Termyn8or
Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
|
I think part of it is that we see the bad ones more than the good ones. But what mkes a Man worth millions a year ? Someone with higher insight and abilities, able to actually lead by merit, merit not based on the bank balance ? Or is it just the money ? Works both ways I think.
Let's take your example, Henry Ford. What you said is true. Instead of trying to screw the working Man he paid about as well as possible. This is what it takes to attract good people. In the early days, people who worked for Ford made a hell of alot more than most others. People wanted to work there, so badly in fact some of them died trying. It was a very tough job. There was less automation and I doubt there was air conditioning. But it was a near unprecented way for the common Man to utilize his strength and work ethic. Nobody generally paid that much. They had good lives and the company made plenty of money. So what was Henry Ford worth per year ? Where did all the investment capital come from ? His pocket ? I really don't know but whatever the source, he didn't misuse it.
His plan was the antithesis of outsourcing, in fact I would go so far as to call it insourcing. And the fact is it worked. What I wonder though, perhaps someone knows - it's well known that Ford and Hitler were penpals at least and had a great del of mutual respect. With Ford it was Model As, Model Ts and such, with Hitler it was the Wolksvagon. Which innovated first ? Or did they collaberate alot on these projects ?
Cars were already available but too expensive for most people. Each of them had the vision to put automobiles in the hands of the common people. So who knows which was the chicken and which was the egg here ? Without them you would still have to buy a chassis and then have a coach made and mounted to procure an automobile. Well until someone else came along and did it at least. No doubt Hitler came up with the capital by the nationalistic programs, but how did Ford get it ? Selling stock ?
But things changed. My Uncle worked for Ford forever, from probably the 1950s until his death in the 1990s. He started in the foundry and eventually became an executive. But he told me a few things. I make no pretense, he was no angel. There were groups of people working there who cheated the company, and from what I heard this was pretty widespead. Out of say five guys, one would go to work and punch the timeclock for the others. They took turns working, literally. He was also a financial genius, and well educated. He gave up a desk job at a finance company to work in that foundry, and it paid off for him. And he did a few things at that finance company as well, made alot of money. He was probably quite an asset to the Ford Motor company, despite the shenannigans in the beginning. There were no timecards towards the end.
But what about when there were time cards ? He and his buddies cherated that company and did a pretty good job at it I would say. First of all with the benefit package and the decent pay, each employee costs quite a bit. What happens when you have to pay five of them for the work of one ? You're up to the neck in bottom line.
Even this didn't really wreck the auto industry, it was entitlements. Really sweet retirement and medical plans. Make fifty grand a year sweeping the floor, and if you fall down and spend a half a million dollars at the hospital it's covered. This was supported by investments.
Personally what I would have done was to put all these benefits in the pervue of the union. Let them provide the retirement and other benefits, we'll take out any deductions you want, but YOU handle it. We build cars. If that had happened it would be the unions with the problems due to the crash, they would be the ones who needed a bailout. Of course the crash would've hurt sales, but not much else. I wouldn't stick my neck out like that. Most companies that don't have these problem might have IRAs, matching funds and all that, but once it's your's that's it. You work, I'll pay you. You don't work, I will not. If I build cars, I build cars. You got your money, see you tomorrow.
So what I'm saying is that this codependency should never have happened.
But if the CEOs had the backbone to stand up to the union, agree to pay handsmoely of course FOR WORK, and stayed out of the banking business things would be quite different.
But now it got even worse. There is no saving for retirement. For one it doesn't work too well in the face of "inflation", which is a misnomer anyway, inflation is more the deflation of the currency. You simply cannot collect enough interest in the bank to hedge against that, no matter what the bullshit official figures say.
So even if we take a good hard look at where all this money came from, as well as where it is going, there is no apparent solution. Not in this system. That's why I advocated allowing businesses to collapse rather than bailing them out. It would bring change. Instead they propped up the status quo.
Claivoyance isn't magic, it's just a higher form of insight. As such, due to what has happened, I think we are in for another round of strife. A few more crashes, more foreclosures on businesses as well as private properties, the same game different day. But the same question exists. The commoner lost alot of money in investments due to this horseshit, if something is lost, that means it was there and is no longer there. Where did it go ?
T^T
|
RE: 10 Ceos, have to cut 47,850 jobs!! - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread