GM posts largest quarterly profit since 2004

Well i'm glad to see someone understands you can cook the books to make anything look good. This article is so full of the crap.

What is the federal agency (subsidiary) of GM?

What money does not have to be repaid?

When I get (as a taxpayer) the return on my investment then they can brag about a profit. Right now their just moving bailout money around the bookkeepers journal and calling it a profit.

There is an ad on TV that says it all: "I want my money, and I want it NOW".

Yes, we should make sure to croak the economy of the Midwest as quickly as possible. THEN we can have a depression.

Except the federal agency (subsidiary) of GM does not need to report the money it does not have to pay back to the federal government. This would change the numbers quite a bit.

What money? GM already paid back the emergancy loan the US government gave in 2008. The only stake the US government still has in GM is its stock ownership stake.

As of this moment, the only stake the US government has in GM is:

$2.1 billion invested in preferred shares that pay dividends

a 61% share of common equity valued at about $45 billion

Think all this profit comes from the ..Cash for Clunkers Program...ha ha

But how much did that stupid idea... REALLY cost the American taxpayers..?

You do realize, Govt Motors, that we no longer believe in coincidences. The DAY before the IPO? Could you be any more obvious? Hey, here's a thought. Pay back the "forgiven" 49 billion you took. Pay the preferred stock holders that were robbed for your union buddies back. Then we will look at your bottom line. Why would anyone in their right mind buy this stock that could be nationalized again?

"Sources told Reuters on Wednesday that the largest U.S. automaker had secured a $5 billion credit facility"

Considering that the previous lenders were raped and pillaged, and their assets given to the unions that were supposed to be below them in priority, what lender in their right mind would give them money?

Somehow, I suspect that the government (taxpayers) had to give a loan guarantee, which keeps us on the hook.

GM's IPO shares should be distributed to all taxpayers.

That works out to 61%. GM HAD to show a profit so they could borrow 5 Billion to buy stock back from the government. The 61% IS the LOAN at this point. That is why they look healthy. They will not be healthy until they repurchase the stock that the Government has.

As a taxpayer, I will be waiting for my dividend check in the mail.

Here's a quote from a knowledgeable source;

"We were recently told that GM paid off it’s debt to the US Government, in full, with interest and ahead of schedule. As we now know, this was a lie perpetrated on the American people by the Obama Administration. GM received $52 billion from the US government and $9.2 billion from Canada. During their bankruptcy, most of this debt was either forgiven, or converted to stock owned by the US Government. In the end, GM supposedly only owed the US $6.7 billion, which was the amount repaid. Ten cents on the dollar."

When the IPO comes out, and we see how much the government's share is REALLY worth, we'll know how much Obama's sweetheart deal for the unions really cost us.

I live in Michigan. This whole mess with GM was just another way to prop-up the union who voted for Obama and to screw the long-time owners of GM bonds and stocks. (Yes, there are PLENTY of grandmothers and pensioners who lost their life savings in this fiasco!) IF GM truly now has 38 Billion or so in cash BEFORE the IPO, then why was the bailout even needed? It was all a lie rushed through to make Obama look presidential! Why is it that our news media is not looking at these MOST BASIC of issues relating to Government Motors?

Gamerk2,

GM did not pay back the emergency loan. They funneled a portion of the bail out money to an escrow to secure their intention of paying back the actual loan with investors monies obtained through the IPO! GM does not have nor have the ever had the money to pay back the government in full.

I will use the dividend check to offset the increase I will pay in taxes. Overall, I would say I am going to take a loss.

Apparently the government must be buying all the new GM vehicles because most people can't afford to and won't with the economy in the state it's in.

GM reported second-quarter net earnings of $1.3 billion, compared with $865 million in the first quarter.

President Obama rescued GM and saved thousands of jobs, Thanks President Obama.

"GM said it ended the quarter with $32.5 billion in cash, down from $36 billion in the first quarter."

So where did the $3.5 billion go? At this rate they will be out of cash in a little over 2 years.

Reading so many of these posts makes it clearly obvious that too many ppl who use the internet don't have much education, or they just don't seem to do much research. Nobody is "buying off" the Unions. The 17.5% stake the UAW has in GM is a Health Care Trust. Those are health care costs the Union has to pay for now, but the company had to give them money to start the Trust. This is money that in the long term will be off GM's books. GM not paying for Health Care coverage for retirees will be a huge savings to the company, which is why GM & UAW agreed for the Union to take over these costs. So how again were the Unions bought off? I suppose it's because they still have jobs, huh? Maybe some of you should take an economics class or two. You think unemployment is bad now, you think the economy sucks now....imagine what it would be like if the Auto Industry would've been left to fail. Let's try to think long term...you know, the big picture...if only for a moment.

Freedom-Lover,

You are not quite right. GM has actually already paid back the government for all its loans. It owes nothing on the books. What remains is that the government owns a hair over 60% of the shares in GM. That is what the Initial Public Offering (IPO) thing is about. GM intends to sell stock to the public. This IPO will raise capital that will allow the government to sell its holdings in GM, hopefully at a significant profit.

The GM bailout is probably a win-win for the taxpayer just as previous bailouts of Lockheed and the Iococca/Chrysler bailout ended up making a profit for the taxpayer. But even Ford benefited.

You could make an argument that Chrysler should not have been bailed out. They were badly undercapitalized and will probably always be the "sick man" of the American car industry unless they can come up with a sales "blockbuster" like the original mini-van. And given that R&D money is so short at Chrysler that is unlikely.

But the point that everyone seems to miss is that all three American car manufacturers and many of the foreign car manufacturers use the same parts suppliers. If GM went out of business, most of these parts manufacturers would have also gone out of business. The remainder would have lost significant economy of scale and would have had to increase parts prices dramatically.

This would have caused Chrysler to have gone out of business because they are only hanging on by a thread as it is.

Ford had pretty much accidentally made a good move just before the recession hit and mortgaged everything it owned just before the recession. This left them in an excellent cash position just when they needed it. But despite that, Ford would not have been able to survive a collapse of GM and the parts industry.

If all three major American car companies failed, the parts business would collapse to the point that Japanese and other foreign manufacturers who make cars in this country would have been forced to shut down plants and move production to other countries where parts were more readily available.

You're not just talking about GM, you are talking about millions of jobs and the total collapse of all car manufacturing in this country with resulting huge increases in car prices.

bobvet- the reason it is unbelievable is because it is unbelievable. A lot of people forfeited a lot of there hard earned money when preferred bond and stock holders were simply tossed aside. I bet even you could show a profit if all your shareholders were robbed. It is not a slap a GM per se, it is a slap at the nationalization of GM at taxpayers and shareholders expense for the express purpose of rewarding UAW.

wonder how much of that goes towards kickbacks for obama? or will it just be disguised as campaign contributions?

What Rick said! ;)

freedom lover I wonder what it would take for you and those like you to acknowledge Obama as president and admit that he has done some good things

If you were in Michigan and said this out loud you would have been challenged to your views of the world

cmon

Same thing. They get to keep whatever campaign contributions they don't spend.

Chris (and others)

Do you understand that GM paid back the 'bailout' money with Goverment loans?? Ok, maybe not the exact same thing, but it's still taxpayer money in the end. Also, take a look at GMAC and see how much they keep taking in from the goverment.

I would hope they could make a profit. They are paying NO dividends on the common stock that the taxpayers funded, and are making NO debt payments.

If your entire capital structure is FREE money, any business could show profit.

Amazing the ignorance on this board from the liberals that eat up this turd sandwich and think Obama has done good. This was massive political corruption on a billion dollar scale to bail out union votes. Obama stole money from our kids and grandkids to prop up an unsustainable business model with bloated pensions.

So stupid to think that an IPO for US investors to buy back our own money is a win-win situation. Idiots abound.

Jonathon

Very well said.

I want to know what any of you would have done? Oh the poor share holders lost their money. Guess what? Happens all the time. It was their risk in investing in a company that was poorly managed for years. If a decent business man had run the company from the start we wouldn't be in this mess. Michigan & Wisconsin plants had been rusting for years before this mess, & more likely to go under. What's the great plan from the "right" to fix it? Let it fail, and let thousands of ancillary jobs go under? Sounds like something a Democrat would have said. Since Obama took office every pro business & pro employer move has been chided as a backhanded proposition.

We're all in this mess, Left, Right, and Center. We should all be PRAISING an American business for doing well.

If you want to help America then HELP AMERICA and stop whining so much.

Like many of our administration's actions, this was an action with a good intention,screwed up in its' implementation. The SELL OUT of our manufacturing sector had resulted in a situation where we were about to lose the last major sector of it,so I fully supported the rescue of Chrysler and GM. A nation that doesn't manufacture its' own goods ain't $H*T !!! We had to rescue our automotive sector because when the $h*t hits the fan Hyundai Battle Tanks or Navy Destroyers had G*D D@MN well better not be an option!!

That said I don't know that the "bankruptcy" that prevented GM and Chrysler from restructuring union contracts and legacy costs was the right thing to do. I'm glad they seem to be on the right course but their long term future is still anything but assured, but that can be said about any manufacturing business since our politicians will be more than happy to sell them out, like so many in the past 30 years!!

Don't forget that the article mentions that a major part of the profits came from sales to government! In other words, GM is being allowed to do what every other corporation can not do. That is include sales to controlled subsidiaries. With a 61% stake in the GM, the federal government is the owner and sales to the government should not be shown as income as the government is acting as buyer and seller in these transactions. Too bad the author didn't investigate such an obvious problem with the reporting. Something tells be the figures would look quite a bit different.

He's quitting with a very nice and generous severance package I bet. Get out while the money is still in the till before this company goes belly-up!

Not sure if people are aware of this, but GM is sending it's company to Mexico. I wonder how this is going to help out the people in America?

I am really surprised that there are so many anti union people around. Is the reason ignorance of the history of the United states? Do any of you know what it was like in his country before unions? If not go get some books on the history of this country from the peoples prospective and gain some understanding. A union is its members. The members are the workers. Did you know that a union is the most democratic system around and that it gives a voice to the workers? Employers and Corporations do not want unions because then theu can not do anything they want. The worker wants the union so that they are no longer wage slaves. Unions got us a 40 hour work week, It got us better wages and benefits. Mostly unions afforded us all a better way of life and a middle class.

