GM making misleading adverts

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Guibo

Then you should have known that GM are investing in these infrastructures instead of claiming (erroneously) that it's "not their business" to do so. You were wrong.


What makes you think GM aren't investing in future battery technologies?

I wasn't wrong about anything. You made the statement that GM should be spending all this money they have on far reaching future technologies. If wrong, then you've got nothing to bitch about...right?

So either they're already doing it, and I'm wrong and you're bitching about nothing, or they're not doing it, and you still don't have a legit complaint because it's THEIR money to spend.

What GM is doing is working on partnerships with power companies to allow for lower rates for off peak charging. That's not "building infrastructure", it's working a deal, and it's a small cost compared to actually building electrical delivery.

Originally Posted by Guibo

By EQUITY, you are referring to the shares of stock, correct?
.

What difference does it make how it's structured? The government bought a stake in GM, and they can sell it when they want to. In exchange for that stake, GM got money which they can spend as they see fit. It's no longer taxpayer money. The taxpayer BOUGHT a chunk of GM, and GM has the money from that in the bank.

Originally Posted by Guibo

Relevance? That's right: You have none. The fact that the loans are available to other companies has absolutely zero relevance to the topic at hand. Who here is claiming that is bailout money? Tell me their names, because I haven't seen a single person in this thread who referred to that as bailout money.

I want you to state clearly what your opposition is to GM filing for government grants that are available to the entire auto industry, other than your outright bias against them.

You made assertion that since GM was able to repay the bailout loans they shouldn't be applying for these DOE grants, and one has nothing to do with the other. Should GM just sit back and watch all this development money go to it's competitors?

That wouldn't be a very responsible thing to do, now would it?

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

I wasn't wrong about anything. You made the statement that GM should be spending all this money they have on far reaching future technologies. If wrong, then you've got nothing to bitch about...right?

You were wrong. You flat out said GM shouldn't be in the business of doing such things. You said: "That's not their job. Their job is the build the cars. The rest of the market will figure out how to charge them. It would be a complete waste of time for GM to invest a single dime into something like that."
I'm amazed that someone who claims to have such a deep understanding of the automobile industry, and who works in the industry as an EE, would be unable to realize that GM are investing in this because it can help their business.

The question was posed to me: "What would you have preferred for them to use it for?"

I gave a couple of examples. They are not the only examples. The point is, if it's totally their money, then there would be no basis for them to return the money. Why would they?? It's "theirs." Ah, but the escrow account was set up as a contingency.

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

IWhat GM is doing is working on partnerships with power companies to allow for lower rates for off peak charging. That's not "building infrastructure", it's working a deal, and it's a small cost compared to actually building electrical delivery.

Jesus H. Christ. I didn't say they would build electrical delivery. Are you making this crap up? I said they should invest in the infrastructure. That could include (as it turned out to be the case, contrary to your claims of the opposite) working with utilities and municipalities to improve the infrastructure to allow more efficient, more widely available charging systems. If you invest in a software company, does that mean you write the software code? Please. Try to think about ideas in terms of what they could mean (and what most people would consider logical), rather than automatically jumping to wrong conclusions.
Who else, besides you, has used the phrase "building infrastructure" in this thread? Tell me who.

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

What difference does it make how it's structured? The government bought a stake in GM, and they can sell it when they want to. In exchange for that stake, GM got money which they can spend as they see fit. It's no longer taxpayer money. The taxpayer BOUGHT a chunk of GM, and GM has the money from that in the bank.

It makes a difference because they are dipping into the taxpayer-funded escrow account to "pay off" the loan. This is money the taxpayer will not see returned. Get it? If the escrow account was designed for the purpose of paying off the loan, why did they wait so long to do it? Um...maybe because the escrow account wasn't designed for that?

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

I want you to state clearly what your opposition is to GM filing for government grants that are available to the entire auto industry, other than your outright bias against them.

You made assertion that since GM was able to repay the bailout loans they shouldn't be applying for these DOE grants, and one has nothing to do with the other. Should GM just sit back and watch all this development money go to it's competitors?

That wouldn't be a very responsible thing to do, now would it?

Holy crap, dude. There's just no way anyone can talk to you in a sensible manner when GM is involved, is there? I said I wanted to see more transparency. I never objected to them applying for the loan, which you erroneously insinuated that I claimed was bailout money? W...T...F..?? Where did that come from? Please explain to me the "logic" that led you to think I was referring to that as bailout money. I'm guessing by your lack of names that you made that part up. Correct?
GM has every right to apply for that loan. But at least be transparent about it. If you're going to "pay back" a loan by dipping into another taxpayer-funded account, for what appears to be the purpose of qualifying for another loan at a lower interest rate, at least say so. Don't try to impress on the American public that you've paid back the loan through normal channels (like profits from improved automobile sales).

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Guibo

It makes a difference because they are dipping into the taxpayer-funded escrow account to "pay off" the loan. This is money the taxpayer will not see returned. Get it? If the escrow account was designed for the purpose of paying off the loan, why did they wait so long to do it? Um...maybe because the escrow account wasn't designed for that?
).

Ok, for the LAST time.

The escrow account IS NOT TAXPAYER'S MONEY. Get it?!

It is GM's operating money. PERIOD. They aren't dipping into one bailout account to repay another one. They're spending operating capitol to pay off debt.

If you can't grasp this simple concept I'm not sure what else to say to you.

The taxpayer will absolutely see it returned, and there have been numerous articles posted here explaining exactly that, you just don't want to admit it. The taxpayers are going to likely PROFIT from this whole thing.

Originally Posted by Guibo

Holy crap, dude. There's just no way anyone can talk to you in a sensible manner when GM is involved, is there? I said I wanted to see more transparency. I never objected to them applying for the loan, which you erroneously insinuated that I claimed was bailout money? W...T...F..?? Where did that come from? Please explain to me the "logic" that led you to think I was referring to that as bailout money. I'm guessing by your lack of names that you made that part up. Correct?
GM has every right to apply for that loan. But at least be transparent about it. If you're going to "pay back" a loan by dipping into another taxpayer-funded account, for what appears to be the purpose of qualifying for another loan at a lower interest rate, at least say so. Don't try to impress on the American public that you've paid back the loan through normal channels (like profits from improved automobile sales).

Here's what you said before about the DOE money.

Originally Posted by Guibo

They are self-sustainable...so why don't they return the rest of the money that's in the escrow? After all, they don't need it, right? Yet they are applying for a further $14.4B loan from the DOE. The escrow account was for the possibility that sales would worsen or other problems that might come up. Was it really for "repaying" the loan?
Either way, there's ~$6.7B that the taxpayers won't see back. All we'll get back is the interest.

You're absolutely implying that GM is applying for it to fund their normal operations, and that's completely untrue. The DOE fund is a fund intended to advance automotive technologies, is available to everyone in the industry, and can only be spent on certain things.

Now, explain exactly where this $6.7B is that you keep harping on that the taxpayers are being screwed out of.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Ok, for the LAST time.

The escrow account IS NOT TAXPAYER'S MONEY. Get it?!

It is GM's operating money. PERIOD.

Where did they get this money? Why is it considered a contingency, to be returned if they don't need it? If it's their money, there should be absolutely zero expectancy that the money should be returned.

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

The taxpayer will absolutely see it returned, and there have been numerous articles posted here explaining exactly that, you just don't want to admit it. The taxpayers are going to likely PROFIT from this whole thing.

We are not debating that. That's not the issue. What's at issue is how they "repaid" the loan.

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Here's what you said before about the DOE money.

You're absolutely implying that GM is applying for it to fund their normal operations, and that's completely untrue. The DOE fund is a fund intended to advance automotive technologies, is available to everyone in the industry, and can only be spent on certain things.

Now, explain exactly where this $6.7B is that you keep harping on that the taxpayers are being screwed out of.

Wrong. I didn't imply they were using the DOE money for normal operations. You're making that crap up. Quit it. What I said was that if they don't need the money in the escrow account, why not just return all of it? This in absolutely no way implies they are going to use the DOE loan for operations. This is a statement about the health and condition of the company, not about a transfer of DOE loans to be used for operations, got it? I already know what the DOE loan is for. Once again, all I hear is crickets when I ask for how you concluded that I thought that was bailout money. I never said it was bailout money.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Guibo

Where did they get this money? Why is it considered a contingency, to be returned if they don't need it? If it's their money, there should be absolutely zero expectancy that the money should be returned.

Who said anything about it being a "contingency fund"? This money was what the government gave GM in exchange for a 60% stake in the company.

