So... What About a GM, Chrysler, Ford Bailout?

[MountainDon]

... bankruptcy?  The airlines all went bk and they kept the planes in the air. 

Exactly!!

[MountainDon]

The $70 - 80 an hour figures have all the regular and early retirement costs calculated in, if I understand correctly. All those incentives to leave their workforce early have some pretty good long term benefits.

[muldoon]

peter, if your still in ford - this spike is probably a good exit.  F is up to 1.45 on news.

BB Wire

By John Hughes and Nicholas Johnston
Nov. 20 (Bloomberg) -- A group of U.S. senators has reached
a bipartisan agreement on aiding U.S. automakers, said an aide to
Democratic Senator Carl Levin of Michigan.
No details are available, Levin aide Tara Andringa said in
an e-mail. Levin and colleagues Debbie Stabenow, a Michigan
Democrat, George Voinovich, an Ohio Republican, and Kit Bond, a
Missouri Republican, scheduled a 2:30 p.m. news conference in
Washington.
Congressional leaders haven't said whether they support the
plan.

Think about that a second.  4 senators, all from auto manufacturing states, all agree something should be done.  No one else is in agreement and the news spins it as "bipartisan support".  This is a flashing exit sign before anyone else figures out how thin this news actually is.  reeks of desperation. 

[MountainDon]

Maybe Exxon/Mobil should bailout the Big 3?  As a sort of a thank you for all the business...

[peternap]

peter, if your still in ford - this spike is probably a good exit.  F is up to 1.45 on news.

BB Wire

By John Hughes and Nicholas Johnston
Nov. 20 (Bloomberg) -- A group of U.S. senators has reached
a bipartisan agreement on aiding U.S. automakers, said an aide to
Democratic Senator Carl Levin of Michigan.
No details are available, Levin aide Tara Andringa said in
an e-mail. Levin and colleagues Debbie Stabenow, a Michigan
Democrat, George Voinovich, an Ohio Republican, and Kit Bond, a
Missouri Republican, scheduled a 2:30 p.m. news conference in
Washington.
Congressional leaders haven't said whether they support the
plan.

Think about that a second.  4 senators, all from auto manufacturing states, all agree something should be done.  No one else is in agreement and the news spins it as "bipartisan support".  This is a flashing exit sign before anyone else figures out how thin this news actually is.  reeks of desperation. 

Thanks Muldoo, but I was already out and took the loss, then wet ito Morgan Stanley and sold on the peak. Made a good profit on that.

[harry51]

What good is it to give these guys a loan?  They are dead. 

From GM's latest 10-Q

Short-term borrowings and current portion of long-term debt.
September 2008: $7.21 Billion
September 2007: $5.26 Billion

In one year's time, short term borrowing and interest on long term debt has gone up by $2 billion per quarter, $8 billion per year!

GM has $36 billion in long term debt and has a negative net worth of $60 billion.

---
Why would anyone give them a loan?  Why should we, how exactly are they going to pay it back when they are burning 2 billion a quarter in losses?  Looking at yahoo finance, there entire market cap is 1.6Billion.  They are losing MORE than the entire company is worth every 3 months?  And they keep continueing to keep doing it. 

--
Heres an idea,  I want every single executive to put their entire net worth up as collateral on this loan.  Everything.  I want the unions to put the entire pension fund up as collateral.  All of it.  Now I might believe them when they say they are going to make it work because they have direct and very personal reasons to do so.  Then let's talk. 

The other side is I dont really see whats so bad about bankruptcy?  The airlines all went bk and they kept the planes in the air.  Why would GM or Ford go into BK, wash away some liabilities and emerge a healthier company?  The answer lies in lobbying money and the greed and fraud that makes all of us so mad. 

NO MORE 
[/quote


Ditto!!!

[considerations]

Yagh!!    Today

Treasury overpaid for banks' assets
Watchdog panel finds $78 billion spent was more than their worth
By JIM KUHNHENN
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON -- A government watchdog has concluded that the federal government gave financial institutions a $78 billion subsidy last year by overpaying for stocks and other assets as part of its massive Wall Street rescue program.

In a report scheduled for release Friday, the Congressional Oversight Panel for the bailout funds found that in some cases the government paid dramatically more than the actual value of the stocks at the time of the transactions.

   
  Geithner
Financially ailing insurance giant American International Group, deemed by the Treasury Department to be too big to be allowed to fail, received $40 billion from the Treasury for assets valued at $14.8 billion, the oversight panel found.

The findings added to the frustrations of lawmakers already wary of the $700 billion rescue plan, known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Congress approved the plan last fall, but members of both parties criticized spending decisions by the Bush administration and former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

The misgivings come as new Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is preparing to place the Obama administration's imprint on the program with a sweeping new framework for helping banks, loosening credit and helping reduce foreclosures. Geithner plans to unveil the changes Monday.

In a bright spot for the rescue program, the same banks that received capital infusions from Treasury have already paid $271 million in dividends to the federal government and are expected to pay $1.5 billion more in dividends by the end of this month. Wells Fargo, which received a $25 billion infusion, has already announced it would pay Treasury $371 million in dividends this month.

The oversight panel examined 10 transactions, including eight made under a capital purchase program designed to put liquidity into the banks in hopes of easing credit. That money went to banks considered "healthy" financially but in need of capital to make loans.

Two other transactions went to AIG and to Citigroup Inc. under programs designed to help companies that were facing serious financial difficulties.

Overall, the panel and the analysts it retained to conduct the valuation study found that the Treasury used taxpayers' money to pay $62.5 billion more than the value of assets in the 10 transactions it examined. By extrapolating to the more than 300 institutions that received money, it concluded that the government in effect paid $78 billion more than the actual value of the assets at the time.

"Treasury chose to offer 'one size fits all' pricing in order to encourage all institutions to participate, and in so doing disregarded apparent differences in their financial condition," the report states. "A consequence is that Treasury effectively offered weaker participants greater subsidies than it offered to stronger participants."

Panel Chairwoman Elizabeth Warren, testifying to the Senate banking committee Thursday, said: "There may be good policy reasons for overpaying, but without a clearly delineated reason, we can't know that."

Reacting to the panel's conclusions, Treasury spokesman Isaac Baker said in a statement: "Treasury has made long-term investments to stabilize the financial sector and get credit flowing, but more needs to be done."

He said the plan that Geithner will announce Monday "will strengthen transparency and accountability measures so that taxpayers know where and how their money is being spent and whether it's achieving real results."

Senate Banking Chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said the overpayment was sure to "raise eyebrows."

"I can understand some gap," he said. "No one is expecting perfection between the price you pay and what you think you're getting. But that's a pretty large disparity."

[glenn kangiser]

Some day we are supposed to go home Friday and have a new bank on Monday - don't know which one - ours didn't get the bail out -