PDA

View Full Version : Economics GM CEO to resign


chiefforlife
03-29-2009, 05:42 PM
GM CEO Rick Wagoner to resign
As troubled automaker appeals for federal help, Rick Wagoner gives up top spot following years of losses and declining U.S. market share.


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- General Motors Chief Executive Rick Wagoner will resign as part of the federal government's plan to bail out the struggling automaker, White House and GM officials told CNN Sunday.

Wagoner's departure comes the day before President Obama is expected to announce the latest details of the government's assistance plan for GM and Chrysler LLC.

A GM spokesman declined to comment, but a statement from the company said, "We are anticipating an announcement soon from the administration regarding the restructuring of the U.S. auto industry."

The two automakers face a Tuesday deadline to prove to the Treasury Department that they can be viable in the long term. Without such a finding, the government can recall the $13.4 billion it has already lent to GM (GM, Fortune 500) and the $4 billion it loaned to Chrysler.

A 32-year company veteran, Wagoner has been CEO of GM since 2000.

--CNN's Kate Bolduan and John King contributed to this report. To top of page


While I do like the fact that the government is holding the automakers feet to the fire, I cant help but wonder why the Banks and companys like AIG arent being held to the same standards.
Has AIG showed the government how it will again, be a viable company? Has the government threatened to recall the billions it gave them?

BucEyedPea
03-29-2009, 05:44 PM
Just saw that. Imagine that a man with no business experience asking a businessman to resign. I can't wait to see what the govt produces out of this mess.

BucEyedPea
03-29-2009, 05:47 PM
While he's at it Obama should also ask Giethner and Bernanke to resign as well.

wild1
03-29-2009, 05:54 PM
probably a behind the scenes deal for the Obama administration to install a CEO of their choosing, re: AIG

wild1
03-29-2009, 05:55 PM
you are right BEP, this is what happens when you get people who learn in books about running a business or a country but have never actually done anything. never met a payroll, never had to turn a profit, etc

banyon
03-29-2009, 05:58 PM
you are right BEP, this is what happens when you get people who learn in books about running a business or a country but have never actually done anything. never met a payroll, never had to turn a profit, etc

Yeah, if only Bush would agree to come back.

banyon
03-29-2009, 05:58 PM
Bad week for Duke U.

chiefforlife
03-29-2009, 06:04 PM
Wagoner has ran the company for 9 years. He had a fair shot to do something, he didnt. I dont know all of the details and neither do any of you. We dont know who will replace him, why would we assume it will be an Obama selection?

The point I was trying to make is why the double standard on the companies we bail out? If its white collar, we ask no questions. If its blue collar we stipulate a viable business plan must be in place.
Both should be required to do so, dont you think?

wild1
03-29-2009, 06:06 PM
Yeah, if only Bush would agree to come back.

is that the only comeback you people have on economic policy? yeah, well bush sucked?

BucEyedPea
03-29-2009, 06:09 PM
you are right BEP, this is what happens when you get people who learn in books about running a business or a country but have never actually done anything. never met a payroll, never had to turn a profit, etc

That and knowing the historical track record for gov run enterprises. It'll probably end up like Amtrack.

banyon
03-29-2009, 06:11 PM
is that the only comeback you people have on economic policy? yeah, well bush sucked?

No, the point was that he was an individual with the type of background you seemed to be pining for.

BucEyedPea
03-29-2009, 06:11 PM
Wagoner has ran the company for 9 years. He had a fair shot to do something, he didnt. I dont know all of the details and neither do any of you. We dont know who will replace him, why would we assume it will be an Obama selection?

The point I was trying to make is why the double standard on the companies we bail out? If its white collar, we ask no questions. If its blue collar we stipulate a viable business plan must be in place.
Both should be required to do so, dont you think?

I agree with all you say about him....but he should have been let go by the company. And this is another reason why we shouldn't have bailouts or nationalization. Because what the govt funds it controls. And the govt's track record is that it does not run good control.

chiefforlife
03-29-2009, 06:11 PM
you are right BEP, this is what happens when you get people who learn in books about running a business or a country but have never actually done anything. never met a payroll, never had to turn a profit, etc

The point is that Wagoner has never met a payroll(had to borrow) or turned a profit, should he be allowed to continue?

BucEyedPea
03-29-2009, 06:12 PM
is that the only comeback you people have on economic policy? yeah, well bush sucked?

Yes...that and call-out threads, calling people who don't agree "smucks"
Routine stuff.

wild1
03-29-2009, 06:12 PM
Politico says Obama demanded his resignation:

'The Obama administration asked Rick Wagoner, the chairman and CEO of General Motors, to step down and he agreed, a White House official said.

On Monday, President Barack Obama is to unveil his plans for the auto industry, including a response to a request for additional funds by GM and Chrysler. The plan is based on recommendations from the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry, headed by the Treasury Department.

The White House confirmed Wagoner was leaving at the government's behest after The Associated Press reported his immediate departure, without giving a reason."


Nice to see that the lay of the land now is that Dear Leader can fire your CEO

Dallas Chief
03-29-2009, 06:13 PM
is that the only comeback you people have on economic policy? yeah, well bush sucked?

They've got nothing.

banyon
03-29-2009, 06:14 PM
Yes...that and call-out threads, calling people who don't agree "smucks"
Routine stuff.

What? When did any of that happen?

chiefforlife
03-29-2009, 06:14 PM
I agree with all you say about him....but he should have been let go by the company. And this is another reason why we shouldn't have bailouts or nationalization. Because what the govt funds it controls. And the govt's track record is that it does not run good control.

I wouldnt argue with any of this either, especially about the government control. It is curious why he was forced by the Whitehouse to step down. Again, I have to ask, why the car manufacturer and not AIG? Why was their CEO not publicly hung, I mean, forced to step down?

BucEyedPea
03-29-2009, 06:16 PM
I wouldnt argue with any of this either, especially about the government control. It is curious why he was forced by the Whitehouse to step down. Again, I have to ask, why the car manufacturer and not AIG? Why was their CEO not publicly hung, I mean, forced to step down?

I have my own theory about AIG. Crony capitalism at work here.
Obama does have a Wall Street background even his mother's work was funded by some of those sources as does Michelle. Treasury has a connection to Wall Street too under both D's and Rs. Wall Street's been in bed with our govt for a very long time.

BucEyedPea
03-29-2009, 06:17 PM
They've got nothing.

My line is catching on. :)

wild1
03-29-2009, 06:18 PM
I wouldnt argue with any of this either, especially about the government control. It is curious why he was forced by the Whitehouse to step down. Again, I have to ask, why the car manufacturer and not AIG? Why was their CEO not publicly hung, I mean, forced to step down?

Ed Liddy was handpicked by the government. He only has been on the job since September.

chiefforlife
03-29-2009, 06:19 PM
Politico says Obama demanded his resignation:

'The Obama administration asked Rick Wagoner, the chairman and CEO of General Motors, to step down and he agreed, a White House official said.

On Monday, President Barack Obama is to unveil his plans for the auto industry, including a response to a request for additional funds by GM and Chrysler. The plan is based on recommendations from the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry, headed by the Treasury Department.

The White House confirmed Wagoner was leaving at the government's behest after The Associated Press reported his immediate departure, without giving a reason."


Nice to see that the lay of the land now is that Dear Leader can fire your CEO

I do find this strange, I can only hope it was determined that Wagoner was responsible for holding the company back in some serious way. Still...

banyon
03-29-2009, 06:21 PM
I agree that this is not a good precedent and we should never have been involved in the corporate welfare bailouts.

chiefforlife
03-29-2009, 06:22 PM
I have my own theory about AIG. Crony capitalism at work here.
Obama does have a Wall Street background even his mother's work was funded by some of those sources as does Michelle. Treasury has a connection to Wall Street too under both D's and Rs. Wall Street's been in bed with our govt for a very long time.

I appreciate that you lay that out as your theory, I am starting to think there is something to it as well. After all we are talking about 14 billion versus 185 billion, which is in more serious need of a good CEO?

chiefforlife
03-29-2009, 06:25 PM
I agree that this is not a good precedent and we should never have been involved in the corporate welfare bailouts.

This, I believe would have been the correct course. Let the chips fall where they may, I believe we would have a much quicker correction also. Perhaps more immediate pain but not so lengthy.

wild1
03-29-2009, 06:27 PM
I appreciate that you lay that out as your theory, I am starting to think there is something to it as well. After all we are talking about 14 billion versus 185 billion, which is in more serious need of a good CEO?

the government will give GM whatever they want. the powers that be cannot, will not, allow the union power base and the votes that come along with it to evaporate.

if they have to write checks out of the treasury every quarter for 4/8 more years they will do it.

jiveturkey
03-29-2009, 06:30 PM
Ed Liddy was handpicked by the government. He only has been on the job since September.And I'm pretty sure that AIG is being dismantled, which goes back to the original question. I don't think that they intend on it being viable in the future. It going to be sold off in pieces and that money is going to be used to pay back the government.

