Bailout Watch: Heading for a Populist Backlash?

Now that the crisis is spreading to the real economy, you can feel the anger and resentment starting to build. Robert Reich thinks we may be "courting a populist backlash":

Are We Courting a Populist Backlash?, by Robert Reich: The government is doing a lousy job helping distressed homeowners. And according to ... the Comptroller of the Currency, the little that's been done has had surprisingly little effect. Nearly 36 percent of homeowners holding mortgages whose terms were adjusted to give them more leeway defaulted on payments within three months, and almost 53 percent were behind on payments by six months.

What's going on? It's hard to know for sure, because the homeowners who have qualified for help so far were supposed to have been fairly good credit risks.... My guess is the worsening economy is making it harder for just about all homeowners to pay their mortgages, and those who were teetering on the edge months ago ... are now way under water. Two of the biggest culprits: Layoffs and fewer working hours. ...

It wouldn't surprise me if many of these Americans were starting to look at the size of the bailouts of Wall Street and the bailout of the Big Three -- at the executives, well-paid professional employees, upscale creditors and shareholders, and even well-paid blue-collar workers, who are the major beneficiaries of this federal largesse -- and conclude that a fundamental principle of fairness is being violated.

These Americans aren't revolutionaries. To the contrary, they're deeply conservative. They've worked hard, but their hard work hasn't paid off. Some have tried to save, only to see their savings disappear. They're worried about the future and about their kids' futures. They never expected anything like this.

This is the angry soil in which populist backlashes can take root.

We may be able to do a better job of sorting out which homeowners to help now that we have some experience with the program, so the 53% number may be improved upon going forward. But if the goal is to prevent a certain number of foreclosures, and if the number cannot be improved, we could also help twice as many people. That might help with the backlash problem.

On the populist backlash, maybe that was part of the reason for this?:

Deal to Rescue American Automakers Is Moving Ahead, by David M. Herszenhorn, NY Times: The White House and Democratic Congressional leaders said Monday that they were close to agreeing on the terms of a $15 billion government rescue of the American automobile industry that would be directed by one or more appointees of President Bush and would impose expansive federal oversight of the auto companies.

The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, said she hoped that Mr. Bush’s appointee — or car czar, as the position has come to be known — would not need to be replaced by President-elect Barack Obama, raising the prospect that the outgoing and incoming administrations would cooperate in selecting someone.

The president’s designee would disburse the short-term emergency loans to General Motors (GM) and Chrysler, which are at risk of financial collapse, and would directly supervise the reorganization plans that the auto manufacturers have agreed to carry out in exchange for government aid. The government also could receive warrants that would give it equity stakes in the companies.

The Ford Motor Company (F) announced Monday evening that it would not seek short-term federal aid, denying that it faced the same “near-term liquidity issue” as G.M. and Chrysler. ...[O]fficials expressed optimism that they would reach a deal and that Congress would vote on the package this week.

The progress in the Washington talks helped lift the stock markets...

By Jan. 1, according to the draft bill, the car czar would be required to develop benchmarks for assessing the automakers’ progress in carrying out the restructuring plans. The car czar would also have the power to convene meetings of an array of interested parties in the auto companies, including unions, creditors, suppliers, auto dealers and shareholders. ...

The White House had earlier proposed that the auto czar reside within the Commerce Department with the title of “financial viability adviser.” The Democrats’ draft would seem to allow the administration to do just that, and would not require Senate confirmation for the post. The Democrats’ draft legislation includes an array of stringent taxpayer protections. ...

Will Americans be more likely to buy cars from GM and Chrysler if they are part owners in the companies? Market share will be critical as car sales decline in coming months - output will have to fall - so will foreign carmakers move to protect themselves with offsetting subsidies, etc. of their own? I'm not comfortable with this for a variety of reasons, but losing that many jobs right now is not an attractive option, so there doesn't seem to be much of a choice.

One question to ask is how we ended up putting ourselves into a position where we could not allow firms to fail. There are lots of reasons, but if we had better social insurance, good enough so that the health and welfare of workers and their families was not threatened by the failure of the automakers, it would be a lot easier to avoid a bailout.

