Home > Jay Bookman > Archives > 2008 > September > 10 > Entry

Corporate socialists demanding handouts

By Jay Bookman | Wednesday, September 10, 2008, 08:39 AM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

For years — no, for decades — Detroit automakers blocked efforts to mandate improved gas mileage by whining and complaining about government intervention in the marketplace. Even though such policies were manifestly in the best interest of the country, making us less reliant on foreign oil, reducing air pollution, slowing the flow of dollars overseas — gas mileage regulations remained essentially what they were in the ’70s.

As a result, Detroit kept building new dinosaurs that ran on old dinosaurs, and now that the inevitable has happened, those former free-market purists are demanding $50 billion in taxpayer-guaranteed loans — $50 billion!!! — to finance conversion to the fuel-efficient technologies they refused to invest in earlier.

Likewise for years — no, for decades — Wall Street financiers likewise blocked efforts to tighten regulation of financial markets by whining and complaining about government intervention in the marketplace. The market will regulate itself, we were told, and if the market “produced” salaries of $100 million a year for certain masters of the universe, then who we lowly peons to complain? Now they too are running to the government, begging and pleading to be protected against their own excesses and foolishness. First Bear Stearns, now a bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, again at a potential cost of tens of billions of dollars.

Meanwhile, we can’t help out unsophisticated homebuyers who are losing their homes, because they have to take their lumps for their mistakes. We can’t give our returning war veterans the treatment they need, because it would be too expensive. The Georgia War Veterans Home in Milledgeville is being closed in the name of gov’t austerity, forcing 80 veterans out on the street. In downtown Atlanta we’re cracking down on panhandlers and the homeless, many of whom are clearly mentally ill, never drawing the connection between their plight and the fact that Georgia spends so little on treating its mentally ill citizens. The state Consumers Utiliity Counsel, charged with defending the interests of consumers against Georgia Power and big industrial concerns, is also being defunded in the name of austerity.

“Of the people, by the people and for the people?” Hardly. In fact, anybody who came up with such a phrase today would be condemned as a socialist. And Lord knows we can’t have any of THAT in America — well, except for the big guys. They’re different.

Permalink | Comments (114) | Post your comment |

Comments

By AJC/DNC Management

September 10, 2008 9:10 AM | Link to this

I cannot say it much better than this:

It must infuriate the auto makers how readily their critics attribute their problems to their own incompetence. Then how to explain that GM is thriving in Europe, selling small cars that get lots of miles per gallon? Buick is among the biggest selling brands in China. GM is running away with Latin America.

Not only did history saddle them with a UAW labor monopoly that their foreign competitors have managed to avoid. Even that might not have been fatal had Congress not enacted its “corporate average fuel economy” rules in the 1970s.

Let us have a moment of nonflagellating realism. Toyota is as capable of poor market timing as GM or Ford — witness its multibillion-dollar bet on the Tundra pickup. It flies in the face of human and business realities to imagine that, generation after generation, Detroit hired idiots while Toyota recruited geniuses — though that’s the usual explanation of Detroit’s troubles.

By "The Corporal"

September 10, 2008 9:12 AM | Link to this

Jay

You are correct. We have become a nation of individual and corporate socialists. Even Franklin D. Roosevelt would be amazed.

So let’s start down the road to reverse it whether or not it’s a Republican or Democrat plan! What say ye?

By BDAtlanta

September 10, 2008 9:13 AM | Link to this

The American Way:

Capitalism when times are good, Socialism when times are bad.

Corporate interests can’t share the wealth (taxes) when things are good but taxpayers must share their pain (bail-outs with tax dollars) when times are bad.

By JAY BOOKMAN

September 10, 2008 9:18 AM | Link to this

Yeah Management. Because Lord knows they don’t have ANY of those pesky unions in Europe.

Try again.

By "The Corporal"

September 10, 2008 9:20 AM | Link to this

P.S.

Interesting vent on your AJC website this morning ………..

Entitlement is just another way to promote socialism.

By BDAtlanta

September 10, 2008 9:23 AM | Link to this

Ok Corporal,

So, if we reverse what we’ve done in the past, we will be dropping any loopholes and begin taxing corporate interests at full rate.

Also, if we are reversing, no more bail-outs.

I can get behind that.

By JAY BOOKMAN

September 10, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this

Your government pension is an entitlement, corporal.

So’s your retiree health care.

Are you surrendering those? Or are you “entitled” to them?

By hillbilly ragger

September 10, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this

About time you got righteously p!ssed off.

More like this, please.

By RW-(the original)

September 10, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this

Why doesn’t the AJC series on redlining ever come up in these screeds?

Frankly Republicans have failed us in the arena that Jay brings up, but if anybody thinks the cure is Democrats they’re insane on steroids.

By mickeymouse

September 10, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this

You hit the nail on the head…’Bookman. ‘But that don’t mean that 9/11 was not a conspiracy!…I trust the government,despite not being able to remember the last time they told me the truth!

By JAY BOOKMAN

September 10, 2008 9:39 AM | Link to this

You don’t hear ANYBODY who knows a lick about the credit or mortgage industry claiming those rules had anything to do with this problem, RW. Nobody.

