Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    9:09 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Auto Industry Workers Feel "Betrayed" by Obama Back to Topics
teacher_tim

Champion Author
Maryland

Posts:19,291
Points:826,610
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 8:46:37 AM

"Former Delphi plant manager Tom Rose has a different opinion about the bailout: "It’s good press. It’s good politics, but it’s only one side of the story.”

Rose and tens of thousands of other Delphi retirees were nervous in 2009 when the company was trudging its way through bankruptcy. So a lot of questions were asked, like how’s our pension looking?

The answer, says Rose, was a thumbs-up from management, which said the pension was well funded.

And then, it wasn’t.

Delphi abruptly cancelled its employee pensions and turned over what remained in them to the federal government to administer.

It was the nightmare scenario for Delphi retirees. The monthly payments that were to be their financial bedrock through retirement years were slashed. The cuts were staggering, ranged from 30 to 70 percent.

After 39 years on the job, Rose’s pension was clipped 40 percent.

“You spend years and years making your financial plan for your retirement ... and going through all the numbers,” Rose said, “and it gets taken away from you in a heartbeat. ... and I feel absolutely betrayed.”

But it was at this time that a floundering General Motors was seeking emergency help from the federal government. The company was in needs of billions. Chrysler was also at the White House door looking for assistance.

The Obama administration was willing but demanded a rapid restructuring of the companies. Typically, in these kinds of bankruptcies or bankruptcy-like circumstances, concessions are made or financial commitments are broken. But what GM needed besides the infusion of cash from the federal government was labor peace.

Any deal between the U.S. government and GM was not binding on the United Auto Workers. That gave the union leverage. What it wanted was its retired Delphi members taken care of.

GM already had an agreement with the UAW to “top-off” its union pensions at Delphi, if that company went into bankruptcy.

Steven Rattner, point-man for the White House on the bailout, notes that these types of side agreements typically get tossed out in bankruptcies. To Rattner, it was important for
GM to honor the side-deal about Delphi members.

"It was not easy to decide where to draw the line,” says Rattner, “but ultimately we decided that GM should honor its prior agreement (with the UAW).”

But that was it. Salaried Delphi retiree pensions were not made whole. The 20,000 who had banked their future on their pensions were left to figure it out on their own.

Tom Rose thinks he knows why. “The union had political connections and we did not," he said."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/31/auto-industry-touted-by-obama-still-rubs-some-industry-retirees-wrong-way/?test=latestnews#ixzz2AyUh2T6S

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 11/1/2012 8:49:29 AM EST]
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
cbuck80
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:2,690
Points:846,230
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Dec 10, 2012 12:54:28 PM

Good nothing will ever happen until everyone figures out what he is up too isn't helping us.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,291
Points:826,610
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 10, 2012 12:51:42 PM

Definitely, now look at who owns A123 that Obamagave the stimulus money to...the Chinese.
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 1:29:51 PM

Not trying to switch anything. Just making an additional point.

There are people trying to bust unions and unions trying to rig the rules to force people to join against their will. And even create unions out of thin air. Not very fresh air there. More like a pyle of poo.

Personally I've seen the moral high ground shift during my life time IMHO.

Profile Pic
EKEugene
All-Star Author North Carolina

Posts:589
Points:12,175
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 1:23:38 PM


- And where do you see the word "mandate"?
Oh I remember -- you made it up. "Most" ≇ "mandate". You may leave my words intact, thank you very much.

>> he's blowing some considerably uncomfortable smoke up the Prezzie's butt. <<

Which was exactly my point. Thanks for bringing it to a colorful life.



[Edited by: EKEugene at 11/14/2012 1:27:27 PM EST]
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,815
Points:3,036,495
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 12:58:06 PM

Hey EKE, here is some more Neal Boortz for you. He might be a blowhard, but he's blowing some considerably uncomfortable smoke up the Prezzie's butt.

Yesterday's Schedule for Dear Ruler
"11:30 AM

The President and the Vice President attend a meeting with members of the labor community and other progressive leaders to discuss the actions we need to take to keep our economy growing and find a balanced approach to reduce our deficit.

