Now, since none of the more blinkered Obama fans have actually commented on this particular issue, without screaming about Bush or excusing it in some way, let us hear the excuses now... this is *OBAMA'S AUTO BAILOUT PLAN* George W. Bush has nothing at all to do with it. *NOTHING* We all know Bush was one of the worst presidents in the history of the USA. there. done and dusted. now deal with this issue. *NOW* justify this policy based on the facts about what Obama is doing, and the people he is hurting *WITHOUT* mentioning George W. Bush since his stupidity is completely irrelevant. Here are the facts- - Obama's "plan" for Chrysler is to wipe out 71% of the money American institutions invested in the company. - Secured lenders, who were guaranteed more from a bankruptcy filing in court, rejected his "offer" of 29 cents on the dollar (so UAW could be given control of Chrysler with 55% of its shares) Obama accused them of being "unpatriotic", and having their own self-interest above that of Chrysler's workers (to whom he wanted to give control of the company) "But while many stakeholders made sacrifices, some did not, in particular, a group of investment firms and hedge funds that hoped to hold out for a taxpayer-funded bailout. I don't stand with them. I stand with Chrysler's employees, management and suppliers. I don't stand with those who held out when everybody else made sacrifices." - Since nobody feels any sympathy for these mean hedge fund managers who actually manage people's money who Obama was clearly trying to demonize conveniently, how abouyt having some sympathy for many of the *REAL* people getting screwed by Obama so he can pay back the unions? two Indiana state pension funds -- Indiana State Teachers Retirement Fund, Indiana State Police Pension Trust and the Indiana Major Moves Construction Fund, own about $42.5 million of Chrysler secured debt ( representing teachers and state police officers -- and a state construction fund) Filed objections against Obama's plan to seize their money in contravention to bankruptcy laws. The teachers' pension fund alone has said it would lose $4.6 million under Obama's proposal. - The fact is, President Obama is in fact stomping on investor's legal rights. Cops and teachers are hardly greedy wall streeters, are they? Secured investors are *LEGALLY* entitled to be repaid first, before other Chrysler bondholders are, and to receive an ownership stake in the company should it go bankrupt. President Obama has *DELIBERATELY* circumvented those *LAWS* in order to give UAW more money, and control of the company by simply voiding all the legal documents that Chryselr had with its secured lenders. NOW, On to Step 2... President Obama is now attempting to do the *EXACT SAME THING* to GM...and worse... these are *AMERICANS* who have *RIGHTS* for a market determined decision of what their investment is worth - not a decision by an Obama political fiat. At least with Chrysler, it was easy to ride roughshod over the bondholders, because it had much fewer and they were much richer, but this is *GM* As for how this will all shake out...take a look at how great a job Great Britain did of running their car companies when the government got involved. the government will *OWN* 51% of GM under the Obama "plan". the UAW will own 38%. the bondholders who *SHOULD* by all legal rights, have the first claims to all the company's assets, get only *10 percent* and the *CURRENT* stockholders...get *1%* GM is going to be 90% (nearly) owned by the government and the UAW. The UK tried it in the 70s and failed miserably, with the majority going out of businees....and now, we are doing the *EXACT* same thing, saving the unions at the expense of making good cars. When it is all said and done, the GM deal will give UAW 3 times more equity as the bondholders, even though they hold 8 billion dollars less worth of GM's liability then the Bondholders. there are over 100,000 Individual GM bondholders, and the majority of them are not these rich wall street meanies. Those "greedy" bondholders who protested and wanted to meet with the administration to discuss it, were then rebuffed by the Obama adminstration... So let us look at a couple of those greedy folks who Obama is about to destroy to pay back some of his most ardent supporters...roughly 25% of them are individual investors, and that does not account for the pension funds that hold a large portion of the remaining 75%. Marjorie Holden, 81 years old, retired teacher, widow Five years ago, paid about $40,000 for GM bonds, which generate interest ranging from 7.4% to 8.4%. Now the bonds are worth just under $10,000. "The bondholders are not all rich," says the retired teacher. "I need to conserve my assets." Chris Crowe, Denver, Co Im a retired electrician from Denver, Colorado. Im not rich and Im not a Wall Street bank. These bonds finance my sons college tuition and my retirement. Im actually very concerned about not getting a check on May 15 from my bonds because I need this money to pay my property taxes. When the administration refuses to meet with the bondholders or chooses to wipe them out, theyre wiping me out, and lots of others like me. Gary Thomas, (retired mechanic) from Kingston, Tenn. I spent a good portion of my life working on GM cars and decided to buy bonds in GM because I believed they would be a solid investment for my future. I use the interest from the bonds for everyday living expenses and I cannot afford to see GM go bankrupt. After doing the math, I have realized that if I were to accept the administrations current offer, I would only have $10,000 per year to live off of. That is barely enough to live a decent life and I doubt anyone would deny that. Harley VanDeloo, 69, (retired high-tech marketing representativ" Thousand Oaks, Calif., bought $20,000 in GM bonds a year ago, now valued at less than $3,000. "I thought GM was too big to fail." Dennis Buchholtz,67, superintendent of a factory who invested $98,000 in GM bonds and relies on the $150 a week he receives in interest to help fund his retirement. "That offer doesn't seem fair...We have invested twice as much as the government and we'll only get a fifth of what the government will." "If this deal goes through, we're wiped out," sitting in his living room with Judy, 61. "We're too old to recoup. Who's going to hire me?" John Milne, retiree holds GM bonds with a face value of $20,000. "I'm equally as mad at GM as at the government because GM has done nothing more than give the UAW and the government what they want,I came here because this is the only place where small bondholders can be heard," he added. "We've been shut out of this entire process." Teresa Durhone, retired early from her job as a paralegal to take care of her 83-year old mother in Ocala, Fla, "To this day, if they told me GM would be OK, I'd hold them to maturity,It wasn't a speculative venture for me. It was an attempt to get a nice solid retirement income that would allow me to stay home with my mother." She said the GM bonds, which have an original face value of $25,000, are about 10% of her savings, and an even greater percentage of her retirement income. She said she's still hopeful the company can survive without bankruptcy. But she's very worried. "I try not to obsess over it but I do lose a little bit of sleep," Obama is offering the bondholders, who hold roughly 60% of the secured bonds, 10% of an insolvent company and saying that is "fair" SO, tell us why these people should suffer, so Obama can pay back the unions? If you cannot do this without attempting to draw the idiotic george w bush into it, then do not bother posting. This is *OBAMA'S PLAN* and we have not said anything about the future effects this is going to have on lending to highly unionized companies, like airlines, steel manufacturers etc...the risk priced in by the firms doing the lending is going to make it to expensive for these companies to seek loans...lenders, wary of being wiped out by an administration that does not care at all about lenders rights, will turn their backs on these unionized companies with underfunded liabilities... anyway do these folks look like Wall Street Sharks? http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2009-05/47037697.jpg either defend the plan for what it is, or criticize it.