Obama fires GM CEO!!!!

[Foolmewunz]

I have a few questions here concerning this move. How much money did GM receive? Is it enough to make the government majority share-holders? If the answer is no then the government has no legal right to fire anybody at GM.

And for that matter, is the money GM received considered bailout money or a loan? If the latter then I don't believe they still have any legal right. If I'm mistaken please point this out.

It's not just a matter of majority voting stock. If you're the only bank in town, as the U.S. government is ( or more accurately, the only bank in town willing to bail this sorry confusion of a corporation out, yet again ), you can inform the potential borrower that certain conditions need to be met before you will loan them any more money. It happens all the time in the open financial sector, why is it suddenly wrong that it's being done to GM?

Because it's Obama doing it?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

What concerns me is the erosion of freedoms and liberties and the expansion of government control.

You can deprive a people of their freedoms and exert control over them quickly and quite dramatically overnight by a force of arms.

Or... it can be done far more easily, if slowly, with far less opposition, perhaps even no opposition, by laying out largesse from the public treasury with strings attached.

 

[Oliver]

Let's be clear here, Fascism is only when government forces itself into a company.

When that company willingly comes to the government to ask for cash, then there is nothing remotely fascist about the government making stipulations on how that cash is to be received.

Absolutely! And as for the topic title: Technically you're not fired just because someone asks you to resign. Heck, I even send an Email to Whitehouse.gov asking Bush to resign ... and finally, he gave up. Now did I "fire" him? According to some peoples logic in here: Absolutely!

 

[Gangularis]

What concerns me is the erosion of freedoms and liberties and the expansion of government control.

You can deprive a people of their freedoms and exert control over them quickly and quite dramatically overnight by a force of arms.

Or... it can be done far more easily, if slowly, with far less opposition, perhaps even no opposition, by laying out largesse from the public treasury with strings attached.

What the hell are you even talking about? Seriously...

 

[leftysergeant]

What concerns me is the erosion of freedoms and liberties and the expansion of government control.

You can deprive a people of their freedoms and exert control over them quickly and quite dramatically overnight by a force of arms.

No one isbeing deprived of any freedom. GM asked for a subsidy. President Obama told them that he did not want to lend them money with a jerk like Wagoner in charge.

They decided the bailout was more important than idiot boy's dignity. Buh-bye.
Having utterly failed to prove his worth to the world, I don't see how Wagoner is losing anyhting to which he was entitled.

As for those of you who want the unions slapped around, grow up. They did not make the decision to bet the farm on the continued viability of the SUV.

I think it is just the greed of the investor class, or wannabes, coming out again. "This would be a freaking PARADISE if those working schlubs just shut up about needing a living wage..."

 

[Darat]

So the facts are that the title of this thread is simply incorrect, the socialist fascist President didn't fire the CEO of the company.

Glad that's been cleared up.

 

[Disbelief]

No one isbeing deprived of any freedom. GM asked for a subsidy. President Obama told them that he did not want to lend them money with a jerk like Wagoner in charge.

They decided the bailout was more important than idiot boy's dignity. Buh-bye.
Having utterly failed to prove his worth to the world, I don't see how Wagoner is losing anyhting to which he was entitled.

As for those of you who want the unions slapped around, grow up. They did not make the decision to bet the farm on the continued viability of the SUV.

I think it is just the greed of the investor class, or wannabes, coming out again. "This would be a freaking PARADISE if those working schlubs just shut up about needing a living wage..."

Why the hate for Wagoner, considering he is the one responsible for putting out some of the best vehicles GM has ever built - new Malibu, CTS, Traverse, Acadia, etc. He is the one who cut salaried workforce in half and closed the plants to make GM more competitive. While he made mistakes, he spent more time trying to correct the HUGE mistakes of his predecessors than screwing things up himself.

This move was a symbolic gesture for Obama to show he was going to play hardball with the automakers. Why not do the same with the financial institutions that have really screwed up the economy?

 

[gdnp]

This move was a symbolic gesture for Obama to show he was going to play hardball with the automakers. Why not do the same with the financial institutions that have really screwed up the economy?

AIG has a new CEO. Lehman Bros. CEO is out of a job. I can't tell you what happened to Bear Sterns, Indy Mac, Wachovia, etc. CEOs when their companies were taken over, but I doubt they were promoted.

 

[Lonewulf]

I never took you for a fascist.

Since when is government in the business of business, lefty? You didn't like it when you thought W was doing it, how and why do you like it when Obama is doing it?

Please, explain this. You have just confused the hell out of me.

DR

Wow. "Fascist"? Really?

There flies away some more of my respect.

 

[BPSCG]

In this case, I think that government does know better than at least a few business people how to run a business.

Evidence?

We complained about the Shrub's dealings with business mainly because he seemed to think that business could run a country better than government.

You keep running with that meme - that business somehow tries to run the country.

 

[BPSCG]

Wait, which libel is being thrown at Obama today, accusations of facism or accusations of socialism?

