In case you were worried about the United Auto Workers union lately, you needn't be. It looks like they will be taken care of just fine. As for other workers in the auto industry, they may not be so lucky. Take a look at the latest from the Wall Street Journal.

It's hard to keep up, but this week the federal Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation took over the pension liabilities of Delphi, the auto-parts spinoff of GM that has been working its way through Chapter 11 since 2005. As with the previous taxpayer rescues, this one includes a special favor for the United Auto Workers.

Under the agreement, the PBGC will assume some $6.2 billion in pension liabilities from Delphi, including both hourly and salaried employees ... As Delphi's former parent, GM had agreed to take responsibility for billions of dollars of Delphi's pension obligations to its hourly employees.

It will be months before Delphi employees know what percentage of their expected pension they'll receive, but not all pensioners are created equal in this arrangement. UAW employees will have their pensions made whole by GM, which insists it is merely fulfilling its end of a deal made with the UAW in 1999 (when it spun off Delphi) to cover any future pension shortfall ... Less fortunate are smaller unions and Delphi's salaried employees, whose pensions may see drastic reductions and who already lost their health care and life insurance plans on April 1.

There are two groups that Obama and the Democrats are sure to protect as their big-government agenda progresses: Unions and trial lawyers. You didn't happen to see any medical malpractice reform in the government health plans, did you?

OK pay attention to this one. Here's a little taste of what it is like to live in a country with entirely too much government. In this case, let's focus on Hugo Chavez's Venezuela, where he has managed to nationalize nearly every major industry.

For the next three months, GM is stopping production in Venezuela. Why? Because the Venezuelan government won't give them enough dollars to import parts. Yep the government won't give them enough money to continue production. So they will just shut down. Where does Hugo Chavez get the power to do this? Simple, he had the government implement currency controls. Back in 2003, Chavez started regulating the access that businesses and people had to dollars. Now, if a Venezuelan wants to import goods or take a vacation, they must apply to the government currency agency for dollars.

So what started happening? Businesses and citizens started transferring money out of Venezuela to the tune of $72.7 billion since 2003. Clearly this had an effect on the economy ñ inflation, less private investment.

So all of this money and investment has left the country. Then what happens? An economic crisis. Oil prices drop, and oil represents 93% of Venezuela's exports. So now, the government has less money for imports. It has to tighten currency controls and ration its dollar supplies. The government starts prioritizing where dollars get spent. Food and medicine take priority while "luxury goods" like liquor, cosmetics and designer clothing are limited or completely shut out. And when it comes to those evil private businesses, they are rationed too. Hence, the closing of the GM plant ñ because the government doesn't view money for GM to import parts and continue production as a high priority.

So what happens now? Well when companies can't get government dollars they turn to dollar-denominated government bonds, which sell at three times the official exchange rate. Now more money is entering the system and .. tada the inflation rate continues to climb. Venezuelans suddenly have less purchasing power. What happens when you have less power as a consumer? Economic growth comes to a halt, and the cycle continues.

You want the Reader's Digest version of all of this? Hugo Chavez gets too involved with his dreams of regulating the free market and seizing private industry. In short order the market is on its way to hell on a sled. Hugo tries even more intervention. The sled speeds up.

Sound like anyone you know?

All of the sudden, Congressional Democrats are realizing the implications of this government takeover of GM. Why? Because they are starting to hear from constituents who aren't too happy about the fact that the government is deciding which dealerships will be put out of businesses. So now that these politicians have to worry about votes, they express "growing concern" to Obama about the closure of GM and Chrysler dealerships. Here, for your pleasure, is a letter from House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer and Reps. Chris Van Hollen and Daniel Maffei.

Dear President Obama:

We are writing to express our concerns about General Motors' and Chrysler's decision to close profitable automobile dealerships across the country, and urge you to ask GM and Chrysler to delay final action on proposed closures pending further review of the decision to consolidate dealerships and the process by which Chrysler and GM selected the dealerships to close.

