When someone has an unfair advantage, there's an expression my husband's family uses, "It all depends on whose cow's in the corn." What had me thinking about this today are reports that the Treasury has reached an agreement with the U.A.W. that would protect retiree health care benefits in a Chrysler bankruptcy.
Speaking with bankruptcy experts, there really is no way to protect those benefits in a bankruptcy proceeding. It would be the taxpayers who would guarantee those benefits. I don't want anyone to lose their benefits, but it's not fair for some people have theirs underwritten by others. Aren't retiree health benefits covered by Medicare? And if Medicare is good enough for the majority of older Americans, why should any one industry get special protection?
Comments
Hi Stephanie,
With regards to ISRG, please forward my email to SEC so they can provide more transparency on the unfair trading in this stock from 4/17/09 to 2/24/09
Thanks
Dear Stephanie,
Thanks for your interview with Mary Shapiro. I would like more transparency in the hedge fund monitoring because the stock market is becoming a legalising gambling casino.
Stock symbol ISRG - the stock was pressured by the hedge funds when in one week in shot up 50%.
Goldman Sachs that took TARP money and is supposed a bank now should not be allowed to take hugh profits at the expense of taxpayer
Tommy,
You say it's "morally corrupt and akin to theft" for a company to promise retiree health insurance as an enticement for staying there and then eliminate that obligation. But apparently it's not morally corrupt for our government to eliminate the obligation to pay the bonuses promised to AIG employees for staying there. Both companies received bailout money and public opinion seems to say the UAW is largely responsible for the Big 3's financial situation. So I don't understand the double standard.
It seems to me there are certain elements that need "lock box" protection, not only for the benefit of the individual but for the general well being of the country. If I had chosen to continue to work in an industry or for a company that utilized as an enticement to my staying employed there, a good retirement plan, I think it is morally corrupt and akin to theft, for that company to have the ability to eliminate its obligation for that money through any type of legal maneuvering.
.
People might say well they had a choice and thats the risk. Thats extremely short sighted and selfish for the wealthiest country in the world who has no problem with sending money offshore to help others but leave its own who pay the taxes that allow that kind of humanitarianism to even take place, struggling and scared of where they will live or have food to eat.
.
I guess my point is, I have no problem with policies in this new world order, that absolutely make sure we are taking care of those in this country who have made it possible for America to be what it has been.
The UAW's LM-2 is posted on the Department of Labor's website. The UAW has over $1 Billion in assets---including a $7 Million golf course (shown at cost). Maybe the UAW should be forced to liquidate some of their holdings and subsidize their members' retirement benefits. We the taxpayers have already done our share. We purchased overpriced American cars- which allowed UAW members to get higher wages-which allowed UAW to collect higher dues- which allowed the UAW to get more revenue-which allowed the UAW to buy toys like a golf course.
JD,
Like I said, I hate to see anyone lose benefits. But other early retirees are forced to purchase their own coverage or find a job with health care. Maybe this helps Obama make the case for his health care plan.
OF COURSE A LOT OF RETIREES ARE ON MEDICARE. HOWEVER THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF AUTO WORKERS THAT ARE TOO YOUNG FOR MEDICARE. LIKE MY HUSBAND , HE IS ONLY 62. WHAT IS HE SUPPOSED TO DO. IT IS NOT FAIR ANYWAY YOU LOOK AT IT. THE WORKERS ARE THE ONES THAT WILL GET SHAFTED AGAIN