What about bankruptcy option?

What about bankruptcy option?

seattletimes.nwsource.com

WASHINGTON — To hear the chief executive officers of Detroit automakers and union leaders tell it, bankruptcy and economic hellfire await if lawmakers don't craft a government bailout for them soon.

Probably not, according to legal and economic experts who warn that what's ailing Detroit isn't fixable with $25 billion.

Government aid of the sort that's being debated might allow U.S. automakers to survive a bit longer in their current form, but even supporters acknowledge it's unlikely to make them thrive.

For now, their fallback argument is that not helping them could be the worse of two bad options.

"If one of the companies was to go into bankruptcy, I would almost bet it would take another one with it, and possibly all three of them," Ron Gettelfinger, president of the United Auto Workers (UAW), told the Senate Banking Committee late Tuesday.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Mod Edit: Altered thread title to reflect actual article headline.
Please review link: Breaking Alternative News guidelines


[edit on 11/19/2008 by maria_stardust]

Here we find ourselves in the midst of yet more bailout talks.

The "Big 3" are on bended knee asking Washington for $25 billion, after flying into Dulles International on private jets. Many people make the argument that we need to or we will lose a monstrous portion of our American auto industry. Others argue that we shouldn't bail them out and that they should pay for their mistake.

I must say that I don't think these corporate giants should be bailed out. They continued producing more and more automobiles while people were buying less and less. This in itself led to their downfall. Simple rule of smart production: If consumers stop buying, you stop making. I understand they may have to produce X amount of automobiles, but if people aren't buying them they are only spending money on hopeless product.

It is also my honest belief that a source of the problem here is unions. They may have improved workers' conditions and improved wages, but at the cost of their employers, and now look at the fiasco they are stuck in. Unions began in the heat of the industrial revolution in our country, to improve extremely poor wages and conditions. People often abandoned their families because of lack of financial support, and many people died from disease and other hazards in the workplace. However, this simply isn't happening in today's day and age. The industry needs to be deunionized.

Even if our government gives these companies the money they beg for, unions must see their final day. It only makes the rich richer, but, at this moment in time, it might need to happen to restore stability.




seattletimes.nwsource.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Mod Edit: Altered thread title to reflect actual article headline.
Please review link: Breaking Alternative News guidelines


[edit on 11/19/2008 by maria_stardust]

Originally posted by prestonposthuma

I must say that I don't think these corporate giants should be bailed out.

It is also my honest belief that a source of the problem here is unions. They may have improved workers' conditions and improved wages, but at the cost of their employers, and now look at the fiasco they are stuck in.

Unions getting bounced out will not make things better. It will if anything make the fat cats fatter. Unions do pay attention. And when they see a huge money making period and none of that money is trickling down to them yet people are getting laid off they strike and force the employers to do the rite and fair thing. I know that the 'rite and fair thing' is a lost concept in todays business but it is alive and well to the ones sweating thier butts off on the manufacturing floor. If the owners of these corporations were honest and fair instead of fat and greedy then unions would not be neccessary.

[edit on 19-11-2008 by ch1ldofthe70s]

[edit on 19-11-2008 by ch1ldofthe70s]

[edit on 19-11-2008 by ch1ldofthe70s]

[edit on 19-11-2008 by ch1ldofthe70s]

[edit on 19-11-2008 by ch1ldofthe70s]

[edit on 19-11-2008 by ch1ldofthe70s]

Isn't it possible that the rich must get richer to begin with? If not isn't our system designed to implode on itself? Think about it.....if our country is built on a system that has such separation of classes, won't it rot from the inside?

I agree that the American auto workers have dug this hole for their employers. With all the benefits, paid vactions, etc. each worker is getting the equivalent of $72/hour. That's a lot of money per hour! Then, at least half of them are lazy, but know their union will keep them employed no matter how poor their work ethic is. We end up putting out an inferior product compared to our overseas competitors and Americans are reticent about buying American because of it. Some auto workers even sabotage the product when they've been scolded by their supervisor or are mad at their wife - for whatever reason, they don't tighten bolts and I've heard a story of a Coke bottle in the crank shaft.

Solution? Don't De-Unionize, but renegotiate for a more realistic labor cost. Why should auto workers be making more than other labor jobs? If that doesn't work - De-Unionize! A new, realistic union can always be re-formed later. And don't allow any druggies to work - make it strict.

The problem with thhis unions is that they have lost their purpose. The purpose of the labor unions use to be to protect the right and working conditions of the employee.

Now is about how much we can take from my employer no matter at what cost and this time the cost for the unions could be the end of their jobs.

Labor unions need to go back and refocuse on what their purpose should be.