Closing these dealerships will put over 100,000 jobs at risk at a time when our country is shedding jobs at an alarming rate. We also question the criteria being used to determine which dealerships should be closed and the fundamental fairness involved in this effort. It is our view that the market rather than leaving it up to the manufacturers whose poor leadership contributed to their demise. Furthermore, we believe car dealers will be key players in any effort to revive the American auto industry.

We believe the dealerships are one of the auto industry's key sources of strength and the manufacturers should continue to honor their agreements and contracts. The dealerships, and their more than 1 million employees, form personal relationships with customers that often contribute to brand loyalty and will be key to General Motors' and Chrysler's recovery following this economic downturn. While we understand the desire to reduce the number of unprofitable dealerships, no one has yet sufficiently explained the need to close profitable dealerships.

We recognize that efforts by your Auto Task Force prevented the total liquidation of General Motors and Chrysler, as well as their dealership networks. We commend your efforts to help these businesses survive these challenging economic times.

However, we are concerned that manufacturers are closing profitable dealerships to circumvent current contracts which could require expensive buy-outs under normal conditions. We are also concerned about allegations that dealers that have previously stood up for their rights against the manufacturers are being targeted by these closures. We believe that the forced closures of profitable dealerships needs to be scrutinized by the Task Force to prevent additional future financial loses to General Motors and Chrysler and job loses across the United States

We may consider legislative proposals to ensure that dealers and their employees are treated fairly, and we look forward to your timely response.

Look, folks. This is just the beginning. Obama is promoting a fascist economic system in the country. OK .. I know you're government educated and you don't really understand economic fascism. Here's your primer:

• An economic system where both industry and business is owned and controlled by the government ..... Socialism.
• An economic system where industry and business is privately owned, but controlled by the government ..... Fascism.
• An economic system where industry and business is privately owned an privately controlled. .... Free enterprise.

See if this is taught in your local government school.

By the time this nuze is posted, GM will have filed for bankruptcy protection. Sadly, there are more Americans that can explain the intimate details of the American Idol finalists, but they cannot explain why GM is going bankrupt or what effect this will have on our economy and the future of American capitalism.

This arranged bankruptcy filing essentially hands GM over to the government. When all is said and done, the government will own 72.5% of General Motors. The United Auto Workers union will own another 17.5% of General Motors. Major bondholders will essentially own 10% of the company. GM stock will probably not be traded for at least six to 18 months. If you are a current GM stockholder, say goodbye to your shares. The taxpayers will make back the $40 billion loaned to GM if shares of the new GM increase dramatically in value. This is change you can believe in.

Sometime this morning, around 11:30 EST, we will be addressed by GM's CEO Barack Obama. The Looter-In-Chief. He will explain why GM's bankruptcy and government ownership will be the best route for this nation. He will do it in a way so that the government educated will understand just enough to nod their heads in agreement and then go back to reading their People magazines. They won't question the Constitutionality of it all. They won't question the free market implications. All they need to know is that their right to watch a big screen TV hasn't been "taken" away from them.

By the way, if we had Mitt Romney in charge right now, GM and Chrysler would have been pushed into bankruptcy months ago. But either way, he says that now the government should immediately turn around and distribute its 72.5% stake to the taxpayers and the UAW should do the same for its members.

Are we encouraging companies to turn to the government? GM is going to save more than $12 billion in tax breaks .... If it ever becomes a viable company again. But these new tax rules don't apply to companies that don't turn to the government for help but are taken over by other private companies. Chrysler, for example, could lose the value of its tax write-offs if it merges with Fiat.

The AP explains:

U.S. taxpayers are about to become majority shareholders in GM, acquiring more than 70 percent of the company in exchange for billions of dollars in aid. Under ordinary circumstances, an ownership change like that would trigger a big tax hit for a money-losing corporation like GM, severely limiting its ability to use current losses to lower future tax bills.

But these are far from ordinary times. The Treasury Department has, in effect, suspended long-standing tax rules for companies that receive bailout money, providing benefits not available to firms that don't receive government help. New Treasury rules could provide GM billions in tax breaks once it becomes profitable and starts paying taxes again, which could be years away.

The value of those savings, however, would be dramatically reduced if GM is taken over by another company. Decades ago, Congress severely restricted the ability of money-losing companies to cash in on the tax breaks if they are taken over by other companies.

The goal was to discourage corporate takeovers for the principle purpose of avoiding taxes, Willens said.

The government, however, doesn't want to penalize firms for taking part in the taxpayer-financed bailout, so the Treasury Department has issued several notices in recent months creating exceptions for firms that receive bailout money. Under the new rules, corporations can keep their tax breaks if the government becomes a majority owner.

OK ... let's put this in language that even the purposely dumbed-down government educated myrmidons in this country can understand. If you are running a substantial private business and if you decide that it is your responsibility to weather this economic storm and keep your business viable without using taxpayer's money and submitting to more authoritarian government control, you will then have to pay your taxes just like everyone else. Wait ... NOT like everyone else. That would be because if you decide that you can't make it on your own, and government intervention with taxpayer's money would be helpful, you will be rewarded with corporate tax breaks. Got it on your own, no help. Play footsie with government control, financial benefits await. Not the way to run a free enterprise economy.

How do you like the idea of the Imperial Federal Government of the United States owning ALL of General Motors? Well, it could happen! Yeah, I know ... that's pure socialism. But look who's in the White House! A typical Marxist grad student is running the show. Don't act surprised.

According to Reuters:

General Motors' plan for a bankruptcy filing involves a quick sale of the company's healthy assets to a new company initially owned by the U.S. government, a source familiar with the situation said on Tuesday.

The new company is expected to honor the claims of secured lenders, possibly in full, according to the source.

The remaining assets of GM would stay in bankruptcy protection to satisfy other outstanding claims.

The government's plans include giving stakes in the new company to GM's union and bondholders, although the ownership structure of the company is still being negotiated, said the source who is familiar with the company's plans.

In addition, the government would extend a credit line to the new company and forgive the bulk of the $15.4 billion in emergency loans that the U.S. has already provided to GM, the source said.

But when it comes to the unions, UAW president Ron Gettelfinger says that he plans to sell the union's stake in Chrysler and GM in order to raise cash to cover retiree healthcare costs.

I'm looking for the part where the government is required to privatize. If you see it, let me know ... or is General Motors, along with Chrysler, going to be a ward of the state.

By the way ... Yesterday PrezBO announced his plans for a 39-mile-per-gallon corporate fuel economy average by 2016. Not going to happen. Any American automaker who tries to meet this goal is going to have to sell so many tiny and unsafe high-mileage cars that it will be virtually impossible for them to be profitable without adding thousands to the price of the models that people actually want to buy. This is what you get in a government-run economy. Products that people don't want to buy, but that please the snot out of special interest groups like the Sierra Club.

Experts say that Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing is all but inevitable for General Motors. If it wanted to avoid bankruptcy, GM would have to persuade bondholders to swap $27 billion in debt for 10% of its risky stock. That's not all .. you also have the UAW to deal with, and you have to close factories and dealerships. Oh and all of this has to be done by a June 1 deadline.

Bottom line is that it doesn't seem like it is going to happen.

Experts say that GM is currently lining up majority stakeholders to make a court-supervised reorganization go more quickly. But some say that the threat of bankruptcy is just a ploy to con any reluctant bondholders into the equity swap deal. The government requires that 90% of the thousands of bondholders agree to this stock swap. Why would they, considering that the government and the UAW would get far more stock in exchange for debts owed by GM? Consider what the White House tried to pull last week with Chrysler .........

Barack Obama's auto task force has a difficult choice to make ... will it bend to union demands and require GM to keep more jobs in the US or will it allow GM to expand its operations in countries with cheaper labor?

After pouring billions of OUR CHILDREN'S DOLLARS into GM, the fact of the matter is that it can't survive while it is beholden to the United Auto Workers. This means moving more manufacturing (and therefore jobs) overseas. Needless to say, the unions are less than happy. They feel as they have a right to these jobs! How dare GM try and make money by paying people to do the same job for less money!

The current outline for GM would roughly double the number of cars built in Mexico, China and South Korea. This makes absolute sense. In the United States, GM pays UAW workers about $54 an hour with benefits. However in South Korea, GM would pay its workers less than half of that at $22 an hour. In Mexico, workers could earn about $10 an hour and in China that figure could be as low as $3 an hour.

A UAW official says, "My hope is that the government is like the UAW: protectors of the people." I'm sorry but GM is not in the business of protecting the people. It is in the business of making cars. As for the UAW .. it isn't in the business of protecting people either .. unless they're UAW union members.

When I'm thinking about these autoworkers one image sticks in my mind. When is the last time you saw an autoworker wearing a windbreaker or hat with just a Ford, Chevy or Chrysler logo on it? I'm sure they're out there .. but I haven't seen one. Instead they're always wearing their clothing emblazoned with the UAW logo .. UAW Local this, that and the other thing. Who are they working for? Ask them and they'll point to their union logo. Seems a lot of them forgot that the union doesn't sign their paychecks.

So what is it going to be, Obama? Are you going to let GM survive by allowing it to expand its overseas production with less costs, or are you going to bow to the labor unions and force GM to make cars in the United States?

You are going to love this. We've known for a while now that Barack Obama has had a vision for the auto companies long before he'd be able to use this economic crisis as an excuse to execute his plan. And that vision is to require the auto industry to build cars that would please the environmentalists, if not the consumers.

The White House has released a report of General Motors that says the company's restructuring plan will not lead to a stronger company. And why is this? Because GM's proposal relies heavily on advanced, fuel-efficient cars, which are not commercially viable. Cars like the Chevy Volt, which is too expensive to be commercially successful.

So Obama's Auto Task Force comes out and says that GM's restructuring plan isn't viable because they are doing what President Obama wants them to do: build a "green" auto industry. According to this task force, the plan is based on economic assumptions are leave little room for error.

And even if GM succeeds in making and selling "green" cars ... the task force says that "it will not lead to a viable company because it will not be able to make enough money to weather future economic slowdowns ... Even if the projected plan is achieved, the cash flow forecast is quite modest, leaving the company little margin for error in what will be a very difficult turnaround."

Suspiciously missing from the task force's report is the crushing costs of GM's labor force. Keep in mind that GM was required, under the original terms of the bailout, to modify labor contracts. And the task force acknowledges that GM has failed to successfully renegotiate these contracts, but does not cite it as a reason as to why GM's plan is not viable.

Either way, there is one simple way to renegotiate these union contracts. Bankruptcy. Obama is using the term "structured bankruptcy." What would you like to wager that any Obama-approved "structured bankruptcy" contains some pretty strong protections for the unions. Democrats aren't quite ready to eat their own.

Yesterday we got Obama's official plan for the auto industry. Step #1: Fire the CEO of General Motors. Step #2: Push Chrysler toward a merger with an Italian car company. Step #3: Threaten bankruptcy for both companies.

Wall Street didn't seem to like the administration's response. The Dow responded remarkably ... sinking nearly 4%. I guess I would have lost confidence too, if I realized that the government could oust any CEO at will if the president thinks it is the right thing to do. In fact, some experts are saying that this is the most significant presidential intervention in the private sector since 1952 and Harry Truman with the steel industry.

So it is clearly Obama's goal to re-make the auto industry the way he wants it to be, not based on profitability or the demand of the market place. He says, "I am absolutely committed to working with Congress and the auto companies to meet one goal: The United States of America will lead the world in building the next generation of clean cars ... our auto industry is not moving in the right direction fast enough to succeed." In other words .. Obama gets to decide the right direction. Instead of making cars that the consumers want, Obama will decree that the automakers will make cars that HE wants. If they don't move in that direction fast enough he'll just fire one team and hire another.

