Comments for Republicans seek to break U.S. labor »
Posted By Radiofreeeuropa 1 year, 1 month ago in Political NewsAfter a decade of fictional rules that let the American banking industry become a bigger gamble than Vegas, that house of cards fell not only on us, but around the planet. And now we are stuck dealing with the ripples.
While creating exciting new ways to avoid and ignore regulation and lend money for kids to buy cap guns with no down payment, the leaders of that industry, which produces nothing, filled their pockets, their hands, their shoes and their briefcases with your money before calling for help. And help came.
the Big Three auto CEOs are not so much likeable representatives of their industry. They ride into Washington begging for help in private jets, they make salaries and bonuses that should embarrass them and do embarrass us. When asked if he would consider reducing his salary to $1 while getting federal help, Ford CEO Alan Mulally said “I think I’m OK where I am.” Mr. Mulally’s compensation is $21.7 million. Not a very lovable beggar.
Yet 3-4 million American households rely on the auto industry for their income. The management can rot for all I care, they haven't "earned" a dime. But it's interesting that when Paulson's buddies want you to pay for their pedicures it's unquestionable. Give them whatever they want.
Read Full Story at irontontribune.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 203
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
-
80%
lfergie8121 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Good find RFE. I've been saying all along that the reason that Bush and the Republicans don't want to give the auto industry a loan is to break the unions. They want to reduce everyone to minimum wage and what people don't realize is that if the unions go, even those that don't work for a union will lose wages too. Only the fear of an organized union make the companies pay their employees well because with a large unemployed labor force, the companies will have the upper hand.
Reply-
iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user13 Replies
-
75%
xddy4u21 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ifergie812, You are so RIGHT ON. Even the CEOs crying for a bail out, are trying to get what they
Reply
couldn't get Bargaining, cutting Retires Benefits. Those scumbags never let up. Then you have those minimum wage SLAVES bashing Unions. If they knew what unions are all about, every job in this Country would be unionized. The jerks doesn't realize that the more union Dues you pay, the more you make an hour, because Union Dues are only 2.5 hours a month. If your Dues are 65.00 a month, that means you are making 25.00 an hour. Not bad pay. Wake up you Working Slaves, UNIONIZE.
-
-
SwampFox-82ndComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So if unions are the culprits (they are not), how does one explain this Mr. Romney?
Reply
http://www.aflcio.org/issues/jobseconomy/ceopay.cf...
The UAW cut the new hire payscale to 1/2 of what it was.
But bloated management salaries are staggering. And even as they came in their private jets (burning 20,000 dollars of fuel) to beg for a handout, the CEOs refused to accept responsibility for their industry ills and refused to take pay cuts themselves. After decades of collecting over 20 million dollar salaries plus untold perks and options while steering the companies into losing millions and hundreds of millions quarter after quarter I for one have no sympathy for them.
We can not however rely on foreign car companies entirely, the U.S. must have an industrial base or truly it will go the way of the dodo. U.S. companies all must abandon the idea that their management is worth preposterous sums. They aren't. The arguement has been if we don't pay the top talent whatever they desire, they will go to some other country.
Right...
European management is generally paid much lower, though of course still quite lucrative on the pay scale. this chart breaks down how the pay is allocated...as in Salary, Bonuses and LTIs. The number on the left is the market capitalization of the companies (in billions).
Japans top execs make about a third of their U.S. counterparts.
Workers (as well as execs) in Japan's companies like Toyota are given bonuses and stocks on top of their pay if the company does well.
Here in the US the CEO of Ford is paid 24 million dollars even though year after year he loses millions for the company.
Like the republican culture of corruption in DC, it's time for a change. These people have aptly demonstrated they are not worth the money they are paid, if competent at all. Every Bailout beggar that comes to DC for a handout should have their management fired as a matter of course.-
-
15%
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well carpenters are charging $50 an hour here in NJ. (Non union ones).
Reply
As Henry Ford understood it if the middle class has money they buy goods and the economy flourishes. All successful business models are a partnership between owners-managers-labor. If labor is treated fairly they tend to care about the quality of their work. Look at tvs manufactured in China, a friend who owns an electronics store told me only one in 3 doesn't have to be returned. That's pathetic.
How about the cost of shipping these things?
No there is nothing wrong with businesses treating their workers with dignity, nothing at all. Healthcare, pensions used to be the norm. People were loyal to their employers if their employers were loyal to them. it's a 2 way street. If the middle class has money, they don't hoard it or hide it to avoid taxes, they spend it. They make the wheels of the economy turn. The more prosperous the middle class, the better the economy.
Everyone wins. including owners and management.
As opposed to the failed ridiculous "trickle down" nonsense.
Where the very few profit tremendously and everyone else declines.-
0%
awongscreen1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Treating employees fairly is not part of capitalism Republican (or even Democrate) government want. Higher employee wages means lower profits. Capitalism do not need middle class. Unchallenged authority in making money is the ideal world. The rest of the people living in poverty should not be on the agenda.
Reply
-
-
91%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Endoscopy,
Reply
I agree. We should, "ignore the fact that the workers are getting an average $28 per hour, great medical benefits, and long term pay if laid off," and concentrate on the real issues of this problem. Thank you for agreeing and not getting sidetracked.-
-
-
25%
slate1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why does everything I post **** you off? I was just pointing out that the cost was even higher than what was said. Look many people in this country doesn't make 20 and hr much less 28, much less than enough to make 150+ a year, which many make. TImes 2-3 million, yeah now you're talking real money.
Reply
So you're saying that labor has only cost the Big 3 10%? Then where is the rest going? The corps aren't all billionaires are they?
Hmmmmmmm could it be that much of the 'profit' does go to paying labor? Retirement packages and that sort of thing?
God Bless em, I was in a union at one time and know how easy it was to think the company owed us everything, which seems to be the mindset. Let the corps die we won't give an inch or give up anything kind of mentality. That what I saw when I was a member. Don't you think that everyone needs to cut back to save an industry and their jobs?-
100%
earthlingerer1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, I guess it really sucks to you guys that think that getting an honest days pay isn't worth it to you, whether it's sweeping up hazardous waste, or simply working hard...
Reply
It's certainly an american wonder to IMAGINE that bagboys, waitresses, mail carriers, and janitors don't deserve a living equal to "high and mighties" like CEOs, and others.
WELCOME TO THE 21st CENTURY, IDIOTS!!!
When the "lowlies" see your gold-plated toiletries, don't be a bit F'in surprised that "joe the plumber" or "Flo the waitress" is screaming "kiss my grits".-
-
HomerJS49Comment removed: Abusive
-
-
100%
ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Who's ****** off? I'm just pointing out the error in your post. It only takes around 14 man hours to make a Jeep in the most efficient plant. It takes less than 40 man hours to make a car in one of the least efficient plants. No matter what the labor price per hour is, $28.00 or $78.00 this is chicken feed when compared to the overall cost of the automobile.