I read the article and I'd like to know the real reason Whitacre is retiring?

not BPs fault????

I seem to recall tax cuts for the poor, too. 15% to 10% rate. Higher plateau for lower income people to NOT pay taxes. Increased child tax credits, higher earned income credit limits, etc......The fallacy of tax cuts only for the rich is a Dumbocrat talking point that has been sold by the guvment propaganda media, which is owned by Government Electric.

They only tell you what they want you to hear, all the good stuff happening is going on behind closed doors as they rob the Federal Reserves for themselves, and then bill it to the poor and middle-class Americans.

CEO Ed Whitacre is brilliant and we all need to learn from this article. It says that he's stepping down now, while the company is reporting great profits prior to it's IPO. What does this mean? It means that he realizes that the company looks as good as it will get and he's going to parlay his "sucess" now to get a better job (more cash) somewhere else. He realizes that all of the company purging and federal government(taxpayer) money is making GM look good now, while later it will come back to reality. If he's gone, it's not his fault.

Why would a CEO choose to step down if they are bound to massively benefit from the growing profitability of their company? They don't.......

Gamerk2---and all those of you unaware . GM CEO Ed Whitacre went on a national television ad and proclaimed GM had payed there loan back from PROFIT 5 years early to the American taxpayer. The entire ad was a lie and removed by the FCI 2 days later for elasticizing the truth. Even former Auto Czar Steve Rattner confirmed they were being dishonest in the claim. The 6.7 Billion dollar loan re payed 5 years early was paid with money given to GM upon exit of bankruptcy by the US Treasury dept ,some 16 billion dollars in exit funds of American Taxpayer funds . So in matter of principle GM paid back the 6.7 Billion dollar loan with Tax payer money . In other words they paid us back with our own money. It was also confirmed that GM had yet to turn a real profit as of April 2010. Obama and gang loaned GM some 60 Billion dollars of which 6.7 billion was to be re payed and the rest converted to common stock which = 61 % of company. GM's response to the scandal was," no one ever thought a year ago we could ever pay back anything" ! THIS ENTIRE BAILOUT WAS WRONG !. THIS COMPANY CAUSED IT'S OWN DEMISE AS THEY BUILD NOTHING BUT CRAP! Buy American -Buy FORD. GM is nothing but a huge conglomerate that has and is screwing the American people.

Chris,

"You're not just talking about GM, you are talking about millions of jobs and the total collapse of all car manufacturing in this country with resulting huge increases in car prices."

Really Chris? Car manufacturing would not collapse. If GM had gone under, without declaring Chapter 11 bankruptcy which it should have done in the first place, the void would be filled with other auto manufacturers. Those other auto companies would have absorbed all of GM's manufacturing capacity. Not only that but the GM workers, plants, and infrastructure would also be absorbed. Car manufacturing would not collapse. Ya think that the other manufacturers wouldn't buy up all the GM equipment and plants at bargain basement prices? You don't think that they would try to grab more market share? Pulease!

Hyundai can't be the face of U.S. car manufacturing Sven. The fact is we have to demand that our F**king SELL OUT POLITICIANS (of both parties) QUIT allowing whole industries to be shipped offshore. I support foreign owned manufacturing on our shores BUT NOT if it results in the COLLAPSE of our own manufacturing!! How many battle tanks did Hyundai make for us for WW II??

This was a necessary action,even if I would have preferred a more traditional bankruptcy that allowed GM and Chrysler to shed or restructure their crippling union obligations. A nation without a proper manufacturing base is a THIRD WORLD country which seems to be the goal of both of our sorry a$$ political parties when it comes to the selling out of our industries.

Lots baloney being "shared" here. Good thing few of you don't worry yourself about facts. Oh well - this sounds more like the paranoid therapy page than an intelligent discussion.

The bailout is working. Lots of decent GM cars on the road. The taxpayers will be repaid with profit - oops - you are supposed to hate this. I personally like profits. Most Americans used to as well. Now, they holler about anything just because they are told to - not because facts bear it out.

Hundreds of thousands still working because of the bailout. But you want them all unemployed too, right? That's logic for you.

Previous bailouts (New York City, Chrysler, the airlines) all went down with little or no comment. Suddenly this is so terrible. Why condemned now and not then? Please explain why no outcry for other bailouts?

Some pundit on TV or ranter on the radio or goofball tweeting is saying you should be angry with anything that happens right now. I suggest that we should cheer good news, and verify, but not condemn based on conjecture. Until you know the facts, don't "assume" there is a problem.

Too much negativity creates ulcers and rashes....and not much constructive thought or action. Too many spit wads being tossed for therapy...

Dorfy ---you are so smart ,how did GM pay back $6.7 billion dollar loan to taxpayers and where did the money come from ? Earn your credibility or shut up when you do not know what you are talking about.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE SOMEONE EXPLAIN THIS ONE SMALL PROBLEM I HAVE WITH THIS IPO,,,,,,

Whitacre said last week that the company is eager to sell shares in an initial public offering so it can end its dependence on the government and pay off $43.3 billion in bailout funds that were converted into a majority stake in the company.

HOW THE F**K DO WE WIN HERE????????

The GOVERNMENT bailout funds (which is our money) were converted into a majority stake in GM. Now GM is converting this ownership into stock to be sold as an IPO. We own these shares,,,,RIGHT? 60.8% of GM is We The People's,,,,RIGHT? So, How the hell do we make out on this GREAT DEAL when we are going to buy back the shares we already OWN??????

THIS IS LIKE THE DEPARTMENT OF REDUNDANCY DEPEARTMENT!!!!!!

If GM offers 300 MILLION shares at their IPO of whatever value, we tax paying citizens should all get 2 shares of GM stock before it goes IPO (assuming there are 150 million tax paying citizens). We shouldn't have to BUY anything. If they issue 600 million shares we should get 4 shares, and on and on. We The People own this company.

WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT!!!!!

They used OUR tax dollars to buy it for US to keep it out of bakruptcy. The ONLY way we can recover all of our investment into the bailout is if every share, or the equivalent of $43.3 BILLION DOLLARS is bought by investors from outside of our tax paying base. Basically we need to have this amount bought by foreign investors to make our money back. Otherwise we are paying for it twice in our mutual funds, 401k's or other investment vehicles.

RIGHT?

Bankruptcy early on would have been the better option. GM and the jobs would still be here, and fewer people would have lost money.

Everyone in power and everyone who understands finance knows this. Its the rest of you I worry about. WOW!

ScoMata

I couldn't agree with you more. All the people who talk about 'What else could he have done' and 'Should GM have just failed?' My repsonse is, they should not have been bailed out. They should have gone into bankruptcy first and then if needed gotten a loan. Everyone knew that the bailout would only be temporary, bankruptcy was inevitable. But This group in charge found it as an opportunity to take control and give power to the unions.

This fix will create more problems in the future.

Just because this man that's claiming to have made money for a company doesn't mean he should be getting more (big bonuses). Instead, they should use that extra money to pay back the Feds and to hire more people that needs a job. Giving this man millions of dollars in a bonus means lots of jobs that could have been made for people.

This is why America is so mesed up.

GM used additional Stimulus money to pay off the first loan from the government. Like using money you received from Mom to pay back a loan from Dad. Either way, the money came from you and I. Word out of Detroit is that the Obama administration was not very happy with Whitaker. Evidently, at an auto trade meeting last month, he said being taken over by the government has hurt or stunted GM sales. They need to get out from under the Obama motors tag as quickly as possible. So the word came down for him to look elsewhere. Also, he and some of the other execs. were not big proponents of the Obama peope pushing the green automobiles. A $40,000 electric mid sized vehicle. The only way they will sell any of those is with the $7500 tax right off. You can buy a more highly rated Ford vehicle of similar class for $24,000. Well, we will see.

Chunky Monkey

Trace Ed Whittacre's past, where he has been and who he has worked with. You might find some answers as tho why he is getting a great bonus for a quick exit.

Ray W

Very good information. Also, don't forget that GM has admitted the Volt will never make money or even break even.

Gee Whitacres! Where's my dividend check for bailing out the Great Mistake? You can be sure I'll be going out and buying one of those shi**y Volts for 45 grand! Not! If you take the UAW out of the equation, this car would really sell for under 30 grand!

Live to Ride,

Yet another highly "educated" poster! lmao

UAW employee wages & benefits account for 3% of vehicle cost. Let's just use a tiny bit of common sense here for a second, ok. Toyota pays about $2 less per hour than union shops pay...yet their vehicles are closely priced at union-made vehicles. Hmmm, funny how that works huh?! You should also research the difference in pay for the management of both Toyota & GM. GM CEO's make millions in salary plus millions more in bonus's, while the CEO of Toyota makes a modest cpl hundred thousand. And you think $2 an hour makes that big of a difference? Didn't they teach math at your school?

How much of this profit is related to the part that Gov Motors doesn't pay for warranty repairs, but is payed for by the tax payers (per BsO) how about the $250 mil they got for the junk Volt that goes a wopping 40 miles on a charge then switches to gas? and the tax payers are going to be hit for around $7 thousand to help sell them!!! how about the $362 mil + they have recieved this year from the tax payers (per bussiness report today) and it's easy to make a profit when you write off all your debt and tell the ones you owe to go to **** now they want you (us) to invest in them again? get screwed again? well all I can say is GM go to **** and nice job of cooking the books, must have learned from Congress

hardworkinwomen---- Your Volt is waiting for you at your local Chevrolet Dealer!

Whenever there is positive economic news, the right goes to whatever length necessary to twist it around and say it's bad. I can not believe how some people are so full of hatred for President Obama, they simply will not acknowledge any good news.

goFord

How much of this profit is related to the part that Gov Motors doesn't pay for warranty repairs, but is payed for by the tax payers (per BsO) how about the $250 mil they got for the junk Volt that goes a wopping 40 miles on a charge then switches to gas?

FYI, most people make round trips of less than 40 miles. The car is perfect for making shopping trips, and round trips to work and back.

Live to Ride,

I actually have a Pontiac Grand Prix that I absolutely love, so I'm not really in the market for a new car. It also wouldn't make sense for me to buy one considering I drive about 75mi a day round trip to work & back.

Of course you can't reason with facts. Is that really all you have for a rebuttal? It kinda sucks when facts don't sway your way huh?

I am so tired of hearing “Government Motors”. So before this whole thing gets started I want to lay down a few facts. There is virtually no major auto manufacturing company that does not receive some form of government assistance.

In the case of Volkswagen approximately 20% of that corporation is owned by the State of Lower Saxony. That’s sort of like Michigan buying 20% of GM, this is Government Motors in a very true sense.

Additionally, Japan had for a long period of time after WW2 aggressively prevented importation manufactured goods with high tariffs and a policy known as Rationalization of the Industry
The Industry Rationalization Promotion Law adopted in March 1952 marked the first implementation of the new government policy ... Through this law, the automobile, steel, machine tool, and electric communications equipment industries were designated as key industries that ought to be rationalized. The provisions of this law gave those industries tax advantages and also made low-interest government loans available to them. The cost reductions thus gained by the automobile industry, together with improvements in the quality of their product, allowed manufacturers to produce cars with export competitiveness.

http://www.jama.org/about/industry5.htm

And let’s not forget the folks you love to hate …France! Yes the French Government own a 15% share of Renault Nissan

The Financial Times reported today “The French government took steps to tighten its grip on partly state-owned companies to ensure they maintain factories and jobs in France.

Nicolas Sarkozy, French president, appointed a senior business figure to run a revamped agency responsible for government shareholdings. Jean-Dominique Comolli, deputy chairman of Imperial Tobacco, will act as commissioner for state shareholdings, reporting directly to Christine Lagarde, finance minister.”

The article goes on to say “.The state has stakes in several of France’s largest companies including EDF, GDF Suez, France Télécom, EADS and Renault.”

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8e142fb6-9f24-11df-8732-00144feabdc0.html

And don’t try to escape to Nissan or (Infinity) either

Signed on 27 March 1999, the Renault–Nissan Alliance is the first of its kind involving a Japanese and a French company, each with its own distinct corporate culture and brand identity, linked through cross-shareholding. Renault has a stake of 44.4 percent in the Japanese automaker Nissan, while Nissan in turn has a 15 percent stake (non-voting) in Renault.

The Koreans are no different in 1962 they passed a protection act to shield their auto industry as well you can look it up on Wikipedia. South Korea out right banned the import of foreign cars until 1988 (Hyundai began selling cars here in 1985). Today 99.3% of all cars in South Korea are made in South Korea.

You see what I mean, but here is the difference. Once GM does it’s IPO we as taxpayers will have no real ownership of GM at all.

Would I like it if none of these car makers ever received a penny of government aid…sure I would! Then it would be a battle of who builds the best cheapest… but it doesn’t work that way. Governments around the world are always going to seek the advantage by what ever means they have and as a country for us to survive we will have to meet them square on even it means resorting to tactics we don’t like.

But if you still want to bash Government Motors you can always scream at someone driving a VW or a Toyota or Infinity or a Hyundai.

No,God bless the tax payers who are footing the bill and have no choice when we have to bail their as..es out again, and don't forget to God bless Toyota for the f-up which helped any type of sales for GM.

I seem to recall tax cuts for the poor, too. 15% to 10% rate. Higher plateau for lower income people to NOT pay taxes. Increased child tax credits, higher earned income credit limits, etc......The fallacy of tax cuts only for the rich is a Dumbocrat talking point that has been sold by the guvment propaganda media, which is owned by Government Electric.

What a stupid comment. Talk about the dumb voter! I feel sad for our country's future with leadership like Obama.

Yes.

God Bless him for stealing the wealth of secured bond holders and giving it to unsecured creditors, insiders and UAW thugs.

God Bless him for ignoring the RULE OF LAW and intimidating legitimate owners into abandoning their property rights.

God Bless him for fulfilling the TRUE definition of fascism and establishing a government/corporate partnership that picks winners and losers at the expense of the private investor.

You'd have to be crazy to think that this 'profit' is real.
Just as real as when the GM CEO claimed to pay off a government loan with bailout money.

Why am i not surprised? With all that happened with Toyota, this was bound to happen. The US Government went against Toyota to help the Detroit automakers and this might prove it. Why does the Government release the preliminary findings of the NHSTA about the problems with Toyota vehicles just before the GM results. And you want me to believe that a company that was in losses for the last 6 years became profitable in a year on its own without any reason. How does that happen? The US government partially destroyed Toyota's reputation just like it did with Audi in the late 1980's. I owned a Toyota Camry before, i own a Camry and a 2010 Prius now. And i will always be a Toyota customer because i trust them unlike others.

GM is simply being propped up with tax dollars. It's like looking at a someone with a large trust fund and saying, "they're so successful". Lies, smoke and mirrors!!!!

What in the world does religion have to do with free market capitalism? Where'd that one come from?

Dave, be careful, people will hate you for making sense about the apparent influence of sky gods.

God Bless him for stealing the wealth of secured bond holders and giving it to unsecured creditors, insiders and UAW thugs.

I got news for you, GM was going bankrupt, with or without government assistance. And I note, the Secured Bond Holders shouldn't see a dime for running GM the way they did for so long. [Remember, they own the company]. After all, if you run the company into the ground, why should you profit off your failures? Or did that suddenly change in America?

God Bless him for ignoring the RULE OF LAW and intimidating legitimate owners into abandoning their property rights.

What intimidation do you speak of?

God Bless him for fulfilling the TRUE definition of fascism and establishing a government/corporate partnership that picks winners and losers at the expense of the private investor.

So, you would rather the entire auto industry collapse, which probably would have started a depression?

You'd have to be crazy to think that this 'profit' is real.
Just as real as when the GM CEO claimed to pay off a government loan with bailout money.

You're free to look at the SEC filing if you want; its public domain after all. Fact is, the GM bankrupcy did exactly as intended, and cut cost overhead.

As for the government loan payback, good move on GM's part to pay off the high interest loan using other funds; great business dececion that probably cost the Feds a few billion in interest, but a smart move non-the-less. Of course, this alone if proof why more oversight is needed on business, as this type of procedure should be made illegial.

Gamer,

The anti American, complaining posts about a venerable US Corporation making a strong comeback proves my point that even if a Doctor announced a cure for cancer, people would still post hateful reasons why it's a bad thing. Unbelievable (at least I used to think so).

Spenumatsa,

The US government went against Toyota because of their SUB-PAR quality standards in Japan. These standards have resulted in numerous (dangerous) defects that have had the need to recall millions of cars. You can't deny that Toyota had known of a life-threatening defect (even after a handful of deaths) and did not repair the problem in the timely manner. This is what happens in free-trade with no government regulation, companies will nickle and dime their product because the general public is too stupid to find fault or has been pre-conditioned to failure (i.e. limited time warranties).

Do not blame a government for protecting its citizens against foreign threats.

Releasing the NHSTA results just before the news does not have a large effect on GM quarterly numbers. Those numbers are spread out through 3 months not 3 days.

Yes a company can go from losing money to profitable in one year. It is called restructuring. GM shed most of its costly brands and only kept the profitable ones, it is only a shame that they had not done this earlier, (then again they only did this because Government made them-free trade did not).

I am sorry to hear that you are a Toyota customer however it seems like with your intelligence level it is only appropriate.

P.S. I don't have anything against Toyota per se, i have something against the lack of restrictions (quality control, working conditions etc) in the producer's main manufacturing headquarters. This goes to all companies, Auto industry or otherwise.

P.S.S. I am aware that Toyota has manufacturing plants in the U.S. and is subject to U.S. standards in quality control. I would trust those products much more than the imported ones. No they are not perfect, but they are of better quality.

Government is needed to make sure the big dogs don't get everything on their Christmas list and big dogs are needed to make sure the government doesn't get the same. In the mean time the little pups (90% of the population) just feed on the scraps.

Just pointing out that Tim H wants to put people in a box! Personally I do beiieve in a sky god but I also believe that it is not interconnected with GM's losses or profits, free-market capitalism or the price of tea in China!

God bless people for stealing, God bless politicians for ignoring their employers - the voter? I don't think so. Steailing is simply WRONG! How could God condone stealing and still be holy? Interesting.

Fascism is not establishing a mutually respectful relationship, it is I'm a benevolent dictator. When I pull a string, you jump. If you don't maybe I just won't destroy you, if that is more convenient for me.

How is I'm from the government and I'm here to help you any different? Yeah right, at what cost?

I'm sorry, but this "investment" in GM is not going to be profitable unless ALL of the money given to them is returned... and that was never the plan.

This was all merely a plan to allow every UAW worker to continue to pay their 2 hours worth of salary per month to the UAW in membership fees... thus allowing the UAW to donate to the Dems and to continue to fund their nasty advertisements for Democrat candidates that we are all SO da#n tired of seeing and hearing!

Nami, you sure threw the anti-american card into this one quickly. An argument can made that GM made a strong comeback but another argument can be made that all is not what it seems if you take the time to look under the surface which is not the same as sticking your head in the sand and believing what the man behind the curtain is telling you. GM found a cure for it's cancer but the downside is that it's going to sacrifice life out of countless others in order to keep GM alive and well!

Gamerk,

Since when do bondholders run ANY company? LOL

The "sky-god" reference is an observation. The political right is rife with anti-intellectualism. Half of the 2008 Republican Primary presidential candidates rejected evolution! Almost the entirety of the right equates the patently false ramblings of weathermen and disgruntled nut-jobs with a scientific dispute about global warming ( there is no dispute-it is happening and will seriously threaten our civilization as well as species). And this same movement embraces free-market ideology with a similar reason-free fervor. All policies espoused by the right are substantiated only by belief and fervor, and the magic of the free-market ( all evidence of this Great Recession/ 2nd Depression to the contrary).

I mean really, what does the right offer? More tax cuts? Where are all the great jobs Bush gave us when he dropped taxes for the wealthy and bankrupted the Federal budget? And other than saying "Fannie! Freddie!", how does the Right explain our economic meltdown?

By the way, I think it's obvious that, opposed to the sky-god of unrestrained corporate predation on the middle class ( oh, I'm sorry, the "free-market") the Righty devil is Obama.

Again, all reason-free emotional lunacy.

God bless our President for ignoring Republicans and polls and making a profitable investment in the American worker! Actions like the GM bailout will save American industry.

Are you serious? So the $88 billion they cost private citizens in the prior 5 years with a bankruptcy and the and the $43 billion they still owe the gov't in equity are erased by $2b they made this year?

If you gave me $131 and I showed you that I made $2, would you be excited? Really???

Funny, I was under the impression that this thread was specifically about GM quarterly profits and how those numbers came to be? I didn't realize it was about saving the world from those who personally believe in a god! And the way it works is anyone that chooses to put entire groups of individuals in the same box because they disagree with you on an issue, well....you give them the right to put you in their own boxes of their choice.

If you lost 88 dollars and I invested 43 more and ended up with 140, plus made 8 dollars a year in income, plus let 2 million American keep their jobs? Yes, I would be excited. Oh wait, I am excited. Except that half of America has its head so far up its rear it thinks cutting taxes on the rich makes worthwhile jobs.

Dave,

In this thread there is an awful lot of bias about how those numbers came to be. That bias is generated by BELIEFS, not reason. I think it's only fair to point out the bias.

By the way, ever since Newt and the Contract on America when a list of thirty words to be associated with " liberal" was recommended by Gingrich in 1996 that list including- " sick shallow steal selfish" oh and my personal favorite, "traitors," I am sensitive about putting people in boxes. I am a liberal. The Right Wing already puts me in a box. Sometimes they use language that makes this box look an awful lot like a coffin.

If you lost 88 dollars and I invested 43 more and ended up with 140, plus made 8 dollars a year in income, plus let 2 million American keep their jobs? Yes, I would be excited.

How do you end up with 140? An investment in equity is a liability, not an asset. You still owe the 140. It's not your money, just like the equity is not GM's. It's ours.

Dave proves that he doesn't undestand the issue or the history behind the goobermint takeover of GM.

Bondholders running the company? WTF?

Intimidation: We saw the Obama administration threaten the large institutional bondholders with public condemnation if they didn't acquiesce to the transfer of ownership from the bondholders to the UAW.

Dave thinks a real bankruptcy would've caused a depression. Pure ignorance.

News, Dave - GM would still operate under a REAL bankruptcy and would've come out stronger. Only, there was a good chance they would have been able to nullify UAW salary and retirement contracts and agreements. That means the generous UAW benefits would've been cut or eliminated, and no way was Obama gonna see that happen.

GM was STOLEN in what can be considered the greatest seizure of wealth in American history.

Maximum Bob, you are Maximum Deluded. GM would have continued operating just like Lehman Brothers did. Ooops, sudden lesson in Keynesian economics that even a student as dim as Bush learned.

Memo to yourself, you are so sensitive about putting people in boxes that you feel very comfortable putting others into boxes that disagree with you! I don't understand the logic? Is it really a surprise to anyone that a fair number of politicians from any side say discouraging things about the other sides? Not all of them mind you, I'm not going to put them all in the same box. See how that works! Some left-leaners are currently saying that if you're a conservative, then you are a racist. Well, I'm a conservative but I'm certainly not a racist and I'm not going to take those who make that claim seriously. That would be very thin-skinned of me and being stuck on what they say would be the equivilant of falling into their trap!

Hey Maximum Bob, this is Dave and I believe that you have confused my views with someone elses!

Dave, you really think the Left has put the same concerted well-funded effort to associate the term "Conservative" with "traitor?" You are right, I am thinn-skinned about when the right's intellectual leader ( says alot, there) and then-Speaker of the House, calls me a traitor. When the party leaders call liberals traitor, it means alot more than when some blogger calls conservatives racist.

Oh, and the Tea Party has alot of racists who participate ( I especially dislike the poster of Obama with a bone through his nose). The Left has simply pointed out racist statements like this, an notes is really doesn't seem to bother you people. So the " box" we put you in is that you are either unprincipled or racist. Which is a box you built yourself. Yay for you, you personally disown racism.

I wouldn't buy a GM car, or Ford or Chrysler, because of the union. The unions and their obscene pensions are what is wrong with this country. They should all fail.

I feel noting for the Gov't motors corp. and their losses. Everyone knows that all the bosses and union people did not loose one red cent..

Who would have lost IF GM failed...? quite a few people...

Who lost when GM got bailed out every taxpayer iin the United States...

Who lost when GM filed bankruptcy...?

Every single investor that ever trusted GM with one single dime of their hard earned money...

Who did not lose.......GM

The best thing that could have happened to GM would have been bankruptcy. The could have reorganized and gotten out from under those huge union contracts. But the Democrats could not let that happen. The UAW was one of their biggest contributors. So now they are pushing "Green" vehicles like the Volt. Very expensive and won't sell without the government supports and tax right offs. In 5 or 6 years, GM will be back in the same place. Labor costs including the legecy costs of the retired still have not been addressed properly. The labor cost of the Japanese and Korean manfacturers down South are lower.

No Son of a Gun,

A tiny bit of factual info for you to chew on. When you invest in any business, you risk losing your investment. Big rewards come with big risk. That's the name of the investment game. I've lost thousands in investments too & so have many other ppl but you don't hear them all whining. Why are GM investors any different?

Furthermore, there were many monetary & benefit changes for the UAW. Just a few, each employee lost $1.10 per hour (COLA), their health care went from being 100% covered, to 5 visits per family, per year with a $25 co-pay (that's 1 visit per person, per year if u have a family of 5). Every additional Dr. visit is 100% paid for by the employee. I bet even your insurance is better than that! Tier 2 employees make less than half of what traditional employees make, their medical benefits are less & they do not get a pension. This is by no means all the changes, but at least you get a good idea.

Do you want to guess what changes the Company employees had to endure? Initially they lost some of their salary, but that only lasted 3months until they all got their money back.

Additionally, GM did lose. Many ppl won't buy their products because of the govn't intervention. The bailout will tarnish GM's name for awhile to come. Though any smart investor will tell you, it's our tax money at stake, why wouldn't you support GM making a profit so we get paid back? I don't know, it seems like common sense to me!

See how fun it is when you actually have facts to discuss!

Haven't you heard? he thinks he is a God, and anyone that thinks they intend to pay back the buy out must have their heads up their ***

You heard wrong.
Maybe you heard it from another person that doesn't listen to Rush?

Rush has explained this a number of times and the tapes are clear that he NEVER urged people not to buy GM cars. In fact, he was proudly extolling the virtues of his GM SUV on his show.

But, then again, you didn't hear that because you don't listen to Rush and neither do the people who tell you what they heard.

Life would be better if we all listened to shouting fat men spew disinformation and bile.

Life will be better after November 2. Have a happy Thanksgiving.

Hey Tetra...perhaps we should just listen to skinny black men who can read a mean teleprompter and who always tell the truth?

Maximum -that is the MO of a lot of people on this site, they take what is presented as news as the whole truth. What is really informative is actually listening to the people the news media reports on and finding out what Paul Harvey used to say "the rest of the story."

Two days after the Palin video surfaced the major media figures took the first third of the video. I saw the whole video - they left out where the woman in question became less adamant and more open minded.

You are wrong. I've heard Rush BRAGGING about his GM SUV many times. But I have also heard him blast the federal tax subsidy on buying a Chevy Volt -- and he is right! Who in their right mind wants to pay $41,000 for a hybrid vehicle that can only go 40 miles on electricity and then must be powered by an old-fashioned STEEL block engine that requires premium fuel? This piece of junk is a mess pushed through by Obama and his know-nothing pseudointellectual and pseudoenvironmental friends.... and even with a $7,500 tax credit very few will be sold.

DB and Rick,

These guys are like the old REO song, "Heard it from a friend who, heard it from a friend who, heard it from another ..."

They don't listen to Rush.
They let others pretend to listen to Rush and tell them what to think.
Then, they act like they heard it and repeat it to others as if it were fact.

When challenged on the facts, they invariably skulk way without a correction.

LOL, he said you should buy them. After all, the American people own it now. Why not buy from yourself. Problem is, market forces are not driving what GM and Chrysler are making. The Democratic "Green" agenda is. Problem is the fossil fuel vehicles cost less and perform better. As long as fossil fuels stay cheap green automobiles will never make a major impact. Therefore, enter "Cap and Trade" which will bring huge increases in the cost of fossil fuels. However, it will also kill the economy and jobs.

You know, the headline's great and all, and the market might even go up 70-100 points, but tomorrow Secretary of Something Bob will stub his toe and it'll drop 165.72...

Actually, even with this "good" news, the Dow will drop 100 points today.

I agree that these cars look great.... BUT why is is that their most interesting designs are mere copies of ones made 40-50 years ago? LOL

I think its called retro?

It really is true that the quality and design of American car companies has improved tremendously, and it is good to see them selling well in a brutally competitive global market. We have a Ford and a Cadillac, and are very happy with them. Other countries produce beautiful cars, too, but my wife and I appreciate that we own cars that were mostly designed and built by employees whose wages were fair, whose wages were spent in the USA, and whose earnings were taxed to help pay for our Social Security. My wife and I have paid our share of federal taxes, and view the auto bailout as a successful and worthwhile investment. Profitable companies paying good salaries to Americans who are producing high quality products are what America needs more of, and it looks like the loans to GM are working. I question the sanity, patriotism and common sense of the people who claim outrage that the industrial heart of America wasn't allowed to collapse.

"fair" wages?
WTF are those?
Wages extorted with the help of government legislation and bureaucrats?
Wages (and benefits) that drove GM (and others) to the point of bankruptcy?

The UAW stole GM with the help of Obama. No way I'm going to support those thieving bastages until GM becomes a private entity with no government involvement. Of course, with the existing UAW contracts and wage/benefit obligations, that GM won't last long either.

GM will have to reorganize within the next ten years, government or not.

John S. Smith,

GM and Crysler went bankrupt. All this Obama-orchastrated quick-bankrupt mess did was prop-up the unions so that the UAW could continue to donate money to the Democrats and to fund "soft $" attack ads against their opponents. This was Stalinism at its best! A more typical reorganization would have kept the manufacturing backbone just fine... albeit one that was sustainable for 50-100 years, unlike this temporary band-aid.

