OUCH! Paper Claims Taxpayer Losses Are Due General Motors Subsidizing Union Compensation

The U.S. government will lose about $23 billion on the 2008-2009 bailout of General Motors and Chrysler. President Obama emphatically defends his decision to subsidize the automakers, arguing it was necessary to prevent massive job losses.

But, even accepting this premise, the government could have executed the bailout with no net cost to taxpayers. It could have—had the Administration required the United Auto Workers (UAW) to accept standard bankruptcy concessions instead of granting the union preferential treatment. The extra UAW subsidies cost $26.5 billion—more than the entire foreign aid budget in 2011. The Administration did not need to lose money to keep GM and Chrysler operating.

The Detroit auto bailout was, in fact, a UAW bailout.

Read Article

thetruth01 - 6/14/2012 12:32:45 PM

-2 Boost

Well what would you expect from the Heritage Foundation?

MBCLS07 - 6/15/2012 3:07:42 PM

+3 Boost

"thetruth01", You're asking the wrong question. The correct question is "what would you expect from the Obama Administration?" The answer, as we've learned over the past 3.5 years, is unprecedented debt and corrosive cronyism in the form of taxpayer-funded handouts to his political supporters (i.e. uaw).

meetbhagde - 6/14/2012 1:09:32 PM

-1 Boost

Now AutoSpies is becoming a right-wing mouthpiece? Never thought I'd see Heritage Foundation links on this site...

What's next? Obamacare will make the next 3 series less fun to drive?

Steve - 6/14/2012 5:58:10 PM

+3 Boost

I can't believe this is true. Next thing you'll be telling me is that politicians get "contributions" from the UAW (biting sarcasm intended)