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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wayners who wrote (35465)	5/8/2009 5:02:55 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: "Ah but there is always the Federal Pension Guarantee Agency" 1) That is for when companies default on their pension payments. (Here, with Chrysler, there are still possibly viable assets... a business which - if properly restructured - might well be able to cover it's pension obligations without costing the taxpayer the whole dime... if FPGA had to pick it all up.) 2) Fed Pension Guarantee --- does not have enough money in it right now to cover this (even when payments are scaled down to the federal maximum). The Agency has ALREADY TOLD CONGRESS that any more big hits to their fund and they would have to RAISE TAXES on industry... or else 'borrow' hundreds of Billions more directly from the taxpayers. That's why (from the taxpayer's point-of-view... not to mention from the point-of-view of well run business who don't want to see their taxes raised over this) it is so much better if the company can be saved so that it can pay it's own bills.