Bob, you do realize that Toyota only pays line workers about $2 less per hour than GM does, right? Now if you wanna talk about the Corporate ladder, that's a different story. What company pays their CEO millions upon millions in salary plus bonus's for running a company in the red for 10yrs? I don't get a bonus for losing my company money....do you? Toyota, on the other hand, pays their CEO a very "modest" salary of a cpl hundred thousand.

Brooke, it's clear you have no idea how campaign contributions are paid for by the Union. Maybe before you spew incorrect information you should go ahead & research that. This is the internet after-all. Let me help you out...the Union as a whole doesn't actually contribute to any campaigns. What is contributed is a seperate allocated amt of money given by individuals in the UAW. Not everyone contributes to this V-Cap fund. It is an optional fund that many only give $1-$2 a year towards, if any. Union dues are never used for campaign funding.

Least we all forget that Bush started the whole Auto Bailout. Why is it always Obama's fault? Regardless of which Pres. had their hands in it because that point is moot anyway, since you know so much, what would you have done to save the economy? Ppl love to criticize but never offer any better, realistic solutions.

Its because the s**t worked then and it obviously works now. These are some of the best looking and most efficient cars I've seen in years. How many can talk truly sexy and fast for under 30k and with fuel efficiency as good as a 4 cylinder (if you keep your foot out of it:-). For many people who want "negative" hell the sun came up in the east upside down! Nothing is ever really "good" and everyone sucks but "them". There's medication out there for that condition.

If people don't make a decent amount of money they won't be able to buy anything other than the bare necessities. If no one can afford a new car once in a while, or a reasonably priced home, or anything other than just enough food to keep from starving we will become a third world country. Those union jobs you are moaning about enables folks to spend money to keep others working. More companies should pay their people decent salaries and have fair working conditions and benefits and unions wouldn't be necessary. Unions came about many years ago because of companies taking advantage of their workers. I believe we'll see another union movement in the next few years as people realize how unfair business has become to their workers.

Grandma Moses: No, we would just revert back to the America before Unions. That was when there were only two classes, the Elite and the poor masses. There was a samll middle class built by the elite to be a buffer between them and the masses. the majority of the people lived in abject poverty.

husker, after twenty years of running a manufacturing company which sells to the auto companies, that is just wholly incorrect. If the auto companies went through bankruptcy, the union contracts would probably be thrown out by the bankruptcy court. The UAW would be forced to sit down and renegotiate contracts which are more in line with what the foreign manufacturers are paying down South. Wages would be cut by about 20-25% but still a liveable wage. The real big change would do away with the burdonsome killer pension programs in favor of the typical 401K retirement programs like you or I and the automakers down South have. Bankruptcy would not have meant the end of GM or Chrysler. Those auto companies down South do not have unions but they sure have a successful middle class.

My husband and I work at a non-union auto manufacturing plant and we both know 2 things that few on here seem to know: A) We make what we make because of the unions and B) Who do you think buys the cars we, GM, Ford, Honda, and others make? Not to mention the boats, RVs, ATVs, TVs, and other "toys" that keep the economy going? Not the minimum wage earners! Its the MIDDLE CLASS! Making wages and working hours and enjoying safety made possible by picketing, and striking, and concession talks.

At least my brain has inputs. Yours is, I am sure, a hermetically sealed echo-chamber ringing with the same invalid talking points the Right has shouted since Hoover.

Oh, here's something I wonder if I can get into the chamber. You know how letting the top marginal income tax rate return ( by law) from 35% to 39.4% is "socializm?" ( By the way, do you get a new spell-check when you emigrate into Right-wing Virtual America)? Under Eisenhower, the top marginal rate was 91%. Was that Kumminizm? Do you remember that far, back when America worked?

Is there a wire that will get that into your box? Maybe try one up your rear. You know, where your head is.

Tim H I agree with you. The right have been told so many lies so many times they believe them. This president is for us the hard working middle class. The repugs are for big business always has and always will be. I think we have been heading in this recession since reagan and no president or congress did any thing to change the direction this country was headed.Why, because big business was fat dumb and happy. The rights plan since this president was sworn in has been to vote no on anything that would make him look good even if it was good for the country. Does anyone honestly think the mess we are in could have been solved in the 19 months he has been president. I did not. I want to give him a chance 2.5 more years with a congress that can work together. I think the republicans will gain ground this Nov. and I don't care as long as they work together to make things better. Its going to be years. These personal attacks on President Obama are embarrassing and un American. I don't mean disagreeing. Thats fine and its also how we get the best results, by disagreeing, presenting both sides and coming to the best solution. This is not working and I cant blame the president for that. One more thing while I am on my soap box Allot of people say government is to big that could be true but personaly I don't care how big or small it is as long as it works for us.

Tim H, let's see if I have you right. If we take 4% more in taxes from the people who are supposed to be creating more job. They will just love it. They will run out and create millions of more jobs. See the Nobel leareates at the Ivy League schools can write this stuff in papers and get awards from all their colleagues. But the problem is, it has never worked in real life. We did have a top rate of 91% and most of the truly wealthy sheltered income off shore. Everytime taxes are cut, the country sees major economic growth and the government receives more in growth tax revenue.

The bond/stock holders ran the company into the ground over the past decade, remember? Why should they expect to see a cent? Or do we now believe that owners of a company are entitled to see a profit if they run it from $60/share down to below $1/share over a 10 year period?

Or, have people forgotton that shareholders OWN the company?

Gamer2,

Bondholders have ZERO stake in running ANY company. They are merely a (supposedly) secured debtor of a company -- they basically loaned the company $ with the understanding that they would get all (or most, if a company was liquidated) of their $ back plus interest. The GM bondholders held a share of the DEBT of GM! By contrast, GM stockholders owned a share of the equity of GM -- and all stock buyers are told that they can lose every penny of their investment. The bondholders of GM were told for DECADES that they woud always be made whole should GM go bankrupt... in fact, this had been one of the primary tennents of our financial system. When Obama screwed the "fat cat" and "hedge fund" bondholders, countless grandmothers and pension owners of GMs debt ALL lost their money. Hedge funds never bought GM bonds...LOL!

Today one of the reasons that our economy remains slow is because businesses are afraid of making investments. They are afraid of making investments because Obama has done so many reckless things -- like forcing GM into bankruptcy without liquidating anything to pay the secured bondholders, like giving payola to teachers unions needlessly, like floating a recent trial balloon that Fannie and Freddie would pay-off all loans currently below water! IF the bondholders "ran" GM, I am quite certain that their obligations from GM would have been repaid!

Gamerk2's just about as educated on the matter as Dave.

Without the bondholders, GM would've tanked PERMANENTLY.
By law, the secured bondholders get 100% of what's owed before anything is divvy'd up.
They got screwed and the bad taste it left is paralyzing investment in American industry.

Gamerk2, do you know who some of the major stock trading holders are? They are pension funds from unions such as the UAW and AFL-CIO. All these union pension fund managers are interested in are profits.

Its gonna be a Loong time before electric car sales, catch up to electric golf cart sales...

Actually, yes. Its called "Reducing costs".

Just like they paid back their loans with borrowed money back in April.

Hey, if I can pay of my high interest loans by taking out a lower interest loan, I'd jump on that chance too. I fail to see why some people have a problem with a company lowering its long-term financial liability in this fashon...

Hmm, I can reduce costs all day long but if no one is buying my product I'm still not making any money.

Furthermore, they billed it (back in April) that they paid back their loans in full. Never mentioned they were using TARP money to do it. Funny how quickly they pulled that ad once the media got a hold of the story. You just keep drinking the kool aid merk. You're obviously one of those obama voters referenced above.

plenty of people are buying Gm's products..

Their low day supply on most of their vehicles proves this, They have multiple plants running 6 days a week, 24 hrs a day that are still not able to keep up with demand...

Are you really gullable enough to think GM isn't selling cars?

I have no problem with them reducing their cost by taking lower interest loans and reducing higher interest payments. I do have a problem with GM spending millions in advertising on TV boasting that they paid the loans off and the taxpayer hasn't lost a dime!

Gamer, they haven't reduced costs that much. They have had a lot of capital dumped in the company(Stimulus) in the short term. A lot of those costs have been under written by Green Energy Grants. When the costs for R&D, tooling, and new machinery are picked up this way, it is very easy to show a short term profit. However, the vehicle(Volt) must sell to get a decent return. At $40,000, even with government green energy rebates and tax rebates, it will be difficult sell. The Democrats thought the passage of Cap and Trade would drive up the operating costs of fossil fuel vehicles. Then the Green vehicles would be much more economical. However, at this point, the Cap and Trade Bill is a job killer in the short term. But that bill would be a hard sell to even the Democratic Congress.

DO you really think you were going to see any of this "bailout" money anyways?

Wether it was spent on GM or spent on something else, it was never going to put money in the taxpayers pocket...

Re 11.1 - I think the huge bailout was done poorly, but some of the UAW rank and File - the workers are paying taxes where as with out the bailout of GM they would probably be collecting unemployment.

GM should be Highly profitible, There bankruptcy wiped out existing debt, forced major UAW concessions.

The question is where will they be in a year or two. We should all hope they do well after all we own 60%.

Because of this little side story.

New jobless claims near a six-month high. Data show hiring remains weak, companies still cutting workers

Because it's not true bill! It's smoke and mirrors just like everything else obama does. There's no way in this economy that a car company is boasting record profits. Really, how naive does one have to be to not realize that?

These arn't "record" profits for GM...

They are their largest profits in years, but these are NOT EVEN CLOSE to record profits for GM...

IF ford can make a $2+ billion profit and GM is selling more cars then them how does this automatically make this all smoke and mirrors?

People need to take off their tin foil hats and have some common sense...

I love how people piss and moan about how GM needs to payback the tax payer and then when GM makes postive strides and does the right things to pay our money back all people do is piss and moan about how they are liars and theives..

It would be pretty stupid for GM to "cook the books" the day before an IPO filling, all of GM financials are in this filing, it will be seen by all tommorow, why lie about it to be proven wrong tommorow...

Why do you keep saying GM is making record profits? The article says that they made their largest profit in six years. This is not a record profit for GM. Also why is it so hard for you to believe that GM is turning a profit? Ford has been profitable durning this recession and they haven't benefitted from having to file for Chp. 11 protection or get bailout money. They also aren't operating under the protection of the government. With all these advantages, I'd be mad as hell if GM wasn't turning a profit.

What signs? The % of those unemployed or underemployed in over 16%... and this even excludes many who were unemployed for 2 years and have stopped looking.

Rick, you are a walking contradiction. You call to let GM fail and in the same breath whine about the unemployment rate. Guess it never entered your pea brain that if GM were to fail that number you so like to whine and cry about would get higher. So....i'm not clear on just what it is you want. You want a higher unemployment rate? Or do you just need something to whine about no matter how moronic it makes you look?

No, they did that through bankrupcy. The only thing the government takeover did was make sure GM had enough cash on hand to continue to operate.

Where did you get your degree in business and finance? Maybe the feds should have called you in for advice on how to solve the problems of the worst recession since the 30's.

the government pushed them into bankrupcy if you remember!

Interesting how Liberals castigate Big Oil when they make a profit, but when GM makes the largest one in 6 years (supposedly), its such a great thing for the US.

Could it be that if the clown in the WH is behind it, then it becomes a righteous event?

Liberals are SOOOOO hypocritical!

The government pushed them into bankruptcy? Holy mother. What color is the sky in your world. The government pushed them into viability and solvency.

Tim, I know you can read, but you cannot truly belive that THE GOVERNMENT was not the one that forced the bankrupcy by firing 2 CEO's till they got a YES man.

Where did you get your degree in business and finance?

Who needs a degree? I'm probably the only person in America that was smart enough to do some reaserach, come to the conclusion the housing market was inflated, followed the money and realized the banks got caught too much in housing, then shorted the markets and made a boatload of money in the process.

And to be fair, I DID post my conclusions here on Newsvine a few years back; I do believe most of the conservative establishment openly ridiculed me at the time, because the markets would SURELY continue to go up forever, because Supply-Side is infallable, yes?

the government pushed them into bankrupcy if you remember!

They would have gone into bankrupcy anyway, the point conservatives continue to ignore. The only difference is without government funding, they would have went into liquidation and ceased to exist, pushing the unemployment rate up to about 15% in the process. Then again, maybe that what conservatives WANT...

Interesting how Liberals castigate Big Oil when they make a profit, but when GM makes the largest one in 6 years (supposedly), its such a great thing for the US.

Lets see, Big Oil is a Cartel which has complete control of Supply-Demand, and rapes consumers worldwide while refusing to look at alternatives, despite the fact oil is fast running out. I'm sure that has NOTHING to do with our criticisms whatsoever...

Umm, yes I can believe it because it was true. You think GM was not about to enter bankruptcy? And in the version of capitalism that I would hope is the one we want, you fire CEO's when they run companies into the ground. And you don't pay them $40 million dollars to fill a seat.

Tim, I know you can read, but you cannot truly belive that THE GOVERNMENT was not the one that forced the bankrupcy by firing 2 CEO's till they got a YES man.

You run a company into the ground, you get fired. I fail to see the problem...

Secondly, GM was broke. The choices it had was simple:

1: Enter Bankrupcy and take government assistance to stay in operation

2: Enter Bankrupcy and move into liquidation

GM chose the first option; the Federal government didn't force GM to do a thing.

This administration had plenty of help from the previous one. Politicians of both parties are GUILTY of selling our industries out. While I may not agree with the details I fully support the decision to keep the last portion of our once great manufacturing sector afloat. A nation that can't build things is a F**KING JOKE !!! How many Tanks,Military Trucks or Battleships has MOTHERF**KING Wall Street ever built ??

just a citizen

I agree that their profit is because we helped them. But the alternative was inconceiveable! All those jobs lost plus the ripple effect that would have been felt across our country would have been devastating. People are/were WAY too flippant saying "Let 'em fail" and ingnoring the consequences.

Considering Tesla was driven up to $22/share, despite never having posted a profit, and only producing several hundred vehicles...

Wouldn't buy American but if I did I'd buy Ford. They still represent the American spirit. Hard work and individual responsibility. Conversely GM represents Obama's America. Line up with your hands out and I will provide. It's a sickening display of irresponsibility and helplessness!

My Silverado has been fantastic! Had a F150........No thanks....... Live and learn, Chevy from now on!

I just got rid of my F-250 after putting on 270,000 miles on it, original engine, never burn one drop of oil. My new F-250 diesel is just as good. Plan to get over 300,000 miles. I only want to pay for my cars once, not once at the dealership and another at the US Treasury.

"Conversely GM represents Obama's America." Wow. That's rich. Rape your working class until they can no longer provide for themselves & then blame the guy helping them out. Every single one of you is forgetting this mess was well underway while "Barry" was VYING for election. How the republicans manage to keep the poorest & the richest will always vex me.

Spend money to make money folks. One of the oldest business tenets out there. But that's forgotten now isn't it? Where were you when W was driving the US into the ground? Would have been great to hear the Republicans whining about the record debts in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 OR 2008. Nope. This started right as Obama took office. Never mind that we've had record debts since 1910.

You got it back. It went to local governments in the form of a sales tax (in most areas) they collected. It went to thousands of American workers who build most of the cars right here whether the companies are owned by foreign corps or an American company. Those are OUR people you would like to see let go. How unamerican can you get? They got pay checks and paid taxes instead of going on unemployment and sitting at home.

It went to mechanics and sales persons and dealers and all their families, who earned a commission or a pay check and paid TAXES on it. Then they went out and bought more stuff, and contributed to their local economy...and on and on.

You wind bags really are short sighted.

Who owns these "Built in America" car companys? You work and earn your money in America you should try to support AMERICAN companys. If not you are free to leave anytime you like. We are the only country that does not want to support are own people, makes me sick!

Phil. Are we supposed to allow the AMERICANS building Kias and Toyota's to go begging because of your shortsighted view of "patriotism." I still can't get an ALTERNATIVE from you people. You just want to moan whine and complain. Time for you to get back to that dill pickle you were weaned on. If you're not going to support your fellow AMERICAN WORKERS, who needs you?

The new Buick LaCrosse and Regal are built on the Opal Epsilon II platform, designed in China and Lucerne, includes a Korean or Chinese-made transmission and a German engine... and they're assembled in Germany and Shanghai. What makes this an American car again?? LOL

Full disclosure, they will soon be assembled in Kansas City and Ontario also... albeit with mostly European and Asian components. WHAT GOVERNMENT MOTORS???

PhillHill, you make a great point, however I urge you to do some research on the American Auto Industry. Before the transplant company's were building here & American's actually supported American Company's, we had more Auto Workers then, without the transplants, then we do now having the transplants. Common sense tells you, if more ppl are buying American vehicles, more Americans are needed to make them. Transplant company's don't employ near the amt American Auto Company's do. So, even if we sent the transplants packing back to their home country their current American employees would potentially be employed by the American Auto company's. We would re-open many of the closed plants in the US because American demand would go up.

hardworkinwoman

The reason the number of workers is down so far has nothing to do with transplants, it is due to robotics. Take a look at a 20 year old picture of an autoplant, then look at a recent picture. Also if you tossed all the transplants, they would do the same, and if you read the article, you would know that GM, like Ford has plants all over the world, that would be closed, would those jobs come here? Most likely not.

Rick, GM owns Opel ;)

Rick,you couldn't be more wrong. The only part of the LaCrosse the Chinese designed was the interior, the Epsilon II platform is a joint development between the U.S. and Germany. There may be LaCrosses built in China but not the ones for sale in the U.S. The Regal is an Opel Insignia (which the Lacrosse is based on) ,made in the same plant in Germany ,with the only significant difference being the grill. As for the Lucerne,I'm not sure which engine you think is built in Germany, because both the 3.9 liter V6 and 4.6 liter Northstar V8 are U.S. designed and built and the ancient 4 speed automatic is also U.S. designed and while I'm not sure where the plant is I know it's NOT in Korea or China !!!

Fred from NC

Sorry, but YOU are wrong! My neighbor (retired GM exec) took delivery of his about 2 months ago from GERMANY... would you like to see the sticker? It's engine and transmission are from Asia and Europe -- he opted for the 6 speed transmission which was at the time not being made in the US, and this is mated with a new engine also not made in the US. (Basically, the GOOD version of this car is European and Asian! LOL) The Lucerne I mentioned is the city in France... not the car... this is where Opal (or Vauxhall) has their design team who created the body styling... which site around the Chinese-designed interior. (I forget if Vauxhall or Opal is in Lucerne... as I filter out a bit of what my 70-something neighbor tells me.) LOL

Koppsammler,

Sure, GM owns Opal! But, if a Honda made in America is not American, than a GM/Opal made in Europe is also not American! You can't have it both ways! LOL

BUT, REALLY, are these your arguments that this car is AMERICAN??? TOO FUNNY!!!!!!

The Epsilon and Epsilon II are both joint ventures between GM U.S. and G.M. Germany (Opel,which has been owned by GM since early in the 20th century).

Opel's design is in Russelsheim Germany,and yes,much of the LaCrosse and all of the Regal (the first year of Regal production will be from there) were Opel's work, but does it really matter if it's a good car?? I wasn't arguing that it is an American car only that you are totally wrong about Korean and Chinese components being in it.

BTW If you think it's cool to hate on U.S. Manufacturing than you are part of what's wrong with this country, too many people no longer have any pride in being American and they would be wise to either find some pride or step back when those of us who are still proud step up or they're going to get stepped on!!

Careful, you make too much sense...

Its funny how quickly people forget that GM would have gone bankrupt and ceased all operations without government assistance; kinda blows a hole in the "wiping out investor" theory Republicans have though.

Then again, I did say from day 1 that we'd see a profit on GM, just like we did with Chrystler decades ago.

When a US company reports record profits under Obama, it is socialist propaganda.

Don't believe anyone used the word socialist George. What made you think of it?

Also gaymerk, how is chrysler doing these days?

