Obama administration predicts $30B loss on auto bailout

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • BloodEclipse

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 3, 2008
    10,620
    38
    In the trenches for liberty!
    detnews_printart.jpg

    [FONT=arial, helvetica]
    [FONT=verdana,arial]December 8, 2009[/FONT][FONT=verdana,arial]http://detnews.com/article/20091208/AUTO01/912080414[/FONT]

    [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Obama administration predicts $30B loss on auto bailout[/FONT]
    [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
    DAVID SHEPARDSON
    Detroit News Washington Bureau
    [/FONT]Washington -- The Obama administration will tell Congress Wednesday that it expects to lose about $30 billion of the $82 billion government bailout of the auto industry.
    Gene Sperling, senior counsel to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, confirmed in an interview late today that the administration's forecast is that it will lose $30 billion on its auto investments -- but that's down from an earlier estimate of $44 billion.
    "The real news is the projected loss came down to $30 billion from $44 billion," Sperling said, noting that auto sales have improved ahead of what many analysts had forecast. The administration still holds out hope that if things improve, the administration could still recover more.
    Saving General Motors and Chrysler saved hundreds of thousands of jobs, President Barack Obama said today.
    "It was right decision then and the right decision now," Sperling said, calling it a "courageous decision by the president" to give the two automakers a "rebirth even though he knew it was not going to be politically popular."
    The estimate -- the first public accounting of losses connected to the rescue of General Motors and Chrysler -- is in line with what the Government Accountability Office, the Troubled Asset Relief Congressional Oversight Panel and former auto czar Steve Rattner have suggested.
    The Treasury Department has loaned $50 billion to General Motors, and swapped all but $6.7 billion of it for a 61 percent majority stake in the automaker. In order for taxpayers to be repaid fully, GM's stock would have to be worth far more than current estimates when the company goes public as early as next year.
    GM chairman and CEO Edward Whitacre Jr. said that GM will make a $1 billion payment of its outstanding loans on Dec. 31 and plans similar quarterly payments. In a Web chat with reporters today, he said the company could opt to make a lump-sum payment.
    The administration forgave much of Chrysler's $12 billion in government loans. Fiat SpA, which owns 20 percent of Chrysler and controls the company, must repay $6 billion of the loans before it can acquire a majority stake in the automaker. It can get 15 percent by meeting three benchmarks.
    The Treasury Department has also injected $13.5 billion into auto finance company GMAC and now owns a 35.4 percent stake. It is not clear if the government predicts it will lose any of that stake.
    President Barack Obama defended the rescue of the auto industry at a speech on the economy today.
    "We also took steps to prevent the rapid dissolution of the American auto industry, which faced a crisis partly of its own making, to prevent the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs during an already fragile time," Obama said. "These were not decisions that were popular or satisfying; these were decisions that were necessary."
    Obama has noted that the bailout was deeply unpopular and not something he wanted to do.
    "I didn't run for president to pass emergency recovery programs or to bail out banks or to shore up auto companies," he said Saturday during his weekly radio address.
    The administration's report to Congress will disclose that the costs of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program will shrink by at least $200 billion below the projection released in August. Obama wants to tap some of those funds for job creation and to pay down the deficit.

    Didn't Obama tell us, that the taxpayers stood to make money from this deal?:dunno:
    [/FONT]
     

    antsi

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 6, 2008
    1,427
    38
    Saving General Motors and Chrysler saved hundreds of thousands of jobs, President Barack Obama said today.

    Forever? Will GM continue to be viable, and all those folks remain employed until they retire? Will the salaries they earn ever add up to the total amount we spent on the bailout?

    I would really like to see someone break down how much we spent on this bailout versus how many jobs were saved at what salary times how many years.

    I would not be all all surprised if the math adds up to be wildly ineffecient; for example that we spent $500,000 to save a $75K job for 2 years before that person got downsized. I'm guessing it would have been cheaper just to let GM crash and give relief money directly to the laid off folks.
     

    6birds

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 15, 2008
    2,291
    36
    Fishers
    Forever? Will GM continue to be viable, and all those folks remain employed until they retire? Will the salaries they earn ever add up to the total amount we spent on the bailout?

    I would really like to see someone break down how much we spent on this bailout versus how many jobs were saved at what salary times how many years.

    I would not be all all surprised if the math adds up to be wildly ineffecient; for example that we spent $500,000 to save a $75K job for 2 years before that person got downsized. I'm guessing it would have been cheaper just to let GM crash and give relief money back to the folks who paid it in taxes.

    Fixed that for you.
     

    dross

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 27, 2009
    8,699
    48
    Monument, CO
    Forever? Will GM continue to be viable, and all those folks remain employed until they retire? Will the salaries they earn ever add up to the total amount we spent on the bailout?

    I would really like to see someone break down how much we spent on this bailout versus how many jobs were saved at what salary times how many years.

    I would not be all all surprised if the math adds up to be wildly ineffecient; for example that we spent $500,000 to save a $75K job for 2 years before that person got downsized. I'm guessing it would have been cheaper just to let GM crash and give relief money directly to the laid off folks.

    Oh, I saw just such a study. It would have cost a small fraction to only aid those who actually needed it.

    This is the basic game of politics. You "save" a group of visible people, and you hurt a larger group that is more diffused. The overall harm is the same, but an actual face will always sell.

    We bail out a failing company because we can point to the lives that would have been harmed had it failed. We ignore the opportunity lost to the company that wasn't failing, that had made good decisions, who would have had the chance to pick up the customers and assets of the failed company, and deliver product more efficiently than the failed company. But you see, one is concrete,the other is abstract.

    This is the basic game of politics, give to the concentrated interest, and pretend that there's no harm. A concentrated interest trumps a diffused interest in politics, whereas in economics, the opposite is true.
     

    antsi

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 6, 2008
    1,427
    38
    Fixed that for you.

    Oh, of course, if we're going to talk about what would actually make sense, sure.

    I was throwing that out as an alternative within the range of possibilities for an Obama administration. You knew they were going to throw a bunch of taxpayer money down the drain. Probably foolish of me to even bring up how much value is purchased for the amount of money spent.

    This is the basic game of politics, give to the concentrated interest, and pretend that there's no harm.

    Very astute. Spend a couple billion on a sympathetic special interest group and that makes positive headlines. "Obama Throws Billions at Cute Kids with Tragic Disease!" He's a hero. The headline, "Obama's Taxes Cripple Economy, and Those Kids are Still Just as Sick as Ever!" will never get published.
     
    Top Bottom