Chrysler bankrupt. GM's next. Why did we "bail them out?"

[bing_oh]

Title says it all. It's been official with Chrysler for awhile now and most financial and government talking heads say that GM is 99% likely to be the next to file bankrupcy. The simple quesion is, why did we give them billions in taxpayer money if this was going to happen anyway? Personally, I want a frickin refund!

[FlatBlackCaddy]

I think the taxpayer money was to limp GM along til(hopefully) the second half of this recession. If GM and Chrysler both went down while the economy was on the way down it could have plummeted us through the current "floor" we possilbly have hit. That's really all i can think of, anyone with half a brain knew these "loans" were nothing but gifts since GM's ability to pay back any loans was as likely as a 8 year old with a paper route paying back a 200 million dollar 2 year loan.

[280Z Turbo]

The money had to have gone somewhere. It's not like it got launched out into outer space.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

The money had to have gone somewhere. It's not like it got launched out into outer space.

GM is burning through BILLIONS.

Where did the money go?

Bills, Bills and more bills.


Hence why anyone who thought they could all of a sudden get enough cash flow to pay their HUGE debts as well as pay the loan payments(which they needed because they COULDN'T pay their current debt) is a complete retard.

[280Z Turbo]

GM is burning through BILLIONS.

Where did the money go?

Bills, Bills and more bills.


Hence why anyone who thought they could all of a sudden get enough cash flow to pay their HUGE debts as well as pay the loan payments(which they needed because they COULDN'T pay their current debt) is a complete retard.

Economic stimulus for their debt holders?

[FlatBlackCaddy]

GM, we built shit for years because we knew your dumb ass would buy it.

We took your money, we sold you shit, we told you it was normal when it breaks.

We had financial problems because your dumb ass(american public) stopped buying from us, so we took your tax dollars.

Now we are going to file bankruptcy and screw the government, the american taxpayer, the american worker and several american companies out of money they are owed for goods and services rendered.

We will take more government money and assistance to help us through bankruptcy.

When we emerge we will build and ship all our cars from china.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

Economic stimulus for their debt holders?

That's about all the money was good for, paying smaller suppliers and in turn their employees.

[2o6]

GM, we built shit for years because we knew your dumb ass would buy it.

We took your money, we sold you shit, we told you it was normal when it breaks.

We had financial problems because your dumb ass(american public) stopped buying from us, so we took your tax dollars.

Now we are going to file bankruptcy and screw the government, the american taxpayer, the american worker and several american companies out of money they are owed for goods and services rendered.

We will take more government money and assistance to help us through bankruptcy.

When we emerge we will build and ship all our cars from china.

I don't think their products were the culprit. For the most part, their product was fine (with a few exceptions), just the money-sucking method in which the product came to the market is what made GM tank.

[the Teuton]

GM's products were not all that and a bag of chips in a lot of areas, unfortunately.  They had a lot of nice cars, but most of them had unfortunate quality quirks that screwed the pooch.  And after seeing older used GM cars and how they've held up to the test of time compared to Japanese cars and...Fords...I think I can say that I would buy a Ford before I would buy a GM right now even though I think most of GM's current products are better.

[2o6]

For Example:

The Cavalier's basic components were largely the same since the 80's. Building costs weren't that expensive, and it sold pretty well.


Where did the money go?

[the Teuton]

I would go as far as to say that when they were new, a lot of the GM products were very competitive.  But over the long haul, they've turned into crap.  And if I am buying a first car, I want something that will work for me.  And as a young, impressionable person buying a car, chances are I will buy another from that marque if it treats me well enough.

That's where GM screwed the pooch.  Every kid who got a hand me down GM that was downright terrible abandoned the company forever after they could afford to buy something better.

[280Z Turbo]

GM's products were not all that and a bag of chips in a lot of areas, unfortunately.  They had a lot of nice cars, but most of them had unfortunate quality quirks that screwed the pooch.  And after seeing older used GM cars and how they've held up to the test of time compared to Japanese cars and...Fords...I think I can say that I would buy a Ford before I would buy a GM right now even though I think most of GM's current products are better.

I know what you mean. I've always thought that Ford had better interiors, even in the bad times:

[Speed_Racer]

Title says it all. It's been official with Chrysler for awhile now and most financial and government talking heads say that GM is 99% likely to be the next to file bankrupcy. The simple quesion is, why did we give them billions in taxpayer money if this was going to happen anyway? Personally, I want a frickin refund!

Don't expect one, because I highly doubt GM will pay back anything.

We swept the issue under the rug hoping it would disappear. Well, it didn't.

[the Teuton]

In the last 5 years, we have had 2 GMs, 2 Hondas, 2 Subarus, 2 Fords, all used.

Here's the main points that have gone wrong on all of them:

GM:

Cutlass - harmonic balancer (expensive as hell to replace!), power steering completely died, engine ran really rough, interior was terrible, at the time my brother "totaled" it for us, it was getting about 14 mpg in-town

Venture - Transmission only shifts in 2 gears (it's been serviced  multiple times), trim pieces/interior falling apart, significant power steering leak, manifold gasket leak, some other leak that mixed oil with coolant that cost my dad $600 to have fixed just recently, random overheating that seems to have no origin or cause, power sliding door never worked...The van is a piece of junk, so we're saving it as an in-town vehicle and a "cash for clunker" trade-in.

Ford:

Contour - Timing chain skipped off the pulley at 198k miles with little to no service.  It was a $1,000 car that lasted my brother 4 years.

Taurus - Some electrical problems, but nothing really major.  The interior vinyl is peeling a bit on the door panels.  It's a 2001.

