Phil Mickelson Faces 61 Percent Tax Rate Following Back-To-Back Wins

[ocean515]

BS, this was covered in great detail, there was NO ONE who had enough capital and was willing to purchase GM and keep it intact, it would have been broken up and sold in pieces, ie, it would have been dissolved.

We have gone over this many times.

You are wrong. The only reason nobody stepped up was because the government didn't want to sell it. They refused to address the unfunded pension liability and insisted who ever bought GM would have to bring all unfunded liability current. That would have been $30 billion above the actual cost of purchasing GM.

Today, the unfunded pension liability is larger.

GM would have had a new owner, a cleaned up balance sheet, and more money to invest in an attempt to meet future government regulations.

Instead, Opel continues to suck the blood out of it in Europe, and their product is questionable.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

You are wrong. The only reason nobody stepped up was because the government didn't want to sell it. They refused to address the unfunded pension liability and insisted who ever bought GM would have to bring all unfunded liability current. That would have been $30 billion above the actual cost of purchasing GM.

So you are arguing that GM should have gone through Chapter 11, the company would have been dissolved (you have not suggested a buyer who would have bought GM sans pensions) and the pension costs would have been transferred to taxpayers via PBGC.

 

[ocean515]

So you are arguing that GM should have gone through Chapter 11, the company would have been dissolved (you have not suggested a buyer who would have bought GM sans pensions) and the pension costs would have been transferred to taxpayers via PBGC.

The company would not have been dissolved. In fact, Oldsmobile and Pontiac may have remained. Ask former employees of those divisions what they think of the new GM. The pension plan would have either been administered by a Trust, much like a large portion of it is now, or yes, the PBGC would have become involved.

As it stands, GM's pension plan is no better than it was before the bankruptcy. Free cash flow was down $1 billion last quarter, and they added almost $2 billion more to their unfunded pension liabilities. They are technically out of compliance with the minimum funding requirements of pension plans as it stands.

One other thing, the New GM carried over the old 2007 GM-UAW North American Labor Contract, with it's bogus two tier pay plan.

Fact - No car company in the world had the capacity to absord the sales/production volume GM had at the time of it's bankruptcy. That's millions and millions of vehicles globally. Do you honestly think other car companies, or even an investment group wouldn't snap up GM with it's state-of-the-art facilities and global distribution network?

We're not talking Chrysler here.

The fact is the Obama Administration made a gift of GM to the UAW. It also wanted to force new technology onto the market place, regardless of the cost. That's why the Volt was sold as a Chevy, rather than as a Cadillac, as originally planned.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

The company would not have been dissolved.

I have made the point twice and you have yet to respond, WHO WAS GOING TO BUY GM IN WHOLE SANS PENSION? You can keep speculating all you want, but until you can name a real offer, you have nothing.

the PBGC would have become involved.

So again, you expected taxpayers to foot the shortfall in the pension.

As it stands, GM's pension plan is no better than it was before the bankruptcy. Free cash flow was down $1 billion last quarter, and they added almost $2 billion more to their unfunded pension liabilities. They are technically out of compliance with the minimum funding requirements of pension plans as it stands.

Actually, they have restructured hourly pensions and as the interest rates rise, costs decline...a lot.

One other thing, the New GM carried over the old 2007 GM-UAW North American Labor Contract, with it's bogus two tier pay plan.

Wait, let me get this....you are going to talk out of both sides of your mouth? You whine about legacy pension costs AND you whine about new hires getting substantially less benefits?

FFS!

Fact - No car company in the world had the capacity to absord the sales/production volume GM had at the time of it's bankruptcy. That's millions and millions of vehicles globally. Do you honestly think other car companies, or even an investment group wouldn't snap up GM with it's state-of-the-art facilities and global distribution network?

Now you are asking the same question I asked you...NAME THE PARTIES WHO MADE AN OFFER!

We're not talking Chrysler here.

Precisely, it took a company the size of FIAT to buy Chrysler. I am still waiting for that real list of suitors.

The fact is the Obama Administration made a gift of GM to the UAW. It also wanted to force new technology onto the market place, regardless of the cost. That's why the Volt was sold as a Chevy, rather than as a Cadillac, as originally planned.

Um, the CHEVY VOLT was introduced as a concept car in the 2007 North American Auto Show....I'll let you do the math on that one.

