Congress debates the auto bailout.
Today congress met to discuss whether or not to bailout the auto industry or rather the Big 3. As mentioned in a previous post, the BIG 3 are controlled by the UAW and they are running the show in Michigan. Specifically their wages and benefits twice exceed that of the competitors.
However what I find most shocking is the very essence of discussing a non-existent issue. While I can understand the job loss and suffering that will inevitably occur with the collapse of these three companies, since when is unemployment or saving of ANY industry the responsibility of taxpayers? In fact, calling this an auto bailout is somewhat of an injustice, because only three companies are facing bankruptcy, while plenty of companies in America that manufacture automobiles and not facing such dire straits.
Therefore the claim that the UAW president made alleging that the economy has forced the three companies to declare bankruptcy does not hold water, otherwise we would expect every auto company to follow suit.
Cclaims that the financial companies received a bailout and therefore other industries are entitled, are now somewhat expected. One of the dangers that the initial bailout posed was to set a dangerous precedent whereby large companies can threaten the government with economic devastation. Still, one cannot ignore the ludicrous nature of comparing sub-par automobiles to an entire banking system. Whereas the latter fails and the entire country could potentially seize up in an economic avalanche, the former is but a nuisance and primarily effects employees of the failing corporations.
While I am pleased to see some conservative Republicans point out that this bailout will be akin to flushing money down the toilet, the notion that Obama's white house will appeal to the union workers and approve the bailout - is sickening.
On this blog I intend to monitor Obama's policies and actions very closely, there will be a separate page of his failures and accomplishments. If he facilitates this bailout, then we as Americans should hold this egregious act again him for being profoundly un-American and pandering to his constituency.
However what I find most shocking is the very essence of discussing a non-existent issue. While I can understand the job loss and suffering that will inevitably occur with the collapse of these three companies, since when is unemployment or saving of ANY industry the responsibility of taxpayers? In fact, calling this an auto bailout is somewhat of an injustice, because only three companies are facing bankruptcy, while plenty of companies in America that manufacture automobiles and not facing such dire straits.
Therefore the claim that the UAW president made alleging that the economy has forced the three companies to declare bankruptcy does not hold water, otherwise we would expect every auto company to follow suit.
Cclaims that the financial companies received a bailout and therefore other industries are entitled, are now somewhat expected. One of the dangers that the initial bailout posed was to set a dangerous precedent whereby large companies can threaten the government with economic devastation. Still, one cannot ignore the ludicrous nature of comparing sub-par automobiles to an entire banking system. Whereas the latter fails and the entire country could potentially seize up in an economic avalanche, the former is but a nuisance and primarily effects employees of the failing corporations.
While I am pleased to see some conservative Republicans point out that this bailout will be akin to flushing money down the toilet, the notion that Obama's white house will appeal to the union workers and approve the bailout - is sickening.
On this blog I intend to monitor Obama's policies and actions very closely, there will be a separate page of his failures and accomplishments. If he facilitates this bailout, then we as Americans should hold this egregious act again him for being profoundly un-American and pandering to his constituency.
Comments
Post a Comment