One Year After the GM How is Our $50 Billion Investment Looking?

[red states rule]

After Obama leaves the WH in January 2013 and goes back to Chicago, I hope he does not become a stock broker for financial advisor





snip

On the day of the GM IPO, America did cash in some 400 million shares of GM stock, leaving us (the government) with just 500 million shares. Our stake in the ownership of the car company has now fallen from over 60 percent to 26 percent. And we (the government) have recouped $23.1 billion of the $50 spent. That was the good news.

This past week the Treasury Department released the news that losses from the auto industry bailouts are expected to INCREASE from $14.3 billion to $26.6 billion. (http://www.detnews.com/article/20111114/AUTO01/111140434/1361/U.S.-boosts-estimate-of-auto-bailout-losses-to-$23.6B) The blame for this increased loss is placed squarely on the large drop in GM’s stock price.

On January 7th of this year, GM’s stock peaked at $38.98. As of Friday’s close, GM’s stock price had fallen to $21.67… a 35 percent drop from the IPO price.

In order for the American taxpayer to be made whole on the investment we made in just GM, the share price for the automaker needs to climb to $53, more than double the current
price. Can GM’s stock rebound and jump from $21 to $53, providing the government a chance to “take a few chips off the table?” Most analysts will give you a simple two-word answer to that question: It’s doubtful.

What is standing in the way of GM’s stock price increasing and the government getting paid back for its investment? The government.

Industry experts cite the Obama administration’s aggressive push to increase the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards (CAFE Standards) from current levels of 30mpg to 55.4mpg by 2025. The government mandated increase would add an estimated $2000 to $2500 to the cost of every car in America. And automakers would also be saddled with huge spikes in costs to engineer their cars to meet the requirements.

The administration argues that increased costs to consumers will be offset by fuel savings over the long run. But the government numbers are based on the average cost of gasoline in 2011, with no projected increase in gas prices for 2025. It should be noted that the average price of a gallon of regular gasoline has increased from about $1.65 per gallon in Jan. 2009 to current levels near $3.50 per gallon.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/one-year-after-the-gm-ipo-how-is-our-50-billion-investment-looking/

[Gunny]

A nice, cozy little rocket-scarred hovel just inside the Israel-Palestine border would be a more fitting place for him to live. Too many obstacles for him in the US ... like the Constitution.

[ConHog]

After Obama leaves the WH in January 2013 and goes back to Chicago, I hope he does not become a stock broker for financial advisor

Psst Bush started the auto bailouts.

Well actually that isn't correct, it's more correct to say he began THIS round of auto bailouts.

[Psychoblues]

This is only a short term and reasonable adjustment of the current market that conservatives are so freaking nuts about. As far as the government/tax payer getting not only their money back but their money's worth it cannot fail under normal market conditions. What's the problem? Obama? Some of you are simply sick.

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

This is only a short term and reasonable adjustment of the current market that conservatives are so freaking nuts about. As far as the government/tax payer getting not only their money back but their money's worth it cannot fail under normal market conditions. What's the problem? Obama? Some of you are simply sick.

Psychoblues

Are you stating that the Treasury department is lying to us, or that their math is off by about 9 billion dollars? How about actually opening the article and telling us SPECIFICS and where they are wrong? If you aren't willing to do this simple request, then don't reply to me as I'm not going to play your rhetoric game. Either debate the article and facts in question or troll away.

Those defending Obama's every mistake is what is sick.

[Psychoblues]

Are you stating that the Treasury department is lying to us, or that their math is off by about 9 billion dollars? How about actually opening the article and telling us SPECIFICS and where they are wrong? If you aren't willing to do this simple request, then don't reply to me as I'm not going to play your rhetoric game. Either debate the article and facts in question or troll away.

Those defending Obama's every mistake is what is sick.

When all I had ever seen was a dime a dollar bill made me the richest kid around. Everything in perspective, jimbo. I said conservatives worship the market and they do. This is a reflection of the market so what is the problem? The US taxpayer still owns 26% of GM, the taxpayers continue to reap rewards from this investment, and according to normally accepted free market theories the taxpayer will profit handsomely in the long run regardless the temporary swings of the stock market even if they are severe and inexplicable.