GM CEO Rick Wagoner to resign
Has AIG showed the government how it will again, be a viable company? Has the government threatened to recall the billions it gave them?

banyon
03-29-2009, 06:32 PM
This, I believe would have been the correct course. Let the chips fall where they may, I believe we would have a much quicker correction also. Perhaps more immediate pain but not so lengthy.

Regulatory reform of the system and bankruptcy/reorganization of the dilapidated entities would have been my preference.

Now we have no solid reforms and even bigger "too big to fail" entities than when we started this mess, and tons more debt. Basically, if we manage to somehow get out of this disaster unscathed, then we've set ourselves up for an even bigger fall down the road.

BucEyedPea
03-29-2009, 06:35 PM
And I'm pretty sure that AIG is being dismantled, which goes back to the original question. I don't think that they intend on it being viable in the future. It going to be sold off in pieces and that money is going to be used to pay back the government.

I'll believe the bolded part when I see it.

mikey23545
03-29-2009, 06:41 PM
I wonder if Obama will call for his public stoning in front of a pitchfork-and-torch wielding crowd? (In return for sparing his family's life, of course....)

Der Flöprer
03-29-2009, 06:45 PM
I do find it strange that they're playing by completely different rules for the corporations that don't need nearly as much money. Wall Street gets a free ride while everyone else is held to much higher levels of accountability.

chiefforlife
03-29-2009, 06:52 PM
I do find it strange that they're playing by completely different rules for the corporations that don't need nearly as much money. Wall Street gets a free ride while everyone else is held to much higher levels of accountability.

Exactly, it doesnt make any sense. Now the Whitehouse even fires their CEO?

wild1
03-29-2009, 06:56 PM
it makes perfect sense... there are too many votes at risk for the party in power at the present time.

chiefforlife
03-29-2009, 06:59 PM
it makes perfect sense... there are too many votes at risk for the party in power at the present time.

You need to expand on that, what exactly, are you saying?

BucEyedPea
03-29-2009, 07:03 PM
They should call it "Presidential Motors" now.

wild1
03-29-2009, 07:16 PM
You need to expand on that, what exactly, are you saying?

What is the essence of the entities involved?

As a political party the Democratic party's motivation is to remain in power and expand its power. The UAW delivers elections and huge amounts of money, direct and indirect. The DNC's interest is for this system to perpetuate, or become even more favorable to them.

GM's first objective is to survive. GM is in a gun-to-the-head situation, where they cannot survive without the government's help. It has no choice but to say yes no matter what the demands are.

So naturally, the DNC will run GM through the wringer to make it over into whatever form benefits the DNC most. They are not about to kill the golden goose. Rather they will tinker and tinker to optimize its egg production.

Taco John
03-29-2009, 08:13 PM
Whatever you do, don't call it communism!

BucEyedPea
03-29-2009, 08:23 PM
Folks, the Democrat politicians get the big donos from the big banks. They're in bed with them. No one in the top echelons of the finance industry that has a place in the Hamptons is a Republican. Mac is a Democrat underneath. So he's part of the problem too.



According to an analysis of Federal Election Commission records by the Center for Responsive Politics, the top three corporate employers of donors to Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Rahm Emanuel were Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and JPMorgan. Six other financial giants were in the top 30 donors to the White House Dream Team: UBS AG, Lehman Bros., Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch and Credit Suisse Group.

Since 1998, the financial sector has given a total of $37.6 million to Obama, compared to $32.1 million to McCain. But Obama ran for his first national office only in 2004. So McCain got less from the financial industry in a decade that included two runs for president than Obama did in four years.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31229

Even Schumer intervened for hedge fund managers on unfavorable taxes on them.
Dems take care of the financial industry and the financial industry takes care of the Dems.

wild1
03-29-2009, 08:41 PM
Folks, the Democrat politicians get the big donos from the big banks. They're in bed with them. No one in the top echelons of the finance industry that has a place in the Hamptons is a Republican.

dirty little secret alert

dirk digler
03-29-2009, 09:00 PM
I think this is a good thing because the guy was obviously an idiot that ran GM into the ground. Though he shouldn't be the only one that goes.

When I went to the car show in KC a couple of weeks ago the GM area was practically empty from people looking at their cars and the Ford and Chrysler areas were jam packed. That tells me all I need to know about GM because no one is interested in anything they make except maybe the Camaro. Hopefully the Volt will put them back on track.

