So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler and is
also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a while.
Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it would
likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been persuaded that
the impact on current workers and retirees would be staggering if the
companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American workforce
is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a much smaller
percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the jobs of
a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small businesses?
They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much as the auto
industry's union workers. Are they going to get a dedicated and specific
bailout as well to keep the companies they work for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs typically
apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job. Why do the
employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler and is
also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a while.
Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it would
likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been persuaded that
the impact on current workers and retirees would be staggering if the
companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American workforce
is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a much smaller
percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the jobs of
a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small businesses?
They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much as the auto
industry's union workers. Are they going to get a dedicated and specific
bailout as well to keep the companies they work for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs typically
apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job. Why do the
employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch


Whoooooooosh.

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler and
is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a while.
Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it would
likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been persuaded that
the impact on current workers and retirees would be staggering if the
companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a much
smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the jobs
of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small businesses?
They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much as the auto
industry's union workers. Are they going to get a dedicated and
specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs typically
apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job. Why do the
employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch


Whoooooooosh.

Yes, it Whoooooooosh right over you.

On Nov 13, 12:09*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message

...





Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler and
is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a while.
Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it would
likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been persuaded that
the impact on current workers and retirees would be staggering if the
companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. *Obviously the number of union auto workers is a much
smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the jobs
of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small businesses?
They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much as the auto
industry's union workers. * Are they going to get a dedicated and
specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs typically
apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job. * Why do the
employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch

Whoooooooosh.

Yes, it Whoooooooosh right over you.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No it didn't, he just won't address facts or debate in an
intellectually honest manner.. You know that..

On Nov 13, 12:17*pm, wrote:
On Nov 13, 12:09*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:





"Boater" wrote in message

...

Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler and
is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a while.
Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it would
likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been persuaded that
the impact on current workers and retirees would be staggering if the
companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. *Obviously the number of union auto workers is a much
smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the jobs
of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small businesses?
They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much as the auto
industry's union workers. * Are they going to get a dedicated and
specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs typically
apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job. * Why do the
employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch

Whoooooooosh.

Yes, it Whoooooooosh right over you.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No it didn't, he just won't address facts or debate in an
intellectually honest manner.. You know that..- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hell, I'm still trying to find out about this temporary manufacturing
facility the union workers had to be able to accurately bend stainless
steel, weld it, treat it, etc. on site!!! He also said they didn't use
butt welds, so I'd like to know what kind of weld they did use. Can't
wait to see the pictures he said he'd post! Now, I'll bet it'll be of
the finished stairs....not the manufacturing of said stairs, if ANY
little bit of it is the truth!!

On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:17:00 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Nov 13, 12:09*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message

...





Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler and
is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a while.
Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it would
likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been persuaded that
the impact on current workers and retirees would be staggering if the
companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. *Obviously the number of union auto workers is a much
smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the jobs
of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small businesses?
They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much as the auto
industry's union workers. * Are they going to get a dedicated and
specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs typically
apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job. * Why do the
employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch

Whoooooooosh.

Yes, it Whoooooooosh right over you.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No it didn't, he just won't address facts or debate in an
intellectually honest manner.. You know that..

So do those who attempt a rational debate with him. But, they persist in
doing so. Maybe it's just for the laughs at his stupidity. I hope so.
--
A Harry Krause truism:

"It's not a *baby* kicking, beautiful bride, it's just a fetus!"

Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work
for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job.
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch


Whoooooooosh.

Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.

On Nov 13, 8:54*pm, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. *Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. * Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work
for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job. *
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch

Whoooooooosh.

Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Union protection is just glorified welfare for those who don't want to
work. of people like Harry who wouldn't know how. Working for a union,
on the working end of the table, I saw it all the time. The union
going to bat for lazy bitches who wreren't worth 2 dollars an hour.
And before our resident asshole says anything, I was the smallest guy
in the shop of over 350 men, and never had a week where I was not in
the top ten percent of production. BTW, the union hated guys like me,
used to come to some of us and "ask" us to slow down to spare the bums
having to do a days work, for a days pay...

BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for
a while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:

"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."

Here's what I don't understand.

To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.

So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?

What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they
work for in business?

Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new
job. Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more
consideration?

Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?

Eisboch


Whoooooooosh.

Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.


I wish that were so.

wrote:
On Nov 13, 8:54 pm, BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
So now Obama has recommended emergency loans to GM, Ford and Chysler
and is also pushing for a $50B bailout package to tide them over for a
while. Here's a quoted passage from the article:
"If the plan were to offer no strong guarantees against layoffs it
would likely draw fire from unions. But Obama advisers have been
persuaded that the impact on current workers and retirees would be
staggering if the companies went into bankruptcy."
Here's what I don't understand.
To the best of my knowledge, only 12 percent of the total American
workforce is Union. Obviously the number of union auto workers is a
much smaller percentage.
So, Obama thinks that the taxpayers should cough up $50B to save the
jobs of a relatively small percentage of the workforce?
What about the millions of people working in non-union small
businesses? They are being affected by the economic slowdown as much
as the auto industry's union workers. Are they going to get a
dedicated and specific bailout as well to keep the companies they work
for in business?
Those unfortunate enough to get laid off due to work slow downs
typically apply for unemployment benefits and try to find a new job.
Why do the employees of GM, Ford and Chrysler deserve more consideration?
Is this part of the "share the wealth" plan?
Eisboch
Whoooooooosh.
Unions, a just a powerful special interest group. Better funded than and
listened to more often than most of the K street lobbying firms.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Union protection is just glorified welfare for those who don't want to
work. of people like Harry who wouldn't know how. Working for a union,
on the working end of the table, I saw it all the time. The union
going to bat for lazy bitches who wreren't worth 2 dollars an hour.
And before our resident asshole says anything, I was the smallest guy
in the shop of over 350 men, and never had a week where I was not in
the top ten percent of production. BTW, the union hated guys like me,
used to come to some of us and "ask" us to slow down to spare the bums
having to do a days work, for a days pay...

Even now at my advanced age and seniority in the company, my boss has to
tell me to slow down take some time off, stop working so hard. Pass some
work off to the younger guys, let them work through the problems and
come to you if they need help. I can't help myself. I am a producer.