That is strictly a talk-radio talking point, designed to once again cast poor people as the cause of all of our problems and exonerate those who actually do have enough power to cause problems on such a scale.

By Jake

September 10, 2008 9:42 AM | Link to this

The markets would regulate themselves, just as they did in the 30’s when the stock market crashed and the banks failed. However, we are unwilling to suffer the deep recession and possible depression that would be part of the correction cycle if the big three automakers or the entire housing and credit markets were allowed to collapse. So we bailed out Chrysler years ago and Fannie and Freddie this week and we’ll probably provide some corporate welfare for the automakers. Borrowing what I believe Churchill said about democracy, capitalism is a deeply flawed system, but it’s the best one we have!

By Yeah Right

September 10, 2008 9:42 AM | Link to this

And the following from Boortz today is any better???

Barack Obama wants to make the highest income earners in this country return to the 39% tax bracket. And the reason, according to Barack Obama, is because those people “can afford that.” In exchange, because he is such a nice guy, Obama says he is going to cut taxes for 95% of Americans … an act which he declares is not class warfare.

Two points: First, when Obama talks about raising taxes on the evil, disgusting, putrid, rancid, stinking rich because they can afford it, he’s merely going back to his Marxist roots. Remember “From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs?” Straight from the Communist Manifesto .. just reworded slightly by The Chosen One.

Second; Let’s put this nonsense about tax cuts for 95% of Americans to rest. The bottom 50% of income earners don’t even pay income taxes, so how is Our Savior going to give them a tax break? What Obama is really talking about is tax credits. Here’s how his plan will work. He’ll come up with some fancy new tax credit to reward his minions for some type of acceptable behavior – like voting Democrat. Let’s say the tax credit is $2000. But … these people don’t owe any taxes! So what good is a tax credit to them? Well, this is a new type of credit called a “refundable” tax credit. If you’re eligible for the $2000 credit, and you don’t owe any income taxes, you just get a check form the federal government for $2000. Just a very simple wealth redistribution plan. Remember, Obama and the Democrats think that wealth in the United States is not earned, it’s distributed. It’s the government’s job to re-work that distribution to make it more “fair.”

By Dennis

September 10, 2008 9:43 AM | Link to this

For years — no, for decades — Union Bosses with the help of their Congressional Democrat Comrades have extorted one perpetual “benefit” after another from auto-makers. Forcing prices up and quality down.

This socialist practice coupled with the auto-makers inability to stand up to the Union Bosses and Democrats has lead us to this position.

By Willie

September 10, 2008 9:43 AM | Link to this

Jay, I do not believe the government should bail out the auto industry with free tax money. However, making a loan with interest is not bad for the country. They must pay back the loan with interest. This would keep jobs in the US but unions must go….I do blame unions for the high prices and I see low skilled labor in the unions making 3 to 4 times what the average worker makes with tremendous benefits.

By "The Corporal"

September 10, 2008 9:46 AM | Link to this

To JAY

Well now Jay, you are being a little vicious and personal this morning. I must have tweaked you a little bit.

1) I would say that if I had a career (including 2 years in the military where I served this country as a Marine rifleman in Vietnam) plus 34 more years of service to my country in law enforcement (including risking my life at times) and that I contributed substantially via taxes and retirement withholdings that I qualify for a PENSION.

2) Then I would say that there are many in this country who are too lazy to work and they feel they should be supported by ENTITLEMENTS that they have never contributed to or deserve.

3) Is that DIFFERENCE difficult for you to understand?

4) Finally, you always had the option to enlist with UNCLE SAM or have a government” pension but then again you might have had to work for less money than others or maybe even have had to put yourself in danger.

You made the choice so let’s no be too jealous.

By AJC/DNC Management

September 10, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this

By JAY BOOKMAN September 10, 2008 9:18 AM Yeah Management. Because Lord knows they don’t have ANY of those pesky unions in Europe. Try again.

So CAFE standards and the unions have no adverse affect on domestic automakers compared to foreign auto makers, eh?

Not only did history saddle them with a UAW labor monopoly that their foreign competitors have managed to avoid. Even that might not have been fatal had Congress not enacted its “corporate average fuel economy” rules in the 1970s.

Yesterday you quoted the WSJ and today they are talk radio?

The domestic auto makers are a jobs program experiment and junk science victim, period.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 9:55 AM | Link to this

It’s the lobbyists and corporate w******* people. It’s a viscious cycle - lobbyists and corporatists (?sp) buy off the politicians - they vote to keep the fire going.

This election, like all others, is who do you believe is going to change it?

Do you think corporate America in general works for the betterment of the country? Or the betterment of themselves?

Some will argue that they provide jobs - although we’ve seen that jobs are increasing being sent overseas, healthcare benefits are slashed while costs go up, and wages for employees are cut.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this

Dennis,

Can you name ONE example in the past 15 years where a union boss or a union in general has won out over the wishes of management in this country?

When unions step up for employees now, guess what? They close down operations and move overseas.

NAME ONE.

