If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS News)   GM decides that maybe some more of that overreaching government regulation isn't so bad at all   (cbsnews.com) divider line 33
    More: Interesting, idea, U.S. Transportation Department, business days, okays  
•       •       •

4345 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 May 2014 at 5:20 PM (17 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



33 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-05-16 03:22:48 PM
well, yeah, when you can't compete in a free marketplace fairly, big government becomes your best friend.  all that means is that GM makes an inferior product no one wants and the only way they can succeed now is via a rigged marketplace that is regulated in their favor.  though this has been going on since our government bailed GM out.  and probably before.
 
2014-05-16 03:28:23 PM
also, entrenched corporations love big government, lots of regulation and lots of barriers to entry.  those factors promote status quo and reduce the threat or chance a competitor unseats them.  once your entrenched, big government and onerous regulation helps you by hindering upstarts from competing against you.
 
2014-05-16 03:44:26 PM
Stay tuned for the announcement, which should be coming out very soon, in which it's announced that because of GM's willingness to pay this very high fine, admit fault, and promise to do better in the future, it's been decided that the company will be granted immunity from lawsuits for any incidents that happened prior to its reorganization.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-05-16 03:44:40 PM

SlothB77: well, yeah, when you can't compete in a free marketplace fairly, big government becomes your best friend.  all that means is that GM makes an inferior product no one wants and the only way they can succeed now is via a rigged marketplace that is regulated in their favor.  though this has been going on since our government bailed GM out.  and probably before.


Is subjecting GM to oversight that other companies aren't subjected to supposed to rig the market in GM's favor?  Because I would love to hear the logic behind that.
 
2014-05-16 04:17:23 PM

Pocket Ninja: Stay tuned for the announcement, which should be coming out very soon, in which it's announced that because of GM's willingness to pay this very high fine, admit fault, and promise to do better in the future, it's been decided that the company will be granted immunity from lawsuits for any incidents that happened prior to its reorganization.


Came here to say something like this. It's a payoff to prevent a bigger bill.
 
2014-05-16 05:24:24 PM
4.bp.blogspot.com

Just sayin'
 
2014-05-16 05:25:10 PM
35M huh? What's that to GM... maybe a weeks worth of revenue if that. I guess human lives are only worth pennies on the dollar.
 
2014-05-16 05:30:12 PM
The government actually wanted to fine them much more but the law limits the size of the fine to $35 million.
 
2014-05-16 05:40:30 PM
Big business in bed with government.  Human lives destroyed and business protected by government instead of held accountable.

And capitalism will be blamed for it.

This is where Statism leads us, folks.  The rich always screw the little people because they are powerful enough to wield power and get legal favors.

Pure capitalism would make this impossible.  A big company could be sued into oblivion and be replaced after bankruptcy.

Government's job, it's ONLY job, is to protect the rights of individuals.  You can see how a government that does MUCH more than that has totally failed to do that in this case.  But we need a more powerful government to fix it?  Amirite?
 
2014-05-16 05:41:48 PM
Drove my Chevy to the levee and we all died.
 
2014-05-16 05:47:48 PM

Geotpf: The government actually wanted to fine them much more but the law limits the size of the fine to $35 million.


Well, that's a shiatty law then
 
2014-05-16 05:48:21 PM

The_Hairy_Gooch: Geotpf: The government actually wanted to fine them much more but the law limits the size of the fine to $35 million.

Well, that's a shiatty law then


It works perfectly for the companies that put it into place.
 
2014-05-16 05:51:10 PM
Well good, that means they only owe us tax payers $11.16 billion more not counting any interest that should be charged.

UAW owes about $26 billion
 
2014-05-16 05:56:31 PM
So has anyone figured out yet if GM can be sued for the crashes and deaths this caused before the reorganizing?

I'd like to hope it's yes since they hid it for 12 years and didn't do much to fix it but I ain't no lawyering type.
 
2014-05-16 05:59:11 PM

Pocket Ninja: Stay tuned for the announcement, which should be coming out very soon, in which it's announced that because of GM's willingness to pay this very high fine, admit fault, and promise to do better in the future, it's been decided that the company will be granted immunity from lawsuits for any incidents that happened prior to its reorganization.


Maybe I'm misremembering, but wasn't that already structured into the bailout? I recall (no pun intended) there being talk about removing the restructured company from all prior liabilities including lawsuit exposure, but maybe it didn't actually happen.
 
2014-05-16 06:02:41 PM

The_Hairy_Gooch: Geotpf: The government actually wanted to fine them much more but the law limits the size of the fine to $35 million.

Well, that's a shiatty law then


It would be pretty counterproductive to have bailed GM out then kill or severely cripple it with an enormous penalty. Probably politically impossible too.
 
2014-05-16 06:08:52 PM

uncleacid: Drove my Chevy to the levee and we all died.


You mean the tow truck drove?
 
2014-05-16 06:10:09 PM

Boo_Guy: So has anyone figured out yet if GM can be sued for the crashes and deaths this caused before the reorganizing?

I'd like to hope it's yes since they hid it for 12 years and didn't do much to fix it but I ain't no lawyering type.


i thought that issue was solved long ago... the bankruptcy agreements indemnify them from liabilities before the bankruptcy. in laymans terms, GM made a few extra bucks by letting people DIE, but since they weren't ENOUGH extra bucks, then they aren't responsible.

(insert pretty much any lyric from ok go/louisiana land here.)
 
2014-05-16 06:13:06 PM

Boo_Guy: So has anyone figured out yet if GM can be sued for the crashes and deaths this caused before the reorganizing?

I'd like to hope it's yes since they hid it for 12 years and didn't do much to fix it but I ain't no lawyering type.


This has not yet been determined.

