2. 考研
  3. In theory, a government bailout should provide a short-term" infusion of cash to give a struggling company the chance to right i

In theory, a government bailout should provide a short-term" infusion of cash to give a struggling company the chance to right i

admin2015-06-24  29
问题     In theory, a government bailout should provide a short-term" infusion of cash to give a struggling company the chance to right itself. But in its aggressive dealings with U.S. automakers, most recently General Motors, the Obama administration is coming dangerously close to engaging in financial engineering that ignores basic principles of fairness and economic realities toachieve political goals.
    It is now clear that there is no real difference between the government and GM. For all intents and purposes, the government, which is set to assume a 50 percent equity stake in the company, is GM, and it has been calling the shots in negotiations with creditors. While the Obama administration has been playing hardball with bondholders, it has been more than happy to play nice with the United Auto Workers (UAW). How else to explain why a retiree health-care fund controlled by the UAW is going to get a 39 percent equity stake in GM for its remaining $10 billion in claims while bondholders are being pressured to take a 10 percent stake for their $27 billion? It’s highly unlikely that the auto industry professionals at GM would have reached such a deal if the government had not been watching them—or providing the money needed to keep the factory doors open.
    GM is widely expected to file for bankruptcy before the end of this month. If this were a typical bankruptcy, the company would be allowed by law to tear up its UAW collective bargaining agreement and negotiate for drastically reduced wages and benefits. Surely, the government won’t let that happen. Still, the threat of a contract abolition probably played a role in the union’s agreement to cost-cutting measures last week. It’s never easy for unions to make concessions, but the sting of handing back money is being softened by the government’s desire to give the union a huge ownership stake in GM.
    The administration argues that it could not risk alienating the union for fear of triggering a strike that could permanently cripple GM. It also assumes that it had to agree to protect suppliers and fund warranties in order to preserve jobs and reassure potential buyers that their cars would be serviced. These are legitimate concerns. But it’s too bad that the Obama administration has not thought more deeply about how its bullying of bondholders could convince future investors that the last thing they want to do is put money into any company that the government has—or could—become involved in.
If it had not been watched by the government, GM would probably have
选项 A、imposed no pressure on bondholders to take the 10% equity stake.
B、cut the percentage of equity stake controlled by the UAW.
C、torn up its UAW collective bargaining agreement in an illegal way.
D、launched staff-downsizing and reduced workers’ wages and benefits.
答案B
解析 推理判断题。第二段讲到因为有政府的监管，上述协议才能达成。因此可以推断出，如果没有政府帮助，UAW很可能就得不到39%这么多的股权，故B项与之相符。A项imposed no pressure无法推理，原文只提出政府的介人使得债券持有人只获得了10%的股权，并未提及在政府坐视不理的假设下公司会向债券持有人施压：C项的illegal与第三段中“依照法律，通用公司可以撕毁和工人联合会的劳资协议”矛盾；D项downsizing并未提及。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/thFRFFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)