 

[blaxshep]

So you are arguing that GM should have gone through Chapter 11, the company would have been dissolved (you have not suggested a buyer who would have bought GM sans pensions) and the pension costs would have been transferred to taxpayers via PBGC.

Why would anyone have to buy GM? All the remaining car manufacturers would absorb the customer base.

 

[ocean515]

I have made the point twice and you have yet to respond, WHO WAS GOING TO BUY GM IN WHOLE SANS PENSION? You can keep speculating all you want, but until you can name a real offer, you have nothing.
So again, you expected taxpayers to foot the shortfall in the pension.

Actually, they have restructured hourly pensions and as the interest rates rise, costs decline...a lot.

Wait, let me get this....you are going to talk out of bothe sides of your mouth? You whine about legacy pension costs AND you whine about new hires getting substantially less benefits?

FFS!

Now you are asking the same question I asked you...NAME THE PARTIES WHO MADE AN OFFER!

Precisely, it took a company the size of FIAT to buy Chrysler. I am still waiting for that real list of suitors.

Um, the CHEVY VOLT was introduced as a concept car in the 2007 North American Auto Show....I'll let you do the math on that one.

FFS!

Toyota, Tata, any number of automobile companies, including investment firms would have purchased GM. You don't have any information about who was negotiating do you?

Clearly, as usual, you have nothing but emotion and no facts. The 2007 contract established a two tier system. Any laid off workers were required to be hired back at the old hourly rates.

GM ripped off the tax payer, that means you, and rewarded the UAW. That's it.

GM and the Truth About One of America's Biggest Bankruptcies

The Volt was just a concept in '07. They also introduced many other concepts back then. The intitial production vehicle was to be a Cadillac because it would have sold for more money and helped to cover production costs. Of course it became a political tool once they started courting politician in D.C. Imagine such a green car for the masses. Sure, a $45k Honda sized Chevy, for the masses.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

FFS!

Toyota, Tata, any number of automobile companies, including investment firms would have purchased GM. You don't have any information about who was negotiating do you?

Apparently, you don't either because you have not/cannot produce anything (other than continuing rhetoric) showing these offers.

Clearly, as usual, you have nothing but emotion and no facts. The 2007 contract established a two tier system. Any laid off workers were required to be hired back at the old hourly rates.

Now you are avoiding the point, you are whining about new hires not getting old benefits. Give it up.

GM ripped off the tax payer, that means you, and rewarded the UAW. That's it.

GM and the Truth About One of America's Biggest Bankruptcies

Rhetoric, stockholders lost and the company was reborn with pensions (contractual obligations) in place. That always irks Wall Streeters, but then then issue, as we previously debated, was always the poor designs. That was a management issue, not union.

The Volt was just a concept in '07. They also introduced many other concepts back then. The intitial production vehicle was to be a Cadillac because it would have sold for more money and helped to cover production costs. Of course it became a political tool once they started courting politician in D.C. Imagine such a green car for the masses. Sure, a $45k Honda sized Chevy, for the masses.

This is just a continuation of your previous dumb, false point. The choice was made prior to 2007 to badge the Volt as Chevy, it was not a choice "forced by the (Obama) administration".

But don't let me stop you from making REALLY dumb claims.

 

[ocean515]

Apparently, you don't either because you have not/cannot produce anything (other than continuing rhetoric) showing these offers.

Now you are avoiding the point, you are whining about new hires not getting old benefits. Give it up.

Rhetoric, stockholders lost and the company was reborn with pensions (contractual obligations) in place. That always irks Wall Streeters, but then then issue, as we previously debated, was always the poor designs. That was a management issue, not union.
This is just a continuation of your previous dumb, false point. The choice was made prior to 2007 to badge the Volt as Chevy, it was not a choice "forced by the (Obama) administration".

But don't let me stop you from making REALLY dumb claims.

:lamo

What did the GAO have to say about the governments ownership of GM?

You say stock holders lost? Tax payers have lost.

Oh well, hang on to your fantasy.

:2dance:

 

[Gimmesometruth]

What did the GAO have to say about the governments ownership of GM?

You say stock holders lost? Tax payers have lost.

Oh well, hang on to your fantasy.

Still nothing on the purchaser front? You just can't back up your original claim?