Honda:

Civic - CV axles went bad.  That's why we sold it.  It wasn't worth fixing on such an old car.  It ran fine.

Accord - Transmission is a bit jerky and it has a cam tick (I think), but it runs fine.

Subaru:

Impreza - Engine (headgasket) blew at 159k.  Replacement was $300 plus labor because it was cheaper than fixing the gasket.

Legacy - Nil.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Moral of the story:  No one in my family is easy with cars.  We drive them until they're basically useless.  But the GM cars have proven less reliable in my family, leading me to the conclusion that they're not the best cars, financially speaking, for people who buy used.

[280Z Turbo]

In the last 5 years, we have had 2 GMs, 2 Hondas, 2 Subarus, 2 Fords, all used.

Here's the main points that have gone wrong on all of them:

GM:

Cutlass - harmonic balancer (expensive as hell to replace!), power steering completely died, engine ran really rough, interior was terrible, at the time my brother "totaled" it for us, it was getting about 14 mpg in-town

Venture - Transmission only shifts in 2 gears (it's been serviced  multiple times), trim pieces/interior falling apart, significant power steering leak, manifold gasket leak, some other leak that mixed oil with coolant that cost my dad $600 to have fixed just recently, random overheating that seems to have no origin or cause, power sliding door never worked...The van is a piece of junk, so we're saving it as an in-town vehicle and a "cash for clunker" trade-in.

Ford:

Contour - Timing chain skipped off the pulley at 198k miles with little to no service.  It was a $1,000 car that lasted my brother 4 years.

Taurus - Some electrical problems, but nothing really major.  The interior vinyl is peeling a bit on the door panels.  It's a 2001.

Honda:

Civic - CV axles went bad.  That's why we sold it.  It wasn't worth fixing on such an old car.  It ran fine.

Accord - Transmission is a bit jerky and it has a cam tick (I think), but it runs fine.

Subaru:

Impreza - Engine (headgasket) blew at 159k.  Replacement was $300 plus labor because it was cheaper than fixing the gasket.

Legacy - Nil.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Moral of the story:  No one in my family is easy with cars.  We drive them until they're basically useless.  But the GM cars have proven less reliable in my family, leading me to the conclusion that they're not the best cars, financially speaking, for people who buy used.

My mom's Olds Intrigue has 210,000 miles on it and has never had any major repairs.

[the Teuton]

My mom's Olds Intrigue has 210,000 miles on it and has never had any major repairs.

Interesting.  Of all things with GMs, I didn't expect the transmission to be going out on the van.  It has 185k on it.  But, alas, it happened.

Also, your mom's Intrigue has the 3800 V6 -- a notably much more reliable engine than either the 3300 or 3400.

[Secret Chimp]

1980 Citation: leaked freaking everything and never hit 90,000 mi.

[ChrisV]

1980 Citation: leaked freaking everything and never hit 90,000 mi.

Conversely, I gave my '81 Citation V6 away at 323k miles 'cause I didnt need it anymore. Still ran strong (ugly as sin, but reliable as the sun coming up).

[ChrisV]

And of course, seeing the current Chrysler ads with "We're reinventing ourselves" tagline and the 2 electric cars:





I was like WTF? Is Fiat going to support this?

[nickdrinkwater]

How would electric cars save Chrysler anyway?

[Xer0]

The same way that the EV would have saved GM.  They won't, but people love pointing to them non the less.

[GoCougs]

"We" bailed them out because it's the logical extension of the welfare state under the auspices of "protection" of jobs and retirees' benefits.

[2o6]

"We" bailed them out because it's the logical extension of the welfare state under the auspices of "protection" of jobs and retirees' benefits.

You really don't like welfare......

[GoCougs]

You really don't like welfare......

It's not that I don't like it, but recognize its detriment to the existence of the republic; the US government is in debt beyond ability to repay; we have that debt primarily because of welfare.

[r0tor]

my view has always been don't give them money unless your comitted to keep giving them money until they are out of the mess completely... we chose instead to go half way and effectively flushed that money down the drain

[Laconian]

My view is that the system that has wasted their money is incapable of doing a 180 overnight. It was obvious to me that their burn rate would go through their stash of stolen taxpayer money with very little to show for it.

Restructuring under bankruptcy is the only way out IMO.

[GoCougs]

My view is that the system that has wasted their money is incapable of doing a 180 overnight. It was obvious to me that their burn rate would go through their stash of stolen taxpayer money with very little to show for it.

Restructuring under bankruptcy is the only way out IMO.

Which happened anyway...

All these billions $$$ were simply a ~3 month respite, and yet another classic example of Detroit destroying immense amounts of wealth.

[NomisR]

So we still haven't came up with an explanation on what happened to the money?

I think part of it is shareholders, other is employees.  You see, when a company is making money, even for the short term, the employee thinks, hey if you're making all that money, we DESERVE parts of it.. if you don't give it to us, we'll strike.  So of course, the management gives in because for the short term, it won't hurt them and in the long term, they're out of there anyways so they don't care.  And shareholders, but for a more valid reasons wants part of the earnings for their investment, and of course, they got that too.  And everyone was happy until shit hits the fan.

[Nethead]

It's not that I don't like it, but recognize its detriment to the existence of the republic; the US government is in debt beyond ability to repay; we have that debt primarily because of welfare.

GoCougs:  Activate your spellchecker:  "warfare" is not spelled "welfare"...

[bing_oh]

The only outcome of the "bailout" that I can see is, we spend a huge amount of money with no return and we gave the federal government the power to effect the day-to-day decision-making of private industry. How does flushing my tax money down the drain and encourgaing socialism benefit the American public? So fas as I can tell, they don't.