Does it bother anybody that America is now in the business of guaranteeing warranties on cars?Does it bother anybody that an American president can tell an executive to step down?
Does it bother anybody that an American president has told Chrysler they must merge with Fiat?
GM's plans don't warrant WH appreciation and money? The 'experts' aren't happy?
Most of us don't agree with any of this, some of you will. Put that aside. Can someone tell us where IS all this in the constitution? Where does our president get this power? Is it because he's passing our money around and now can demand all of this? And who says the WH experts are smarter than those in industry? What's happened here?
IS THIS what Mr. Obama meant by "SHOVEL READY?" Because, so far, there's been no shoveling of dirt like we thought he meant then (bridges, roads), but PLENTY of 'shoveling' of ...........ya.
z
24 comments:
He gets the power because GM and Chrysler took the money which came under Congress's ability to legislate and allocate funds and probably also under the commerce clause.
Appeal to SCOTUS if it's not to your liking.
Ducky, have you ever read the constitution? Who offered this money to GM and CHRYSLER?
When the state is most corrupt, then the laws are most multiplied. --Tacitus
They may have decided in the past 230 years to call it legal, mr. ducky. But calling it legal doesn't make it right.
Z,
I agree with Ducky to extent. This problem occurred as a result of the bailouts passed by congress. Now, as for the commerce clause, its been stretched all out of proportion by congress over the years.
What a long way we have come since 1816 when President Madison vetoed something called the American System, championed by Henry Clay, John Q. Adams and others. This system advocated spending federal funds for local infrastructure projects.
Madison vetoed it because he thought it an uncostitutional use of federal money and that it didn't fit into the enumerated powers of congress. After all, what does he know? He only wrote the constitution.
Isn't it interesting that news has just came on that Wagoner, GM CEO, entered into an agreement to be paid $20 million when he leaves?
The president also says that the US government will stand behind and guarantee the warranties of GM vehicles. What?
Yes, we've come a long way.
And what do you honestly think the reponse would have been if George Bush called the CEO of GM and asked him to resign?
Papa....just imagine. Hell to pay.
L&O...of course this stems from the congress bailouts, but that's what I'm talking about...the whole thing is unconstitutional, as you suggest/prove ...
AHA...so Wagoner took TWENTY MILLION to leave? Is that in the bail-out? No wonder he didn't put up a fight! He'll live well now forever! And, THIS TIME, it's ON US! What a great relief to GM stockholders, eh?
Cover your eyes, everyone..WHAT WHORES we have running our country.
Ducky, have you ever read the constitution? Who offered this money to GM and CHRYSLER?
----------------------------
Why is that relevant?
What really gets irritating is this right wing habit to insinuate they are the only ones who have ver investigated the Constitution and Constitutional law.
Now, generally when you run into this type of right wing objection they fall back on the 10th Amendment. Well, that doesn't feed the bulldog.
The uber federalist philosophy has been challenged in the Supreme Court and rulings have been made. Now it's true that many of the initial signers never envisioned the court to have much power but there they are as part of the checks and balances.
Now when you assert that those who disagree with you haven't read the Constitution what you are doing is saying that your federalist ideals have been voted down and you lost and since you lost, the Supreme Court must be wrong.
Congress has been issuing bailout funds for some time. Seems I remember Chrysler's first go around.
They may have decided in the past 230 years to call it legal, mr. ducky. But calling it legal doesn't make it right.
--------------------
We are a nation of law, not philosophy, Farmer.
For that matter where in the constitution does it say, we have to subsidize mortgages with taxpayers money?
The implication in all this is, if Congress approves it, it's legal. Or, if the President proclaims something it's legal.
No matter that we, the people, are footing the bill. We are bailing out private citizens for irresponsible behavior.
L&O - We bought a GM car two months ago. There's no way we would go the the government to take advantage of a guarantee on our warranty for our car.
We knew when we bought it the trouble GM was in, and bought the car anyway. It's our responsibilty not the taxpayers. We don't need or want charity.
Now the government is guaranteeing a fine tuned car? What's next? I shudder to think!
Pris
This problem occurred as a result of the bailouts passed by congress. I think this is only partially correct, LOT. The bailouts were a consequence of other, equally serious issues. I left a long comment at your blog a little while ago. In my view, there is more involved here than routine congressional corruption. Auto industries were horribly managed, and the UAW successfully boxed automakers into a corner. We don’t know how much money exchanged hands between automakers and congress . . . but we do know that bailout legislation constitutes an abuse of the people and congressional power. This is what happens when fools continue to send idiots back to Congress. It is what happens when sheep elect a Marxist, disguised as a fiscal moderate. It is the likely result whenever government officials regard the U. S. Constitution as a mere impediment to their communist programs.
For now at least we have a government that considers the Constitution irrelevant.
Ducky, "a nation of laws"? WHOSE, Mr. Obama's?
Pris, GOOD for you!
Mustang and shoprat, you're both right about the constitution...who could imagine this happening?
Mustang..FINALLY, today, I haerd something about Obama and the unions, but do you know that I'm not sure what it was and I am CHOOSING to ignore it, hoping he's calling them to take their responsibility in the problems THEY CAUSED. The very idea that our unions have caused American automobiles to cost so much more for other, better cars, is outrageous and you hear VERY LITTLE about that.
But, when you have a media with a socialist agenda and which loves the unions like they do, who's going to speak up? THIS is the BIG OPEN MINDED TRANSPARENT PRO AMERICAN LIBERAL, huh? LOL
GM isn't so much a car manufacturer as it is a health care and pension providing corporation for the union employees and former employees.
There is simply too much baggage being imposed by the unions.
Mustang,
I replied at my blog. I think that as a matter of course the bailouts were begun by Bush, mainly because he didn't want the car companies to fail on his watch.
Having said that, the unions are salivating at the prospect of nationalized industries. Their view is that of a cash cow supplied by the American taxpayer. The Dems have their crisis and will not let it get away from them. They will nationalize the auto industry and all you have to do is listen to Obama.
He postured about being tough on them and fired the CEO, but in his speech he said he will not let the car industry fail.
How do you reconcile these two without coming to the conclusion that the car companies will be bailed out and nationalized as an "emergency" measure. I described it as an "anaconda" plan that just keeps tightening.
We await the other shoe to drop.
I used to be a Ford fan, & I just may return if they continue to reject the bailout money & dodge Bigfoot's heavy hand. They seem to be playing it smart. I am so steamed at GM for letting him force them into these decisions! Absolutely unconstitutional, but as Shoprat rightly said, this administration cares nothing for the Constitution.
Heil Obama.
David's got an excellent point; BUY FORD if you can.
They refused the money, they deserve support.
Z,
Not being the economic genius that our macroeconomic expert purports to be, I wonder what Ford did right, while they others were melting down?
L&0....I don't know what Ford did...good point.
They must be saddled with the hideously high UAW junk...$3000 a car, I believe, goes to the unions. FORD must be part of the united AUTO workers, right? American cars just can't compete anymore; mediocre designs, not great longevity......versus Audi, Toyota, Honda, etc...I just heard that the foreign car plants in TN pay about half in benefits than the Detroit plants do. Funny, those people are surviving somehow.
This appears to be all about obama and having to pay back the unions for electing him.
Bankruptcy would have upset the union applecart...can't have THAT. Better American money gets thrown away..some experts are suggesting it'll take another 100 billion to GM to keep it above water.
The article and the comments have enticed me to establish a summary as I see it:
1. With the exception of Ford, the U.S. automobile industry has completely missed the market (aka bad management, combined with idiotic union contracts protected by congress against bribery).
2. Unions used to be a good thing - now they are a cancer to society; if they are not cut out, they will ruin many industries, and maybe the country.
3. I am against ANY bailout, it must not happen - if a company is struggling, go Ch. 11 and reorganize/renegotiate. That, of course, was not possible for GM, since bribery by unions has inhibited BHO government to follow that route.
4. Actually, to prove my point, it is the assessment today that the bailout of AIG was not necessary. And I do believe that Bush is as much a culprit in this than BHO.
5. The recent activities of the BHO government with interaction into private industry, like firing and hiring, retroactive taxes and salaries and bonuses make it clear that this government has regard for neither the constitution nor laws. Important laws are being swiped away with one stroke of the pen - which to this extent has only been witnessed in history during the Hitler and Stalin eras.
Congratulation - this march to communism is just remarkable. It is only a pity that it will bring the country to the knees - short of drastic measures, praying is the only thing we have left. Or maybe not.
I suggest that everybody who can afford several days off to get in the car and block every street in and around Washington (100 km circle) for three days. May be that would make people wake up.
Mr.Z
It's definitely a worrying precedent Z. One that i have a feeling will not be the last.
"Why is that relevant?"
So that's a 'no' then quacky.
"What really gets irritating is this right wing habit to insinuate they are the only ones who have ver investigated the Constitution and Constitutional law."
Then, appeal to VRWC if it's not to your liking.
Mr.Z,
I agree with your points about unions. I've been in one my whole working life. I was a union president for 5 years and negotiated four contracts, two as president.
If unions do the work they're supposed to do, such as salary and benefits they are a good thing. But somewhere along the way they have become a political entity that is much more interested in solidifying it power base, rather than taking care of its members.
We were always cognizant of the city's financial status and careful not to kill the golden goose. That is not to say we didn't want our share and we more often than not got it. Unions today have no clue, nor they don't care about the employer.
They use their relationship with politicians, paid for with union members money to keep their power. The game has now come to be keep the politicians on a short leash and squeeze every industry as hard as you can. They are reaping what they have sown and the rank and file members get the pain.
As for your suggestion about DC, I think the tea parties are a good start in making usually silent working people become more politically active. Once they dip their toe, so to speak, they will ready to dive in. I hope the politicians start to feel the heat real soon.
excellent input, L&0..both the
z's thank you for it.
It's striking that you'd say you didn't want to bring your company down with demands. Apparently, the UAW gives no second thought to bringing the whole darned industry and country down as long as they get their free healthcare, huh?
CONSTITUTIONAL!
GEDOUDDAHERE!
We don't need no laxatives.
We got OBMARRHEA!
~ FT
Post a Comment