Obama Supporters - Did the "resignation" of GM CEO make you flinch?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dominic
  • Start date Start date
D

Dominic

Guest
I consider myself an Obama supporter but the resignation of Rick Wagoner at the behest of the Obama administration rubbed me the wrong way. I've dismissed the silly "Socialism" arguments propagated by the right-wing but this is hard to defend.

At BEST it was a political misstep...at worst it was government interference in a matters that should be handled by GM's shareholders.

Thoughts?
 
Excellent question, and the answer is a very tricky one, to say the least. When govt does enter into the business sector, almost by definition of our free enterprise idealism, it`s cause for scrutiny.
However from the purely economic vantage point, it was a necessary move at the time and I support the factors that made it happen.
 
Have you ever been terminated by an employer?

Is it ever 'nice' when someone is canned?

Mr. Wagoner doesn't need anyone's pity, he's wealthy, and the company he helped f up is being bailed out by the chump American taxpayers (speaking of socialism)

How many folks did Mr. Wagoner fire LOL?
 
Agree 100% If the government was a shareholder then they could vote with the other shareholders. Majority rules. If the money was a loan and not buying stocks. Then no vote for the government. If it was a condition of the loan then Rick did the right thing but I still think it was not up to Obama to suggest it. it was up to the shareholders.
 
Flinch??? Don't fool yourself. It's exactly what Obama voters were hoping for when they saw to it that he was elected.
 
let's see..
we gave money to AIG and they promptly spent it on bonuses. And everyone screams that there was no controls.
We give money to GM, have some controls in place, they don't get it turned around.. and people scream that the controls were used.

If you give tax money to a company.. does that give you something close to BEING a shareholder?
Socialism is a routine policy of govt owning the businesses in a country. This is NOT routine policy in the US, but money that GM ASKED for. BIG difference.
Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't GM told upfront that they had a specified amount of time, to get things on a better keel? Wasn't part of the money held back, to keep them from losing all of it?
I don't want to see major companies going down the drain, because of mismanagement. I don't want the govt bailing out every company with a problem.
But I SURE don't want to see another AIG mess with no consequences.
 
this is the only case socialism and america should be allowed in the same sentence. Then again president of hte united states does mean he has a right to do/influence/convince/plea/lie/appeal to whatever he wants. if you dont like that you should have watched his address to the cia this week. Is that twice now he has admitted mistakes?

I for one dont want my leader to ever admit he screwed up unless it is hiring an escort in which case he shouldnt be governing if he gets caught
 
i had no idea he resigned. thanks for filling me in. yeah, thats kinda weird
 
Back
Top