« | »

Bush May Tap $700B Bailout For Big Three

From the Agence France-Pressee:

White House may tap financial bailout fund for automakers

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The White House said Friday that it will consider tapping a 700-billion-dollar financial rescue fund “to prevent a collapse of troubled automakers” after lawmakers failed to pass an alternative.

“Given the current weakened state of the US economy, we will consider other options if necessary — including use of the TARP program — to prevent a collapse of troubled automakers,” said spokeswoman Dana Perino, referring to the Troubled Asset Relief Program conceived to help financial services firms.

Perino, speaking aboard US President George W. Bush’s official Air Force One jet, declined to say when a decision on tapping the TARP would be made, but said the White House understood “the urgency of the situation.”

“While the federal government may need to step in to prevent an immediate failure, the auto companies, their labor unions, and all other stakeholders must be prepared to make the meaningful concessions necessary to become viable,” she warned.

The House of Representatives on Wednesday approved a White House-backed bill, crafted by Democrats, to give the ailing automakers a 14 billion-dollar injection, but the legislation collapsed in the US Senate.

The measure would have required the manufacturing giants to engage in painful restructuring to ensure their long-term survival and repayment of the government monies or face bankruptcy proceedings…

It looks like the now legendary $700 billion bailout fund is going to be used for everything except what it was supposed to be used for.

And how far can even $700 billion go? Also, since this was only one of the series of similar bailout funds, why is it the only one ever mentioned now?

Lastly, the Democrats are frantic to force as many of these decisions upon the Bush administration as possible. Why should Mr. Bush help them?

Let the Anointed One and Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank figure it all out.

After all, they got us here.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, December 12th, 2008. Comments are currently closed.

22 Responses to “Bush May Tap $700B Bailout For Big Three”

  1. GW! Stop trying so hard. You’ve already clinched the RINO awards.

  2. U NO HOO says:

    Compassionate Conservatism?

  3. JohnMG says:

    Everybody who believes Congress should be allowed to rule on whether a plan is fiscally responsible, raise your right hand!!

  4. Phil Byler says:

    Somebody should tell George Bush that he needs to stop with the socialism. The years of excessive spending, the financial industry bailout and his Administration’s efforts with respect to the auto industry add up to a socialist legacy, and it has paved the way for Obama. As mush as Bush has been right in the war against the radical jihadists and his tax cuts, Bush has been very, very wrong on spending and the bailouts.

  5. 12 Gauge Rage says:

    Don’t do it George. Time to put your cajones on the table and tell the Big Three ‘Sorry, no more. The teat’s run dry.’

  6. Liberals Demise says:

    Hey Bush…hows about bailing out the BIG 3…………BIG300 million taxpayers!! If you gave the money to the taxpayer …. you can bet your ranch that the money would already be in the economy NOW!!
    One million to each taxpayer=300 million. Credit cards are paid off, loans on houses and student loans are paid off, new cars are bought, new houses are bought and whats left over you put in the bank or in the stock market or whatever!! BILLIONS of $$$$$$ to the people who wreck the companies is nuts!
    Enough is enough!!! You asswipes are spending OUR money like it was YOUR money and I ( for one ) am SICK OF IT!!! It just may be time to send you bozos’ packin…all the lawyers and clowns out of DC for a oneway trip to a country who will have you. France perhaps!! Ya’ll gotta go….you have ruined this nation and you are nailing the coffin shut on us!!

  7. DEZ says:

    “One million to each taxpayer=300 million.”

    Ummm, might wanna redo the math.

  8. sheehanjihad says:

    Uh, yeah That would be one dollar to each taxpayer…..wait, that’s more than we would get after Jan 20th!

  9. Liberals Demise says:

    DEZ…….I’m drinkin’ a RB (RealityBytes) martini. Torpedo juice or a flame throwers’ bite is more like it!
    Trigger finger typist with glass held on high and not the mathmationist I should be….it is still a shiite less moola than they want to GIVE to the Losers of Great Corporations!! FAR LESS THAN 700 BILLION $$$$$ and we don’t gotta kiss and make nice!! Why is it that I feel the need for a cigarette if the $$$$ goes the the BIG 3 ??

  10. DEZ says:

    No worries Liberals Demise, other than the math gaff, you were spot on.

  11. proreason says:

    BDS finally got to W. He’s got Stockholm Syndrome now.

  12. 12 Gauge Rage says:

    I wouldn’t want to take a ton of money from the government if it were possible because then I would feel forever indebted to them. A government powerful enough to give you everything you need is powerful enough to take away everything you have. Or everything you hold dear and sacred. This is something that diehard socialists consistently fail to grasp.

  13. proreason says:

    Bailout math……simplified.

    In round figures, your trustoworthy federal government has been collecting about 1 Trillion annually recently in Income Tax receipts. Therefore, 700M constitutes about a 70% one-time increase in Income Tax requirements.

    So if you have been paying about 20K annually, the 700B tab means that somehow, you are going to be paying an additional 14K at some point, because 20K * 70% 14K.

    Now Obamy will be putting the printing press on overtime soon, and will be “delaying” the collection of the necessary funds through all sorts of tricks. But printing money will just increase inflation and the hit to you on average will be about the same if you measure purchasing power instead of tax dollars. And if the collections are “delayed” your children will pay the tab, plus intereste.

