GOP inching towards filibustering the auto bailout? Update: 46% support bailout
posted at 5:25 pm on December 9, 2008 by Allahpundit
The boss is cheered by Ensign hopping aboard the bandwagon, but I’ll believe this when I see it.
The bailout is so toxic within the Senate Republican Conference that McConnell isn’t even coming to the negotiating table because he isn’t ready to cut a deal his fellow GOP senators will hate. McConnell’s aides say that he hasn’t negotiated with Democrats because he hadn’t seen legislative language until late Monday afternoon.
The minority leader sounded torn as he spoke of the auto industry Monday. He said the industry is “an important source of jobs throughout America, including my own state of Kentucky.” But he acknowledged Republican resistance to a bailout, saying, “We cannot expose the taxpayers to new burdens without the promise of avoiding in the future the same mistakes that created these problems in the first place.”
A top Senate Republican aide said that the party will need to “regroup” in a closed-door lunch Wednesday before any deals can be struck.
At least 10 Democrats are still undecided, claims Politico. Aren’t we just going to end up with the same song and dance that we went through when the House initially voted down TARP? Let’s say they filibuster it. The market will immediately tank, throwing everyone into a panic at the prospect of cascading unemployment and generating a million soundbites about how Republicans don’t care about American workers. Then they’ll go back into conference and one of two things will happen. Either they’ll table a comprehensive bailout and agree on a short-term bridge loan to get GM through the next few months so that the new Democratic Senate can revisit the issue in January, or they’ll extract some sort of mostly cosmetic concession to give McConnell cover on “avoiding in the future the same mistakes.” Tying the funds to evidence that the companies are restructuring towards long-term viability has been the White House’s sticking point all along; they’ll figure out a way to make that element of it more robust (which, to be sure, will be all to the good) and then they’ll pass it, with the GOP voting against but eschewing the filibuster this time.
Right? Does anyone seriously see Republicans rolling the dice on letting the auto industry fail in the current economic climate? Exit quotation: “I don’t know that we’ve seen anything like this since the government told the automakers what kind of tanks to make during World War II… And that was just for the duration of the war — this could be for much, much longer.”
Update: Is public opinion moving towards a rescue? A plurality now supports the program, 46/42.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Dear God YES.
Stop this abomination and attack on American culture and our way of life.
We don’t have to let the industry “fail”. Either offer use the 25 billion to BUY 1 million cars from the makers or co-sign loans. We don’t need this crypto-socialist intervention that the Dems are frothing at the mouth to implement.
Or would y’all prefer CEO Blago?
Skywise on December 9, 2008 at 5:30 PM
Good.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on December 9, 2008 at 5:31 PM
Yesssssssssssssss!!!
Do it!!!
Just say no to Union Handouts!!
BigWyo on December 9, 2008 at 5:33 PM
Does the GOP want to write off winning Michigan, Ohio and Indiana for the next 20 years? If the GOP filibusters the bill, that will likely be what happens.
jim m on December 9, 2008 at 5:33 PM
Listen, if Ford can make it through 2009, why can’t the rest make it, and if not doesn’t that point to one having better management.
If GM or Chrysler goes under, won’t the remaining sales go to the “victor”?
So why punish the company that is in the best financial position…and give their competitors an advantage.
right2bright on December 9, 2008 at 5:35 PM
We should fight that Marxrist/socialist regime that controls the halls of congress and is about to take over the White House with every tool we have. If you wondered what happened to communism . . . well, it’s alive and well in Washington D.C.
rplat on December 9, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Ain’t Gonna Happen!
With the old guard still running the GOP there is no chance in ChiTcago that this will happen.
DannoJyd on December 9, 2008 at 5:36 PM
Pleeeeessssse guys, defend us taxpayers. No bailout.
L
letget on December 9, 2008 at 5:36 PM
Jim even majorities in the midwest oppose the bailout
goat on December 9, 2008 at 5:38 PM
I’m in Indiana, there’s little domestic car production left. Toyota has a larger presence.
