Detroit, Wall Street problems are different

Our nation is in a state of economic uncertainty and our elected government has bailed out financial institutions and just recently President George W. Bush bailed out Chrysler, General Motors and Ford. Recently, Nelson Graves wrote a column (“It’s all about the bottom line,” Dec. 25) in which he was for the automakers bailout, yet could not understand why Republicans and 55 percent of Americans believe it is “OK to help Wall Street types but not the working class [the people working for the automakers]?”

For the past many months I have read in disgust very liberal columns written by Graves and would like to offer a conservative viewpoint.

When our elected representatives gave money to Wall Street and financial institutions, they did not just give money to CEOs to prevent the loss of their jobs, but instead to prevent the collapse of the banking system which would have been disastrous to everyone who has money in a bank or in stock. So our government did not just help “Wall Street types” but everyone because stocks have since risen and our economy seems to be recuperating.

I watched much of the debate on the automakers bailout and noticed that both Democrats and Republicans had good, convincing arguments. Democrats: The auto industry is a big part of the economy. Republicans: Taxpayers should not have to bail out mistakes made by CEOs. A bigger problem: We do not know where the bailout money for the financial institutions went, which has taught the government to think twice about another bailout package causing the Republicans hesitation.

As a Republican, I too believe it was the CEOs’ fault, but also the factory workers as well. America’s unionized factory workers demand much more money than those working for foreign carmakers, thus driving up the price and reducing the competition. For example there is a $3,385 difference between a 2009 Chevrolet Colorado and its counterpart, a 2009 Toyota Tacoma.

Luke Roadcap

Waynesboro