RE: Congressman, "it not your money"

RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

housesub4you -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 4:31:40 AM)
Why is it so hard for people to understand there is a life span to an industry or company? The auto makers starting losing ground the second our steel industry left this country. When they to choose fight higher standards for MPG, or emissions, or safety, or (insert cause here), while other auto makers are doing just that. maybe....just maybe.. if they did not spend the roughly 7 billion per year on lobbying in DC, they would have more cash on hand. One of the biggest problems they face is the same problem this country is facing, the people in charge are to set in their ways to make any real change. I don't think they should get the money, nor do I think we should have bailed out WS, it's the same "boy who cried wolf" story. Does anyone remember Bush on TV not to long ago saying how this country will fail if we don't loan out the 700 Billion, well now that tune has changed, But we are suppose to believe we can trust the big three? I wonder how long after we bail the big three out (yes I believe we will) the top exec's will leave with a ton of cash, just like WS is starting to do.

MmeGigs -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 4:48:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Jesus Christ, O59 chill out. Let 'em collapse. Let the people who are being asked to save them understand that it was the UNIONS that killed the American auto industry as it exists, and that bailing out a bunch of assholes who feel that a $73.00 an hour employee package is a birthright, ain't my problem. The $73/hr figure is EXTREMELY misleading. Average autoworker pay is $25-$30/hr. Chrysler came up with the $73 figure to go into a bargaining session. By that formula, I cost more than $51/hr - I assure you that I don't make anywhere even close to $51/hr. More than $20/hr of the $73/hr for health care - most of that for post-retirement health care costs. I don't know how some of you folks can keep tossing figures out there without first going out there and seeing what it is they're actually talking about.

thishereboi -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 4:53:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Jesus Christ, O59 chill out. Let 'em collapse. Let the people who are being asked to save them understand that it was the UNIONS that killed the American auto industry as it exists, and that bailing out a bunch of assholes who feel that a $73.00 an hour employee package is a birthright, ain't my problem. That's bullshit of the worst sort. If the UAW is the problem why has so much production moved to Canada? If you didn't know the UAW is the auto worker union in Canada too. Does the Canadian UAW demand retiree benefits (including health care) that add $3,500 to the price of every car? C'mon, Ken, admit it. The unions did some very good things, a long time ago, but they missed the bedtime story about killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. I would have to agree with you on this one. They want to bail out the big 3, ok lose the union and I would consider talking about it. Keep the union and they are on their own.

DomKen -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 6:36:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Jesus Christ, O59 chill out. Let 'em collapse. Let the people who are being asked to save them understand that it was the UNIONS that killed the American auto industry as it exists, and that bailing out a bunch of assholes who feel that a $73.00 an hour employee package is a birthright, ain't my problem. That's bullshit of the worst sort. If the UAW is the problem why has so much production moved to Canada? If you didn't know the UAW is the auto worker union in Canada too. Does the Canadian UAW demand retiree benefits (including health care) that add $3,500 to the price of every car? C'mon, Ken, admit it. The unions did some very good things, a long time ago, but they missed the bedtime story about killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. The only major difference in pay and benefits between US and Canadian UAW contracts is that the canadian ones don't have any direct health insurance benefits. So your argument isn't actually against the union but for a single payer health system in the US which is something I can support as well but your rhetoric is less than clear.

DarkSteven -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 7:51:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 We`re talking about the loss of over a million jobs.That would kill the economy as we know it and put us into a long term depression. Steel,plastic,rubber,glass,micro-chips,parts,paint etc,,..all the businesses that supply Detroit will also go down along with GM/Ford/Chrysler Somehow losing a million plus jobs makes this subject a little more important than spit bucket to take turns on. I`m very surprised that folks don`t see the dire results of letting the auto industry fold. This isn`t a tv show or sports event.This is the possible destruction of the middle class and ruination of the economy we all take for granted. Why are we even flirting with this level of disaster? This is as serious as a heart attack.I wish more folks would treat it that way. Nope. We have a huge auto producing capacity (machines and people) and a demand for cars. Right now, it's owned by the Big Three. If they go BK, then another automaker will come in and buy their capacity. They'll rehire some but not all of the workers. They'll buy from the same suppliers. The fearmongering that says that all those employees and suppliers will fall off the face of the earth, is ridiculous. Think of it this way - for decades, American companies have offshored to foreign companies. This way, the management will get offshored to Japanese companies and the workforce will stay US.

UncleNasty -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 7:52:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 We literally can`t let them fail. This could be the straw that breaks the camel`s back. Too big to fail? That is a great spin tool used for decades to get funding and breaks they should never have received. And they're pulling it out again. As for the camel his back is already broken. Things are continuing to get worse. One floor after another of the house of cards is falling. This is to be expected when there is no solid, sound foundation. An example of "another floor" collapsing was in Tuesdays Wall Street Journal. In response to law suits filed by several States Attorney General regarding massive numbers of predatory and illegal loans Bank of America agreed to an $8.4 billion loan modification deal. The problem is that they no longer are the investors in the pools of mortgages. The write downs and losses they are attempting to pass on the the investors. Now the investors, never having been included in the loop or negotiations, are saying "Whoa, you can't do that. If you want to rewrite or modify these loans you need to buy them back first." Problem is that BoA doesn't have the buckage to do this. This scenario is going to play out in other and similar massive loan mod deals and is just beginning. The whole thing is laughable. Basically they built a complicated investment scam on violations of law and ethics. Did they really think it would last? Uncle Nasty

pahunkboy -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 8:43:11 AM)
so far today gold is up, silver down. many houses were never worth 400k. think about it. take the average salary per year, multiply that by number of years -- or use 27%-31% of actual income the amount of payment- 30 year fixed. 6-8 %. that is closer the the real value. so an areas local wage is proportional.