WilliamTheIrish
03-29-2009, 09:34 PM
One less guy looking for bargains in the mall I guess.

KC native
03-29-2009, 09:39 PM
One less guy looking for bargains in the mall I guess.

ROFL

Simplex3
03-29-2009, 10:07 PM
Whatever you do, don't call it communism!

Isn't it technically closer to fascism? Privately owned but state run?

Simplex3
03-29-2009, 10:10 PM
Hopefully the Volt will put them back on track.

The Volt will be their undoing. It can't possibly succeed without government backing, and big time. Sadly for GM the govt. has already shown it is more interested in social programs.

Plug in electric cars are dumb. You still have to burn fossil fuel at the power plant to get that thing moving, or it has to have a fossil fuel engine to run part time. Hydrogen is the way to go.

BigRedChief
03-29-2009, 10:12 PM
Just saw that. Imagine that a man with no business experience asking a businessman to resign. I can't wait to see what the govt produces out of this mess.
So you think he has done a great job?

wild1
03-29-2009, 10:15 PM
Isn't it technically closer to fascism? Privately owned but state run?

i bet the government owns a LOT of General Motors by the time this moneypit has been filled in

banyon
03-29-2009, 10:24 PM
Plug in electric cars are dumb. You still have to burn fossil fuel at the power plant to get that thing moving, or it has to have a fossil fuel engine to run part time. Hydrogen is the way to go.


Why wouldn't it be more efficient to produce power centrally instead of burning it in hundreds of thousands of miniature combustion engines?

Also, is there a law that the power plants at the source have to burn fossil fuels? Why not prepare for transitioning them to renewable non-OPEC alternatives?

Also, doesn't hydrogen fuel cell technology also require a separate power source? It's not a new energy source, so I'm not sure it has any different qualities than the ones you've just criticized about plug-in's.

SBK
03-29-2009, 10:38 PM
I'm excited to hear if this forced resignation was 'suggested' or if heavy pressure was applied.

alanm
03-29-2009, 10:49 PM
I'm not holding my breath waiting for the head of the UAW to fall on his sword.

alanm
03-29-2009, 11:04 PM
Whatever you do, don't call it communism!Next week they introduce the new and improved Chaika. :thumb:

dirk digler
03-29-2009, 11:06 PM
Hydrogen is the way to go.

I agree but we are not there yet technology or infrastructure wise. Hopefully in the next 10 years we will be if the public keeps up the pressure on the oil and car companies.

DeezNutz
03-29-2009, 11:07 PM
This is setting a disconcerting precedent.

alanm
03-29-2009, 11:09 PM
The Volt will be their undoing. It can't possibly succeed without government backing, and big time. Sadly for GM the govt. has already shown it is more interested in social programs.

Plug in electric cars are dumb. You still have to burn fossil fuel at the power plant to get that thing moving, or it has to have a fossil fuel engine to run part time. Hydrogen is the way to go.But Simplex... They'll throw in your very own solar panel to affix to your garage for free!!!!!!!!!PBJPBJ:rockon:

jAZ
03-30-2009, 07:20 AM
Just saw that. Imagine that a man with no business experience asking a businessman to resign. I can't wait to see what the govt produces out of this mess.

Yes, imagine just about every bankruptcy court in American history.

*gasp*

BigRedChief
03-30-2009, 07:36 AM
This is setting a disconcerting precedent. How so? A failed leader of an almost bankrupt company is forced to resign because of his decisions? Should have happened with the banks.

BucEyedPea
03-30-2009, 07:46 AM
One less guy looking for bargains in the mall I guess.

ROFL Pretty good! :D

But I'd say with no job, he's gonna need some of those deflationary bargains.

BucEyedPea
03-30-2009, 07:48 AM
Isn't it technically closer to fascism? Privately owned but state run?

I'd say so, with the same collective purpose of socialism/communism.

Brock
03-30-2009, 08:49 AM
So you think he has done a great job?

Can you tell us what he did wrong?

Garcia Bronco
03-30-2009, 08:56 AM
While I do like the fact that the government is holding the automakers feet to the fire, I cant help but wonder why the Banks and companys like AIG arent being held to the same standards.
Has AIG showed the government how it will again, be a viable company? Has the government threatened to recall the billions it gave them?

AIG is done. They were loaned money to break the company down so it can be sold off and we can recoup or investment. Which just got harder last week when Congress freaked on a proposal they put in their TARP bill and we lost another expert to help recoup our investment.