In the plainest terms possible so you and others like you can understand this is my side of the debate. But, I also have an article that may help explain my position from a more authoritative position than my own voice. Here goes:

IPO Helps GM Cut Government Ownership in Half
Soon GM will no longer stand for "Government Motors." Due to the General Motors IPO which started on Thursday, November 18, government ownership of GM is about to end.


Due to the bailout and bankruptcy proceedings, the federal government, through the U.S. Treasury, owned 61 percent of General Motors. Other owners include the United Auto Workers Union through its healthcare trust fund and the governments of Canada and Ontario. During the IPO the government as well as the Union have also been selling some of their shares in the company. In fact, all the hype leading up to the IPO has helped to stoke demand and has convinced both the Treasury Department and the United Auto Workers Union to sell significantly more shares than they had previously planned. The UAW sold one-third of its stake in GM or 102 million shares............................................ .................................................. .................................................. ...

Reports say that the IPO had raised $23.1 billion, a lot more than had once been predicted. In addition, it is said that the government's ownership of GM was cut in half. All you Tea Party advocates take note, the IPO has returned billions of dollars in bailout money back to the Treasury. It is also being reported that the GM IPO is the nation's largest ever.............................................. .................................................. .................................................. .............

Much more: http://www.carsdirect.com/automotive-news/ipo-helps-gm-cut-government-ownership-in-half


jimbo, whatever boogiemen you perceive from the Obama administration are only demons of your own mind. This incessant hatred, fear and anger from the right for anything Obama or left wing politics is what is really sick. You haven't always been this way, jim, and I wish you weren't now.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

What rewards PB?





U.S. boosts estimate of auto bailout losses to $23.6B

David Shepardson/ Detroit News Washington Bureau

The Treasury Department dramatically boosted its estimate of losses from its $85 billion auto (http://www.debatepolicy.com/#) industry bailout by more than $9 billion in the face of General Motors Co.'s steep stock decline.
In its monthly report to Congress, the Treasury Department now says it expects to lose $23.6 billion, up from its previous estimate of $14.33 billion.

The Treasury now pegs the cost of the bailout of GM, Chrysler Group LLC and the auto finance companies at $79.6 billion. It no longer includes $5 billion it set aside to guarantee payments to auto suppliers in 2009.

The big increase is a reflection of the sharp decline in the value of GM's share price.
The current estimate of losses is based on GM's Sept. 30 closing price of $20.18, down one-third over the previous quarterly price.

GM's stock closed Monday at $22.99, up 2 percent. The government won't reassess the estimate of the costs until Dec. 30.

The government has recovered $23.2 billion of its $49.5 billion GM bailout, and cut its stake in the company from 61 percent to 26.5 percent. But it has been forced to put on hold the sale of its remaining 500 million shares of stock.


From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20111114/AUTO01/111140434/U.S.-boosts-estimate-of-auto-bailout-losses-to-$23.6B#ixzz1eQ62otaK

[fj1200]

When all I had ever seen was a dime a dollar bill made me the richest kid around. Everything in perspective, jimbo. I said conservatives worship the market and they do. This is a reflection of the market so what is the problem? The US taxpayer still owns 26% of GM, the taxpayers continue to reap rewards from this investment, and according to normally accepted free market theories the taxpayer will profit handsomely in the long run regardless the temporary swings of the stock market even if they are severe and inexplicable.

In the plainest terms possible so you and others like you can understand this is my side of the debate. But, I also have an article that may help explain my position from a more authoritative position than my own voice. Here goes:

IPO Helps GM Cut Government Ownership in Half


So, not only is the government getting back at least most of its bailout money, the bailout helped to save more than a million jobs. The Center for Automotive Research, a nonprofit company, concluded in a study that the bailout of General Motors and Chrysler actually saved more than 1.1 million jobs in 2009 and 314,000 jobs this year.
http://www.carsdirect.com/automotive-news/ipo-helps-gm-cut-government-ownership-in-half

It is an article but it's not more authoritative. That's not a reflection on the quality of your posts though, the article is pretty poor. "Government ownership" is not ending although majority ownership is.

