I was wondering about that. I saw a commercial this morning: an avuncular Ed Whitacre, the CEO of GM, was boasting that his company had completely paid off its loan. I hadn't thought they'd been selling any more cars than usual, so I was wondering where the cash came from.

This editorial, from a site called istockanalyst.com, says about the same thing as the Senator Grassley release, though less diplomatically. Here's the stinging conclusion:

1. As mentioned - what was paid was simply taken from one tax payer's pocket and put into another; therefore, it is still owed to the taxpayer.

2. The newly owed sum of money is surely free of TARP restrictions so the "talent" at GM can earn bonuses again.

3. The government owns about 70% of GM's worthless stock.

4. GM still owes over $50 BILLION to the taxpayer.

5. Last quarter alone, GM managed to LOSE $3.4 billion.

6. GM's pension plan is underfunded by more than $27 billion.

7. Guess who's on the hook for #6? Yep - YOU.

GM is still MASSIVELY in debt and now in the propaganda game. If you are in the market for a new car, I would suggest buying Ford. Stay away from this welfare queen.

I drive a Hyundai.

Rob Peter to pay Paul.

Gettin' a little tired of being Peter, here. Not that I want to be Paul, but pretty soon when they come to rob Peter, Peter ain't gonna have no money. Maybe then Peter and Paul will both turn against the robber.

While agreeing with ORD, Feebie and PJ, remember: money is fungible.

Hi Skipper,

I would be happier if money was liquid, as opposed to fungible. From Wikipedia:

Fungibility is different from liquidity. A good is liquid if it can be easily exchanged for money or another different good. A good is fungible if one unit of the good is substantially equivalent to another unit of the same good of the same quality at the same time and place.

Examples:

Cash is fungible: one US$10 bank note is interchangeable with another.

In other words, I am happier if my money can buy something I can eat, as opposed to more paper.

Pirate Jo:

That's as may be. But when I say money is fungible, that means that it doesn't come in different colors, or is somehow destined for different pots. From the dictionary: money is fungible—money that is raised for one purpose can easily be used for another..

----

It is worth noting that, SFAIK, the government has made a profit on the TARP money it gave to banks.

"SFAIK, the government has made a profit on the TARP money it gave to banks."

Please define 'profit.' They may be "accruing interest" on loans to banks. What does that mean? Will the government ever collect that money? If so, where that money go, and what will it buy? If it is "owed" money from the banks, yet it is also bailing out those same banks (consider GM, too), so it just prints money to bail out these institutions and get its interest payments, what of value is being created that might actually settle a debt in a meaningful way?

This shouldn't be a surprise, but in my experience most people don't get that "money" is NOT CASH.

Neither is the "dollar". Get one out. I'll wait.

See what it says? "Federal Reserve Note". What's that?

A promise to pay. Pay what?

The dollar is a unit of measure - a marker. We could call it the "chicken" or the "Pingu" or any other name. What makes it truly valuable is the amount of concern it can generate as a possession. Want it? What will you do for it?

And there lies the rub. If the answer to that is "nothing", then the dollar, or any other marker you might use, is plain trash.

There is more. Think about it.

Rob Peter to pay Paul.

Actually, isn't it in this case "Rob Paul a minute ago, to pay Paul now."

As Jo said in that other thread, I agree.