Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Obama's original $26 billion investment in GM now worth $12 billion.

Posted 2 years ago on Oct. 24, 2012, 1:14 p.m. EST by TheRazor (-329)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Good job, community organizer. Had he put that $26 billion in a Vanguard index fund, it would be worth $32 billion.

Maybe he should call Bain Capital for investment advice.

He is really a loser when it comes to investment. A total loser.

69 Comments

69 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by flip (7101) 2 years ago

learn something about eocnomics - government is not a business - it can run at no profit and still be doing what it should be - it can run at a loss (like library or fire dept) and be providing the services needed. here is your investment boy - GREG PALAST: As Delco’s biggest customers, GM and Chrysler, collapsed, Delco, now named Delphi, went bust. Down swooped the vultures. The vulture funds bought Delphi for just 67 cents a share. Bloated by $12 billion in taxpayer auto bailout subsidies, the shares blew up from 67 cents to $22 a share. The auto task force chief called it "extortion." Extortion paid big time. So far, Romney and partners have pocketed over $4 billion. Then the billionaires gave Romney a million dollars each for the Republican campaigns. Nevertheless, Romney accused Obama of conflicts.

MITT ROMNEY: This is serious conflict of interest. This ought to be a big story. And I don’t think there are—I think there are a number of people on the—among the president’s team that don’t want that story to get out. We want to make sure it did.

GREG PALAST: Romney said he was opposed to the bailout.

MITT ROMNEY: I wrote an op-ed in the paper, and I said, "Absolutely not. Don’t write a check for $50 billion."

GREG PALAST: But these documents reveal that a government bailout check was in fact cashed by none other than Ann Romney. It says that Ann Romney had a hunk of Mitt’s vast fortune in Elliott Management, Paul Elliott Singer’s vulture fund. Working our way between the limousines in front of his office, we wanted to ask Mr. Singer about his special financial deal with the Romneys. But he turned us down. The Romney campaign refuses to tell us exactly how much they made from the bailout, nor reveal their 2009 taxes.

ANN ROMNEY: We’ve given all you people need to know and understand about our financial situation and about how we live our life.

GREG PALAST: To cover up their payday and avoid taxes, the vulture funds have moved the headquarters of Delphi from Michigan to Jersey—not New Jersey, but the Isle of Jersey off the coast of France, a notorious tax haven.

Governor Romney wrote, "Let Detroit go bankrupt." And it did. Of the 25,000 UAW members at Delphi, every single one lost their job. Delphi once had 29 factories in the U.S., now just one. Today, GM still gets its parts from Delphi, shipped from the plants that the Romney hedge funds have moved to the People’s Republic of China.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6472) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Actually Romney didn't write "Let Detroit go bankrupt" he worte an op-ed that he was proud to have published under that title, the title was writen by the editors, but he didn't object nor did he feel that it misrepresented his position, back then.

[-] 1 points by flip (7101) 2 years ago

are you telling me that he wrote the piece but not the title? and why would you want to tell me that?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6472) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Not to pick a fight, it's just that the Romney guys have been saying that he didn't actually say "let Detroit go bankrupt" and I think the Ds have been weak responding, the point is he was cool with the title, this is much like when Ron Paul had that stuff under his name in the newsletter then tried to say he didn't know anything about it.

Editors often do the headlines, I did once upon a time, it doesn't mean you don't coffer with the writer.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

Am I pleased at that number? NO!
An analysis showed the bailout saved 1,000,000 jobs
thats 14,000 per job
just counting the unemployment payouts, 14,000 per job is trivial

[-] 1 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

Link? Chrysler and GM have 112000 jobs toal. To have saved 1000000, the multipler would have to be 10. A quick goigle and its pyre science that the multipler is 2.8 to 3.6.

Where is your proof?

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

thank you for asking a little rag called the wall street journal


The Center for Automotive Research said today the government’s bailouts of the U.S. auto industry spared more than 1.14 million jobs last year alone, and prevented “additional personal income losses” of nearly $97 billion combined for this year and last.

[-] -2 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

So a $46 billion investment in private enterprise yielded 1000000 new jobs, but an $867 billion stimulus should have produced 2000000 new high paying jobs. Hmmm?

Looks like private enterprise and trickle down econ crushes government trickle down.

CLEARLY WE NEED ROMNEY!!! If anything was conclusive, Bensdad proved it.

GO ROMNEY!!!

[-] 0 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

What criteria was used when deciding to use taxpayer money to help out those people as opposed to the millions of others than lost jobs or lost their homes? Just luck of the draw?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

come on - be honest - you know the answer
the critical nature of the auto business
I'm not saying it was the right answer -
but it is a good answer

[-] -2 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

What makes those jobs any more critical than others who were lost or those workers homes any more important than others who had homes taken by the banks?

There are plenty of other car companies, many of which put out a far superior product anyways.