The Roosevelt Room

Closed Press"

Neal asks the inconvenient, yet obvious, question: A meeting with labor leaders and progressives about growing the economy? How about including some business and industry leaders, and maybe some bankers and financial types? The Liberal Echo Chamber continues to steam full-speed ahead, going off the cliff very soon.

As for "censorship", I never mentioned it. What is on TV is what the American public puts up with, or "demands" by watching it. Not very conservative at all. Is there money to be made? Yep, selling baubles to the fools watching.

About "most" of the electorate.......2% ain't any mandate.
Profile Pic
EKEugene
All-Star Author North Carolina

Posts:589
Points:12,175
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 12:43:06 PM


>> Only a handful of unreconstructed reactionaries harbor the ugly thought of forcing people to join unions. <<

Airfresh I agree with that, but that's not at all the subject here. I notice both you guys keep trying to turn the original statement inside out to a place it was never going. Why is that? Apparently playing Switcheroo also caused you to reverse the meanings of 'facism' and 'socialism' (what you describe in your second sentence, since it favors the worker over the employer and not the reverse, would be socialism, not fascism).

There's a stark difference between on one hand forcing people into one particular alternative, and on the other hand wiping that other alternative off the map completely, and the latter is what Eisenhower was talking about. Just as there's a stark difference between on one hand forcing schoolchildren to use English rather than their Cajun French, and on the other hand wiping the Cajun French language off the map altogether.

It's Eisenhower's original statement that expresses a disdain for fascism. And he was kind of in a position to recognize fascism, having seen its effects close up. He noted the same sentiments at the end of his Presidency in 1961 when he warned of the "military industrial complex". Different actors, same warning. So in the present context Eisenhower isn't warning us about the MIC - he's warning us about Scott Walker.

They don't make Republicans like that any more. Why is that?



[Edited by: EKEugene at 11/14/2012 12:51:46 PM EST]
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,725
Points:1,015,795
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 11:50:14 AM

"Only a handful of unreconstructed reactionaries harbor the ugly thought of breaking unions. Only a fool would try to deprive working men and women of the right to join the union of their choice... "

Only a handful of unreconstructed reactionaries harbor the ugly thought of forcing people to join unions. Only a fascist would try and deprive working men and women of the right to not be forced to join a union.
Profile Pic
EKEugene
All-Star Author North Carolina

Posts:589
Points:12,175
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 11:45:31 AM


>> Look at what is "allowed" on television these days and tell me if that is the result of conservative influence. <<

"Allowed"? By whom? We have a censorship board?

To the tiny extent that a cultural content has anything to do with left/right principles, I guess we could say that since the swill offered all over TVland is calculatedly insipid lowest common denominator televisual diarrhea for the express purpose of making money for the huge megalopolies that own those outlets, then yes, that's certainly a result of conservative influence.

Hardly the point here though. You persist trying to turn the idea around backward. That's irrelevant.

Now, bureaucratic incompetence is bureaucratic incompetence. It may seem convenient to paint them as union issues, especially if you're a radio talk rabble rouser unencumbered by banalities like simple fact checking (i.e.your link), but I tell you what, I've worked many times in New York (and Chicago, and San Francisco, and Anaheim) in the same situation (union territories), without ever once having to join or pay dues, and guess what-- we got it done. Every time. We came, we saw the issues, and we conquered them. If some Army Corps of Engineers suit can't figure that out, that's on him.

Stop making excuses and looking for scapegoats. That's Neil Boortz' job. I'll never understand the idea of outsourcing your analysis and just parroting whatever emotional hype some radio blowhard puts out. What do you think HIS agenda is?

>> The echo you hear is in your own head. <<

Apparently I'm joined inside that head by the voices of most of the electorate of America. You might try listening instead of tuning them out. That's what brings about the kind of backlash you saw last week.


[Edited by: EKEugene at 11/14/2012 11:51:02 AM EST]
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,815
Points:3,036,495
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 11:20:26 AM

My conclusion is spot on. The "freedom" to NOT join a union is lost in some states. Just look at the "mutual aid" of utility companies to help restore the power after Hurricane Sandy. Local utility companies demanded that workers from other states join their union (or at least pay dues while they were working there). Here is the rundown.
Also, the economies in right-to-work states are doing much better than in heavily union-dominated states. Compare Texas to California, Georgia to Illinois.