Comments

[Chris B:]

I don't think that the populist backlash will be directed towards demanding a better safety net or social programs such as universal coverage. It's far more likely that the backlash will be conservative in nature because:

(1) although Bush started the bailouts, future bailouts will increasingly be seen as a creation of Democrats because the Republicans are out of office and won't have to make the decisions,
(2) Bush's support of massive taxpayer bailouts is being spoken of in the conservative media as a foolish mistake by him alone rather than the default conservative position,
(3) the automaker bailouts are being seen as a handout to unions by Democrats, and
(4) the anti-bailout sentiment dovetails nicely with a pro-capitalism, small government, low taxes old-school-conservativ... that is making a comeback among the same people who thought Reagan stood for those things, and
(5) Palin is already trying out these themes.

It remains to be seen whether red-state Republicans will give up their government-produced GM/Ford/Dodge pickups and buy Texas-made Toyota Tundras in protest. I doubt it.

2008 Dec 09 01:52 PM

[Armen:]

Cerebrus should NOT benefit in any from bailout funds.
In fact there should be no bailout of Chrysler.

2008 Dec 09 01:58 PM

[CM in MA:]

Mark, it was going swimmingly until the last paragraph. Allow me to rephrase: if we had better socialism for workers we could let capitalism work on companies, but since workers are subject to the vicissitudes of capitalism we're forced into providing socialism for corporations.

Whew, with logic like that, we're doomed. Will the last capitalist out the door please turn out the lights.

2008 Dec 09 02:01 PM

[SW Richmond:]

"Bailout Watch: Heading for a Populist Backlash?"

God, I hope so. Anything we can do to speed it up?

2008 Dec 09 02:18 PM

[sandspider:]

Besides socialism for the corporations to quote CM in MA, we have a long list of kingdoms and squires of the washington table that feel they are above the law and do not have to participate in the bail out other then stealing others money and no one does a thing about it. Populist backlash? During the Clinton socialism era there were roughly 35,000 American families that uprooted and moved elsewhere. Businessmen and technical folks. I almost went with them. Now that I am working overseas it is just a matter of time before I find my new home as well. With the plans in the punch of the new bunch that offer change I dare say that it will be more then just a populist back lash, it will be a migration of businessmen and technical folks that will leap frog over all the illegals that are granted a free lunch and vanish into other countries. Like my forefathers that came to the Americas looking for freedom, there are many today that will once more be on the move...looking for the same freedom that first brought their families to the new world. That world is being destroyed so it is time once more to unfurl the sails and go seeking a better life. And between our going and the new coming in America will loose what it once stood for. But freedom is not a plot of ground it is a concept and a belief system that will find other fresh soil in which to take root and grow. It is time to set sail and go.

2008 Dec 09 02:20 PM

[Duude:]

I think the populist backlash will grow but will dissipate with an economic recovery within the next year or so. However, that may just in time for the next problem to crop up---a raging inflation problem. I imagine with an eventual economic recovery foreign money will be drawn out of the dollar. No longer in need of the 'safe' dollar. Focus has to return to how we printed our way through this crisis. Who is going to want to hold dollars then? The bubble dollar will need to be deflated and with that imports will skyrocket in price. That aftermath will keep the bailouts in the minds of most Americans.

2008 Dec 09 03:11 PM

[j_dog:]

To Sandspider:

Only 35,000 families left during the "Clinton socialism era"?
Out of like, 100 million?

How many left under the "Bush prosperity era"?

I personally know 5...

Seriously, what planet do you live on?


On Dec 09 02:20 PM sandspider wrote:

> Besides socialism for the corporations to quote CM in MA, we have
> a long list of kingdoms and squires of the washington table that
> feel they are above the law and do not have to participate in the
> bail out other then stealing others money and no one does a thing
> about it. Populist backlash? During the Clinton socialism era there
> were roughly 35,000 American families that uprooted and moved elsewhere.
> Businessmen and technical folks. I almost went with them. Now that
> I am working overseas it is just a matter of time before I find my
> new home as well. With the plans in the punch of the new bunch that
> offer change I dare say that it will be more then just a populist
> back lash, it will be a migration of businessmen and technical folks
> that will leap frog over all the illegals that are granted a free
> lunch and vanish into other countries. Like my forefathers that
> came to the Americas looking for freedom, there are many today that
> will once more be on the move...looking for the same freedom that
> first brought their families to the new world. That world is being
> destroyed so it is time once more to unfurl the sails and go seeking
> a better life. And between our going and the new coming in America
> will loose what it once stood for. But freedom is not a plot of
> ground it is a concept and a belief system that will find other fresh
> soil in which to take root and grow. It is time to set sail and
> go.

2008 Dec 09 03:27 PM

[j_dog:]

To Sandspider:

Only 35,000 families left during the "Clinton socialism era"?
Out of like, 100 million?

How many left under the "Bush prosperity era"?

I personally know 5...

Seriously, what planet do you live on?


On Dec 09 02:20 PM sandspider wrote:

> Besides socialism for the corporations to quote CM in MA, we have
> a long list of kingdoms and squires of the washington table that
> feel they are above the law and do not have to participate in the
> bail out other then stealing others money and no one does a thing
> about it. Populist backlash? During the Clinton socialism era there
> were roughly 35,000 American families that uprooted and moved elsewhere.
> Businessmen and technical folks. I almost went with them. Now that
> I am working overseas it is just a matter of time before I find my
> new home as well. With the plans in the punch of the new bunch that
> offer change I dare say that it will be more then just a populist
> back lash, it will be a migration of businessmen and technical folks
> that will leap frog over all the illegals that are granted a free
> lunch and vanish into other countries. Like my forefathers that
> came to the Americas looking for freedom, there are many today that
> will once more be on the move...looking for the same freedom that
> first brought their families to the new world. That world is being
> destroyed so it is time once more to unfurl the sails and go seeking
> a better life. And between our going and the new coming in America
> will loose what it once stood for. But freedom is not a plot of
> ground it is a concept and a belief system that will find other fresh
> soil in which to take root and grow. It is time to set sail and
> go.

2008 Dec 09 03:27 PM

[bosun.j:]

It's a crying shame that Americans don't have the same courage that Thai people have. Were that the case the situation we're now in wouldn't have ended up plunging the planet into cultural and financial collapse.

2008 Dec 09 03:28 PM

[loupgarous:]

Robert Reich had better PRAY that the backlash is populist in nature - that Americans are the pathetic morons the media paint them as, who don't see the problem with getting second and third mortgages on their homes to buy crap they don't need, and who will believe any huckster in an Italian suit who gets up on a podium, promises them "Change they can believe in" and gives them warmed-over "this is how we got where we are" Senate Democrats.

I don't think so. The electorate seems to have performed in choosing the next President (something we'll never know, because there is no way that an Obama Attorney General will authorize a searching investigation of how significant bogus voter registrations were in the 2008 election (or the 2004 or 2006 elections, for that matter). ACORN gets a walk from the guy they helped put in office.

But I think that once the honeymoon is over, the voters will realize that the real change they have gotten from Barack Obama will be a loss in governmental integrity, a loss in investor confidence as socialism displaces the hidden hand of the market as the leading force in American business, and a loss in our power in the world, because the key to a strong military is a strong economy - and we're about to make all of the mistakes that got socialism a bad name in Europe.

Or has British Leyland made serious noise, apart from a loud crashing sound?

Bailing out the Big Three without solid transfer of equity in exchange for the bailout and major union concessions will give us "change we'll have to push down the road."

2008 Dec 09 03:32 PM

[loupgarous:]

A politicized "Big Three." Hmmmm... cross-eyed dropouts from engineering school who are related to the right people designing our cars, crooks doing the books... what could go wrong?

2008 Dec 09 03:40 PM

[dw57:]

Not sure that you wont have problems as being seen as the creators of this mess. Since this mess was created by wall street and the 'free' market mentality, of any goes capitalism. which we now can see as a big failure. Populism has always tended to be pro-individual and ant-business more than any thing else. and nothing that has transpired has changed that part. what may be the biggest reason for the back lash is that the majority of workers never have seen any benefit in the last 8 years and have yet to recover from the last recession, and now see those who did getting a bail out. and not paying a penalty in doing so. at least the car companies appear to be about to have a penalty the same can't be said of wall street or the banks.


On Dec 09 01:52 PM Chris B wrote:

> I don't think that the populist backlash will be directed towards
> demanding a better safety net or social programs such as universal
> coverage. It's far more likely that the backlash will be conservative
> in nature because:
>
> (1) although Bush started the bailouts, future bailouts will increasingly
> be seen as a creation of Democrats because the Republicans are out
> of office and won't have to make the decisions,
> (2) Bush's support of massive taxpayer bailouts is being spoken of
> in the conservative media as a foolish mistake by him alone rather
> than the default conservative position,
> (3) the automaker bailouts are being seen as a handout to unions
> by Democrats, and
> (4) the anti-bailout sentiment dovetails nicely with a pro-capitalism,
> small government, low taxes old-school-conservativ... that is making
> a comeback among the same people who thought Reagan stood for those
> things, and
> (5) Palin is already trying out these themes.
>
> It remains to be seen whether red-state Republicans will give up
> their government-produced GM/Ford/Dodge pickups and buy Texas-made
> Toyota Tundras in protest. I doubt it.

