Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Should taxpayers fund anti-labor agenda?
Randi Rhodes Message Board > Main Forums > General Discussion
Motor-City
http://www.clickondetroit.com/automotive/1...827/detail.html
QUOTE
".....With Congress returning this coming week from its summer break, the industry plans an aggressive lobbying campaign for the low-interest loans. The situation is growing dire after months of tumbling sales, high gasoline prices and consumers' abandoning profitable trucks and sport utility vehicles.

Lawmakers authorized $25 billion in loans in last year's energy bill to help the companies build fuel-efficient vehicles such as hybrids and electric vehicles. With credit tight, automakers and suppliers now want lawmakers to come up with the money for the program -- and expand the pool of money available to $50 billion over three years.

Industry leaders have argued that the loan guarantees are not a government bailout because it would hasten production of fuel-efficient vehicles and reduce dependence on imported oil.

"This is not about benefiting Wall Street," said Ford Motor Co.'s President of the Americas Mark Fields, referencing recent federal support for the investment firm Bear Stearns and troubled mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

"This is benefiting Main Street, the working men and women. The auto industry is part of the backbone of the U.S. economy."

The low-interest loans, at rates of about 4 percent to 5 percent, would pay for up to 30 percent of the cost of retooling plants to build hybrids, plug-in hybrids, electric cars and other alternatives.

Ford and General Motors Corp.'s credit ratings have fallen below investment grade, making it difficult for the companies to borrow money at affordable rates. Chrysler LLC, which has been heavily dependent upon truck sales, has been privately held since last year and faces similar problems getting access to capital.

"This industry could fall down, literally, or be absorbed if they don't get something in place very soon. I think it's that severe," said Rep. Joe Knollenberg, R-Mich. "Something has to happen pretty quickly because they can't compete paying 15 to 20 percent (interest)."

Industry lobbyists pressed the issue at the recent presidential conventions in Denver and St. Paul, Minn., and members of Michigan's congressional delegation have talked to legislative leaders and the Bush administration about the program. Discussions surround a three-year plan that would make $25 billion in loans available in the first year, followed by $15 billion the second year and $10 billion in the third.

To provide $50 billion in loans, Congress would need to set aside about $7.5 billion to guard against a loan default......"


should taxpayers fund corporate anti-labor agenda? these are after all the very same companies who have spent years sending jobs out of the country and slashing wages and benefits. wont they continue on the same anti-labor tirade but paying on credit and at low interest?

RandiLover
Plans to rebuild the infrastructure are what we need. If tax payer money is used, when the projects take off, and profits are received, a percentage of the profits should go into a pool. This pool should be used to grow more infrastructure. As the pool grows, a percentage can be used to pay off our debt. With so many economic professionals in this country, it is a crime that we were lead down a road to economic bankruptcy. Does not anyone care whether we succeed here in America?
Morgan
I heard the auto industry is moving to Mexico. So which is it?

They want US tax payers to bail them out so they can set up shop in Mexico? Which would mean Americans tax payers prop up the industry...then the industry moves out of the country, taking all the jobs with them?

I am exasperated, daily, by the outright theft.


BUT NOW FOR THE GOOD NEWS -

UPDATE 1-US House votes to end Mexican truck program
Tue Sep 9, 2008 9:47pm EDT

WASHINGTON, Sept 9 (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives defied a White House veto threat on Tuesday by voting to end a controversial pilot program that gives long-haul commercial trucks from Mexico full access to U.S. highways.

The bill, approved 395-18, would reverse a decision by the Transportation Department to continue the program, which was begun last year under NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The Senate has yet to take action on the issue and unless Senate leaders can garner a veto-proof two-thirds vote against the program it appeared set to continue.

Still, the Mexican Embassy in Washington said it was "deeply concerned" about the House vote and welcomed the administration's intention to veto the measure.

"Mexico has fulfilled its NAFTA obligations and expects the U.S. do the same. Should the bill be enacted into law, the government of Mexico will consider taking all the appropriate actions, including remedies or countermeasures under the North American Free Trade Agreement," the embassy statement said.

continued...

MEXICAN OLIGARCHIES are the same as AMERICAN. They want slave labor and thought we'd go along with it? "Oh, sure, take our revenue and our jobs...is there anything else else? How bout our health, how bout our lives?"
Motor-City
QUOTE (RandiLover @ Sep 10 2008, 01:33 PM) *
Plans to rebuild the infrastructure are what we need. If tax payer money is used, when the projects take off, and profits are received, a percentage of the profits should go into a pool. This pool should be used to grow more infrastructure. As the pool grows, a percentage can be used to pay off our debt. With so many economic professionals in this country, it is a crime that we were lead down a road to economic bankruptcy. Does not anyone care whether we succeed here in America?


not just what you do that matters though also how you do it. can you imagine having 50 billion of our own tax dollars used against us to further destroy and deplete our infrastructure? to withhold jobs and drive down wages. they get the money and run out and outsource the retooling to foreign contractors or use the money to retool their foreign operations to have a competetive advantage.
Motor-City
QUOTE (Morgan @ Sep 10 2008, 03:38 PM) *
I heard the auto industry is moving to Mexico. So which is it?

They want US tax payers to bail them out so they can set up shop in Mexico? Which would mean Americans tax payers prop up the industry...then the industry moves out of the country, taking all the jobs with them?

I am exasperated, daily, by the outright theft.


BUT NOW FOR THE GOOD NEWS -

UPDATE 1-US House votes to end Mexican truck program
Tue Sep 9, 2008 9:47pm EDT

WASHINGTON, Sept 9 (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives defied a White House veto threat on Tuesday by voting to end a controversial pilot program that gives long-haul commercial trucks from Mexico full access to U.S. highways.

The bill, approved 395-18, would reverse a decision by the Transportation Department to continue the program, which was begun last year under NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The Senate has yet to take action on the issue and unless Senate leaders can garner a veto-proof two-thirds vote against the program it appeared set to continue.

Still, the Mexican Embassy in Washington said it was "deeply concerned" about the House vote and welcomed the administration's intention to veto the measure.

"Mexico has fulfilled its NAFTA obligations and expects the U.S. do the same. Should the bill be enacted into law, the government of Mexico will consider taking all the appropriate actions, including remedies or countermeasures under the North American Free Trade Agreement," the embassy statement said.

continued...

MEXICAN OLIGARCHIES are the same as AMERICAN. They want slave labor and thought we'd go along with it? "Oh, sure, take our revenue and our jobs...is there anything else else? How bout our health, how bout our lives?"


well that is some good news.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.