The three problems with your post is 1) you'll have to point out where the market is worshiped, 2) you've completely ignored opportunity costs in "continuing to reap rewards," and 3) how do you square "normally accepted free market theories" with a government take-over and ownership of a private sector firm? :rolleyes:

Your article also reinforces the false presumption that without government takeover GM and Chrysler would have completely shut down. In actuality they would have gone under Bankruptcy protection and been reorganized with different structures as determined by the market. The fact that they have continuing operations is proof of the value that they still retained even in bankruptcy and would have emerged without a government bailout. Don't forget the government allowing GM to carry over its tax losses from the previous generation of GM (which doesn't happen in a normal bankruptcy) which is diluting the tax receipts available to Treasury going forward; I wonder if that's calculated in the profit/loss numbers that Treasury is throwing out.

[jimnyc]

Are you stating that the Treasury department is lying to us, or that their math is off by about 9 billion dollars? How about actually opening the article and telling us SPECIFICS and where they are wrong? If you aren't willing to do this simple request, then don't reply to me as I'm not going to play your rhetoric game. Either debate the article and facts in question or troll away.

Those defending Obama's every mistake is what is sick.


When all I had ever seen was a dime a dollar bill made me the richest kid around. Everything in perspective, jimbo. I said conservatives worship the market and they do. This is a reflection of the market so what is the problem? The US taxpayer still owns 26% of GM, the taxpayers continue to reap rewards from this investment, and according to normally accepted free market theories the taxpayer will profit handsomely in the long run regardless the temporary swings of the stock market even if they are severe and inexplicable.

In the plainest terms possible so you and others like you can understand this is my side of the debate. But, I also have an article that may help explain my position from a more authoritative position than my own voice. Here goes:

IPO Helps GM Cut Government Ownership in Half


Soon GM will no longer stand for "Government Motors." Due to the General Motors IPO which started on Thursday, November 18, government ownership of GM is about to end.


Due to the bailout and bankruptcy proceedings, the federal government, through the U.S. Treasury, owned 61 percent of General Motors. Other owners include the United Auto Workers Union through its healthcare trust fund and the governments of Canada and Ontario. During the IPO the government as well as the Union have also been selling some of their shares in the company. In fact, all the hype leading up to the IPO has helped to stoke demand and has convinced both the Treasury Department and the United Auto Workers Union to sell significantly more shares than they had previously planned. The UAW sold one-third of its stake in GM or 102 million shares............................................ .................................................. .................................................. ...

Reports say that the IPO had raised $23.1 billion, a lot more than had once been predicted. In addition, it is said that the government's ownership of GM was cut in half. All you Tea Party advocates take note, the IPO has returned billions of dollars in bailout money back to the Treasury. It is also being reported that the GM IPO is the nation's largest ever.............................................. .................................................. .................................................. .............

Much more: http://www.carsdirect.com/automotive-news/ipo-helps-gm-cut-government-ownership-in-half


jimbo, whatever boogiemen you perceive from the Obama administration are only demons of your own mind. This incessant hatred, fear and anger from the right for anything Obama or left wing politics is what is really sick. You haven't always been this way, jim, and I wish you weren't now.

I'll assume you cannot give specifics to the original article and how they are false.

[Psychoblues]

I'll assume you cannot give specifics to the original article and how they are false.

And I will assume that you haven't given my side a fair consideration and can only accuse it of being false. That's OK. It is the normal response from the rightwingers when they have nothing left to demonstrate as factual and to the contrary. What fj said above is more akin to a debate but I've learned he likes to yank chains for the sole purposes of yanking chains so I really don't know how to take his posts anymore. He certainly is a very smart person and far smarter than me.

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

And I will assume that you haven't given my side a fair consideration and can only accuse it of being false. That's OK. It is the normal response from the rightwingers when they have nothing left to demonstrate as factual and to the contrary. What fj said above is more akin to a debate but I've learned he likes to yank chains for the sole purposes of yanking chains so I really don't know how to take his posts anymore. He certainly is a very smart person and far smarter than me.

Psychoblues

Again, can you not point out specifics in the opening article and what is wrong about them? Is it really so hard? It's a very simple request.

[Psychoblues]

Again, can you not point out specifics in the opening article and what is wrong about them? Is it really so hard? It's a very simple request.

