PDA

View Full Version : GMAC Gets Bailout Funds


Moby
12-30-2008, 12:32 PM
Maybe spending $6 Billion on creating jobs might be a better approach. Who's going to take a car loan without a good paying job?

http://www.forbes.com/topstories/2008/12/30/gmac-washington-tarp-markets-equity-cx_bw_1230markets01.html

Brian Wingfield, 12.30.08, 04:20 AM EST
The U.S. government commits an additional $6 billion to rescue Detroit.

For months, critics of an auto industry bailout have raised a legitimate question: What good will it do if customers can’t get the financing to buy vehicles?

As 2008 draws to a close, Uncle Sam is trying to alleviate that problem while shelling out cash to keep the industry afloat. Late Monday, the Treasury Department said it would buy a $5 billion stake in GMAC, the financing arm of General Motors (nyse: GM - news - people ), in order to help prop up the company. In addition, the government will lend GM as much as $1 billion so that it can buy more equity in GMAC.

The funds will come from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the $700 billion pool of taxpayer money that the U.S. government has set aside to get financial markets running smoothly. The aid is in addition to the $17.4 billion in emergency loans the Bush administration granted earlier this month to GM and Chrysler, which said they faced bankruptcy without immediate assistance.

While the timing of the announcement Monday evening was something of a surprise, the move itself was not entirely unanticipated. On Dec. 24, the Federal Reserve said it would allow GMAC to become a bank holding company, an action that permits it to receive TARP funds. The strings: GMAC had to convert 75% of its debt to equity by last Friday at midnight. However, earlier Monday the company refused to say if it had met the goal by the deadline.

Without government assistance, GMAC (nyse: GJM - news - people ), which provides both vehicle and mortgage financing, was in jeopardy of filing for bankruptcy. This would have spelled further trouble for GM, as GMAC helps to finance purchases of most GM vehicles. In addition, GMAC is jointly owned by GM and Chrysler’s parent company, Cerberus Capital Management. A Cerberus affiliate will also buy additional equity in GMAC.

The government’s move Monday helps to shore up GMAC--for now--and by doing so, it keeps in play an option for consumers to obtain vehicle financing (provided that they qualify). But it’s also another example of the sprawling bailout for banks and now the auto industry that Barack Obama’s incoming administration will inherit in January.

The Treasury has already used the first half of the TARP kitty, and in order to receive the second $350 billion the administration will need to submit a report to Congress explaining how the funds will be used. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has said that the remaining amount will need to be tapped, though it is not clear whether he will do the honors, or whether he’ll leave it to Obama.

In its statement Monday, the Treasury Department said it would "work with Congress and the President-elect's transition team on the appropriate timing for release of the remainder of the TARP funds to support financial market stability."

SeedyROM
12-30-2008, 09:16 PM
Bailout mania. Even worse GMAC becomes a lending bank with access to Fed funds just like AIG. I don't think these politicians realize how much bad advice they are getting. People on the streets of the USA are better educated than most in DC.

GMAC stock jumped up a $1.88 today. It's not too late to start a bank, wreck it and get Fed money. All we need are a few good accountants to hide the cash offshore!:banana:

Cat slave
12-30-2008, 09:35 PM
I was watching Lou Dobbs last night and was appalled that Chrysler and GM
were not required to use the money they get in the "loan" to buy parts and
such right here in America.

Why is our tax money supposed to be used to boost the foreign countrys
work force . Someone said it was "unfriendly" to the global market. WTF!!!
I can think of several ways to be "unfriendly to the global market"!

All "loan" money should be required to be spent in the USA putting Americans
back to work and jump starting our manufacturing base. If they dont do that,
just let them burn, baby, burn.

Ford stated that they did intend to purchase parts from over seas. Maybe
they get a clue, you think?

Mr. Blue
12-31-2008, 01:28 AM
Got a question though, as I was kind of scratching my head on this one and maybe someone can explain it to me.

GMAC said they're making it easier to get financing, so basically most people could get a car loan. Does this make any sense? I mean, isn't it basically feeding the problem of people that may not be able to afford or may not have stellar credit, over-extending themselves just so they can buy a car? Also, what happens when those people default on that loan?

Moby
12-31-2008, 10:12 AM
Got a question though, as I was kind of scratching my head on this one and maybe someone can explain it to me.

