You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Senate GOP has chance to make a stand : Block auto bailout
- Thread starter oktiri
- Start date
I doubt they will do anything like that; too much pressure from business and unions.
Remember, we have the best politicians money can buy and I'm betting payment is being demanded.
Seneca
Remember, we have the best politicians money can buy and I'm betting payment is being demanded.
Seneca
Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:
It's a complicated moral issue.
Huh ?
Investment Banks, Banks, Insurance companies, Credit card comp, student loans..and now the Auto industry.
Pabst, I'm happy to see that you're "flexible" ideologically when it suits you.
But let's be honest, this whole thing about moral hazard and markets decide is 100 % crap.
Thanks. This is why they lost my vote
At least the democrats are not ideological hypocrites. they don't preach one thing and do another
I'm not for ANY bailouts
but auto makes more sense than the financials
as far as I'm concerned, the financials was like going to a dog race track and paying people face value for losing ticket stubs, or even paying them win rates for them
AIG is a fucking insurance company. an insurance company has only one purpose for it's existence - to balance risk
AIG claims they cant do that without luxury - problem is, even with luxury, they STILL cant do their job
but auto makes more sense than the financials
as far as I'm concerned, the financials was like going to a dog race track and paying people face value for losing ticket stubs, or even paying them win rates for them
AIG is a fucking insurance company. an insurance company has only one purpose for it's existence - to balance risk
AIG claims they cant do that without luxury - problem is, even with luxury, they STILL cant do their job
Quote from oktiri:
Huh ?
Investment Banks, Banks, Insurance companies, Credit card comp, student loans..and now the Auto industry.
Pabst, I'm happy to see that you're "flexible" ideologically when it suits you.
But let's be honest, this whole thing about moral hazard and markets decide is 100 % crap.
Thanks. This is why they lost my vote
At least the democrats are not ideological hypocrites. they don't preach one thing and do another
This is less about the auto INDUSTRY than about the guarantees to retirees.
Given that the government uses TAXES to give every do-nothing, incompetent asshole in America who sits at a Commerce Department desk a generous pension I see an EQUAL moral hazard in the inequality of private vs. public pensioners.
How much in taxes did those auto workers and manufactors pay over the years? IOW's Big Brother expects us to pay THEIR retirement but woe is them if they decide to make OUR retirement good. Who was it that MANDATED these unions to begin with? Who treated F and GM as taxable CASH COWS when the going was good? How do you BAILOUT Wall Street and then tell retirees to get fucked? I'm not saying AT ALL that I'm pro-"bailout" but to ignore the myriad of moral/philosophical issues is anti discussion. We haven't even touched upon free trade implications/less costly Asian labor with equal access to U.S. markets etc.
Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:
This is less about the auto INDUSTRY than about the guarantees to retirees.
Given that the government uses TAXES to give every do-nothing, incompetent asshole in America who sits at a Commerce Department desk a generous pension I see an EQUAL moral hazard in the inequality of private vs. public pensioners.
How much in taxes did those auto workers and manufactors pay over the years? IOW's Big Brother expects us to pay THEIR retirement but woe is them if they decide to make OUR retirement good. Who was it that MANDATED these unions to begin with? Who treated F and GM as taxable CASH COWS when the going was good? How do you BAILOUT Wall Street and then tell retirees to get fucked? I'm not saying AT ALL that I'm pro-"bailout" but to ignore the myriad of moral/philosophical issues is anti discussion. We haven't even touched upon free trade implications/less costly Asian labor with equal access to U.S. markets etc.
In other words,
--Free trade is only GOOD when the US has a competitive advantage.
--Bailouts are bad except when the working demographic is middle class unionized whites
--The Fact that management failed miserably to have a strategic view of how the market would develop within the last 20 years is irrelevant.
Thank you.Now, stop lecturing the rest of US about conservative principles.
Quote from oktiri:
In other words,
--Free trade is only GOOD when the US has a competitive advantage.
I'm not an advocate of "free" trade. Any more than I'll make a "trade" with you outside the day's range. If it had been up to me, Asians would still be riding bikes and eating rice while wearing those funny looking hats.
--Bailouts are bad except when the working demographic is middle class unionized whites
White? Are you on DRUGS?
--The Fact that management failed miserably to have a strategic view of how the market would develop within the last 20 years is irrelevant.
That's a question for the marketplace. GM and Toyota sell the same number of units globally.
Thank you.Now, stop lecturing the rest of US about conservative principles. [/B]
Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:
This is less about the auto INDUSTRY than about the guarantees to retirees.
And also about American jobs and the perception that our government cares more about wall street than the average American worker. It's going to be a hard sell for the government to let the auto GM and F fall after bailing out AIG and the big banks. To me the actions of the government look like one big cluster fuck. They don't know what they're going to do next.