The difference between giving unemployement benefits to 2.5Mil workers and dumping cash into a company that makes products no one is buying and will just sit on the storage lot is that in the latter case: 1) the company really doesn't change how it does business when it gets money for tears (it will just happen again); 2) any government direction regarding how to redesign products and retool manufacturing plants is the blind leading the overtly stubborn; and 3) if the workers at all levels within the company don't consider the company a wothwhile investment, why should anyone else?

Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy laws provides a company the mechanism to get debt protection while it reorganizes. Many airlines have gone this route, as well as a lot of businesses in this nation - and a goodly number have exited from Chapter 11 protection with success. Before a nickel goes to the auto makers, they should take advantage of what legal protection is available to them NOW, rather than expect free money for no substantive action to get better. No one has yet to explain why the Big Three haven't gone this route FIRST before seeking a handout, or why Chapter 11 won't work.

To me, the answer is a simple one. In Chapter 11, everything is open to revision, and that includes executive compensation, management staffing structure, labor agreements, benefit plans, et al in order to get a bankruptcy judge to release the company from court control. The union officials fear repercussions from the rank-and-file, the rank-and-file don't want the potential to lost what they have, the management staff is concerned about being in the unemployment line, the executives fear their [ersonal financial packages being turned inside-out.

We have decent laws and structure to cover ailing businesses which have a potential for recovery. Why aren't these options the first to be tried?

Sounds to me this auto industry bailout is more a money-for-votes payback thing than a legitimate economic issue.....