Well it turns out that this is a direction that Barack Obama has envisioned for a while .. and like his chief of staff says, "never let a good crisis go to waste." In Obama's 2006 autobiography, The Audacity Of Hope, here's what he had to say about his vision for the auto industry:

The bottom line is that fuel-efficient cars and alternative fuels like E85, a fuel formulated with 85 percent ethanol, represent the future of the auto industry. It is a future American car companies can attain if we start making some tough choices now. For years U.S. automakers and the UAW have resisted higher fuel-efficiency standards because retooling costs money, and Detroit is already struggling under huge retiree health-care costs and stiff competition. So during my first year in the Senate I proposed legislation I called "Health Care for Hybrids." The bill makes a deal with U.S. automakers: In exchange for federal financial assistance in meeting the health-care costs of retired autoworkers, the Big Three would reinvest these savings into developing more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Aggressively investing in alternative fuel sources can also lead to the creation of thousands of new jobs. Ten or twenty years down the road, that old Maytag plant in Galesburg could reopen its doors as a cellulosic ethanol refinery. Down the street, scientists might be busy in a research lab working on a new hydrogen cell. And across the way, a new auto company could be busy churning out hybrid cars. The new jobs created could be filled by American workers trained with new skills and a world-class education, from elementary school to college.

It seems as though Obama is doing a real good job of selling a crisis as a means to institute his vision of the automotive industry. Are you comfortable with this? In fact .. are you comfortable with this level of government enterprise in the marketplace?

I'm think that there's a nagging thought with many of you that this has gone entirely too far .. and that our markets might have self-corrected if the government had let this crisis run its course. And .. if you've been paying attention you should know that this crisis wouldn't have happened .. and it certainly would have been less severe if Barney Frank hadn't stood in the way of efforts of people like George Bush and John McCain to intervene in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac years ago.

This is something, isn't it? Obama replaces the GM boss, but Barney Frank - the one individual who carries more of the responsibility for this mess than any other single living human being -- seems to be untouchable.

General Motors is asking for billions more in bailout money ... and the news yesterday was that talks with auto worker's unions about contract concessions have failed. Which surprises you more?

(A) The fact that GM is back at the taxpayer teat

(B) The fact that the United Auto Workers don't want to be a part of the solution?

Get back to me when you figure that one out, would you?

We were told that we had to bailout the auto companies (aka. auto workers union) so that we could save an industry that provides a lot of jobs to American workers. In fact, that auto companies went as far as to say that our country would be sent into a depression if we didn't save their companies.

So the taxpayers gave them a bailout. And guess what? They are coming back for more. Billions more. And guess where that money is going?

GM investments in Brazil.

Yep, you read that correctly. An article from the Latin American Herald Tribune reports that GM is going to invest $1 billion in Brazil "to avoid the kind of problems the U.S. automaker is facing in its home market." And according to the president of GM in Brazil, this funding will be coming from the bailout money from the US taxpayers.

I wonder what kind of problems they're talking about avoiding? Probably union problems .. but do the GM officials have the cajones to say that?

Again .. the definition of Socialism? That's when the government not only controls but OWNS the means of production. Today we read that the government is thinking about taking part ownership in the Big Three automakers in return for bailout cash. When would these government shares in these companies ever be returned to the private sector? My guess is that would not happen so long as Barack Obama is in office. Government ownership of major industries is really his cup of tea.

The Democrats and unions hate it that George Bush is so involved in the discussions over a Big Three bailout plan. After all, haven't the people said they want Barack Obama to be their president? What is Bush doing hanging around for so long? Now what really ticks off the Democrat-union crowd is that the Bush Administration is insisting that the bailout money only go to automakers who show that they have a restructuring plan that would actually work. In other words, if the automaker is doomed .. why throw good taxpayer money at them? What's happening here is that the president is looking for a plan to actually make Ford, Chrysler and GM viable industries again, while the Democrats are mainly interesting in keeping the United Auto Workers strong. Different goals, different strategies. The UAW needs to go away ... they've done their damage, they should now just sit back and let the grownups try to fix things.

By who?  That would be General Motors.  GM comes to Washington with absolutely no plan to weather the economic storm other than to grovel for taxpayer money.  Do you get that?  No plan!  Nada!  It's either hand over taxpayer funds or we're going to bail .. and if we bail we're taking the rest of the country with us. 

What arrogance!

