3 ms·
I assume that you are referring to GM. That bailout was by no means cheap, but it wasn't 80 billion, either. According to Wikipedia: > In total $51 billion t
by curtis 11y ago
I assume that you are referring to GM. That bailout was by no means cheap, but it wasn't 80 billion, either. According to Wikipedia:
> In total $51 billion taxpayer money has gone in the GM bailout.[90] Until December 10, 2013, the U. S. Treasury recovered $39 billion from selling its GM stake. The final cost of the GM bailout cost the U. S. taxpayer $12 billion ... [1]
I don't believe this affects your argument really, but I think it's important to try to keep the facts straight, especially about a subject as contentious (and I'd argue, significant) as the GM bailout.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_Chapter_11_reorganization#Bailouts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_Chapter_11_reor...
- ZeroGravitas 11y ago51 billion for GM, 17 for GMAC. The other 12 went to Chrysler.
- aioprisan 11y agoSo $12 billion to save 1.2 million jobs and $34.9 billion in annual tax revenue? Seems like a no brainer. "According to a study by the Center for Automotive Research the GM bailout saved 1.2 million jobs and preserved $34.9 billion in tax revenue.[91]" http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/12/09/government-treasury-gm-general-motors-tarp-bailout-exit-sale/3925515/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/12/09/governme...
- cma 11y agoThat assumes the alternative use of the money they were considering was putting it under a mattress.
- cma 11y agoThat assumes no opportunity cost. Investing that $51 billion in a generic basket of stocks would have had a big payoff instead of a loss.