Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Decker on November 19, 2008, 08:05:06 AM
-
Congress and the Bush administration are currently considering whether to spend $25 billion to rescue Detroit automakers. The proposal has generally been met with stiff resistance from conservatives, who have increasingly been pinning all the blame for the crisis in Detroit on labor unions:
Sen. Jim DeMint: “Some auto manufacturers are struggling because of a bad business structure with high unionized labor costs and burdensome federal regulations. Taxpayers did not create these problems and they should not be forced to pay for them.”
Sen. Jon Kyl: “For years they’ve been sick. They have a bad business model. They have contracts negotiated with the United Auto Workers that impose huge costs.The average hourly cost per worker in this country is about $28.48. For these auto makers, it’s $73. And for the Japanese auto companies working here in the United States, it’s $48.”
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger: “You know, if you pay the auto workers or the benefits and all of those things, are maybe too high. … We have, like, in America, you sell a car, and you have $2,000 of each car just goes to benefits. So I think that there’s a way of reducing all of that, make them more fiscally responsible.”
Unions do not deserve the blame placed on them by the right wing. In fact, unions have repeatedly made concessions to auto executives over recent years. Contrary to Kyl’s claim, new auto employees earn $25.65 an hour.
Big Three automaker CEOs and executives based their business model on a future of cheap oil, fighting fuel efficiency standards despite warnings against such a strategy. Detroit manufactured, as Tom Friedman pointed out, oversized gas-guzzling SUVs that reduced their competitive edge.
Financial firms AIG, Merrill Lynch, and Bear Stearns did not have unionized workers but still suffered economic collapses. Frozen credit markets and a spiraling recession were major contributors to Detroit’s current state. Today, the Center for American Progress urged Congress “to support legislation to grant a $25 billion bridge loan to the U.S. auto companies to ensure that they avoid bankruptcy” provided the automakers provide health and retirement security and invest in clean technology.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/17/unions-auto-bailout/
Why is it that any phenomenon that benefits the middle and lower class as a whole is targeted by rightwingers as THE problem. From Soc. Sec. to this topic, unions, they are decried as a problem.
I, for one, am glad that the 'every man for himself' tact is dying on the vine. It's too divisive a notion in these troubled times.
-
Mismanagement includes the ridiculous wages they pay.
If people want to keep their jobs, they're going to have to accept significant pay cuts.
-
Mismanagement includes the ridiculous wages they pay.
If people want to keep their jobs, they're going to have to accept significant pay cuts.
$25 an hour is 50,000+ a year. That's the average household income in the US.
Have you seen the geometric explosion of executive compensation: million dollar bonuses, golden parachute agreements, golden handcuff agreements?
The execs are pocketing the cash while asking the rank and file to take pay cuts.
Don't seem right to me.
-
The unions are very much to blame. The southern non-union factories are doing ok without union involment. The green dipshits are also strangling the car companies as well. They're building very expensive green cars that nobody wants, at a loss. The management is to blame, in short, their all to blame. If they want to survive, they all will need to take a cut, sell what people want and maintain some sorta quality control. Its 1980 all over again.
-
The unions are very much to blame. The southern non-union factories are doing ok without union involment. The green dipshits are also strangling the car companies as well. They're building very expensive green cars that nobody wants, at a loss. The management is to blame, in short, their all to blame. If they want to survive, they all will need to take a cut, sell what people want and maintain some sorta quality control. Its 1980 all over again.
The same thing will happen that always happens.
The elitest owners and executives pocket the profit and cut the wages and benefits of the working class producers.
One might call that extreme opportunism...or they are all a bunch of well-fed parasites.
-
Yeah well...Detroit isn't in the business of employing people, its in the business of selling cars. If those elitist owners didn't exist u'd be feeding ur horse. Gimme a break. They failed because they're bad businessmen, shortsighted unions and ridiculous green standards emposed by Uncle Sam.
If Congress wants to ease the immediate burden on Detroit, it could also ease the onerous fleet-mileage standards (CAFE rules) that force the companies to make cars domestically that are unprofitable. A mere tweak would help a lot -- for example, simply allow Detroit to meet CAFE standards by counting the cars it makes at home and abroad. This alone might save Chrysler from bankruptcy. But Congress won't budge on that simple change.
And come January 20, Barack Obama is promising to overturn a Bush Administration refusal to grant California a waiver to impose its own new anticarbon automobile rules. This would doom Detroit without huge subsidies, forcing the entire industry to retool merely to supply cars to the California market. The California plan would demand a 23% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from new autos by 2012 and 30% by 2016. The Bush Environmental Protection Agency has refused to grant the waiver, arguing it is better to have a uniform national standard.
All of this shows that Democrats don't merely want to save jobs. They want an entirely different American auto industry that serves goals other than selling cars to consumers. The green lobbies have disliked Detroit for decades -- for resisting fleet mileage standards and having the audacity to make SUVs, trucks and other vehicles that people have wanted to buy but that violate modern environmental pieties. For the greens, the bailout is their main chance to remake Detroit according to their dictates.
This means that if a bailout proceeds Americans would be signing up for much more than a short-term financial fix, a la Chrysler in 1979. Once Congress starts investing in its green visions for Detroit, it isn't likely to give up easily or stop at $50 billion. If the Environmental Motor Company's cars don't sell well enough to earn a profit, then something else would have to be done to vindicate the investments. Taxpayer loans and other subsidies would have to float the companies until Americans wise up or Congress forces consumers to buy them. Taxpayers should get ready to own a piece of Detroit for a very long time.
The more realistic alternative to this utopian green vision is to let GM or Chrysler file for Chapter 11 like any other company that can't pay its bills. The immediate costs would be severe, but at least bankruptcy would provide the political and legal means for them to evolve into smaller, more competitive companies. Taxpayers shouldn't be asked to finance a green industrial policy promoted by lobbyists and Congressmen who know nothing about what it takes to make a car -- much less make a profit.
-
I don't believe that unions are inherently evil, because there have been periods in our history when they've been necessary in some industries.
The auto workers unions, however, have outlived their usefulness.
It's really a problem when the federal government could do a better job of managing an auto company than the auto 'experts' can.
-
No not evil, but shortsighted.
-
Yep - pricing themselves out of a job doesn't seem very wise.
-
Yeah well...Detroit isn't in the business of employing people, its in the business of selling cars. If those elitist owners didn't exist u'd be feeding ur horse. Gimme a break. They failed because they're bad businessmen, shortsighted unions and ridiculous green standards emposed by Uncle Sam.
If Congress wants to ease the immediate burden on Detroit, it could also ease the onerous fleet-mileage standards (CAFE rules) that force the companies to make cars domestically that are unprofitable. A mere tweak would help a lot -- for example, simply allow Detroit to meet CAFE standards by counting the cars it makes at home and abroad. This alone might save Chrysler from bankruptcy. But Congress won't budge on that simple change.
And come January 20, Barack Obama is promising to overturn a Bush Administration refusal to grant California a waiver to impose its own new anticarbon automobile rules. This would doom Detroit without huge subsidies, forcing the entire industry to retool merely to supply cars to the California market. The California plan would demand a 23% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from new autos by 2012 and 30% by 2016. The Bush Environmental Protection Agency has refused to grant the waiver, arguing it is better to have a uniform national standard.
