Canada and U.S. now own GM.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by vmitchinson

Why? Because the politicians did not force GM to build efficient cars that did not need continuous maintenance.

What business is it of the politicians to tell a business what cars to build?

Why? Because the environmentalists wanted clean air to breath.

We all want clean safe air to breath. Is the air dirty?
How much do you want to spend on the last small percentage of air pollution cleanup?
It's called the law of diminishing returns.

Why? Because GM refused to build efficient and reliable cars that the other manufacturers were building and people were buying istead.

They built what they could make money on. SUVs
Did they screw up and let Japan and others take the small car market.
Yes they did. Their mistake. Their error, not mine.

Why? The employees are the victims in this mess. Very convenient to blame the victim isn't it.

The employees negotiated unsustainable and uncompetitive contracts and the management was dumb enough to let them get away with it.

Short sighted thinking on both their parts and now the Fed has chosen to bail them out and screw the bond holders in the process.

Excuse me if I think that bad decisions should be paid for by those who made them.

[jkogel]

Why not blame the guys with the highest salaries of all?

[George A. H. Luck]

Why? Because the politicians did not force GM to build efficient cars that did not need continuous maintenance. POLITICIANS FORCED THE AUTO INDUSTRY IN RUSSIA TO BUILD CARS TOO. LET'S COUNT OUR LUCKY STARS.

Why? Because the environmentalists wanted clean air to breath. ALL VEHICLES MUST CONFORM TO THE SAME ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS NOT JUST THE JAPANESE. THIS IS A NON SQUIRTER.

Why? Because GM refused to build efficient and reliable cars that the other manufacturers were building and people were buying istead. G.M. BUILDS NUMEROUS MODELS THAT GET 'GOOD MILEAGE' THE PROBLEM IS THAT THEY ARE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS MORE THAN THE COMPETITION. IT COSTS TOYOTA $37 / HR TO BUILD A CAR, IT COST G.M. $68. SEE THE PROBLEM?

Why? The employees are the victims in this mess. Very convenient to blame the victim isn't it. THE EMPLOYEES ARE THE 'VICTIMS' OF THE GREED AND AVARICE OF THEIR OWN UNIONS AND THE STUPIDITY OF THE MANAGEMENT OF THE BIG THREE WHO THOUGHT THAT THEY COULD SIGN CONFISCATORY CONTRACTS AND HEALTH CARE DEALS AND NEVER PAY THE PIPER.

[Mario A. Kyriacou, CHI]

I say let GM and any other incompetent auto makers go down. The void will be filled by a more competent auto maker, such as BMW, Audi, VW and Mercedes. I have the exact thoughts when it comes to airlines BTW. I’m well aware of the impact it will have on the families involved and our economy in the short term but I feel it is time for a change, a more positive change for the betterment of the industry.
Our respective Governments should be ashamed of themselves for sailing on a ship that was destined to sink.

[George A. H. Luck]

If Volkswagen, BMW, Audi or Mercedes had to conduct business under these conditions they would be on that same sinking boat.

[Nick Gromicko]

The point is that in GM's best year (1999) its market cap was 60 billion. In other words, when it was at its top we could have bought it for 60 billion. Now Obama bought a portion of it, at its bottom (days before bankruptcy) for $65 billion.

Obama has clearly made the biggest, dumbest, worst business decision in all of human history. He should be banned from using the word "business" in any future speech because it looks so silly having the word come ouit of his mouth.

[Nick Gromicko]

Rumors that Obama is eying up Enron to buy them out, could not be confirmed.