while at the same time dismissing something from a source outside the government and asking for the government to provide proof itself?

You point to Enron and Worldcom scandals but act as if the federal government is somehow immune to this?

You're upset that I can't provide you a study by the CBO but completely dismiss a study that you have no idea if its biased or not just because you assume the CBO would do a better job when the CBO doesn't have experts in that field and would likely use the same type of information the CAR used?

So, maybe you should ask yourself why you want to follow the government so blindly before you ask others who provide you with outside sources that question. Thats pretty damn amazing.

I am not dismissing the report you provided merely asking is it possible that a conflict of interest exists. If the group is funded by the auto industry which I don't know, that would serve as a conflict of interest. It is, in my view, the governments responsibility to spend our money wisely.

Your comment about Enron and Worldcom I don't understand.

I think the appropriate people to work on such a study would obviously include those in the field in addition to financial analysts to ensure the information is as accurate as it can be. The CBO is in theory supposed to do this. If I had to choose between them and a private unaffiliated consulting firm I would take the consulting firm.

I am not sure how you confuse a study looking to eliminate conflict of interest with thinking that I applaud our government.

[Winehole23]

Obviously a benefit for the consumer, but not the saver. Which speaks well to America as it stands in the 21st Century. A grand country if you can afford to buy .

Saving is for losers. Winners gamble at the casino.

[Winehole23]

You covered a lot in your post. I spent 45 min replying to it earlier and by the time I finished I was logged out and lost the reply. I'll try and be brief.

Thanks for taking the trouble to to respond again.

There is a big difference between corporate bankruptcy and going to war. If the decision is made that war is the best option you are not going to worry about a budget. You are going to try and win and limit the loss of our soldiers as much as possible. We have been involved in the middle east long enough to do cost analysis. It wouldn't hurt and I welcome it.

Iran (via DAWA and SCIRI) is the dominant political influence in Iraq, and the Russians and Chinese are their main partners in development; Pakistan, Iran and China will all have enhanced influence in Afghanistan.

This is what we're been dying for? Really?

You may think the federal reserve is a political body and in some ways it may act like it. I look at Greenspan and Bernanke who have been the only fed chairmen since 87 and both have served for both dems and repugs. Their rate decisions in a normal environment are based on inflation.

Short or long term?

That's not a rhetorical question. Is our currency -- i.e, our ing buying power -- being debased by the attempted saves that rate driven malinvestment leads to, or not?

If the markets start to heat up and the economy is running great they push rates up to cool things down. If the market cycle is on the decline rates are lower to stimulate the economy. 2008 was not a normal environment so they stepped in and did things they normally don't do.

That doesn't mean it was a very good idea. Just saying.

FDIC is supposed to step in if it becomes clear the financial ins ution isn't going to make it. AIG's failure would have had a far more significant economic impact than letting GM go. doesn't justify their actions. They should be held accountable. We should also be asking our government where was the oversight we pay for as taxpayers? There was a failure there as well.

Our government sucks because we suck.

Hard to argue with that.

[boutons_deux]

"where was the oversight we pay for as taxpayers"

Repug/conservative "philosophy" says the free market always delivers the best solution, so the Repugs have been deregulating and failing to enforce even minimal regulations. SEC, etc were badly underfunded and not policing.

But when 19 states, including Wall St target Spitzer, went to the Feds to shut down predatory lending, the Repugs all of sudden found some obscure regulatory feature, OCC?, that shutdown the shutdown, and allowed predatory lending to continue unrestricted.

And of course, oilmen in the Repug WH were certainly not going to enforce EPA, OSHA, regs on oil/gas/coal/fracking operations.

frackers sought and obtained FROM REPGUS an exemption of th fracking from EPQ water quality controls. Now, why would they do that?

Miss dubya and Repug/conservative "philosophy", yet?

[Mikesatx]

Thanks for taking the trouble to to respond again.

Iran (via DAWA and SCIRI) is the dominant political influence in Iraq, and the Russians and Chinese are their main partners in development; Pakistan, Iran and China will all have enhanced influence in Afghanistan.

This is what we're been dying for? Really?

Short or long term?

That's not a rhetorical question. Is our currency -- i.e, our ing buying power -- being debased by the attempted saves that rate driven malinvestment leads to, or not?

That doesn't mean it was a very good idea. Just saying.

Our government sucks because we suck.

Hard to argue with that.

Whether or not Iraq was the right move is for another thread and honestly one I would probably stay away from. In my mind there is too much we don't know and may never know.

Devalueing of the currency want come from low rates it will from inflation. The governments spending and printing of money will be the cause. This won't effect us until consumer spending the jobs and real estate market come back. Thats not happening anytime soon.

We as an electorate do suck. We are generally lazy and apathetic. We need to reframe our political questions. Too much here and I assume everywhere is about picking a political side and defending it regardless. It may be overly idealistic but an electorate having an intellectual debate where both sides share and listen would be refreshing. The funny thing is if each individual formed their own opinion on all of the big issues there would no doubt not be a candidate that lines up 100%.

[Marcus Bryant]

We as an electorate do suck. We are generally lazy and apathetic. We need to reframe our political questions. Too much here and I assume everywhere is about picking a political side and defending it regardless. It may be overly idealistic but an electorate having an intellectual debate where both sides share and listen would be refreshing. The funny thing is if each individual formed their own opinion on all of the big issues there would no doubt not be a candidate that lines up 100%.

