Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (437232)	11/29/2008 7:12:52 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1574096

I think Ten's ignoring me, but I sent him this: youtube.com

To: SilentZ who wrote (437232)	11/30/2008 11:41:26 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574096

Z, > They played a massive part in it. But this is a LOT more about the conservative side trying to kill unions than the liberal side trying to save them. Try again. The liberal side is the active side in this case. They want to use government to save the unions. In contrast, the conservative side is passive. Let the unions figure out how to survive on their own, or die in their sheer stubbornness. > They're not. The UAW has already made some massive concessions over the last couple of years. OK tell me then. What is the problem with Ford, GM, and Chrysler? They built the wrong cars? Fine, tell them what kind of cars to build and how to build them in a high-quality, cost-effective manner. Seems like if the unions aren't the problem, then let union representatives run the damn companies. I'm sure THEY know how to do a better job than the CEOs who can't even beg for a bailout without giving up their private jets. > It isn't a lie. The lie is how it's being portrayed by liberals who confuse energy independence with an anti-oil agenda. Tenchusatsu