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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (284099)	12/13/2008 6:36:44 AM
From: Bearcatbob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794041

"Yes, but what is ruinous about the UAW contracts is not so much what they pay the current workers, but that they are paying health and pension costs for 4 retirees for every current worker. They can't just go bankrupt and renege on those costs." It is all part and parcel of the same. Think of the municipal worker contracts - they have traded current cash for early retirement options and long term security. The money is the same - it is only how it is paid that is at issue.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (284099)	12/13/2008 9:42:19 AM
From: John Carragher	2 Recommendations Respond to of 794041

why can't they cut contributions to health care. Pension default gets picked up by gov.. retirees have medicare like the rest of us.. they can join aarp or other alternatives for additional health coverage. What is better save jobs or let the retirees live cost free for health insurance? There is alternative to continue to support existing pension but drop pension benefit program for all existing workers and move to just the 401k programs. Does this company want to continue in operation or have everyone out on the street. if so there will be zip pension and zip health care other than gov provided programs. the industry is a perfect example of greed during the hay days. management gave uaw anything they wanted so long as they could pass it on to the consume. WEll, consumer got tired of it and went elsewhere.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (284099)	12/13/2008 1:06:14 PM
From: Whitebeard	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794041

I thought the government had already picked up the legacy retirement costs?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (284099)	12/13/2008 4:49:01 PM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794041

They can't just go bankrupt and renege on those costs. Isn't that what bankruptcy does? Allows a debtor to legally renege on their financial obligations? It seems to me a bankruptcy judge would first focus on crafting a way for GM to get out of that provision of the contract through a one time settlement with retirees. As for medical.....I believe there are several types of medical plans they could suggest. They have to get these folks off of the dole, and will have to pay to do it, but for the American taxpayer, it beats what is happening now.