Union bosses are a thing of the past.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 10:00 AM | Link to this

Okay, there was the writer’s union or guild or whatever in Hollywood - but the right wingers don’t count Hollywood as real.

By RW-(the original)

September 10, 2008 10:02 AM | Link to this

Amazing how every problem in this country would instantly go away if we did away with talk radio.

The Fannie and Freddie problems are more about having quasi government businesses operating as free enterprise while being staffed/run by cronies of both Democrat and Republican administrations. When you’re a make believe private business that has an in place guarantee against failure you’re free to follow the pressure the whiners in old media put on you.

A true analysis of the troubles with the auto industry that ignores unions as a part of the problem is basically a lie to use your favorite term these days.

I know nothing about the 80 veterans from the home closing, but color me skeptical that they’re being thrown out in the streets.

And lastly, if we can’t and won’t help unsophisticated home buyers what is this all about?

By "The Corporal"

September 10, 2008 10:08 AM | Link to this

I was once a member of a union when I worked (Jay - pay attention - I said “worked”) my way through college. It was the “Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen”. I was a brakeman.

Basically, in addition to actually doing some work, many of the men focused entirely on how to screw with management. It was a constant game of “us against them”. How much could you get by with and when could you file a grievance. I know there was a time in this country when laws were lax or non-existant and unions were a necessary evil but my experience with “a union” was not good to say the least.

By Dennis

September 10, 2008 10:10 AM | Link to this

Bosch, I offer three examples. General Motors, Ford and Chrysler.

By RW-(the original)

September 10, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this

Bosch,

This is going to be a very poor example and hopefully Dennis will give you a more serious one, but the Major League Baseball players union continuously kicks management’s butt.

I forget who won out in the writers strike, but I know they may have ultimately saved Heroes since they interrupted season 2 from it’s death spiral and season 3 which starts on the 22nd will go back to it’s roots, more like season 1.

I guess we the viewers won that one.

By Swami Dave

September 10, 2008 10:14 AM | Link to this

Jay:

I think that I interpreted your response to Corporal in a different way than he did.

He interpreted your query about his government pension & medical care as his military pension and medical benefits awarded to him as a military (and subsequent law enforcement officer). If that is indeed what you meant, then he is right that he, in his career service, earned those benefits.

If, however, you were referring to the higher level “pension and medical care” (aka social security & medicare), then, by all means, the government can quit confiscating my money into these ponzi schemes and allow me to invest that money for my own retirement. I can do a much better job of investing the approx. 15% of my earnings (7.5 employee / 7.5 employer) for my own retirement and care than can the government. After all is said and done, whatever is not spent during my retirement would go to my estate & my heirs as a generational gift to them.

So Jay, which one was it?

-Swami Dave (Truth, History, and Common Sense Refute Liberalism.)

By professional skeptic

September 10, 2008 10:15 AM | Link to this

Jay, what’s a few more hundred billion dollars of corporate welfare bailouts, in the face of the multiple trillions of dollars that the current administration has added to our national debt over the last eight years? Heck… billions? Why not squillions? Sure! Here ya go, here’s half a squillion! Mind the lines, now… failed banks line up to the left, corporations gone bust line up to the right! There’s plenty more squillions of dollars where that came from, soon as we pay a visit yet again, hat in hand, to the Chinese!!

It’s disgusting, but it’s reality. For details, please see this article, or go watch I.O.U.S.A.

By RealityKing

September 10, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this

Meanwhile…, With oil at $104, OPEC agrees to curb oil overproduction. Ministers of oil producing nations announce that they will cut back 520,000 barrels a day in overproduction of crude to avoid more energy turmoil.

Can you say Supply and Demand? It’s never wise to argue against Economics 101. And just think of what could happen if America ramped up it’s production of another.., 520,000, 1, 2, 3 million barrels a day to cancel out billions of dollars going to these dictators!

By RW-(the original)

September 10, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this

Note to the host:

