Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012
Well, when GM spends that money, it's not going to be burned in a fire. The money that they are spending is revenue to somebody, and most likely, that somebody will be a private entity. So, the contributions of the taxpayers aren't going to be in vain in the way you are suggesting. All that's happening is that the current state of the economy is forcing you to reinvest some of what you would otherwise consider discretionary income into our economic system in the name of stability. Wheter via a bailout increasing taxes, or an increase in the unemployment tax seems like semantics to me.
We're a society that is interdependent on each other to an extent. A scenario where a major part of society could just fall out and everyone else is unaffected just isn't feasible. From an economic standpoint, the bailout doesn't guarentee the success of GM per se, but unless the capital ends up being sucked up into the pockets of shareholders, it's guarenteed to benefit the overall economy in some way.
|
If your did not hear I believe that GM no longer has share holders. The problem I see is we have allready dumped 20 bil into GM with no results so now we are going to dump another 30 bil into a long shot to see if that works. I'm guess that 30 bil will turn into another 50 bil. I don't think the impact of GM going under would be 80 bil in unemployment benifits.