Chrysler Pays Off Government Loans

[crazyal]

So the fact that Chrysler still owes the government $2 billion doesn't count?

 

[dave1949]

So the fact that Chrysler still owes the government $2 billion doesn't count?

The government holds a 6.6% stake in Chrysler for which it paid $1.9B is what I get from the article. It is not a loan and is not owed.

Eventually, those stocks will be sold to private investors for some amount of money. Whatever that amount is less than $1.9B, will be peanuts compared to what would have been lost, or compared to the subsidies handed out to the oil industry every year.

I agree with Raspy, look at the bright side of the situation.
Dave.

 

[deerefan]

Better yet, imagine America without the big 3 and the horsepower wars. How boring. We would have nothing to argue about. Imagine arguments over fiats and opels and yugos. Thank god they are still around.

 

[riptides]

Better yet, imagine America without the big 3 and the horsepower wars. How boring. We would have nothing to argue about. Imagine arguments over fiats and opels and yugos. Thank god they are still around.

hah.... I just had a friend in from Italy. The cars over there, especially with the diesel/turbo technology put us to shame.

 

[MoKelly]

The US government has no business using taxpayer money to decide what private sector companies should live or die. It is just plain wrong.

MoKelly

 

[Diamondpilot]

The US government has no business using taxpayer money to decide what private sector companies should live or die. It is just plain wrong.

MoKelly

I could not agree more but it was done and we all know why.... And if you think it was to save jobs I have a bridge to sell you.

I am glad they got paid back. It will all be for nothing if Chrysler does not pay back the loan they now have. I hope they do well and get it paid off so WE don't get stuck with it again.

Chris

 

[dave1949]

The US government has no business using taxpayer money to decide what private sector companies should live or die. It is just plain wrong.

MoKelly

The US gov't has an obligation to the general welfare of citizens--most of whom happen to work for corporations. Tax dollars are one of the few mechanisms available to promote general welfare.

What's 'right' is what benefits citizens and what actually works, which results in keeping our country strong. Why else would there be an elected government - to satisfy a political theory? Can't eat theories or pay bills with them.

In this case citizens benefited from the governments use of tax dollars. We all benefited, and saved tax dollars, for every job and satellite business saved by saving Chrysler because it was done at a very low cost.

As far as which private business gets saved or not, I don't doubt there was some sort of financial evaluation+politics involved that looked at what is possible and what is not, or who has the better chances, or who is willing to accept the conditions. Maybe not morally perfect, but it is the way it works.
Dave.

 

[MoKelly]

The government bailout of inefficiently run companies that cannot compete in an open market does not save any jobs. How many new jobs at Ford or banks or other businesses that would have been created in a free market were destroyed because the US Government propped up the ineffective management at GM, CitiBank, Goldman Sacks, etc.?

Either you believe in free enterprise or you don't. You can't be half-pregnant. It is that simple ... IMHO.

MoKelly

 

[dave1949]

The government bailout of inefficiently run companies that cannot compete in an open market does not save any jobs. How many new jobs at Ford or banks or other businesses that would have been created in a free market were destroyed because the US Government propped up the ineffective management at GM, CitiBank, Goldman Sacks, etc.?

Either you believe in free enterprise or you don't. You can't be half-pregnant. It is that simple ... IMHO.

MoKelly

I believe in free enterprise as a principle, but show me a successful country that functions purely as a free enterprise system. It isn't as simple as you say in reality.

Sometimes practicality takes over, such as when the global economy is going rapidly down the tubes from an overdose of free market-ism. That doesn't mean we've abandoned principles.

No jobs at Ford when nobody has money to buy cars. They would be laying off and shutting plants, not hiring.

Oh well, this is getting too political. You go last :laughing:
Dave.

 

[MoKelly]

I believe in free enterprise as a principle, but show me a successful country that functions purely as a free enterprise system. It isn't as simple as you say in reality.

Sometimes practicality takes over, such as when the global economy is going rapidly down the tubes from an overdose of free market-ism. That doesn't mean we've abandoned principles.

No jobs at Ford when nobody has money to buy cars. They would be laying off and shutting plants, not hiring.

Oh well, this is getting too political. You go last :laughing:
Dave.

Dave - No problems. This is why I love this forum. All ideas are welcome and helpful.

MoKelly