There is no expectancy that the money will be returned. The taxpayers will get repaid when they sell their stake.

Originally Posted by Guibo

Wrong. I didn't imply they were using the DOE money for normal operations. You're making that crap up. Quit it. What I said was that if they don't need the money in the escrow account, why not just return all of it? This in absolutely no way implies they are going to use the DOE loan for operations. This is a statement about the health and condition of the company, not about a transfer of DOE loans to be used for operations, got it? I already know what the DOE loan is for. Once again, all I hear is crickets when I ask for how you concluded that I thought that was bailout money. I never said it was bailout money.

If you weren't implying that the money was needed for something other than what it's supposed to be used for, the what the hell was your point in bringing it up in the first place?!

Your statement was VERY CLEARLY that GM needed the money, and that they repaid the original loan in order to get access to another loan, when the DOE loand can't even be used for the same purpose.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Who said anything about it being a "contingency fund"? This money was what the government gave GM in exchange for a 60% stake in the company.

There is no expectancy that the money will be returned. The taxpayers will get repaid when they sell their stake.

Um, the governement and GM are saying its a contingency fund. The US Treasury acknowledges this account and that it is supported by TARP funds. Did you even bother to watch the second video in the opening post? Did you bother to read blue2fire's post here?:
http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showp...0&postcount=14

"So how is it paying it?
As it turns out, the Obama administration put $13.4 billion of the aid money as 'working capital' in an escrow account when the company was in bankruptcy. The company is using this escrow money--government money--to pay back the government loan."
http://www.forbes.com/2010/04/23/gen...ha-dalmia.html


How did you conclude that they were taking money from the equity (shares of stock) to repay the loan? blue2fire even said in post #5 that we're not talking about the equity.

This is money that was designed to help GM in the event that sales or the economy soured. If not, it was going to be returned. It's not GM's free and clear. This is why I asked others here what the escrow account was exactly for. It sounded to me like the money in the account was free for GM to use for anything (and that could include long-term investment spending). Only one other member came forward with the answer (and that certainly wasn't you). If GM is in such good health that they're dipping into this account designed for emergencies to repay the loan (5 years ahead of schedule), why not just give back the rest of the money from that account? Why not mention it in the commercial?

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Your statement was VERY CLEARLY that GM needed the money, and that they repaid the original loan in order to get access to another loan, when the DOE loand can't even be used for the same purpose.

Wrong. My statement clearly implicates that if they don't need the money, then why not return it? It's about the health of the company.

[jeremyc74]

[

Originally Posted by Guibo

Wrong. My statement clearly implicates that if they don't need the money, then why not return it? It's about the health of the company.

BECAUSE IT IS THEIRS TO KEEP FOREVER!!!!!!

There was no seperate fund. There was a LOAN, which has been repaid, and there was stock issued.

I'm going to post one more link for you to ignore, and I'm done with this. At this point you know you're wrong, and you're just too stubborn to admit it.


http://www.carlist.com/blog/?p=1374

How much money was given to General Motors?
In a press conference today Ron Bloom, auto task force leader said that the total amount the Government paid General Motors was $49.5 billion. On December 31, 2008, Treasury agreed to make loan $13.4 billion to General Motors Corporation to fund working capital. Under the loan agreement, GM was also required
to implement a viable restructuring plan. The first plan GM submitted failed to establish a credible path to viability, and the deadline was extended to June 1. Treasury loaned an additional $6 billion to fund GM during this period. To achieve an orderly restructuring, GM filed for bankruptcy on June 1, 2009. Treasury provided $30.1 billion under a debtor-in-possession financing agreement to assist GM during the bankruptcy. The new entity, General Motors Company (New GM), began operating on July 10, 2009, following its purchase of most of the assets of the Old GM.
Was part of that loan written off in the bankruptcy?
Mr. Bloom: The Bush administration did loan General Motors $13.4 (billion), there were some additional investments made and then the DIP loan. Essentially, the entire investment that the Treasury made was converted into the three instruments I described, which is to say the $6.7 (billion) in debt, the $2.1 (billion) of preferred, those two obviously equal $8.8 (billion) of fixed obligations and the 60.8 percent ownership of the common stock. So that’s what the government has and the return on that total investment will be, you know, $8.8 (billion), which we’ll get back in the preferred and the debt plus the interest and dividends, which I spoke about, and obviously, whatever we’re able to realize on the common stock.
Q Okay. So that $13.4 (billion) is part of that larger breakdown that you get, it’s not a separate — it’s not looked at or held separately in any way?
MR. BLOOM: No. No, it’s not. What we have in totality and we said this at the time of the restructuring that we thought it would be challenging for the value of the stock to go high enough that the entirety of the investment including the $13.4 (billion) would be repaid and that’s been talked about by the various oversight bodies. On the other hand, the future value of the common stock is unknowable and over time it will be what it will be.
Q: So the total amount is the $30.1 (billion) in DIP financing plus the $13.4 (billion) plus a couple of other –
MR. BLOOM: The total, total, total if you include all of the monies is $49.5 billion.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

BECAUSE IT IS THEIRS TO KEEP FOREVER!!!!!!

How is it theirs to keep forever? From your source:
"On December 31, 2008, Treasury agreed to make loan $13.4 billion to General Motors Corporation to fund working capital. Under the loan agreement, GM was also required to implement a viable restructuring plan. The first plan GM submitted failed to establish a credible path to viability, and the deadline was extended to June 1. Treasury loaned an additional $6 billion to fund GM during this period. To achieve an orderly restructuring, GM filed for bankruptcy on June 1, 2009. Treasury provided $30.1 billion under a debtor-in-possession financing agreement to assist GM during the bankruptcy..."

How much did GM repay? I see here $19.4B in loans. I have yet to see any news release that GM has repaid $19.4B in loans.


Here's TARP's Inspector General Barofsky in Senate testimony on April 10, 2010, acknowledging the escrow fund, from which GM drew to repay the loan. Forward to 1:22:50:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/293082-1

His comments to Fox News in an interview on April 21:
"I mean, the good news is, that money — they already have that money that’s in that escrow account, so it does lower the total amount of money that they owe to the government, so that’s somewhat good news. But I don’t think we should exaggerate it too much, when we remember where — the source of this money is just other TARP money."

And not from the profits from sales of automobiles, as implied by Whitacre.

The money is not theirs to keep forever. It's a loan, funded by the taxpayer. And they must get approval from the Treasury department to use it, which begs the question: If it's your money, why do you have to get approval from a government agency to use it?

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Guibo

How much did GM repay? I see here $19.4B in loans. I have yet to see any news release that GM has repaid $19.4B in loans.

?

It's in big fucking bold print right from the mans mouth in the my previous post. Those loans were covered in the equity swap.

No one's this dense, you're just being PITA now.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

It's in big fucking bold print right from the mans mouth in the my previous post. Those loans were covered in the equity swap.

No one's this dense, you're just being PITA now.

None of that contradicts Barofsky's statement that the funds used to repay the loan came from the escrow account, which was designed in case GM needed it. The remainder was to be paid back. That's not their money. It was not their money to keep forever, as you claimed. How is it their money to keep forever if they are expected to return it??

If the loans were covered in the equity swap, then that still means GM is using taxpayer-funded money to repay the loan. And if they took it from equity, that means that portion which would have been available for stock offering is no longer there. Where else did they get this money to repay the loan? We have sworn testimony by TARP's Inspector General that the money came from a taxpayer-funded account.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Guibo

None of that contradicts Barofsky's statement that the funds used to repay the loan came from the escrow account, which was designed in case GM needed it. The remainder was to be paid back..

Bullshit it doesn't.

Last time:

the entire investment that the Treasury made was converted into the three instruments I described, which is to say the $6.7 (billion) in debt, the $2.1 (billion) of preferred, those two obviously equal $8.8 (billion) of fixed obligations and the 60.8 percent ownership of the common stock. So that’s what the government has and the return on that total investment will be, you know, $8.8 (billion), which we’ll get back in the preferred and the debt plus the interest and dividends, which I spoke about, and obviously, whatever we’re able to realize on the common stock.

[majin ssj eric]

Jeremy, you're wrong. Period. The $13.4 billion in escrow is NOT GM's money. It has NOTHING to do with the equity the US government bought in GM. It was a loan, expected to be paid back, that GM is to use for capitalization (not to dip in and pay back another seperate loan). I don't understand how you can't see that from this quote:

"On December 31, 2008, Treasury agreed to make loan $13.4 billion to General Motors Corporation to fund working capital. Under the loan agreement, GM was also required to implement a viable restructuring plan. The first plan GM submitted failed to establish a credible path to viability, and the deadline was extended to June 1. Treasury loaned an additional $6 billion to fund GM during this period. To achieve an orderly restructuring, GM filed for bankruptcy on June 1, 2009. Treasury provided $30.1 billion under a debtor-in-possession financing agreement to assist GM during the bankruptcy..."

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by majin ssj eric

Jeremy, you're wrong. Period. The $13.4 billion in escrow is NOT GM's money. It has NOTHING to do with the equity the US government bought in GM. It was a loan, expected to be paid back, that GM is to use for capitalization (not to dip in and pay back another seperate loan). I don't understand how you can't see that from this quote:

That was the initial $13.4 billion loan that Bush gave GM when Congress voted not to give the loans to GM. The money that GM used to repay the loan was new setup by Obama during GM's bankruptcy in June of 2009.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by quagmire

That was the initial $13.4 billion loan that Bush gave GM when Congress voted not to give the loans to GM. The money that GM used to repay the loan was new setup by Obama during GM's bankruptcy in June of 2009.

So what you're saying is that both Bush and Obama loaned $13.4B to GM? That would appear to be the case. Read from the previous article I posted:
"As it turns out, the Obama administration put $13.4 billion of the aid money as 'working capital' in an escrow account when the company was in bankruptcy."
Bush authorized $13.4B in December 2008. After GM filed for bankruptcy in 2009, a further $13.B amount was loaned to them in the escrow account. So what happened to the original $13.4B loan? It sounds like that's the amount that was absorbed in the equity swap. The additional loan by Obama after bankruptcy is a separate matter.


A December, 2009 audit memorandum sent to Treasury Secretary Geitner, signed by none other than TARP Inspector General Barofsky, states:

"A portion of the proceeds of the $30.1 billion loan to GM was placed in an escrow account so that Treasury could exercise additional supervision over its use. Treasury must approve each withdrawal."

Now, here's the part where it explicitly forecasts that GM will use this loan amount (not their money to spend freely, but only with the authority of Treasury, and funded by taxpayers) to settle the other loans:
"After the withdrawal of funds related to Delphi, the escrow account had a balance of approximately $13.7 billion. GM officials stated that they intend to seek release of additional escrowed funds to repay its outstanding $6.7 billion loan to treasury and $1.3 billion to the Canadian government."

http://www.sigtarp.gov/reports/audit...gram_Funds.pdf


The simple fact is, we have TARP's Inspector General, in videotaped and sworn testimony to the Senate, testifying that GM used money from this escrow account, which is under authority of Treasury (not GM's to "keep forever!"), to repay the loan.

This is from jeremy's own link:
"So, where will they get the money?
General Motors currently has $13.4 billion dollars in a restricted cash account, known as a Debtor-in-possession (DIP), which means that the company has to get approval from the UST for utilizing that money."

It's really not their money if they can only use it at the discretion of UST.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Bullshit it doesn't.

It doesn't. And if what you say is true (that the money came only from the instruments listed), then that would mean GM dipped into the equity (owned by the government, ie. the taxpayers) to repay the loan, and those shares, which would have been sold to investors, are gone. Are you really sure you want to admit to that?

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Guibo

It doesn't. And if what you say is true (that the money came only from the instruments listed), then that would mean GM dipped into the equity (owned by the government, ie. the taxpayers) to repay the loan, and those shares, which would have been sold to investors, are gone. Are you really sure you want to admit to that?

OMFG....you really don't understand how this works....do you?

The government gave GM money for it's shares. The shares don't just go away when GM spends the money. The government still owns 60% of the company, and they will get their money back when they sell that to investors during an IPO later this year, or early next year.

If you don't understand the basic principles of this sort of stuff, you should probably refrain from commenting on it. That post made no sense whatsoever.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by majin ssj eric

Jeremy, you're wrong. Period. The $13.4 billion in escrow is NOT GM's money. It has NOTHING to do with the equity the US government bought in GM. It was a loan, expected to be paid back, that GM is to use for capitalization (not to dip in and pay back another seperate loan). I don't understand how you can't see that from this quote:

Jesus Christ.....WTF is wrong with you people. I posted a link to a very recent interview with the man who is administering the entire process, and he VERY CLEARLY spelled out exactly what GM owes the government, and exactly what the government owns.


