Johnny Coli Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 So? Then why are you arguing against letting those private entities deal with their own issues? Why are you advocating for taking money of our the pockets of working taxpayers to fund the irresponsible promises of one private group to another? And do the same rules apply to anyone now -- the government guarantees all contracts? Or it is only for those with enough lobbyist money to throw around? btw, "excessive" would be the correct word to use before "wage" in your last sentence. The loan is coming from the package that was already given to the Treasury. Its already coming out of the taxpayer's pockets. How much money do you think will come out of our pockets if you add another couple million people to the unemployment rolls? Hey, who cares though. As long as we get to screw over the UAW.
stuckincincy Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 So? This was negotiated on between the union and management. Everybody was happy with the groundbreaking concessions the UAW made last October. Auto stocks rose. Everybody was high-fiving each other over the board room tables. What happened in the interm? The economy tanked. That's not a direct result of the UAW getting a decent wage, health insurance and a pension. The Obama Magical Mystery Tour election campaign railed on incessantly and made hay about the loss of jobs for Americans, about how they would grit their noble teeth to bite companies that move off-shore and dare profit off the downtrodden who become bereft of good American jobs. I've yet to hear the Savior ring in on this...although that placard with the small Presidential Seal slapped on the lectern that says "The Office of The President-Elect" is a nice touch.
Tcali Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 1 Year ago ...let em fail, but this economy and market are WAY too fragile to handle this.....throwing $25 billion at a problem will prevent TRILLIONS in market loss and further business failures......just my 2 cents... WITH drastic restructuring of contracts. The 25 BIL will be down the drain in a couple years if pensions and salaries/benefits aren't drastically slashed.
Tcali Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 The loan is coming from the package that was already given to the Treasury. Its already coming out of the taxpayer's pockets. How much money do you think will come out of our pockets if you add another couple million people to the unemployment rolls? Hey, who cares though. As long as we get to screw over the UAW. The UAW has done the screwing over. How many jobs have those ridiculous contracts cost so far by making the american auto companies uncompetitive? Yeah--let the UAW get its way....and soon practically all the plants will be closed. Grow some common sense.
Tcali Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 So? This was negotiated on between the union and management. Everybody was happy with the groundbreaking concessions the UAW made last October. Auto stocks rose. Everybody was high-fiving each other over the board room tables. What happened in the interm? The economy tanked. That's not a direct result of the UAW getting a decent wage, health insurance and a pension. Pathetic post.
mead107 Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 The UAW has done the screwing over. How many jobs have those ridiculous contracts cost so far by making the american auto companies uncompetitive? Yeah--let the UAW get its way....and soon practically all the plants will be closed. Grow some common sense. and what is the pay of all the management to cost of labor to the guy that builds the car ? Not the unions fault that the company loves to spend money .
Johnny Coli Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 The Obama Magical Mystery Tour election campaign railed on incessantly and made hay about the loss of jobs for Americans, about how they would grit their noble teeth to bite companies that move off-shore and dare profit off the downtrodden who become bereft of good American jobs. I've yet to hear the Savior ring in on this...although that placard with the small Presidential Seal slapped on the lectern that says "The Office of The President-Elect" is a nice touch. Well, you've blamed everything that's happened over the past eight years on Clinton, so I'm not surprised to see you're already ramping up to blame Obama 60 days before he even takes office.
mead107 Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 With out the unions you would be working 60 to 70 hours a !@#$ing week with no time off and working for $5.00 per hour.
VOR Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 I'm glad to see the latest position of "No plan, no money." These guys have watermelon-sized gonads to ask for this money unconditionally. Actually, they didn't ask for it unconditionally. They said that executives would get no bonuses, the Government would be a shareholder, and there would be full financial transparency. But again, let the oil companies do it, or let them declare bankruptcy, reorganize, and streamline. This has been decades in the making.
Johnny Coli Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 The UAW has done the screwing over. How many jobs have those ridiculous contracts cost so far by making the american auto companies uncompetitive? Yeah--let the UAW get its way....and soon practically all the plants will be closed. Grow some common sense. The UAW hasn't screwed anybody over. They've done their job in negotiating a fair wage and benefit package for their members. Nobody held a gun to the heads of the guys representing management in those negotiations. The UAW made significant concessions last year. They'll make more concessions if need be this time. The UAW in no part is responsible for the state of the US economy. Not by any stretch. Sure, unions and minority homeowners are a convenient set of scapegoats to trot out there, but they're not at the root of this mess. One of us is arguing to try and save three million jobs, an industry and by doing so trying to avoid a devastating hit to the economy at the worst possible time. The other one of us is arguing for a scorched earth policy to stick it to the unions. Who's arguing using common sense, and who's being petty?
Chef Jim Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 With out the unions you would be working 60 to 70 hours a !@#$ing week with no time off and working for $5.00 per hour. The 20's were a long time ago. The unions have worn out their purpose and have gone too far.
Acantha Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 With out the unions you would be working 60 to 70 hours a !@#$ing week with no time off and working for $5.00 per hour.
Acantha Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 By the way, does anyone think it could possibly be a combination of the UAW, fat cat CEO's, and government policies that caused this? Or is fighting over one or the other the real point?
mead107 Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 The 20's were a long time ago. The unions have worn out their purpose and have gone too far. Do you think so ? Why do they go over seas and only pay a bag of rice to the workers ? ???? make them work 60 hours and employ kids . The big good !@#$ing company , right . bend over . Why is that japan will not import gm cars from the US ?
Chef Jim Posted November 21, 2008 Posted November 21, 2008 Do you think so ? Why do they go over seas and only pay a bag of rice to the workers ? ???? make them work 60 hours and employ kids . The big good !@#$ing company , right . bend over . Why is that japan will not import gm cars from the US ? So you're cool with the American auto industry going belly up?
Steely Dan Posted November 21, 2008 Posted November 21, 2008 Pathetic post. Why? With out the unions you would be working 60 to 70 hours a !@#$ing week with no time off and working for $5.00 per hour. True. Unions are a double edged sword. The only unions good for their employees now are for jobs that can't leave the country like repairmen and truckers. The auto companies just move jobs out of the country to Mexico or other low wage countries. They did set things up for future employees in many industries that weren't ever unionized.
pBills Posted November 21, 2008 Posted November 21, 2008 The 20's were a long time ago. The unions have worn out their purpose and have gone too far. How many organizing drives have you been on? Probably none? So if that's the case then you truly have no idea what people have to put up with before coming unionized.
Chef Jim Posted November 21, 2008 Posted November 21, 2008 How many organizing drives have you been on? Probably none? So if that's the case then you truly have no idea what people have to put up with before coming unionized. I've never worked union before so I only know what people have to put up with before becoming unionized. I see no problems. You're an idiot.
mead107 Posted November 21, 2008 Posted November 21, 2008 So you're cool with the American auto industry going belly up? only gm . they can go !@#$
Recommended Posts