This is not an attempt to change or suggest a new topic.

~~~~~~~~~

Obama is getting ready to take to the airwaves and lie about calling Sarah Palin a pig yesterday. The reason it’s a lie is because he didn’t stop there in some offhanded remark. He made the pig comment and then made a comment about an old smelly fish, then said that’s not change, so the construct was the exact same one he uses when he harps about Palin, then McCain and says that’s not change.

Now frankly I find his remarks far below the dignity of the office he’s seeking, but were we to be governed by a pig and an old smelly fish it might not be a good thing but it would certainly be change.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I know return you to the discussion of how Republicans are socialists and Democrats are the saviors that are willing to vanquish the villain known as talk radio.

By AJC/DNC Management

September 10, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this

The socialists hate American business, they simply demonize them.

Just look at Walmart for a good example. All they have done is raise the standard of living for the poor by providing them with affordable and necessary products.

This good deed has in turn caused the socialists to foam up and rage about the unfairness of it all.

Is it not insanity or what?

What could possibly be their motivations?

The need for Power, maybe?

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this

Dennis,

And how did it work out for the employees? How many have lost their jobs in the past 15 years? What about their health benefits and wages?

Giving a general laundry list of three automakers with no details of how the deals have worked out for the employees is dishonest.

RW,

Major league baseball? Yeah, those guys have it tough. A bunch of rich guys arguing with another bunch of rich guys. That’s why I stopped watching baseball.

Writers strike? I was mad about Chuck. I liked that show - I’m glad to see it’s coming back - Heroes too - my daughter almost stops breathing when they show the previews.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 10:29 AM | Link to this

Corporal,

Funny how times have changed. NOW, in 2008, management sits around with their huge paychecks because they don’t have to pay taxes, and thinks of ways to screw their employees!

By hillbilly ragger

September 10, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this

Yeah Right @ 9.42, Boortz is a liar. He’s not even remotely close in asserting that “The bottom 50% of income earners don’t even pay income taxes.”

What’s more, Boortz and other conservos conveniently leave out that ALL wage earners pay FICA and Medicaid federal taxes starting with the first dollar earned.

But then, he’s a liar.

By tcoach

September 10, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

The reason that the gov’t bails out large coorporations is because it is for greater good of all. We as citizens never quit buying those gas guzzeling cars. How many people drove around in SUV’S for the past 15 years. So we as a nation of consumers are just as much to blame for the cars that were produced and sold.
The reason that the governmnet should not buy out every horrible mortgage is because it will harm more citizens without anyone but the ones with failed mortgages recieving a benifit. While by saving places like GM they are able to continue to employ workers and able to continue insurance benefits and other sorts of things that many people benefit from. If someone made a bad mortgage they are the ones who should pay that price. While I think it is very unfair for thousands of workers to loose benfits or salary because of bad decisions made high up. The decisions were only bad because as a nation we chose to drive gas guzzelers. It is supply and demand, but we thought that we did not look cool in a small compact.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this

SQUILLIONS.

My new word for the day.

By "The Corporal"

September 10, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this

To SwamiDave

Thank you. Good points but notice Jay did not respond to me.

To Bosch

Ah, pushing class warfare are we? Just remember, if the war ever really starts you might be considered one of the elite to be brought down.

By rightytighty

September 10, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

I agree Jay, no more handouts, bailouts or government gurantees! Not to corporations, cronies or lazy a* citizens. We have to reduce government and it’s out of control spending habits.

Now.., who’s best suited for that job? A hero or a zero??

By JAY BOOKMAN

September 10, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

Social Security and Medicare for senior citizens are no less “earned” entitlements than the corporal’s government pension is. There’s no distinction between the two.

By hillbilly ragger

September 10, 2008 10:38 AM | Link to this

Gotta run. Just remember, rational people: it isn’t ever “class warfare” when Republicans wage it.

By Jake

September 10, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this

Terrible legislation signed today as the lenders can volunteer to take a hit (the other option being foreclosure) while the stupid homeowners get bailed out with a reduced mortgage at a reduced rate. Wish I’d bought more house than I could afford!

By Swami Dave

September 10, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

And while we are discussing the “mortgage meltdown” mess, let us not forget the biggest mortgage industry stories of 24 months ago.

24 months ago (and probably more recently than that), the biggest stories in the mortgage industry was their “unfair” practices that limited mortgage access to specific groups. The very same hypocritical politicians that are today crucifying the mortgage industry for failed loans were complaining and threatening legislative & judicial action if they refused to relax restrictions to make it easier for groups (historically unqualified by standard guidelines) to get mortgages.

no credit history - no problem, just bring in a power bill (or any one of about thirteen things that were just simply -declared- to be equivalent to a credit history).`

dont have a job or dont make enough money to qualify - no problem, we’ll just count as income money from “other sources” or create “teaser” rates that effect negative amortization at the end of the initial period.

dont have enough for a down payment - no problem, we’ll create a program to loan it to you or simply roll that into the principal balance too (“upside down” day 1).

And for the extra credit, the reality is that anyone who highlighted this boondoggle and predicted the meltdown that would occur when you divorce standard underwriting practice from likely ability to repay would have been labelled a racist / bigot / hatemonger.