George. Couldn't have said it better.

You conservatives are so predictable and hypocritical. When Reagan bailed out Chrysler, I did not hear about "Government motors".

Are you talking about the 1979 Chrysler bailout when Lee Iacocca was the CEO? You might want to check who was president in 1979. It was some peanut organizer.

FACTS will always come out!! Thanks Road warrior ,I was going to point that out to those distorted factual persons.

Ron,

Hope you are not a Lions fan. If you are, no offense intended in post 22-3. I hope they can get their act together with their new QB.

Are you talking about the 1979 Chrysler bailout when Lee Iacocca was the CEO? You might want to check who was president in 1979. It was some peanut organizer.

First off, it was a loan gurantee, not a Federal Bailout. Secondly, the US government made several Billion dollars on that 1.5 Billion loan, due largly to intrest. [Hence, why GM used other funds to pay of the Federal Loan: To get rid of the intrest payments].

EDIT

thirdly, Regan was more then happy to flaunt the profit made on the Chrysler loans after the fact; funny how a government profit can change perspective on things, no?

Also gaymerk, how is chrysler doing these days?

Not as well; I was actually calling for them to be let to collapse, due to past precident of mismanagement. That being said, the government stake in Chrsler is significantly less (only 8% stock ownsership, compared to 61% for GM) as well.

Of course, you can also use that very argument as evidence that (GASP) government can run business more effectivly then private business, based on the two different results for GM and Chrysler.

+1 George!

Right On! we should all get our "news" from Tingle up my leg Mathews,Keith Obnoxiousman,Ed whats his face, and Rachael Madcow they are the real truth sayers.

I flip to them every night for my laugh of the day-very funny-I highly recommend it

Love how you lefties attack Fox and Lindbaugh-drives you up a wall-because no one listens to the lefty stations

George,

I hate to let facts get in the way of a good rant... but....

The Chrysler bailout was in 1979. Our President was Jimmy Carter! LOL

http://uspolitics.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=uspolitics&cdn=newsissues&tm=23&gps=394_189_1241_558&f=00&tt=2&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.cato.org/pubs/pas/PA00Aes.html

George-295538 all of the old common stock and bonds issued by the Old GM are worthless - they have been wiped away. They are never going to be worth anything. The New GM is going to have an IPO Initial Public Offering I believe. If any entity was heavily invested in the old GM - They have already lost, it would probably be illegal to try to sell old GM stocks as anything more than historical worthless paper(Like Confederate money).

Paul,

George is still living in 1979... when Reagan was President. ;) If he wants to hold onto his worthless GM stock, we should just exit quietly. The men in the white suits will handle it....

1: Loan Guarentee, not a bailout, which was paid back ahead of schedule, with interest

2: George probably assumed Regan was in office, especially since he was the one who held a press conference claiming success when Chrysler paid back the loans early with interest, resulting in a Federal profit. Regan sure was quick to take credit, now wasn't he.

Paul-835738

Paul, if you read the article you will see that the Bond holders of the old GM, hold almost 10% of the new GM, so no they have not lost it all. Plus they may still get something in bankruptcy court as assets get sold off.

Hey, Republicans were the one's which re-did the bankrupcy laws back in 2005; go have a talk to them about why Business can do what private citizens can't. As I recall, democrats like me were screaming from the hilltops during that debate about the obvious hypocracy of the situation.

OK jmac. What's your Plan B? What did you expect the government to do, allow the American car building industry to collapse so it's bones could be picked clean by foreign nationals? These are the same companies, remember, who contract and build a huge amount of our war materials for the Defense Department. Should we have let that fall into the hands of foreign governments? You know so much, tell us.

Should Obama have simply allowed hundreds of thousands of workers to be dumped onto the unemployment rolls so we could pay them to stay home? Go ahead smart guy. You and your friends here have ALL the answers. Let's hear 'em.

They believed a company such as Tesla (which has YET to turn a profit, I might add) would step in; after all, thats how the free markets work!

...hey, if you say it enough, it might come true...

As a socialist my point is to show the hypocracy of capitalism!There isn't a single business on Wall Street that didn't benefit from the bailout because all the companies who received Federal money, owed money to someone else who owed money to someone else etc. If they had collapsed then they all would have gone down with them. A Republican President and his federal appointees at the federal Reserve etc. realized this and so began the bailout in the first place!

Even before the financial collapse, the biggest beneficiaries of the Federal Governments largess is private business. Boeing, McDonnell Douglass, Raytheon, GM, Ford, IBM, any hospital in your town, any doctor in your town and the tens of thousands of small business that rely on those companies for their bread and butter etc etc.

Republicans asking for an end to Federal Government spending is like a turkey asking for an early Thanksgiving!

As a socialist I sincerely believe in the bailout despite the fact that I realized that it was propping up a system that I believe is corrupting democracy! The problem with us lefties is that we don't want our fellow man suffer! It is, and always was, the fatal flaw in the liberal left!

Perhaps with a good old fashioned collapse the real capitalism would step forward and flourish.Too many backroom deals, smoke and mirrirs too know what is real and what is bs.

Well yes, but then Obama would have been blamed for that. Its a shame the collapse didn't happen a year sooner in that regards. I figured from day one Obama would get screwed due to economic conditions, hence why I was a Clinton supporter. [Nevermind that Democrats have a serious problem: Who follows Obama in 2016? Another reason Clinton made more sense...]

I'm not sure that 'real' capitalism ever existed without some Government acquiescence ...and maybe if it did we wouldn't like what we see! Before the second world war men would fight for work on the docks when work tags were thrown out in the crowd at the dock gates. Do people really want to go back to this?

ALL the benefits that we take for granted in our society; health benefits, vacations, a living wage, were never given freely by business! Unions, with the help of left wing governments fought and won all of these things! And we ALL benefit today from that fight!

How soon we all forget!

jmac,

These people forget everything. Apparently, workers earn 1/300th what the CEO makes, not because the CEO and his cronies are the one's setting the salaries, but because of the highly refined science that perfectly matches productivity with pay.

Then, it turns out, if all profit led by gains in productivity are distributed only to CEO's, cronies, Wall Street ( with some dribbles to the stock-holders only up till 2000), when the consumer-middle class economy collapses, it has something to do with Obama being a "Socializt".

They remember nothing. They learn nothing. The Right is a religion, and religions are dangerous if you use them to make policy. This is something our Founders knew when they sought the separation of church and state. But now the Right won't remember that either, after Texas Board of education removes Thomas Jefferson from textbooks.

Remember teh days you brought a stock for the Dividend? Seems like ages ago...

Remember, you own stock, you own a part of the company. So why should the Dividend be smaller then the bonus one of your employees (The CEO) gets?

CEO's have largly realized that because coorporations sell so much stock to so many individuals, its impossible for the shareholders to do anything, so they award themselves salaries/bonuses, screwing the shareholder in the process. Imagine if that $500 Million bonus was handed out as part of the dividend payment...

Ah, the unending Laissez-Faire debate. Seems like this has been going on for...350 years now? I often wonder if humans would ever learn if they lived longer. It doesn't seem like 80 years is enough. Capitalists are so quick to point out how socialism can't ever work. I had a social studies teacher that always said, "Socialism is Great, until you plug people into. Then it gets messed up". Well the same holds true with capitalism. Capitalism is great, until you plug people into it. We need a delicate mix, which is something the Right & Left may never learn.

The way to a happy marriage is through compromise. Extremists don't compromise.

Who is president now pill and what's the topic?

I just didn't want your view of recent history to be too short or too narrow. You conservative pukes are living in a big glass house to be tossing stones. Get it yet?

Obama will be moving to Detroit in 2013, and I am not talking about the CEO of Gov't Motors. He will be the new coach of the Detroit Lions. I can the excuses now.

• Reporter: Why is your team 0-5?
• Coach Obama: I inherited the mess from Jim Schwartz.

Five weeks later:

• Reporter: Why is your team 0-10?
• Coach Obama: Uh, uh, it's Rod Marinelli's fault.

Six weeks later:

• Reporter: Why is your team 0-16?
• Coach Obama: Let me be clear. It's Dick Jauron's fault. You know, things could have been much worse. Uh sorry guys, I have a tee time.

Stick to your day job roady. This was really boring.

PillHill,

It got your attention, didn't it? I bet you listen to Rush Limbaugh, too.

Ha! Ha! very clever. The fact of the matter is when new team managers take over it does take several years or more to rebuild the team and reverse the losing trend.

Seriously? Its not like Obama can just wipe away the deficit and economic conditions he inherited. I said from year one that he gets 2 1/2 years to address the economy before I come to a decision. [Right now, he gets a C, although if employment improves, which it looks like will happen early next year, he gets bumped to a B].

As for the deficit, I've yet to hear a single Republican name a single program to be cut. Meanwhile, Obama has already put a spending freeze on discretionary spending (40% of the budget). As for the other 60%:

20% is payment on the debt [untouchable]

20% is Medicare/Medicaid/Etc. [During the healthcare debate, Republicans slammed Obama for cutting this, so obviously, we can't touch this spending]

20% is Defense spending [Obama is getting slammed for cutting this too...].

So, if Obama freezes discretionary spending, can't cut defense, and can't cut medical overhead...what exactly do you want him to do? Hypocracy much when it comes to the deficit?

gamerk2

The biggest entitlement in history and the biggest jobs killer as a starter, ObamaCare. Let's not confuse debt with deficit. Debt is what is already in the books as unpaid bills. Deficit is what you are currently spending above what you take in. Again, Obama is scheduled to increase healthcare cost by $310 billion per the CBO, not reduce it as we were told. Almost a trillion in "stimulus" with no results. And Obama wants more. I give Obama two years just as I gave Reagan two years to turn up jobs. What I saw during Reagan's first two years was tremendous activity on the front end of economic growth, meaning companies placing orders with engineering firms to draw up plans for the expansions. Contrast that to Obama's first two years where engineering firms are still cutting staff (read side article on the new jobles claims on MSNBC). I hope I am wrong, but I see no hiring come 2011.

Again, Obama is scheduled to increase healthcare cost by $310 billion per the CBO, not reduce it as we were told.

