‘New’ GM Agrees to Assume Future Liability Claims of ‘Old’ GM Products

June 29, 2009

  • June 29, 2009 at 2:51 am
    Alphonse Denayer says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    It is interesting that the government has no problem leaving Chrysler and certain GM liability claimants in the lurch, in order to pursue their agenda of government oligarchy (aka fascism), government controlled industry and serving the unions. But they took an entirely contrary position in the case of the AIG Financial Company units — refusing to place those business units in liquidation, although it was in the blatant best interest of the individual U.S. tax payer to do so, because they refused to let international corporate investors (including foreign governments) suffer.

    We no longer have a government with the interests of its citizens at heart, as their actions make perfectly clear and their words contradict — repeated on the MSN as an opiate for the unenlightened masses.

  • June 29, 2009 at 3:01 am
    Antoninus says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Well said! Equal justice but not so equal for USA citzens.

  • June 29, 2009 at 3:22 am
    X GM Buyer says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Who in their right mind would buy a vehicle from GM now. Government designed crap and they still have most of the bagage and liability that destroyed them. I have always bought GM vehicles but no more. Hello Japan or Germany. Maybe Ford. Look at their new government designed web site. Click on the future vehicles section. Oh boy.

  • June 29, 2009 at 3:41 am
    Wes says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Just more proof that GM is toast… Obama and Congress couldn’t run their own offices, let alone a (once) giant corporation…
    So sad.

  • June 29, 2009 at 4:22 am
    Baxtor says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Sue the SEC if you were a GM shareholder or Chrysler or any other stock that went belly up. Isn’t it the government’s (SEC)job to approve the number of shares given out by a company? And to make sure they are secure to an extent? If so, then why did they allow GM and other major corporations to sell so many shares? If it was limited, they may have received some kind of compensation back. I don’t think any company where the shareholders get wiped out should be allowed to sell stock ever again. I know it would be hard to monitor in some cases, but in these it would be easy. I say sue the SEC for failure to monitor. At least the government is going to add more jobs for more government monitoring that apparently doesn’t work.

  • June 30, 2009 at 7:51 am
    Brice X. Rhodes says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    This wasn’t a “a concession to consumer groups”– what a bunch of hogwash. It was a payoff to the trial bar for their continued support of our Socialist administration.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*