Garcia Bronco
03-30-2009, 08:57 AM
Ed Liddy was handpicked by the government. He only has been on the job since September.

Not only that but he came out of retirement and is only getting paid 1 dollar. Nice thing for him to do.

SBK
03-30-2009, 11:25 AM
The US Government now stands behind your GM Warranty. I guess this means an oil change is going to cost $3,000.

Cave Johnson
03-30-2009, 11:29 AM
AIG is done. They were loaned money to break the company down so it can be sold off and we can recoup or investment. Which just got harder last week when Congress freaked on a proposal they put in their TARP bill and we lost another expert to help recoup our investment.

Is this the "I quit" guy?

Garcia Bronco
03-30-2009, 11:39 AM
Is this the "I quit" guy?

Yes

Cave Johnson
03-30-2009, 11:47 AM
Yes

Matt Taibbi bodyslammed that guy last week. I'll post his response in a new thread.

patteeu
03-30-2009, 12:50 PM
While he's at it Obama should also ask Giethner and Bernanke to resign as well.

As of today, I'm asking Obama to resign.

patteeu
03-30-2009, 12:54 PM
Regulatory reform of the system and bankruptcy/reorganization of the dilapidated entities would have been my preference.

Now we have no solid reforms and even bigger "too big to fail" entities than when we started this mess, and tons more debt. Basically, if we manage to somehow get out of this disaster unscathed, then we've set ourselves up for an even bigger fall down the road.

I've figured it out. The US government is trying to take over as many business enterprises as it can in order to insure that our government itself is too big to fail in the eyes of the Chinese when the time comes!

petegz28
03-30-2009, 12:55 PM
As of today, I'm asking Obama to resign.

Well to bad. And wht do you care? Wagoner is getting a multi-million $ severance for ruining the company. You should be proud of him.

BigRedChief
03-30-2009, 12:56 PM
Can you tell us what he did wrong?
He was the head of the company that lost billions of $'s. The only reason that GM still exsists today as it is and not in bankruptcy is tax payer money.

Thats enough right there to get you fired.

petegz28
03-30-2009, 12:59 PM
He was the head of the company that lost billions of $'s. The only reason that GM still exsists today as it is and not in bankruptcy is tax payer money.

Thats enough right there to get you fired.

This is accurate.

KC Dan
03-30-2009, 12:59 PM
He was the head of the company that lost billions of $'s. The only reason that GM still exsists today as it is and not in bankruptcy is tax payer money.

Thats enough right there to get you fired.
This... And, it should have been the GM board firing him not the POTUS

patteeu
03-30-2009, 01:01 PM
Why wouldn't it be more efficient to produce power centrally instead of burning it in hundreds of thousands of miniature combustion engines?

Also, is there a law that the power plants at the source have to burn fossil fuels? Why not prepare for transitioning them to renewable non-OPEC alternatives?

Also, doesn't hydrogen fuel cell technology also require a separate power source? It's not a new energy source, so I'm not sure it has any different qualities than the ones you've just criticized about plug-in's.

Good criticisms. I don't see why we don't pursue an electricity generation capability built more heavily on nuclear (with some solar and wind in the mix to satisfy the hippies) and a transportation energy solution based on natural gas in the short to medium term (with plug in electrics or hydrogen vehicles in the mix, particularly as nuclear capacity grows).

patteeu
03-30-2009, 01:04 PM
Well to bad. And wht do you care? Wagoner is getting a multi-million $ severance for ruining the company. You should be proud of him.

I don't have any allegiance to Wagoner. I drive a Ford.

mlyonsd
03-30-2009, 01:07 PM
Well to bad. And wht do you care? Wagoner is getting a multi-million $ severance for ruining the company. You should be proud of him.

If that's true Obama is dumber than I thought.

petegz28
03-30-2009, 01:08 PM
If that's true Obama is dumber than I thought.

IT is true. Very true.

Brock
03-30-2009, 01:11 PM
He was the head of the company that lost billions of $'s. The only reason that GM still exsists today as it is and not in bankruptcy is tax payer money.

Thats enough right there to get you fired.

so you can't tell me what he did wrong, other than take the job to begin with? That's what I figured.

BigRedChief
03-30-2009, 01:22 PM
so you can't tell me what he did wrong, other than take the job to begin with? That's what I figured.
uuhhh I just told you what he did wrong. If being the head of a company that should be in bankruptcy isn't enough to get you fired, then what is?
From 2005:
Wagner: New GM Management Could Slow Up Any Turn-around - Huh?

FRANKFURT, Dec 12, 2005; Reuters reported that a major management shakeup at General Motors Corp. could slow the loss-making U.S. carmaker's efforts to boost performance, GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner told industry newspaper Automotive News.
"When you bring in a lot of new people, you bring in a lot of change and people just sort of sit there and try to figure out what to do," he said in an interview published on Monday amid mounting pressure on him to get GM sorted out.

The world's biggest carmaker has lost nearly $4 billion this year and last week promoted its head of European operations to the post of chief financial officer.

Wagoner, who has rebuffed calls to step down as CEO, refused to put a public deadline on his attempts to revive the ailing carmaker.

"Other people may or may not have timeframes, but it's not what I'm worried about," he said. "I'm focused on the fact that we need to fix the business, and that's really what is driving me."
Wagoner said GM had not been nimble enough to adjust quickly to slumping sales of high-margin sport-utility vehicles (SUVs) this year.

"We just couldn't react," he said in an interview conducted last week. "It really highlighted that the underpinnings of our business are too fragile. So if we lose mix or volume, we cannot get costs down as fast as (sales) volume comes down."
He added that sales volume for some of GM's new products, especially mid-sized cars, had not met expectations.
"They're actually picking up some momentum now, but they didn't start off strong," he said.
Next year, 30 percent of GM's sales volume will be generated by vehicles that are less than 18 months old, Wagoner said.

petegz28
03-30-2009, 01:24 PM
so you can't tell me what he did wrong, other than take the job to begin with? That's what I figured.

Um if he did anything right, why would he have to beg for tax payer $'s? Why could he not produce the plan the Fed Gov wanted to justify the continuation of said tax payer funded financing?

Brock
03-30-2009, 01:25 PM
uuhhh I just told you what he did wrong. If being the head of a company that should be in bankruptcy isn't enough to get you fired, then what is?

Yeah, I get it, the figurehead is always the one to be toppled when things go wrong. I just wondered if you were capable of anything more than vague generalities.

BigRedChief
03-30-2009, 01:27 PM
Yeah, I get it, the figurehead is always the one to be toppled when things go wrong. I just wondered if you were capable of anything more than vague generalities.
What is your deal? You think he was doing a great job?

petegz28
03-30-2009, 01:28 PM
Yeah, I get it, the figurehead is always the one to be toppled when things go wrong. I just wondered if you were capable of anything more than vague generalities.

Um yes that is how it works. You run the company, you take the blame. And he is getting paid millions of $'s for being fired.

trndobrd
03-30-2009, 01:28 PM
I wouldnt argue with any of this either, especially about the government control. It is curious why he was forced by the Whitehouse to step down. Again, I have to ask, why the car manufacturer and not AIG? Why was their CEO not publicly hung, I mean, forced to step down?

When all else fails, follow the money. $131k vs. $14 million. 2008 Presidential contributions, per www.opensecrets.org


Auto Manufacturers: Top Recipients

Top 20 Presidential Candidates
Rank Candidate Amount
1 Obama, Barack (D) $131,199
2 McCain, John (R) $79,081
3 Romney, Mitt (R) $43,300
4 Clinton, Hillary (D) $39,290
5 Paul, Ron (R) $27,911


Securities & Investment: Top Recipients

Top 20 Presidential Candidates
Rank Candidate Amount
1 Obama, Barack (D) $14,447,682
2 McCain, John (R) $8,547,727
3 Clinton, Hillary (D) $6,776,654
4 Giuliani, Rudolph W (R) $5,099,595
5 Romney, Mitt (R) $4,981,989
6 Dodd, Chris (D) $2,907,182
7 Richardson, Bill (D) $818,000
8 Edwards, John (D) $806,795
9 Thompson, Fred (R) $500,905
10 Biden, Joseph R Jr (D) $442,325
11 Paul, Ron (R) $313,860

Brock
03-30-2009, 01:32 PM
What is your deal? You think he was doing a great job?

Do you think the CEO of Shell Oil is doing a great job? Their profits are through the roof.

BigRedChief
03-30-2009, 01:34 PM
Do you think the CEO of Shell Oil is doing a great job? Their profits are through the roof.Huh? Is shell Oil needing a taxpayer funded bailout to survive? Whats the analogy?

petegz28
03-30-2009, 01:38 PM
Do you think the CEO of Shell Oil is doing a great job? Their profits are through the roof.

What is the point to this rambling?

Brock
03-30-2009, 01:38 PM
What is the point to this rambling?

