GM CEO resigns at Obama's behest

[Soul Crusher]

hahahaha.  Where does it say that the captains of private industry can fly to Washington in private jets begging for bail outs?  See, washington can condition these soup kitchen handouts as it sees fit.

If the elitest executives don't like it, they can decline the bail out.

I agree, which is why i think the bailouts were a terrible idea in the first place.

[Dos Equis]

GM could say "Thanks, but no thanks" and keep their guy.  The fact is, if the company fails, he's out of a job anyway, right? 

If by "fail" you mean that they are out of business, then they all lose their jobs.  If you're talking about bankruptcy, then no he doesn't necessarily lose his job. 

In any event, this is a decision that should be made by shareholders through their board of directors, not the federal government. 

[shootfighter1]

I agree with you guys but if the company gets repeated bailouts of taxpayor money then gov has some control here.
The whole bailout thing is messy.  Thats why many of us argued for gov assisted organized bankrupcy in the fall.  There's no definite end here and certainly favortism towards some companies over others, which in itself is unfair.
I think this administration is at least straining the limits set by the constitution.  I am far from a constitutional lawyer but I know the founding fathers did not intend to give the federal gov the kind of power Obama and Geithner are now wielding.

[Dos Equis]

I agree with you guys but if the company gets repeated bailouts of taxpayor money then gov has some control here.
The whole bailout thing is messy.  Thats why many of us argued for gov assisted organized bankrupcy in the fall.  There's no definite end here and certainly favortism towards some companies over others, which in itself is unfair.
I think this administration is at least straining the limits set by the constitution.  I am far from a constitutional lawyer but I know the founding fathers did not intend to give the federal gov the kind of power Obama and Geithner are now wielding.

That's really the heart of the problem:  where does it end?  Dangerous precedent being set here. 

[BM OUT]

hahahaha.  Where does it say that the captains of private industry can fly to Washington in private jets begging for bail outs?  See, washington can condition these soup kitchen handouts as it sees fit.

If the elitest executives don't like it, they can decline the bail out.

Geitner has said he wants to dictate how much ALL CEos can make in the financial industry even if they took no bailout money.Now,congress just voted themselves a permanent 8% increse EVERY year.Any plans to eliminate that?

[Decker]

I agree with you guys but if the company gets repeated bailouts of taxpayor money then gov has some control here.
The whole bailout thing is messy.  Thats why many of us argued for gov assisted organized bankrupcy in the fall.  There's no definite end here and certainly favortism towards some companies over others, which in itself is unfair.
I think this administration is at least straining the limits set by the constitution.  I am far from a constitutional lawyer but I know the founding fathers did not intend to give the federal gov the kind of power Obama and Geithner are now wielding.

I'd like to see some 'just desserts' doled out.  But we cannot, as a nation, afford to fall behind in our national recovery.

I believe the bail outs are necessary.  I believe they should be done and done robustly.

I also believe that the US gov. should thoroughly investigate all of the wall street players in this debacle and hand out charges accordingly.

I also believe that once these bailed out businesses are on firmer ground, they should be broken up so that they will never be too big to fail again.

[Dos Equis]

President Obama said Monday his administration has "no intention" of running General Motors, even as the White House demanded the resignation of the automaker's CEO and called for a "better business plan" before considering lending more government money to bail out the company.   http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/30/obama-auto/

 

[Soul Crusher]

I'd like to see some 'just desserts' doled out.  But we cannot, as a nation, afford to fall behind in our national recovery.

I believe the bail outs are necessary.  I believe they should be done and done robustly.

I also believe that the US gov. should thoroughly investigate all of the wall street players in this debacle and hand out charges accordingly.

I also believe that once these bailed out businesses are on firmer ground, they should be broken up so that they will never be too big to fail again.

Where and when does it end? 

How can a company get a "firmer ground" if it becomes reliant upon GOVT money like welfare receipients do on welfare??

Why should only those at the top get bailouts? 

 

[240 is Back]

President Obama said Monday his administration has "no intention" of running General Motors, even as the White House demanded the resignation of the automaker's CEO and called for a "better business plan" before considering lending more government money to bail out the company.   http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/30/obama-auto/

 

there's a difference between *running* an institution and just approving the business plan and who is running the place.

99.9% of the employees are still there, but now Obama, in exchange for billlions of dollars, wants to approve the plan.  I don't get why any firm receiving its lifeblood from an outside source would bitch about any stipulation.

methinks if Lord Cheney had attached 2 or 3 provisions to the 150 bil that AIG got, you guys would have been defending it.  "Zero" does it and you criticize it no matter what.  heck, 333386 was at first mad obama didn't do it for the banks too, then upon realizing that meant he agreed with Obama, he quickly had to change his position.

[Dos Equis]

Rubbish.  I and others opposed the Bush bailout.  There goes that theory. 

[240 is Back]

Rubbish.  I and others opposed the Bush bailout.  There goes that theory. 

Both presidents and the majority of congress approved it.  Democracy sucks sometimes.  Without the bailouts, however, there's a good chance most of our retirements would be wiped out at the moment.  AIG fails and the ripples are beyond what we can imagine.  I'm very anti-welfare, but when it's the backbone of our economy, you gotta do it.

Ron Paul and Schiff and others are right in theory... but wow, I'd hate to be the generation that loses 15 years of saving, ya know?

[Dos Equis]

AIG, GM et al. should file bankruptcy and attempt to reorganize.  If they cannot reorganize, they don't need to be in business. 

If they cant reorganize, another business will step in and take their places.  Happens all the time.  We had a local insurance company go through liquidation here and every single one of the policyholders was placed with another insurance company.  Failure by one company is opportunity for many others. 

Success and failure is part of the system.  These people are creating a quagmire.   

[240 is Back]

AIG, GM et al. should file bankruptcy and attempt to reorganize.  If they cannot reorganize, they don't need to be in business. 

If they cant reorganize, another business will step in and take their places.  Happens all the time.  We had a local insurance company go through liquidation here and every single one of the policyholders was placed with another insurance company.  Failure by one company is opportunity for many others. 

Success and failure is part of the system.  These people are creating a quagmire.   

the pro is that a-holes in BOTH parties took the campaign donations, and let these firms become monopolies that were too big to fail.

AIG should be ten small AIGs.  Some could fail, some would not.
GM and Chrysler and Ford should be 15 car companies.  Cadillac could succeed and the F100 might not.  Stop letting one dog suck down 3 winners.

[Bindare_Dundat]

You notice that Obama and the administration is saying the same thing today about the auto industry as they did when they gave their final warning with the deadline a couple months ago.  They said to receive more taxpayor $ they had to have a solid plan.  If the plan and actions taken didn't have viability, they must go through bankrupcy.  Well, the administration said their plans and action weren't enough....and yet is proceeding to give them another 60 days of public money to do it again....??  This administration gives empty threats unless its something that is part of their agenda.

That's because there is NO PLAN B for these guys.

[Bindare_Dundat]

The market is tanking again...315 points.  Is this in responce to GM?  Usually when the market reacts this much, it is an acute responce.

It was the GM news and  Geitner said banks may need more money.

[The Coach]

After Obamas speech saying "the government will back GM and Chrysler warranties, it only confirms and reassures that I won't be buying American anytime soon. I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop with Ford, so far they seem to be the only intelligent Company that hasn't taken government money. But since I don't trust Obama, I will be buying foreign from here on out. We already have a Dodge Durando (05) and an 08' MB C350, the Durango will be payed off in 2 months. But the next will be foreign!

[Decker]

Where and when does it end? 

How can a company get a "firmer ground" if it becomes reliant upon GOVT money like welfare receipients do on welfare??

Why should only those at the top get bailouts? 

 

It ends when the companies receiving aid are no longer on the precipice of folding.

What gives you any indication that these bailouts are on-going into perpetuity or the like? 

Those at the top are getting bailouts, no doubt.  The money should have been conditioned on surrendering some of the elite's income.  There are justifications and counterarguments to that but I don't want to get into that right now.

That's why I propose an exhaustive investigation of Wall Street.  Then we'll know if Obama is a man of change...not spare change.

Money can be recouped from the guilty parties.

Then those culpable will be removed from the system.

Then the companies will be broken up.

[Soul Crusher]

It ends when the companies receiving aid are no longer on the precipice of folding.

What gives you any indication that these bailouts are on-going into perpetuity or the like? 

Those at the top are getting bailouts, no doubt.  The money should have been conditioned on surrendering some of the elite's income.  There are justifications and counterarguments to that but I don't want to get into that right now.

That's why I propose an exhaustive investigation of Wall Street.  Then we'll know if Obama is a man of change...not spare change.

Money can be recouped from the guilty parties.

Then those culpable will be removed from the system.

Then the companies will be broken up.

They are doing the opposite of what you say. 

Geithner was Paulson's buddy at Treasury and carrying out the same agenda that got started last year.

[Dos Equis]

The outgoing CEO is apparently eligible for $20 mil.  I would have resigned too.  lol. 

How long till Obama and/or the liberals in Congress advocate/pass a bill to take this guy's money? 

[Soul Crusher]

The outgoing CEO is apparently eligible for $20 mil.  I would have resigned too.  lol. 

How long till Obama and/or the liberals in Congress advocate/pass a bill to take this guy's money? 

Never.  The govt is getting 50% of that in income and state taxes anyway.

[Dos Equis]

Never.  The govt is getting 50% of that in income and state taxes anyway.

Yeah.  I wasn't being serious.