I’m also of the belief that if the 2 of the big 3 fail, new car companies will form with new ideas.
But if Pelosi gets her way with this abomination?! Making the car companies build public transportation to whatever Al Gore thinks is going to hit him on the head this year instead of what’s fiscally responsible?
No, this is a nightmare waiting to happen.
Skywise on December 9, 2008 at 5:38 PM
The GOP should not filibuster this. They have nothing to gain from it. If a bailout doesn’t pass now, it will in January with larger Dem majorities. The GOP would just be delaying the inevitable while setting themselves up to take responsibility for a GM bankruptcy if that happens before the new President and Congress take office. Let the Dems pass this and take full responsibility for the bailout.
Mark1971 on December 9, 2008 at 5:38 PM
The workers are smarter then that, they know mis-management and unions caused the problems.
Ford will remain, and become stronger, picking up much of the loss.
By the end of the year, the auto industry will be “corrected” unions weaker, and the companies that are left stronger.
Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, the rest will sing the praises of the GOP, and finally put the spotlight on the poor representation from the dems.
That won’t make you feel better…but the GOP will love it.
right2bright on December 9, 2008 at 5:39 PM
Unless you believe the US Gov’t can design and build cars that people will buy and do it efficiently, what is the point of the bailout?
ronsfi on December 9, 2008 at 5:41 PM
I am strongly opposed to the Federal Government owning a stake in ANY private company. The ‘Bailout’ (read Union salvation at taxpayer expense) will not result in higher quality automobiles until the engineers re-design (with increased safety standards, ‘Green’ standards, etc. to deal with), factories re-tool and re-work Union work rules (figure 5 – 8 years minimum). Meanwhile, Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Mercedes, etc. will continue to eat American products for breakfast while companies, unions and Congress bicker about costs.
Let the companies fail and re-structure under Chapter 11 so that they can break Union contracts (a major cost factor) and get rid of feather-bedding retirement packages (yet another). We may well get better cars faster than letting CEO Nancy and COO Harry make the decisions.
SeniorD on December 9, 2008 at 5:41 PM
This would be different … how?
Let the Big 3 declare bankruptsy. At least that is somewhat more honorable than picking the pocket of the evil corporations, and it would give the automakers the chance to kick the Union in the teeth. After all, it is the Union that is killing American automakers.
On a side note, Rush told his listeners that the top 2 vehicles being stolen today are American made. Think about that for a bit.
DannoJyd on December 9, 2008 at 5:42 PM
Right2bright, one of the big 3 going under will likely cause a ripple effect that takes out much of its supply chain. And the big 3 generally share many of the same suppliers.
I’ve seen the national poll numbers, but can’t seem to find the regional numbers showing approval/disapproval in the midwest. Does anyone have a link?
jim m on December 9, 2008 at 5:47 PM
Does the American taxpayer want to get bent over again in 5 years to pay off union stooges???
So they go tits up and just walk away from it all and burn it to the ground?? Really???
You would kinda thing they’d gut up, start from scratch, and get back to business…but no, this is (The New and Improved?)America…We all deserve this that and the other for the simple fact that we are breathing….
Unions are a blight on our economy and should be banned like asbestos.
Your job in the (fill in the blank) industry just took a
giant sh!*!!! Move!! Go somewhere else. People do it all the time.
Stop bitching and strap on a pair.
BigWyo on December 9, 2008 at 5:47 PM
Ohio voted for the GOP for 20+ years until November, didn’t it? And didn’t Indiana vote for the GOP in November?
jim m on December 9, 2008 at 5:48 PM
No union handouts.
Write your congress critters
Support Rep. Louis Gohmert’s proposal for a 2 month tax holiday instead!
You know what would fix Ford? Tell ‘em to dust off their 52MPG Diesel Escort from Europe they had in the mid 80s. Then waive the sales tax on the cars, like Conneticut does if you buy a hybrid or clean diesel.
