GM pays back US & Canadian loans way early

[Georgie]

Originally Posted by Supermans

Thank you I am happy I purchased my Camaro 1SS V8 stick before any gas guzzler tax might be forced upon it. You are getting polished rims and the BA upgrade. I perhaps would not have gotten the BA upgrade if I had a choice again but would have gone aftermarket. The polished rims are a must . The 1SS is definitely better in my opinion than getting a fully loaded V6. Boston Acoustic lacks bass, which is my main problem with it. CGM was my number 1 choice for a long time..But last minute I went with IOM and I am very happy. I have seen some CGM with the stripes around here and they are very nice looking as well. Either one you will be happy.

Now are you stalking me or stocking me? I assume you want to stuff me into a stocking for Christmas

haha my spelling is awesome... how do you think polished rims look on the CGM? i can go without Boston Acoustics if the Stereo will play MP3s and all that jazz...

[FenwickHockey65]

IBTL.

This thread is out of control.

[truth411]

Originally Posted by Xanthos

GM requested the federal bailout money in a time of hardship. When they received that money, a certain amount of it was given as a loan (unsecured, to be repaid) and the rest was treated as a government investment in the company in the form of stocks. GM did not have to use the entirety of the money from the loan portion before they got to the point where they felt they were profitable enough to use that and some of their cash reserves to repay the remainder of the loan. I really don't see how this is a problem in any way.

Say I, as an individual, go to the bank because I'm having trouble with bills. I request and am approved for a 1500 dollar signature loan on a 12 month term. I take that loan, use 600 of it for bills, and set 900 aside in a savings account in case I need it while I get back on my feet. I then proceed to pay off the signature loan without touching the 900 in that savings account. Awesome!

Alternatively, lets say two months into the loan term I get back on my feet enough that I feel comfortable covering my expenses without that "rainy day" backup fund. The remaining balance on the loan is, for the sake of discussion, 1300 dollars. I take that 900 dollars, plus 400 dollars of money from my income (or anywhere, really) and pay off the signature loan. How is this any different, aside from the balance of my bank account after payoff and the time between disbursement and payoff?

Honestly, I don't see why anybody is upset by this. GM paid back the money they borrowed early at the expense of their total cash reserves. Only time will tell if it was a good decision for the company, but it is nothing but good news for the government.
- X

Best post in this thread, I don't understand what is so bad about this, They paid back the debt with the borrowed money that they did not use and have no need for it, so how is this a bad thing???

GM: Heres the borrowed money back Uncle sam, turn out that I don't need it after all.

[vsound]

Originally Posted by Chief Blackhawk

IE


Post office

DMV

Social Security

Public Education

Amtrak

Stimulus bill

Cash for clunkers

The real question is what hasnt the government touched that hasnt turned to $hit? The military is about the only thing that works right for the government.

Well, you always have options. Pay for your private schooling, for example.

Most people can't, thus the need for the government to step in.

The point isn't for it to be the best. It is for it to be the best possible while being accessible.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by Supermans

OK, I removed the offensive obama car. Please let me know if I should delete anything else I have said here..

I can start with the basic influence that has been around since the early 70's. There is an indirect influence from both the government and Congress on auto designers and engineers to produce environmentally friendly cars. "Regulators are talking to companies, and companies are responding to regulators,". And there is a faction in Congress that believes that since two of the companies are owned by taxpayers, they need to "behave in a way that's favorable to the environmental movement. There is a dichotomy between what the government wants sold in the market to meet emissions and fuel-economy requirements and what the public wants. It is not rocket science to see how the Government is affecting directly and indirectly the car industry. as for GM, all of the top level employee's have to follow what the Obama administration's vision is where they should be. They want to keep their jobs in this troubled economy.

Reading comprehension isn't your strong-point is it? As I recall, I said show me evidence of direct influence inside the corporation. You have shown, while true evidence, evidence that doesn't show direct control of the new GM business plans by the Obama Administration.

As for evidence of political interference that directly effects the new GM. There are so many examples of this I don't know where to begin.

Let's start with this one.

Obama administration orders the government to buy more gm cars vs other brands after bailout. Less of Ford, and not looking for the best prices either but GM cars only. Now I know the Government has bought many GM cars in the past, however they have also bought a large sum of Ford vehicles and other brands. However in this case, the numbers have been skewed heavily in GM's favor in order to artificially boost sales numbers even though it is not directly coming from the taxpayers but indirectly thru the Government. So you say what's wrong with this? Ford is getting the shaft for not accepting Obama's takeover bid in the long run.