Reply
-
-
iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
100%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Slate, thanks for your post. Sweepers are out sourced. You were correct, before the last contract.
Reply
We made the concession. They start at $14 an hour. I have 2 team members that returned to my team from "labor maintenance, their jobs included cleaning tanks, sludge pits, sewer lines, setting traps and removing dead carcasses. They have HAZMAT training, confined space training, biohazard and fire surpression training, etc.
The new people are dropping like flies. They tell me, (before they quit), that the work is too difficult for the pay. I never considered LM a good option for me. Most went into it for the OT, regardless of the hard work.
-
-
-
-
iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
100%
ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ENDO, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt in this case, and pretend that you are absolutely correct. The problem is the high cost of labor! Right?
Reply
The least efficient plant in the US this year was a Ford plant and it took them around 38 hours to assemble an automobile complete from bumper to bumper. Using your figures, that comes to a total labor cost of $1064.00 for each car. Even if you include all the benefits that come along with each employee, and figure the cost at $78.00 per hour it only comes to $2964.00 PLEASE tell me how in the hell this results in the cost of a $30,000+ car?
To make matters worse, the most efficient plant turned out cars at the rate of 14 man hours per car. A gastly total of $392.00 per car at your rate, or $1092.00 when benefits are included.
Do you realize how silly your argument is?
Last of all, are you aware that none of the automakers will hire you if you do not have a college degree?-
38%
pc251 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you are forgetting all the legacy costs..........
Reply
http://www.autoblog.com/2006/09/20/explaining-the-...
The legacy costs have their roots in the concept of "cradle-to-grave" care provided to industrial workers by their lifelong employers. Such a system utilized employer-funded pensions to provide retirement income and catastrophic injury coverage for employees, and also ensured workers that they would receive a high level of health care coverage upon retirement. This arrangement minimized the burden on government-funded social security programs and provided significant incentive for loyalty on behalf of the employee, but also depended on steady growth within the manufacturing sector - an assumption that, as we now see all too clearly, turned out to be wrong.
Follow the jump for a breakdown on what automakers could do to address the burden of legacy costs and what they actually are doing.
In addition to requiring a steady base of active employees, pension plans also depend on deft actuarial footwork, and frankly most plans have not adapted well to the increased longevity of retirees.-
43%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Not just legacy costs
Reply
Look at the ridiculous Jobs bank programs
This is an article from 2005:
Ken Pool is making good money. On weekdays, he shows up at 7 a.m. at Ford Motor Co.'s Michigan Truck Plant in Wayne, signs in, and then starts working -- on a crossword puzzle. Pool hates the monotony, but the pay is good: more than $31 an hour, plus benefits.
"We just go in and play crossword puzzles, watch videos that someone brings in or read the newspaper," he says. "Otherwise, I've just sat."
Pool is one of more than 12,000 American autoworkers who, instead of installing windshields or bending sheet metal, spend their days counting the hours in a jobs bank set up by Detroit automakers and Delphi Corp. as part of an extraordinary job security agreement with the United Auto Workers union.
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0510/17/A...-
50%
pc251 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
here is one for you
Reply
http://www.freep.com/article/20081120/BUSINESS01/3...
UAW may give up jobs bank to revive auto loans
The UAW is negotiating the possible elimination of its controversial jobs bank and is considering other concessions to help Detroit's automakers win low-cost loans from Congress, people familiar with negotiations said late Thursday.
Union officers from several locals said they did not know if the concession had been made but expected the jobs bank to be ended as part of a package of shared sacrifice when the automakers and UAW President Ron Gettelfinger return to Congress early next month. The jobs bank pays laid-off workers, sometimes for years.
after bleeding the auto companies dry for the past 20 years the the UAW management for the BIG 3 (Dewey, Cheatem and Howe) are going to agree to concessions. so much for union solidarity during tought economic times-
-
100%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
pc25 and nostalgia, I feel your pain and concern.
Reply
Years ago the UAW saw the corporate trend for off shore and American transplant facilities. The reaction in negotiations? It's gonna cost ya! The Corps bit hard on that one and let 'er roll...the rest is history in the making. You haven't been keeping up. I've never been in the bank. Fortunately I haven't qualified up to this point. By the time I might, it may be gone...and you'll be happy.
If more Americans stood their ground, perhaps, just perhaps there would be more good paying jobs and opportunities out there. One tactic in any negotiation is to seize a pinch point and apply pressure. The language of the current contract regarding the JOBS program is stated between pages 199-228. It includes restrictions, qualifications and outsourcing. The maximum duration for any jobs bank employee is 48 weeks.
-
-
-
100%
lfergie8121 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
nostalgia, while you and PC25 go about your hatchet job on the auto workers keep in mind that the articles and examples you mention are from 2005 and 2007 which was before the last contract. Union concessions have nearly eliminated those positions that were created to allow a person to remain employed if automation took their place and were only active if vehicle sales were steady. Since these articles, there has been a new contract that even allows the automotive industry to close plants that are no longer needed and eliminate those jobs you mentioned which were "bought out" and no longer exist. In other words, those jobs are no longer in the American automotive industry.
Reply
The "cradle-to-grave" jobs were a product of the Japanese auto plants in Japan. American auto plants never had "cradle-to-grave" jobs as per se.-
0%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"nostalgia, while you and PC25 go about your hatchet job on the auto workers keep in mind that the articles and examples you mention are from 2005 and 2007 which was before the last contract"
Reply
You need to read about what the Democrats are planning then talk to us about "hatchet jobs"
The very people you voted for are planning this
As far as the concessions in the last labor contract - they don't take effect until 2010
By then, those concessions are going to look like peanuts compared to what the Democrats are going to do with their "prepackaged bankruptcy"
-
-
-
100%
ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"you are forgetting all the legacy costs."
Reply
No, I didn't forget legacy costs. The higher figure of $78.00 includes your "legacy costs". These are the figures toute4d by the republican party when they cry out at the total cost of building a car.-
0%
pc251 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://philhardwickblog.wordpress.com/2008/11/12/d...
Reply
Detroit auto workers’ compensation compared to the rest of us.
Detroit’s costs are far too high for their market share. While GM has spent billions of dollars on labor buyouts in recent years, it is still forced by federal mileage standards to churn out small cars that make little or no profit at plants organized by the United Auto Workers.
Rest assured that the politicians don’t want to do a thing about those labor contracts or mileage standards. In their letter, Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid recommend such “taxpayer protections” as “limits on executive compensation and equity stakes” that would dilute shareholders. But they never mention the UAW contracts that have done so much to put Detroit on the road to ruin (see chart above). In fact, the main point of any taxpayer rescue seems to be to postpone a day of reckoning on those contracts. That includes even the notorious UAW Jobs Bank that continues to pay workers not to work.-
100%
ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The chart you refer to shows the very costs I am talking about, only it claims the cost is $73.00 per hour.
Reply
This is still far from enough cost to wreck the auto industry. After all, if it takes only 40 man hours in the least efficient plant in the US for the production of one car, then the labor cost of that car is around 3000.00. So why does this car cost 30K to the consumer?-
-
100%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ifergie812, not this time. Line level management is taking a beating.
Reply
My group leader is shuffled from area to area and taking on more turf every day. No longer my GL, his replacement came out of the office for a week, and then quit.
I cover many of their former responsibilities, actually all but two, payroll, and hiring and firing. I was offered that job in '93, and ungraciously (as is my style) turned it down. I told them it was a sh!t sandwich, and there wasn't enough bread to cover the taste of the sh!t.
That said, I also kept my union protection that the GL job would have lost. The poor bastards are pulling their hair out and running around like they are on fire. The bottom line is, the stock holders have no concern for anyones benefit. We are ALL necessary evils to them. To be exterminated at the first opportunity.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Republicrat1844Comment removed: Retracted by user4 Replies
-
BlueAutumn_1989Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
100%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Endoscopy...You can ignore the facts, be ignorant of the facts, or be cognizant of the facts and make ignorant choices. One fact is, people without jobs don't buy cars, washing machines, airline tickets, etc. Nor do they employ plumbers, mechanics, dentists, or endoscopy technicians.
Reply
The big3 have been admonished about that since the '60s. (actually since the automation revolution in the late '40s). What does being aware of another's good (yet shrinking) pay, or diminishing benefits, do for you, except (that it appears to) make you resentful?
-
-
100%
lfergie8121 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The problem is with the financial wealth of those CEOs. It would not hurt them if the auto industry failed because they are set for live as it is because they have already made more money than 80% of the people will make in their life time.
Reply
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
More than 2.5 billion dollars a year are spent in Washington DC on lobbying for special "treatment" by those who can afford to pay.
Reply
So any tax tweaks must include closing the loopholes for the wealthiest. You hear republicans claim that corporate taxes are too high, yet over half of U.S. corporations actually pay NO taxes at all thanks to successful lobbying for loopholes.
The myth is exposed here- http://www.alternet.org/workplace/106410/tax_cuts%...
So frankly if the oozing loopholes were closed, and US corporations actually paid their fair share, the tax rate could be dropped for them. But ONLY if they play fair and close the loopholes for the privileged. -
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dick Cheney's Haliburton for instance receives much of it's income from taxpayers providing "privatized" services for the military.
Reply
(the argument was made by Cheney that private companies could do these jobs once included in the military cheaper. With 65.oo hamburgers the norm, I doubt this is true. But when he was S.O.D. for Reagan, Cheney set it up...then became CEO of the company who received the government contracts). Now they hide their income (which originated from our tax dollars) in Abu Dhabi to avoid contributing to their own profiteering.
Seems to me any company receiving taxpayer dollars through government contracts should at least be taxpayers themselves.
Now that may be bad news for the globalists who want our military to buy Chinese planes etc. because they are cheaper.
One must ask in this hyper "security" minded era if that is a good idea. Considering for instance the whole "freedom fries" caper, what if the nitwits decided to wage war on France... they are now supplying the aircraft...can you see how this is dumb?
And how is it the average taxpayer in Britain pays less than the average taxpayer in the U.S. considering they have all that "socialism"? (free education, free healthcare, etc.) How is that possible? Well for one thing their military budget isn't more than the rest of the nations on earth combined. (Ours is). When Bush is finally out of the white house, does anyone see the need to take on the rest of the nations on earth in the battlefield? (All that money and it didn't stop a single guy trying to light his shoe on fire. Or prevent commercial jets from flying into buildings, even the Pentagon without a single plane scrambled.)-
33%
Georgia501 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The unions are not innocent. It's not just wages and it's not just new hire wages. It's also cradle-to-grave health benefits and make-work work rules. That said, I agee that management in the auto industry has been way too arrogant and insensitive. Bottom line: Americans are not buying what they produce, and no amount of taxpayer money is going to make Americans want their products.
Reply
I say this as a guy who's been driving a Chrysler product since 1987. Over that span of time, I've had only 3 cars. Most people went through 3 cars merely in the 90s. My experience has been that a well-maintained American car will go the distance. But my experience apparently has not been the norm.-
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is no reason whatsoever the US can't manufacture some of the best cars in the world.
Reply
We did at one time. I too tend to keep my cars longer than most folks.
It simply is not the workers fault, management is to blame primarily for not understanding the marketplace, for sticking to old models that don't work in todays world. I think the loans should be given, I also think management should be put on a major diet until such time as their management becomes successful. Or they should step down.
Now that being said, reliability has increased in most domestic cars in recent years...
Kudos! that's step one.
Step 2-
Design innovative fuel efficient cars people will like.-
18%
Endoscopy1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We make equivalent cars to anybody else. The problem was that in the 70's the quality lagged behind. Since then they caught up on quality over 10 years ago. The problem is that people still perceive a difference. Records show that there is no difference. At one point about 5 years ago two different manufacturers made cars on the same line. A US manufacturer and a Japanese manufacturer. The only difference between the cars was some trim. They would tag certain cars to receive American or Japanese trim. Identical cars but the Japanese version sold a lot more because people thought that the Japanese car was more reliable. People who bought them were questioned as to why they bought the car they did. Those that bought the Japanese version claimed higher reliability of their car over the American one. They were shocked when they learned that both cars were identical and came off of the exact same line.
Reply
How do you change people perceptions?
You think that the management is to blame. Not correct. Studebaker died when it made the cheaper small efficient car. People wanted the bigger more powerful car. Then in the 70's the gas crunch came. All of a sudden the cars that were in demand a few months earlier could not be sold. Everyone wanted the smaller cheaper to run Japanese cars. They went from a small percentage to a large percentage overnight. The quality difference was seen at that point. and after the gas problem was over the US manufacturers never got back the market share they lost. A similar thing happened recently. People for the most part wanted the larger vehicles. Not too many wanted the efficient smaller cars. Again the Gas crunch and people did not want to buy the cars they were buying a few months ago.
It takes three years to refit a major change to a line. US manufacturers try to have their plans laid out that far ahead. Unions did not let them change over to the robots that can be adapted in a year. Too many would have been laid off.-
100%
ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Unions did not let them change over to the robots that can be adapted in a year."
Reply
Do you have any idea how many man hours it takes to make a car today, vs. 1965?
Robots are all over the place at the US auto plants. There was a time in the 70's that you could see hundreds of workers from one station. Now you may see ten percent as many.
-
-
100%
slate1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Heck we make good cars now, they just don't get as good mileage as they should and they are a bit expensive once you have to pay for fuel. Other than that, they last if you maintain them and the parts cost less than Honda and other parts.
