So, what's the answer? 73 - 44 = an untenable business model. The geniuses in Congress, mostly democrats, who are beholden to the unions and the environmental wackos, have pressured the auto makers to accept ridiculous UAW contracts, and have imposed CAFE standards upon them. Add to the cauldron the big-bonus nincompoop auto execs that came up with the Hummer and the Scion, and you come up with a poisonous potion worthy of the Wierd Sisters of Macbeth.
Now the same geniuses, plus Bush and King Henry (Paulsen), want to use my money, my hard-earned money, to bail Detroit out. Not to worry, you say, its a loan to Detroit, and they have to pay it back to the taxpayers. Remember the last time Congress said the loans would be paid back? Its called the sub-prime mortgage crisis.
NO MORE BAILOUTS!
Posts
2 comments:
Desman,
It's possible to argue against the bailout without using the $73/hour strawman.
The average GM assembly-line worker makes around $30 per hour in wages. the $73 per hour figure is the sum of all of GM's labor, health, and pension costs, divided by the total number of hours worked. In other words, it includes all the healthcare and retirement costs of retired workers.
I just checked my paycheck and I'm outraged that no one else's pension was included.
It's fun to blame the unions for this mess, but why aren't the Japanese automakers asking for a bailout? (http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/12/12/zakaria.autobailout/index.html?iref=newssearch)
Glenn:
I actually blamed Congress, the UAW, management, Bush, and Paulson.
Bottom line for me is I dont want my money invested in or lent to business that are doomed to fail any way. The restructuting that would result from a bankruptcy proceeding would be more beneficial than a federal bailout.
Post a Comment