You'd have to put down your torch and pitchfork and think rationally to understand. In other words, you're disqualified.

petegz28
03-30-2009, 01:43 PM
You'd have to put down your torch and pitchfork and think rationally to understand. In other words, you're disqualified.

In other words you are just ranting and have no point.

headsnap
03-30-2009, 02:54 PM
In other words you are just ranting and have no point.

no, in fact he has a hell of a point!

mlyonsd
03-30-2009, 02:55 PM
When all else fails, follow the money. $131k vs. $14 million. 2008 Presidential contributions, per www.opensecrets.org (http://www.opensecrets.org)


Auto Manufacturers: Top Recipients

Top 20 Presidential Candidates
Rank Candidate Amount
1 Obama, Barack (D) $131,199
2 McCain, John (R) $79,081
3 Romney, Mitt (R) $43,300
4 Clinton, Hillary (D) $39,290
5 Paul, Ron (R) $27,911


Securities & Investment: Top Recipients

Top 20 Presidential Candidates
Rank Candidate Amount
1 Obama, Barack (D) $14,447,682
2 McCain, John (R) $8,547,727
3 Clinton, Hillary (D) $6,776,654
4 Giuliani, Rudolph W (R) $5,099,595
5 Romney, Mitt (R) $4,981,989
6 Dodd, Chris (D) $2,907,182
7 Richardson, Bill (D) $818,000
8 Edwards, John (D) $806,795
9 Thompson, Fred (R) $500,905
10 Biden, Joseph R Jr (D) $442,325
11 Paul, Ron (R) $313,860

If I were a betting man I'd say that since its apparent the government is now going to meddle in the hiring and firing of company execs you'll see plenty of 'campaign donations' made to members of congress in the future.

petegz28
03-30-2009, 03:53 PM
no, in fact he has a hell of a point!

what is said point?

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:11 PM
Just saw that. Imagine that a man with no business experience asking a businessman to resign. I can't wait to see what the govt produces out of this mess.


Rack O Bomma's gonna change it. Dear leader has issued a proclaimation. GM shall now be instructed to make solar powered vehicles.

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:16 PM
Whatever you do, don't call it communism!Fascism.

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:21 PM
you are right BEP, this is what happens when you get people who learn in books about running a business or a country but have never actually done anything. never met a payroll, never had to turn a profit, etcBut your wrong. He learned how to be a community agitator. He learned about Rules for Radicals. He learned how to do machine gutter Chicago styel politics.

Don't underestimate this man.

In less than 100 days, he has virtually nationalized the banks, and the auto industry.

Central planning with private ownership. Fascism.

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:23 PM
Why wouldn't it be more efficient to produce power centrally instead of burning it in hundreds of thousands of miniature combustion engines?

Also, is there a law that the power plants at the source have to burn fossil fuels? Why not prepare for transitioning them to renewable non-OPEC alternatives?

Also, doesn't hydrogen fuel cell technology also require a separate power source? It's not a new energy source, so I'm not sure it has any different qualities than the ones you've just criticized about plug-in's.If that shit was such a good idea, wtf isn't it on the market already? Because Dear leader hasn't approved of it yet?

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:29 PM
Can you tell us what he did wrong?He built big SUV's and trucks that people bought when times were good, then gas hit 4.50 and because of government mandated cafe standards, he couldn't make a car profitable enough to survive in the depressed economy.

Therefore he must go to the front of Obama's BOHICA line.

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:30 PM
The US Government now stands behind your GM Warranty. I guess this means an oil change is going to cost $3,000.Lends a whole new meaning to "full faith and credit", doesn't it?

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:31 PM
I've figured it out. The US government is trying to take over as many business enterprises as it can in order to insure that our government itself is too big to fail in the eyes of the Chinese when the time comes!"Kill you? Why would I do that Mr. Bower, you are much too vawooable to do that"?wtf?

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:34 PM
Good criticisms. I don't see why we don't pursue an electricity generation capability built more heavily on nuclear (with some solar and wind in the mix to satisfy the hippies) and a transportation energy solution based on natural gas in the short to medium term (with plug in electrics or hydrogen vehicles in the mix, particularly as nuclear capacity grows).It sure would put a lot of unemployed contractors back to work. Kind of shovel ready. We need the power, they need the construction jobs.


Did I mention the part about no carbon?

banyon
03-30-2009, 04:40 PM
If that shit was such a good idea, wtf isn't it on the market already? Because Dear leader hasn't approved of it yet?