Personally, I am against "attempting to abolish" social security, unemployment insurance, and labor laws. The "farm programs" are another issue. Even democrats line up to say "end corporate welfare" paid out to large farming operations, and I agree with that.

It's obvious this country has been moving Left for decades. Democrats and other leftists now dominate local governments, county governments, public schools and universities. Look at what is "allowed" on television these days and tell me if that is the result of conservative influence.

The echo you hear is in your own head.
Profile Pic
EKEugene
All-Star Author North Carolina

Posts:589
Points:12,175
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 10:42:38 AM


No I75, you've got the Ike idea turned inside-out. It was about the freedom TO join a union, not to not join one. That's why your conclusion is also inside-out.

It's obvious this country has been moving steadily to the right for decades-- when you look around and there's no more right to move to, that should tell you something.

Like it did last week. How soon we forget.


More from Ike:
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. ... Their number is negligible and they are stupid."

Now let that line "you would not hear of that party again" resonate with last Tuesday's election results and see if you can come to any conclusions. Especially ones that are not presently part of the CEC (Conservative Echo Cloud).





[Edited by: EKEugene at 11/14/2012 10:50:44 AM EST]
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,514
Points:1,519,765
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 10:01:55 AM

When Unions Started in this country. There were few laws and/or government agencies that protected workers.

Today Union have transformed into a Brute force with no other goal to force the company to continually pay more to its Union workers. Weather the Company can afford it or not
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,815
Points:3,036,495
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 9:41:26 AM

EKE: (quoting Ike) "Only a fool would try to deprive working men and women of the right to join the union of their choice.."
Well, the nation is full of fools then. Try to get a job in a US auto maker factory and tell them you don't want to join their union. Or you want to join a different union than they have there.
Try to get a job at Kroger and tell them you don't want to joint their UFCW union and have your wages usurped. You have about an hour's wages takes each week by the union, and if you work part time 20 hours, that is 5% of your earnings. Nice choice, huh?

This country has two parties - Left, and Far Left. there is no "Right" any more, at least none that holds any offices or has any power.
Profile Pic
LTVibe
Champion Author Orlando

Posts:6,701
Points:523,620
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 9:28:38 AM


Yes, Eisenhower was concerned about the rights of workers in the US. Unfortunately for the Guatemalans working for America's United Fruit Company, Eisenhower sided with corporate interests over the rights of the workers to decent wages and working conditions.
Profile Pic
EKEugene
All-Star Author North Carolina

Posts:589
Points:12,175
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2012 10:11:13 PM


Time's up.

"Only a handful of unreconstructed reactionaries harbor the ugly thought of breaking unions. Only a fool would try to deprive working men and women of the right to join the union of their choice... "Workers have a right to organize into unions and to bargain collectively with their employers. And a strong, free labor movement is an invigorating and necessary part of our industrial society."

Dwight David Eisenhower, a Republican (November 1954)

---- which just demonstrates how far to the far right the Republican party, and indeed both parties, have moved themselves since then. That's why I double over in laughter when I hear Obama or some Democrat described in this forum as "far left". We have no far left party. We have a Right and a Further Right.
Profile Pic
nraacct
Champion Author North Carolina

Posts:9,111
Points:1,767,355
Joined:Jul 2004
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2012 2:45:32 PM

Apparently not enough felt that way, otherwise the election results (especially in Ohio) could have been different.
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:19,026
Points:3,132,960
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2012 2:42:41 PM

Tim, "counting chickens", no just looking at the election results.

eJ, "Get fresh funding", where may ask in 2008-09 other than the govt. The "debauchery" saved the company and the jobs. "The only real "sour grapes" is coming from the con losers in the election. "Can't legally seize your 401k", no but that does not include many retirement funds.

nstrd, "the UAW got paid off" if you are talking about workers drawing pay checks, yes. I'm sure you can make a case to work for less as a non union worker.
Profile Pic
EKEugene
All-Star Author North Carolina

Posts:589
Points:12,175
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2012 1:23:32 PM


=> Unions only suck the money out of everyone else <=

Pop quiz: without Googling, what President said this:

"Only a handful of unreconstructed reactionaries harbor the ugly thought of breaking unions. Only a fool would try to deprive working men and women of the right to join the union of their choice."

?

Want a hint? The same guy who said: ""Workers have a right to organize into unions and to bargain collectively with their employers. And a strong, free labor movement is an invigorating and necessary part of our industrial society."

Answer later....
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,514
Points:1,519,765
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2012 10:30:26 AM

If the UAW did not get what they wanted. The bail out would have really went down the tubes when they ( UAW) went on strike for the loss of pay or the loss of pension.

Unions only suck the money out of everyone else
Profile Pic
nstrdnvstr
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:40,764
Points:4,583,055
Joined:May 2001
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2012 9:24:01 PM

But the UAW got paid off!
Profile Pic
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,772
Points:140,130
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2012 6:03:53 PM

"And by the way, this is a good commercial for 401K. Better the money go into your own account than a pension fund that can be raided."

Wow, I never considered that! Democrats can't legally seize your 401K to re-distribute to whom they wish. But then again, you can't sue the government, so nevermind.

One week after the election, Democrats are already scrambling to keep all the squirming puppies in a box! One slips out, then another, then another!

Like I said a few months ago, I almost hoped Obama wins so he can enjoy the mess he created and Romney would not be left holding the bag. Now I am certain and really starting to enjoy the spectacle!!


[Edited by: e_jeepin at 11/12/2012 6:04:51 PM EST]
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,085
Points:3,445,270
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2012 5:34:35 PM

All of a sudden the workers feel betrayed? Hmmm.. interesting that they feel betrayed AFTER the election is over.

And by the way, this is a good commercial for 401K. Better the money go into your own account than a pension fund that can be raided.

[Edited by: AC-302 at 11/12/2012 5:35:50 PM EST]
Profile Pic
noseatbelt
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:8,133
Points:212,590
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2012 5:29:10 PM

a friend in ohio says he regrets voting early for obama, and if he knew then what he knows now, his vote would be different. He also said there are many others that feel that way. A re vote would be interesting.
Profile Pic
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,772
Points:140,130
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2012 5:21:11 PM

The auto bailout really was a partially explained campaign "fact". Delphi had to go the route of legal bankruptcy and workers lost their shirts. Most were ex GM employees enticed to transition to the new company on "no worries, your pension is safe" promises. The old GM was obligated to a stout percentage to the Delphi pensions. After Obama cronies re-wrote the deal, Delphi hourly workers were forgotten.

Economically speaking, I am all for the govt being the "bank of last resort" in order to save a massive industry and jobs.

Romney said "let them go bankrupt" (reorganize, get fresh funding, move on)

Team Obama convinced voters this meant "let the industry go"

The real untold story is that the Obama managed GM "bankruptcy" was an unprecedented debauchery of a real Bankruptcy process. This changed the way Bond holders will look at investing in companies forever. Why bother when now you have no legal claim to your investment and a President can just redistribute it as he wants to most benefit him (the UAW)

Of course, Libs have never read the actual details of the unprecedented lopsided re-allocation to the UAW and just call this "sour grapes".

It was an illegal "take-it-or-leave-it" political stunt violating US bankruptcy law.

This will come back to haunt the industry when they are in need of fresh Bond Holders. They will say "no thanks, we cant risk losing to the govt again".


[Edited by: e_jeepin at 11/12/2012 5:25:35 PM EST]
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,291
Points:826,610
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2012 2:51:13 PM

I love literary references, thanks Eugene.

Counting chickens,gocatgo? Isn't that what Romney is accused of doing?
Profile Pic
EKEugene
All-Star Author North Carolina

Posts:589
Points:12,175
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2012 11:15:17 AM


This is classic Doublethink. Auto workers are "betrayed" -- therefore they voted for him.