    And don’t forget, estimates of the total “cost” of the bailouts is now over 4 Trillion, or about 6 times the 700B that is mentioned in this article.

    But having your share of the government’s debt increase by about 4 times what you pay in one year’s income tax shouldn’t bother you, now that you have a government you know is looking out for your best interests. Barney Fife, Obamy, Rahm the Impaler, the Hildabeast, Slow Joe, Chris Dudd and Charlie Rangel are there for you full-time, up to 2 hours a day, up to 100 days a year.

  14. Phil Byler says:

    McCain voted against the auto bailout.

  15. U NO HOO says:

    “Why is it that I feel the need for a cigarette if the $$$$ goes the the BIG 3 ??”

    Cars don’t have cigarette lighters anymore.

  16. proreason says:

    GM sales are off 40% from Nov 2007. They lost a little money that quarter but not much.

    Last November’s annualized sales were $188B. If the 40% drop holds for a year, they will have a $75B shortfall over the next 12 months.

    What in the current economy would make sales go up? The product cycle is years. Unemployment is headed over 10%. People’s savings have been obliterated. Americans like foreign cars better. Cars last longer now. The infamous Volt has 0 chance to succeed. Even the French have concluded electric cars are not viable.

    Without a major restructuring, therefore, the 1-year cost to keep GM alone afloat, without layoffs will be in the neighborhood of 75B. Consider it welfare.

    A total bailout, if it were possible, could easily cost taxpayers a lot more than 150 Billion.

    The only viable option is a form of bankruptcy where the Big 3 have the oportunity to align their costs with the market. Call it a bailout if you will, but it has to happen.

    The government bailout being discussed is Welfare for the UAW. Pure and simple. And the welfare could last for years, and will increase the federal budget by at least 10% for years.

    Who thinks the UAW would use that welfare wisely?

    Better to get the pain over with now, and limit the taxpayers’ burden.

    • proreason says:

      And from NRO today, Thursday, Dec 18, 2008…….

      Bailout Update: Rumors and Real Costs [Henry Payne] (under Planet Gore blog)

      “The real cost of getting the “Detroit Two” through 2009 is somewhere in the ballpark of $60 to $125 billion. “…Henry Paine

      note…..”through 2009” only

  17. Reality Bytes says:

    Psst! W. Come here. I wanna tell you somethin’.



    ***According to DNC talking points. Raising taxes during the Obama administration is not really raising taxes. It’s simply putting taxes back where they were before Bush came into office, which is a tactic I suggest we keep in mind when gas goes back up to $4.00. E.G.

    “Gas hasn’t gone up. It simply is back to the level that it was when we started talking about alternative energy.”

    Brace yourself folks!

  18. Lurkin_no_mo says:

    Hmmm….WWRD? (What would Reagan do?) (THE RON…. not his offsprings)

  19. Reality Bytes says:

    SG – Does this sound like Reagan?!

    1. Reagan would go before the American people & let them know that those in Congress were giving Fannie & Freddie cover & we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place & don’t deserve their vote.

    2. If somehow we still managed our way into recession, he would go to the source of the problem – he would tell the American people that their pensions could be saved if only Congress would eliminate capital gains taxes, which he would explain is like forcing movie goers to pay admission twice – once on the way in & again on the way out.

    • GuppyNblue says:

      “Reagan would go before the American people & let them know that those in Congress were giving Fannie & Freddie cover”

      Sooooo true. I don’t know how we expect anything from the GOP today when they’re either too chickensh*t or invested to speak the truth. I’ve said it before, if you’re not you’re willing to identify the problem then you can’t possibly fix it. If thats politically unappealing and even cost votes, so be it. We do the right thing because it’s the right thing. When did we accept this concept that being a politician is a career and they’re allowed to compromise the nation to keep their jobs?

      The truth is that tax cuts are the most direct approach to stimulating an economy. Letting people have more of their money to spend is better than giving billions to banks and hoping they will lend it to us with interest.

      (Just a personal note: I can’t stand politicians at all. Whenever I have the opportunity to meat one – I pass. But I had genuine feelings for Ronald Reagan and believe he had the same for us).

  20. sheehanjihad says:

    Obama sounds like that Billy Mays character on television hawking .25 cent items for “ONLY 19.95!!” plus “shipping and handling”. And you get another one for absolutely free!!!! (just pay shipping and handling for that one too) What they dont tell you is that the “shipping and handling” covers the entire cost of the item you are buying. Advertising, manufacturing, shipping, freight, postage, labor, everything! The 19.95 is pure profit. Obama has a similar plan….everything he offers will be “Absolutely FREE!!” and we, the taxpayers, are going to pay the “shipping and handling” on his bullshit bailout plan.

    Like Billy Mays….Obama is a huckster of the umpteenth degree. He knows a sucker when he sees it, and he also knows how to pull the wool over the eyes of some of the most ignorant people ever to live in this country. Unlike Billy Mays though, I have to pay for “Moonbeam’s” “shipping and handling”for her government giveaways… and I dont even get the first one, or the second one, I get nothing. But yet, I am going to have to pay for it. All of it. Obama’s inauguration will play like a giant infomercial…a straight faced carnival barker fleecing the public out of every last cent he can. And he is going to get away with it too.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »