Republicans get one right and finally start doing what they're supposed to

IHateUGAlyDawgs · Post by **IHateUGAlyDawgs** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 8:07 am

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081212/ap_on_go_co/congress_autos

I'm disappointed Bush would back this in the first place, but I'm glad Republicans were able to do the right thing in the end.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 10:03 am

dana perino just released a statement that bush was considering using TARP funds to help bail out the auto industry

it's fucked up that the UAW couldn't agree to the terms...

slideman67 · Post by **slideman67** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 10:33 am

Yeah, the Republicans are flexing their muscles to make a political point - to hell with the millions of workers who would be affected by this as long as they can score political points.

Do the Republicans really want this economy to tank? It amazes me that anyone consideres them to be good stewards of the economy.

Thank God there will be fewer of them in the next Congress. With stupid moves like this, there will be fewer of them in future elections as well.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 10:47 am

you're funny slide.

the UAW are at fault here.

IHateUGAlyDawgs · Post by **IHateUGAlyDawgs** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:49 am

slider, unbelievable.

You don't want those millions affected? get rid of that god damn union.

It's the curse of those people and they (as well as the dems) are too blind to see it. The auto industry has been dying for years. Let it rot, or fix itself.

G8rMom7 · Post by **G8rMom7** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:07 pm

Slider, so your idea of GOOD stewards of the economy is who?...Barney Frank and Chris Dodd? LMAO

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:13 pm

the sticking point from what i understand is that the UAW refused to give congress a definitive date in 2009 whereas the UAW was planning to be 'competitive' to it's peers.

pretty selfish of the UAW to jeopardize the companies they work for because they didn't want to commit a definitive date.

ironically - if they get TARP money, there will be MORE to have to answer for than a definitive date...good luck UAW! playing hardball with a senate that was going to make the companies you work for not only viable, but competitive was a stupid strategy...good luck with playing hardball with the federal reserve.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:30 pm

what's HILARIOUS is this :

i, as the head of my family, need 14 units (units = hundred or thousand or million or billion dollars) to keep my family afloat...gotta pay my bills...otherwise, i go bankrupt...someone wants to help me and all they ask is that a family member of mine sign off formerly on rectifying spending habits and that family member replies "fuck off"... wtf?! how is my bailer-outer at fault?

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:35 pm

furthermore - it's PARTISAN to blame/praise either side of the aisle when it was SENATE who decided on the package...senate voted as a whole.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:50 pm

from hater's link...VERY, VERY bi-partisan ms. pelosi

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called Senate Republicans' refusal to support the White House-negotiated bill irresponsible...........

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:29 pm

Yeah, the Republicans are flexing their muscles to make a political point - to hell with the millions of workers who would be affected by this as long as they can score political points.

Do the Republicans really want this economy to tank? It amazes me that anyone consideres them to be good stewards of the economy.

Thank God there will be fewer of them in the next Congress. With stupid moves like this, there will be fewer of them in future elections as well.

slide, buddy, seriously...you can't be so myopic. You act as if there's no legitimate reason for not bailing out the Detroit 3. Because there's a principled reason for opposing the bailout, however, it's unfair of you to assume that the Republicans are merely playing politics. If that's fair for you then I'd just say that the Democrats have been shilling for labor, making their own political point, and then we'd both be guilty of not having a very thoughtful convo on the topic.

I assume, though, that you are skeptical about the importance of any supposed 'moral hazard' posed by the government's intervention in the economy, right? Either that or you don't care about it at all.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:50 pm

For everyone...THIS is a good summation of why all this stuff is morally wrong:

"What is outrageous economically and is outrageous morally is that normally in times like this, people who are competent and who saw it coming and who kept their powder dry go and take over the assets from the incompetent," he said. "What's happening this time is that the government is taking the assets from the competent people and giving them to the incompetent people and saying, now you can compete with the competent people. It is horrible economics."

http://www.reuters.com/article/InvestmentOutlook09/idUSTRE4BA5CO20081211

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:26 pm

dodd is out right now talking about how angry he is that corker lead a mission to bail out the autos and in the same vein, ask labor to take paycuts "amidst THIS economy...THIS economy in which people are struggling to feed their families, heat their homes, teach their children"

love how dodd is trying to appeal to the emotion of the nation with that type of rhetoric.

G8rMom7 · Post by **G8rMom7** » Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:09 pm

From what I read the AAU's hourly rate is comparable to their competion in other parts of the country...where it is drastically different is in benefits. So it seems to me if they just cut back on their benefits...no biggie since the Dems are going to try to push through a national health care system...who needs company health insurance anymore?...then they would be able to be more competitive.

I think the numbers I saw were both paid an hourly average wage of $30 an hour, but with benefits added it was more like $48 an hour for non-AAU and something like $68 per hour for the AAU workers. I'm guessing that includes pensions and all that stuff too? In any case, either way they are making more than me. I need to learn how to use a drill I guess.