My only question is who among the media are doing the Freedom of Information requests from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, & associated government entities / officials. It would be interesting to get copies of the emails, letter, phone records, etc. where the agencies / bureaucrats / politicians forced the underwriters to relax the guidelines. It would be even more interesting to see their responses that say “when we do this; these are the things that will occur….”

Of course, we are much too busy digging dirt in Alaska & highlighting bridges that didnt get built to go to deep into a real scandal like this!

-Swami Dave (Truth, History, and Common Sense Refute Liberalism!)

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 10:41 AM | Link to this

Andy,

And the fascists love corporate America.

WalMart? Raising the standard of living for the poor while selling out our economy to China.

How many of the products in WalMart are made in the U.S.A?

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this

Corporal,

Nope. Not pushing class warfare at all, because that is another ignorant talking point from the ultra right that doesn’t exist.

You brought it up. I merely pointed out that in the PRESENT, the tide has shifted.

By Bisch is a Retard

September 10, 2008 10:54 AM | Link to this

Do you 1) want to make $15 a day making socks for 14 hours in some sweatshop, 2) make $15 an hour but pay $20 for a pair of socks made in America by union former autoworkers, or 3) make $15 an hour and pay $2 for socks because Chinese slave labor is making them cheaply?

By Swami Dave

September 10, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this

Jay:

To Corporals benefits / entitlements, we can agree to disagree. For me, benefits are what you get on the basis of what you do (like his service). Entitlements are what you get based on who you are (like social security for American seniors).

For me, I would be more than happy to opt out of social security / medicare (as politicians and some other groups are allowed to do), if they would kindly quit confiscating my money to fund them. I am more than happy to invest and fund my retirement / medical care on my own.

-Swami Dave

By Copyleft

September 10, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this

Sounds like Corporal’s the one who’s feeling stung and extra-touchy, now that you’ve pointed out his own reliance on “entitlement,” Jay.

A sure sign you’ve hit on a substantive argument is the opponent’s anger and eagerness to change the subject.

By AJC/DNC Management

September 10, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this

By Bosch September 10, 2008 10:41 AM Andy, And the fascists love corporate America. WalMart? Raising the standard of living for the poor while selling out our economy to China. How many of the products in WalMart are made in the U.S.A?

Bosch, dearie: How many domestic automobiles do Americans buy^^.

So now you are concerned, how convenient.

And would anybody else like to get on board with Bosch and back up the idea that we get nothing from our financial dealings with China?

By rightytighty

September 10, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this

Social Security and Medicare are “earned” entitlements??

Ha!! And if I guess right on your approx 2025 retirment date. You’re going to be bitterly disappointed…

By Jake

September 10, 2008 11:09 AM | Link to this

Swami - Bad example. ADC, Medicaid, etc. are entitlements. For social security there is at least some relationship between what you and your employer paid into the plan and what you can get out, just like a pension, although those who paid little or nothing still qualify for a minimum benefit known as SSI, which is paid from Treasury funds, not the social security account. On the other hand you get Medicaid benefits just for being poor and ADC just for being a baby momma.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

Andy,

Apples? Oranges? What’s your point?

Yeah, what’s the interest rate on those Chinese loans they are giving us to finance the war(s)?

By "The Corporal"

September 10, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

To Bosch

O.K. I hear you but keep your powder dry just in case.

To Copyleft

This so called professional AJC blog is not supposed to be about personal attacks. That’s exactly what Jay did this morning (after I agreed in general with his premise). I merely responded to that.

You’re not jealous too are you?

By Paul

September 10, 2008 11:14 AM | Link to this

Jay 10:37

[[Social Security and Medicare for senior citizens are no less “earned” entitlements than the corporal’s government pension is. There’s no distinction between the two.]]

SS & M apply to all citizens who pay Social Security taxes for a certain time period. As most everyone who works is subject to SS tax (cannot opt out) it applies to most everybody. SS also provides a monthly lifetime income to a surviving spouse or children under 18. Corporal’s gov’t pension was predicated on his working for a certain entity (gov’t). Even (keep it Federal) Federal workers qualify for different retirement programs – they are not all the same.
In the sense SS recipients qualify after 40 quarters and have benefits based partly on income, it is similar to Federal programs, which are based upon total work history and ending income level. But those very similarities carry with them dissimilarities. But as an ‘entitlement’ is a right granted by law or contract, they can in that sense be viewed as the ‘same.’ But there is are several distinctions. BTW – during Hillary’s health care debacle I was in a group with a guy I knew to be a current military officer. He was arguing against her plan. I observed he and his family participated in one of the most socialistic health care programs in the county, one for which he paid nothing. He responded he earned it, it was part of his employment. I responded it was only there because the citizens of the country agreed to have their money taken and given to him for that program. It could change at any time.

As I said, welfare is what the other guy gets -

By N-GA

September 10, 2008 11:14 AM | Link to this

It’s amusing to read how some people would have the government “loan” the money to the auto industry. You can really tell how many business-people we have blogging here.

Let me see…how many ways can a publically traded corporation raise money? Well, they could borrow it from banks if the banks deem them credit-worthy. Or, they could issue corporate bonds if the bond market deems them credit-worthy. Then again, they could issue more stock (common or preferred) if there are people willing to buy the newly-issued stock. Maybe they could even sell assets, stop paying dividends, and reduce bloated management salaries.