Half-truths are dangerous. What conservatives forget is that cost is still CHEAPER then the cost of doing nothing. Secondly, factor in long-term savings. Its an investment: Make americans healther, and over time, healthcare costs drop.

Almost a trillion in "stimulus" with no results

We were lossing 750k jobs net a month January 2008. We lost 100k net last month. A 650k/month decrease in job losses is hardly nothing. Again, short term spending. Conservatives are making the same mistakes they made back in 1936, when they forced FDR to address the deficit/debt, leading to a second collapse of the markets.

What I saw during Reagan's first two years was tremendous activity on the front end of economic growth, meaning companies placing orders with engineering firms to draw up plans for the expansions.

And increased the deficit tremendously in the process, increasing teh size of the deficit by a total 20% his first two years. Nice of you to admit that spending like a drunken sailor produces jobs though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

Contrast that to Obama's first two years where engineering firms are still cutting staff (read side article on the new jobles claims on MSNBC).

Again, we went from loosing 750k/month net to loosing 100k/month net. And even then, the private sector has ADDED jobs the past 6 months, and every business benchmark points to increased hiring in 2011. Of course, if you let Obama increase the deficit by 20%, I'm sure he'll be able to outperform Regan in the process.

(And before a snide comment that he already has increased the size of the deficit, the 2009 budget, the one with the 1.8 Trillion shortfall, was a Bush budget; the first year of a new presidental term's budget is created by the previous terms administration. From the 2009 budget, the deficit has actually shrunk a bit.)

gamerk2

What does the spending and deficit under Reagan have to do with private engineering companies going into high gear for the upcoming expansion? But since you brought it up, Reagan had a Democrat Congress passing all the spending bills, not unlike the deficit escalating under Bush once the Democrats took over in 2006.

You talked about the decrease in the rate of job loss once Obama took office, but you did not answer why all the engineering offices are vacant, places where all construction and economic expansions begin. If these office begin filling up today, it will be no earlier than 2012 before the plans hit the ground. In the meantime, NO JOBS.

Reagan had a Democrat Congress passing all the spending bills, not unlike the deficit escalating under Bush once the Democrats took over in 2006.

Actually, the Seante was Republican for most of Regans term. Secondly, you're free to look up all the budgets proposed by Regan year by year, and try to explain the increased spending in each budget, or the long-term effects of the tax cuts for the rich has had. Regan spent more then any other President while cutting taxes on the rich, and he's the primary reason the deficit is still so bad.

EDIT

I also note, a lot of the reason for teh increased deficit under Regan was the increase in defense spending (up to 10% GDP). And I also remind you, its the REgan Administration that coined the pharse "The deficit doesn't matter".

Another point on Congress: Following WWII, every President, regardless of party reduced the yearly deficit, without fail. Democrats controlled Congress every single year during that period. The minute we get Regan and Supply Side though, we start getting 10% yearly increases to the deficit. Coincidence?

Can anyone tell me one fiscally conservative thing Republicans have done since Regan came to office anyway?

You talked about the decrease the rate of job loss once Obama took office, but you did not answer why all the engineering offices are vacant, places where all construction and economic expansions begin. If these office begin filling up today, it will be no no earlier than 2012 before the plans hit the ground. In the meantime, NO JOBS.

Odd, you make teh assumption that construction drives teh economy, which hasn't been true for a very long time. Construction ISN'T going to recover, something people need to come to grips with. It will be decades before the glut of building on the market clears out, simply because of how large the bubble was allowed to grow.

As for engineering, I assume you refer to structual engineers. In that case, because of the downturn in construction (see above), there is a downward pressure on engineering posititons. As the construction market improves, so will the market for structual engineers.

I do find it funny how quickly you ignore the data i provided, then focus on one area that isn;t doing well (for somewhat obvious reasons I might add). The private sector has been improving for some time, and every indication points to a general improvement through 2011. And as conservatives LOVE to point out, private business employees a majority of americans, and drives the economy.

The private sector has been improving for some time, and every indication points to a general improvement through 2011.

gamerk2

The top economic adviser quits while things are getting better?? You must have also missed the article about three weeks ago where a host of economic experts were saying the unemployment rate will linger around 9.5% through 2011 and we won't return to the Bush rates of 4.5%-5% until 2015. Engineering is more than just structural. You have chemical, electrical, mechanical, piping, etc who design and specify equipment for add-ons to existing facilities and buildings. How else can you have new jobs if there is no place to put the equipment and the employees? You can choose to ignore it, but there is zero activity on the front end, and it is all because of the uncertainty generated by this president. Why do you supposed Obama is running around the country this week telling businesses that he is not anti-business? If he is truly the friend of businesses, he wouldn't need to tell them.

You must have also missed the article about three weeks ago where a host of economic experts were saying the unemployment rate will linger around 9.5% through 2011 and we won't return to the Bush rates of 4.5%-5% until 2015

You mean that opinion piece on MSN Money? I can easily produce a few opinion pieces that shows economists predicting a general drop in unemployment through 2011. I'm basing my predictions on business plans to increase hiring of permanent/long-term postitions, which is an indication of increased hiring. If the private sector is gaining jobs, and if the private sector drives the economy, logic follows that unemployment will gradually drop as the private sector improves. (I now note how quickly you changed topics away from the improvement in the private sector again :D)

How else can you have new jobs if there is no place to put the equipment and the employees?

I really hope you can see the flaw in your arguement. Because business laid off employees during 2007-2009, there is little need for structual expansion of buildings, as the previous positions need to be re-filled. Likewise, because of a glut of buildings on the market, abondoned due to the collapse of real estate, there is little need for new construction. As such, you can have increased hiring without needing to create/expand facalities.

gamerk2

You need to be on Obama's economic team. You seem to have all the answers. Forget about Larry Summers who is only credible adviser remaining on Obama's team who was the brains behind the booms under Reagan and Clinton. He advocates the dreaded TC word. Tell me something. Why did one of the largest alternative energy companies in the US, Lurgi Inc, lay off most of its staff in 2009 and still not contemplating rehiring any time soon? I know because I have been in contact with them. If any area that should be optimistic about the Obama economic plan, it would be green energy companies, wouldn't you think?

Note the changing of the topic again; now that I counter-argumented his initial points, he feels the need to change topics, focusing instead on one company and trying to use that as an example for the entire US economy.

Given the explosion of "alternative energy" companies in recent years, I figure a majority will be bankrupt before long, as there are too many compnaies fighting over too small a prize. Simmilar to the .com bust really; you have a lot of companies chasing over something new, that will never turn a profit in the end. The few that survive will become major players though...

(I could go on a VERY long rant about how idiotic america is going about implementing alternative engeries; Solar Power Plants? Are you kidding me? Per-unit solar arrays make far much more sense, cost wise and size wise...)

Oh, BTW, would you have guessed I was a Nixon Republican? I left the party after Republicans jumped off the fiscal cliff under Regan. (Even if they hadn't, I'm Socally Liberal, so I probably would have left by the late 90's anyways...). Kenysian economics worked without fail for over 35 years, and until America abondons the idiotic principles Republicans have put forward (Low taxes on the rich and business to promote growth? 20% of our wealth going to defense spending? And people wonder why we are broke?), the deficit will continue to grow out of control.

Kenysian economics are simple: As the long term economic cost of a recession is so high, it is acceptable to temporarilly go into debt to end it quicker. After economic stability is resored, you can begin to reduce spending and pay off the debt that was added. Of course, this assumes you have the ability to spend vast sums of cash, which is impossible at our current debt load. As such, we can't spend enough to end the recession outright, like the rest of the world has done, so we get another year or two of recession before we can even address the debt issue...hence why people like me went ballistic over Regans spending/taxation practices.

Given the explosion of "alternative energy" companies in recent years, I figure a majority will be bankrupt before long, as there are too many compnaies fighting over too small a prize.

gamerk2

Small prize, hmmm. I thought green energy will power the 21st century. Anyway, I'm outta here. See you in 82 days. The voters will speak.

Straw men. That's all they have. Keep it up gamerk2. They've nothing but koolaid on their side.

Small prize, hmmm. I thought green energy will power the 21st century

It will, but not the way its being pushed. Solar power plants? Ethonal? Are you kidding me? Building should use per-unit solar arrays, vehicles should use hydrogen fuel cells (which NASA developed in the 60's for god's sake; hardly new technology). Of course, the power co's will NEVER let them be marginalized in such a way, and no oil co will ever front the infrastructure costs of setting up a Hydrogen based refueling system, so it will take a few decades for people to realize how illogical their current solution is.

Trust me, I can go on a multi-page rant on this topic. :D I'm off for tonight myself.

LOL Bravo game. The all mighty Road warrior couldn't keep up and did what the crazy right is famous for. "I'm out of here" LMAO

Shellie, I'm back. What do you want to talk about?

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100050412/the-stunning-decline-of-barack-obama-10-key-reasons-why-the-obama-presidency-is-in-meltdown/

Come on, Shellie, the court had decided cheerleading is not a sport, but debating is.

Gm employs FAR larger numbers then 100,000...

Just an FYI

I agree Eric! I would rather that out Government bail out a car manufacturer than any Wall Street bank. Car companies produce a product and employ hundreds of thousands of people when you account for all the dealerships and 'satellite' companies around them. Wall street banks don't actually produce a single widget! In fact what the collapse of the market has shown is that all the so called 'wealth' that they produced over the last ten years was nothing more that passing the same moeny between them whilst all taking a cut along the way. The profits they posted were illusionary. The Financial Times of London estimated that ALL the profits posted in the previous decade were lost in the first six months of the recession! The books have now been balanced at the taxpayers expense and the debt is now owned by us, the taxpayer. Now if that isn't welfare then I don't know what is!

Socialize the losses privatize the profits is the name of the game and always has been!

If you think 103,000 is a lot more than 100,000 you are correct hockeyguy.

GMNA (GM North America)
103,000

GMIO (GM International Operations)
57,000

Adam Opel GmbH (Europe)
47,000

Total number of employees
207,000

They will some day soon employ more robots than people.

He didn't say NA, he said GM in total...

I would call 200,000 FAR more then 100,000.... would you not...

The correct number is closer to 250,000...

What the H... are you talking about.