I heard that GM will never pay back the Federal money. So,did taxpayers just

K

Keith

New member
help fatten the wallet of Hannity? I heard a top economics that the big banks are paying back TARP money, but that GM will never be able to do it.
Sean Hannity and Laura Lingraham make a fortune hawking loser GM and I resent paying for socialized companies and their overpaid spokespersons.
 
why would conservatives reap the benefits when it was barack "i have no desire to own car companies" obama who forced the conservative CEO of GM to resign, put a hand picked supporter in his place, made GM sell half of it's branding to the chinese, then give 40% of the company's stake to the UAW?

i don't see how you can blame any of this on conservatives. this whole plot to eliminate american dominance in the auto industry to allow china ungoverned access to our markets stinks of socialism!

did you hear that obama's folks just gave a finnish person who has a sham office here in pontiac, mi half a BILLION dollars to produce autos in finland? but the administration assures us that this will in some way benefit the american consumer... even though the car they are producing will cost $87,900... that's the base model and who wants to spend that much with out the mp3 compatible sound system... i mean really?

elitist snobs!
 
Hannity got paid for pointing out the obvious. AIG won't pay back their loans either.

Looks like we all got hamstringed. 2010 around the corner...if you choose to be apathetic or vote for these crooks again in the face of this utter disregard for you and yours, you deserve what you get.
 
The loans GM got, which I opposed vociferously if ineffectually, is now what is called by Accountants a "sunk cost." The checks have cleared, and the money is gone, and it might or might not ever come back.

This is a separate issue from whether or not hiring a given spokesperson at a given price is a good idea. That analysis is really limited to considering how many units will be sold because of their endorsements, how much per unit is Profit, and whether the total is higher than the cost of the advertising.

I honestly don't know what the relevant numbers are, not a single one, so I don't actually have an opinion whether or not it was a waste of anybody's money, taxpayer or otherwise. I certainly agree that this would be the presumption based on the track record of government decisions.

However, "even a blind hog can find a nut once in a while." I'd want facts.
 
Back
Top