But nooooooooooooooo! They want to suck at the federal teat.

I say let them go into bankruptcy. That should guarantee them years of continued operations, new contract negotiations, debt renegotiations, etc. Maybe they could emerge from bankruptcy like many airlines have…then maybe not.

By Paul

September 10, 2008 11:15 AM | Link to this

hillbilly ragger/Mrs. Godzilla

I provided information the other day that as of 2004 about a third of US households did not pay income tax. Given changes in the tax law, that number has risen.

By T

September 10, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this

It’s only a handout when citizens ask for them. Does anyone know where this surplus of funds is located? With no new taxes, how are we going to pay for all of this?

By jasper

September 10, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this

Jay - spot on today with problem, but short on ideas for solution. Obviously raising the corp. tax rate will only punish the honest business owners, mostly domestic. Cutting the govt. subsidies is a good start, but barely a drop in the bucket compared to hidden profits and foreign tax shelters of the major mult-nationals, issues almost impossible to find, prove, and penalize cost effectively.

How about an overhaul of our entire tax system, maybe changing it from income to consumption. That might be fair.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this

Bisch is a Retard,

Try using examples that are real.

By Paul

September 10, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this

On to the column

Jay,

[[For years — no, for decades — Detroit automakers blocked efforts to mandate improved gas mileage]]

Wow, that’s a lot of influence. I thought only Congress or the Administration could block it. Automakers must have tremendous power. Or could it be campaign contributions to buy a course of action? I return to my call for full public financing of all Federal elections. And term limits.

[[gas mileage regulations remained essentially what they were in the ’70s.]]

Glad you kept this nonpartisan. Because, since Carter, no President or Congress has had anything resembling a plan to get us energy independent. But on a partisan side, care to guess who was the leading ‘blocker’ in weakening the new CAFÉ standards? Yup, Democrat John Dingell.

[[Detroit kept building new dinosaurs that ran on old dinosaurs]] For years, Congress even gave tax credits – credits! – to businesses who bought the largest SUVs. My 5ft 2 in neighbor, who has a home business and no employees, drives an SUV she can barely see out of. I’m so happy knowing I helped pay for it.

For years, GM drove other US automakers out of business. What’s good for the goose…

On the other hand, this strikes me as a lot like the ‘illegal immigrant’ debate. Gov’t was highly complicit for years in encouraging the situation. Gov’t is us – we elect representatives to implement the policies we want. So a case can be made that ‘we’ pay the piper for a situation we helped create.

But the bottom line is, neither candidate is willing to give up a substantial number of electoral votes. So these loans will go through.

Oh, and UAW employees and their families have one of the most generous health care systems (and one of the most expensive) in the country. Those costs comprise a significant expense item for the companies. Think the UAW and retirees are willing to sacrifice a bit for the common good? (Laughter begins: now).

By AJC/DNC Management

September 10, 2008 11:34 AM | Link to this

Bosch: I’m not the one advocating that we impose tax levies, union benefits and regulations on American corporations so that Chinese businesses are able to sell their products cheaper than we can.

But you are.

And if you really want to define what growing governmental power is, the government burdened our very own corporations right out of business and now guess what, the government has to bail them out.

Why, how convenient.

Convenient for you Power Mongers, that is.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

Andy,

I am? Really?

By Swami Dave

September 10, 2008 11:48 AM | Link to this

Jake:

As I said, I am more than happy to opt out of all of them so long as they quit taking my money to fund them.

-Swami Dave

By Copyleft

September 10, 2008 11:50 AM | Link to this

Corporal: Jealous of what, exactly? Nothing you’ve posted indicates anything of the sort of life I’d want.

By Paul

September 10, 2008 11:52 AM | Link to this

Bosch 11:42

[[I am? Really?]]

You are? Wow! You Episcopalians really have your act together!

Link: Bosch as the I am

By RW-(the original)

September 10, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this

N-GA,

Just out of curiosity could you list the time stamps of these pro auto industry bailout posts you think you see above your 11:14 comment?

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this

Paul,

Good one!

You know the saying….when you’ve got it - well……

:-)

By TW

September 10, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this

Was Sarah Palin against the Bridge to Nowhere before or after she invented the pipeline?

By Paul

September 10, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

Bosch

Midori pointed out earlier that Factcheck is to the Left as MoveOn is to the Right.

Have you ever heard that?

By "The Corporal"

September 10, 2008 12:10 PM | Link to this

To Copyleft

Oh, I was just messing with you. I knew that.

Some people serve/give to their country and then there are those who just sit there and some even who just take. Only you know where you fit in.

P.S. Do you really not know the difference between a pension and an entitlement?

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 12:11 PM | Link to this

And Paul,

Come on, be fair, I didn’t say I was the “I Am;” there IS a question mark with the phrase, not a period.

By Fact

September 10, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this

hillbilly ragger @ 1030

re: Yeah Right @ 9.42, Boortz is a liar. He’s not even remotely close in asserting that “The bottom 50% of income earners don’t even pay income taxes.”

The top 50% pay 96.4%. The bottom 50% pay a paltry 3.6% of all income taxes.

By RW-(the original)

September 10, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this

TW,

Quit trying to introduce new topics or you’ll be sent a strongly worded letter.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A representative for John McCain responded immediately, sending Walsh a box filled with stickers and signs.

