Effective immediately Rick Wagoner is to resign from his post as CEO at GM. THE US Government who has been literally shareholder in General Motors since giving them money to borrow starting  in December of 2008 forced Wagoner out of his post. In an article that I saw on yahoo.com Wagoner could not get enough concessions from the UAW(United Auto Workers)  and downize the company enough during his tenure as CEO at GM. The article also holds Wagoner responsible for GM going with a stale business model in relying on sales of SUV's and pick-up trucks too heavily in a time of 4.00 dollar a gallon of gas last year.

In my opinion Wagoner did an ok job but the company is still currently too big like the article said on yahoo.com. Wagoner also in my opinion did not move fast enough in changing the culture at GM which a company like Hyundai has done in the past 10 years. GM's reliability still lags behind Honda, Toyota, and Ford in the past few years accoding to reliability surveys.

Hey Rick....

Don't let the tailgate hit you in the arse...

Now what makes me wonder is why they haven't done more to oust the management of AIG.

If any company needs to restructure, it's that one.

Now what makes me wonder is why they haven't done more to oust the management of AIG.

If any company needs to restructure, it's that one.


No labor union at AIG.  What's more, they don't make anything.  They just shuffle money around.  That's what our kleptocratic government likes.

As for GM, they might have done better if they'd nationalized the f**ker in 1987 and ousted Roger Smith instead...but then Michael Moore would be stuck writing articles about herbal teas for Mother Jones.
:P

Another reason why he was ousted was because GM's budget would have implied more government money.  Obama's trying so hard to prevent a snowball effect with the bailouts.  Not sure if it'll work or not.

Another reason why he was ousted was because GM's budget would have implied more government money.  Obama's trying so hard to prevent a snowball effect with the bailouts.  Not sure if it'll work or not.


Well, that's the funny thing anybody whose ever received SSI or so-called transitional assistance knows when you take the government's money you deal with the government's meddling.  And yet, these corporate boardroom sonofabitches want the government's money while they pretend they're a free market enterprise.  Why not?  That's the way the government dealt with big business for decades.  I mentioned Roger Smith, the famous GM CEO of "Roger & Me."  Back then, the government was subsidizing GM to close plants in Michigan and move them to Mexico.  Nothing wrong with that, it isn't "socialism" after all...it's "fascism."

Communism: You have two cows; the government takes them both and gives the milk to you.
Fascism: You have two cows; the government takes them both and sells the milk to you.

No labor union at AIG.  What's more, they don't make anything.  They just shuffle money around.  That's what our kleptocratic government likes.

As for GM, they might have done better if they'd nationalized the f**ker in 1987 and ousted Roger Smith instead...but then Michael Moore would be stuck writing articles about herbal teas for Mother Jones.
:P


I know it might sound strange coming from me, but honestly, I'd prefer it if we nationalized AIG, a lot of banks, and maybe even GM.

If something ever becomes "too big to fall", it should either be nationalized or split up like AT&T once was.

I do not believe that GM was "too big to fail".  All the auto industry and the UAW did was scare the government into thinking that an automotive bankruptcy would be a disaster.

But a "prepackaged chapter 11" would not have been much different than what we see now.  Union contracts thrown out, bondholders taking a pennies-on-the-dollar haircut, supplier contracts ashcanned.  The only difference would be in a Chapter 11, the shareholders would be wiped out, as well they should.  What are we seeing now?  Revamped labor/supplier contracts, bondholders getting haircut, and so on.  The only "winners" are the shareholders.

While I am not a big Obama supporter, I do not object to him dictating terms to the auto industry if they are asking for government funds.  Those who want the heavy hand of government out of the auto industry should not have asked for the heavy funds of government.

And yes... I would never have given the automakers the money they have gotten already.  I *might* have bailed out the auto supplier industry in the event of a chapter 11 though.  (And I have to think about that some more too)

Seven years ago nearly the entire steel industry went bankrupt... 32 companies in 2 years.  The world continues to rotate nevertheless...

I do not believe that GM was "too big to fail".  All the auto industry and the UAW did was scare the government into thinking that an automotive bankruptcy would be a disaster.

...or they just paid off a lot of the administration through lobbyism.  Obama did receive a lot of funding from the UAW.

But a "prepackaged chapter 11" would not have been much different than what we see now.  Union contracts thrown out, bondholders taking a pennies-on-the-dollar haircut, supplier contracts ashcanned.  The only difference would be in a Chapter 11, the shareholders would be wiped out, as well they should.  What are we seeing now?  Revamped labor/supplier contracts, bondholders getting haircut, and so on.  The only "winners" are the shareholders.

Indeed.  AIG is the same case.

While I am not a big Obama supporter, I do not object to him dictating terms to the auto industry if they are asking for government funds.  Those who want the heavy hand of government out of the auto industry should not have asked for the heavy funds of government.

Exactly.

And yes... I would never have given the automakers the money they have gotten already.  I *might* have bailed out the auto supplier industry in the event of a chapter 11 though.  (And I have to think about that some more too)

I wouldn't have bailed them out period.  Corporate welfare sucks no matter what the economic cycle happens to be.

Seven years ago nearly the entire steel industry went bankrupt... 32 companies in 2 years.  The world continues to rotate nevertheless...


So true... 

While I am not a big Obama supporter, I do not object to him dictating terms to the auto industry if they are asking for government funds.  Those who want the heavy hand of government out of the auto industry should not have asked for the heavy funds of government.



Like I was saying, it seems to me big business got used to playing it both ways: Free market or government subsidy, whichever's more convenient.  Now the government has broken the covenant...

Well if you're feeling sad for the old boy, Rick Wagoner Rewarded With $20 Million Retirement Package. Not that anyone was really surprised of this...So I guess compared to the AIG bonuses, he's making out nicely for driving whats left of what was one of the largest corporations into the ground. :P

What a bizarre line of events, and to think Chevy just introduced the new 2010 Camaro (last week), thats been out of production for the last 7 years.

Its odd to think that all three automakers being in hot financial water, while they are now currently producing three of the biggest engines and horsepower ever in a genuine revival of the muscle car war. Talk about being out of touch.

You'd think it was 1969 again with the Mustang GT, Dodge Challenger SRT8, and Camaro SS all on the (empty) dealers showroom floors in the midst of all of this...whats a poor car guy to do? :-\\ 
Maybe its the swan song for the industry...