Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
you have to be kidding. how much did this BS cost us? i don't see americans having to pay a foreign company to take over a formerly american industry as a good thing. it might have been different if a foreign company had voluntarily decided to invest in an american company, but that isn't what happened.
(daily caller)
Today was “payoff day” for Chrysler, the day when CEO Sergio Marchionne went to Michigan to boast that his company had repaid, with interest, by wire transfer to the United States Treasury and by bank transfer to the Canadian government, every penny that had been loaned less than two years ago. [Emphasis added]
You intuitively figured that this was BS, right? You didn’t know exactly why, but you knew you could count on Edward Niedermeyer of Truth About Cars to explain that Chrysler’s every-penny ”payback” was, oh, about $5 billion short. Well, you were right. … Hint: Some of the money was loaned more than two years ago. … P.S.: The government still owns 6.6% of Chrysler and it doesn’t look like its position will be bought out soon.Update: It may not be as phony as reported above–it could be phonier! There also seems to be a $3.5 billion loan from the Department of Energy. Conn Carroll’s conclusion–
So, to recap, the Obama Energy Department is loaning a foreign car company $3.5 billion so that it can pay the Treasury Department $7.6 billion even though American taxpayers spent $13 billion to save an American car company that is currently only worth $5 billion.
we all knew intuitively that this was BS.
i don't think americans want too many more of those success stories, because we can't afford it.
how long can jobs be bought without actual productivity? it's just kicking the can down the road and you know it, and they dumped chrysler in europe.
Sergio Marchionne, chief executive officer of Fiat and Chrysler, ceased sales of the U.S. brand in continental Europe today after four decades. The combination of Chrysler and Lancia is part of his plan to end losses in Europe and cut costs by 1.5 billion euros ($2.2 billion) by 2014. Under Fiat, Chrysler’s sales slumped to about a quarter of their total with Daimler AG.
Last edited by floridasandy; 06-06-2011 at 04:46 AM..
It wasn't a foreign car company when the money was loaned. Heard of Cereberus? They owned it...American company. Your right wing blogger is just full of BS.The remaining interest in Chrysler will yield a profit as well, the blogger won't post that when it happens either. the loan was paid with interest plain and simple, no matter how you choose to twist the facts.
Chrysler cutting European operations is irrelevant to this discussion.
Oil production could be the biggest source of new jobs this decade. So far it has almost no competition as a transportation fuel. Electric cars will remain a small part of the market and conversion to natural gas is too expensive. We need the oil and we need the jobs.
It wasn't a foreign car company when the money was loaned. Heard of Cereberus? They owned it...American company. Your right wing blogger is just full of BS.The remaining interest in Chrysler will yield a profit as well, the blogger won't post that when it happens either. the loan was paid with interest plain and simple, no matter how you choose to twist the facts.
Chrysler cutting European operations is irrelevant to this discussion.
robert farago (formerly with truth about cars, now truth about guns) covered the chrysler situation beautifully.
Cerberus Gives Fiat 35% of Chrysler
By Robert Farago on January 20, 2009
So, this is how it’s gonna go, eh? Chrysler’s going to dress-up the cratered car company long enough to use federal funds to stay alive long enough to strip and flip the company’s assets. Sweet. For some. More specifically, if Fiat’s grabbing 35 percent of Chrysler, can we, the taxpayers, have our $4b back now please? Nope.
or this at the time: (from truth about cars)
American taxpayers have loaned Chrysler $4b. The Auburn Hills automaker has their hand out for an additional $3b. And what do the taxpayers get? A full newspaper page ad thanking them and a bunch of IOUs. Meanwhile Fiat is looking to pick up a third of Chrysler from Cerberus for little more than blue sky and a business plan. Political and economic ideologies aside, it doesn’t seem fair. Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) agrees. During the confirmation hearings for the incoming administration’s Treasury Secretary, Sen. Bingaman asked Timothy Geithner what’s up with that. “It’s hard to explain why the American taxpayer shouldn’t own Chrysler,” the Senator asserted. True dat. When Daimler bought Chrysler, they didn’t ask U.S. taxpayers to finance the deal. When the Germans off-loaded ChryCo on Cerberus, no taxpayer subsidy was involved. If Fiat isn’t anteing up any cash– which it isn’t– somebody’s got to pay for adapting the Fiat platforms for the American market and retooling the plants. (At least in theory.) Cerberus, Chrysler and Fiat are hoping that the Italian job is compelling enough to obscure what’s really happening here: U.S. taxpayers are being fleeced. Again. Still.
that about sums it up.
pvande, i am with you on oil drilling. i do think that since we have all this money to throw around at somebody, we could have started investing in natural gas. that would have created REAL jobs, not pretend jobs, not "stimulus" jobs. of course, i am not sure that real jobs are even part of the plan.
Last edited by floridasandy; 06-06-2011 at 04:58 PM..
robert farago (formerly with truth about cars, now truth about guns) covered the chrysler situation beautifully.
