Bravo to President Obama for scrapping the "car czar" idea and taking on the tough decisions himself. As I read these depressing stories about the state of the U.S. auto industry I couldn't help but think how obvious it was that the introduction of UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE in America would completely solve the automakers' biggest problems. (Legacy benefits are what make American cars so unprofitable and have the Big Three drowning in debt). But then my friend Jesse pointed out that it would be a lot easier to have sympathy for these people if THEY hadn't been the ones fighting AGAINST said solution. ("Socialism" doesn't seem so bad now, does it?) Will O kill two birds with one stone anyway? We can only hope so. The auto industry certainly wouldn't be the only one that would find enormous relief with the weight of entitlements off its payroll.
3 comments:
If you have an agreement with your employer for so many dollars and medical coverage and other things for services rendered why would that be called entitlements? In my world it's called fair compensation for work. These same people that refer to agreed upon compensation as entitlements are the same ones that think bonuses for driving a bank or company into oblivion are owed to them and payment is mandatory at the taxpayers expense. I disagree. That's not the real world.
No, the real world is THAT MODEL to which you're referring has bankrupted the auto industry. That's why it needs to be changed, so people DO get what they worked for. They're just going to need to get it elsewhere.
No offense, but where did your friend get his information? My understanding is one of the big three, say the big one, was in favor of national health care - costs for its large insured group were higher because providers had to absorb costs of care of the uninsured and therefore fees to insured were more than just what would be required to provide the service to the insured.
Post a Comment