All of this shows that Democrats don't merely want to save jobs. They want an entirely different American auto industry that serves goals other than selling cars to consumers. The green lobbies have disliked Detroit for decades -- for resisting fleet mileage standards and having the audacity to make SUVs, trucks and other vehicles that people have wanted to buy but that violate modern environmental pieties. For the greens, the bailout is their main chance to remake Detroit according to their dictates.
This means that if a bailout proceeds Americans would be signing up for much more than a short-term financial fix, a la Chrysler in 1979. Once Congress starts investing in its green visions for Detroit, it isn't likely to give up easily or stop at $50 billion. If the Environmental Motor Company's cars don't sell well enough to earn a profit, then something else would have to be done to vindicate the investments. Taxpayer loans and other subsidies would have to float the companies until Americans wise up or Congress forces consumers to buy them. Taxpayers should get ready to own a piece of Detroit for a very long time.
The more realistic alternative to this utopian green vision is to let GM or Chrysler file for Chapter 11 like any other company that can't pay its bills. The immediate costs would be severe, but at least bankruptcy would provide the political and legal means for them to evolve into smaller, more competitive companies. Taxpayers shouldn't be asked to finance a green industrial policy promoted by lobbyists and Congressmen who know nothing about what it takes to make a car -- much less make a profit.
They are bad businessmen b/c idiot americans buy SUVs which guzzle gas, (a finite resource), and they build those stupid trucks to meet demand.
Then americans complain about the cost of gas going up. Idiots.
So the government responds by tinkering with the CAFE standards (SUVs are classified as trucks--less efficient more gas guzzling). http://enhs.umn.edu/5105/suv/suv.html
The elitest owners/executives still claim their millions while asking the unions to continuously cut back on wages and benefits....and the kicker is that the unions have been caving to the demands.
GM CEO Rick Wagoner earned $9.3 million in salary and bonus in 2006, nearly double what he earned in 2005.
While UAW members finish voting on a new contract with General Motors that includes a cost-of-living freeze, union negotiators have moved on to Chrysler, with Ford Motor (F) next.
Chrysler's new CEO, Bob Nardelli, became a symbol of corporate excess when he left Home Depot early this year with a $210 million severance package. Ford's new CEO, Alan Mulally, got $27.8 million in salary and bonus in his first few months on the job, including an $18.5 million signing bonus.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2007-10-09-auto-exec-pay_N.htm
Don't cry about the plight of the executives, they're cleaning up at everyone elses expense.
-
No bailout.
My initial impulse was to bail out the automakers. The ripple effect of one or more of them going under or bankrupt would be horribly painful, but maybe it’s time for some pain. We can’t put it off forever and as the CEOs flap their tongues before congress it is clear that they still do not get it.
As one of their congressional interlocutors observed, there is something wrong when three CEOs fly in to Washington DC on three private jets (by definition a luxury) asking for taxpayer money. Couldn’t they have “jetpooled” together and come in on one private plane? Couldn’t they have downgraded to a First Class ticket on a commercial flight? They all talk about “scaling back” “reorganizing” and “changing the way they do business” but if they can’t set the example with their own perks what possible incentive do we have to believe that they will be any more responsible with taxpayer money?
And, yes, the unions are to blame too. The writing has been on the wall for some time; when you hitch your future to a sinking ship and continue to demand more from that ship, you have only yourself to blame when the shit hits the fan. :'(
-
....
And, yes, the unions are to blame too. The writing has been on the wall for some time; when you hitch your future to a sinking ship and continue to demand more from that ship, you have only yourself to blame when the shit hits the fan. :'(
I would agree with this to an extent.
-
$25 an hour is 50,000+ a year. That's the average household income in the US.
Have you seen the geometric explosion of executive compensation: million dollar bonuses, golden parachute agreements, golden handcuff agreements?
The execs are pocketing the cash while asking the rank and file to take pay cuts.
Don't seem right to me.
The benes and salary average out to 72 an hour per employee.
-
The benes and salary average out to 72 an hour per employee.
new auto employees earn $25.65 an hour.
General Motors Corp., ..., paid its production workers an average of $27 an hour
http://www.aftermarketnews.com/Item/28594/uaw_losing_pay_edge_foreign_automakers_bonuses_boost_wages_in_us_plants_as_detroit_car_companies_struggle.aspx
Auto companies will hire replacement workers for people taking buyouts or retiring. The new production workers for the Big Three will be paid $14 an hour — about half of what their counterparts currently earn — in accordance with the contracts negotiated last fall.
http://www.autoobserver.com/2008/02/help-wanted-autoworkers-at-14-an-hour.html
The problem is not that benefits per se, the problem is that everyone should have the same health benefits but the runaway costs of private coverage have made this into a gigantic problem.
The U.S. automakers are moving more production to Canada where a national health care program provides coverage for workers and their families for less than one-fifth of the cost of health benefits on the U.S. side of the border.
http://www.workinglife.org/wiki/The+Auto+Industry+Crisis+is+a+Health+Care+Crisis+(April+15,+2005)
-
This is one issue of many. Healthcare isn't the only reason...and why is healthcare so hi...nutbag trial lawyers like Edwards.
-
new auto employees earn $25.65 an hour.
General Motors Corp., ..., paid its production workers an average of $27 an hour
http://www.aftermarketnews.com/Item/28594/uaw_losing_pay_edge_foreign_automakers_bonuses_boost_wages_in_us_plants_as_detroit_car_companies_struggle.aspx
Auto companies will hire replacement workers for people taking buyouts or retiring. The new production workers for the Big Three will be paid $14 an hour — about half of what their counterparts currently earn — in accordance with the contracts negotiated last fall.
http://www.autoobserver.com/2008/02/help-wanted-autoworkers-at-14-an-hour.html
The problem is not that benefits per se, the problem is that everyone should have the same health benefits but the runaway costs of private coverage have made this into a gigantic problem.
The U.S. automakers are moving more production to Canada where a national health care program provides coverage for workers and their families for less than one-fifth of the cost of health benefits on the U.S. side of the border.
http://www.workinglife.org/wiki/The+Auto+Industry+Crisis+is+a+Health+Care+Crisis+(April+15,+2005)
When you add in the cost of health care, pension, SS, workers comp, etc, it comes out to $72 an hour.
The US auto companies are in a fix because they produced over priced cars that people dont want. Its that simple.
They cannot produce a cheap car and make money on it because the labor and legacy costs are too high. They only make money on trucks and SUVS.
-
this '25 billion' is just monopoly money anyways ;D
-
When you add in the cost of health care, pension, SS, workers comp, etc, it comes out to $72 an hour.
The US auto companies are in a fix because they produced over priced cars that people dont want. Its that simple.
They cannot produce a cheap car and make money on it because the labor and legacy costs are too high. They only make money on trucks and SUVS.
I think it's mismanagement of huge proportions and not worker pay. Here's why:
In at least one case last year, workers for a foreign automaker for the first time averaged more in base pay and bonuses than UAW members working for domestic automakers, according to an economist for the Center for Automotive Research and figures supplied to the Free Press by auto companies.
In that instance, Toyota Motor Corp. gave workers at its largest U.S. plant bonuses of $6,000 to $8,000, boosting the average pay at the Georgetown, KY, plant to the equivalent of $30 an hour. That compares with a $27 hourly average for UAW workers, most of whom did not receive profit-sharing checks last year. Toyota would not provide a U.S. average, but said its 7,000-worker Georgetown plant is representative of its U.S. operations.
Honda Motor Co. and Nissan Motor Co. are not far behind Toyota and UAW pay levels. Comparable wages have long been one way foreign companies fight off UAW organizing efforts.
http://www.aftermarketnews.com/Item/28594/uaw_losing_pay_edge_foreign_automakers_bonuses_boost_wages_in_us_plants_as_detroit_car_companies_struggle.aspx
-
This is one issue of many. Healthcare isn't the only reason...and why is healthcare so hi...nutbag trial lawyers like Edwards.
No, it's not trial lawyers that are to blame for high health care costs--that accounts for less than 3% of the costs. It's the bureaucratic practices of private insurers with their paper chase and corporate jets, million dollar salaries, golf and stadium sponsorships etc that drive up the cost.
$0.3 trillion is spent on adminstration. Much of this adminstration was caused by the insurance companies, which leads to the hospitals having to increase their prices, to cover it, which leads to higher insurance prices.
http://kriswager.blogspot.com/2007/04/why-is-health-care-so-expensive-in-us.html
-
Decker what is your opinion on the state of GM, Chrystler, and Ford vs Honda and Toyota of America?
Toyota and Honda of America have forged partnerships with their employees and kept the unions out.
Toyota made a contract with their fulltime employees that they would not lay them off despite the downturn. Even though this is costing them 300 million they are sticking to it.
Toyota has no leveraged assets and has 18.5 Billion in the bank.
-
Decker what is your opinion on the state of GM, Chrystler, and Ford vs Honda and Toyota of America?
Toyota and Honda of America have forged partnerships with their employees and kept the unions out.
Toyota made a contract with their fulltime employees that they would not lay them off despite the downturn. Even though this is costing them 300 million they are sticking to it.
Toyota has no leveraged assets and has 18.5 Billion in the bank.
Toyota and Honda make great products that people want to buy.
-
Toyota and Honda make great products that people want to buy.
Yes I agree, but my point is they have managed to avoid unionization of their american workforce.
-
Yes I agree, but my point is they have managed to avoid unionization of their american workforce.
Unionization is a ticket to bankruptcy, lazi workers, and disaster.
Any business that decides to go Union should be making an immediate exit plan.
The unions of today, especially the trade and municiple unions, are helping destroy the country bit by bit.
The result in higher costs and lower productivity and service to the taxpayer and customer.
If the US auto companies want to survive, the UAW needs to be abolished asap.
-
Decker what is your opinion on the state of GM, Chrystler, and Ford vs Honda and Toyota of America?
Toyota and Honda of America have forged partnerships with their employees and kept the unions out.
Toyota made a contract with their fulltime employees that they would not lay them off despite the downturn. Even though this is costing them 300 million they are sticking to it.
Toyota has no leveraged assets and has 18.5 Billion in the bank.
I don't know what kind of comparison you want. I don't think the failure can be laid at the feet of labor. I'm sorry, not when the counterparts in Japan are making roughly the same amount of compensation(including benefits). There's a reason why the Japs have been kicking our ass for decades in the auto world. It's management and superior products.
-
I had always heard that cars from Asian and European companies, even if they are made in the US, are better than cars from American companies, and that the unions are the reason why. Union workers, whether or not they are lazy, unskilled or unmotivated, they can't be easily fired. But in a company where there is no union, you get to hire the best guys for the job and fire the ones who are not doing a good job.
-
I had always heard that cars from Asian and European companies, even if they are made in the US, are better than cars from American companies, and that the unions are the reason why. Union workers, whether or not they are lazy, unskilled or unmotivated, they can't be easily fired. But in a company where there is no union, you get to hire the best guys for the job and fire the ones who are not doing a good job.
Damn right. Unions are a cancer to productivty, accountability, and prgoress.
-
I had always heard that cars from Asian and European companies, even if they are made in the US, are better than cars from American companies, and that the unions are the reason why. Union workers, whether or not they are lazy, unskilled or unmotivated, they can't be easily fired. But in a company where there is no union, you get to hire the best guys for the job and fire the ones who are not doing a good job.
Workers can always be fired with cause.
Your anecdotal conclusions are what is pushed through the liberal media in the US. It's not the executive class, it's the workers who are the problem. Those damn people expect a livable wage, benefits and a modicum of job security.
Whereas management/owners want a race to the bottom for worker compensation/safety/etc.--that's why 'globalization' is such a hit: it undoes the last 100 years of progress for labor.
Why pay a livable wage here in the US when some kid in indonesia will do the job for pennies on the dollar without the "constraints" of benefits or worker safety?
-
Workers can always be fired with cause.
Your anecdotal conclusions are what is pushed through the liberal media in the US. It's not the executive class, it's the workers who are the problem. Those damn people expect a livable wage, benefits and a modicum of job security.
Whereas management/owners want a race to the bottom for worker compensation/safety/etc.--that's why 'globalization' is such a hit: it undoes the last 100 years of progress for labor.
Why pay a livable wage here in the US when some kid in indonesia will do the job for pennies on the dollar without the "constraints" of benefits or worker safety?
Its both. The execs and the unions both stink. They produce an over priced product people dont want. Its that simple.
Other than the Corvette, Denali, and F150, there is not one other American made car I could see myself wanting.
I have a 2007 BMW 3 Series and a Ford Explorer 2002. I had a mustang GT before that which constantly had problems with the thermostat overheat all the time. FORD - Fix Or Repair Daily!
The BMW is near flawless. The Explorer transmission went at 40,000 miles.
My next purchase will be either a Honda Ridgeline or Nissan Fronteir.
-
Workers can always be fired with cause.
Your anecdotal conclusions are what is pushed through the liberal media in the US. It's not the executive class, it's the workers who are the problem. Those damn people expect a livable wage, benefits and a modicum of job security.
Whereas management/owners want a race to the bottom for worker compensation/safety/etc.--that's why 'globalization' is such a hit: it undoes the last 100 years of progress for labor.
Why pay a livable wage here in the US when some kid in indonesia will do the job for pennies on the dollar without the "constraints" of benefits or worker safety?
They are not my anecdotal conclusions. It's just what I've always heard. I never knew, and did not really care, if that was the true reason why Asian and European cars are so much better than American cars. Aren't the Honda Accord and the Toyota Camry the most sold cars in America, and Lexus has the highest customer satisfaction? This thread is the first time I hear something different.
-
They are not my anecdotal conclusions. It's just what I've always heard. I never knew, and did not really care, if that was the true reason why Asian and European cars are so much better than American cars. Aren't the Honda Accord and the Toyota Camry the most sold cars in America, and Lexus has the highest customer satisfaction? This thread is the first time I hear something different.
The whole "for cause" thing is a joke since it always results in lawsuits since the parties always disagree on the "cause".
Its the same thing as incompetent teachers not being able to be fired.
-
Its both. The execs and the unions both stink. They produce an over priced product people dont want. Its that simple.
Other than the Corvette, Denali, and F150, there is not one other American made car I could see myself wanting.
I have a 2007 BMW 3 Series and a Ford Explorer 2002. I had a mustang GT before that which constantly had problems with the thermostat overheat all the time. FORD - Fix Or Repair Daily!
The BMW is near flawless. The Explorer transmission went at 40,000 miles.
My next purchase will be either a Honda Ridgeline or Nissan Fronteir.
The problem with this thread is that this topic is really complex. We try to engage in reductionism like crazy here and sometimes that just doesn't work.
Yeah, I think that some guy earning 50k for pushing a broom is out of touch. I also think some guy getting 9 million for doing a shitty job should be slapped around. There's so much wrong with labor/management.
I remember when the biggest discussion was about 'buying american.' Now toyota is more american than some american cars.
-
Now toyota is more american than some american cars.
And still better than American cars, and they have no union. Not saying that's the reason. :)
-
They are not my anecdotal conclusions. It's just what I've always heard. ..
That's what anecdotal means.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/anecdotal
I wasn't trying to offend you. Anecdotal evidence is not very good evidence, that's all. Sometimes it's dead on.
-
Its both. The execs and the unions both stink. They produce an over priced product people dont want. Its that simple.
Other than the Corvette, Denali, and F150, there is not one other American made car I could see myself wanting.
I have a 2007 BMW 3 Series and a Ford Explorer 2002. I had a mustang GT before that which constantly had problems with the thermostat overheat all the time. FORD - Fix Or Repair Daily!
The BMW is near flawless. The Explorer transmission went at 40,000 miles.
My next purchase will be either a Honda Ridgeline or Nissan Fronteir.
As i was listening to the editor in chief of Forbes magazine on C-span radio. The question abou the Automakers. he said, "Which US auto Industry, are we talking about the Auto Industry that makes Honda Accords, BMWs, Mercedes? They are doing well. Or The Auto Industry in Detroit?" Another guy on another day said that GM is making a killing in China, and they are also doing well in Europe....Seems like the problem is how they run things over here, and how they have had low quality product for ages, so now that they finally are coming with the goods, its too late, the public doesn't trust them....
-
That's what anecdotal means.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/anecdotal
I wasn't trying to offend you. Anecdotal evidence is not very good evidence, that's all. Sometimes it's dead on.
You did not offend me, and I know you were not trying to. I'm just saying that I can't argue with you because it's just what I've heard. I'm not an expert on this subject. :)
-
As i was listening to the editor in chief of Forbes magazine on C-span radio. The question abou the Automakers. he said, "Which US auto Industry, are we talking about the Auto Industry that makes Honda Accords, BMWs, Mercedes? They are doing well. Or The Auto Industry in Detroit?" Another guy on another day said that GM is making a killing in China, and they are also doing well in Europe....Seems like the problem is how they run things over here, and how they have had low quality product for ages, so now that they finally are coming with the goods, its too late, the public doesn't trust them....
I would live to buy American and get a F150. However, for what I want, its going to cost$$$$$$$$$$ where I can get a honda Ridgeline at less cost and know it will go forever.
-
The problem with this thread is that this topic is really complex. We try to engage in reductionism like crazy here and sometimes that just doesn't work.
Yeah, I think that some guy earning 50k for pushing a broom is out of touch. I also think some guy getting 9 million for doing a shitty job should be slapped around. There's so much wrong with labor/management.
I remember when the biggest discussion was about 'buying american.' Now toyota is more american than some american cars.
These are all good points. Bottom line I think if a company is failing you need to let it die. There will always be someone to take their place if the market is there.
I understand the significance of these companies to the American Insustrial past, but these companies have gotten fat and bloated and obviously their business model and products are subpar.
-
Big Three auto CEOs flew private jets to ask for taxpayer money Story Highlights
Lawmaker: Flying jet to hearing like going to "soup kitchen in high hat and tuxedo"
Rep. Brad Sherman asked CEOs whether they would fly back commercial
Company representatives pointed to safety, travel policies as reasons for flying jets
By Josh Levs
(CNN) -- Some lawmakers lashed out at the CEOs of the Big Three auto companies Wednesday for flying private jets to Washington to request taxpayer bailout money.
(http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/US/11/19/autos.ceo.jets/art.auto.ceos.ap.jpg)
Chrysler CEO Robert Nardelli, left, and Ford CEO Alan Mulally testify on Capitol Hill on Wednesday.
"There is a delicious irony in seeing private luxury jets flying into Washington, D.C., and people coming off of them with tin cups in their hand, saying that they're going to be trimming down and streamlining their businesses," Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-New York, told the chief executive officers of Ford, Chrysler and General Motors at a hearing of the House Financial Services Committee.
"It's almost like seeing a guy show up at the soup kitchen in high hat and tuxedo. It kind of makes you a little bit suspicious."
He added, "couldn't you all have downgraded to first class or jet-pooled or something to get here? It would have at least sent a message that you do get it."
Rep. Brad Sherman, D-California, asked the three CEOs to "raise their hand if they flew here commercial. Let the record show, no hands went up. Second, I'm going to ask you to raise your hand if you are planning to sell your jet in place now and fly back commercial. Let the record show, no hands went up."
The executives -- Alan Mulally of Ford, Robert Nardelli of Chrysler and Richard Wagoner of GM -- did not specifically respond to those remarks. In their testimony, they said they are streamlining business operations in general. Watch Nardelli ask for help »
When contacted by CNN, the three auto companies defended the CEOs' travel as standard procedure.
Like many other major corporations, all three have policies requiring their CEOs to travel in private jets for safety reasons.
"Making a big to-do about this when issues vital to the jobs of millions of Americans are being discussed in Washington is diverting attention away from a critical debate that will determine the future health of the auto industry and the American economy," GM spokesman Tom Wilkinson said in a statement.
Chrysler spokeswoman Lori McTavish said in a statement, "while always being mindful of company costs, all business travel requires the highest standard of safety for all employees."
Ford spokeswoman Kelli Felker pointed to the company's travel policy and did not provide a statement elaborating.
But those statements did little to mollify the critics.
"If it is simply the company's money at stake, then only the shareholders can be upset or feel as it it might be excessive," said Thomas Schatz, president of the watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste.
But in this case, he said, "it's outrageous."
"They're coming to Washington to beg the taxpayers to help them. It's unseemly to be running around on a $20,000 flight versus a $500 round trip," Schatz added.
The companies did not disclose how much the flights cost.
Analysts contacted by CNN noted that the prices vary with the size of the plane and the crew, and whether the aircraft is leased or owned by the company.
Analyst Richard Aboulafia of the Teal Group said that $20,000 is a legitimate ballpark figure for a round trip corporate jet flight between Detroit, Michigan, and Washington.
When asked whether they plan to change their travel policies as part of the restructuring needed to shore up their finances, none of the companies answered directly. But they said they have cut back on travel in general as revenues have fallen.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/11/19/autos.ceo.jets/index.html
-
Auto Execs Fly Corporate Jets to D.C., Tin Cups in Hand
By Dana Milbank
There are 24 daily nonstop flights from Detroit to the Washington area. Richard Wagoner, Alan Mulally and Robert Nardelli probably should have taken one of them.
Instead, the chief executives of the Big Three automakers opted to fly their company jets to the capital for their hearings this week before the Senate and House -- an ill-timed display of corporate excess for a trio of executives begging for an additional $25 billion from the public trough this week.
"There's a delicious irony in seeing private luxury jets flying into Washington, D.C., and people coming off of them with tin cups in their hands," Rep. Gary L. Ackerman (D-N.Y.) advised the pampered executives at a hearing yesterday. "It's almost like seeing a guy show up at the soup kitchen in high-hat and tuxedo. . . . I mean, couldn't you all have downgraded to first class or jet-pooled or something to get here?"
The Big Three said nothing, which prompted Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) to rub it in. "I'm going to ask the three executives here to raise their hand if they flew here commercial," he said. All still at the witness table. "Second," he continued, "I'm going ask you to raise your hand if you're planning to sell your jet . . . and fly back commercial." More stillness. "Let the record show no hands went up," Sherman grandstanded.
By now, the men were probably wishing they had driven -- and other members of the House Financial Services Committee weren't done riding the CEOs over their jets. "You traveled in a private jet?" Rep. Nydia M. Velázquez (D-N.Y.) contributed. Rep. Patrick T. McHenry (R-N.C.) felt the need to say that "I'm not an opponent of private flights by any means, but the fact that you flew in on your own private jet at tens of thousands itself dollars of cost just for you to make your way to Washington is a bit arrogant before you ask the taxpayers for money."
It was a display of stone-cold tone-deafness by the automaker chiefs. In their telling, they have no responsibility for the auto industry's current mess. Threatening the nation with economic Armageddon if they are not given government aid, they spent much of the session declaring what a fine job they've been doing in Detroit.
"Chrysler really is the quintessential American car company!" Chrysler's Nardelli boasted.
"We have products that are winning car and truck of the year regularly," General Motors' Wagoner proclaimed.
"We are equal to or better than Honda and Toyota," Ford's Mulally added. "Every new vehicle that we make, whether it's small, medium or large, is best in fuel efficiency. The given is safety. And we have more, at Ford, more five-star quality and safety ratings than any other automobile."
Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) cut him off. "Thank you, Mr. --"
"And the best value!" Mulally blurted out.
"Commercials can go later," the chairman proposed.
They would have to go later, because members of the committee wanted to turn the session into a special edition of "Car Talk." Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) spoke of his '99 Jeep: "It probably has about 150,000 miles on it, and it's still running doggone well." Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.) invoked his '98 Jeep Cherokee: "Small problem with the back hatch staying open; we can talk about that afterwards." Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) praised her Chrysler minivan. Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.) had good words for her Jeep but complained that it didn't come in a hybrid version.
"I drive the same '66 Plymouth Valiant that I've always had," Ackerman proffered. He went on to discuss a problem with the GPS system in his Cadillac. "I wanted a loaded car in blue; I had to reach out to five states to find one in blue," he complained.
It seemed everybody had a car story to tell. Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.) let it be known that he was a car dealer for 25 years. Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) disclosed that he had worked at the GM plant in Framingham. Rep. Donald Manzullo (R-Ill.) wanted to see more ads for the car made in his district, while Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.) said the Edsel was once made in his home town. Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.) read from Cicero and held up photos of cars. And Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.) had no car stories to tell but delivered the surprising news that the problem with the Titanic was not its collision with an iceberg.
Detroit area lawmakers made passionate arguments that the carmakers had already done what "they possibly can to restructure and become globally competitive," as Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich.) put it.
But the executives were not helping their own case. When Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.) tried to find out when GM would run out of cash, Wagoner hemmed and hawed until the lawmaker protested that "I don't quite understand what the hell you just told me." When Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.) asked about GM's outlook for the quarter, Wagoner informed him that "we don't provide financial guidance in earnings."
So it was hard to feel sorry for the executives when Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.), late in the hearing, reminded them again that "the symbolism of the private jet is difficult," and mischievously asked the witnesses whether, in another symbolic gesture, they would be willing to work for $1 a year, as Nardelli has offered to do.
"I don't have a position on that today," demurred Wagoner (2007 total compensation: $15.7 million).
"I understand the intent, but I think where we are is okay," said Mulally ($21.7 million).
"I'm asking about you," Roskam pressed.
"I think I'm okay where I am," Mulally said.
And don't even think about asking him to fly commercial.
-
The big 3 pay there employees $25+ an hour, but it's the total cost per hour $70+ that's the problem...compared to the non unionized auto makers who's total cost is $40+ dollars an hour.
This issue is not what the employees are being paid, the issue is total cost.
Without this bailout being approved, which the senate hearing denied today, the big 3 will more then likely file for bankruptcy...but more then likely it will not be the end of these companies. They will file chapter 7, which will allow them to still fully function while renegotiating union agreements, parts agreements, etc. It will be a long tough road, but it's the right one.
Any of those companies that don't make it will be because of union greed.
Unions overall, the principles and ideas behind getting a union together for any employee group, the idea is sound and the thought I believe was originally a good one. But union greed has been one of the major pitfalls of the U.S. economy...they are as much to blame as corrupt CEO's and executives...maybe even more so.
-
I don't get where this hatred and condescension for the working man comes from on these boards.
The benefits and pay of non-union foreign automakers are in line with their US counterparts, so what's the problem?
In other words, it's not the Unions that is causing the Big 3 to go belly up.
Is it that executive pay has exploded exponentially? Maybe. Is it horrible management, probably.
-
Its both. Unionism promotes mediocrity. The stupid execs are WAY overpaid and not producing innovative and good products at a reasonable cost.
The reason they cant do so is because they are hamstrung by Union rules and costs.
GM can't compete and produce a reliable afforable car because they will lose money on each car produced due to the costs of labor and legacy costs involved.
Its sad, but this has been in the making for years, this is nothing new.
Toyota, Honda, and BMW all make cars in the US and are not in a mess. Why???????
UNIONS & GOOD PRODUCTS THAT PEOPLE WANT TO BUY!!!!!!!!!
I have a 2007 BMW and 2002 Ford.
I will never buy another Ford again and love my BMW. However, a BMW is not cheap and my next car will probably be a Honda ridgline or Nissan Frontier.
-
I don't get where this hatred and condescension for the working man comes from on these boards.
The benefits and pay of non-union foreign automakers are in line with their US counterparts, so what's the problem?
In other words, it's not the Unions that is causing the Big 3 to go belly up.
Is it that executive pay has exploded exponentially? Maybe. Is it horrible management, probably.
If the Automakers go belly up then what happens to the Unions?
Do the Unions have any influence with elected representatives?
-
If the Automakers go belly up then what happens to the Unions?
Do the Unions have any influence with elected representatives?
I don't know. The big 3 will probably declare bankruptcy and reorganize and lay off a sizable portion of the workforce. The collectively bargained contract will still exist and apply.
-
Decker, there was a comparison of auto workers from the US vs auto workers from Japan on tv (so I don't have a link). They are not given similar wages and benefits. The US worker made far more with wages, benefits and paid time off. A lot of guys work overtime for time and a half or even double time. You may be speaking of newly hired employees but thats not the average worker, nor does it include benefits & union overhead costs.
