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: TimF who wrote (44808)	8/13/2010 6:50:06 PM
From: tejek	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

First of all, it was not Obama who benefited the unions but rather than the BK judge. No, it was the Obama administration. The administration was a creditor itself, and was a creditor of other creditors, and a regulator of still more, used the power of that position, to pressure a large block of creditors to agree to the bailout along the lines of what happened. That majority block in turn controlled the agreement which was submitted to the judge for approval. It was the BK judge who made the approval. He could have turned it down. Secondly, why do you always come out in defense of impersonal corps. instead of the American worker? I'm defending reasonably applying the law and agreements, rather than granting special interest favors to well connected groups like the unions. The laws are skewed to favor the rich and corps. Also the unions are not in the general interest of the American worker. To the extent they manage to increase the price of some labor, they do so by decreasing the price of other labor and/or increasing unemployment and/or increasing prices. The unions kept this country from communism. Learn your American history.