personally, I would prefer it if they paid the taxpayers back before they gave bonuses to the workers who's pension benefits were the cause of them going broke and needing the bailout......
Didn't GM pay back that money last April?
personally, I would prefer it if they paid the taxpayers back before they gave bonuses to the workers who's pension benefits were the cause of them going broke and needing the bailout......
Didn't GM pay back that money last April?
Um, no. Try again.
try what?.....what didn't you like about what I provided.....
A law passed in 1964 imposing a tariff on light trucks does not require foreign manufacturers to build passenger cars (or trucks for that matter) in the United States to sell them in the US market.
no...we loaned them the money they paid us in April........plus we're waiting for a chance to sell our stock for a price which won't make it a total loss.....
You are wrong. There is such a law, well not exactly as I stated but definitely it is protectionism. Basically what they do is build the cars here to get the domestic tag and avoid tariffs. This is protectionism at work.Hardly. There is no such law. They not only build their plants here in the US (mainly in the south and midwest were land and labor are cheaper) for the reasons I stated but they also do so because they can take advantage of the cartels they have in their home countries (which violate Sherman anti-trust laws in the USA) in which they agree to raise prices by a set amount across the board and for all members of the cartel. They do this to offset their fixed costs such as egnineering and tool making for new models which gives them a huge competative advantage over US automakers for which this practice is illegal.
You are wrong. There is such a law, well not exactly as I stated but definitely it is protectionism. Basically what they do is build the cars here to get the domestic tag and avoid tariffs. This is protectionism at work.
Didn't you say you wished GM had paid back the taxpayers before they paid bonuses?
personally, I would prefer it if they paid the taxpayers back before they gave bonuses to the workers who's pension benefits were the cause of them going broke and needing the bailout......
Those bonuses are just piss in a bucket compared to those paid to Goldman Sachs et al.
Have all banks and financial institutions that were bailed out paid their loans back?
Have all banks and financial institutions that were bailed out paid their loans back?
no, and they should....
Then why are they paying obscene bonuses, far in excess of anything being paid to GM workers?
the answer was obvious, TS already gave it.....
sure there are tards on the right here who spew venom about unions.
But there a lot of RICH conservatives here who were against all the bailouts from the beginning.
I see it as more of a class issue than a right vs left. The UBER RICH hamptons yatch club types got bailed out thru fear tactics.
One could easily make the case that it would have been a regional recession/depression limited to the NY yatch club. A lot of what caused the deepness of the recession was the needless spreading of fear to get the trillion passed.