The troop leader said she called Obama’s Chicago campaign headquarters and explained why she needed the curios. Walsh said she was directed to Obama’s Web site—where she could buy all the buttons and posters she wanted.

Walsh said the woman at Obama’s headquarters put her on hold. After a few minutes, she returned with the same answer. The woman told her that she sympathized, but the Obama campaign needs every penny it can get, Walsh said.

Now how is this possibly on topic you might ask. Well Obama opted out of public financing and it now appears his fund raising is sorely lagging behind, even to the point of stiffing the Girl Scouts.

How long before his campaign asks for a government bailout?

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 12:17 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Is this a trick? Is this some kind of test question? An apple is to a vegetable as a carrot is to a:

a) fruit

b) car

c) horse

d) bicycle

Just kidding. No, I haven’t heard that.

By ByteMe

September 10, 2008 12:18 PM | Link to this

Letting GM and Ford go into bankruptcy may be both smart and dumb at the same time.

Smart in that it would immediately cancel all labor agreements and reduce the amount they have to pay out to bondholders and eliminate all stockholders. They’ll be able to more easily resize the company and sell assets. Immediately, they’ll be able to sell new cars without having an extra $1000+ on them to fund retirement benefits.

Dumb in that in cancelling labor agreements, it leaves the tens of thousands of people relying on their underfunded pension plan in the lurch, straining available social services for Detroit and other locations. In one quick step, people whose retirements were set are going to not have enough to live on and need help.

Is it cheaper for taxpayers if the companies get a loan from the Feds the way Chrysler did in the ‘80’s? Or is it cheaper to have them declare bankruptcy and have the government take over their underfunded pension plans? My guess is that the loans are cheaper, but the bankruptcy may be a better bet long-term for the companies.

Right now with the credit markets in turmoil, no one wants to lend them money. Rightly so, since both companies are a mess.

By Midori

September 10, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

Paul,

any web site that Dick Cheney espouses as a “fair and balanced” tool HAS to be, IMHO, “suspect”.

By Midori

September 10, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this

PS, Paul —

you misquoted me.

I said “Media Matters”, not “Moveon.org”

By Paul

September 10, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this

Bosch

[[Come on, be fair, I didn’t say I was the “I Am;” there IS a question mark with the phrase, not a period.]]

You libs are so literal…

:-)

RW-(the original) 12:15

So now the Republicans give away to those in need and the Democrats won’t? I’m in the Twilight Zone…

Bosch 12:17

Me, either. Just because a group says “you know, you misrepresented that” doesn’t mean it’s a partisan attack. But as far as your test, I always thought the carrot went with Bugs Bunny.

Didja see Obama on BOR? That’s the kind of give and take I like. Obama does really well in such an environment.

By "The Corporal"

September 10, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this

“Oinkbama” is going to make a lot of women voters angry with that “pig” thing.

By TW

September 10, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this

Quit trying to introduce new topics or you’ll be sent a strongly worded letter.

RW - please forward a copy of said letter to the McCain Campaign.

By Shawny

September 10, 2008 12:29 PM | Link to this

It is a sign of the apocolypse when I agree with Jay on something…no corporate bailouts. They made their bed in the free market by doing stupid stuff, and they should fold their corporations when it doesn’t work. Other better, smarter companies will fill the market place void.

By mike hussein smith

September 10, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this

Let’s see a show of hands for spending billions next on bailing out Lehman. It’s sinking like a rock and taking Wall Street with it. Taxpayers just dropped big booties on Freddie and Fannie, and here comes another Capitalist with hat in hand. The GOP treasury raiders keep adding new names to the corporate welfare rolls to cover up just what a p!ss-poor job they’ve done as regulators, then blithely allow the Capitalists to resume the same kind of silliness that got them where they were to begin with (Chrysler, for instance, is back to a pre-bailout situation, falling short because it refused to produce autos anybody wanted). In turn, the bailed out companies keep paying their CEOs in 8- or 9-digit numbers, and the American taxpayer gets screwed again.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this

Midori@12:20,

Amen.

By Paul

September 10, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this

Midori

Thank you. But I hadn’t heard Factcheck hit for being partisan before. Seems to me they do a pretty good job of taking a statement and analyzing truth content, context, etc. Only a few times have I found them off on the analysis.

the 12:20 - possibly he meant they don’t reflexively consider him the Spawn of Satan? Bosch started this religious theme today -

By RW-(the original)

September 10, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this

Paul,

There was no “need” involved. Just a Girl Scout leader trying to generate some interest in her troop. How ham handed is the Obama campaign to have to get shamed into donating a few trinkets?

By mike hussein smith

September 10, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

And if GM and Ford went broke, they wouldn’t be stuck paying all those multimillion-dollar salaries to the corporate baboons who helped destroy them. Except, of course, that ain’t gonna happen.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

Paul,

No, I didn’t see Obama on BOR - I was watching it and before Obama came on, there was a family emergency thing, and I had to run out, which is pretty much the story of my life these days. I had to watch that idiot for 15 whole minutes (and Karl Rove - I still feel icky) and didn’t get to see Obama.

By Paul

September 10, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

RW-(the original)

Some have said Reps are better at running campaigns because of their business backgrounds. That’s a stereotype, of course, but it appears the Obama campaign should lose a few lawyers and hire a few PR types.

By Bosch is a Retard

September 10, 2008 12:51 PM | Link to this

