David McCallum said: Mel Bain was private capital investment, private individuals put up their money in hopes of a return. The others you mentioned just happens to be the money of citizens of this country.......aka taxpayers.........we had NO say in that.
David, you are correct, the problem that was being faced at the time of the auto bailouts was groups like Bain couldn't or wouldn't invest their money, so the government did it to help protect those businesses, and in their eyes the country as a whole.
Dennis, 80% isn't too bad I guess, probably what the president did with the government's investment, the big loss Solyndra, the big winners GM and Chrysler. With the exception of where the money came from to invest, I don't see much difference between the two then.
The big question that nobody discusses is what would have happened if the government didn't bail out the auto industry? I don't know if we really know, but when the economy was in the shape it was it, why take that chance? Heck even George W. supported the bailouts, as a matter of fact some started while he was still in office. Bain could have even if they invested into a business let it go bankrupt, but could we have really afford to let GM and Chrysler do it? Ford was even in agreement, I guess we could be all driving foreign cars now if we hadn't. And we complain about not enough manufacturing as it is. But all you guys will talk about is the give away to the auto unions, not the good it did for a bunch of middle class workers. Maybe this is why what happened in Wisconsin didn't happen in Ohio?
Mel