Reply-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The quality of American cars has been generally good for a few years now. They were playing catch up for quite some time from their refusal to retool in the 70s.
Reply
That's when people bought Japanese brands and liked them. This created brand loyalty the same way my Dad was a Buick man...you now had Toyota men (and ladies of course). That can only be undone with serious incentives to try another brand. I have 4 cars in my household, Mine, my wife's, My son's and my daughter's.
We have had amazingly few unexpected repairs with the Japanese cars we've owned, I wish I could say the same for the American ones. Though according to consumer reports many models do now have good reliability. My daughter's Mitsubishi has almost 200,000 miles on it and has needed only the recommended maintenances. My wife's American car threw a rod at 50,000 miles. The company did replace the engine at no charge, but then the air conditioning wouldn't work, we had it back 3 times to the dealer and no one could fix it. Got tired of being inconvenienced and traded it in on a Honda. It has 150,000 miles on it now with no unusual problems at all. Now years ago we had a Plymouth Horizon that we loved, that was as good as any Japanese car I've owned. But they stopped making them. My daughter wants to replace her car now and we will look at the American models but we would be foolish not to look at Mitsubishis Hondas and Toyotas as well because in the past they have served us extremely well. (We tend to keep them longer than most folks, the long term cost of ownership matters to me more than someone who gets a new car every couple years.)
What can the "big 3" do to get my business?
Offer a better price on a car that has the same if not better features.
This includes fuel efficiency.
Oh and it has to get a decent write up in consumer reports as well.
I'll let you know how it goes. I will be giving the big 3 another shot at it.
But I still think their management is clueless.
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
RFE, you've done your homework (and mine!) on the topic.
Reply
It's a sad spectacle to read posts by those with anti-union sentiments. So often uninformed and angry, they regard GM's problems as the UAW's fault. They rail about a contract they haven't read. This contract has been, and still is hailed by the corporation as "landmark". Similar contracts are in effect with all U S and represented "transplant" companies as well.
The UAW has no say in the product decisions made by the companies, but they had been saying it anyway. "It" being that the companies had to be proactive and start making efficient vehicles.
One thing we did get was a paragraph in former contracts known as "document 40". This gave the operator on the shop floor the ability to call attention to poor manufacturing techniques, parts, or standards, that would negatively effect the quality or safety of the product. Not the worker, but the product. This is indicative of the employees commitment to the customer.
I remember thinking in the late '80s that no one was going to buy the Caprices we were building. They were fat, heavy, and looked like a giant horseshoe crab. I was right. It had a short run, my plant was closed, and I relocated to Texas. My move impacted many of the locals here who were looking forward to jobs for their kin. We all made sacrifices. That contract allowed me to make that sacrifice to keep my job. Those that don't have options like that would rather I didn't, than organize and get their own contracts. Or at least that's how it seems.-
100%
CRYMTYPHON1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
To read an authoritative view on a complex subject,
Reply
that ends with Or at least that's how it seems. is to be reminded what sensible honest explanation sounds like.
Thanks, Sumptuousdigs!
Can I ask whether you think the auto companies should get a bailout?
I can't decide; I was listening to Michael Moore, and even he was on both sides.-
100%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thank you, CRYMTPHON. I'm afraid no matter how I try, you won't get an objective answer from me...but you probably know already,(from having shared these threads) that won't stop me.
Reply
First, I can't call it a bail out. Loan is the word that the Corps are using, and I think it has a different definition. The spectacle of fat cats arriving in Washington asking for a loan is different than asking for a bail out. What loan officer would loan a prospective client money, if he showed up in tatters?
Second, this isn't just about the big shots and Wall Street. It's about Main St. and Elm St., Brook St. and all of the streets in the country. It's about shops and people that don't even have a direct connection to the industry. It's about giving people a chance to weather a perfect storm, that admittedly, a third of it is their own making. These things happen to regular Joes in real life. What makes this surreal is the scale.
Third, my opinion is that realistic controls and conditions be placed on this loan. One such that was suggested is that any expenditure by the companies $25,000,000 or over must be reviewed and OKed by congress. This would ensure that the funds weren't building plants in China. (Corporations these days are multinational, and is this wasn't stipulated the "heart' of the loan could conceivably be cut out).
These are my thoughts, for starters.-
-
100%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
sumptuousdigs,
Reply
I think the reason that many are still seeing this as a bailout v. a loan is because the money would be coming from the $700 billion bailout already allotted. Congress, the Feds, and the Treasury just added provisions that expanded what qualifiers are needed to be included in getting bailout monies. Of course, they change the game at will and have no set standards or rules for how they approach anything at this point. Totally Ridiculous and Incompetent!
Personally, I will have to see something in writing to believe that any of this money will ever be seen by the tax-payers again.-
100%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Gotcha. I remember Lee Iacocca lobbying for his loan, still referred to as the Chrysler bailout.
Reply
Once we shell out our taxes, we never see them again.
Not as cash anyway.
We should see it in roads and other infrastructure. In security from the local to the national level. In services like police and fire fighters. In education and cultural programs. Everyone has different feelings or opinions about what different amounts of weight are applied where. The fact that these things get done, makes us a union.
The paltry cash incentives and 'stimulus' rebates of late are like Christians to the lions in the Circus Maximus. It's a sop and a sideshow to deflect our attention from the collapse around us.-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Very well thought out and insightful posts sumptuousdigs. I believe we just can not allow these industries to fail. Not because they are "too large" but because they actually"produce" something (a rarity in the U.S.), provide decent jobs, and because it makes no sense to lose the manufacturing base. Can companies get away with paying Chinese workers 35.00 a week? I guess so. Should they? I think not! It's obvious that the end result of labor "equalization", as globalists like to refer to it, is not that workers in China or Mexico will be rewarded with higher standards of living but that U.S. and other countries like Canada and the E.U. members will be expected to lower theirs. The truth is that labor has made many concessions in the U.S. and what made our economy and social structure different and remarkably successful was a large prosperous middle class that "spread the wealth around".
Reply
Henry Ford, when questioned why he would pay his workers what at the time seemed like a high wage compared to other lines of work, said he wanted people to be able to afford his cars....
Kind of sums it up.
Without a prosperous middle class to buy products there is no trade, global or otherwise.-
100%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, RFE and sump, you have put together a very insightful thread. And, I agree with your assessment of the situation. Labor is not the cause of the problem, but could be a solution to it.
Reply
Let me explain. I watched a Senate hearing on what was happening with increased oil prices back before the market started to collapse. Each of the "experts" brought in agreed on one thing...rebuilding the infrastructure and creating jobs. The logic is very simple and was used by Franklin D. Roosevelt to get Americans back on their feet and America back on track. The formula is employ "Americans" (not ******* outsourcing), pay them and give them benefits, and let them have buying power (with cash not credit)! The same things you two are discussing. This will infuse real money into the economy and have an upward spiral that will make the rich richer, but won't exclude the poor or middle class that works hard, gets an education, and earns his/her way. This should appeal to conservatives that want to empower the individual and want to diminish the welfare class. Right now the core principles and the business practices have been flipped upside down because of greed and corruption at the highest levels.
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
lfergie8121 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CRYMTYPHON
Reply
The real question is should the American automobile industry be given a loan. The problem with this whole "bailout" thing is making it sound like the government is giving them the money with no intentions of repayment which isn't the case. In the mid 80s. Chrysler was in bad shape and was given a government loan which they paid back with interest and were able to survive. So just as you may have a problem with a medical bill and need a loan until you get back on your feet the auto industry needs a loan until this economic crisis passes over and sales pick up again so they can get back on their feet.
-
-
-
96%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The UAW stands for the "United Autmobile, Agricultural Implement, and Aerospace workers". Yep, we built the shuttles, (we didn't design the 'O' rings though). We build aircraft, tractors, trucks, harvesters, space modules, cars, tanks, trains, buses, and trailers. We represent teachers, municipal workers, cops, firemen, hotel and motel employees, etc. You see, unions offer their services in a free market. There is choice. The UAW has had an outstanding record as a leader in competent and productive representation.
Reply-
9%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Are you listening to what Democratic leaders in Congress and Obama are saying???
Reply
"prepackaged bankrupcy"
Pelosi is calling it a "restructuring"
Dodd was talking about the government pension guaranteee fund which pays a maximum of $40K per year - it's a sliding scale
Here is one article:
Bailout with a price: Chapter 11 bankruptcy
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5...-
100%
Progressive1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Banks aren't lending as it is. They're not even lending to businesses that are doing well, much less businesses that are doing poorly. And in that circumstance, the usual options may not be available." - Obama
Reply
I don't see how they can prepackage Chapter 11 bankruptcy without cutting pensions like they did when the airlines went belly up, which I suspect would become standard industry practice in short order, with all other major corporations following suit. With credit frozen over the near term, it seems to me there's little to prevent a rapid descent into Chapter 7.-
0%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
They will do what the airlines did - turn over the pensions to the Feds. That was what Dodd was talking about. The maximum the Pension Guarantee Fund will pay out is $40K
Reply
Dodd was a little more candid than Pelosi. She has been very careful to talk about "restructuring" the auto industry
If you want to know more just look at what Pelosi did with Dingle:
House Panel Backs Waxman Over Dingell As Energy Chair
House Democratic leaders have voted to strip Representative John Dingell of his chairmanship of the House Energy and Commerce committee, replacing him with Henry Waxman
The move was a dramatic one for House Democrats -- considered a victory for House liberals and environmentalists, a big defeat for Michigan and the auto industry.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/11/ho...
Dingle lost the vote on Thursday. This is VERY bad news for the auto industry
It was also the Obama transition team who started the ball rolling on the "prepackaged" bankrupcy which House and Senate Democrats are backing
The auto unions are going to take a big hit from the Democrats - link below-
0%
nostalgia1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama Team Said to Explore `Prepack' Auto Bankruptcy
Reply
President-Elect Barack Obama's transition team is exploring a swift, prepackaged bankruptcy for automakers as a possible solution to the industry's financial crisis, according to a person familiar with the matter.
A representative of Obama's team has already contacted at least one bankruptcy-law firm to say that Daniel Tarullo, a professor at Georgetown University's law school who heads Obama's economic policy working group, would call to discuss the workings of a so-called prepack, according to this person.
``It creates the environment to deal with GM's problems but limits government financial commitment,'' said bankruptcy lawyer Mark Bane of Ropes & Gray in New York
In a prepackaged bankruptcy, an automaker would go into court with financing in hand after reaching agreement with lenders, workers and suppliers on what each would give up and on the business plan to be followed. The process might take six to 12 months, compared with two to five years if the automakers followed an ordinary Chapter 11 proceeding and worked out agreements under a judge's supervision, Bane said.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087=aa...
This may keep the companies in business but the concessions required of the unions are going to be huge-
100%
Progressive1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That link didn't work for me.
Reply
"In a prepackaged bankruptcy, an automaker would go into court with financing in hand after reaching agreement with lenders, workers and suppliers on what each would give up and on the business plan to be followed."
Why does it always seem the lenders, workers and suppliers end up making all the concessions, while the executives bail out wearing their golden parachutes?-
100%
lfergie8121 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why isn't the oil industry, which the Bush administration were a part of, being blamed for the present crisis of the automotive industry? If anyone bothers to check, even the foreign automotive companies are losing their profits because of reduced sales. The inflated prices of oil is hurting everyone but Exxon and their buddies while Bush and company sat in the White House and did absolutely nothing to try containing the price of oil. In case everyone's memory is short, the price of oil was $25 a barrel when Bush took office.
Reply
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan200...
Good job Bush/Cheney you greed A-holes.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
94%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
RFE,
Reply
Thank you for the invite and the interesting article. sumptuousdigs is correct about you doing your homework. sumpy is also correct that most people don’t understand unions; including me. However, I do understand business and economics.
My take:
The Republicans are either just plain stupid or very evil (I’m opting for a 70:30 split). Why is it ok for the financial sector to ask for a $700 billion dollar bailout, without almost any strings attached, the auto industry can't get what amounts to 3.5% of that pie?
The reason I say that withholding money from the Big 3 is either stupid or evil is because, “The sheer scale of the automotive industry is enormous. In the United States, the auto industry is responsible for 6.6 million jobs, which is about 5 percent of all private-sector jobs and nearly 4 percent of Gross Domestic Product. No other single industry is more linked to U.S. manufacturing strength or generates more retail business and employment. The U.S. auto industry purchases 60 percent of all the rubber and about 30 percent of all aluminum, iron and stainless steel used in the United States,” (www.ford.com, 2006).
Now, imagine the collapse of the Big 3 and the ripple effect it would have on an already crumbling economy. I agree that there should be some stipulation as to how the money will make the auto industry economically stronger, but shouldn’t that be a given even with the financial sector? If the Big 3 collapse and this could happen in the next 5 weeks, the economic downward spiral we are in will accelerate and expand geometrically. No bailout plan will be sufficient and Capitalism, as we know it, would cease to exist. I really don’t think anyone can wrap their heads around what that means. Unfortunately, a total collapse may be the only way we can correct bad business practices, bad government policies on said practices, and finally bring justice to those who did understand this possibility and disregarded it because it wasn’t profitable to do so.-
100%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well put, DarkWizard.
Reply
The disparity in the deals sought, and deals granted, is a glaring example of miscalculated priorities, in my opinion. The 'squeeze' was applied by the sheer force of immediacy and panic, by our reps, who, I feel, had a gun to their heads. Money is just fancy paper when it has no backing. We've been pushing a lot of that for decades.
A broad description of a union would be the United States, or even better, E Pluribus Unum.
At one time the struggle to organize labor was a violent one. Hence the misuse of the word 'thug" when applied to the wrong party. It would be useful for some to look up the histories behind 'Matewan", Joe Hill, The Battle Of The Overpass, The Haymarket Riot, and countless other incidences that checker American history, before afixing these labels.
I look at our country as a union that is operating under bad management.-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am of the similar thought about this as CRYMTYPHON, as that old Stones song went, I am sitting on a fence.
Reply
The main reason I have against it, is that even with a loan, they can still go bankrupt, but I see that letting them fail is a very bad choice also; but when they come back again with their detailed agendas of what they will do, I believe that they also should have letters of resignation with them, and no compensation of any kind.-
-
BlueAutumn_1989Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is an excellent documentary I would recommend to all.
Reply
Harlan County USA.
http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=334
I knew 2 of the Union organizers in this film personally, Understand that without unions and government oversight (min.wage, safety laws etc.) this would be a 3rd world country with no middle class. -
-
-
-
100%
slate1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Republicans are either just plain stupid or very evil (I’m opting for a 70:30 split). Why is it ok for the financial sector to ask for a $700 billion dollar bailout, without almost any strings attached, the auto industry can't get what amounts to 3.5% of that pie?
Reply
I agree. I think that congrees realized that they made a big mistake and now they won't have the money to bail out everyone that has and will step up to be saved.
Will they bail out the Union jobs but then turn a blind eye to those in the fiels I work in? What about the fast food folks, Plumbers, Carpenter and so on?
I think that if any money is given it should be a loan and I want the financial guys to pay back every cent with interest.-
-
-
iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
100%
cushi1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think the corporate executives should be made to work with their pay suspended (or for minimum wage, that would be interesting) until such time as they can produce evidence of returning profits and solvency of their firms. I bet you they would bust their humps to get the mess straightened out lickety split! Confiscate the luxury jets and sell them, with the proceeds going back into the coffers as an initial deposit on the debt owed to all taxpayers. Allow the workers to evaluate the executives according to their competency and the results produced, for a change.
Reply
Most of the greedy, spoiled and rich executives have a disconnect from the realities of struggling people, and they need a rude awakening. They should have to sign a legal document of agreement to work under the prescribed conditions for whatever set period of time is deemed reasonable by the lender (government). They need to re-learn the meaning of hard work and SACRIFICE. -
67%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
slate,
Reply
The reason I was against the $700 billion bailout in the first place was that it opened up the floodgates for every business that could claim it was "too big to fail." They'll be lining up down the hall taking a ticket and holding their hands out. The fallacy of this bailout plan (or lack of) is that it was supposed to jump-start the economy.
The 4 biggest banks have been given $25 billion each and instead of reworking foreclosure or giving loans to small businesses, they are looking to use the money for deals to merge with smaller banks. And, on top of this, there are already Senate hearings investigating allegations on whether money has been aside to make sure the execs get their salaries and bonuses! Ludicrous!
Back on point, once you’ve started giving out money to companies that are too big to fail, where do you draw the line? The airlines are watching to see how the auto industry fairs and so on.
-
-
-
100%
simonsez1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Federal Government underwrites the entire military industrial complex with enormous amounts of money each year to develop continually more sophisticated weapons, while our enemies use home-made bombs against us. In today's world, how much additional sophistication is necessary?
Reply
The Federal Government subsidizes all sorts of commodities under the guise that these products are necessary and should be protected.
Management and labor are both responsible for the problems in the automotive industry, but we have to help them survive. If we allow them to fail, we are then under the control of foreign sources just as we are for oil. Autos are one of the staples of our country and should not be allowed to disappear.-
100%
slate1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
((The Federal Government underwrites the entire military industrial complex with enormous amounts of money each year to develop continually more sophisticated weapons, while our enemies use home-made bombs against us. In today's world, how much additional sophistication is necessary?))
Reply
First of all, the government is charged with protecting us and making sure we have the sopisticated wepons for that defense; since it's not only Iraq that we have to be able to fend off. China and Russia have very modern wepons if you haven't figured that out.
((The Federal Government subsidizes all sorts of commodities under the guise that these products are necessary and should be protected.))
((Management and labor are both responsible for the problems in the automotive industry, but we have to help them survive. If we allow them to fail, we are then under the control of foreign sources just as we are for oil. Autos are one of the staples of our country and should not be allowed to disappear))
On those points, I agree.-
50%
jimdoze1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The military choices are more sophistication or more boots, slate. While it is true that sophistication does not and cannot always replace boots... it has done more in that regard than most realize.
Reply
I reluctantly agree that the (somewhat less than) big three should be bailed. I am also for for firing some of upper management as sacrificial lambs and severely limiting upper management pay until they right themselves and pay back the taxpayers money. The unions and the retirees will also need to take big cuts... otherwise the American operations of these companies will never be able to compete here and internationally. -
iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
100%
Progressive1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for the invite, RFE. The comments are equally compelling. I have to go with Pelosi on the auto industry bailout; show us the plan before we'll show you the money:
Reply
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/11/15/memo-to-... -
-
100%
Rick78x1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WE HAVE ALLOWED THESE INTERNATIONAL BANKERS REIGN OVER OUR ECONOMY FORGETTING THAT WHOSOEVER SIGNS THE CHECKS OR CREATES THE CURRENCY, RULES. AS A HISTORICAL REMINDER:
Reply
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
-James Madison (Mmm... Does Taliban, Al Queda and Bin Laden come to mind?)
Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.
-Thomas Jefferson (Welcome Federal Reserve)
For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security.
-Thomas Jefferson (Trashing of the 2nd Ammendment of the Constitution perhaps)
I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.
-Thomas Jefferson (To those with those minds open and their pockets empty, this speaks for itself)
Have we lived within these historical, wise and timeless principles. NO. Instead we have allowed ourselves to be lulled to sleep with sunday football games and Ipods, playstations and the latest fashion fads, SUV's and credit cards, over-priced houses and fleeting jobs, etc... etc... We don't read unless its a diet menu or a McDonalds billboard. We have degraded into the most lazy, dumbed-down, ignorant, spoiled population on the face of the earth and NOW IT'S TIME TO PAY THE PRICE FOR OUR blind indulgence in trivial pursuits. Good luck and much prayer America --- we're going to need it. If you're looking for blame, look in the mirror!-
89%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Rick78x,
Reply
"We have degraded into the most lazy, dumbed-down, ignorant, spoiled population on the face of the earth and NOW IT'S TIME TO PAY THE PRICE FOR OUR blind indulgence in trivial pursuits."
That statement and the correct usage of quotes from our Founding Fathers (I use them myself) gain you my respect and praise. We were warned, we refuse to learn from history, and now we've been dumbed-down and must pay the price. I couldn't agree with you more. But, I believe that there is an upside to all this...getting back to fundamentals which work. I think we will be forced to revisit methodologies we've discarded in favor of ones that "balance the sheets" so to speak. It is time to replace corporate and government pretenders with civil-minded, intelligent “doers.”
-
-
20%
beavith11 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
all i can say about the original post is that the republicans have now become the boogeyman, even in the face of clear democratic majorities.
Reply
we find ourselves in a very weird place.
if the unions get broken, it'll be at the hands of the democrats.-
85%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
beavith1,
Reply
"all i can say about the original post is that the republicans have now become the boogeyman, even in the face of clear democratic majorities."
"we find ourselves in a very weird place."
"if the unions get broken, it'll be at the hands of the democrats."
1) The Republicans have been the "boogeyman" since Bush decided to attack Iraq and stop pursuing Osama. This was a major shift that caused many to question the logic of this administration and those who support it.
2) You have been in a very "weird place" since the Supreme Court had to claim Bush's presidency and not the electorate.
3) If the unions get broken it will not be at the hands of the Democrats it will be on the hands of your beloved corporate executives who once again have no strategic plan, no business plan, well...no plan for what to do once the $25 billion "loan" runs out; if they even get it.
So, I have a hard time empathizing with your personal predicament as you re-evaluate the differences between true conservatism and the Republican Party's philosophies as they are apparently at odds with one another. -
0%
jimdoze1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is not either political party that will roll back the UAW. It is simple economics. If they don't voluntarily allow themselves to be competitive, there is no amount of bailout that will save them. The question is... will they blink before there is nothing to blink about?
Reply -
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well the Democrats by and large have merely said show us a business plan before you get the loan, I am certain President Obama will not allow the industry to fail when he is in the oval office.
Reply
Frankly it certainly isn't all republicans who are against helping the auto industry (Pat Buchanan comes to mind) but Romney has said let them disappear and there is and has been a rather sizable faction who are against labor in general. FTA-You see, if the Republicans can allow GM to fall into bankruptcy, then all the labor contracts are voided and all the pension commitments denied. The federal government will pick up the pension plans after cutting those benefits by as much as 70 percent.
Workers, well, their chance at a living wage must fall for the GOP to be happy, so they would have to accept non-union wages and benefits.
So the trick is that Paulson, Bond and Bush support “expediting” the existing $25 billion set aside for the auto industry, money restricted to new product development. They want to claim that by pushing money the industry can’t spend right now on survival, they are saving the industry, all the while pushing it to bankruptcy.
All simply to destroy American labor.
Understand that for a Global economy to work, global labor must be "equalized".
This means American, Canadian, and European nations who enjoy a relatively high standard of living must compete equitably with Mexican and Chinese labor. Do you really think it's the Mexican and Chinese whose pay scale will be brought up to the standards of the US, Canada, and Europe? You know of course what the alternative is.
-
-
100%
albionperfides1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
These are the most serious, well informed comments I have read on Propeller: well done. In the UK it's true that we have free healthcare at the point of delivery but we have [gladly] paid some 9.5% of income for this over a working life and this also pays the state pension. Education is free too up to University when tuition and residence costs have to be met. To call this socialism as some in the US do is nonsense. They haven't experienced it and should come and try it for themselves.
Reply -
100%
albionperfides1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
These are the most serious, well informed comments I have read on Propeller: well done. In the UK it's true that we have free healthcare at the point of delivery but we have [gladly] paid some 9.5% of income for this over a working life and this also pays the state pension. Education is free too up to University when tuition and residence costs have to be met. To call this socialism as some in the US do is nonsense. They haven't experienced it and should come and try it for themselves.
Reply -
bidding-directory-listComment removed: Hard Banned
-
29%
k9kssr1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Okay, so you all say the UAW/labor doesn't figure into the demise of the auto industry, what does? Is this purely the fault of high CEO salaries and bonuses? What needs to happen, if they are given a bailout/loan, so this doesn't happen again?
Reply-
91%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
k9kssr,
Reply
First off, there are never any guarantees that this could "never happen again." One would need a crystal ball to know the perfect path and even then this economic fluctuation may have more to do with natural economic patterns than just the cost of labor or the salaries of CEOs. But, the bubbles being caused that continually grow worse may be alleviated through better understanding of these natural fluctuations, better business practices, and better government oversight.
Right now we are very close to entering an economic crisis which could rival The Great Depression and in many ways be worse because of global implications. Believing that we can get out of this dilemma by following the same methods, and the same people that implementing them in the first place, is pretty much insanity by definition.
The real wealth of this country is in its people. Right now those people are being kicked while they're lying down. The rich will have no more wealth if there is no one to buy their products, make their products, or pay their taxes. Therefore, the rich will have created their own demise. I know it's hard for many to understand the intertwined relationships between labor, management, government, and economic health, but unless a redistribution of wealth occurs quickly, the majority of Americans will be cashing out their 401Ks, emptying their savings and checking, and be standing in soup lines along with former CEOs.-
100%
willottica1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The real wealth of this country is in its people.
Reply
Normally a comment I would pass right by without even thinking about it. But what does it mean? The US does not have as many people as China, and we are supposed to believe that all men are created equal. (I do, I think a Chinese person is just as valuable as an American one.) So if America's wealth is in her people, then China must be vastly more wealthy.
I think the real wealth that is in America is her land. America is a huge country, resource rich, with diverse geography and a friendly climate. This is wealth. China is not that different geographically, but has 5 times as many people, so one could expect each person to have only 1/5th of the wealth.
Another thing that has made America wealthy is the freedom. Freedom from government oppression and corruption, that so far, has encouraged ingenuity and hard work. As government continues to grow, and give handouts to the wealthiest (rather than the hardest-working), this encouragement will disappear. People are increasingly unwilling to work hard, because government will take care of them, and they see that most of the benefits of their hard work go to someone else (their employer or the shareholders). For very few Americans does hard work translate into increased success, and many will work hard only to see their jobs outsourced or 'downsized'. What was the point of company loyalty? What was the point of working hard when the boss wasn't looking?
I really think that Americans, and all of Western Civilization will have to learn the meaning of "enough" and give up on the dream of "more". We can't all have more. It seems that the only way of maintaining our current standard of living is by the oppression of the third world. Is it worth it? Or will we still have "enough" even without continuous expansion and further wealth.-
80%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
willottica,
Reply
Point well taken, but I'll stick to my statement that "The real wealth of this country is in its people."
The defense of my position is in the very statement you made, "So if America's wealth is in her people, then China must be vastly more wealthy." It isn't the quantity of people a country has, but the opportunities to succeed. In the last 15 years we've moved away from being the most innovative place in the world to outsourcing everything that wasn't nailed down. The effect it has had is that all of the other countries we outsourced to are getting "our" opportunities and becoming wealthier, industrialized, and educated while we sit back, play X-Box, and contemplate our belly-buttons (obviously a generalization).
We can easily regain our prominence as the most innovative country again if we change our focus from gaining wealth at any cost to becoming the land of opportunity again. We've created a society that pays plastic surgeons more than heart surgeons and sports figures more than educators. The message is backwards and gives no incentive to achieve greatness. I could go on, but hopefully you get my point.
-
-
-
-
75%
slate1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I thought it was Pelosi and Ried that said they weren't going to give the money. After all they are in the majority and in January they will become the super majority and they, along with Obama will have the purse strings. Let's see what they do and blame them if they decide to not fund the Big Three.
Reply-
88%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
slate,
Reply
Believing one's self to be Democrat, Republican, or other may not matter soon. After what has transpired the past 8 years it is obvious that neither major political party is competent enough or willing to make dramatic changes. The economic situation is much, much worse than any of us are being told. Even the heavy-hitters in the financial sector can't get regular investors to follow their lead. You wanna know why? The rich are losing money on bad investments and the middle class is broke! Soon, the government will be broke too! Sure, lots of money will be printed, but you might as well frame each dollar as artwork for the value they'll contain.
We're getting to the point were the only hope may be asking Peabody and Sherman if we can borrow the "Way Back" machine and get a do-over! Of course, the chances of that are about as realistic as Peabody and Sherman...no less.-
-
100%
willottica1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oddly enough, the "one world currency" would likely help Americans. Free trade is crippling now because the Yuan is pegged artificially low against the USD. If both countries dealt with the same dollars, and those dollars meant the same there as here, American labor would be much more affordable.
Reply
The only problem is: who gets to print the WORLD-DOLLAR. As a Canadian, I would never want to share a currency with the US, since the US just prints more money when it starts running low. Whoever controls the presses would be the richest country.-
Neutral
slate1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It wouldn't be based on the US from what I hear, which will make us less wealthy and I think at least in the short turn it would really send the world into an even greater tailspin. I think it will also lessen nation’s sovereignty. Who would rule the world if we become one and would they be benevolent?
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
sumptuousdigs1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Well I can't disagree with either of you. Neither has acted as if it represented it's constituents in modern times. If Obama can't bring real discernible change, I suspect a 3rd party will emerge. But will it be too late?"
Reply
That's how the Republican Party came into existence.
-
-
-
-
Republicrat1844Comment removed: Retracted by user2 Replies
-
-
82%
Beau78901 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's the thing about the bailout of the financial industry. If banks don't lend to businesses, all business stops moving. It's a sad truth that our economy is based on businesses (as well as consumers) spending more than they can afford.
Reply
With that said, the banks should have gotten money with strict conditions as to how it was spent, and close supervision by the government. But there was none of that. The MBAs in charge of banks saw their greatest potential for profit in buying and merging rather than lending, and that's what they've been doing with the money, rather than lending to business. And it's too late to impose such conditions--unfortunately, much of that money has already been spent.
As for other industries, yes there are large ones with millions of employees, as in Detroit. I haven't done the research, but I'd bet almost every large industry (with the possible exception of the military sector) is suffering these days. I'd also bet that if the percentage of total U.S. jobs at small businesses of under 100 employees were aggregated as one piece of a pie chart along with large industries, the small businesses would make up a significant wedge, of a size in line with those single large industries. And most businesses in this country are having trouble. The government can't give money--conditions or not--to all of them, and I'm not sure any of them deserves or needs help more than others. -
-
10%
aliciabc111 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Do any of you morans who blame the republicans for this so called demise really believe that these brokers, mortgage lenders and business owners are all greedy repubs. If you do think again, there are plenty of greedy dems and hell you just elected one. How the hell on a Senators salary can you buy the house he did. He is just as guilty as the rest. The Dems had control for two years and did nothing to stop it as well as the war that they said they would if elected. So now how do we to believe them now!
Reply
---- A third party comment go green -----
100%
willottica1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How the hell on a Senators salary can you buy the house he did.
Reply
He didn't buy it on a Senator's salary, he bought it from book royalties. In case you were unaware of this, he wrote 2 bestsellers. That tends to earn a guy a little bit of cash. Furthermore, his house isn't THAT expensive. He works; his wife works; both hold advanced degrees and are likely compensated appropriately. -
-
-
-
iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
-
89%
truthiness1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the idea that the unions are the problem is ludicrous.
Reply
sure there are problems in the unions, just as there are problems in all things. however, any business person will tell you their two highest overhead costs are payroll and insurance.
since we clearly are trying not to remove payroll.. how about we remove insurance costs. if we create national health insurance every single industry in America ( manufacturing, banking, and retail) will find itself with more operating money. How's that for a bailout plan?
currently the American taxpayer, employee and business pays for both private health insurance and government health insurance (government employees, medicare, medicaid, schip, military) to the tune of 1.3 trillion dollars. remove all that redundancy and create a non-profit single payer and make everyone pay into it through a 10% sales tax it will cost us each less and save American business. -
100%
frctm51 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It seems like the Republicans are hell bent on losing the few remaining seats they have in the house and senate.Letting manufacturing jobs, the few that remain, die off out of worship for the free market is further evidence of how out of touch with the new reality they are. Yes, killing off more jobs and a strategic industry, that is what you want to do in the face of one of our worst recessions since 1929. They're really stuck on stupid.
Reply-
iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
25%
GLee1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obviously many of the larger unions have become quite a burden on the US. Yes, they make descent products but the deals that they pounded thru to employers will break companies up in bits. The unions need to give in on many issues to help America stay healthy. It's called Patriotism. Just as VP Biden.
Reply -
0%
jk54891 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The current woeful state of the economy was deliberately caused by the Democrat party thru mandates on banks to make housing loans to people who couldn't afford them. Knowing that it would all collapse, it gave these socialists an excuse for government take over of the banking, pharmaceutical, healthcare and automotive industries. If unions have any reason to exist in a global marketplace, it should be to fight this unconstitutional government takeover of private industry. Welcome to Marxism.. Fight for liberty.
Reply -
HomerJS49Comment removed: Abusive
-
-
100%
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
T%he real problem with the American auto companies started in the 70s when they refused to retool. They have been behind the curve ever since, this is NOT the fault of the workers but management. Very Poor Management, so I feel we must not let them collapse for numerous reasons sited in above comments. But we should also demand either new management or at least that management's pay be related to success.
Reply -
100%
xddy4u21 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Unions once were strong. Then came along that SCUMBAG, Senile Commie Bastard Reagan, and tried to break the Union's back by firing the Controllers. As a life long Member of the AFL-CIO, UAW and the Teamsters, I'd (P)ISS on the Grave of Reagan. I'm Union and I don't give a (s)hit about Management or any President that let Big Business screw the workers.
Reply -
HomerJS49Comment removed: Abusive
-
SwampFox-82ndComment removed: Retracted by user6 Replies
-
JoseMadreComment removed: Hard Banned
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.