The total cost of the average auto worker is $72 or $73 per person including salary and benefits. Thats extremely high. I agree on corporate greed and outrageous salaries and bonuses of greedy execs. The problems is multifactorial. The industry needs an overhaul to compete. (Plus a better product with improved fuel efficiency). I think HH6 is on to something about the green agenda too.
If an auto company files for bankrupcy, the union agreements can be renegotiated. Executive salaries and bonuses can also be redesigned.
Its good to see many democrats and republicans opposing another taxpayor bailout. Perhaps there are other ways the government can help the auto industry...but giving them our $ to run the same system is illogical.
-
http://rightvoices.com/2008/11/18/average-total-compensation-for-a-big-three-autoworker-is-7321-an-hour-toyota-honda-and-nissan-pay-a-still-generous-4420-an-hour-in-total-compensation-%e2%80%94-a-cost-edge-of-nearly-40/
Average cost of a US big 3 auto worker is $73.21 whereas total cost of a toyota, honda, nissan auto employee is $44.20. Thats a 40% difference in cost, which is passed on to the product.
I'd like to see a comparison of executive salaries and bonuses too. Both are an issue IMO!
-
http://rightvoices.com/2008/11/18/average-total-compensation-for-a-big-three-autoworker-is-7321-an-hour-toyota-honda-and-nissan-pay-a-still-generous-4420-an-hour-in-total-compensation-%e2%80%94-a-cost-edge-of-nearly-40/
Average cost of a US big 3 auto worker is $73.21 whereas total cost of a toyota, honda, nissan auto employee is $44.20. Thats a 40% difference is cost, which is passed on to the product.
I'd like to see a comparison of executive salaries and bonuses too. Both are an issue IMO!
In at least one case last year, workers for a foreign automaker for the first time averaged more in base pay and bonuses than UAW members working for domestic automakers, according to an economist for the Center for Automotive Research and figures supplied to the Free Press by auto companies.
In that instance, Toyota Motor Corp. gave workers at its largest U.S. plant bonuses of $6,000 to $8,000, boosting the average pay at the Georgetown, KY, plant to the equivalent of $30 an hour. That compares with a $27 hourly average for UAW workers, most of whom did not receive profit-sharing checks last year. Toyota would not provide a U.S. average, but said its 7,000-worker Georgetown plant is representative of its U.S. operations.
Honda Motor Co. and Nissan Motor Co. are not far behind Toyota and UAW pay levels. Comparable wages have long been one way foreign companies fight off UAW organizing efforts.
http://www.aftermarketnews.com/Item/28594/uaw_losing_pay_edge_foreign_automakers_bonuses_boost_wages_in_us_plants_as_detroit_car_companies_struggle.aspx
-
Something else i don't get. how it that it cost 70$ an hour but workers are only paid $30?
Who gets the other $40?
-
In at least one case last year, workers for a foreign automaker for the first time averaged more in base pay and bonuses than UAW members working for domestic automakers, according to an economist for the Center for Automotive Research and figures supplied to the Free Press by auto companies.
In that instance, Toyota Motor Corp. gave workers at its largest U.S. plant bonuses of $6,000 to $8,000, boosting the average pay at the Georgetown, KY, plant to the equivalent of $30 an hour. That compares with a $27 hourly average for UAW workers, most of whom did not receive profit-sharing checks last year. Toyota would not provide a U.S. average, but said its 7,000-worker Georgetown plant is representative of its U.S. operations.
Honda Motor Co. and Nissan Motor Co. are not far behind Toyota and UAW pay levels. Comparable wages have long been one way foreign companies fight off UAW organizing efforts.
http://www.aftermarketnews.com/Item/28594/uaw_losing_pay_edge_foreign_automakers_bonuses_boost_wages_in_us_plants_as_detroit_car_companies_struggle.aspx
Profit sharing checks...so if the Big 3 aren't making a profit then workers don't get a check. Besides that's bonus pay, not a set pay or promotion for workers. That article is a little skewed. The employess will not continue making that bonus money if the profit is not the same the next year. I think it's very important to note that there is a reason that foreign companies fight off the UAW, I think it would be the cost issue. Nobody here has a problem with the working man; it's simply an issue with both management and the UAW which is a problem the way it has been run. I'm more inclined to believe guys like Troponin that have lived in that type of enviroment than any of us that is looking outside in.
-
Yes, troponin posted some good info about the unions in a prior thread.
-
Something else i don't get. how it that it cost 70$ an hour but workers are only paid $30?
Who gets the other $40?
The cost to have an employee is incredible! What the employee gets is only a portion of what it costs to have an employee.
For example:
$26.00 per hour salary +
7 1/2% per cent Social security contribution
Health Insurance
Union Stamps.
Workers Comp & Disability
FICA
These costs all total an average hourly wage to the employer of about 72.00 per hour. Most employees have no idea how much it costs the employer to have them there.
-
I blame the Jews...I always blame the Jews.
-
I blame the Jews...I always blame the Jews.
Why think and come up with rational and reasonable argument when you can always fall back on that stupidity????
Seriously, how stupid can you really be to say something like that?
-
Why the fuck do we still have unions!?
-
The cost to have an employee is incredible! What the employee gets is only a portion of what it costs to have an employee.
For example:
$26.00 per hour salary +
7 1/2% per cent Social security contribution
Health Insurance
Union Stamps.
Workers Comp & Disability
FICA
These costs all total an average hourly wage to the employer of about 72.00 per hour. Most employees have no idea how much it costs the employer to have them there.
this is f-ing appalling.
they have to pay over 100% of the wage for that shit?
While the foreign auto makers pay nearly half and produce a better product.
-
While the union protects the worker in some ways, the greedy unions actually take significant pay away from the worker. We now see unions causing more problems than the traditional protection they provided.
Also, new employees may get $26/hr but many auto workers receive far more than that. It is not at all uncommon for an auto worker to make $70-100,000 per year, as Troponin and I pointed out in a prior thread.
-
Profit sharing checks...so if the Big 3 aren't making a profit then workers don't get a check. Besides that's bonus pay, not a set pay or promotion for workers. That article is a little skewed. The employess will not continue making that bonus money if the profit is not the same the next year. I think it's very important to note that there is a reason that foreign companies fight off the UAW, I think it would be the cost issue. Nobody here has a problem with the working man; it's simply an issue with both management and the UAW which is a problem the way it has been run. I'm more inclined to believe guys like Troponin that have lived in that type of enviroment than any of us that is looking outside in.
Profit sharing is not bonus pay, never has been. It's considered part of gross compensation.
-
You people are missing the point.
I think this error is grounded in the idea that the free market is somehow governing the employment contract.
That is just oversimplification.
Trade issues, health care, real market demands and a whole host of other concerns affect the employment arrangement.
You guys piss and moan about the average household income + benefits for the autoworkers. That's how the goddam compensation should be.
The workers's standing and rights have been attacked and eroded for so long that we've become accustomed to living check to check with nothing but employee deferral programs to cover the costs of retirement, healthcare, dental care, or the like.
