The US government has sold its remaining shares in General Motors, leaving it with a loss of around $10bn (£6bn) on the bailout of the car maker.
The US Treasury spent $49.5bn bailing out GM in 2008 and 2009, and took a 61% stake in the car maker.
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said the move prevented the collapse of the US auto industry and saved a million jobs.
"With the final sale of GM stock, this important chapter in our nation's history is now closed," he said.
GM filed for bankruptcy protection in June 2009, making it the biggest failure of an industrial company in US history.
The reorganisation saw it slash 13 car plants and 27,000 employees in the US.
Since emerging from bankruptcy, GM has reported 15 profitable quarters, has almost $27bn in cash and is considering rewarding shareholders with a dividend payment.
The government began selling its shares in GM in November 2010 and last month said it expected to sell its remaining shares by the end of the year.
One million jobs
The rescue of the US auto industry began under the administration of former US President George W Bush in 2008.
President Barack Obama expanded the effort and took control of GM and rival, Chrysler. Canadian authorities also took part in the rescue.
Treasury Secretary Lew said today that President Obama had "understood that inaction could have cost the broader economy more than one million jobs, billions in lost personal savings, and significantly reduced economic production."
When GM was bailed out by the US Government with my tax dollars, it was a worthless stock. Trading was suspended at what, six or seven dollars? But it really had zero value. By the beginning of this year it was around what? $25? Just this year it went from what, $25 to $40?
To do this and save a bunch of people's asses, the government put out 50B and got back 40B. GM had little if any cash. Since the bailout, 15 consecutive positive quarters, 27 B in the bank. I made money on GM. How about you?
What was the cost for this? 10B. It could have been 0. The government didn't recoup its entire investment, why?
Because too many people would see what a losing proposition the stock market has become for the little investor. It is there for the large institutions to fleece the little guy.
Ironic because the big guy says the little guy doesn't count when it comes to anything but taking his money in the guise of investments.
I never have resorted to calling names in a discussion, but I am going to take exception here. You must be one of those stupid fat-assed turds that thinks that everything should be for him. You obviously expect the government to bail you out, so it doesn't matter whether you are sharp or stupid. So go on being stupid with your own arrogance. The feds gave away 10 Billion in tax dollars, so people that think they are smart, but are pile of shit stupid can go on doing what the want and don't wreck the economy. 10 B loss. 10 B bailout.
And instead of fact checking me, you ought to worry about pissing yourself, at least figuratively, in these conversations (for once). Take a look at the preferred issuances since the late 80's and 90's when Ross Perot, who own(ed) what preferred stock, the terms and how many large institutional investors including hedges and pensions, had worthless stock and hope keeping them afloat. And look what that backing was tied to. And then follow the greed trail. Managers were leveraged out their asses over worthless GM stocks. So much so that if the feds hadn't fixed it, pension funds and institutional investors would have also tumbled. So there.