The Big Three returned to Washington in their hybrid cars.  They presented their plans in hopes that this will be enough to get them a government bailout.  But guess what?  There doesn't seem to be any really drastic changes.  Their business models haven't really changed.  Their adhesion contracts with the unions are still in place.  There aren't any secure plans to pay back the taxpayers other than creating a government oversight board.  Oh yeah ... that makes me feel so good; a government oversight board.  I feel better already.

There is some talk about symbolic cuts.  The CEO of GM and the CEO of Ford say that they will work for $1 a year if it means their companies get a taxpayer bailout.  That's great.  The problem isn't solved by paying CEOs a buck a year.  The problem is solved by bring in some management talent that will make extremely difficult decisions and them paying them a gazillion dollars if they can pull their companies out of the fire without raping the taxpayers.    

There is already a provision under our laws to take care of this mess.  It's called Bankruptcy.  Chapter 11 bankruptcy, to be more exact.  Reorganization.  The magic of bankruptcy is that all outstanding contracts that are making it difficult for these automakers to compete and survive would or could be cancelled --- and that includes the contracts with the United Auto Workers.  Nancy Pelosi is saying that bankruptcy is not an option.  Why not?  For the very reason I just set forth.  Bankruptcy would not work well for the unions.

The capitalist system - free enterprise - has lifted more people out of poverty than any other economic system ever devised by man.  Freedom works.  And freedom means the freedom to fail if you don't live up to consumer expectations or if you allowed yourself to be drug into unprofitability by asinine union agreements and products the consumers just don't want.

My guess is that the only way these auto companies survive is if they have to fight their way through this without taxpayer help.  A bailout is the easy way out for them.  What a stupid idea it is to throw tens of billions of dollars at these companies only to have them declare bankruptcy down the road. 

There's another idea floating around out there.  Let's just take Ford, GM and Chrysler and combine them into one large auto company. Oh yeah .. that ought to work.  Nothing like good old-fashioned competition to spruce up the marketplace. 

And speaking of competition ... there is no way the Big Three can survive under their current agreement with the unions.  These unions cannot be allowed to bring these automakers down.  Get rid of them.

Alright so this auto bailout bill is in a holding pattern. But just remember that it doesn't mean it is dead. So here are some facts that should keep you seething ...

The Big Three currently pay 85% of union benefits to UAW members ... who aren't even working. Yep. Remember how I told you about the Job Banks for union workers? If a union worker is employed at a plant that closes, the auto makers still pay 85% of their union benefits. Rick Wagoner, CEO of General Motors, says that his company must reduce operating costs ... but his company must continue paying for union employee benefits for employees NOT to work. Does this sound like a smart business plan for you? As a business owner, this asinine agreement to pay for the benefits of people who aren't currently working should be the first to go.

I've talked about this idea of a "right" to a job where you live. It seems that the unions have already done their part to make that a reality. Let's say that you work at a plant in Detroit and it closes. Meanwhile, a new plant is opening in Missouri. You don't have to move to Missouri to keep your job. But guess what, you also won't be fired! You can opt to go on Job Banks where you can sit on your butt in Detroit, do crossword puzzles for eight hours a day, and collect 95% of pay for the rest of your life.

That business model is the one asking for your tax dollars. And you are telling me that these union contracts, these Job Banks, have nothing to do with the Big Three's current situation?

Meanwhile, the legislative director of the UAW says that the problems with the auto industry are because of a series of bad trade and healthcare policies, along with the current credit crisis.

At least someone at GM learned a lesson ... GM will be returning two of its leased corporate jets.

Short and sweet: Send these automakers into bankruptcy if for no other reason than to give them the means to bust the unions.

A listener Rose from Orlando says that she logged on to AOL yesterday and was greeted by an ad from GM asking people to support the auto bailout. Yep. GM has launched a campaign ad saying that our national security is at risk if we don't bail them out. Rose brings up a good point: They could be using their time and money bailing themselves out. Apparently this ad links you to a website gmfactsandfiction.com where you can see about a 3 minute video on why the Big 3 need to be bailed out. Also note that the video was put on YouTube by GM Blogs, which happens to be General Motors' home for corporate blogs.

We'll keep a sharp lookout today as the Senate votes on the automaker's bailout to see who is next to the taxpayer trough. My guess? Airlines.