[-] 1 points by mideast (506) 2 years ago

this was about employees not companies

[-] 0 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

What made those employees so much more important than others that were laid off?

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

The number of Americans affected by the US auto industry liquidating was in the millions.

So that's what makes these employees important. More important? Not more important than the same number of fired workers but the same number doesn't exist like the auto industry.

The auto industry is a strategic industry that must survive. You know it was the auto industry that switched over to manufacturing military equipment during WWII.

They must be saved because oftheir economic strategic importance.

[-] 0 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

I was talking about GM, not the entire auto industry. A good chunk of the auto industry was just fine. Ford didn't need to be bailed out. Nor did all of the Japanese companies that have a big chunk of their manufacturing base here in America.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

I'm talking about the American auto industry. If Gm & Chrysler was allowed to liquidate like Romney suggested the secondary parts/suppliers could not stay in business for just Ford.

They would go out of businesses and. probably Ford too. GM/Chrysler had to be saved.

Sorry.

[-] 0 points by nameisthase (-12) 2 years ago

Yea. Ok, so let's save the coal industry now.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Nope. Time to end that industry.

coal corps have cut jobs and increased production so much the industry employment is down to just over 100k.

We have millions of green jobs. We will create millions more green jobs, We can give coal workers 1st shot at the green jobs.

Hows that? And the green jobs are safer for the workers, AND we can save the remaining mountaintops in VA that we haven't blown up already!

[-] 0 points by nameisthase (-12) 2 years ago

What about all the people that heat their homes with coal because they can't afford either fuel oil or wood? Obviously if you shut down coal, they won't be able to afford electricity, either.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Coal is used to generate electricity. heating homes is fuel oil (dirty, expensive) or natural gas.

We will end the coal industry when new green tech electric generation can replace coal.

It's better for the coal workers, It's better for the air (& people who breath air), and it's better for the mountaintops.

[-] 0 points by nameisthase (-12) 2 years ago

Many people are using coal to heat their homes because they can't afford these high fuel oil prices; what about them?


They heat their homes with coal in many places where gas and fuel oil are considered unaffordable.

If we're going to be a government for and by the people, at what point do we begin to consider the people?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Home heating has been converted to fuel & netural gas in most places. Where are you suggesting people are heating homes with coal?

Inany event whereever that is they have to convert to natural gas. Clean & inexpensive.

That'll do it!

[-] 2 points by Shayneh (-482) 2 years ago

I believe it was more like 46 billion and we will never see it returned - but I will be willing to bet you that GM contributed to Obamas orginization.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Planetoid (-32) from Sacramento, CA 2 years ago

And this just in: Jeep is thinking about moving it's manufacturing to China.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/jeep-an-obama-favorite-looks-to-shift-production-to-china/article/2511703#.UInmy-Jwb8u

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

There's really no such thing as a domestic or foreign car anymore. GM pulled a fast one and got away with it. Sure, they saved jobs in the US but created plenty of jobs in China too. Maybe cheap Chinese labor will keep them afloat- until the next bailout.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6472) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

A million jobs for $8,000 per job, that's fantastic!!! That could be one of the most successful programs of all time.

BTW hasn't the market done great since Obama took office four more years baby!!

[-] 1 points by gsw (2735) 2 years ago

well, sometimes money spent, to help 5 million workers, is worth every cent.

even if it doesn't pay out on your excel spreadsheet, these are Americans.

we know you would like the workers to make about 5 bucks an hour.

so you can more greatly enjoy your $460,OOO salary you make as a job creator, with little tax expenditure or moral qualms, you 1 per-center.

why don't you who take your superior skills and dollars and pay your fair tax share.

You hide-behind the republicans-treasonous traitors and whores.

[-] 0 points by throaway (57) 2 years ago

You need to expand the horizons from which you get your news

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

What about the millions of jobs we saved by the investment in Americas auto industry? You don't give a shit about that do you.?

And let's keep in mind that it was Pres Obamas economic policies that improved the market by 100% and allowed Vanguard do so well.

The auto industry investment will do just fine. We did it to save a critical American industry and millions of American jobs, not for immediate profit.

That's the problem with the 1% plutocrats (& you I guess) You gotta put people ahead of profits!

Greedy, Selfish, bloodsucking bastards!

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 2 years ago

So, who's going to pay the balance that GM ows - taxpayers? This bailout didn't save "millions of American" jobs as you would be led to beleive.

If it did why then do we still have 12 million people unemployed? Obama was selective and is selective in whom he choses to bail out or give grants to - that's wrong for a government to do regardless of how bad the economly is.

The market will eventually turn itself around over time - it may not happen in 4 years but it will happen. Inflating the stock market by printing money making people think all is well is false.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

We did save millions of jobs (but not every job duh!) The investment will in fact yield a profit eventually, so no one will have to pay it back!

And if we did as you suggest (nothing) millions of people would be unemployed and struggling.

Do you care about that?

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 2 years ago

What about all the small businesses that went under because of what's going on. 16 million jobs were lost compared to 26 billion to save 1.1 million jobs.

Don't you think that that 26 billion could have been better spent on small businesses that employed the 16 million?

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

We've cut taxes 18 times for small businesses, in an effort to help them deal with therepublican created great recession.

Best thing for small business is if repubs in congress would pass the jobs bill, infrastructure jobs bank bill, the veterans jobs bill, the greentech investment jobs bill, that dems have proposed.

In addition small business would benefit if repub stat govt wouldrehire the million state workers they've fired!

Then maybe cut working class taxes/debt to create some consumer spending.

That'll do it.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

As a small business owner, how would any of those bills you listed help me more than just using that money in the form of a tax cut? Obviously I know how to invest in my business more efficiently than the government does.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Jobs bills will put people to work! You don'r know how that helps small business?

More people working, means more consumers with money, spending at small businesses.

And the plan has the virtue of helping American families not working,and adding to the revenue of govt to cut the deficit. Haven't we been fed the story that business is not hiring 'cause they are unsure about deficit/debt problems in the future?

Understand?

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

I don't know about other businesses but our investment is minimal not because of deficit problems but because we aren't sure what our tax rate will be in the future and what we will be able to deduct, both on our business taxes and more importantly on my personal taxes.

The demand for my product (dental work) is extremely inelastic. Our business is fairly steady regardless of the economy, fortunately. We would definitely be helped more by a tax cut because that would be a sure thing.

I can see how some businesses would be helped by more consumer spending though, namely those that sell products with a more elastic demand.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Sure Dentistry is a special case. I wonder if cutting the malpractice insurance premiums would help all Drs? What are your highest costs?

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

Mooks is dead wrong. Dentistry and demand is very elastic. A very simple exercise is ti eliminate dental benefits (there is no dental insurance, Delta Dental, Metlife, Cigna all describe their product as a benefit not insurance) and see how his practice does. in most dental practices roughly 50% of all fees are paid by emplyee benefits, not cash across the desk.

Malpractice premuims for dentists are insignificant. Nothing like for MDs.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

Our practice participates with exactly zero benefit (aka insurance) plans. We are completely fee for service. If you want a claim form filled out, we will do it, but our fees are our fees and we don't lower them to meet an insurance company's plan. We are very fortunate to be in a community that supports such a model but they are a lot of others like us.

It is not 100% inelastic but we are very inelastic. People want to save their teeth. We accept Care Credit as a 3rd party finance option and the utilization of this has definitely gone up with the economic downturn. People have been putting off things like big implant cases or taking longer to save up for them but demand for bread and butter dentistry is essentially unchanged.

You are right about malpractice though. I pay more for my car insurance for my wife and I. Disability insurance is steep, though I pay it with my own after tax money so if I should ever need it the payouts will not be taxed.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Ok. So what is the biggest cost for dentists.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

Labor by far. Big cases have big lab bills but also bring in big revenue. At the end of the day though labor is our biggest expense. About 18% last year. Used to be around 21% but we had a little attrition.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Then tax breaks for small business to hire people might help you most?

When would you want from the govt to improve your business/profit.

[-] 1 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

Staff salaries. Rent shoud be 5%, lab in a very well run practice 10%, supplies 5-7%, and staff salaries in a very efficient office 20%. I know offices with 25% overhead (rare indeed) and others with 80% overhead(just a step ahead of bankruptcy.)

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

That is about right as an average.. 80% overhead is madness though. Are they accepting mostly Medicaid patients and getting shitty reimbursements? I don't see how it can be that high unless you are getting paid next to nothing. Labor, supplies, labs, etc can only cost so much.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Thanks

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 2 years ago

"Well, if small businesses had tax cuts 18 times why are so many going out of business? All those jobs you are talking about are government spending jobs.

How about we first focus on "investing" in small business growth by providing grants for people who want to start a small business.

So the questions that have to be asked is "what kind of small business will prosper - would there be a demand for their product or service?.

Next would be what types of businessses are there out there that would fit this reuirement. Some examples would be Education, Energy, Health Care, service sector, international trade and defense to name a few.

The private sector needs to be the ones to provide the services that are needed by the people and government instead of the government trying to be in the business of business. The government needs to be on standby when it comes to owning and operating a business and get out of the way.

This would be a positive start and once the economy started to grow taxes would be put back into the federal tresury where that money could be used for those you mentioned. We need to get the economy going first so we can fund these projects without going into further debt.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

The fed govt has done exactly what you are suggesting they should do. We have expanded financial availability to business.

The jobs bills I'm talking about do not create govt jobs, they creat tax breaks to small business to hire vets, they help states (w/ public/private loans) to do needed infrastructure work, and hire the necessary people.