GMAC said they're making it easier to get financing, so basically most people could get a car loan. Does this make any sense? I mean, isn't it basically feeding the problem of people that may not be able to afford or may not have stellar credit, over-extending themselves just so they can buy a car? Also, what happens when those people default on that loan?
Defaulting on loans isn't what sent the economy in a tumble. It was the default swap insurance on those loans that caused the problem. There is an estimated $350 Billion at risk from foreclosure in 2008 and about $1.5 Trillion at risk over the long haul and that's something that could be bought by tax payers (we've borrowed $5 Trillion just to pay for Bush tax cuts).

The default swap market to insure loans is estimated at $40 to $65 trillion. Once the OCC stopped auditing financial institutions in 2003, there has been no way to know how much of that money is tied to subprime lending. When a foreclosure occurs a bank might lose a loan worth $200,000 but get property worth $160,000 for a loss of $40k. However, the default swap business may have insured that entire loan 10 to 20 times so the total loss might be $4,000,000 to everyone involved in that mortgage.

What once might have been a $40k loss has turned 100 times worse (or even more).

As long as those loans aren't insured with no assets then a bad loan is just bad business. It will never add up to 10s of billions of dollars in losses.

The problem is that when people are worried about jobs they don't take loans for new cars. At least not the majority of the middle class.

Mr. Blue
12-31-2008, 03:26 PM
As long as those loans aren't insured with no assets then a bad loan is just bad business. It will never add up to 10s of billions of dollars in losses.

Yes, but the tax payers keep having to foot the bill for bad business decisions. I just see it that one problem with America is people living beyond their means. In my grandfather's time, if you couldn't afford to buy something with your salary, you saved for it, or you didn't buy it.

I'm just amazed that everyone thinks we can spend our way out of these problems. I agree with you that job creation, jobs that can't be exported, is what we should be focused on, but instead we keep throwing more money on problems and to me they're not fixing the problem, they're just floating it for awhile longer.

Moby
12-31-2008, 04:03 PM
Yes, but the tax payers keep having to foot the bill for bad business decisions. I just see it that one problem with America is people living beyond their means. In my grandfather's time, if you couldn't afford to buy something with your salary, you saved for it, or you didn't buy it.
That's very true but the default is what made subprime lending profitable. You didn't see advertisements from subprime lenders until 2003. Before that they would lend money, have people default and lose out. After 2003 they could lend money all they wanted. Sell the loans to people that had no assets because they didn't need assets because they had default swap insurance.

Hell, you could hand out a bad loan. Buy swap insurance on it 100 times and make out like a bandit if your customer defaulted on the loan. It was a huge money maker.

Basically in 2003 the OCC cleared the way for making money on bad loans. Before that it was always a losing business.

We all knew that the $700 Billion was going to be wasted because the admins track record on pretty much everything starting from Bush's originals companies went bust. This $6 Billion came from that $700.

Mr. Blue
12-31-2008, 05:47 PM
That's very true but the default is what made subprime lending profitable. You didn't see advertisements from subprime lenders until 2003. Before that they would lend money, have people default and lose out. After 2003 they could lend money all they wanted. Sell the loans to people that had no assets because they didn't need assets because they had default swap insurance.

Hell, you could hand out a bad loan. Buy swap insurance on it 100 times and make out like a bandit if your customer defaulted on the loan. It was a huge money maker.

Basically in 2003 the OCC cleared the way for making money on bad loans. Before that it was always a losing business.

We all knew that the $700 Billion was going to be wasted because the admins track record on pretty much everything starting from Bush's originals companies went bust. This $6 Billion came from that $700.

I agree.

The thing is most people aren't educated regarding money. I mean we'll have our children educated in say a foreign language for 4 years and yet we don't spend enough time on money issues. Not only commonsense type money issues, like balancing a checkbook, saving, not using credit frivolously, but on bigger broader levels.

I consider myself fairly well educated and I'll admit that this is amazingly confusing at times, not just because the issue is complex, but there's such a level of insanity about it that you go, nahhhh that can't be the reason.

I'm just wondering how many of our politicians actually know all that's going on...I fear many don't and they're just exacerbating the situation.

Mr, gone
12-31-2008, 11:21 PM
The Zeitgeist Addendum explains everything...

Cat slave
01-01-2009, 12:17 AM
Got a question though, as I was kind of scratching my head on this one and maybe someone can explain it to me.

GMAC said they're making it easier to get financing, so basically most people could get a car loan. Does this make any sense? I mean, isn't it basically feeding the problem of people that may not be able to afford or may not have stellar credit, over-extending themselves just so they can buy a car? Also, what happens when those people default on that loan?

That was exactly my response.

Cat slave
01-01-2009, 09:01 PM
I find myself turning on the union as well as the stinking government.
Its everyone for themselves. No free lunches. No nuthin....just survival!