Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
Gm headed for bankruptcy again WTF
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mach1USMC" data-source="post: 12188640" data-attributes="member: 42788"><p>So what's wrong with the regular bankruptcy process that DOESN'T involve millions of TAXPAYER dollars. </p><p></p><p>Not only that the premise of last part "93 347 Cobra" argument makes no sense. You two are ASSUMING that GM and Chrysler wouldn't have continued post bankruptcy, but you have ZERO facts or info to back that up. In fact Fiat ended up buying Chrysler did they not? Some conglomerate would have purchased all or part of GM just like they did Chrysler. Car companies do this all the time and will continue to do it. So no- the American auto industry would have been just fine after a normal bankruptcy. The biggest reason Slobama did what he did is to secure union support plain and simple. Under bankruptcy secured debt gets paid first and union contracts get restructured so the company can afford the contract. Under the bail out all that was avoided, investors lost their asses, the idiot contracts stayed in place and NOW look where we are at. GM STILL owes us (the taxpayers) BILLIONS of dollars and they still might go bankrupt. So please- do tell, what was REALLY accomplished by the bailout?:rollseyes</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mach1USMC, post: 12188640, member: 42788"] So what's wrong with the regular bankruptcy process that DOESN'T involve millions of TAXPAYER dollars. Not only that the premise of last part "93 347 Cobra" argument makes no sense. You two are ASSUMING that GM and Chrysler wouldn't have continued post bankruptcy, but you have ZERO facts or info to back that up. In fact Fiat ended up buying Chrysler did they not? Some conglomerate would have purchased all or part of GM just like they did Chrysler. Car companies do this all the time and will continue to do it. So no- the American auto industry would have been just fine after a normal bankruptcy. The biggest reason Slobama did what he did is to secure union support plain and simple. Under bankruptcy secured debt gets paid first and union contracts get restructured so the company can afford the contract. Under the bail out all that was avoided, investors lost their asses, the idiot contracts stayed in place and NOW look where we are at. GM STILL owes us (the taxpayers) BILLIONS of dollars and they still might go bankrupt. So please- do tell, what was REALLY accomplished by the bailout?:rollseyes [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
Gm headed for bankruptcy again WTF
Top