2008 Dec 09 03:56 PM

[dw57:]

I think that Chrysler should be merged with the other 2. or just merge all of them


On Dec 09 01:58 PM Armen wrote:

> Cerebrus should NOT benefit in any from bailout funds.
> In fact there should be no bailout of Chrysler.

2008 Dec 09 03:57 PM

[dw57:]

not sure we will have a recovery in a few years. maybe 10. and the flight to safety seems to be overwhelmingly to the dollar. and if we are printing our way out, it would appear every one else is too. and that cause the business community screwed up and has no way to fix it.


On Dec 09 03:11 PM Duude wrote:

> I think the populist backlash will grow but will dissipate with an
> economic recovery within the next year or so. However, that may just
> in time for the next problem to crop up---a raging inflation problem.
> I imagine with an eventual economic recovery foreign money will be
> drawn out of the dollar. No longer in need of the 'safe' dollar.
> Focus has to return to how we printed our way through this crisis.
> Who is going to want to hold dollars then? The bubble dollar will
> need to be deflated and with that imports will skyrocket in price.
> That aftermath will keep the bailouts in the minds of most Americans.

2008 Dec 09 04:01 PM

[dw57:]

i think we chose the next president based on the performance (or lack there of) of the current one. and that has tarred and feathered the GOP with one word, incompetence. until they can show they can actually do work with out messing it up and not involving politics in all they do, they will not come back


On Dec 09 03:32 PM loupgarous wrote:

> Robert Reich had better PRAY that the backlash is populist in nature
> - that Americans are the pathetic morons the media paint them as,
> who don't see the problem with getting second and third mortgages
> on their homes to buy crap they don't need, and who will believe
> any huckster in an Italian suit who gets up on a podium, promises
> them "Change they can believe in" and gives them warmed-over "this
> is how we got where we are" Senate Democrats.
>
> I don't think so. The electorate seems to have performed in choosing
> the next President (something we'll never know, because there is
> no way that an Obama Attorney General will authorize a searching
> investigation of how significant bogus voter registrations were in
> the 2008 election (or the 2004 or 2006 elections, for that matter).
> ACORN gets a walk from the guy they helped put in office.
>
> But I think that once the honeymoon is over, the voters will realize
> that the real change they have gotten from Barack Obama will be a
> loss in governmental integrity, a loss in investor confidence as
> socialism displaces the hidden hand of the market as the leading
> force in American business, and a loss in our power in the world,
> because the key to a strong military is a strong economy - and we're
> about to make all of the mistakes that got socialism a bad name in
> Europe.
>
> Or has British Leyland made serious noise, apart from a loud crashing
> sound?
>
> Bailing out the Big Three without solid transfer of equity in exchange
> for the bailout and major union concessions will give us "change
> we'll have to push down the road."

2008 Dec 09 04:04 PM

[bosun.j:]

@dw57:

Oh yeah, great idea! Why stop with one car company? How about one of every company out there. No, no, not one of every kind of company, ONE COMPANY THAT SELLS YOU WHAT THEY DEEM YOU NEED! No competition, poor quality, high prices, slave wages and no complaining! A veritable extremist-capitalist wet dream!!! Yeah, and while we're at it let's get rid of all but one country ruled by George Bush for life! Now we're cooking with gas!!




On Dec 09 03:57 PM dw57 wrote:

> I think that Chrysler should be merged with the other 2. or just
> merge all of them

2008 Dec 09 04:08 PM

[303820:]

WELL.. I'M NOT AS EDUCATED AS MOST OF YOU....AND I REALLY CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS THAT'S SO COMPLICATED...EVERY ONE LIKE TO BLAME UNIONS AND MANAGEMENT...I THING THEY(THE BIG THREE) GOT THE SHAFT WHEN RONALD REGAN INVITED THE ASIANS TO THIS COUNTRY IN ORDER TO BUST THE UNIONS...THE ASIANS ARE ABLE TO USE BETTER QUALITY PARTS BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE LEGACY COST THAT DETROIT HAS...HEALTH CARE AND PENSIONS....PERHAPS IF OUR GOVERNMENT WOULD TAKE CARE OF ITS PEOPLE..THEN WE COULD COMPETE ON A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. (USA IS THE ONLY COUNTRY WITHOUT A NATIONAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM) OR RETIREMENT PROGRAM(SOCIAL SECURITY DOESN'T PAY FOR MOST PEOPLE GAS BILL).