I added information that the OP article fails to consider. share or discuss. And I give the information a differing POV which may or may not have any worth to you. I maintain it does to me and no one has offered anything that might change my mind. Your argument directed specifically towards me and ignoring the overall posting propensities of this entire board at any given time is pretty damned weak, jimbo.


Psychoblues

[ConHog]

I added information that the OP article fails to consider. share or discuss. And I give the information a differing POV which may or may not have any worth to you. I maintain it does to me and no one has offered anything that might change my mind. Your argument directed specifically towards me and ignoring the overall posting propensities of this entire board at any given time is pretty damned weak, jimbo.


Psychoblues

I submit that NOTHING would change your mind about any of your liberal stances.

[jimnyc]

I added information that the OP article fails to consider. share or discuss. And I give the information a differing POV which may or may not have any worth to you. I maintain it does to me and no one has offered anything that might change my mind. Your argument directed specifically towards me and ignoring the overall posting propensities of this entire board at any given time is pretty damned weak, jimbo.


Psychoblues

Of course its directed at you, you're the only one in this thread appearing to think the opening article is bogus. I asked why. I think this is a very reasonable request. What's weak is your continued ability to dodge and/or troll threads when people are pleasant towards you but ask questions. Then when someone tells you to fuck off, you whine like a bitch. Whatever, I'll know better than to think you have changed or to entertain you in a debate again.

[fj1200]

I added information that the OP article fails to consider. share or discuss. And I give the information a differing POV which may or may not have any worth to you. I maintain it does to me and no one has offered anything that might change my mind. Your argument directed specifically towards me and ignoring the overall posting propensities of this entire board at any given time is pretty damned weak, jimbo.

PB, come on, your link offers nothing more than the OP, and considerably less no doubt, and starts off with a misleading line to boot:

... government ownership of GM is about to end.

It's far easier to make a case FOR the bailout in the first place than it is to deny the reality that it's not looking good at this point. I'd start there if I were you, I think you're still wrong, but it's a better place to start from. :poke:

Pay no attention to me though, I'm just "yankin' chains." ;)

[Love Monkey]

I keep checking my mail box but so far I haven't received any kind of a GM rebate for the loan.

[Psychoblues]

Of course its directed at you, you're the only one in this thread appearing to think the opening article is bogus. I asked why. I think this is a very reasonable request. What's weak is your continued ability to dodge and/or troll threads when people are pleasant towards you but ask questions. Then when someone tells you to fuck off, you whine like a bitch. Whatever, I'll know better than to think you have changed or to entertain you in a debate again.

I have never said or thought the OP was bogus, jimbo. Point it out or admit you're a liar. I gave an opposing opinion, even added information and an article. This is what a political debate message board does by definition. And your failures to understand all that is simply that. Your failures.

Psychoblues

[ConHog]

I have never said or thought the OP was bogus, jimbo. Point it out or admit you're a liar. I gave an opposing opinion, even added information and an article. This is what a political debate message board does by definition. And your failures to understand all that is simply that. Your failures.

Psychoblues


What do you hope to gain by needlessly antagonizing the guy who in fact has let you back on HIS board numerous times?

[Psychoblues]

What do you hope to gain by needlessly antagonizing the guy who in fact has let you back on HIS board numerous times?

This is not antagonization, conway. It's debate and conversation and his allowing me to participate here is absolutely none of your business. I watched you pitifully crying for someone to ban me from certain threads to no avail whatsoever. You had nothing to dispute me, you did the only thing you could. Beg for unnecessary intervention. You don't run this board, cowgirl, and I don't think you could if you bought it outright.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

I have never said or thought the OP was bogus, jimbo. Point it out or admit you're a liar. I gave an opposing opinion, even added information and an article. This is what a political debate message board does by definition. And your failures to understand all that is simply that. Your failures.

Psychoblues


How can you say the taxpayers got a good deal when we are currently out over $26 BILLION?
While at the same time Obama has pissed thru billions more for failed "green" projects, another trillion for a "stimulus" plan, billions more for "Cash for Clunkers", and billions on top of alll that on failed jobs bills

All the time whining how he needs MORE money to "save" the economy

And we are supposed to be happy with all this PB?