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 : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (66861)	3/2/2012 1:27:21 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Debt restructuring is part of the bankruptcy process. Not part of the bailout. The unions "get" something in a deal, doesn't mean they own it. If the union pension plans get an ownership stake, that's something the unions would favor and want to get in the negotiation over the bankruptcy. The article you posted recognized that point (considering it justified, but still recognizing it) "In return for its share, the UAW could not strike over wages at Chrysler or GM in the last round of contract talks, and it gave other concessions too." But it didn't recognize the point that the the pension plans got a larger ownership stake than they would normally be entitled to under bankruptcy law, and that in more direct terms the unions (while they did have to make some concessions) apparently got a better deal than they would have without the government intervention.

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (66861)	4/6/2012 11:38:22 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Debt protection from bankruptcy generally isn't considered government aid. If you really want to consider it as such, I disagree, but fine change my statement to "GM likely would have survived without massive aid other than bankruptcy protection". And if it was so bad off that it wouldn't have, then it probably shouldn't have gotten any sort of bailout. Government picking winners, directing investment, and socilizing privte losses is a negative thing. So the 'unions' as you put it (actually the union-administered PENSION PLANS as I have pointed out - the unions themselves didn't get any) have 10% ownership of GM. Which is more than they would have gotten from an impartial administration of bankruptcy law, considering the junior status of that obligation compared to the bond holders' status, but the government was partial, not impartial.