2008 Dec 09 05:17 PM

[303820:]

DW57...OH....YEA... THE GOP...HERE IS THEIR AGENDA! GET RID OF THE UNIONS...THEY ARE CUTTING IN TO THE PROFITS, LESS FOR WALL STREET.
CUT WAGES... PEOPLE ARE MAKING TO MUCH MONEY.
NO HEALTH CARE BENEFITS, UN LESS YOU BUY YOUR OWN.
NO PENSIONS, NO SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS, ONLY 401KS....(401KS YOUR MONEY BACK TO WALL STREET).NO WORK RULES..WHAT YOUR BOSS SAYS GOES.
WALL MART WAGES ONLY ALLOWED!

2008 Dec 09 05:51 PM

[303820:]

WHY THE POLITICOS IN WASHINGTON WASTED NO TIME IN GIVING AIG BILLIONS.....AIG HOLDS THEIR RETIREMENT MONEY...DAHHHHHHHHHH

2008 Dec 09 05:56 PM

[consumerons...:]

Most of us in this country need no calculations to know what we cost our employers. Our pay per hour is it. Period,
And most of us don't have it a fourth as good as these union workers who want to think we're all so stupid that we'll call reduced pay and benefits for people who aren't even there yet (new hires) some kind of concession.
There is a whole country full of people who work just as hard as they do that resent the entitlement mentality they are witnessing. Those of you who think you're speaking for the "working person" by defending those who have literally had the stupidity to drive their employers to the edge of failure, are not speaking for us. These autoworkers that seem to think they should command the same level of pay and benefits as many doctors and engineers offend most of us far more than the people you are defending.
This economy has been losing industrial jobs for decades now. It started where I'm from around 1980. What about all the people across this country who have had the experience of driving by a union picket line knowing that in their community there must be thousands of people a week driving by that would feel lucky to have those (strikers) jobs even at half the money they were already making and even without the benefits they already had?
You're defending the wrong people. By the way, I'm not a republican. I'm not some white-collar worker that gets to work in an office all day, either. What I am is a $9 an hour worker in an area where $9 an hour is pretty good money for what I do. I would be as ridiculous as the union autoworkers if I expected a lot more than I'm getting. The local economy wouldn't support it.
I'm a restaurant worker. Go ahead, knock it all you want. It gets 120 degrees most of the summer in a restaurant kitchen and I never take breaks. That's my choice, and the reason I've gotten many raises which I've never asked for. It's as hard as any job I've ever had and there aren't a lot of jobs in this area. I am 52 yrs old. I have worked hard all my life and not always doing what I do now. Whatever I ever manage to have I'll have to get ON MY OWN. And I'll probably still be working because I'll HAVE to be when I'm 70.
But you go right ahead and defend people making $50 an hour or more in wages and benefits. I'll tell you what. I'll have the money for a new car in a few more years. And I WILL NOT put ONE PENNY in the pocket of a $100,000 a year forklift driver.

2008 Dec 09 06:45 PM

[E Nuff Sed:]

Consumeronstrike said it all. Between the union and the capitalists the ordinary hardworking citizen is getting crushed. One day this worm will turn and USA will be become the UASS (Union of American Socialist Republics).

2008 Dec 09 07:21 PM

[bosun.j:]

@consumeronstrike:

This is the umpteenth time you have made the same post with the same sad story. Have a little pride! Stop being a chump! Your silly nonsense is playing right into the hands of the extremist-capitalist neo-CON anti-union anti-anybody-whos-not-... elite scumbags. Turn off faux news and free your mind from the owning class propaganda!

Work your fingers to the bone whadda ya get? Bony fingers!

Nothing to be proud of, not at all. Get a good union job and lift yourself out of poverty so you won't have to die in front of that grill!

You like to cook, apply to Harry Lundberg School. After the SIU union pays you to learn how cook, work and live on a ship you'll then be able to get your seaman's documents. You'll have a good union job where you make a good wage and good overtime, work four months on and and four months off, have paid vacation when your not on the ship! Retirement, medical, education all paid for.

