I don't like the tone of that OpEd, btw, I'm not recommending it. I personally find it odious be referring to healthcare as luxurious and decadent. But the article does lay out the basic economics of the situation.
Judah On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Judah McAuley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That is what GM told Congress in 2005. > > http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/06/16/gms_healthcare_dilemma/ > > The economics comes in because they aren't just paying for current > employees. They are also paying healthcare costs for a number of > retired employees as terms of previous employment contracts. > > Judah > > On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Jochem van Dieten > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> ** Private ** wrote: >>> Or we could be the government of good and make sure that everyone has >>> health care and a stable retirement system in place so that GM doesn't >>> have to add $1500 onto every car because of idiotic health care policy >>> in our country. >> >> So let me get this straight. GM, a 266 thousand employee company, produced >> 9.37 million cars in 2007. That is about 35 cars per employee. You are >> saying that GM is paying $52,500 per employee per year for pension and >> health care? >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors >> >> Jochem >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:274579 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
