It is black and white. Support the unions. Support the workers.

[rug]

That is the only measure, especially now.

[midnight]

1. I second that....

[SmileyRose]

2. I predict

during the bankruptcies to come, the UAW retirees will be stripped of medical benefits and at least half their monthly pension, surviving spouses will lose their few hundred dollars a month benefit, active workers will loose most of the pension they thought they would have and will have no medical benefits.

I predict primary shareholders, retired upper level management, current upper level management will get raises.

[BeatleBoot]

Don't forget the "Retention Packages" during a bankruptcy

Those packages will be given to upper management - as an incentive to "stick with the company" until they are out of bankruptcy.

[BeatleBoot]

6. Self Delete

The "double post ghost" in my keyboard again.

[LiberalFighter]

10. If that happens I hope drastic action is taken against the those mention in the last sentence.

[DonCoquixote]

3. OK

I want the unions to be back, but can you answer this, how do we give a bailout (and yes, it is a loan, but if they were capable of paying loans back, they would not be in this mess) to these Ceo's without them using it to further screw over said workers. Does anyone think these folks are going to change without making an ironclad Plan for them to, which is what Reid and Pelosi wanted? How do we NOT let it become yet another giveaway to the rich that Bush does before leaving office?

[rug]

8. Imprison any CEO who uses a dime of a bailout for debt service and not for jobs and pensions.

[Boojatta]

18. Bailout?

It has been suggested that supporting unions means personally buying union-made products, and that it doesn't mean supporting a particular public policy.

[rug]

21. Does this look like a suggestion?

[LiberalFighter]

20. First put restrictions on upper management.

Such as get rid of their corporate jets.

Cut their salaries to no more than 8 times the lowest paid full time employee.

Cap any stock options to 10% and they must be exercised within 60 days and at the closing price on the day the stock is purchased. If they don't exercise the option they lose it.

Eliminate bonuses when the company is in the red.

Get rid of their club memberships.

Cut any transportation to bare minimum.

Cut freebie catered luncheons.

Cut all alcoholic beverages.

Cut all individual bottled water.

Reduce all unnecessary space in their headquarters. Seal those spaces and reduce energy consumption.

[EFerrari]

4. Agreed. n/t

[Telly Savalas]

5. The workers aren't the recipients of the bailout. Management is.

[spindrifter]

12. If the "bailout" saves jobs, the workers are recipients.

[readmoreoften]

32. Not if it turns their jobs to $10 an hour, non-union jobs and gives all the $ to CEOs.

[GrantDem]

7. Count me in...

[spindrifter]

9. You are absolutely right!

We have to support the unions...if it was not for the labor movement, we would have a vast underclass that works as many hours as the masters want. Children would also be working at dangerous jobs. Just look at countries where children are still working, much like indentured servants or slaves.

Support the unions...think about them when you call in sick and still get paid for the day at work.

Support the unions...they have enabled Americans to achieve their dreams of life above the poverty line after working for 35 years.

If you scoff at the labor unions and decry the "extra" that their contracts add to prices so management's profit is smaller, then you endorse the idea that the majority of us do not deserve more than the bare minimum. You endorse the idea that Americans should not be able to afford anything better than what the Dollar Stores offer, and you do not care that we have jobs only for a small elite.

[pampango]

35. Do we support the unions better by handing over the $25 billion with no strings attached

or by forcing management to agree to a plan that will revitalize the industry and make it a viable source of union jobs for years to come?

[mike_c]

11. this isn't a binary issue....

We can support workers while simultaneously forcing restructuring on the auto industry. Bailing out a failed industry is not the answer-- certainly not one with any sustainable prospects. They'll spend the money, it will be gone, and we'll all be back to someplace similar to this.

The auto companies who cannot stay afloat should go into receivership or be nationalized, IMO, and turned to the production of things America actually needs, like light rail mass transit-- and better cars and trucks.

[rug]

14. This same industry in 1941 went from making coupes and sedans to tanks and planes overnight.

It is not simply the auto industry. If you skim off these bloodsuckers and invest in production and the workers who produce, it will be making electric vehicles and railcars in a matter of years.

[mike_c]

19. agreed, 100 percent....

:thumbsup:

[Greyhound]

30. Absolutely, but giving the "assholes in charge" billions will not make this happen.

This is just a case of the parasites hiding behind the call of "save the workers, save the unions" and when/if (don't worry they will get it) they will fuck the workers and kill the union and go about their same old business of charging the most they can for the least they can provide.

Specific legislation is the only solution to this and they will not do that, it has not even been discussed.

[NashVegas]

13. They Said That In the 1990s When We Wanted Better CAFE Standards, Too

I'm really tired of this emotional argument, which serves the higher purpose of allowing corporate management to continue fucking up.

I want unions to continue to exist. I want union members to continue having their jobs and the pensions they were promised. I just don't see how that can happen if management is not held accountable for incompetency.

[Canuckistanian]

15. You DO understand that this MIGHT not help the workers much at all

What's to stop the executives from grabbing all that cash and just offshoring EVEN MORE brands?

Re-tool the agreement. Get the American worker protections CARVED IN STONE.

THEN it will be "the only measure".

[rug]

16. If management wants to control a bailout, let them put up their testicles as collateral.

If they can track every quarter given to a political campaign, they can earmark ever quarter for direct investment and jobs and production. Any embezzlement or diversion carries jail time. Period.

[Hannah Bell]

17. support the workers. give the bosses $$$$$$$.

[Pithlet]

22. Yes. I don't even want to hear anymore kvetching about Wal Mart anymore.

It's hollow. It's just fucking lip service. I can't believe this is the same DU that rails against Wal Mart and talks about the poor workers there. And then I come here and I see "Who cares about the auto workers! Let the industry die!" Indeed! The very same principles we're fighting for in fighting against Wal Mart and the conditions there are the same ones we're fighting for in fighting for those auto workers! If they all lose their jobs, we might as well shop at Wal Mart, for all the good we've done.

[DonCoquixote]

25. No one wants to see unions die

Nor see Wal-Mart rise, but we already see what happened the last time someone shouted "Give rich men money or die!" AIG execs are getting their bonuses, after having their vacation. We want the unions to live, but I ask HOW do we keep this from being yet another smash and grab by the rich, who will use that money to further cut the throat of unions? Do you not think that is what they plan all along? That and to leave the Obama administration so far in debt they cannot do anything except wait for the 2012 palin/Romney ticket?

I want the unions to live, I just am not sure giving a blank check to the people who have been KILLING them is the best answer.

[Pithlet]

26. It's better than letting them die.

And I don't think anyone is advocating a blank check. But letting them go under simply isn't an option. I'm sorry, but I do think it's telling that if you bring up Wal Mart on DU, you'll get a nearly unanimous opinion on the matter. But the plight of UAW workers? For some, their hatred of the big 3 and their insistence that they don't get this "blank check" is more important. Oh, hell no, we can't have that happen! Don't let those people with their fancy jets get their hands on our money! UAW workers? Too bad about them, but I won't let those big 3 companies get our money! No way!!!!!!

It boggles the mind. Do you know how much more important it is that we don't let those workers' jobs die? Really. It should be a no brainer. I'd rather risk money falling into undeserving hands. It's that important. Look, I am in no way fan of GM. I grew up in Flint. I saw what that damned company did to my home town. I loathe GM. I despise the people who run that company. I'm not defending the company, or the big wigs that run it. I'm solely concerned with the workers, and the effect it has on our country if they all lose their jobs. Not just short term. We've all already paid dearly already with the loss of union jobs in other sectors. This? I don't even want to think about it. We're so concerned with Wal Mart, and how Wal Mart affects our country. We can all agree on that. This is even more important. The collapse of our UAW workers is a big deal, and there are a considerable number of DUErs poo pooing it. I truly don't get that.

[me b zola]

23. On this we can agree

Recommended

[Jim Sagle]

24. Fuckin' A.

:thumbsup:

[Odin2005]

27. A-fucking-MEN. n/t

[Greyhound]

28. Sorry, all this bail-out will do is finance their chapter 11 reorg, which will be

used to kill the unions anyway.

This disaster cannot be prevented without specific legislation which will require politicians to make a stand in favor of the workers and that ain't gonna happen, they have a campaign to finance.

This is just like the Wall Street ransom, achieving nothing but easing the losses suffered by the shareholders, mostly those holding the preferred shares.

[amitta]

29. don't take the bait

I'm not.

[KharmaTrain]

31. So We Create A "Make Work" System?

Just like the Soviet Union? We create work just for the sake of creating work? We just keep cranking out cars that people can't afford so that 3 million people have jobs? Those who say this is a loan, imagine going in front of a loan officer with the "business plan" these guys brought to Capitol Hill the other day, would you approve that loan? Where's the return? What assurances are there that not only will this money go to workers and pensions and to help restructure the business, but that they won't be back in another 3 months crying poor once again.

We're all in deep shit here...the economy is collapsing. People can't afford the gas, yet alone the cars. The escalation in prices, the decimation of the credit market and the decayed financial infrastruture of this company goes far beyond 3 million auto jobs...and if we don't address that problem, no one will recover.

There's no black or white here. I'm very pro-union, but I'm not seeing a solution here, just another hand reaching into an ever inflating treasury that only delays more problems and doesn't hasten any recovery. If we're gonna spend 25 billion, the money can go into a lot of different sectors and pockets...help create 10 million jobs that will then help create more. Throwing money at this pit is only a stop gap solution.

[NNN0LHI]

36. These three guys and other flunkies representing the companies making the Big 3 look bad

Acting like boobs flying in on their own corporate jets and not having any coherent answers for Congress. Do you think they are Republicans or Democrats? These are the same guys who have been driving these companies into the ground trying to escape their contractual commitments to its retirees.

What do you think? Are they Republicans or Democrats?

Does it make any difference?

Don

[KharmaTrain]

37. It's Playing The Fear Card

No question the goal by the Repugnicans is to union bust here...and use their corporate media toadies to sing how its the unions and the pensions that are the problem. It's a Pavolvian reflex that many now assume to be fact and why those flunkies can be so arrogant cause they know that their PR machines will blame the unions first and foremost and they attempt to be the heroes here in "saving jobs". The corporate play both sides of the aisle here, as we're seeing, through the large amounts of money they throw at the GOOP and by holding the unions hostage and with them their Democratic allies. I see a lot of that playing out here on DU...and with the frustration of those who would be directly affected by a major auto shutdown.

The bottom line is this economic mess is bipartisan. We can assess all the blame we want on the repugnicans and the greed of the past 25 years, but that won't solve any of the messes we're facing right now. Again, I question, will 25 billion really save the industry or is it just a stop-gap...throwing money that could be invested in created more than 3 million jobs that in time would regenerate the consumer economy that can afford to buy cars. Hopefully by then the auto industry has restructured and conforms to a new economy based on quality and economy.

Cheers...

[ColoradoMagician]

33. I support them

...

[HughBeaumont]

34. But see . . . when I read articles like THIS . . .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4502735

. . . it just tells me that, like the bank/AIG bailout, the workers . . . again . . . are going to be giving rich assholes money for their own firings. That isn't any kind of a plan.

NO tax money should be given unless there is an ABSOLUTE GUARANDAMNTEE that the workers you have now will remain on the payroll. NO offshoring plants. NO mass firings. You want to save your industry and help the economy, you're going to play ball and suck it up. The gravy train is OVER and your workers will NOT pay for your fuck-ups. THAT is the message we should be sending to these CEOs.

[pampango]

39. Exactly, which requires a plan and a damn strict one on how the loan proceeds

will be used. If they need the money that badly, these executive should be willing to play ball and agree that these loans come with requirements to change the industry (and protect the workers) in a way that makes it viable in the long run so that those jobs are there 10 or 20 years from now, not just for a few months.

[robinlynne]

38. whihc has ntohing to do with bailing out CEOs so they can send the money to their new factory in

Brazil...