bitterlyclingin
Silver Member
- Aug 4, 2011
- 3,122
- 425
- 98
[You already know how Obama & co stiffed the salaried and non union employees of Delphi Corp in favor of the UAW. They lost, among other things, 70% of their pensions while the Union was made whole. Now it turns out that in the GM Bankruptcy the Union's subsidies, subsidies that would have not been allowed had a bankruptcy that followed the rule of law been allowed to take place, cost the US taxpayer some 26.5 billion. The US currently stands to lose 23 billion for its part in the GM bailout. Nice deal if you can get it in this land where all are supposedly equal, but where some are much more equal than the others in this age of Obama.
Theoretically all parties are supposed to suffer equally in bankruptcies, management for failing to follow economic policies, shareholders for allowing incompetent management to continue its wasteful management ways, and the workers for failing to be adequately productive and their exorbitant wage and benefit demands. Instead, with the UAW, its as if nothing ever happened, tokin and cokin at every break.
Now doncha feel all warm & cuddly at your generosity? That is, until you find where a UAW worker took a dump in your spare tire well when the car was still on the line. Why should they care? It never mattered before the bankruptcy.]
"The US government will lose about $23 billion on the 2008-2009 bailout of General Motors and Chrysler. President Obama emphatically defends his decision to subsidize the automakers, arguing it was necessary to prevent massive job losses. But, even accepting this premise, the government could have executed the bailout with no net cost to taxpayers. It could have—had the Administration required the United Auto Workers (UAW) to accept standard bankruptcy concessions instead of granting the union preferential treatment. The extra UAW subsidies cost $26.5 billion—more than the entire foreign aid budget in 2011. The Administration did not need to lose money to keep GM and Chrysler operating. The Detroit auto bailout was, in fact, a UAW bailout"
The Volokh Conspiracy » Auto Bailout or UAW Bailout?
Theoretically all parties are supposed to suffer equally in bankruptcies, management for failing to follow economic policies, shareholders for allowing incompetent management to continue its wasteful management ways, and the workers for failing to be adequately productive and their exorbitant wage and benefit demands. Instead, with the UAW, its as if nothing ever happened, tokin and cokin at every break.
Now doncha feel all warm & cuddly at your generosity? That is, until you find where a UAW worker took a dump in your spare tire well when the car was still on the line. Why should they care? It never mattered before the bankruptcy.]
"The US government will lose about $23 billion on the 2008-2009 bailout of General Motors and Chrysler. President Obama emphatically defends his decision to subsidize the automakers, arguing it was necessary to prevent massive job losses. But, even accepting this premise, the government could have executed the bailout with no net cost to taxpayers. It could have—had the Administration required the United Auto Workers (UAW) to accept standard bankruptcy concessions instead of granting the union preferential treatment. The extra UAW subsidies cost $26.5 billion—more than the entire foreign aid budget in 2011. The Administration did not need to lose money to keep GM and Chrysler operating. The Detroit auto bailout was, in fact, a UAW bailout"
The Volokh Conspiracy » Auto Bailout or UAW Bailout?
Last edited:
