Ask A Liberal: Auto Bailout
Hey Lib,
Does the auto industry deserve a bailout?
Sincerely,
Tailfin in Ypsilanti, MI
Dear Tailfin,
Of course the auto industry does not deserve a bailout. Whether or not they should get one is another question entirely. People constantly get things they don’t deserve—it’s the reason Hank Williams, Jr. has a career. The big question is what action best serves the common good. In the case of Mr. Williams, that would mean a graceful retirement. The case of the auto industry is more complex.
Some people seem to think we should let heavy industry wither on the vine and make the transition to a “service economy,” whatever that is. To me it boils down to “I’ll make you a pizza if you cut my hair.” Maybe I’m irrationally tied to the Industrial Revolution, but I don’t think a nation can have a healthy economy unless somewhere in that nation big things are rolling off an assembly line.
On the other hand, the leaders of the auto industry have manufactured their own troubles with more zeal than they ever showed for automotive design. They’ve foisted fossil-fuel-devouring monsters on the American public like it was their mission in life to destroy every last vestige of the dinosaurs.
The maxim used to be “as General Motors goes, so goes America.” Since that would mean a decades-long slide into irrelevancy driven by faulty decision-making, I suggest we retire that maxim, particularly since America recently made perhaps its best decision in half a century with the election of Barack Obama. In automotive terms, he’s a fuel-efficient green vehicle after eight years of an ugly gas-guzzler. (And I hardly have to mention that he’s a hybrid.) He also seems inclined to invest the money needed to keep the auto industry on the road. With a few fresh ideas and new leadership, it could lead the way to the post-petroleum future. If it doesn’t work out, we can use it for parts.
Yours,
Frederick Douglas Trotsky-Goldman
Hey naivete
Why don't you just buy somebody a car factory, so you can walk to work? Why don't you give somebody your credit card so after theyre rich again, you can buy their watered-down product they already owe you at a third the price...but you'll be paying triple.
Don't be stupid. Never give money to the desperate---especially money you have to pay interest on.
Unless you're feeding them in a bread line...which is their deserts.
Give it up. Stick a fork in Paulson and Franks. Let this bag of s*hit drop. We'll be back sooner...then later or never.
- Email this page
By aaazzz111November 18, 2008 - 6:25pmBeing held hostage by strong
Being held hostage by strong arming unions, and standards and regulations that their competition are not held to is "faulty decision-making"??
Because of the excessive regulations and being forced to give into the demands of corrupt unions, it costs GM 70 dollars an hour to do what Toyota can do for 40 dollars an hour. How much do you think a janitor for Hyundai makes? It has been the UAW and Washington's policies that made it nearly impossible for a domestic auto manufacturer to turn a profit for 20 years, and then they wonder why they aren't turning a profit?
Anyone that thinks a Tundra is a better truck than a Silverado is a fricking idiot.
The same thing is being done to the auto industry that was done to the housing industry, the government gave them no other option but to fail so they could come in and take over. One was done by forcing banks to lower their loaning standards under threat of investigations the other was done with unfair regulations being placed upon everyone except the competition. Utilities are next.
- Email this page
By 96815November 18, 2008 - 7:11pmYep a typical freemarketeer,
Trying to blame the workers for the problem that was caused bymanagment. That just shows me that you don`t know if the people you employ can not buy your product can anybody else? See Mr Ford himself made sure that people working on the assembly line could afford his product with good wages.
FREE LEONARD PELTIER
www.aimovement.org
www.layoffinhofe.com
www.autismrock.org
www.tulsaironworkers.com
- Email this page
By rlm_dcbNovember 18, 2008 - 7:52pmI heard one CEO say he would skip his bonus--just this one years
But not his $600,000 a year regular paycheck. I want to so snap these guys awake.--Don't feed mogli after midnight
Demand a whole new day out of all these losers.
700 billion will buy a lot of cots and soup. If cars don't sell, don't build cars.
- Email this page
By aaazzz111November 18, 2008 - 10:25pmBy aaazzz111November 18, 2008 - 10:25pm
Not to split hairs over trivialities, but here I go anyway.
Gizmo was a mogwai that wasn't supposed to be fed after midnight. Mowgli was the boy from Rudyard Kipling's The Jungle Book. :-)
Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.
- Email this page
By Guy FawkesNovember 18, 2008 - 10:45pmDamn, the one time I don't research
And theres a Gremlin expert in the building. Cool save, Fawkes.
- Email this page
By aaazzz111November 18, 2008 - 10:50pmMr. Ford didn't have to deal
Mr. Ford didn't have to deal with endless regulations that his competition didn't need to follow. Mr. Ford didn't have to deal with corrupt unions and their unfair demands. Mr. Ford didn't have to deal with threats of walkouts. Mr. Ford didn't have to deal with the green mafia pushing impossible standards. Mr. Ford was a typical freemarketer.
- Email this page
By 96815November 18, 2008 - 10:45pmBy 96815November 18, 2008 - 10:45pm
A typical free market advocate is an anti-semitic douchebag that loves him some Hitler? Thanks for clearing that up.
Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.
- Email this page
By Guy FawkesNovember 18, 2008 - 10:50pmManagement can't self-police its worker abuses.
Without Unions there is abuse and slavery. Happens every time. Find another way to run a business. Dont leave workers to the psychotic whims of management.
- Email this page
By aaazzz111November 18, 2008 - 11:03pmBy 96815November 18, 2008 - 10:45pm
Who was Ford's competition back then? Nobody.
People in America bought American made cars until the mid 1970's, when the oil embargo herded people into buying more fuel efficient foreign imports. Those auto imports have had to comply with the same standards that American automakers have had to.
Management should have been able to read the tea leaves.
- Email this page
By roadgoddessNovember 18, 2008 - 11:40pmFawkes, Road
you don't have a single fact correct.
From the Wall Street Journal 17 Nov 2008:
GM knows it needs fewer brands and dealers, but the dealers
are protected from termination by state laws. This makes eliminating them and
the brands they sell very expensive. It would cost GM billions of dollars and
many years to reduce the number of dealers it has to a number near Toyota's.
Foreign-owned manufacturers who build cars with American workers pay wages
similar to GM's. But their expenses for benefits are a fraction of GM's. GM is
contractually required to support thousands of workers in the UAW's "Jobs Bank"
program, which guarantees nearly full wages and benefits for workers who lose
their jobs due to automation or plant closure. It supports more retirees than
current workers. It owns or leases enormous amounts of property for facilities
it's not using and probably will never use again, and is obliged to support
revenue bonds for municipalities that issued them to build these facilities. It
has other contractual obligations such as health coverage for union retirees.
All of these commitments drain its cash every month. Moreover, GM supports
myriad suppliers and supports a huge infrastructure of firms and localities that
depend on it. Many of them have contractual claims; they all have moral claims.
They all want GM to be more or less what it is.
And therein lies the problem: The cost of terminating dealers is only a fraction
of what it would cost to rebuild GM to become a company sized and marketed
appropriately for its market share. Contracts would have to be bought out. The
company would have to shed many of its fixed obligations. Some obligations will
be impossible to cut by voluntary agreement. GM will run out of cash and out of
time.
- Email this page
By richaduNovember 19, 2008 - 12:10amBy richaduNovember 19, 2008 - 12:06am
Ummm, Ford WAS an anti-semitic douchebag that loved him some Hitler, & Hitler loved him some Henry Ford right back. I can only assume that you weren't addressing me.
Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.
- Email this page
By Guy FawkesNovember 19, 2008 - 12:11amNo it is true Ford
didn't hate Hitler until the contracts to build bombers came through. You were disputing 96815's comment about how the "Big Three" are caught by circumstances beyond their (recent) control. It was that part I was addressing.
I think you should admit you changed the subject by bringing up WWII because are you not saying FDR was also a douchebag anti-semitic for giving big bucks to Ford's company? Don't worry about answering that, we all know WWII wasn't always "their finest hour."
Besides which "Mr .Ford" are we talking about? I honestly don't know. Was it the same "Mr. Ford" who said "they can have any color they want as long as it is black" or one of his progeny who supported the leader of the Socialist-Workers' Party in Germany?
- Email this page
By richaduNovember 19, 2008 - 12:33amBy richaduNovember 19, 2008 - 12:10am
So, what you're saying is this: Blame the workers. Blame those greedy, greedy, unionized workers. BULLSHIT! Why the hell do you think that Toyota and Honda sell so well, and have since the market here demanded those cars? I remember those earlier cars as being ugly, and we pooh-poohed them for being "cheap" (quality). But people bought them up because they were cheaper to drive. I LIVED during that transition from seeing all American cars, to economical foriegn cars. I remember the gas rationing...saw it with my own two eyes. I was in high school, for christ's sake!
So if I read that long string of sentences with no paragraphs correctly, you believe that it was absolutely NOT POSSIBLE for the 'big three' to stay competitive by giving us high MPG, yet 'stylish' and durable vehicles? We the consumer would have shunned them? UTTER NONSENSE!!! The only reason that SUV's and the big trucks did so well during the '90s is because we could afford to drive them. Me...I want a Jeep Wrangler that gets 50mpg, not 17mpg. Tell me it can't be done, and I'll call you a liar. The reason that the 'big three' are now failing is that they didn't have the forsight to anticipate any more spikes in oil prices, even though they had two major warnings prior to the last few years.
The blame for the failures of the auto companies sits squarely on the shoulders of lazy, greedy, short-sighted management. Period.
- Email this page
By roadgoddessNovember 19, 2008 - 6:51amBy 96815November 18, 2008 - 10:45pm
did you rad that union members? This uneducated buffoon says you are all corrupt because you belong to a union.
What frogg is telling you is that we need to sell more cars, not for you, the worker, but fir the ceo, board members and stock holders.
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 1:19amProf
what are you talking about?
It's been a while since I've rad anything but I wouldn't mind trying tokin' on something new.
- Email this page
By richaduNovember 19, 2008 - 1:37amBy richaduNovember 19, 2008 - 1:37am
What am I talking about? Well lets see. A one letter typo appeared because of speed typing. Actually two in that sentence. "Rad" for "read" the one you are referring to: "Read that union workers".
You do understand the difference between a simple typo because of a key stroke (or lack of) and a constant inability to differentiate words like to/too and there/their right? The latter being constantly put on display by 90% of the right wing posters on this board (which gives weight to the argument that 90% of the right wing posters on the board are sock puppets of one or two people).
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 8:17amunions
Obviously you do not know the history of unions. Study up! Unions have given Americans union and non-union workers; the 40 hour workweek, paid vacations, paid holidays, equal pay for women doing the same job, dignity and respect in the shop, health and safety protections, seniority protections and on and on. Unions were also involved in the civil rights movement. UAW President Walter Reuther walked arm and arm with Martin Luther King.
Our United States of America has given 3 billion of our tax $$ in incentives to foreign auto makers. Alabama where the dispicable Representative Mr. Shelby, gave Honda $158 million, Toyota $29 mllion, Hyudi(who knows how to spell it, I don't car) $252.8 million, and Mercedes $253 million plus gave them the land, cleared the land and trained the workers.
The Big 3 want a bridge loan not a bail out. Yes, their should be strings to the big CEO's making 400 to 500 times what the workers make. Unlike the Wall Street do what ever the hell you want to deal.
If not for the Big 3 WWII would not have been won....
Do not fault the union brothers and sisters for this mess. Most of the blame is corporate greed. Most of it. Again, take a Labor History Class, Please.
- Email this page
By americaisaunionNovember 22, 2008 - 8:50pmI could build a small vehicle in my garage
The city could purchase a whole fleet.
All electric.
Computer intelligent.
Wont leave downtown area.
Vandalproof.
Auto-return to charge stations on their own.
Taxi industry would hate them.
- Email this page
By aaazzz111November 18, 2008 - 10:23pmUS auto makers scoffed at the small profits on small cars
They decided to continue with suv's knowing fuel prices were going up and people wanted smaller cars.
Now do they laugh at the small profit on all those small cars honda and toyota are selling when their suv's aren't selling enough?
Bad management on the part of US automakers is to blame.
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 1:17amhttp://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3225/is_/ai_n27025578
While that is most certainly true, one of the reasons the US automakers went for the high profit SUVs was because of all the legacy costs given to them by the ...... wait for it..... UNIONS.
Now, when the big three (or at least one or two of them) go under and contracts HAVE to be renegotiated we'll just see how much power the unions have. Unions have to power to drive a business to bankruptcy (airlines). Oh and get this, WHEN congress passes the "Employee Free Choice Act", like a virus, the unions will fester and multiply until they destroy the host (the host being business the employ them) until the businesses move to find cheaper labor. Look at the states where foreign auto makers are making cars where they don't have unions demanding crazy hourly wages, they aren't hurting as badly as the "rust belt" states.
Big three auto worker ~$74/hr
Overseas auto worker ~$44/hr
Average worker ~$28/hr
Source, MSNBC "Morning Joe" about 15 mins ago....
Part of fixing the problem will be a National Health System as the health care costs will no longer be carried by the companies. That'll help some...
Enjoy the huge salary UAW workers, right up until GM, Ford and Chrysler declare bankruptcy and "renegotiate".
Not blaming the worker, I'm blaming the corrupt union bosses...
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 7:24amOOPs..
Was in the middle of writing a paper when my last website went into my subject line.
Unless you are intrested in reading about how pain as the 5th vital sign isn't working to control pain, don't copy an paste...
My sub line should have read..
By F U Bush (date).....
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 8:04amBy StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 7:24am
Nice try at covering your tracks. You right wingers blame the unions and when it is pointed out to you that you are in fact blaming the workers rather than management when you do, you shift your argument to the "corrupt union leaders".
Well I have to say that the arguments you right wingers make usually run similar to your post above. There is always a statement about the fight for good wages and benefits being the problem and a finger pointed at the "corrupt union leaders". The two seem to go together which implies that you equate the fight for better wages with corruption since you never give any evidence of corruption on the part of union leaders. You just blame the high wages and temper you criticism of the high wage earner with this ridiculous, unproven statement about the union leaders.
Even when an analysis of the economics might suggest that the high wages are part of the problem, the fight to get those wages is not defined as corrupt.
The workers have a right to belong to a union. By blaming the problem on the high wages of union workers, you are in fact blaming the union workers who believe in their union and support the actions taken by the union to secure those wages. You cannot separate the two by implying the union leaders are corrupt without justification. Furthermore even if an individual union leader is proven corrupt, that is a separate issue from the high wages. You right wingers state that the problem is the high wages. However corrupt the union leader might be, you are still pointing to the high wages as the problem. And if the union worker approved of the union securing those wages you are in fact blaming the worker.
It has become clear to me that this argument on the part of right wingers is simply absurd. You need to explain the following to better make your argument:
1. Do you believe the workers have a right to unions?
2. Do you equate the bargaining by unions for higher wages with corruption?
3. Are you implying actual corruption on the part of specific union leaders? If so then prove it,
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 8:10amBy f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 8:10am
Fair enough...
Ok, to your question..
1. Do you believe the workers have a right to unions?
-Yes, BUT I also believe that the jobs provided by companies are not property of the workers. Once a worker (union or not) demands a wage that is higher than what the boss feels the job is worth it is the boss' RIGHT (duty) to say "no" and if the worker then elects to strike and stop production it should be the right of the boss to find somebody who will do the job a the price the boss can pay. If there are more workers willing to do the job than jobs available, supply increases and labor prices go down. If there are fewer skilled workers and more job vacancies, wages go up. That is why MDs make a bunch of money.
As far as the Employee Free Choice Act goes, well that is a bit of a sham. Employees may already unionize in a two step process. First, union bosses enter the shop and ask the employees want a union and for people to sign a petition (not a secret ballot) allowing a vote. OK, fine. Then they have a secret ballot and WHAMO, unions lose. Why? Because employees know that the union could ultimately force the employer out of business (see the big 3 and airlines) or they simply don't want (or feel they need) a union (yes, that happens).
The EFCA will get rid of the secret ballot part. How "American" is that? Union bosses come into a business (with Guido and Luca) and "ask" workers to sign the petition. Those who refuse...Well, they make them an offer they CAN'T refuse.....
2. Do you equate the bargaining by unions for higher wages with corruption?
-Not unto itself, but when the union bosses (not generally workers themselves) gain in the process, than yes. Prime example, the unions wanting a raise in the min wage. That little move isn't to help min wage workers, it's to increase the pay of people who are paid at a mulitple of the min wage. People who are already being paid VERY well.
3. Are you implying actual corruption on the part of specific union leaders? If so then prove it,
-Ok, got me.
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 8:28amBy StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 8:28am
Go back and read your post. You make a remark about the union worker's wages implying that is the reason for the auto industry failure. You then try to shift the blame to the "corrupt union leaders". But those two statements are not related. As a matter of fact your original statement to the workers appears to be very accusatory towards the worker.
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 9:33amBy StillFightn November 19, 2008 - 8:28am.
And if the community is organized and watching out for each other then there are no workers for the employer. I suppose you think strikes should be illegal and are a form of corruption. What do you think a union should be? A little club for bake sales to pay for the beer at the christmas party?
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 9:36amBy f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 8:10am
#3. Are you implying actual corruption on the part of specific union leaders? If so then prove it,
-That was an easy search..
www.unionfacts.com/articles/cardCheck.cfm
"Facing declining membership, union officials have turned to a highly questionable practice of organizing new members through a process called "card check." With card checks, paid union organizers try to persuade workers to sign cards saying that they favor union representation. This persuasion is documented as frequently including deception, coercion, and harassing visits to workers' homes."
As labor union membership has declined in the US, union bosses have seen their power decay. They want/need need the EFCA to expand their power base and increase thier union dues. You figure out why they want more money....
Union membership was 48% in 1948 was only 12.5% in 2004. Decreasing during both democratic and republican administrations.
www.workinglife.org/wiki/Union+Membership:+Overall+(1948-2004)
Oh and you want to talk about corrupt union bosses and salary..
Gus Bevona's $412,852 salary as head of the 65,000-member New York building service workers' union...
http: //query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E03E3D81F39F935A15752C0A960958260
$412,852!!!! How many of his members make CLOSE to that..
www.nlpc.org/olap/UCU2/03_03_09.htm
Am. Fed'n of State, County & Mun. Employees (AFSCME) Gerald W. McEntee $352,404
Laborers' Int'l Union of N. Am. (LIUNA) Arthur A. Coia $335,674
Union leaders need members so that they can line their own pockets.....
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 8:54amBy StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 8:54am
And does this corruption that you imply here on the part of some leaders indicate that the union wages were negotiated in a corrupt fashion?
The declining union membership in this country is NOT the result of people simply turning away from unions. That is a misrepresentation.
You are also now implying that a union leader's salary equates to corruption. That's a stretch on your part. I happen to agree it is too high. But most right wingers argue tooth and nail to preserve every cent of an over paid CEO's salary. Why is a CEO paid so much? Because he or she is guiding the company to the benefit of all the workers? Hardly. But that could be an argument, weak as it is. The same could be applied to a union leader doing the work for fellow laborers. But I'm sure you see it differently for a union leader than for a CEO.
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 9:29amBy f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 9:29am
But I'm sure you see it differently for a union leader than for a CEO.
-NOPE, they both make insane amounts of money and there is room for regulation. In fact, the union leader is essentially the CEO of the Union.
The board of directors votes in the pay of the CEO and you know they all went to Harvard, Princeton or Yale together.
The point is, the UAW has killed the US auto industry. Because of the UAW, GM has to pay WAY more for labor in the rust belt than their counterparts in the southern states with "right to work" laws.
Why should ANYBODY be forced to join a union if they do not wish to?
Why do away with the secret ballot to vote in a union? (See the EFCA)...
Detriot is going to die, and it's the fault of the unions demanding $80/hr for people that turn a wrench or place a spot-weld. And guess what, if the auto makers are smart, they will shut down, retool and move south to "right to work" states and leave Guido and Luca looking for other saps to pay union dues (after all Guido has a new $2,000,000 home on which he has to pay a mortgage). Hmmmm, maybe they can unionize Starbucks and put them out of business too.
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 9:29am
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 4:04pmBy StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 4:04pm
Well the point is that you proclaimed the "corrupt union leaders" are to blame. And when asked you had to go find some examples of corruption which is not definitive of the nature of all union leaders and most importantly shows that you were making up that argument from the start to avoid placing blame on union workers.
The union workers did not make the decision to make SUV's when the market showed the demand for them was dying.
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 4:14pmBy f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 4:14pm
The union workers did not make the decision to make SUV's when the market showed the demand for them was dying.
-No, you are correct, it was the CEOs. I'm not saying that the CEOs don't have blame here, not by a LONG shot. Every time a see a TV ad for a Hummer (saw one just today), I want to vomit. I'm saying the CEOs made that decision because SUVs had a MUCH higher profit margin than smaller cars and that cash is/was needed to pay the legacy costs given to them by the UAW. Legacy costs that the Japanese and German companies don't have.
Our CAFE standards should be 40-50 MPG. And our CEOs while well paid shouldn't make the vast amounts of cash they do, BUT a union shouldn't be allowed to close down a plant without the company being allowed to hire needed workers.
Dude.. Did you see the difference in pay that a US autoworker makes compared to EVERYBODY else in the US? There are PLENTY of people that make $80/hr... THEY ARE CALLED DOCTORS and they have more than 11 years of school. They aren't welders or painters.
There is plenty of blame to spread around but unless the strangle hold of the UAW is loosened, it will kill the golden goose and the Big 3 are gonna die. Where will the UAW go then?
Now back to the question on the EFCA... Why do away with the secret ballot for unionization?
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 4:29pmBy StillFightnNovember 19, 2008 - 4:29pm
Difference in pay - yes that is the problem. Not that the union workers make so much but that our economy us based on searching the world over for cheap labor to exploit.
The grand notion of supply and demand economics is a lie.
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 5:36pmAuto Industry Bailout
If we do throw money into the big three we need to insure there are several ROPES attached.
1. We get Stock in return, at least half of it voting stock
2. The top tier, the Board and anyone with a Pres or VP or GM should be immediately required to submit their resignation. The performance of each of these people should be reviewed and most of them should be fired. Given 2 weeks notice a cardboard box thirty minutes and a security guard to escort them off company premises. They got us here, they should get the fruits of their labor.
3. Any stock or stock options these fired employees have must be sold back to the company at time of their firing at market value. Fruits of the pudding.
4. The US Government MUST put in place a Single Payer Health Care System. Without it we will never ever be competitive in the manufacturing of anything. Time to wake up and smell the dung heap the insurance companies have put us in, and realize that they are over charging us for healthcare and should also get the fruits of their labor.
5. Unions should be strengthened, and any one who wants to be in a union should be allowed to do so. Union representatives should be on the Board, at least 25% of its make up should be Union people.
6. The US Government MUST adjust its trade policies. Tariffs must be applied on goods entering the country to off set the difference in labor and health care costs between the US and the importing company.
7. Products should meet the same safety and health standards that our factories are required to meet.
8..Tariffs should also be applied where the cost of environmental protection causes a difference in price of US manufactured prices and foreign manufactured prices.
Then and only then should we give/lend/or invest in our Auto Makers. If none of this can be accomplished. Let em go into Chapter 11. Without these reforms they will not ever be able to compete in a meaningful way again.
BillP
- Email this page
By pbillpNovember 19, 2008 - 5:46am"Capitalism in the US"
But the high wages are in fact not the problem. The problem is the poor management decisions of the companies for continuing to make large vehicles when the public was in fact shifting away from that choice.
And another part of the problem is that the system of capitalism being practiced in the US is NOT the glorious capitalism of supply and demand taught in classes. No. Capitalism as it is now practiced is a system designed to seek out low wage workers outside of our own economy in foreign lands and maximize the profits of the few in this country.
