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: carranza2 who wrote (304220)	5/7/2009 5:28:58 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	7 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793670

Similarly, the UAW gets a seat on the Chrysler board but it is a non-voting seat, as I appreciate it. The UAW gets 1 board seat out of 6. The Federal Govt gets 4 board seats out of 6. The UAW gets 55% of equity - initially. Govt gets the rest initially, then gives 20% to Fiat for no money down, maybe more later. Thus Obama Motors. Bottom line: both look similar, but the Bush bank bailout was much, much larger More here than just numbers. I believe that Paulson was motivated by genuine panic and the financial system would collapse and drag the global economy into a shattering depression. I don't know enough to judge if this is true but I do count it as a more benign motive than political payola to preserve 60,000 overpaid UAW jobs at $250,000 each and rising. The numbers involved in paying out what AIG owed its clients are very large. But Paulson made no moves to own the clients. I don't even know if he made any moves to own AIG, most of which is functioning insurance company, on more than a temporary basis. Paulson or Bush never got in front of a mike to say that he "didn't stand" with AIG or any of their clients. That's different intent and different ends.