Cerberus Gives Fiat 35% of Chrysler
By Robert Farago on January 20, 2009
So, this is how it’s gonna go, eh? Chrysler’s going to dress-up the cratered car company long enough to use federal funds to stay alive long enough to strip and flip the company’s assets. Sweet. For some. More specifically, if Fiat’s grabbing 35 percent of Chrysler, can we, the taxpayers, have our $4b back now please? Nope.
or this at the time: (from truth about cars)
American taxpayers have loaned Chrysler $4b. The Auburn Hills automaker has their hand out for an additional $3b. And what do the taxpayers get? A full newspaper page ad thanking them and a bunch of IOUs. Meanwhile Fiat is looking to pick up a third of Chrysler from Cerberus for little more than blue sky and a business plan. Political and economic ideologies aside, it doesn’t seem fair. Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) agrees. During the confirmation hearings for the incoming administration’s Treasury Secretary, Sen. Bingaman asked Timothy Geithner what’s up with that. “It’s hard to explain why the American taxpayer shouldn’t own Chrysler,” the Senator asserted. True dat. When Daimler bought Chrysler, they didn’t ask U.S. taxpayers to finance the deal. When the Germans off-loaded ChryCo on Cerberus, no taxpayer subsidy was involved. If Fiat isn’t anteing up any cash– which it isn’t– somebody’s got to pay for adapting the Fiat platforms for the American market and retooling the plants. (At least in theory.) Cerberus, Chrysler and Fiat are hoping that the Italian job is compelling enough to obscure what’s really happening here: U.S. taxpayers are being fleeced. Again. Still.
that about sums it up.
pvande, i am with you on oil drilling. i do think that since we have all this money to throw around at somebody, we could have started investing in natural gas. that would have created REAL jobs, not pretend jobs, not "stimulus" jobs. of course, i am not sure that real jobs are even part of the plan.
More blogger BS. The truth is that saving GM and Chrysler avoided the loss of an estimated 1.4 million jobs. Even if that number is inflated, it is a whole lot of jobs. 12,000 jobs were added in Michigan recently and 40,000 nationwide. Fiat invested in Chrysler because it was a good investment, not because of smoke and mirrors as your blogger claims.
I understand that you have put a lot of words out there in defense of your erroneous point of view, but it is time to face the facts and admit you were wrong. Repeatedly posting misinformation, most of which is outdated, will not change the fact that the auto bailout was successful, no matter how hard you may wish it was not.
It wasn't a foreign car company when the money was loaned. Heard of Cereberus? They owned it...American company. Your right wing blogger is just full of BS.The remaining interest in Chrysler will yield a profit as well, the blogger won't post that when it happens either. the loan was paid with interest plain and simple, no matter how you choose to twist the facts.
Chrysler cutting European operations is irrelevant to this discussion.
maybe you want to look at the facts, chrysler is now owned by fix it again tony:
The U.S government has sold its shares in Chrysler LLC at a likely loss of $1.3 billion in taxpayer money, the Treasury Department said Thursday, announcing the end of a controversial investment that resurrected the troubled auto company.
Italian automaker Fiat SpA, which has run the company since it emerged from bankruptcy protection in June 2009, purchased the U.S. government's remaining 98,000 shares in the auto company for $560 million
maybe you want to look at the facts, chrysler is now owned by fix it again tony:
The U.S government has sold its shares in Chrysler LLC at a likely loss of $1.3 billion in taxpayer money, the Treasury Department said Thursday, announcing the end of a controversial investment that resurrected the troubled auto company.
Italian automaker Fiat SpA, which has run the company since it emerged from bankruptcy protection in June 2009, purchased the U.S. government's remaining 98,000 shares in the auto company for $560 million
i wonder how many american jobs could have been created with 1.3 billion dollars.
As usual, Fox News picks out one not-very-big number, disregards its significance, and runs with a knee-jerk story that ignores the other 99 points that are related to it.
$1.3-billion is about 1% of projected earnings for Fiat/Chrysler in 2014. Those earnings become possible because Fiat has the expertise and the platform right now to start producing a 40-mpg car for the American market under an American badge.
QUOTE=jtur88;20265458]As usual, Fox News picks out one not-very-big number, disregards its significance, and runs with a knee-jerk story that ignores the other 99 points that are related to it.
$1.3-billion is about 1% of projected earnings for Fiat/Chrysler in 2014. Those earnings become possible because Fiat has the expertise and the platform right now to start producing a 40-mpg car for the American market under an American badge.
i guess you are ignoring the basic fact that american taxpayers shelled out billions so that a foreign company could wind up owning chrysler.
it's really hard to put a positive spin on that.
.
I don't mind a hard challenge, so let me try, since it's not really that hard.
American interests will still own 40-some percent of the company, which projects an income of 140-billion within three years. Income that will largely be generated by Fiat's near-term capacity to earn a market share in high-MPG vehicles. Looks like that comes out to about 60-billion earnings for American investors, against your paltry 1.3 billion that you and Fox News are raging about because it's costing you some flag-waving rights.
How's that for a positive spin?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
