Now THIS is how you bail out GM

[$tevie]

First of all, your OP was based on an incorrect "fact", because sometimes these bailouts do work out and the government does get paid back, probably more often than you think.
http://www.propublica.org/special/bailout-aftermaths

Second of all, everyone keeps coming up with these "send us the check", "send us the stocks", "send us the money" mantras. There was nothing new or original to comment upon there.

[OWC Jamie]

Was the guy who called in ( this was a radio talk show ?) Joe the Stock certificate holder ?

Sorry, but it would seem that according to what some claim our future tax program will be would mean those being bailed out will be paying all the taxes to pay for the bail out.
The rest of us are just worker ants maintaining the nest. No stocks for us. (not even in our 401 K s) :-)

[Mac1337]

$tevie wrote:
First of all, your OP was based on an incorrect "fact", because sometimes these bailouts do work out and the government does get paid back, probably more often than you think.
http://www.propublica.org/special/bailout-aftermaths

Second of all, everyone keeps coming up with these "send us the check", "send us the stocks", "send us the money" mantras. There was nothing new or original to comment upon there.

You are done ranting? I am still waiting to hear why it is a bad idea.

[$tevie]

Ranting? I gave you a link showing that bailouts do not necessarily lose money for the taxpayers. Did you read it?

Giving everyone stock in the companies is a childish idea and you must in your heart know that. Just processing the enormous amount of information needed to fulfill that, and then mailing them, will cost as much as the bailout will. Get real.

[lafinfil]

Please please help me here -

How does giving out stock certificates to individuals bail out the auto industry ?

This is the "idea" that I took away from your post.

Did read it correctly ? If so please explain how it works for those of us that are a little slow.

I'm open to an idea that will work.

[Gutenberg]

What would you do with your three shares of Chrysler? Sell them for about three cents, that's what. What good would that do besides allow you to vent your spleen on the auto companies?

There are a lot of businesses that depend on the auto companies. See the above thread on metals. The Port of Baltimore is second only to the Port of New York in exported autos and tops in European imports.

I don't see the purpose in hurting millions of American workers to satisfy someone's desire to punish the auto companies and their executives.

[Mac1337]

$tevie wrote:
Ranting? I gave you a link showing that bailouts do not necessarily lose money for the taxpayers. Did you read it?

Giving everyone stock in the companies is a childish idea and you must in your heart know that. Just processing the enormous amount of information needed to fulfill that, and then mailing them, will cost as much as the bailout will. Get real.

You still are not addressing the merit of the proposal. I am not debating that it is not a money making opportunity. My point is why let the congress keep the gains and spend it on likes of acorn, which they tried to sneak it by las time? Government mailed millions of stimulus checks. Did you object to that or worry about how much it costs to process them?

[kj]

I wonder how many of those in favor of the bailout have owned a gm car in the last 10yrs. How many ever will? I bet not many.

>>>I don't see the purpose in hurting millions of American workers to satisfy someone's desire to punish the auto companies and their executives.

I'm not convinced that GM has a future. I think others see the same things I do, and that's why they wonder how wise it is to sink a lot of money into it. I don't think it has anything to do with punishing anyone. In the long run, it might be better for people if GM dies, or at least gets flogged beyond recognition. kj.

[$tevie]

It cost a bomb to mail those checks, don't you remember? And as a matter of fact I was on record as calling that a gimmick and a bribe. I blew the money like everyone else but it was still a stupid idea and here we are with the economy in the crapper DESPITE those dumb checks.

[$tevie]

Dakota wrote:
[quote=$tevie]
Ranting? I gave you a link showing that bailouts do not necessarily lose money for the taxpayers. Did you read it?

Giving everyone stock in the companies is a childish idea and you must in your heart know that. Just processing the enormous amount of information needed to fulfill that, and then mailing them, will cost as much as the bailout will. Get real.

You still are not addressing the merit of the proposal. I am not debating that it is not a money making opportunity. My point is why let the congress keep the gains and spend it on likes of acorn, which they tried to sneak it by las time? Government mailed millions of stimulus checks. Did you object to that or worry about how much it costs to process them?
I am not addressing the merit because there is none. You are just trying to express the same old right wing lament that Congress is profligate with money and your imaginary concept that somehow US citizens are all frugal with theirs.

And what about the people that currently hold stock in GM? Do you just tell them to go eff themselves or what?

This is just more BS from people who resent thinking that anyone is getting something for nothing, yet have never complained about Halliburton's free ride on our nickel at all. It's political BS.