The examples are all very real except for the $20 socks, American socks made by union workers would probably only have to cost $3.50-$4.00. But there are plenty of people that make $15 an hour that can buy socks at Walmart for $2 a pair because they are made in Chinese sweatshops where the workers make less than $15 for a 14 hour day. In general people will make themselves better off by buying the $2 socks just like they bought the better and cheaper Japanese cars in the 70’s and 80’s.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

Paul,

I think you mean lose a few lobbyists and hire a few PR types.

AND, no, I didn’t start the whole religious thing! Don’t make me call you a doo-doo head.

mike hussein smith @ 12:20,

Great post.

By Swami Dave

September 10, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this

Oh no Paul!

If the Obama campaign fired the lawyers and hired more business-minded folks, who would they have available to send on their Alaska political dirt-digging adventures? Likewise, who would they have to send out on Election Day as monitors watching for “voting irregularities” and filing 11th hour lawsuits to keep polls open past the legal election timeframes in “targeted” (read: Democratic) districts. Then, who would they have to fan out after the election to challenge certifications and try to disqualify legally cast ballots from groups like our overseas military personnel who tend to not vote Democratic?

Oh no RW.

Senator Obama has a long history of needing lawyers more than campaign staffers to help him win elections. Just ask former Illinois State Senator Anne Palmer!

-Swami Dave

By Jake

September 10, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this

Depends on how many plant closings, firings, and layoffs result from the bankruptcies. The Chrysler bailout was predicated on the unemployment impact, unemployed autoworkers cause many nearby retail failures and eventually all of Flint Michigan is in the tank with unemployment 3 or 4 times the national average. However, I want the gov to provide for the common defense not bailout auto makers, mortgage lenders or homeowners.

By Swami Dave

September 10, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this

Ooops…typo. Should have been “Oh no Paul” instead of “Oh no RW”. For shame that these computers dont type what were are thinking…..

-SD

By N-GA

September 10, 2008 1:10 PM | Link to this

RW,

While you should really go back and do your own reading, I’ll do it for you this time.

Two examples of support for some form of auto-industry bail-out can be found at 9:42 and 10:31.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this

Bosch is a Retard@ 12:51 (I have confidence to type that, - too bad the creator of such a name doesn’t have the confidence to use the name they usually do),

“Would probably” is a dead give away that those examples aren’t real - just long-winded hyperbole.

By Bosch

September 10, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this

Okay Paul (see my post to you at 12:52),

Let me rephrase:

Maybe McCain needs to lose a few lobbyists and Obama needs to hire a few PR types.

That’s what I get for trying to be cheeky. :-)

By @@

September 10, 2008 1:57 PM | Link to this

Come on Jay……selectively choosing one target while schmoozing another target does not an unbiased journalist make.

Heck, the auto industry didn’t even have to ask OBlahMa, he volunteered billions of our dollars in Michigan.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama spoke Monday about the need to retool Michigan’s empty factories to make alternative energy products such as wind turbines and solar panels and said he’d put billions into helping auto manufacturers make more fuel-efficient cars.

So I’m not sure what his part errrr…..our part of that $50 Billion can be attributed to his campaign promise.

About the industry’s blocking of efforts. *The composite motor vehicle fuel rate (miles per gallon) rose 42 percent from 1973 to 1991 and then varied little over the next 15 years.

I’d say the public demand had something to do with the products Detroit manufactures.

If you wanna talk about helping the “downtrodden”, at least include the the fraud they perpetuate on America’s least among them and us. Since you get to selectively choose your targets, I can do the same. Let’s take Chicago’s electronic food-stamp program—called Link—was launched in Illinois in 1997 to combat rampant fraud in the paper food-stamp program. The stamps were often used illegally, as black-market currency, to buy drugs. But cheaters quickly found a way to steal from the new, electronic food-stamp system, too.

The latest scam works like this:

A welfare recipient goes to a store with a Link card credited by the government with a dollar amount for groceries—say, $100. The store clerk swipes the card through a government computer and takes credit for $100 in phony food sales. Then, the clerk hands $70 to the welfare recipient, keeping the rest as profit.

Typically, a Link participant receives $200 to $500 a month on his or her card, depending on household size. The program does not allow a participant to use a Link card to get cash.

And it’s still going on Jay.

And please, don’t champion the unions as those looking out for the workers.

The high cost of Big Labor’s ‘free choice’

You might be surprised to learn that in the last reported five years, inspectors from the Department of Labor obtained 1,100 labor racketeering indictments, with court judgments exceeding $400 million in fines and other forms of punishment and repayment to union members who were ripped off.

In addition, the federal Office of Labor-Management Standards has successfully prosecuted 850 corrupt union officials and obtained $103 million in restitution orders since 2001.

And since 2000, labor unions have faced more than 14,000 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaints — charging leaders with discrimination by race, sex, age, disability and religion.

According to the U.S. Department of Labor Office of Inspector General, “Schemes involving bribery, extortion, deprivation of union rights by violence and embezzlement used by early racketeers are still employed to abuse the power of unions.”

But union leaders have kept their activities out of the public eye — relying on deft political maneuvering, multimillion-dollar public relations campaigns and the residual goodwill of the American people.

If you’re gonna dish it out, make sure EVERYONE gets their fair share of blame.

The automakers employ hundreds of thousands. How much money can be found in the employees’ combined incomes. How many businesses outside the auto plant are necessary in the manufacturing of automobiles? How many people do they employ? How many people work for the insurance companies that are in place to provide the benefits.

I could go on and on Jay,