How many times do I have to requote the shit before you bother to read what it says?!

Originally Posted by Bloom

Q Okay. So that $13.4 (billion) is part of that larger breakdown that you get, it’s not a separate — it’s not looked at or held separately in any way?
MR. BLOOM: No. No, it’s not. What we have in totality and we said this at the time of the restructuring that we thought it would be challenging for the value of the stock to go high enough that the entirety of the investment including the $13.4 (billion) would be repaid and that’s been talked about by the various oversight bodies. On the other hand, the future value of the common stock is unknowable and over time it will be what it will be.
Q: So the total amount is the $30.1 (billion) in DIP financing plus the $13.4 (billion) plus a couple of other –
MR. BLOOM: The total, total, total if you include all of the monies is $49.5 billion.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

How many times do I have to requote the shit before you bother to read what it says?!

The $13.4B he's talking about is the money authorized under Bush and allocated Dec'08-Jan'09. That was before their bankruptcy declaration, 6 months later. What about the money specifically mentioned by TARP's Inspector General to the Senate as well to Treasury Secretary Geitner, which he says comes from an escrow account from which GM must seek authorization from Treasury before using? Is TARP's Inspector General lying when he mentions the escrow account under sworn testimony and an official audit document to Geitner?

jeremy, how do you explain this, from your own link?:
"So, where will they get the money?
General Motors currently has $13.4 billion dollars in a restricted cash account, known as a Debtor-in-possession (DIP), which means that the company has to get approval from the UST for utilizing that money."

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

The government gave GM money for it's shares. The shares don't just go away when GM spends the money. The government still owns 60% of the company, and they will get their money back when they sell that to investors during an IPO later this year, or early next year.

The government gave GM money? I thought this was a loan. It would have to be, otherwise such a deal would never go through.
So where did GM get the money to repay its loan? It's not from the sales of automobiles, as Whitacre is implying, right?

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Guibo

The government gave GM money? I thought this was a loan.

Now you're just being idiotic.

The GAVE them money IN EXCHANGE for a stake in the company.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Now you're just being idiotic.
The GAVE them money IN EXCHANGE for a stake in the company.

That's not a gift. That's a trade of monetary support in exchange for something else. That's not giving money.

Answer the question, jeremy: Where did GM get the money to pay back the loan?

I'll give you a hint. Your vaunted Ron Bloom acknowledging the escrow account right here:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5AH3YF20091118

Just because he didn't mention it before in your previous link, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Your own link said it exists. We have testimony by a TARP official to both the Senate and Treasury that it exists and is the source of "repayment" of the loan.

[majin ssj eric]

Originally Posted by Guibo

That's not a gift. That's a trade of monetary support in exchange for something else. That's not giving money.

Answer the question, jeremy: Where did GM get the money to pay back the loan?

I'll give you a hint. Your vaunted Ron Bloom acknowledging the escrow account right here:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5AH3YF20091118

Just because he didn't mention it before in your previous link, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Your own link said it exists. We have testimony by a TARP official to both the Senate and Treasury that it exists and is the source of "repayment" of the loan.

Game. Set. Match.

/Thread.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Guibo

That's not a gift. That's a trade of monetary support in exchange for something else. That's not giving money.

Answer the question, jeremy: Where did GM get the money to pay back the loan?

I'll give you a hint. Your vaunted Ron Bloom acknowledging the escrow account right here:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5AH3YF20091118

Just because he didn't mention it before in your previous link, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Your own link said it exists. We have testimony by a TARP official to both the Senate and Treasury that it exists and is the source of "repayment" of the loan.

Originally Posted by majin ssj eric

Game. Set. Match.

/Thread.

Do you two ever read the links for yourselves?

God damn it's like shooting blind fish in a barrel. You're both absolutely clueless about the entire process.

From YOUR year old story:

Originally Posted by Bloom

Ron Bloom, who oversees the U.S. government's 61 percent equity stake in the automaker, said U.S. officials and GM would meet in June to consider how quickly taxpayers would be paid back from the GM escrow account.

GM will make quarterly payments of $1 billion to the U.S. Treasury on a $6.7 billion loan and $200 million to repay the governments of Canada and Ontario for a $1.4 billion loan.
Most of the $50 billion in government support for GM was converted into equity in the automaker