The Government has the freedom to buy whatever brand of vehicle they want. If anything, they're helping the taxpayer by making sure GM gets sales in order show investor confidence.

The firing of Rick Wagoner as another direct influence along with thehiring of the new CEO. This same concept of indirect influence thru a direct appointment is seen with the Supreme Court appointments.

The firing of Rick Wagoner was during the bankruptcy phase. Rick was essentially the CEO of the old GM, now known as Motors Liquidation Company. Thus, Motors Liquidation Company is irrelevant in financial terms to the new GM that appeared after bankruptcy. Combining these facts, the new GM has shown no evidence of political interference inside the company itself.

Then you have Barney Frank and company making decisions in congress about keeping and getting rid of dealerships.. I could go on and on..

I'm not aware of this particular accusation. Feel free to link me to a credible source so I can inevitably destroy that argument too.

Hylton is correct here and I know I am not against GM by far, however I do not like the way our country is heading since I do not like too much Government control. Not to get political, I will not be bothered with this as there is nothing we can do about propaganda and making use of a slogan or headline that GM has payed back its loan money in full and so forth when in reality they are far from it if you take into account all the vehicles our Government has purchased from itself in the mix.. All in all I hope GM can keep making a profit from this day forth and that one day it returns to being a private company.



Do you guys remember when Rick Waggoner and the other two ceo's were lambasted for flying in private jets by our Government?

Well, how about on Earth Day, our Government ties up air traffic for the day and burns countless amounts of fuel. Hypocritical anyone?
http://nycaviation.com/2010/04/21/ob...the-same-city/

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...84-503544.html

I remember everyone in this forum upset at the way the Government was treating GM and the other car companies. It seemed back then being against what the Government was doing was a good thing.. Now we have so many defending what our Government is doing after they took over GM. I'm hoping that everyone can take a step back and question sometimes these obvious propaganda slogans that come out at the most opportunistic times when they appear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Blur View Post
Would you rather have GM blow the money on something useless and pay it back on time? The money is paid back early. This is good news no matter how you slice it.


I'd rather have them use the money wisely by researching and developing new vehicles people want to buy in droves, and not coerced into buying with more incentives and handouts..

You would rather them keep taxpayer money? How can you not see the contradiction in this; You want the government to not hold any stock, but you wanted GM to keep unused taxpayer money to further fund their business plans that were irrelevant to what the bailout money was given to them for in the first place?

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by bigearl

First let me say I don't want GM to fail, and I think they have what it takes to succeed. I also want the whole process to stay above board and honest. The Government has a whole task force on cars now. They own 61% of GM's stock. I understand optimism, but it seems like people weren't paying attention and forget what they don't want to hear:



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...033101521.html

"There will be continuing coordination as decisions about the leadership of the company are made," a White House official said yesterday. "Folks from the autos task force will be involved in those decisions."

"There's a new CEO and new chairman of the board," said Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.). "The government will play an active role as with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other institutions with a major investment from taxpayers."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124834709924575511.html

"The Treasury Department completed its makeover of General Motors Co.'s board, naming five new directors with backgrounds in the telecommunications and private-equity industries."

"The new board is led by former AT&T Chief Ed Whitacre, who was named GM's chairman by the Obama administration in June. The United Auto Workers, which was awarded a board seat after it made major health-care concessions to GM, named former auto analyst and onetime GM adviser Steve Girsky to the board in June."

Then Dr. Cynthia Telles is voted on to the board by the board of GM (as opposed to by the treasury), a UCLA Psychiatry professor and commissioner of Los Angeles County in a move that GM lauded as helping to restore diversity?

"Dr. Telles also serves on the boards of Kaiser Permanente and Americas United Bank, the largest Hispanic-owned bank based in California. President Barack Obama recently appointed Dr. Telles to the White House Commission on Presidential Scholars, a group that selects scholars to be recognized in a variety of fields."

I'm not saying they're bad choices, they seem to be making some good decisions so far. But the administration chose half the board and decided which half of the former board to allow to stay on. Of course they influenced the direction of GM.

All of what you posted happened during the bankruptcy phase. The Government isn't interfering in the new GM business direction.

[vsound]

Originally Posted by Chief Blackhawk

Point being the post office is broke, social security is busted, public education is a joke, the dmv is the worst customer experience you can imagine.

You dont have a choice on whether or not you pay into any of them, even if you never use them.

Sure you need public education. But as for being the best possible while being accessible...


well the government just took over all student loans.....now they are the best possible period. The government is pushing for control of pretty much every private sector.

Our government needs a good gut check ladies an gents. The spending is getting out of control.

Yeah, everyone watch out!

It's not like all those private sectors, banks, etc. didn't go broke on their own. Plus, college loans were a pile of bull already. It is robbery what the banks were pulling on kids.

Does anyone want to try making a cheap, user-friendly service that delivers mail to everyone in the country daily??? Well, step up!

[truth411]

Ummm.. close the thread??

[bigearl]

Originally Posted by a_Username

All of what you posted happened during the bankruptcy phase. The Government isn't interfering in the new GM business direction.

That just doesn't make sense. The new GM direction was set by hiring the board.

Let's take the clearest example, the Supreme Court. The current administration looks very carefully for people who see the law as the administration sees it. No, the president can't go in and tell the Supreme Court how to do things, but judicial nomination is considered to be maybe THE most important tool available to Presidents to influence future law.

Now in the GM set up- they chose half the board and approved the other half. The board members were interviewed and vetted. The Government doesn't have to interfere daily, because they chose people who would follow 'the plan'--whatever 'the plan' is. You likely wouldn't see the Treasury exercise the power they have as majority stockholder until the board veered off the current business plan.

The same board members will likely remain for some time after the IPO, so whatever business plan was approved in bankruptcy will be GM's direction for probably the next decade or longer.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by bigearl

That just doesn't make sense. The new GM direction was set by hiring the board.

Let's take the clearest example, the Supreme Court. The current administration looks very carefully for people who see the law as the administration sees it. No, the president can't go in and tell the Supreme Court how to do things, but judicial nomination is considered to be maybe THE most important tool available to Presidents to influence future law.

Now in the GM set up- they chose half the board and approved the other half. The board members were interviewed and vetted. The Government doesn't have to interfere daily, because they chose people who would follow 'the plan'--whatever 'the plan' is. You likely wouldn't see the Treasury exercise the power they have as majority stockholder until the board veered off the current business plan.

The same board members will likely remain for some time after the IPO, so whatever business plan was approved in bankruptcy will be GM's direction for probably the next decade or longer.

They were hired because the government felt the board could turn the company around. It is influencing but only to a certain, irrelevant point. Also, as I recall, I said show me evidence of direct influence. Think of it like this...

A President appoints a Supreme Court justice because they share the same views. He feels comfortable that the justice would make decisions that are similar to decisions he would have made. Thus, the only influence was the correct appointment of the justice himself, and after the appointment the justice acted by his own will.

What seems to be the problem is that certain political parties seem to think that Obama is literally telling how many cars to sell and to who. This would be an example of direct influence, however this isn't the case in the new GM.

Indirect influence could be found in any part of the auto industry. Does anyone remember the ex-NHTSA employees that were hired by Toyota to specifically deal with safety issues?

[vsound]

Originally Posted by truth411

Ummm.. close the thread??

I disagree with this. I mean, yeah, in some ways this thread is political, but in other ways it is about Camaro, and it is about Chevrolet.

It just so happens that the economics and the politics meet here.

Still, to get back on topic, I honestly interpret it as GM borrowed the money, didn't need all of it, and gave it back. Therefore, it is paid off.

That makes GM happy, and the Federal Government very happy.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by Blade

Supermans - Do you own a GM automobile?

All my vehicles are GM. All bought before the Government takeover. Why?

[Mr. Wyndham]

If I could facepalm any harder, I'd give myself a concussion.

Why some people have to be so....Oh, nevermind.
I'm done in here. Wear your tinfoil hats and your self-righteous clothes...

...Just God forbid any of you come into positions of power in this country.

*sigh*

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by Georgie

haha my spelling is awesome... how do you think polished rims look on the CGM? i can go without Boston Acoustics if the Stereo will play MP3s and all that jazz...

THe polished rims on CGM look great. Getting the BA does not mean it can play MP3's as it is missing the C&C package. The speakers aren't that great though, you'd be better off aftermarket in my opinion.