Hey, you won't have to wait "a few more years" to become a good consumer again!

2008 Dec 09 07:32 PM

[dw57:]

not sure where you got the 100K forklift operator. using your way of costing out what we cost our employers, the average big 3 autoworker costs $28 dollars an hour. the transplants only cost about 24 or there abouts. when the big 3 are trying to get concessions from the unions (and pump up the Wall Street support and other executives) they will talk about about that $73 an hour wage labor cost. but labor cost isn't the same thing as wages. when you make a product (say a car), you have to include things like wages (sure enough) but you also include things like benefits, and in the domestics case (because some have been around a while, like 100 years?) retiree costs (since in the old days pre-401k there were pensions) and because (at the time) benefits were cheap, companies promised benefits to retirees, and it includes management and executive pay (and you can't forget their benefits too which as you might guess are better than the ones given to every one else ), and management and executive retirees too. now we get to the bottom line here, the most I have ever heard in hours it takes to make a car is about 21. now 21 * 73 = 1533. and thats what the labor part of the car is. now take a look at the rebates. on average is 1000, and can be as high as 7500. guess which costs the company more? and that doesn't include any special financing, or dealer incentives. the companies that are dealing with this could have fixed it by escrowing enough cash to deal with it, but didn't do so. not that its really in the end hurting that much (as you can tell that rebate is much higher that the labor is). the thing is that is hurting them (and every one else) is that mess the financial wizards have created. cause they can't get capital (long term credit markets are frozen) and so they have trouble giving out loans.

On Dec 09 06:45 PM consumeronstrike wrote:

> Most of us in this country need no calculations to know what we cost
> our employers. Our pay per hour is it. Period,
> And most of us don't have it a fourth as good as these union workers
> who want to think we're all so stupid that we'll call reduced pay
> and benefits for people who aren't even there yet (new hires) some
> kind of concession.
> There is a whole country full of people who work just as hard as
> they do that resent the entitlement mentality they are witnessing.
> Those of you who think you're speaking for the "working person"
> by defending those who have literally had the stupidity to drive
> their employers to the edge of failure, are not speaking for us.
> These autoworkers that seem to think they should command the same
> level of pay and benefits as many doctors and engineers offend most
> of us far more than the people you are defending.
> This economy has been losing industrial jobs for decades now. It
> started where I'm from around 1980. What about all the people across
> this country who have had the experience of driving by a union picket
> line knowing that in their community there must be thousands of people
> a week driving by that would feel lucky to have those (strikers)
> jobs even at half the money they were already making and even without
> the benefits they already had?
> You're defending the wrong people. By the way, I'm not a republican.
> I'm not some white-collar worker that gets to work in an office all
> day, either. What I am is a $9 an hour worker in an area where $9
> an hour is pretty good money for what I do. I would be as ridiculous
> as the union autoworkers if I expected a lot more than I'm getting.
> The local economy wouldn't support it.
> I'm a restaurant worker. Go ahead, knock it all you want. It gets
> 120 degrees most of the summer in a restaurant kitchen and I never
> take breaks. That's my choice, and the reason I've gotten many
> raises which I've never asked for. It's as hard as any job I've
> ever had and there aren't a lot of jobs in this area. I am 52 yrs
> old. I have worked hard all my life and not always doing what I
> do now. Whatever I ever manage to have I'll have to get ON MY OWN.
> And I'll probably still be working because I'll HAVE to be when I'm
> 70.
> But you go right ahead and defend people making $50 an hour or more
> in wages and benefits. I'll tell you what. I'll have the money
> for a new car in a few more years. And I WILL NOT put ONE PENNY
> in the pocket of a $100,000 a year forklift driver.

2008 Dec 09 07:48 PM

[consumerons...:]

Bosun J:

What part of " I'm 52 yrs old" did you not hear? And as far as going to sea I spent 12 yrs active duty U.S. Navy, thank you. I was a career man till a bad fall wrecked my back. I in fact could EASILY get 80-100 % disability if I tried. I'd rather work.
On other posts you claim to have some education. Ever take an economics class? You seem to think a WORLD full of people making the kind of wages and benefits the union autoworkers enjoy ( they damn well ought to enjoy them) would be sustainable economically. If you do indeed think that, I see no point in responding to you beyond this one time. I will not attempt to reason with irrational people. I'm sure many union people who read these posts like you very much.