Repubs need to stop obstructing these jobs bills because it is what small business needs.

I do think also that the public jobs that repubs have eliminated in this employment crises MUST be rehired. I will help those million families and add govt revenue to cut the defict/debt a bit.

I do think

[-] 0 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 2 years ago

"We"? What is "we"? Who is it that you work for?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

We the American govt! 'WE' are in this together right? It's not me against you is it? I don't feel that way. I think we need each other. We can't succeed without each other.

Peace,

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

Millions of jobs? Bullshit. Prove it or call yourself a liar. I say you have no clue as to what jobs were created.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Saved. The direct auto co jobs and then all the supply co's and service co's make up millions of jobs.

BAM!

[-] 1 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

With a link. You just saying it is less than worthless.

Let me help: GM HAS 79000 employees, Chrysler has 44000. lets put a 5 times multiplier on those jobs. so roughly 600000 saved jobs. You could have given each mythical employee $100000 for that money.

Thank heavens we have a real businessman running for President. Community organizers are losers. Your money and mine.

BTW declare yourself a liar. I proved again all you do is lie.

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

Lets see, $46 billion created a million jobs. Wonder why $862 billion stimulus didnt create 20 million jobs?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

You didn't mention the suppliers in about 15 different states!

They don't count?

[-] 0 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

I did moron. thats was the 5x multiplier. For every GM JOB, I ADDED 4 non GM jobs.

You were one of the slow kids in 2nd grade?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

What about the service jobs for all those auto workers/suppliers?

I think you gotta multiply by 10.

I guess your insults mean your arguments are weak. Ha! You lose.

[-] 1 points by TheRazor (-329) 2 years ago

And you would be wrong. The multiplier for a productive autoworker job is 3.6, slow kid. I over emphasized to give you the benefit of the doubt, and still you fucked up.

Pitiful.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

"slow kid"? "Pitiful"? more insults that betray the impotence of your position. Please refrain!

The jobs saved amount to about a million jobs in many states.

Your partisanship prevents you from acknowledging the truth. You "multipliers" are inaccurate.

Peace, Good luck in all your good efforts.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

"Obama...Outsourcer in Chief"...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2012/08/12/outsourcer-in-chief-obama-of-general-motors/

"We need to look no further than General Motors’ own figures to learn that GM outsources almost two thirds of its jobs overseas. Less than one in five GM vehicles are manufactured in the United States."

"To be exact: GM’s December 31, 2011 annual report shows General Motors of North America accounting for 98,000 of the 207,000 GM jobs worldwide. But 12,000 of these jobs are in Canada and 11,500 are in Mexico. Accordingly, GM has 74,500 jobs in the United States and 122,500 abroad, even after Obama’s touted surge in Detroit jobs. Almost two thirds of GM’s jobs are in other countries."

"GM’s outsourcing is not a slip. GM clearly states that foreign investment and outsourcing of jobs are an integral parts of its growth strategy."

"Grace D. Lieblein, President and CEO of GM Mexico, for example, proudly announced in a GM Mexico press release:

“75 years ago, General Motors came to our country with a dream to fulfill: turning Mexico into a prosperous nation for the benefit of millions of families. Today, after 75 years into the adventure, we have achieved goals that seemed unattainable, thanks to the efforts and dedication of Mexican talent. During the 75 years GM Mexico has been in operation, the subsidiary has produced 7 million vehicles, 20 million engines, and 4 million transmissions. GM Mexico employs 11,500 direct and about 90,000 indirect employees.”

"So it now appears that GM’s goal is to make Mexico prosperous, not the good old US of A! In the same press release, GM heralds its upcoming billion dollar investments in its Mexican plants (versus a $100 million investment in Rochester, New York). It should have saved the Rochester announcement for another day."

"GM is no less ambitious with respect to manufacturing in the BRIC countries of Brazil, Russia, India, and China. Again from GM’s annual report:

“We will continue to grow our business under the Baojin, Jiefang, and Wuling brands. We operate in Chinese markets through a number of joint ventures and maintaining good relations with our joint venture partners, which are affiliated with the Chinese government, is an important part of our Chinese growth strategy.”

[-] 3 points by gsw (2735) 2 years ago

most all the American corps have a lot of manufacturing oversees.

that is why they are raking in so much cash.

[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

And yet GM has yet to pay back it's entire stimulus "loan"....why is that?

GM is one of the things Obama likes to pay himself on the back for-yet TWO THIRDS of it's jobs are OVERSEAS.....

[-] -1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

GM=Government Motors

[-] -1 points by DavidMD (-7) 2 years ago

GM took a lot of that taxpayer money and it helped them build a mega plant in China. How's that workin out for ya??? GM will never be able to pay the debt off

[-] -2 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 2 years ago

Your point?