WTF are you babbling about?

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:42 PM
Huh? Is shell Oil needing a taxpayer funded bailout to survive? Whats the analogy?No, they just need a windfall profits tax to fix thei asses.

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:43 PM
WTF are you babbling about?ROFL

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 04:45 PM
WTF are you babbling about?I think I was replying to your calls for some kind of green car, but you got me, I am just fugging off during lunch. Little post whoring here and there. Sorry, nothing to see here, move along.

:D

Der Flöprer
03-30-2009, 04:51 PM
They should call it "Presidential Motors" now.

LMAO Now that's funny.

mikey23545
03-30-2009, 04:56 PM
Um yes that is how it works. You run the company, you take the blame. And he is getting paid millions of $'s for being fired.

It's who that's doing the firing that's scary, dumbass.

KC Dan
03-30-2009, 05:00 PM
LMAO Now that's funny.
Nah, it should be "Government Motors" that way they don't have to change their signs and paperwork since it is on our dime now. Save money!

memyselfI
03-30-2009, 05:02 PM
Today it's the auto industry....

Calcountry
03-30-2009, 07:20 PM
When the came for the Bankers, nobody cared. When they came for the insurance guys, nobody said anything cause it was just AIG, when the Came for the auto companies, nobody cared. .....

wild1
03-30-2009, 08:00 PM
I remember when I lived in a country that had private industry. Not just industries the president has not yet chose to dabble in.

petegz28
03-30-2009, 08:04 PM
I remember when I lived in a country that had private industry. Not just industries the president has not yet chose to dabble in.

Who went to who asking for money?

banyon
03-30-2009, 08:11 PM
When the came for the Bankers, nobody cared. When they came for the insurance guys, nobody said anything cause it was just AIG, when the Came for the auto companies, nobody cared. .....

Yeah, it's the holocaust for really wealthy white guys!!11!1

chiefforlife
03-30-2009, 08:15 PM
Now Wagoner gets a 20 Million retirement package...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/03/30/gm.ceo.compensation/index.html

WOW!

wild1
03-30-2009, 08:17 PM
Who went to who asking for money?

The issues are much larger than a check with a lot of zeroes that the government wrote.

These are questions of the limited power of the office of the president. The president taking a dictatorial view of business should worry everyone. It's not going to end with companies that borrowed money.

They are already seeking authority to seize companies that did not receive tarp money. Soon all they will have to say is that a company is "systematically" important and the government takes it over.

Keep bleating while Rome burns, I guess.

KC Dan
03-30-2009, 08:19 PM
The issues are much larger than a check with a lot of zeroes that the government wrote.

These are questions of the limited power of the office of the president. The president taking a dictatorial view of business should worry everyone. It's not going to end with companies that borrowed money.

They are already seeking authority to seize companies that did not receive tarp money. Soon all they will have to say is that a company is "systematically" important and the government takes it over.

Keep bleating while Rome burns, I guess.
Any company not "green" or making green products better standy by. This is a very large planned program that our gov't has embarked upon. We'll see if the gov't allows GM to build an SUV following bankruptcy. I bet not

stevieray
03-30-2009, 08:26 PM
They are already seeking authority to seize companies that did not receive tarp money. Soon all they will have to say is that a company is "systematically" important and the government takes it over.

Keep bleating while Rome burns, I guess.

or shut it down as a systemic risk..

petegz28
03-30-2009, 09:37 PM
The issues are much larger than a check with a lot of zeroes that the government wrote.

These are questions of the limited power of the office of the president. The president taking a dictatorial view of business should worry everyone. It's not going to end with companies that borrowed money.

They are already seeking authority to seize companies that did not receive tarp money. Soon all they will have to say is that a company is "systematically" important and the government takes it over.

Keep bleating while Rome burns, I guess.

In some ways Rome needs to burn as the private sector Romans brought this on themselves. Not that I agree with what is going on or anything. But I think our country is due for a reality check across the board.

wild1
03-30-2009, 09:39 PM
In some ways Rome needs to burn as the private sector Romans brought this on themselves. Not that I agree with what is going on or anything. But I think our country is due for a reality check across the board.

Let's destroy the constitutional role of government, because I think a few people I don't like need to be taught a lesson.

petegz28
03-30-2009, 09:46 PM
Let's destroy the constitutional role of government, because I think a few people I don't like need to be taught a lesson.

I think you are taking my comment to extremes. The point I am making is the People were not\are not minding their Government and therefore are due for a wakeup call for not doing so.