Simon Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 ~Anxiously awaiting your explanation of how shrieking "Hey! Look at what those UAW workers have!" is not playing class warfare~ Your repetitive idiocy only serves to set your cause back by providing ample evidence of the stupidity most reasonable folks are tired of. You're exactly the same as simple-minded dolts like Boomer and Wacka. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 Your repetitive idiocy only serves to set your cause back by providing ample evidence of the stupidity most reasonable folks are tired of.You're exactly the same as simple-minded dolts like Boomer and Wacka. 1) "Repetitive idiocy" implies that he responded to my question in the first place. 2) That's ironic seeing how often he repeated the "Why do union workers deserve 4 more dollars an hour?" question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 1) "Repetitive idiocy" implies that he responded to my question in the first place.2) That's ironic seeing how often he repeated the "Why do union workers deserve 4 more dollars an hour?" question. It's not a friggin question. It's a statement. It's not class warfare, because he's pointing out the obvious pay differential among people in the same economic class. Figures, the one time you should use Google to educate yourself, you don't. Hence - idiot, and not even an elegant one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 It's not a friggin question. It's a statement. It's not class warfare, because he's pointing out the obvious pay differential among people in the same economic class. Figures, the one time you should use Google to educate yourself, you don't. Hence - idiot, and not even an elegant one. Actually you'd be well advised to check out Google to find out the meaning of class warfare. I know it's inconvenient to your narrow right wing worldview but class warfare isn't limited to just railing on CEO compensation. And while you're at it you should work on your dissing and dismissing skills, you seem to have regressed a bit since yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 Actually you'd be well advised to check out Google to find out the meaning of class warfare. I know it's inconvenient to your narrow right wing worldview but class warfare isn't limited to just railing on CEO compensation. And while you're at it you should work on your dissing and dismissing skills, you seem to have regressed a bit since yesterday. Then provide the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 Then provide the link. Looks like I'm going to have to wait until Talking Point Tom comes back online for your real response, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted December 13, 2008 Share Posted December 13, 2008 Looks like I'm going to have to wait until Talking Point Tom comes back online for your real response, right? And I'll go back to cleaning pigeon droppings on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted December 13, 2008 Author Share Posted December 13, 2008 Here's an article on the cost of a bankruptcy: On top of all the other jobs lost the ripple effect would be pretty great and probably cost more indirectly than a bailout: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...refer=worldwide Retail Impact That includes 1.4 million people in industries such as retailing that aren’t directly tied to manufacturing. Economists say each manufacturing job is responsible for an additional six jobs outside the industry. Many analysts say the Center for Automotive Research totals are exaggerated. The actual number of losses would depend on whether Americans keep buying cars and trucks. While a Chapter 11 bankruptcy would allow the automakers to continue making vehicles while they restructure, GM, Ford and Chrysler have argued deliveries would drop precipitously as customers balked at buying anything made by a company that might not be around to fix it. U.S. auto sales plunged 37 percent in November to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 10.2 million -- the lowest level in 26 years, according to Autodata Corp. in Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey -- compared with 16.1 million a year earlier and 10.6 million in October. Closing Dealerships Dealerships are already feeling the pinch. The National Automobile Dealers Association, a trade group based in McLean, Virginia, estimates that even without an automaker bankruptcy, 900 dealers will close this year and 1,100 next year, most of them GM, Ford and Chrysler franchises. The association says the three companies have more than 13,000 dealers nationwide, employing more than 700,000 workers. The ripples of failure would also spread quickly to auto- parts makers. “There’s a fairly large number of suppliers out there very squeezed on cash right now,” says Jim Gillette, director of supplier analysis for CSM Worldwide, an automotive consulting firm in Northville, Michigan. “Vehicle volumes are so low, regardless of a bailout, that suppliers are still in trouble.” Production Problems Because many of these business work for all three companies, widespread closures would lead to production problems at Ford, even if it didn’t file for bankruptcy protection, officials at the No. 2 U.S. car company have said. Parts makers including American Axle & Manufacturing Holdings Inc. and brake and powertrain-system makers ArvinMeritor Inc. and Hayes Lemmerz International Inc. employ 526,000 workers, according to U.S. Labor Department statistics, down more than 300,000 since 2000. Gillette predicts another fifth of them will lose their jobs in the coming year even if the automakers get bridge loans. That will mean higher unemployment costs for states, which pay an average of $279 a week for benefits for 26 weeks, according to Jennifer Kaplan, a Labor Department economist. The payments can last as long as 39 weeks in some states, including Ohio, where GM has more than 11,000 employees, according to the company’s Web site. The jobless rate there was 7.2 percent in September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts