So it's OK to bail out Citibank, but the Big 3 can pound salt over a $25 billion loan

[DainBramaged]

Washington as a whole just sucks. Paulson can't get the fuck out of here fast enough.

Oh, and for all you end timers who WANT to see the Unions busted, when the breadlines form, you can explain to me why it was such a good idea to put 5 million people out of work to satisfy your need for anarchy.

[Coexist]

1. if the news would show this comparative rush to bail out a bank whilst kicking autoworkers

in the teeth by hemming and hawing and making them beg, the populace would be outraged. As they should be.

[BobRossi]

2. Pelosi, Reid, et al.

Can suck sand. What the fuck is with people in California and Nevada that they elect the likes of these pretenders?

[babylonsister]

3. Not true. But to go to DC with no clue as to any plan they might want

implemented, I think Congress was well within their rights to withhold any funds until we know how they will be spent. We need more accountability, not less.

[Romulox]

4. Ummm, yes it is 100% true. Are wishing things away now?

http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSWEN098720081124

[babylonsister]

11. I prefer them showing some responsibility instead of just cutting checks

for them. So sue me.

And Congress feels the same way. What's wrong with that? Instead of being angry at Congress, get your ire up for the big 3 execs who thought they could saunter in and get free money.

They'll get their money, but there will be strings attached, as there should be.

[DainBramaged]

16. Should there be strings for the banks, WHY NOT EQUAL TREATMENT

feh

[babylonsister]

22. Duh. Of course there should be. Paulson sucks and scared people

sufficiently to bail out the banks. Now they're not even accountable for how the money has been spent. It pisses me off, too.

[DainBramaged]

25. THERE ARE NO CONDITIONS

We were asking for a LOAN, LOAN, not bailout, LOAN

LOAN

[Telly Savalas]

80. A loan which has a high probability of default is a bailout.

Hell, Citigroup ought to be happy to make the fucking loan. They have plenty of capital now.

[Romulox]

88. Like the ones given to AIG and Citi, you mean? nt

[Romulox]

18. Read the morning paper. They just cut a $300 billion dollar check to Citi. No hearings required.

And you're still going on about "free money" to the Big 3? :wtf:

[DainBramaged]

23. So is my credit car d debt forgiven now???

:rofl:

[babylonsister]

24. I don't get the morning paper and just woke up a bit ago.

I didn't know that, don't think it's right, but also think there should be strings attached to Citi.

Fucked up situation, I know. I don't know who's making these decisions and don't know why this one was made.

[Romulox]

26. It's on the interweb. nt

[babylonsister]

27. What part of 'I just woke up' don't you understand? I'll go read all about it. nt

[pampango]

38. There are strings attached to the Citi bailout.

The reports I have seen indicated that their bailout "plan" included government veto over executive compensation, dividend payments and, at least partial, government ownership of Citi.

Perhaps the auto executives have offered to give the government veto power over executive compensation, control over dividend payments and partial government ownership of the companies through stock ownership. If a bailout "plan" is worked out with the auto industry (and I hope it is), some of the same elements (and some new ones specific to the auto industry - hybrids, mileage standards, employment safeguards) should be in that "plan".

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081124/citigroup.html

[DainBramaged]

41. Strings, really like no lunch at Sardi's, limit shoe purchases to $500 a pair

crank back on Limo Service and more than one person should use the limo, no pate' for lunch except Friday.

Anything I miss?

[pampango]

45. Well. the government gets to control executive compensation. Once the Obama admistration

begins, I trust that the things you mentioned will be included in "executive compensation". For now, we probably agree that no one will put a stop to those.

[lapfog_1]

42. Yeah, this is the second Citibank bailout in the last few weeks.

Citibank was one of the nine banks to get initial TARP money. $25 B in the first round. They used it to buy other banks.

This round - $20 B more - yeah, we got some stock for it. Big whoop. Restrictions on CEO and executive pay... that may be a myth.

[pampango]

49. Sure the limits on executive pay may be a "myth". Under Bush for the next couple of months,

they undoubtedly are. I hope that in a couple of months that changes.

If the limits are "myths", the auto executives ought to agree to similar limits (if only for PR purposes) if they believe in their hearts that the limits will not be enforced. Similarly, if the big auto boys think that selling stock ownership to the government is a "big whoop", they should suggest that as a condition they will accept. Basically, if they propose a "plan" that includes the same "limitations" that the City "plan" included, they shouldn't have any trouble getting the loans that they are requesting. If the "limitations" are enforceable, the auto execs will only agree if they are desperate. If they are just for show, then they should agree to them as they are just a "big whoop."

[lapfog_1]

36. Let's be accurate.

Though even when accurate it still stinks.

They got $20 B bailout (apparently to do with however they wish).

This is ON TOP of the initial $25 B handed to them a few weeks ago from the TARP. They used it to BUY OTHER BANKS.

In addition, they get a $300 B in loan guarantees. In case any of their assets don't match the initial asset value. So, basically, we just bought their entire MBS portfolio at FACE VALUE. Exactly what they said wouldn't happen with TARP (which is why this loan guarantee didn't come from TARP).

[DainBramaged]

37. And GM gets how much of these funds????

:popcorn:

[lapfog_1]

39. GM got sent packing...

and told to walk back to Washington if they can come up with a plan. And none too fast either. Might get them some money by Christmas... or not.

[DainBramaged]

40. I think those who are against helping GM and the UAW

need to be sent packing when their term is up for election. We will not forget.

[Canuckistanian]

7. Did Citibank have a plan? How about AIG? Goldman Sachs?

I don't remember hearing anything about their "plans".

[DainBramaged]

12. They had shit for assets and Booshe said OK BOYZ here ya go

but the UAW and all the ancillary businesses, they can go fuck themselves, Booshe don't need no car.

[babylonsister]

14. Once burned, twice shy? nt

[rockymountaindem]

81. Except that it's still going on right now

Citibank just got more government support while the automakers got zilch. Citibank, with no plan, got the government to back $300 billion in assets while the automakers got a big fat goose egg. Citibank, the company that's laying off people in this country so they can create 1000 new jobs in the Philippines, got money. The automakers, who are responsible directly or indirectly for millions of jobs in this country, get the shaft. The double standard is evident.

[Raineyb]

58. Citigroup plan = laugh all the way to the bank. n/t

Regards

[DainBramaged]

8. What kind of plan does Citibank have????

<crickets>

[SammyWinstonJack]

15. Take the money and run? Seems like that is their plan.

[babylonsister]

17. I have no idea. Have they been given their recently requested money yet?

Wouldn't they have to go before a committee to plead their case?

[Romulox]

20. Oy. Please at least scan the headlines before posting. nt

[DainBramaged]

21. Carte blanche, I guess the headlines aren't clear enough.

[Warren Stupidity]

28. No they don't and that is the point.

Congress simply gave Paulson 350B (and perhaps more) with essentially no oversight to do whatever he thought he needed to do. And this morning that appears to be 'bail out citibank' with no plan, no hearings, no oversight. Meanwhile Detroit has been told to pound sand. 6 million jobs, at a minimum, are at stake in the auto industry. But there is no sense of urgency, no crisis there, nothing to see, move along. Of course it didn't help that the idiot Detroit CEOs flew three separate private jets to Warshington to plead for aid. I certainly agree that those jerks deserve nothing. But ignoring the CEOs, there is simply too much at risk here to let Detroit fail, but that appears to be the plan.

[Le Taz Hot]

35. Too bad they didn't have the same high standards

with Wall Street. No accountability, no oversight, no transparency. Nice gig if you can get it.

[Telly Savalas]

79. What's Citibank's plan?

Is there a shred of evidence to suggest they won't come begging for more in 6 months?

[Skidmore]

5. You know, they all can pound salt.

The Big 3 do not deserve free money without making meaningful changes in the way they do business and make cars. They've ignored good business practices and production of forward looking products for decades now.

[DainBramaged]

9. So should the banks make changes?? Never mind, go ride your bicycle.

:eyes:

[Skidmore]

30. Yes, the banks should also make changes.

This idea that good money should continually be tossed after bad has been done time and time again. No, there is no free ride for the citizen and there should not be one for corporations or financial institutions which do not manage their affairs properly. How many times are you prepared to keep throwing money down the rat hole? Do you have a bottomless pocket when it comes to your personal debt? I don't. The repo man has come to collect the debt. Unfortunately, he is accompanied by the burglar who wants to grab as much of your stuff as he can before the repo man can hook his chains to your car.

Last week when I listened to those representatives of the Big 3, not one of them suggested that they recognized the need to change any of their practices or products. The representatives of the banks seem to think also that they can forever conduct business using the same models, albeit tweaked a bit for cosmetic purposes.

[DainBramaged]

74. I'm not going to abandon the LAST major industry we have, are you?

[JVS]

32. In the banks' favor, at least they offer something that there is a high demand for

If the banks were actually to use the bailout money to make loans and keep the overstressed credit market from collapsing, things would be a lot better.
If the big three used their money to squirt out more SUVs on the other hand, it would merely add to the inventory that isn't moving anyway.

[MichiganVote]

89. Last time I looked there is a high demand for cars...your "If" is a pretty big promise.

The banks are not asking for bail out funds to retool their industry. They can change their products at will. Retooling an auto plant is a much more involved process than changing some letterhead and the interest rate on a product.

[sarcasmo]

53. Citibank does? They have a failing business too? The real reason is Citibank

doesn't have a Union. I don't think there are as many liberals on this board as we thought. This is class warfare. GM wanted a loan and not a bailout, Citibank gets a bailout?

[Skidmore]

55. Read my response above.

Being liberal doesn't mean you have to be a fool about expecting sound economic and business practices. GM wants a loan, fine. I understand that. GM can also come up with some sort of plan as to how they will change their business and products so they can pay the loan back. The auto makers have waltzed us down the primrose path before and there was nothing to show for it then either.

As far as the banks go, I didn't support bailouts for them as they seek to perpetuate their global Ponzi scheme.

[lisa58]

6. Didn't Citibank just apply for part of the $700 billion?

[DainBramaged]

10. You bet.

[Romulox]

13. They were just APPROVED for another $300 billion on top of the earlier $20 billion

I'm still waiting for a breakdown in Citi's labor costs from our resident DU economists.

None has been forthcoming so far.

[DainBramaged]

19. It's probably around $1200 an hour, but that's ok, they have educations.

:eyes:

[JVS]

29. Two wrongs doesn't make a right.

Neither bailout was/would be good.

[lapfog_1]

31. You realize, of course, that this is the second "bailout"

for Citibank...

They got an initial $25 B as one of the nine banks to receive money from TARP. Despite the wishes of congress, and likely even Paulson himself, they did nothing to remove bad assets, nor did they restructure bad mortgages, nor did they push the money into companies clamoring for more credit... no, they used that $25 B to acquire other banks.

Now they get another $20 B PLUS a loan guarantee for at least $300 B more. With that loan guarantee, they now have ZERO incentive to take losses in their mortgage backed securities, nor any incentive to work with homeowners to stay in their houses. None.

Who sits on the Board of Citibank, who was it's previous CEO, who insisted in the Clinton years (along with Greenspan) that no oversight was needed for the emerging "exotic" investments of Credit Default Swaps and the like. None other than Obama economic advisor Robert Rubin. Not only that, but Summers has long been his "right hand" and he had another protege at the NY Fed... one Geithner.

Funny how that works.

Oh, and Detroit can, apparently, go pound sand. What's another 3 million unemployed. $25 B for those wasteful jerks. Sure glad we didn't do that! :sarcasm:

[liberal N proud]

33. They will bail out the big 3...

Once they have brought the UAW to its knees.

First of all, Citibank is full of suits, executives who are part of the same club as Paulson where the Autoworkers are just your blue collar slobs that they don't give a shit about.

Clue:
Meet the press yesterday, Asshole Brokaw proclaimed that Obama was just going to have to get in the face of the unions and tell them they were going to have to give up their big salaries. He never once mentioned the obscene salaries of the executives.

[Le Taz Hot]

34. I was watching Michael Moore on LKL the other night

and I thought he had some excellent ideas. Basically, do what Roosevelt did and LEND them enough money to retool to build hybrids, high-speed rail and other forms of mass transit using clean technology.

'Course this makes WAY too much sense and it doesn't put money in the top 1% pocket so it will never fly but I thought it was a good place to start. Too bad it will never happen.

[ben_thayer]

48. Dingdingdingdingding!

Moore was SPOT ON!

But I hope it does happen...

[JackRiddler]

43. It's not "okay" to bail out Citibank.

It's giving them real money to cover phantom values they invented in bets. It's another epic crime in the fiscal end times of the American state.

And after they pretend to submit a plan, the Big 3 will get their handout without any real conditions, too. And it won't do any good for the people, either.

[DainBramaged]

47. Not if we have anything to say about

so many here think the UAW is passive and won't have input? If that's the case, BUY JAPANESE, then you don't ave to worry now, do you???

[JackRiddler]

57. I happily don't own a car and this isn't about UAW.

If I was UAW, I bet my demands would far exceed theirs.

You tell me: Is UAW articulating a vision where the personnel choose board members instead of the banks? Do they want the workers and the local community and the stakeholders in control of the capital and the company and picking the CEO, instead of outside shareholders? Do they have a vision for how what they do fits into the rest of the world?

If not, what good are they?

What is UAW's stance on mass transport? What's their stance on the railways?

What is UAW's position on environmental sustainability? Fuel standards? Investing in alternative powertrains? The Hummer? The electric car? Carbon dioxide emissions?

Perhaps we differ about the future of transportation and the sustainability (or desirability) of the hydrocarbon-powered automotive culture that has turned most public space into an unlivable pesthole and contributed as much as any other factor to the fire burning the planet.

If the companies who lobbied and pressured politicians to achieve this very destructive end now come begging for money because they didn't plan even five years ahead and catered to the selfish so they could reap the short-term profit margins of two-ton vanity cars, that's real tough. The government should take them over, fire the management, and convert them to sustainably building things that are not just useful but necessary in the present historic moment, like electric trains and wind turbines.

I feel for the workers. I'm sure we agree jobs rebuilding the railways (which obviously can't be done anywhere except in the country itself) and converting to alternatice energy sources like wind and solar should be unionized, well-paid, and covered (along with everyone else) by a universal health care and pension plan.

[pampango]

60. I think we agree. The UAW should demand that the $25 loan/bailout for auto industry

HAS to come with conditions. To allow the Big 3 to get the money with no questions asked would mean that they will continue with "business as usual" which has not been good for the companies or the union. Conditions similar to those imposed on Citibank (executive compensation limits, dividend payment restrictions, sale of stock to the government) should be imposed on the auto companies along with other conditions related the kinds of cars they will produce and how they will produce them.

The UAW should should be in favor of using this opportunity to force the companies to stop running the industry (and the union) into the ground.

[JackRiddler]

61. Sounds like we do...

A bailout without the right conditions practically guarantees that the car companies will screw the workers first, as usual, and then anyway end up bankrupt, breaking up units and selling to China or merging them into Toyota or the German producers.

Imagine if the UAW actually took the lead in criticizing the industry. (Not as radically as I would, but at all.) Imagine if they were the ones introducing concepts of sustainable production, compacts with lower emissions, and alternative development for powertrains, energies and transport modes generally -- alongside the need to protect workers and keep jobs in the country. I think they'd have a much more powerful position politically. The UAW could choose to lead a discussion about the future, instead of allowing themselves to be portrayed by the companies and the corporate media as whiners trying to protect their endangered economic position. All it takes is imagination at a point where they have nothing to lose.

[Kalyke]

44. Yes, apparently.

Maybe Congress understands penny loafters better than Doc Martin's.

:shrug:

[MadHound]

46. So, are you willing to let GM have a double dip in the bailout pool

GMAC is looking to transfer itself into a bank holding company(ie a commercial bank) in order to allow it a shot at the 700 billion that we're currently giving out to financial institutions. Since GMAC is so intimately intertwined with GM, this would, in effect, be giving a bailout to GM by the back door. Do you think that this is right? Why should we both loan and give money to GMAC.

The only way I'm in favor of this 25 billion bailout for Detroit is to attach stringent conditions to how these corporations are managed, how the money is spent, and the type of vehicles they manufacture, ie making all of their cars much more fuel efficient and start rolling out alternative vehicles, electric, along with a commitment to keep manufacturing jobs here

By the by, you're so concerned about the jobs lost if the bailout goes through(and I notice that it seems as though your estimate of jobs lost goes up about a million every time you post one of these rants, why's that), how do you feel about the fact that GM is already planning on using part of its bailout money on its operations in Brazil? <http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-11/19/content_10381498.htm>
So much for saving those US jobs:shrug:

Meanwhile, Ford is actually doing quite well in China, thus boosting its bottom line by making cars there, both for the Asian market and to ship back here for US consumption. Hmm, doing a bailout to send more jobs abroad.

Frankly, when it comes down to it, I don't trust, nor want, any bailout plan for either the financial, manufacturing, or any other sector until Obama takes office. We've already seen how badly the first bailout package has been pillaged and misspent, we don't need to throw more good money after bad.

[DainBramaged]

50. GMAC is a F-I-N-A-N-C-I-A-L Institution, they don't build cars, and is 51% owned by Cerebus

I think everything is wrong, and I'm waiting for the crash so all of you haters can stand in line with me waiting for soup and bread and tell me how terrible the auto industry was. Because if most of you had your way, there would be NO Unions and ONLY foreign crap in this country.

Why not just move to Japan or China then you don't have to worry about who is getting money?

Oh and genius, the Chevy Volt, the FIRST plug in hybrid for the masses, will be available in late 2009. It has been under development for two years now.


Goodbye.

[MadHound]

54. Gee, thanks for the condescending tone, do you actually want to discuss this,

Or do you just want to rant mindlessly because you don't know the nuts and bolts of what's going on?

Yes, I understand that GMAC is a financial institution, I believe that I mentioned that in my OP. I also mentioned that it is intimately intertwined with GM itself, yet you refuse to address this. So, for your edification, here's a money quote from last week when GMAC made this announcement:
"Factors that could cause our actual results to be materially different from our expectations include, among others, the following: securing funding required to maintain our and ResCap's operations; maintaining the mutually beneficial relationship between us and General Motors Corporation ("GM"); our ability, or inability, to maintain an appropriate level of debt; the profitability and financial condition of GM" Get the picture? Or do you need it spelled out in one syllable words? Here's a link for more. <http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/GMAC-Files-Application-With-Federal/story.aspx?guid={4C322CB4-F7E0-4704-AB4D-76CFFF0794E6}>

I also note that you not only didn't address the issues of GM using this money to fund its Brazil operation, or Ford's China operation, and the subsequent job loss, you seem to want to lump me into those who want Detroit to fail simply because I want some conditions attached to this bailout What, you just want to throw money at these people? Don't you get it, if we do that then we might as well throw the money into a fire for all the good it will do us. The Big 3 have got to fundamentally change their business plan, and this is an excellent opportunity for us to change it. If we just throw money at them, no strings attached, the problems will only continue to grow, and we'll be back here in five years or less with the Big 3 needing ever more public cash. Do You Understand?

But hey, if you simply want to berate those of us who are unwilling to simply throw money at the Big 3, go right ahead. All you're doing is showing not only your own ignorance, but also how narrow minded and illegitimate your view on this matter is. What the hell is wrong with attaching conditions to this?

[DainBramaged]

56. I said goodbye, should I say it in some other language?

What you say doesn't mean shit to a tree to ANYONE in Washington, so suck it up and bother someone else.

[MadHound]

59. LOL, you are too funny, when the going gets hard, you run away. Whaaaaaaa!

Geez, being a rough, tough, car buildin' union member like yourself(by the by, what happened to your union logo, afraid to display it or what?), I thought you could handle a bit of debate on the facts of the matter. Instead you do a drive by response and expect that to be the last word:eyes: What, can't handle the facts? Can't deal with the truth of the matter? Don't like getting your ass handed to you?

That's OK, we understand, go ahead, run and hide. We'll just be waiting for you when you come out of your cave.

P.S. What I say and what you say here on this board has equal influence on those in Washington. However that's not why people post here. People post to discuss and debate the issues of the day. Apparently you don't want to do that, all you want to do is try to ram your personal opinion down everybody's throat, and when somebody disagrees with you, and especially when they have facts to back themselves up with, you go for the typical quick insult, then run away. Good show:rofl:

[DainBramaged]

64. No. Dealing with assholes here has made me realize I'm on my own so bite my ass

and be one of the first on my new Obama era ignore list.

Bye dickweed.

[MadHound]

67. Oh noes, not your new Obama era ignore list

You really are a wuss, you know that? I started out by being very civil to you in this thread, yet you didn't agree with what I was saying, so you immediately went for the personal attack and name calling. You refuse to discuss the issues, you simply berate and insult anybody who disagrees with you. If you are so damn intent on converting people over to your viewpoint, don't you think that it's better to engage with them in a civil manner rather than simply hurling insults and epithets? Oh well, to each his own.

As far as your ignore list, well, that just goes to show how much of a wuss you are, unable to deal with anybody who disagrees with you on anything. Hmm, reminds me of denizens of another message board, one whose initials are F and R.

But don't worry, I'll still continue to post to those threads of yours that I see fit to. And you know what, you'll even take a sneak peek at my posts to, though you won't admit to it. You can't stand to know what people are saying to you, so you'll look, yes you will. And perhaps some sense will enter that head of yours. If not, oh well.

Can't stand the heat, so you get out the ignore list:rofl: Really now, that's just sad. What do you do when people disagree with you in real life, banish them? You must be just a peach to live with:rofl:

[JackRiddler]

63. It's nice that you've already got a scapegoat

for the plunder operation genetically programmed into capitalism and carried out this year by the bankers in collusion with Treasury and the Federal Reserve so as to enrich themselves and screw everyone else.

So when you and I are both on the soup line, you can tell me it's my fault.

What do you have to say to Posts 57 and 61, please?

[DainBramaged]

65. Goodbye, just like to the last dickweed

I'm done dealing with you anti-union morans.

[MadHound]

68. Anti-union eh? Let me ask you big tough union guy, how many unions have your formed

You know, went in and formed from scratch, not joined, actually persuaded the people of where you worked to join a union?

I've done this twice in my life, thank you very much. Yet you still have the audacity to think of me as anti-union. Simply goes to show how out of touch you are, and how far your head is implanted into your ass.

The UAW ain't the only game in town, and some of us are probably more pro union than you are. Rather than simply join one and where their logo on our ass, we actually go out and create new ones out of scratch.

You're so full of it.

[JackRiddler]

70. Why do you order roast baby with garlic sauce? You cannibal scoundrel!

Get out of my restaurant!

[stray cat]

51. What about those of us who don't work for GM - we are workers do we deserve bailed out too?

some of us are unsure GM should be singled out for pay raises for workers when the rest of us have forfeited pay raises and jobs.

[hedgehog]

62. A lot of people work for GM even though GM's name isn't on their pay stubs!

[DainBramaged]

66. They don't wan to hear it here, we are scum

[Better Believe It]

69. Congress Is Holding A Gun To The Heads Of Auto Workers

"some of us are unsure GM should be singled out for pay raises for workers when the rest of us have forfeited pay raises and jobs."

First, did you voluntary give up pay raises and jobs, did you have a voice in those decisions? Probably not. And that's the problem.

The GM and other union auto workers have already given up pay raises for years, the top pay scale is frozen at $29.78 for the next two years (while corporate CEO's make out like bandits) and over the past few contracts agreed to major technology changes that have eliminated the jobs of hundreds of thousands of auto workers. How much do you think a new unionized auto worker makes? $14.00 an hour without any pension or health care benefits. These facts not been publicized in the corporate mass media. Gee .... I wonder why that is?

Congress will now demand that auto workers experfience yet another round of severe cuts and concessions to the Big Three domestic auto workers which may very well take them below the level of benefits non-union auto workers in the south receive. And like non-union workers these terms will be dictated to them, the unionized auto workers will not have any real voice in the decisions made by the auto companies and Congress regarding their conditions of work. A gun will be put to their head by labors alleged "friends" in Congress. Take the cuts or the auto industry will be taken down by Congress and you will lose your jobs along with a few million other working class people!

So, for all practical purposes we will have a "union free" auto industry which is a gigantic step toward achieving the employers ultimate goal in this crisis .... a union free nation or company/government unions that the workers have no real control over.

Is that what you want to see?

[DainBramaged]

72. Most here don't care, they are either shills for the Right

or anarchists who want us to return to the stone age. We waste our breath trying to explain. Some are here to just create chaos, and now I just click the big red x again.

Life is too short.

[sarcasmo]

52. No Unions or Pensions= no hearings. Our Government is not for the average person.

It's for the big Corporation.

[YvonneCa]

71. My take on this is different. I think it's about framing the debate...

...in a way that helps the middle class.

Remember how this debate started (Republican framing, in my mind)? There were two sides: Republicans were for letting GM go bankrupt and rebuilding the industry (maybe) afterward. Democrats were against the bankruptcy idea...saying that we couldn't let our auto industry go bankrupt because,even if we rebuilt it, no one would buy a car from a bankrupt dealer (due to warranty fears).

Then the Democrats split and held hearings. They declared bankruptcy as unthinkable (Take THAT, you Republicans! :7) But they were in two camps: One group (Levin and the Michigan group) are the good guys...taking up for workers, unions, pensions...and saying that they deserve another chance to build the cars of the future that will help turn this economy around. ;)

The other camp...Dodd and the committee...are the 'bad' guys...saying enough is enough, and "you car makers better get us a plan or no $$$ for you!"

See how the debate is different? Bankruptcy...which would devastate the industry and our economy,hurt workers, unions and pensions...is set aside. In it's place, we now are wondering "Can Detroit come up with a plan by December 3rd?" Of course they can. (Remember...YES WE CAN!!!)

Obama scores one for the middle class!!! :7

[DainBramaged]

73. Please also notice, the Republican Senators AGAINST the LOAN

all have Japanese/German/Korean TRANSPLANT factories in their states, and what better way to improve their standing with these scumbags then to destroy the big 3. Then we can truly be slaves to other lands. But those are American cars, built by Americans Are Buick's built in China Chinese cars or American cars built in China? Does the profit come back to America? Just like the profits for Toyota's and Honda's and Nissan's go back to Japan.

[YvonneCa]

75. That's right. Companies like Toyota and Honda...

...who do make great cars...benefit if the competition (GM, Ford, etc.) goes bankrupt. That's one reason they oppose any bridge loan or action by Congress to help automakers. Another reason they oppose it...ESPECIALLY if Obama insists they get a plan underway to innovate and lead on the new generation of fuel-efficient cars...is that THEY want to be the builders of those new cars. And with cars like the Prius, they are well on their way.

And the final reason , IMO, that Republicans oppose money to the big 3 in any form is that they WANT the unions to go bust. They WANT benefits like health care cut. They don't want to honor pensions. This is just their ideology of small government and keeping government out of business. But their ideology hurts people...and it's been hurting the middle class for the last eight years.

[MadHound]

76. Hmm, even Obama is saying what a lot of us have said, no blank check,

In fact he praises Congress for delaying the bailout vote and demanding that the Big 3 come back with a better plan for the auto industry. Gee, tying the bailout to certain benchmarks and forcing the auto industry to enter the twenty first century. Isn't that what a lot of us around here have been saying?
But you won't hear any of that, you just want we the taxpayers to throw good money after bad, and keep kicking that can down the road.

<http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081124/AUTO01/811240417>

So I suppose that you now think Obama is either a right wing plant or an anarchist:eyes: Guess what, he doesn't care, neither do we.

[Better Believe It]

77. Hmmm .... So what further "sacrifices" demanded by the automakers and Congress do you think the auto

workers should be forced to make?

Perhaps reduced their pay and benefits down to the level of the non-union auto workers who work in Shelby's Alabama? Would that satisfy you?

[MadHound]

85. Never said that I wanted the auto workers to make any sacrifice

But never let that stop you from trying to put words in other people's mouths:eyes:

[Better Believe It]

86. So you disagree with Congress & Obama on this?

Well, I'm glad to hear that. I don't want to put words into your mouth but your attack on the original poster suggested to me that you support the calls for more sacrifices from the auto workers. And I'm pleased to hear that's not the case.

OK?

[MadHound]

87. I disagree with Congress and Obama on a lot of things

So never, ever assume that I'm in lockstep with them. OK?

However, though I've heard Obama state that Detroit needs to come back with a plan that reworks the entire industry, I've yet to hear him say anything about the workers. If you've seen this, please post a link, I'm interested in seeing it. Thanks.

[Edweird]

78. Silly rabbit! Don't you know that when the Gov. gives money to

people THAT DON'T NEED IT, it's 'stimulating the economy' and 'good for the country'. When the Gov. gives money to people THAT ACTUALLY NEED IT, it's 'welfare' and 'socialism' and 'a drain on society'.
Get with the program, will ya?
:hi:

[OhioChick]

82. Billions upon billions are given

to the financial sector, no questions asked...nor any accountability as to how the funds (our money) is spent. But, ask for money to help the Big 3 (pretty much the last of our manufacturing left in this country) or else 30 million workers get handed pink slips and everyone is up in arms.

What is wrong with this picture?

[Triana]

83. My sentiments exactly. Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dum can't GET out of there fast enough...

...ie: Bernanke and Paulson - who've pretty much admitted they're clueless and it's obvious they're just looting the place for all their banking and Wall St. buddies. Anyone else can go to Hell - there ARE other industries that make up the US economy besides fucking banks - such as, well, the AUTO industry.

And Main Street? "Go Cheney Yourselves" seems to be the sentiment for the rest of us.

Scumbags.

And bu$hit is - where? Checked out .... gone to - what is it, Peru?

Jeeeeeeeeze

CAN WE PUHLEEEEEEEEZE HAVE PRESIDENT OBAMA NOW?!?! LIKE - YESTERDAY?

[TheKentuckian]

84. I got no issue with people wantinga plan and strings on their tax dollars

What does bother me are those who are happy to write blood sucking leach banks a blank check but have a billion conditions for the auto makers. Hell, I have conditions too like not using the money overseas and putting us on the cutting edge of efficiency and multiple power sources but not letting this situation go into a complete death spiral is crucial.