Here, here.

[Winehole23]

Whether or not Iraq was the right move is for another thread and honestly one I would probably stay away from. In my mind there is too much we don't know and may never know.

It was a terrible idea from the beginning. Given the results apparent so far, it's even harder to justify in retrospect. But you're right, Iraq belongs in another thread.

The governments spending and printing of money will be the cause. This won't effect us until consumer spending the jobs and real estate market come back. Thats not happening anytime soon.

Yep. Staggering that $13-14 trillion later, the proximate danger is still deflation. Housing may not rebound until 2013, and employment may not return to pre-panic levels until 2016 or so..

Longer term, not so sure I'd rule inflation out, especially with a double dip: with the political will for stimulus being about exhausted, (R)'s replacing (D)'s in Congress and deficit hawkishness growing on all sides, an even heavier reliance on QE for the second down leg would seem hard to avoid.

[CosmicCowboy]

It was a terrible idea from the beginning. Given the results apparent so far, it's even harder to justify in retrospect. But you're right, Iraq belongs in another thread.

Yep. Staggering that $13-14 trillion later, the proximate danger is still deflation. Housing may not rebound until 2013, and employment may not return to pre-panic levels until 2016 or so..

Longer term, not so sure I'd rule inflation out, especially with a double dip: with the political will for stimulus being about exhausted, (R)'s replacing (D)'s in Congress and deficit hawkishness growing on all sides, an even heavier reliance on QE for the second down leg would seem hard to avoid.

Personally I think fears/predictions of deflation are way overblown. With CPI excluding energy and food, and concentrating on consumer durables mostly imported from China etc. we are simply getting false signals on the real direction of our US economy. Yeah, we are in a housing bubble with the foreclosure belly in the market but we lived through the RTC mess here in Texas and we will live through this. Out of control inflation and devaluation of the dollar are still my basic fear/prediction.

[Winehole23]

That is the majority opinion I would guess. Experience is the teacher.

We'll see, CC.

[Winehole23]

If $13-14 trillion (one year's US GDP roughly) spent over about two years hasn't alleviated the danger of the US economy contracting again, how far away is the conclusion that we are already ing insolvent, or very soon might be?

[CosmicCowboy]

If $13-14 trillion (one year's US GDP roughly) spent over about two years hasn't alleviated the danger of the US economy contracting again, how far away is the conclusion that we are already ing insolvent, or very soon might be?

Agree. Thats why you don't keep throwing borrowed/created money at the problem.

[boutons_deux]

"If $13-14 trillion (one year's US GDP roughly) spent over about two years"

The stimulus wasn't that big. Thanks for lying.

If Magic Negro had sprinkled about $2T instead of the still unspent $700B, we'd be in much better shape.

btw, school kids are being told to bring their own toilet paper to school, some schools are so broke. Repugs/conservatives/capitalists/Wall St have truly ed down the US.

[Winehole23]

The stimulus wasn't that big. Thanks for lying.

Reading fail.

$13-14 Trillion represents the sum of bailout, QE, and emergency Fed and government loans.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=armOzfkwtCA4

[RandomGuy]

Take it up with the Wall Street Journal:

Majority of GM Bondholders Back Debt-for-Equity Deal


http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ...042969721.html

So someone told WSJ 54% approved.

CNN at the same time said 20%.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/28/news...ion=2009052810

I honestly don't know the exact number but I know it was the speculators that bought discounted bonds that cut the deal.

Actually you are wrong about that. The linked article talked about several groups that approved it. The 20% figure you cite is from a specific group, and at least one other group that represented 15% was talked about as supporting the deal. The CNN article is from a couple of days prior to the WSJ article.

The important part though out of either seems to be the section from the CNN piece:

The official said Treasury will look at which bondholders have accepted the deal and which different classes of investors they represent to determine whether there is "sufficient" support. GM had previously said it needs approval from 90% of these creditors in order for any offer to take effect.

The bondholders presumedly could have balked at the terms, and let it slide into bankruptcy.

Your premise that the terms were forced down their throats would seem to be fairly weak.

Given the fact that the bondholders could have forced a bankruptcy, but didn't, and accepted the terms offered, the only logical conclusions is that the bondholders collectively determined that they got a better deal than they would have in a bankruptcy. I would guess they approved the deal by something likely approaching 90%, and most certainly a clear majority.

[CosmicCowboy]

LOL

And now Obama will double the bondholders...just when their debt converts to stock he will dump all the US stock into the market (driving the price of their stock down) for his own political reasons. Sweet.

[clambake]

so, you're saying its a good time to get in?

[Wild Cobra]

LOL...

I stayed out of this thread. My remarks must be in another similar thread.

[Nbadan]

at the GOP

One week they want the govt to get out of private business, the next week they are whining because the government is willing to take a loss to get out of the private business

Millions of american jobs were saved and a multinational American corporation exists that wouldn't have existed without the bailout...of course that does not matter to teajadistas

[RandomGuy]

at the GOP

One week they want the govt to get out of private business, the next week they are whining because the government is willing to take a loss to get out of the private business

Millions of american jobs were saved and a multinational American corporation exists that wouldn't have existed without the bailout...of course that does not matter to teajadistas

It is *wee* ironic, and fully illustrative of the "win at all costs" mentality fully in the drivers seat at the GOP. "Facts? Who needs 'em. Consistency? Nah, not for us."

GMAFB.