Normally, no.  The "new" GM is considered a different company than the "old" GM, and therefore did not take on it's liabilities.  The "old" GM actually still technically exists (but of course is completely broke).

However, if you can prove the bankruptcy was fraudulent, the judge can partially or completely undo it.  There is a reasonable case to be made for this, since the old GM knew about the problem but didn't tell anybody, including the bankruptcy court.

That is, this is a corporate lawyer's wet dream of a case-it'll take years to sort out fully.
 
2014-05-16 06:19:06 PM

jjorsett: Pocket Ninja: Stay tuned for the announcement, which should be coming out very soon, in which it's announced that because of GM's willingness to pay this very high fine, admit fault, and promise to do better in the future, it's been decided that the company will be granted immunity from lawsuits for any incidents that happened prior to its reorganization.

Maybe I'm misremembering, but wasn't that already structured into the bailout? I recall (no pun intended) there being talk about removing the restructured company from all prior liabilities including lawsuit exposure, but maybe it didn't actually happen.


That's what they will probably argue in the civil suits - that "Old GM" was responsible for the misdeeds so "New GM" is not liable since "New GM" purchased assets free and clear during the bankruptcy organization.
 
2014-05-16 06:23:13 PM
If GM were a person earning the median income, the fine would be $87.10.

GM Gross Income: $20.5B
US Median Income: $51,017
 
2014-05-16 06:27:56 PM

stampylives: Boo_Guy: So has anyone figured out yet if GM can be sued for the crashes and deaths this caused before the reorganizing?

I'd like to hope it's yes since they hid it for 12 years and didn't do much to fix it but I ain't no lawyering type.

i thought that issue was solved long ago... the bankruptcy agreements indemnify them from liabilities before the bankruptcy. in laymans terms, GM made a few extra bucks by letting people DIE, but since they weren't ENOUGH extra bucks, then they aren't responsible.

(insert pretty much any lyric from ok go/louisiana land here.)


But this is one long continuous issue that affected people/products in the old and new GM.
So someone who bought a GM shiatmobile May 30th 2009 is out of luck but if you bought the same GM shiatmobile on June 1st 2009 you can get damages?

It doesn't seem right,  they acted in bad faith and didn't follow the laws for reporting and fixing safety issues,  that should open them up to lawsuits from any affected products from pre or post bankruptcy GM.
 
2014-05-16 06:35:24 PM

bigstoopidbruce: Big business in bed with government.  Human lives destroyed and business protected by government instead of held accountable.

And capitalism will be blamed for it.

This is where Statism leads us, folks.  The rich always screw the little people because they are powerful enough to wield power and get legal favors.

Pure capitalism would make this impossible.  A big company could be sued into oblivion and be replaced after bankruptcy.

Government's job, it's ONLY job, is to protect the rights of individuals.  You can see how a government that does MUCH more than that has totally failed to do that in this case.  But we need a more powerful government to fix it?  Amirite?


2/10
 
2014-05-16 06:37:47 PM
In Defense of GM.
No one is asking the right question: Was the company's risk assessment about the faulty ignition switch reasonable?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/20 14 /04/in_defense_of_gm_its_risk_assessment_about_the_faulty_ignition_swi tch_may.html
 
2014-05-16 06:42:11 PM

bigstoopidbruce: Big business in bed with government.  Human lives destroyed and business protected by government instead of held accountable.

And capitalism will be blamed for it.

This is where Statism leads us, folks.  The rich always screw the little people because they are powerful enough to wield power and get legal favors.

Pure capitalism would make this impossible.  A big company could be sued into oblivion and be replaced after bankruptcy.

Government's job, it's ONLY job, is to protect the rights of individuals.  You can see how a government that does MUCH more than that has totally failed to do that in this case.  But we need a more powerful government to fix it?  Amirite?


Aren't you one of those guys usually in favour of tort reform?  Make up your mind.
 
2014-05-16 06:45:30 PM
So the government fined itself?
 
2014-05-16 07:17:14 PM
I love how GM pays $35 million to make this all go away, when a confirmed 12 and probably more people died. Toyota has 6 deaths from sudden acceleration that may/may not have been driver error, and they pay $1.2 farking billion. Don't tell me our government believes in a fair marketplace because they protect the shiat out of big business in this country.
 
2014-05-16 08:40:25 PM
GM got a government bailout. Ford didn't want or need one. Of course GM likes the government.
 
2014-05-16 08:55:43 PM

The_Hairy_Gooch: 35M huh? What's that to GM... maybe a weeks worth of revenue if that. I guess human lives are only worth pennies on the dollar.


A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.

Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?

You wouldn't believe.

Which car company do you work for?

A major one.
 
2014-05-16 09:51:31 PM
I'm curious if the 35 million is less than the recalls would've cost.
 
2014-05-16 10:38:02 PM
Had an interview for a Engineering job at GM a couple years ago and turned it down when they said it was a contract position. Heard most of the new hires are contract so I don't see GM lasting too long.
 
2014-05-16 10:41:50 PM

The_Hairy_Gooch: 35M huh? What's that to GM... maybe a weeks worth of revenue if that. I guess human lives are only worth pennies on the dollar.


No, I heard on one of the major networks that it was a SINGLE DAY's worth of revenue.
 
2014-05-17 08:32:50 AM

jayphat: I love how GM pays $35 million to make this all go away, when a confirmed 12 and probably more people died. Toyota has 6 deaths from sudden acceleration that may/may not have been driver error, and they pay $1.2 farking billion. Don't tell me our government believes in a fair marketplace because they protect the shiat out of big business in this country.


They sure do. Toyota being a foreign company, and there's a good chance that the deaths were related to driver error.
 
Displayed 33 of 33 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report