I guess you finally figured out that the Obama admin did not have a time machine to go back to 2006/07 and "force" GM to put a Chevy badge on the Volt.

 

[ocean515]

Still nothing on the purchaser front? You just can't back up your original claim?

I guess you finally figured out that the Obama admin did not have a time machine to go back to 2006/07 and "force" GM to put a Chevy badge on the Volt.

Still nothing from you to prove nobody was interested?

Why are you dodging the questions?

What was the first production car to receive an electric starter?

Explain the Jobs Bank program? How much money did GM pay over the years to workers who didn't work, that could have been spent on developing better product?

I'm done.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Still nothing from you to prove nobody was interested?

Why are you dodging the questions?

Prove a negative? Dude, you made the claim, stop the dancing and produce...or can it.

What was the first production car to receive an electric starter?

What is the price of tea in China?

Explain the Jobs Bank program? How much money did GM pay over the years to workers who didn't work, that could have been spent on developing better product?

Straw meet grasp.

I'm done.

Buh-bye.

 

[ocean515]

Prove a negative? Dude, you made the claim, stop the dancing and produce...or can it.

What is the price of tea in China?

Straw meet grasp.

Buh-bye.

Dudette, has your delusion changed any of the facts?

Here, read some.

Earnings Releases - Quarterly Reports & Financial Releases | GM.com

Do you know how to read an earnings report? How about a chart set?

Something tells me the answer is obvious.

:whothere:

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Dudette, has your delusion changed any of the facts?

Here, read some.

Earnings Releases - Quarterly Reports & Financial Releases | GM.com

Do you know how to read an earnings report? How about a chart set?

Something tells me the answer is obvious.

:whothere:

Is this another failed attempt by you to present a buyer of GM? A report showing increasing profits.....is your substitute for a buyer of GM in 2009?

Talk about deluded.

 

[ocean515]

Is this another failed attempt by you to present a buyer of GM? A report showing increasing profits.....is your substitute for a buyer of GM in 2009?

Talk about deluded.

Nissan and Renault, among others, were in talks with GM prior to the government stepping in and creating NGMCO, Inc., to take over GM, and reward the UAW.

You're clueless. Run along and troll somewhere else.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Nissan and Renault, among others, were in talks with GM prior to the government stepping in and creating NGMCO, Inc., to take over GM, and reward the UAW.

You're clueless. Run along and troll somewhere else.

And you keep chattering away without links. I have lost count of the number of times you have made baseless claims on real offers made.

Nothing...but then, most often, that is what you present.

PS...have you noticed how far you have strayed FROM YOUR OWN TOPIC?

 

[Joe Steel]

Is he justified to complain about his tax bill, or is he just another greedy 1%'er?

The question should be, is 61% enough? The rate should be at least 90%. If he doesn't like it, he can do something else. Maybe he could flip burgers at McDonalds. He probably wouldn't pay any income taxes on what he earned there.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Thanks for the update. He could live in NV (I'll rent him a place for $750) and pay 0% state tax. So, it sounds like a personal choice. Must be rough making only a million or two a year.

Especially when the government takes 61% of it.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

:laughat:

The question should be, is 61% enough? The rate should be at least 90%. If he doesn't like it, he can do something else. Maybe he could flip burgers at McDonalds. He probably wouldn't pay any income taxes on what he earned there.

 

[specklebang]

Especially when the government takes 61% of it.

Yes, that really does suck and it means that for every million, all you get to keep is $390,000. That's actually awful although it's better than nothing. That's why I suggested he move, his tax rate would be more reasonable in my lovely state which is real close to CA and has indoor toilets and grocery stores. Luxury condos on the Strip going begging, you can live there just for the HOA fee. So why on earth would somebody with a business as portable as being a professional golfer choose his tax state where he would have to pay CA's notoriously high taxes? It kind of makes me not feel sorry for him. I know the OP is meant to imbue me with great sadness at the horror this man is facing but somehow I can't get myself to tear up. He won't be homeless.

 

[ocean515]

The question should be, is 61% enough? The rate should be at least 90%. If he doesn't like it, he can do something else. Maybe he could flip burgers at McDonalds. He probably wouldn't pay any income taxes on what he earned there.

Naw. Even if he paid 90%, it wouldn't change the life of envious losers.

He should probably just use his middle finger to remind the needy class of his membership in the 1% club he devoted so much time and energy to become a member of.