Gotta love how transparent this administration is!

[adymond]

Anyone really surprised about this? Really surprised? Seriously?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32751671...ashington_post

U.S. ‘unlikely’ to recoup auto outlay, panel finds
Congressional oversight report urges more transparency from the Treasury

WASHINGTON - The federal government is unlikely to recoup all of the billions of dollars that it has invested in General Motors and Chrysler, according to a new congressional oversight report assessing the automakers' rescue.

The report said that a $5.4 billion portion of the $10.5 billion owed by Chrysler is "highly unlikely" to be repaid, while full recovery of the $50 billion sunk into GM would require the company's stock to reach unprecedented heights.

"Although taxpayers may recover some portion of their investment in Chrysler and GM, it is unlikely they will recover the entire amount," according to the report, which is scheduled to be released Wednesday.

The report also recommended that the Treasury Department act with more transparency and provide a legal analysis justifying the use of financial rescue funds for the automakers. The report was prepared by the Congressional Oversight Panel, which is overseeing the federal bailout programs.

In all, the government has invested $74 billion in the nation's auto industry, including $12.5 billion into auto financing giant GMAC and $3.5 billion into auto suppliers, according to the report.

Catastrophe averted?
The panel said the government may have averted economic catastrophe by taking on the rescue. The automotive industry represents about 6.5 percent of the manufacturing jobs in the United States.

"Preserving portions of Chrysler and General Motors might have resulted in savings for the government in other ways," the report said.

GM issued a statement Tuesday night saying that it was a stronger company than it was before its bankruptcy filing and government rescue. "We are confident that we will repay our nation's support because we are a company with less debt, a stronger balance sheet, a winning product portfolio and the right size to match today's market realities," it said.

The panel also addressed complaints that the government-led bankruptcy proceedings for the two automakers set precedents that could make investors wary. In each case, many investors were wiped out or took substantial losses. But the panel said it is difficult to predict what effect the bankruptcies may have on investment decisions.

"Academics and practitioners with whom the Panel's staff have spoken seem to believe that it is both too early and, given the number of variables, perhaps not possible to conclude one way or another as to what effect the government's involvement in the Chrysler bankruptcy will have on credit markets going forward," the report said.

Similarly, it said it was difficult to determine whether, as critics have charged, the bankruptcies were unusually abrupt or punishing to creditors.

"Because there is no one-size-fits-all bankruptcy for multi-billion dollar companies, it is difficult to categorize the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies as being either typical or atypical," it said.

The panel adopted the report on a 2 to 1 vote. Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex), the lone member of Congress on the panel and a staunch opponent of the auto industry rescue, voted against the report's findings. He accused the Obama administration of using the auto bailout, which began under the Bush administration, "to orchestrate the bankruptcies of Chrysler and GM so as to promote its economic, social and political agenda."

"By making such an unprecedented investment in Chrysler and GM, the Administration by definition chose not to assist other Americans that are in need," he said in a statement. "With the economic suffering the American taxpayers have endured during the past two years one wonders why Chrysler and GM merited such generosity to the exclusion of other taxpayers."

[JavaProgrammer]

Wasn't cash for clunkers supposed to solve these problems?

[camper]

Wasn't cash for clunkers supposed to solve these problems?

Cash for clunkers will gave a few positive looking numbers for a month or so, but it added to the problem which has put is in a bad way and that is increasing personal, corporate, and government debt rather than decreasing it.

Stupid is as stupid does.

camper

[cgbudde]

Hey look at it this way, obama now has all these autoworkers voting for him because he saved their companies.

[PocketProtector]

Wasn't cash for clunkers supposed to solve these problems?

No....like everything Obama, paying back the campaign contributors.

[adymond]

Cash for clunkers will gave a few positive looking numbers for a month or so, but it added to the problem which has put is in a bad way and that is increasing personal, corporate, and government debt rather than decreasing it.

Stupid is as stupid does.

camper

Quoted for truth.

[GunLawyer001]

Hey look at it this way, obama now has all these autoworkers voting for him because he saved their companies.

I'm convinced that you have half of his agenda right there, Obama needs the union support to implement his scheme. The SEIU people are the only ones supporting his health care grab at the public meetings, union thugs are beating up old people and handicapped sign carriers. So Obama bought himself a supply of Brown Shirts by always appearing to be pro-union.