thornhappy -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 4:13:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Jesus Christ, O59 chill out. Let 'em collapse. Let the people who are being asked to save them understand that it was the UNIONS that killed the American auto industry as it exists, and that bailing out a bunch of assholes who feel that a $73.00 an hour employee package is a birthright, ain't my problem. When I worked in Silicon Valley, I used to hear folks say that each employee cost about 3 times their salary, when you added overhead, insurance, etc. GM was running a bit over 2 times in 2005. GM has much higher health costs vs Japanese companies because Japan has a national health service. thornhappy thornhappy

toledotpeslave -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 5:40:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Jesus Christ, O59 chill out. Let 'em collapse. Let the people who are being asked to save them understand that it was the UNIONS that killed the American auto industry as it exists, and that bailing out a bunch of assholes who feel that a $73.00 an hour employee package is a birthright, ain't my problem. The $73/hr figure is EXTREMELY misleading. Average autoworker pay is $25-$30/hr. Chrysler came up with the $73 figure to go into a bargaining session. By that formula, I cost more than $51/hr - I assure you that I don't make anywhere even close to $51/hr. More than $20/hr of the $73/hr for health care - most of that for post-retirement health care costs. I don't know how some of you folks can keep tossing figures out there without first going out there and seeing what it is they're actually talking about. They do cost the company $73 an hour. What they "make" doesn't matter. The UAW makes the business model of the Big 2.8 obsolete. Chapter 11 is the way to go, and in the process some unneeded dealers and extra production capacity will have to be trimmed off.

DedicatedDom40 -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 5:56:43 PM)
This isnt a bailout. Its a retroactive "gluttony tax", and the people who just had to have SUV's will be paying dearly.

TheHeretic -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 6:59:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs The $73/hr figure is EXTREMELY misleading. Apply the same formula Chrysler (or whoever) used to come up with that "misleading" number to other blue-collar type jobs. Not so misleading now, is it? Both management and the unions have been ignorant assholes for years. Let it fall.

rulemylife -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 7:56:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs The $73/hr figure is EXTREMELY misleading. Apply the same formula Chrysler (or whoever) used to come up with that "misleading" number to other blue-collar type jobs. Not so misleading now, is it? Since you've decided to go down that road I'm sure you're prepared to back it up with some examples.

TheHeretic -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 8:15:40 PM)
Read this very thread, RML. I've seen a couple examples right here.

rulemylife -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 8:22:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Read this very thread, RML. I've seen a couple examples right here. I don't post on threads I haven't read entirely. So, again, give some specific examples of what you just claimed to be true. If, in fact, it is a fact then you can at least take the time to share.

thornhappy -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 8:25:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Does the Canadian UAW demand retiree benefits (including health care) that add $3,500 to the price of every car? C'mon, Ken, admit it. The unions did some very good things, a long time ago, but they missed the bedtime story about killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. Canada has one of those evil things called a national health system. thornhappy

TheHeretic -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/20/2008 9:45:21 PM)
Try the post I was quoting from, RML... Where the person I was replying to applied the same sort of math to herself and came up with roughly 2/3 of what a GM rivethead costs.

MmeGigs -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/21/2008 1:25:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Apply the same formula Chrysler (or whoever) used to come up with that "misleading" number to other blue-collar type jobs. Not so misleading now, is it? Yep, I still think it is for a number of reasons. I think the number is inflated, but my biggest issue with it is that the folks who are using the figure aren't putting it in context. The way I've seen it used almost invariably implies that this is actual hourly wages and compensation for auto workers, which is not even remotely the case. quote: Let it fall. I couldn't agree with you more on this. The Big 3 and the UAW have become an anachronism. The Big 3 have a business model that is built on world domination - that between them they have the lion's share of the automotive market, and thus can call the shots. A lot of us loved our big, powerful American-made rides, but an increasing number of us were loving our Toyotas and Hondas and Volkswagens. The UAW is built on the idea that you get a job, stay with it til you retire, and the company takes care of you for life, and the whole "mobile workforce" thing seems to have gone right by them, which is kind of ironic in a way. They didn't seem to notice that every other union started making incremental concessions 20 years ago or more, accepting smaller increases, picking up more of health care and retirement cost, altering their retiree health plans to include the use of Medicare.

TheHeretic -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/21/2008 9:27:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MmeGigs The way I've seen it used almost invariably implies that this is actual hourly wages and compensation for auto workers, which is not even remotely the case. The stupid are going to read any number the way they will, Gigs. It is still well above the comparable number for every other similar job that could be done by a properly trained monkey.

bamabbwsub -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/21/2008 10:11:11 PM)
I found this article by Mitt Romney, and I have to agree with him: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=1&hp Here are some of his key points: "Without that bailout, Detroit will need to drastically restructure itself. With it, the automakers will stay the course — the suicidal course of declining market shares, insurmountable labor and retiree burdens, technology atrophy, product inferiority and never-ending job losses. Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check. First, their huge disadvantage in costs relative to foreign brands must be eliminated. Second, management as is must go. The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk. In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check."

Termyn8or -> RE: Congressman, "it not your money" (11/21/2008 11:05:33 PM)
How about if employers got out of the retirement business and just gave the employees all their money now ? T

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125