2008 Dec 09 08:01 PM

[consumerons...:]

B.J.

Also, I think you sound like Lenin reincarnated.

2008 Dec 09 08:14 PM

[consumerons...:]

Lenin:
" Let the ruling classes trmble...."

Now that was a rosy path he led them down, wasn't it?

2008 Dec 09 08:24 PM

[303820:]

CONSUMERTONSTRIKE:

I'm an auto worker...i also worked in a restaurant making a 1/4 of what my union job pays..let me tell you when i hired at GM there were two line of people.. one going in and the other coming out...If you or any one else never worked on the assembly line... you have no idea what it is like sure there are some easy jobs but most will break your back(climbing in and out of those cars) mess up your knees, wrist, shoulders...working in a restaurant is your choice. and as you say you've got many raises...then... you've been there a few years...IF YOU'RE SATISFIED WORKING IN A RESTAURANT FINE...DON'T BAD MOUTH THOSE WHO CHOSE TO MAKE MORE MONEY THEN YOU.

2008 Dec 09 09:17 PM

[303820:]

Now people...easy...on consumeronstrike! there are parts of this country where union jobs are not available...thanks to Ronald Regan.

2008 Dec 09 09:22 PM

[bosun.j:]

@User 303820:

I know, thanks. I simply cant figure out why he's complaining with Reagan's Johnson so far down his throat!

2008 Dec 09 09:27 PM

[303820:]

Our politicos in Washington have succeed in pitting every working man and woman in to country against each other in the name of competition...we are at a point where we thing that to have something is better than nothing..just like Mexican and Chinese workers...they want us to feel guilty to have more then those that have less...it's UN-American to have good wages..UN-American to have health care benefits...UN-American to have pension benefits...unless of course you're a congressmen or a senator.

2008 Dec 09 09:38 PM

[303820:]

JOBS..JOBS...JOBS... WE NEED OUR MANUFACTURING JOB BACK!
WE NEED BUYING POWER NOT BORROWING POWER.

2008 Dec 09 09:44 PM

[bosun.j:]

@User 303820:

Indeed. That's why I had to get out of there. Everybody fighting about everything all the time. I refer to it as the Pepsi-Coke metric. A friend may more accurately describe it as "all booga booga all the time. Either way, exhausting! Thanks again.

2008 Dec 09 09:44 PM

[303820:]

Enjoy paradise!

2008 Dec 09 09:49 PM

[Poor me:]

I can sum this post up easily. Americans are PISSED, and fed up with all this phony bail out crap. As for a car czar being appointed, well that will be the begining of the end of the big three for sure. communism doesn't work, leave the free market alone. The only people to come out on top from this are Nancy, Gore, Reide, Dodd, and all the other names of these so called experts we have heard in the past few months. They all have investment interest in these projects, or will be filling their pockets during the long term plan they have. Us, we will get the bill., oh, and shitty little cars to drive at double the price. Also, for you Reagan bashers, you just don't get it. He believed in less goverment. I am a UAW member, and I think we have one of the weakest locals in the UAW. I make more than I did before the union came in which is good, but I also think because our union is as weak as it is, and we don't get large increases, or retirement, etc. that may also be why we are still in business, and doing very well right now. If we made $50 plus an hour, we would not be in business today, so maybe being weak has kept us working. I make about $19 an hour, and I can tell you that anyone in our plant would make cars for the same thing we are making right now. Whats the difference, a car, motor, trailer, etc. its all the same in a factory.

2008 Dec 10 01:58 AM

[consumerons...:]

GM:
Cost of goods sold as a percent of revenue:
2005: 88%
2006: 79%
2007: 93%

Stockholder's Equity: Not any more

Research & Development: Not a significant enough amount to be reflected on any of the last 3 years' income statements. Wonder why?

Working capital:
Huh?
Total current assets minus total current liablities. WORKING CAPITAL!
Huh?
Never mind.

2008 Dec 10 10:15 AM

[k9s-4-k8:]

If its courage that brought Thailand such a heritage of advanced culture and financial dominance as it now has, I vote for fear.


On Dec 09 03:28 PM bosun.j wrote:

> It's a crying shame that Americans don't have the same courage that
> Thai people have. Were that the case the situation we're now in wouldn't
> have ended up plunging the planet into cultural and financial collapse.

2008 Dec 10 10:49 AM