The other half is to spend as much money as possible in as short a period of time as possible, before the nation catches on to his overall plan. That's the reason for his deadlines, because he knew all along that his stated plan would fall apart within months, and he'd lose even the Democrats in Congress.

It doesn't matter to Obama where his trillions get spent, on "shovel-ready projects" or handouts to ACORN or lottery tickets, as long as he manages to spend all of the next administration's money now. Massive debt carries over from President to President, so he can control the agenda even after he's voted out in 2012.

This is a recurring theme among radicals, to "overwhelm the system" in order to bring in revolutionary change. They spoke of swamping the Welfare rolls in order to do this, and their plans always require killing the existing order before their new Socialist paradise can be imposed by force. Capitalism is the dominant world economic force because it works so well, and they can only kill capitalism with economic weapons. They need to bankrupt the USA.

It's like any local club, or city government, or a family budget. It doesn't matter who runs the Borough, if the last administration spent the savings, sold the assets, and signed IOU's that exceed any possible revenue source. You can vote in the reform ticket, but as soon as they get in office they'll be hamstrung by the Borough's debts. Obama wants to make his successor irrelevant by removing all options other than servicing the debt.

It's like marrying a divorcee who still has her share of the multi-million dollar debts that her ex ran up on hookers and blow during her dysfunctional marriage. Doesn't matter what frugality or skill you bring, your new marriage will be overshadowed by that debt, and it will control where you live and what you do for years.

[autotech6506]

Kind of Ironic because these "bailouts" we're haralded as "investments" saing that we would profit from the deal in the end. Hate to say it but...I TOLD YOU SO!!!

[stevieb92]

Watch out for what you post on the Internets. Obummer said it himself. You have just written a majority of his playbook for all of us to see.

I'm convinced that you have half of his agenda right there, Obama needs the union support to implement his scheme. The SEIU people are the only ones supporting his health care grab at the public meetings, union thugs are beating up old people and handicapped sign carriers. So Obama bought himself a supply of Brown Shirts by always appearing to be pro-union.

The other half is to spend as much money as possible in as short a period of time as possible, before the nation catches on to his overall plan. That's the reason for his deadlines, because he knew all along that his stated plan would fall apart within months, and he'd lose even the Democrats in Congress.

It doesn't matter to Obama where his trillions get spent, on "shovel-ready projects" or handouts to ACORN or lottery tickets, as long as he manages to spend all of the next administration's money now. Massive debt carries over from President to President, so he can control the agenda even after he's voted out in 2012.

This is a recurring theme among radicals, to "overwhelm the system" in order to bring in revolutionary change. They spoke of swamping the Welfare rolls in order to do this, and their plans always require killing the existing order before their new Socialist paradise can be imposed by force. Capitalism is the dominant world economic force because it works so well, and they can only kill capitalism with economic weapons. They need to bankrupt the USA.

It's like any local club, or city government, or a family budget. It doesn't matter who runs the Borough, if the last administration spent the savings, sold the assets, and signed IOU's that exceed any possible revenue source. You can vote in the reform ticket, but as soon as they get in office they'll be hamstrung by the Borough's debts. Obama wants to make his successor irrelevant by removing all options other than servicing the debt.

It's like marrying a divorcee who still has her share of the multi-million dollar debts that her ex ran up on hookers and blow during her dysfunctional marriage. Doesn't matter what frugality or skill you bring, your new marriage will be overshadowed by that debt, and it will control where you live and what you do for years.

[arrrrgh15]

"Although taxpayers may recover some portion of their investment in Chrysler and GM, it is unlikely they will recover the entire amount," according to the report, which is scheduled to be released Wednesday."

So, we're NOT going to get our money back, or make that profit that our lord and master promised us?

"Preserving portions of Chrysler and General Motors might have resulted in savings for the government in other ways," the report said."

Savings to who? Shouldn't the government pass that savings back on to the taxpayers so we can get our money back?

Well, Gunlawyer001 is probably on to something and has me very concerned.

Even if I can run around yelling "I told you so" it won't make much of a difference because I'm on the same sinking ship as everybody else.

Will working class get so jaded that they actually end up prefering socialism to capitalism? If I blame everything on CEOs and the upper class, will that cause them to revolt? After all, our health care problems are the result of CEOs at insurance companies. I mean, look how much money they make, or didn't they release their earnings as requested by liberal democrats?

Just really not liking the direction this country is headed. Very worried.