Seriously, are we supposed to believe that more midwestern families eating mac 'n cheese is the way we're going to fix our economy?

Especially considering this terrible concern that working stiffs are getting paid too much is coming from the same guys who had no problem giving a bailout to Wall Street, home of John Thain's $10 million bonus for tanking Merrill Lynch? From guys who themselves get 50, 60, and 70 thousand dollar pensions when they retire?

I get it--they hate unions. But, uh, unions didn't get us into our current mess. They've been declining since the 1970's--and, as a total coincidence, that's when median wages started to stagnate and women had to join the workforce to keep families afloat.

It's simply amazing that Republicans can't see the link between declining median wages, weakening of the labor union, the biggest gap between super-rich and everyone else since 1929 and our nation's biggest financial collapse since 1929.

It's almost like if we let rich people suck up all the economic gains from increased productivity, it doesn't trickle down! Instead, it goes into bubbles which, when they pop, take down the real economy!

Is it confirmed that the UAW had agreed to phase in wage cuts? Corker's position is that the UAW only offered to STUDY wage cuts, dragging things out until their labor contract ends in '11.

Not enough attention has been paid to the effects of the credit crisis on the auto companies themselves (versus lower consumer spending. Detroit has not been viable as a manufacturer of cars for decades - the cost structure prohibited it. the bulk of profits were made financing the purchases of cars, not making them. credit crisis ended the charade.

I don't understand why Republican Senators from states with a Big 3 presence (Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana & Minnesota) would go along with the Southern Republican filibuster.

Also, why aren't car dealers (a Republican party financial mainstay) screaming --- bankruptcy also would allow their franchise agreements to be voided (just like union contracts).

Maybe the UAW should run ads in the Southern states explaining that under Chapter 11, payments made by a petitioner within 90 days of filing (e.g., after 10/3 for a 1/1/2009 filing) might be voided as preferential transfers and the recipient has to cough up the money into the bankruptcy estate. Such voidable payments could include payments for advertising in newspapers, payments to car dealers, and even rebates on those pick-up trucks !

Those people who complain about a Washington "car czar" realize that in bankruptcy, the creditors' lawyers will be scrutinizing every contract and expenditure. A bankruptcy filing will essentially will appoint the UAW's lawyers as the car czars, given the status of the UAW's members as significant unsecured creditors.

Can anybody try some simple math -- or spot a likely error when they see one? It ain't $800 unless it's a 40G car. Most of us get cars with a so-called "dealer invoice" of around 20-25. The alleged difference between the wages and benefits (forgetting the bogus inclusion of legacy costs) of Big 3 vs. Japanese automakers is 20% or less (in part the difference between a southern and a northern work force, assuming they are talking about Japanese-owned plants in the U.S.). Labor costs are supposedly 10% of the total cost of a car. 20% of 10% is 2%. 2% of 20K is $400, not $800.

Who knows what's in that 10% figure, either. Probably includes the legacy costs as well as actual labor costs. So most likely we end up with a real cost difference of about $250-$300 -- between 1% and 2% of the total. Why can't the freakin' mistakes go the other way once in a blue moon? No matter what, the narrative of "excess" wages "extracted" by "greedy unions" must be advanced at all times by every reporter.

Good ol' Tim Fernholz, the man who never met a bailout he didn't like.