The very wealthy in this country seek to deprive the average citizen of good wages by paying foreign labor cheap wages. The profits are then split as follows: most to the wealthy here in the US and some to the foreign worker. With most industries doing this, the companies depend on the US consumer to use credit to purchase their goods. And that is how we got to where we are today.
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 19, 2008 - 7:45am"Labor is prior to, and
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves the much higher compensation."
-- Abraham Lincoln, State of the Union message, 1861
- Email this page
By MichtouNovember 23, 2008 - 1:09pmAuto "Bailout"
The auto companies have asked for a LOAN, not corporate welfare like the financial businesses.Big Oil Interests have killed auto companies working on new more energy efficient technologies. If you don't have a job you can't buy stuff. So many of our manufacturing jobs have been shipped overseas so 8 yr. olds can make ten cents a day stitching stuff together. Look inside the shoe you are wearing. Bet it was made in China. By an 8 yr. old. Look around on the freeway. Lots of old Fords, Chevies, and Chryslers. Not toomany old Nissans or Toyotas or Hondas. I remember several years ago Ford asking for a grant or some kind of assistance to research to energy efficient technologies and being told no by our government. Of course, I live in the Detroit area so it was reported here. Why are so many of you such labor haters? Do you want to return to a feudal state? Did you pay attention in history class or American Government class? Do you understand the cause and effect relationship? I don't have a job anymore because the shoe factory I worked in moved to China therefore I have no money to buy the shoes that are shipped over from China. Same thing with the auto industry. Let 8 year olds build your cars. Would you let your 8 year old work in a factory? How about letting your children work in a factory that has no regulation on how long they work or whether they get a meal break or whether they are safe while they work? How about letting your teenage daughter get shipped to some island to work in a factory where management can rape her as they please and then when she pops up pregnant she gets an abortion or gets fired. Remember Abramoff? Another fine example of a compassionate conservative looking out for his own best interests. Yeah. Labor Unions are evil. Look at what the banking industry has done with little regulation. Wake up America. Read your history books. If you don't know history you are doomed to repeat it.
- Email this page
By greentigerNovember 19, 2008 - 9:44amGang Green vs. Gangrene
We shall overcome...like real soon.
- Email this page
By aaazzz111November 19, 2008 - 10:17amIf the AutoCo is asking for a loan, What is HouseCo asking for?
If the AutoCo is asking for a loan, What is HouseCo asking for?...we know what the BankCo wants...more money for BushCo offshore bankco.
- Email this page
By aaazzz111November 19, 2008 - 10:31am$27 an hour is a HIGH wage?
The agreement, signed last week after two years of often bitter negotiations involving the UAW, Delphi and its former parent, General Motors Corp., lowers wages for many longtime workers from about $27 per hour to a pay scale for all workers that runs between $14 and $18.50.
The agreement, signed last week after two years of often bitter negotiations involving the UAW, Delphi and its former parent, General Motors Corp., lowers wages for many longtime workers from about $27 per hour to a pay scale for all workers that runs between $14 and $18.50.
Analysts have said it also could set precedence in wages for the rest of the domestic parts industry and perhaps affect national contract talks later this summer between the UAW and GM, Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler Group.
Troy-based Delphi offered unions a base wage of $9 an hour shortly after it filed for bankruptcy protection in October 2005.
http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/13584318/detail.html?qs=1;bp=t
I'd call it 'not being financially squeezed' wage, especially if one is supporting a family. Then they take a HUGE cut? Hmph!
- Email this page
By roadgoddessNovember 19, 2008 - 9:49pmBy roadgoddessNovember 19, 2008 - 9:49pm
Well hopefully those cuts (I'd not heard of them before) will set GM up for future successes. Now if the CEOs would stop acting like assholes (flying in on private jets at $20,000 instead of simply flying first class) maybe some real progress will be made. The US auto industry needs to consider the Japanese model in employee compensation.
Don't forget, IF the Big 3 can hold out or better yet, simply file Chapter 11, when a national healthcare system comes online, that will be one HUGE cost gone from their bottom line.
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 7:06amBy StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 7:06am
Glad to see you're 'on board' with fixing our health-care system, that you seem to recognize that the 'status quo' just isn't working out.
BTW...did you happen to notice that thie article was written last year?
- Email this page
By roadgoddessNovember 20, 2008 - 7:27amBy roadgoddessNovember 20, 2008 - 7:27am
I've never really been against at federal healthcare system of primary and preventative care. I can make a GREAT business argument for one. Here is one system that I've promoted in the past...
1. More money into prevention... Tax the hell out of tobacco products to pay for part of this which will also cause people to cut down. A double whammy..... I would also legalize marijuana and tax the hell outta that but that may be a little "progressive".
2. Pay for the education of more Primary Care providers (MDs, DOs, PAs and NPs) in return for a term of service in the system.
3. Mandate those in the system (volunteers) be making strides to a healthy BMI, tobacco cessation AND mandatory drug testing. Failure of these tests is grounds for removal from the system.
4. Once insurance companies know that participants in the system have good primary and preventative care and are tobacco/drug free, they can get catastrophic insurance at reduced rates (typically ~3000) for a family of four with a high deductable that can be saved for TAX free through an HSA.
Is it draconian?...Yep... but if the taxpayers are going to pay for healthcare there needs to be Responsibilities with the Rights.....
I would also advocate mandatory drug testing to receive ANY type of government assistance. Use drugs, there goes your welfare check AND we're gonna take your kids...
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 10:26amHow about mandatory mental health screening for people like you
who post lies and anti american comments that they hear from drug addicts on the radio? You should be barred from any social benefits and any job other than a toilet cleaner. You want to drug test because it would deny those damn inner city BLACK people welfare. Well it wont happen. Drug addiction is a disease as is your mental health issue.
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000November 20, 2008 - 3:41pmBy hufflarry2000November 20, 2008 - 3:41pm
Wow Huffy I didn't realize you were such the racist. Wow, were did you get your white sheets? Burn crosses much?
I would NEVER imply that inner city black people were drug users (like you just did). Drug usage is non-racial.
"You want to drug test because it would deny those damn inner city BLACK people welfare."
-HEY AA, you have a CONFIRMED RACIST HERE WITH HUFFY! He called black people drug users! C'mon BAN HIS RACIST ASS!!!!!!
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 3:46pmLike I said
people like you should be screened for mental health issues and not given a job better than toilet cleaner.
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000November 20, 2008 - 3:50pmBy hufflarry2000November 20, 2008 - 3:50pm
Just cry "Uncle!" Huffy. You've met your better and he just handed your butt to you...
Have a nice day....
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 3:53pmDelusions of grandeur
are a sure sign of mental illness. Maybe you are popping pills like your hero?
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000November 20, 2008 - 3:58pmYeah, it's all the union's fault that American business is
collapsing. I never knew that all those workers at AIG, Lehman Brothers, Countrywide, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were unionized!
Blaming unions for the ills of the automakers or any other company is just plain ludicrous. Union membership now is the lowest it has been in decades, and can it be any coincidence that the decline of unions coincides with the lack of improvement in middle class living standards?
I'm not in a union, but I appreciate what they have done for us. I am proud of the coal miners that dealt with machine gun-toting Pinkerton thugs and the bombers of the US Army Air Corps to stand up for better wages and working conditions. I am thankful for the workers that died in Chicago in the early days of the union movement as they fought against greedy and corrupt company managers. Because they fought for those basic rights, we have a country that is far better off than places like India and China, where workers toil for far more hours under barbaric conditions for a pittance of money.
Are unions perfect? Of course not, but they are a necessary counterbalance to the corporate greed and criminality we have seen over the past 30 years, culminating in the financial disaster we see today.
Truth is whatever you can get other people to believe - Tom Smothers
- Email this page
By UffdaguyNovember 20, 2008 - 3:52pmBy UffdaguyNovember 20, 2008 - 3:52pm
I'm not going to sit here and say that unions haven't done good things but sit back and look at the facts in the auto industry... Because of the UAW AND the CEOs, the auto industry is in REAL trouble and may go under. Where will be auto workers be if the GM, Ford and Chrysler go under?
I heard one REAL good suggestion today. Before the Big 3 get a DIME from the American people, why don't they CEOs go to the UAW and ask for a lone - to save the company - from the retirement fund. In return, the UAW gets a BIG share of the BIG 3. Once the workers are working for themselves (employee owned) they may see it in their best intrest to help the company stay afloat.
GM just closed at $2.93 a share with 610,500,000 shares outstanding. That is a outstanding value of about 1.8 Billion. The UAW could buy that pretty easy I'd imagine. Make it an employee-owned company...
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 4:05pmHow can you basically ignore the elephant in the room?
Did the unions run GM? Did they choose the R&D priorities, the marketing strategies, the budgets and the direction of the company? Hell no. They were passengers on board the corporate Titanic as successive "Capt. Smiths" drove the company faster into the icebergs. Would GM be in better shape if their people were paid less? Doubtful, because the people in charge always seemed to come up with creative new ways to mess their company's future up.
I say either nationalize the bastards, or let them sink. We are witnessing the effects of unrestrained capitalism, destroying banks, automakers, homeowners and everyone else. I for one am totally against rewarding these companies for their greed and criminal actions by giving them bottomless wallets that they can empty at will.
Truth is whatever you can get other people to believe - Tom Smothers
- Email this page
By UffdaguyNovember 20, 2008 - 4:15pmNo scabs
Most of our trolls are bitching and complaining about the union workers wanting a better salary. The traitor amongst us says they only turn wrenches so they don't deserve better pay. Ever notice how these same people fight so hard for the billionaires' money? The people who lay off the wrench turning laborers to raise the stock price are entitled to the money they earned at other's expense but the laborer can go to hell.
Enough said.
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 20, 2008 - 11:59amHow about this?
Let those managers come down and turn wrenches one day a week. And let them earn the pay those wrench-turners earn for that day.
Humility is the cornerstone of wisdom.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error. ~~~John Kenneth Galbraith
- Email this page
By nonexistent manNovember 20, 2008 - 12:20pmBy nonexistent manNovember 20, 2008 - 12:20pm
How about this..
Let those wrench turners go to college (Business school) take the hard subjects and sacrifice for 4-6 (MBA) years (and the loans that many of us took) for an advanced education to EARN the pay of an executive. This doesn't mean that the MAJOR FAT CAT CEOs should be getting millions (see my previous comments). I'm just saying that working you ass off in high school to get into a good colleges comes with lifetime benefits. How much education does it take to turn a wrench? How much education does (didactic or practical) does it take to run a major corporation?
Again, look at the Japanese model, the CEOs make good money but not lavash money and they don't eat lunch in private rooms courtesy of the company. By that same token, the average worker isn't beholden to unions and they appreciate the company for providing the opportunity to work.
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 1:00pmBy StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 1:00pm
I'd love to see you thrown into a factory and made to work there for a day. I'm sure you would know which wrench to use and which nuts to turn...
Apparently frightened twit thinks no factory worker ever went to college.
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 20, 2008 - 1:05pmBy f u bush2November 20, 2008 - 1:05pm
Hey, just like you, I made my own choices. I'm not slamming autoworkers but once they make so much money (mainly due to legacy costs) that the Big 3 cars can't make enough profit than the whole thing implodes.
I'm sure you would know which wrench to use and which nuts to turn...
-Yeah, and I'm sure you wouldn’t' know which insertion kit to use when running a PICC, or what solutions to use to properly assure the line is correctly flushed and syringe to use to assure that you don't blow off the end of the PICC causing a pulmonary embolism.
-Or better yet, what site is best for an ID PPD placement and when to recheck it....
-Or which meds are best used to achieve a good state of conscious sedation for a relatively painless colonoscopy.. Or what to do if the patient has an adverse reaction to the drugs you picked.
Dippy..
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 3:00pmBy StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 3:00pm
Nor would I mock your position or wages because of my Masters degree or the PhD I'm close to finishing.
Dumb ass
YOU are the one defining which jobs are respectable and which aren't. YOU are the one declaring educated people wouldn't take a job that requires a wrench.
- Email this page
By f u bush2November 20, 2008 - 3:08pmBy f u bush2November 20, 2008 - 3:08pm
Here is a difference, I don't have an issue with those who make sacrifices to make a better living. I understand that people with more skills/education make more money than I. I have no doubt that some guys on the assembly lines who have certain skills make more money than I and I have no issue with that. I also know that no garbage man should make what I make.
YOU are the one declaring educated people wouldn't take a job that requires a wrench.
-Hey I would take a job turning a wrench if I made as much $$$ as the union employees do (it would be a lot less headaches than being an RN). The problem is, that many of those jobs simply aren't worth the $80/hr (in cash and benefits) that those employees are making because of the UAW.
PS: Congrats on the PhD. I'll be going after mine soon after I finish the Masters.... You teaching?
You never responded....
Why get rid of the secret ballot for unionization? Why the EFCA? If people want a union why not let the secret ballot do it's thing?
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..
- Email this page
By StillFightnNovember 20, 2008 - 3:23pmHave you ever been a garbage man?
How do you know what they are worth? You dont. From what you post here, I dont think you are worth more than min wage. You are one of those people who may have a slight education but does not have the intelligence or common sense to put it to good use. For Christ sakes, you get your opinions from a closet gay drug addict!
- Email this page
By hufflarry2000November 20, 2008 - 3:46pmYou've never been around an organization effort, have you?
Workers submit authorization cards for unionization. The union then advises management that the required percentage of workers have submitted cards. Management then calls for a secret ballot, and immediately begins spreading FUD regarding unionization.
I've been through it four times. Only once did management's FUD succeed.
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error. ~~~John Kenneth Galbraith
- Email this page
By nonexistent manNovember 20, 2008 - 4:06pmBy nonexistent manNovember 20, 2008 - 4:06pm
Management then calls for a secret ballot, and immediately begins spreading FUD regarding unionization.
-Yes but if the EFCA gets passed (and it will), the secret ballot aspect will go away... Thus, when Guido and Luca hand out those cards to some worker who may not want an union and says:
"Yo! Sign here sos' we can get you in da union... You DO want a union DON'T you... Hey, you have a pretty family it would be a shame if somthin' were to happen to dem... Thank you for your union support".....
I've been through it four times. Only once did management's FUD succeed
-That's funny considering Union numers have been decreasing steadily since the 50s....
The best part of an Obama Presidency is that Hillary will NEVER be President..