You understand, of course, that there is a large overlap between the two?

 

[BPSCG]

So, you would have the USA dependent for vehicles as well as steel on overseas foreign interests?

That's not very strategic of you, is it?

I feel the same way about the steel industry, btw.

Sure, let the midwest suffer even more, Bush screwed them, why shouldn't Obama screw them some more? Is that your point? Get out of that ivory tower much?

Some points:

1) Bankruptcy does not necessarily mean going out of business. As evidence, I offer you Delta Airlines, United Airlines, USAirways...

2) Even if GM, Ford, and Chrysler all go out of business, Americans will still need just as many cars as they do today. But instead of buying a Chevy, built in Canada, they'll buy a Toyota, built in Alabama.

3) And if the Toyota and Honda and Hyundai and VW need to ramp up their production of cars sold in America, they'll hire Americans to work in their factories here.

 

[Disbelief]

Some points:

1) Bankruptcy does not necessarily mean going out of business. As evidence, I offer you Delta Airlines, United Airlines, USAirways...

Different industries and different dynamics. Bankruptcy for Chrysler will mean liquidation, whiole for GM it is probably a 50/50 proposition.

2) Even if GM, Ford, and Chrysler all go out of business, Americans will still need just as many cars as they do today. But instead of buying a Chevy, built in Canada, they'll buy a Toyota, built in Alabama.

Yet you lose money for engineering and many smaller suppliers. You also lose billions in R&D that helps drive other industries.

3) And if the Toyota and Honda and Hyundai and VW need to ramp up their production of cars sold in America, they'll hire Americans to work in their factories here.

Why cede another industry to foreign companies? What is wrong with having homegrown manufacturing if it can be fixed?

 

[BPSCG]

I'm reminded today that the governors of Louisiana, South Carolina, and Alaska are refusing federal stimulus money because they don't like the strings attached.

Given what we see with GM today, does anyone think they are being foolish?

 

[gdnp]

Some points:

1) Bankruptcy does not necessarily mean going out of business. As evidence, I offer you Delta Airlines, United Airlines, USAirways...

When I buy a ticket on a bankrupt airline, I am betting that they will still be flying in a month, a pretty good bet. If I lose I am out the price of a ticket.

Were I to buy a car from a bankrupt auto company, I am betting that they will be in business in one or 3 or 6 years to honor their warranties and supply me with spare parts. If I lose, I am potentially out a lot more.

 

[BPSCG]

Why cede another industry to foreign companies? What is wrong with having homegrown manufacturing if it can be fixed?

I somehow don't see a federal takeover of the US auto industry as being a fix.

In any case, if you think the US auto industry is having problems now, wait until you see what it looks like 25 years from now when China and India are sending us millions of inexpensive little cars, just the way Toyota and Datsun and Honda did 50 years ago.

 

[Disbelief]

I somehow don't see a federal takeover of the US auto industry as being a fix.

Which is why there should be loans with oversight and not a federal takeover.

In any case, if you think the US auto industry is having problems now, wait until you see what it looks like 25 years from now when China and India are sending us millions of inexpensive little cars, just the way Toyota and Datsun and Honda did 50 years ago.

I know exactly what is going on in the industry, so I am well aware of the possibility of China and India sending over vehicles. They still have a long way to go, but they will eventually get there. Part of the reason China will be successful, is because the government is forcing consolidation in their industry so the companies will have a better approach to tackling the NA market.

ETA: IS still does not answer the question of why we should cede the industry. If GM gets stabilized, they will be in a much better position to counter anything China/India can throw at them as opposed to when they totally botched the "Japanese invasion."

 

[Wildy]

Wait, which libel is being thrown at Obama today, accusations of facism or accusations of socialism?

Socialo-fascism?
Fasco-socialism?

 

[Ziggurat]

Why would the head of UAW need to step down? Have they failed, in some significant way, to be a union leader? Did they ask for a large chunk of bail out money in order to prevent their collapse as an organization, due to their own failures?

They helped lead GM into its current financial woes, which threatens the financial security of their members. And they're pushing for the bailout. So yeah, I'd call that a failure on the part of the UAW. Why doesn't the same logic apply? Because the money isn't being given directly to them but only indirectly? That's perhaps a valid legal argument, but it's not exactly a satisfactory one.

 

[a_unique_person]

They helped lead GM into its current financial woes, which threatens the financial security of their members. And they're pushing for the bailout. So yeah, I'd call that a failure on the part of the UAW. Why doesn't the same logic apply? Because the money isn't being given directly to them but only indirectly? That's perhaps a valid legal argument, but it's not exactly a satisfactory one.

No, they accepted a promise of a good pension instead of wage that reflected the profitability of GM at that time. The managers at that time just made a deal that they wouldn't have to deal with, but future managers would. If you are to blame the unions, blame them for not insisting at the time they struck the deal they just simply got a bigger share of the profits.