Iblis on December 9, 2008 at 5:49 PM
I wonder if McConnell will be influence by the fact that Toyota has plants in Kentucky???
mad saint jack on December 9, 2008 at 5:49 PM
The above is code for “dot a few I’s and cross a few T’s” and we’ll vote for it.
The Repub party is in the minority because they have no core values that they believe in. They believe in staying in office and pretending to embrace small government and fiscal prudence. However on every occasion to exercise those beliefs they make excuses, saying “just this one time”. Year in, year out.
The comedy is, they can’t figure out why no one wants to be a Repub anymore and they keep losing elections.
patrick neid on December 9, 2008 at 5:50 PM
Bush will take responsibility. Dont kid yourself.
lodge on December 9, 2008 at 5:51 PM
Bankruptcy is the answer. If a majority of the voters want to continue electing crooked liberals and leftists then let them take their own poison. As for the rest of us, we’re sick and tired of these bums controlling our lives and our futures as they attempt to establish a massive Marxist welfare state. Our principles and our values are worth suffering for and fighting for. I’m standing on my principles and I couldn’t care less for whom the rust belt votes.
rplat on December 9, 2008 at 5:52 PM
The filibuster will be long forgotten by ’12, ’10 even.
However the albatross will be flapping on the Donks neck ‘cuz the collapse happened on Dems watch.
Throwing Pelosi & Reid a lifeline here is beyond stupid.
Come Jan. 20, let them twist in the wind.
Bruno Strozek on December 9, 2008 at 5:55 PM
Wait a minute…the GOP is finally going to listen to its constituents?!
We’ll see, but I will be overjoyed if they do filibuster this idiotic bailout for the Unions (I refuse to say it is for the auto industry).
jencab on December 9, 2008 at 6:02 PM
No Bailout.
dogsoldier on December 9, 2008 at 6:03 PM
I don’t know the answer. On one hand I hate the idea of bailing out GM. I can not believe they are in this position, we have been through downturns before and they did not go belly up immediately. On the other hand, this could cascade beyond the auto companies and cost all sorts of people their jobs at a time when there are not a lot of jobs to get. And I am sure that the government will pay the extra unemployment benefits and end up spending billions to take care of the people who do lose their jobs.
I think Allah is right here, it will go just about like he says.
Terrye on December 9, 2008 at 6:03 PM
And when does it end? When do we decide, OK, this company can fail? I’d really like to know. In fact, if there was a cut off somewhere, I’m sure many people would feel better about all of this.
They just don’t seem to know what the hell they’re doing, and they keep demanding more and giving government more control.
Esthier on December 9, 2008 at 6:03 PM
I wish they would, but I’m sure it’s just for show.
I can see using tax dollars to cover the pensioners, but other than that- no bailout. It’s called “private industry” for a reason!
dinobalz on December 9, 2008 at 6:04 PM
Coming in second on the bailout is not going to win votes in the Midwest states for the GOP. Let’s try to win the rest of the country by showing we aren’t the socialist-lite party.
pedestrian on December 9, 2008 at 6:07 PM
completely filibustering this (the right thing to do) requires intestinal fortitude.
Any evidence of that in congress on the republican side of the house?
I didnt think so.
psv on December 9, 2008 at 6:07 PM
if they really want a bailout, they should just change their name to citicorp. they’ll get billions, no questions asked.
lolwut on December 9, 2008 at 6:11 PM
Bush(and Republicans)will only be blamed if an auto company goes bankrupt before he leaves office. This is why they shouldn’t filibuster it. They gain nothing from it because a bailout is inevitable when Obama takes office. They can only lose.
The GOP can stand on its principles by voting against it when it comes to the floor. A filibuster only delays the inevitable while exposing the GOP to blame for a GM bankruptcy.
Mark1971 on December 9, 2008 at 6:12 PM
No UAW bailout.
If necessary, filibuster!
batter on December 9, 2008 at 6:12 PM
Does anyone get the impression that perhaps the GOP in Congress is becoming more conservative in their tone, rhetoric and their aims and perhaps that may have something to do with the popularity that Sarah Palin enjoys in the polls and her impact of creating a Chambliss landslide victory by promoting a Reagan conservative message?
technopeasant on December 9, 2008 at 6:13 PM
I don’t understand why folks are worried about them going into bankruptcy. Creditors end up owning the Companies. Its not like the value of the plants and IP isn’t still there. It would make perfect sense for them to shut down for a bit to rehire workers are SANE rates and reopen. Failing that, the can sell a lot of the plants and IP off to one or the other Auto companies still around.
If the UAW doesn’t want to work for a mere $45/hr. I know a lot of folks who would.
OBQuiet on December 9, 2008 at 6:15 PM
I doubt that. As far as I can see, BDS will push people to blame Bush even if it takes two years for one to go bankrupt.
Esthier on December 9, 2008 at 6:16 PM
Nah. It’s already a done deal. Now, it’s just a question as to how best to arrange the smoke and mirrors for the taxpayer. McConnell et al won’t swim upstream. Good old boys. Remember,..getting re-elected comes before anything else. Incumbents get re-elected on pork.
a capella on December 9, 2008 at 6:18 PM
No. Once the Dems pass their bailout and give potentially $100 billion plus to the auto companies they will own this issue. If one of them goes bankrupt after being given all this money it won’t be Bush and the GOP who look bad.
Mark1971 on December 9, 2008 at 6:19 PM
I hope you’re right, but with $100 billion I really don’t see how they can go bankrupt even if they fail to produce a profit for the next four years.
Esthier on December 9, 2008 at 6:21 PM
Ooooh, just like the Great Republican Oil Rebellion!
Yeah, the Repubs who’ve “grown a pair” have those nice foreign auto plants — the ones that got plenty of government “incentives,” tax breaks and other bennies, and don’t have to abide by the conditions the feds have allowed/encouraged unions to pour on domestic manufacturers, remember? — in their states.
I bet Nancy and Harry are shaking in their boots….
MrScribbler on December 9, 2008 at 6:21 PM
So, you don’t see how you just contradicted yourself?
Count to 10 on December 9, 2008 at 6:25 PM
If the Republicans need to support a bailout to be politically viable (a supposition which the polls do NOT support) then they have already lost because they will never be able to outbid the Democrats in pandering to the automakers and the unions.
PackerBronco on December 9, 2008 at 6:26 PM
Prior to our current financial crisis the market had already made its decision about these companies–they were going into Chapter 11. Then when Paulson/Bernanke started bailing out the banks to protect depositors etc certain Dems started talking about bailing out the auto’s, home builders and the like.
Soon after, the skids started getting greased about how we can not afford the layoffs, the loss to our industrial base etc. With that the billions are coming.
It’s absolute lunacy. They are simply earmarking billions to their base voters–the unions. Where were the bailouts to the 100′s of thousands laid off when the internet bubble burst and 1000′s of companies went out of business?
Chapter 11 was established to take care of these problems forcing restructuring and new management on companies who had refused to do so on their own. The airlines have been through it and people kept flying. UAL, Northwest and Delta come to mind.
We are being had and the Repubs are not going to do anything about it.
patrick neid on December 9, 2008 at 6:33 PM
The Republicans should filibuster the bill, DEMANDING that any automaker wanting Government money needs to throw out the UAW and have non-union right-to-work factories everywhere in the United States. If the Democrats write that into the bill, then the GOP votes for cloture.
Everybody without their head up a union boss’ butt knows what’s killing the Big 3, and why Toyota and Honda can build cars at a profit in America. Time to stick it to the unions, like Reagan and Thatcher did.
Steve Z on December 9, 2008 at 6:36 PM
I wrote Saxby Chambliss a letter and he confirmed that he does not support the bailout.
mindhacker on December 9, 2008 at 6:40 PM
Oh, by the way, that 46-42 plurality for the bailout is an MSNBC poll. It would be interesting to see a Rasmussen or Gallup poll to see what people are really thinking.
Steve Z on December 9, 2008 at 6:41 PM
Indiana was lost and will continue to be lost as long as ACORN is active. Automobile manufacturing has nothing to do with it. It’s been on the decline in Indiana for quite a while and the plants I know of are all foreign (Subaru, Honda, Toyota).
The Republicans should promote their own plan and vote against this, highlighting the inherent weakness of a bailout to a sector whose labor union has failed to make any significant concessions, but I do not think they should filibuster. The visuals of a filibuster are too easy for the MSM to manipulate against Republicans.
Y-not on December 9, 2008 at 6:45 PM
OBQuiet:
If it was that simple I don’t think there would be a debate. I think the fear is that millions of people will lose their jobs in the middle of a recession, making the recession worse for everyone. I think that is what is worrying people. They are thinking of all the other jobs that just went away and never came back at any wage. The midwest has seen a lot of that in recent years. People are scared.
Terrye on December 9, 2008 at 6:53 PM
that is way above his thinking…he would never be able to grasp that logic. Hence he is a liberal…he proves it with every post.
right2bright on December 9, 2008 at 6:56 PM
Simple plan…entice them with tax incentives to upgrade equiptment…Ford is on life support, but says they can last through 2009 without any bail out money…if any assistance is needed, send it their way, they are solvent.
Let GM and Chrysler merge, become one company and see how they can cut their costs, and merge their overhead.
Everyone, force the unions to re-negotiate all wages, and re-negotiate executive wages. Cut out all bonuses for everyone over X number of dollars per year. The decisions makers, the top execs, take a huge pay cut…they have been stealing from the company for years, pay back time.
Top wage, $5 million, and no bonuses, give them one car to drive, no personal use of corporate jet, but keep the jet(s).
right2bright on December 9, 2008 at 7:02 PM
what is a bailout? are we discussing a gift or a loan?
in our history we have given LOANS to the auto industry. with favorable results.
would i be in favor of giving a loan? sure.
it just seems to me that the WORD LOAN = BAILOUT
bailout has a bad conutation . the press calls it a bailout.
do i think that the auto industry should get special help. no. but if in fact if tax payers could make a little why not.
TomLawler on December 9, 2008 at 7:03 PM
Do you know what the “supply chain” is, or do you just regurgitate words you see and like?
I assure you they do not share their supply chain…
right2bright on December 9, 2008 at 7:06 PM
Good question, for awhile it was called a bailout, but now they have switched to a “loan”…I do not know what assets we are loaning against.
You are thinking of Chrysler, one company, in a robust economy…this is much different. I don’t trust our elected to use the right name or do the right thing.
Chrysler changed management, changed a lot of things, I do not see happening in this scenario…
right2bright on December 9, 2008 at 7:10 PM
Sure, unions have priced a LOT of our industry out of the market. But cars are selling. Not as many as they would like and fewer from them then they want. But if all three went belly up, that wouldn’t affect demand by much. Other agencies would need to make the cars that Detroit wasn’t. Plants already build and set up would have value for this. More that way than as empty lots. When the creditors assumed control, they would need workers. Just not as many or as over paid.
In fact, at lower wages, they could afford to higher more workers. Union members would lose but non-union workers currently shut out could well gain.
OBQuiet on December 9, 2008 at 7:37 PM
My attitude about this is let them file for bankruptcy and work the best deal they can with the court Some conditions I’d place on them:
- Terminate the UAW contract and start over on labor costs. No more than the average of the foreign manufacturers wages and benefits adjusted for cost of living differentials. Inflation adjusted increases only for the next five years or until the company returns to consistent profitability.
- Cut senior management compensation packages. Leave their salaries alone but eliminate any possible bonuses, golden parachutes, etc.Bonuses can be reinstated based on actual financial performance. Terminate redundant management, 2 weeks pay per year of service, one year of health care or until they get another job
- Close any obsolete plants, pay off labor at some rational basis, no more than 2 weeks wages for each year of service, health care for no more than a year or until they get another job
- End the job bank program, no more pay and benefits for not working
Once they’ve tried that, then come back and, if they have made a reasonable effort to cut their ridiculous cost basis, we can look at some bridge funding to get them past the short term rough spots while they wait for the cost reductions to pay off. Loans only and to be repaid within five years of returning to consistent profitability. No government ownership stake, no government management, no government oversight of company operations other than monitoring financial performance and labor/management costs.
johnsteele on December 9, 2008 at 7:41 PM
Not gonna happen folks. The GOP is so freaking spineless, they will look at that 46% poll and shit their pants.
angryed on December 9, 2008 at 8:06 PM
And we know this for sure just how? Would it be they same way we knew everything else?
Cheshire Cat on December 9, 2008 at 8:16 PM
Congressmen are like diapers, the should be changed often and for the same reason.
Cheshire Cat on December 9, 2008 at 8:17 PM
Inching? More like millimetering.
Valiant on December 9, 2008 at 8:25 PM
You hit the nail on the head. This is not the role of Government.
Red State State of Mind on December 9, 2008 at 8:47 PM
“A plurality now supports the program, 46/42.”
it’s a meaningless number regarding “the program”. People don’t know the what “the program” is.
Who wants the auto companies to go under?
All the majority number means is that the public would like to find a way to keep the Big 3 alive.
notagool on December 9, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Ok, let me type this slowly so you can understand it (this is a joke).
Most of the suppliers to one of the big 3 supply the other two, and most of those suppliers have been stretched to the limit (financially speaking) by at least one of the big 3. If, for instance, GM filed for Chap. 11 or 7 and didn’t pay its payables owed to its suppliers, many of them would also have to file for Chap. 11 or 7 and would stop supplying parts and services to the other two (at least until they had debtor-in-bankruptcy financing and decided to not reject contracts). That would mean the other two of the Big 3 would be unable to timely get parts and services from a large part of their supplier base (as they share many of the same suppliers) and would probably have to declare Chap. 11 or 7.
I worked in the Detroit area for a supplier to the Big 3 for about 2 years before moving six months ago, BTW.
jim m on December 9, 2008 at 9:34 PM
I love me some Mitch.
fossten on December 9, 2008 at 9:58 PM
The dims want this bailout badly, this will be as bad as the tarp deal. Rebubs should be running from this bill. Just say no to bailouts.
Time for GOP to grow a pair.
bi-partisian support = taxpayer gets screwed, repubs get blamed.
la.rt.wngr on December 9, 2008 at 10:24 PM
Send ‘em to Chapter 11.
GarandFan on December 9, 2008 at 11:33 PM
I doubt this will be stopped … collectively, they, the GOP, simply does not have the balls or the spine, nor do they yet believe in limited government. They are still trying to play the “Dem-Lite compassionate conservative card”.
AZ_Redneck on December 9, 2008 at 11:35 PM
Actually, lawyers and politicians have done more to kill the American automakers than unions. Hourly labor costs are only 10% of the cost of building a car for the domestics. The most expensive part of building a car for the domestic automakers is actually parts, the components they buy or make themselves. Government regulations and product liability costs round out the top three cost factors. Legacy labor costs may tip the balance in favor of the non-union transplant facilities, mostly in the anti-labor South (if the South is so friendly to business, how come all those textile mills closed?), but it’s the government that’s made it so expensive to build cars in the first place.
First off, whether you like organized labor or not, the Wagner act and creation of the NLRB in 1935 paved the way for the auto industry to be organized in the late 1930′s. Unions couldn’t have had as much power as they did without the assistance of politicians and government bureaucrats. With the postwar boom, by the mid 1950s the Detroit based companies were pumping out the cars. Like Bob Seger sang, “the big line moved… we met production…back in 55 we were makin thunderbirds”. The companies were making a lot of money. The the 113 day UAW strike against GM was very costly to the company and started a national recession. So the auto companies opted for labor peace to make money. Meanwhile tax laws made it better for both the companies and the UAW to negotiate over increased benefits, which aren’t taxed like wages nor matched with FICA contributions. Blame the politicians.
Today a big chunk of the cost of building a car is complying with government regulations of one kind or another. The cars must be safe and not pollute and they must get a certain fleet average fuel economy (which gave the Japanese companies an advantage because they didn’t make big cars and trucks). All the engineering to design crush sections and passenger cells, all the specialty steels that make it possible, the air bags, etcetera may be worthwhile things, but they cost money, in most cases add weight and reduce fuel efficiency.
Then there is product liability. The politicians, many of whom are lawyers, make product liability laws enforced by courts made up of, guess who? That’s right, more lawyers. Then the automakers have to hire even more lawyers to defend themselves against product liability lawsuits filed by, that’s right, even more lawyers.
While we’re on the subject of lawyers, those legacy health care costs are expensive, in good part, to testing, vetting, insuring, and defending every drug, every piece of equipment from MRIs to hospital electrical receptacles, every medical procedure and test, everything related at all to medicine against the possibility of a product liability, wrongful death or malpractice lawsuit.
So management and labor both have a role in Detroit’s current difficulties by screwing up on product and unsustainable labor contracts, agreed. But you can’t ignore the role that politicians and lawyers have in Detroit’s dilemma.
Makin’ Thunderbirds
Bob Seger
The big line moved one mile an hour
So loud it really hurt
The big line moved so loud
It really hurt
Back in 55
We were makin thunderbirds
We filled conveyors
We met production
Foremen didnt waste words
We met production
Foremen didnt waste words
We were young and proud
We were makin thunderbirds
We were makin thunderbirds
We were makin thunderbirds
They were long and low and sleek and fast
They were all you ever heard
Back in 55
We were makin thunderbirds
Now the years have flown and the plants have changed
And youre lucky if you work
The big line moves but youre lucky if you work
Back in 55
We were makin thunderbirds
We were makin thunderbirds
We were makin thunderbirds
They were long and low and sleek and fast
They were classic in a word
Back in 55
We were makin thunderbirds
We were young and proud
We were makin thunderbirds
We were young and sure
We were makin thunderbirds
rokemronnie on December 10, 2008 at 12:27 AM
On bankruptcy and the labor contracts:
The automakers and their suppliers have a critical credit-based relationship. The argument is made (and I cannot judge it) that if GM goes bankrupt the suppliers will not be able to get the credit they need to sell on credit to GM. Likewise for Chrysler and Ford. So even bankruptcy can only work if there are some bailout guarantees.
As to the labor contracts: there are new contracts in place for next year. They can’t undo the retirement benefits (including medical care) for people who have already retired. This socialistic arrangement needs to be shouted to the skies, and the government (which created the union monopoly) should absorb some of it and let a bankruptcy court release some of the rest or assign it to the current workers, who should pay it or reject it by explicit vote.
njcommuter on December 10, 2008 at 3:21 AM
Since I bought my first new car in 1979, I’ve bought nothing but American brands. If Congress pushes this bailout through, I’ll never buy another American-brand vehicle. I figure I’ll be giving them and the corrupt unions more than enough support already by my compulsory taxes.
SynthSmith on December 10, 2008 at 8:01 AM
You bailout, I boycott.
You can prop up these failures in Detroit, but you can’t make people buy their awful cars.
james23 on December 10, 2008 at 10:37 AM