Up is down. Freedom is slavery. And most apropos to the disheveled Republican apologists, "ignorance is strength".
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:19,026
Points:3,132,960
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2012 11:11:54 AM

Tim, "Lol" there were 3 million American voters that disagreed with you. Did I mention that Obama carried Ohio where your so called "betrayed" auto workers live. "Sweeping mandate" tell that to the people at the electoral college where Obama has about a 30% lead. That "4%" also decided to add a few more dems to Congress and the Senate too. I have good reason to be hysterical, "Lol". If there is no change in the GOP by 2014 I may have another reason to get hysterical.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,291
Points:826,610
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2012 12:02:26 AM

lol gocat,
There aren't 3 million auto workers in total that voted against Romney. That was a NATIONAL figure for the difference.

It's hysterical how you think that a 4% win is a sweeping mandate. Are you still sticking to that?
Profile Pic
c2bravo
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:2,259
Points:118,550
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Nov 11, 2012 4:15:58 PM

Teacher Tim

As a non-salaried Delphi retiree, this is my opinion. Tom Rose chose to go into management. Therefore he knew he would not be represented by the UAW.
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:19,026
Points:3,132,960
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Nov 11, 2012 2:10:40 PM

Tim, so are you still sticking to that "auto workers feel betrayed by Obama" nonsense? It would seem that the Obama 3 million + majority disagreed with you.
Profile Pic
rkt wgn
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:18,618
Points:3,302,655
Joined:Dec 2004
Message Posted: Nov 2, 2012 4:20:21 PM

Read about Romney and Delphi.

Romney is the one who profited on Delphi. Check out:

Daily Kos: Romney's Delphi scandal

Romney bought stock when they were in trouble.They gained more than 3000% on their investments. His wife Ann was right there with him.

check it out
www.thenation.com
Mitt Romneys bailout bonanza
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,291
Points:826,610
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 2, 2012 3:52:04 PM

[The] bailout saved the auto industry [which would have been there anyway following restructuring] and thousands of decent [overpaid UNION] jobs [at the expense of middle class taxpayers' retirement savings and investments, and nonunion pensions.]

Just a bit of editing to make your talking point a more accurate statement.

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 11/2/2012 3:54:55 PM EST]
Profile Pic
worryfree
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,224
Points:2,410,325
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Nov 2, 2012 3:44:44 PM

bailout saved the auto industry and thousands of decent jobs
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:15,999
Points:2,310,810
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 2, 2012 2:34:37 PM

gvan also states: "<<<Loan guarantees don't do any good if the banks don't have any money.">>>
**********
The bailout wasn't a loan guarantee, it was a loan, there is a difference.

The loan allowed GM to not be forced to restructure, and fix the problems that led to their mess in the first place, and while also leaving others for dead (such as investors including 401K funds). This is a loan that they haven't yet paid back, even despite if you listen to the propaganda permeating around that they are doing quite well and in excellent financial health. This was in some ways a "pardon" for some of their debt.
Profile Pic
citygasman
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:15,060
Points:48,980
Joined:Jun 2008
Message Posted: Nov 2, 2012 2:31:04 PM

Absolutly not!!! a gov funded bailout was not needed

Just the facts
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:15,999
Points:2,310,810
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 2, 2012 2:28:06 PM

gvan asks: <<<"And where would the Delphi workers be if President Obama had not bailed out GM?">>>
***************
Working for a reorganized and restructured company doing the same thing, probably under a new contract making a fair wage with average benefits, like the rest of the people that still have jobs in America. (As opposed to obscene pay and benefits)

A better question is "What happened to the taxpayer's money?" or even "What happened to the original shareholder's money?" or my favorite, "When will my company get complimentary funding?"
Profile Pic
gvan
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:25,268
Points:3,437,890
Joined:Dec 2004
Message Posted: Nov 2, 2012 2:23:35 PM

"Another reason that they should have worked it out in bankruptcy WITHOUT a government bailout."

Maybe this will help you understand why a government bailout was the only way to keep GM and Chrysler operating and why Romney's plan was unworkable:

But in the 2008 piece, Romney said the money needed to keep General Motors (GM, Fortune 500) and Chrysler Group alive during bankruptcy should have come from the private sector, with the government providing only "guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing." Those guarantees would have made lenders whole if the automakers subsequently defaulted.
The problem was that there was no one available to write checks for the automakers other than the government in late 2008 and early 2009.
The financial markets had melted down in the wake of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. Treasury was pumping billions into the nation's banks, who were not willing to then lend money to a struggling auto industry -- or anyone else.
Steve Rattner, the Obama administration car czar at the time, said in his own New York Times op-ed piece that the administration tried to find private financing, but that "not one (would-be lender) had the slightest interest in financing those companies on any terms."
Bob Lutz, the vice chairman of GM at the time and an outspoken Republican himself, said the loan guarantees Romney talks about would not have made a difference due to the cash crunch at the time.
"The banks were even more broke than we were. Who had the money?" he told the Detroit Free Press in February. "Loan guarantees don't do any good if the banks don't have any money."

Profile Pic
citygasman
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:15,060
Points:48,980
Joined:Jun 2008
Message Posted: Nov 2, 2012 2:21:36 PM

Still working, better off.
G.M, like othe companies go through bankruptcy and come out stronger.

Obama nationalizing G.M did not save them
Profile Pic
gvan
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:25,268
Points:3,437,890
Joined:Dec 2004
Message Posted: Nov 2, 2012 2:16:39 PM

And where would the Delphi workers be if President Obama had not bailed out GM?
Profile Pic
The_Janitor
Rookie Author Denver

Posts:82
Points:1,600
Joined:Oct 2012
Message Posted: Nov 2, 2012 3:29:28 AM

Isn't it ironic how a wholly American institution, invented here in the US, Labor Unions, have now become entirely un-American?
Profile Pic
worryfree
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,224
Points:2,410,325
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 11:10:15 PM

Continue to watch FOX to know what you should think about Libya..
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:8,395
Points:1,237,835
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 11:08:45 PM

If I heard this correctly on the radio, the union workers had their pensions saved in what was an illegal bankruptcy. The non-union workers took it in the back side.

Obama plaid to his base and the rest got played.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,156
Points:1,521,245
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 10:10:33 PM

I also heard that the 'secured bonds' were not honored as part of the Obmacruptcy. Anyone want to hazard a guess as to the long term effects of Obama's illegal change in the bankruptcy laws.

Think if a investor will accept a lower rate of interest again to purchase 'secured bonds' from a company. Think what he long term effects will be if sources of relatively inexpensive (low interest) loans to companies dries up because the supposed secure bonds are subject to the whims of the president....
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,291
Points:826,610
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 10:02:42 PM

Because the usual bankruptcy procedures were totally ignored to favor the unions
Profile Pic
modeshoo825
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:2,530
Points:51,080
Joined:Sep 2007
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 9:40:50 PM

"The Union's pensions were guaranteed, the White collar workers pensions were not. How was this Obama's fault again?"

"Typically, in these kinds of bankruptcies or bankruptcy-like circumstances, concessions are made or financial commitments (like 'guaranteed' pensions) are broken.", that's how, yadh.

Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,527
Points:692,610
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 9:14:29 PM

Sweet deal for the unions...
Profile Pic
PappaVanTwee
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:14,635
Points:714,710
Joined:Feb 2003
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 7:44:58 PM

The Union's pensions were guaranteed, the White collar workers pensions were not. How was this Obama's fault again?
Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,527
Points:692,610
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 7:22:55 PM

Another reason that they should have worked it out in bankruptcy WITHOUT a government bailout.
Profile Pic
Hiram 615
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:23,879
Points:3,044,640
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 5:47:07 PM

Your neighbor's son should have joined a union. With choices come consequences.
Profile Pic
noseatbelt
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:8,133
Points:212,590
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 5:36:31 PM

My neighbors son worked for delphi, non union. his pension went from 1700,00 a month to around 250.00. meanwhile, my cousin worked for delphi, a union member, his pension is basicly un changed. sure sounds like obama protected his buddies at the unions.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,291
Points:826,610
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 1, 2012 3:10:15 PM

I'm not sure what you find confusing about the bailouts catering to the unions, at the expense of the nonunion workers and bondholders, but I'm glad I could be one of your favorites. :)
Post a reply Back to Topics