In the 1950s, a good job had decent pay, a pension, and other benefits to make life somewhat less hazardous.
There's been a loosely concerted effort to change all that. Now, in the last several decades, we find labor's pay has stagnated while executive compensation has exploded in geometric proportions.
"Globalization" has helped this happen. It's a race to the bottom for the american worker and we've been conditioned to view that as a determined course of history. Sorry labor, suck on it. While owners laugh all the way to the bank.
The course of human history has a loose connection to free labor. It took us a few hundred years to overcome the seduction of slavery. We peaked about 50 years ago. And now we are devolving.
-
Since you have obviously never run a business yourself, you have no idea how expensive it is to be in business and keep people employed.
The fact of the matter is that anyone who is in business knows that the cost just in staying in business is getting too high in this country due to all these demands every busybody wants to impose on businesses without reality to the marketplace.
Between the increased taxes, energy costs, health care, materials, rents, it makes being business that much harder. It is simply impossible to keep passing on these costs to the customer before the service or product you provide is unmarketable.
The onerous pensions and labor related costs for the auto companies make their business model not workable unless you want cars all costing 45k and up.
-
I blame the Jews...I always blame the Jews.
Why think and come up with rational and reasonable argument when you can always fall back on that stupidity????
Seriously, how stupid can you really be to say something like that?
Deicide is a Jew. :)
-
I hear what your saying Decker. Part of the problem is the overal cost of good benefits. Thats the whole healthcare argument.
But separating that out, the unions still have a negative overall impact these days. They do not provide enough benefit to justify their costs.
I also agree that executive compensation is out of hand...but I have few suggestions on that point.
-
I hear what your saying Decker. Part of the problem is the overal cost of good benefits. Thats the whole healthcare argument.
But separating that out, the unions still have a negative overall impact these days. They do not provide enough benefit to justify their costs.
I also agree that executive compensation is out of hand...but I have few suggestions on that point.
Read my earlier post. The rising cost(s) just in being in business is killing this country. Between taxes, energy costs, benes, health care, its impossible for business in this country to succeed.
Unless this is addressed, there will be many more layoffs and a depression.
If the global warming/union/sierra club types get their way, we are done for good and better go buy tents because that is where this is heading.
-
Profit sharing is not bonus pay, never has been. It's considered part of gross compensation.
Gross compensation is not salary nor a a wage. It is also not the same as benefits/ unions dues etc. Most "bonuses" are based on the performance of a company in a quarter, which the article says. That is how most bonuses are structured in this day and age.
We all recognize that CEOs are getting way too much. I mentioned in another thread that the CEO of Chrysler(mainly) during the interviews was a pompous prick, the guy thought he was ENTITLED to the money. At least the other two guys were doing a somewhat better job during the questioning.
-
Gross compensation is not salary nor a a wage. It is also not the same as benefits/ unions dues etc. Most "bonuses" are based on the performance of a company in a quarter, which the article says. That is how most bonuses are structured in this day and age.
We all recognize that CEOs are getting way too much. I mentioned in another thread that the CEO of Chrysler(mainly) during the interviews was a pompous prick, the guy thought he was ENTITLED to the money. At least the other two guys were doing a somewhat better job during the questioning.
All of these overpaid slobs need to go.
-
Gross compensation is not salary nor a a wage. It is also not the same as benefits/ unions dues etc. Most "bonuses" are based on the performance of a company in a quarter, which the article says. That is how most bonuses are structured in this day and age.
We all recognize that CEOs are getting way too much. I mentioned in another thread that the CEO of Chrysler(mainly) during the interviews was a pompous prick, the guy thought he was ENTITLED to the money. At least the other two guys were doing a somewhat better job during the questioning.
There are many different definitions of compensation and gross compensation does include salary or wages. In some venues profit sharing contributions can be referred to as bonus compensation but that doesn't change the fact that it is not bonuse compensation. I used to draft employment agreements so I know a bit about bonus compensation and currently I work as an ERISA attorney so I work with Profit Sharing plans all the time.
Yeah, I know what you mean about the CEO pay. I wish I could reduce the problem with the Big 3 to that. But there are so many variables in play as to why this train wreck happened that I'm having a hard time getting a grasp of it all.
-
Decker,
How come the left always brings up the CEO's pay scale? So the head guy makes 25M a year. How many times over that is being dumped into the rathole of 'organized labor'?
Is that the only rally cry you guys have?
-
Why think and come up with rational and reasonable argument when you can always fall back on that stupidity????
Seriously, how stupid can you really be to say something like that?
No head for sarcasm...eh? ::)
-
Decker,
How come the left always brings up the CEO's pay scale? So the head guy makes 25M a year. How many times over that is being dumped into the rathole of 'organized labor'?
Is that the only rally cry you guys have?
that's a really really good question.
I suppose if we were going to discuss this intelligently we'd look at the ledger to determine what the Big 3's annual expenses are and what the annual income is. That would give us a first step to address what might be excessive and what isn't.
I point out the executive pay b/c it's grown by HUUUUUGE leaps and bounds over the years while the workers have accepted management's concessions for wage freezes. That's still generalizing though. Those aren't numbers.
That 'rathole' of organized labor is the backbone of this country.
By the way, why does management's shit smell better to you than labor's?
I'm sorry, why do you defend executives over the working class?
-
The problem with the unions is that most of the added costs they impose on the company does not benefit the worker actually performing the work. Alot of that money goes into the pockets of the union bosses, organizers, and no shoe jobs.
The executives are WAAYYY overpaid. I agree. If they dont produce a profit, they should not be getting huge salaries and bonuses. A bonus for what???? A bonus should only be for good performance, not failure.
This is my gripe with corporate america, failure and success are both rewarded with grotesque amounts of money.
If a company is in the toilet, no bonuses should be meeted out to anyone until a profit it generated.
-
The problem with the unions is that most of the added costs they impose on the company does not benefit the worker actually performing the work. Alot of that money goes into the pockets of the union bosses, organizers, and no shoe jobs.
The executives are WAAYYY overpaid. I agree. If they dont produce a profit, they should not be getting huge salaries and bonuses. A bonus for what???? A bonus should only be for good performance, not failure.
This is my gripe with corporate america, failure and success are both rewarded with grotesque amounts of money.
If a company is in the toilet, no bonuses should be meeted out to anyone until a profit it generated.
UAW President Ron Gettelfinger got a 2.3 percent raise in 2006, a year after taking a pay cut, a federal report released Thursday showed.
Gettelfinger earned $145,126 and received $13,405 in allowances and official expenses for a total compensation of $158,530. His 2006 salary was still slightly less than he made in 2004 -- $145,466 -- after he and other officers took a 2.5 percent pay cut in 2005. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070413/AUTO01/704130353/1148
If $145,000 represents the money going into the pockets of the union bosses then how on earth is that breaking a company whose income whose income is billions? (In fairness, the National UAW cost for wages is about 90 million for thousands of union workers).
A separate UAW report released last month showed that its membership had declined to its lowest level since World War II. Membership through the end of December fell 3.4 percent to 538,448, a loss of 18,651 members compared with 2005.
The unions are shrinking.
Unfortunately it's very easy for me to see bankruptcy, reorganization and lay-offs coming.
Maybe that's needed to kick the industry in the head to do things differently.
-
The problem with the unions is that most of the added costs they impose on the company does not benefit the worker actually performing the work. Alot of that money goes into the pockets of the union bosses, organizers, and no shoe jobs.
The executives are WAAYYY overpaid. I agree. If they dont produce a profit, they should not be getting huge salaries and bonuses. A bonus for what? A bonus should only be for good performance, not failure.
This is my gripe with corporate america, failure and success are both rewarded with grotesque amounts of money.
If a company is in the toilet, no bonuses should be meeted out to anyone until a profit it generated
Absolutely 33386. I couldn't have put it any better.
-
I hear today that Ford and (not sure if it was GM or chrysler) were making good profits overseas, significantly better than profits made here. They equated that with higher union/employee costs.
I didn't get all the specifics. Do the big 3 have plants outside the US? How could profits be better overseas?
-
The problem with the unions is that most of the added costs they impose on the company does not benefit the worker actually performing the work. Alot of that money goes into the pockets of the union bosses, organizers, and no shoe jobs.
The executives are WAAYYY overpaid. I agree. If they dont produce a profit, they should not be getting huge salaries and bonuses. A bonus for what? A bonus should only be for good performance, not failure.
This is my gripe with corporate america, failure and success are both rewarded with grotesque amounts of money.
If a company is in the toilet, no bonuses should be meeted out to anyone until a profit it generated
Absolutely 33386. I couldn't have put it any better.
I have a few clients in the trades and the costs are literally mondblowing for union labor. You cant believe what it costs to have painters on a union job. These costs all get passed along to the end purchaser in the form of higher costs for the project or real estate. Its terrible.
Whats worse, the Union thugs always show up and intimidate the workers and the company and look for handouts. Its terrible.
-
Why is Obama pushing for transparent union votes? Shouldn't workers have the right to private ballots to avoid discrimination? This seems obvious...what am I missing?
-
Why is Obama pushing for transparent union votes? Shouldn't workers have the right to private ballots to avoid discrimination? This seems obvious...what am I missing?
Because open voting makes it easier for the union organizers and bosses to intimidate the workers and members since they will know how the members themselves vote.
This is a huge payback to Big Labor and will destroy thousands of businesses instantly. This is a disater in the making.
-
But that seems entirely transparent 333386..I'm looking for someone to point out the other side's view on this one. Its seems to be a complete disaster and irresponsible!?
-
But that seems entirely transparent 333386..I'm looking for someone to point out the other side's view on this one. Its seems to be a complete disaster and irresponsible!?
The argument by the AFL is that businesses have been able to shut out unionization to such a degree that the scales are now tipped heavily against the unions. The Unions claim to need this so that they can increase membership and keep from being shut out completely.
Even many liberals are against this disaster. This truly will be a watershed moment if this mess goes through. Huge layoffs will happen.
-
that's a really really good question.
I suppose if we were going to discuss this intelligently we'd look at the ledger to determine what the Big 3's annual expenses are and what the annual income is. That would give us a first step to address what might be excessive and what isn't.
I point out the executive pay b/c it's grown by HUUUUUGE leaps and bounds over the years while the workers have accepted management's concessions for wage freezes. That's still generalizing though. Those aren't numbers.
That 'rathole' of organized labor is the backbone of this country.
By the way, why does management's shit smell better to you than labor's?
I'm sorry, why do you defend executives over the working class?
Actually no, I agree that the top dogs are ripping off the system too.
It's just that I have never heard an intelligent argument as to how union labor benefits anyone or anything (other than their own system) in modern society. The most common retort is "Well the CEO makes a lot of money, so who cares if the laborer does too..."
-
Transparent voting is wrong. It is nobodies business how a person votes...for anything. I know I will get crap for this, but in times like now I'm glad I live in the South...no unions to mention. If you work you get paid...if you don't, you don't get paid. Just a synopsis, but you get the picture. ;D
I also read somewhere that foreign companies' execs don't make nearly as much money as the Big 3 execs make. I still say let them fail, I'm tired of bailouts, I'm tired of corrupt politicians, and I'm tired of politicians spending our money and then saying it isn't ours.
-
Actually no, I agree that the top dogs are ripping off the system too.
It's just that I have never heard an intelligent argument as to how union labor benefits anyone or anything (other than their own system) in modern society. The most common retort is "Well the CEO makes a lot of money, so who cares if the laborer does too..."
In the bargaining process for employment, management has the upperhand. Unions benefit the average worker by putting the full force of the rank and file behind each individual worker for bargaining purposes.
This has resulted in securing that which was once the norm in this country: a livable wage, health benefits and a pension.
Now in today's conditioned pop culture, those things are viewed as excessive or gravy. The worker should be grateful to just have a job...and work the most hours in the civilized world...for less pay...no benefits...except the one's that the worker himself funds through tax deferred vehicles like 401(k) plans or Sec. 125 plans.
-
In the bargaining process for employment, management has the upperhand. Unions benefit the average worker by putting the full force of the rank and file behind each individual worker for bargaining purposes.
This has resulted in securing that which was once the norm in this country: a livable wage, health benefits and a pension.
Now in today's conditioned pop culture, those things are viewed as excessive or gravy. The worker should be grateful to just have a job...and work the most hours in the civilized world...for less pay...no benefits...except the one's that the worker himself funds through tax deferred vehicles like 401(k) plans or Sec. 125 plans.
I agree, but $40 per hour for this? While foreign automakers have no unions, pay their people more, and produce a better product?
That make no sense.
-
I agree, but $40 per hour for this? While foreign automakers have no unions, pay their people more, and produce a better product?
That make no sense.
Foreign Automakers also have to work in dangerous sweatshop conditions. Foreign Automakers also have to work without any concern for the environment. Foreign Automakers are not bound to the same values that bind us.
The grass is not greener on the non-unionized side.
It's always been the dream of corporate america to have unions demonized to the extent that even the people helped by unions bitch and moan about them.
Free labor, or a close approximation, is always the prize for the elites.
It was the efforts of unions decades ago that helped establish and maintain our American middle class. What a shock to realize that both are disappearing.
I would like to see a comprehensive analysis on exactly how Unions are to blame for the shit we are in now.
B/c from where I'm sitting, the protestations are nothing more than regurgitated propganda.
-
Let them deal with it on thier own, that's what we have bankruptcy laws for. F**k em.
-
Let them deal with it on thier own, that's what we have bankruptcy laws for. F**k em.
There's that broad-minded pragmatic compassionate opinion that you're so famous for.
-
Foreign Automakers also have to work in dangerous sweatshop conditions. Foreign Automakers also have to work without any concern for the environment. Foreign Automakers are not bound to the same values that bind us.
The grass is not greener on the non-unionized side.
It's always been the dream of corporate america to have unions demonized to the extent that even the people helped by unions bitch and moan about them.
Free labor, or a close approximation, is always the prize for the elites.
It was the efforts of unions decades ago that helped establish and maintain our American middle class. What a shock to realize that both are disappearing.
I would like to see a comprehensive analysis on exactly how Unions are to blame for the shit we are in now.
B/c from where I'm sitting, the protestations are nothing more than regurgitated propganda.
I'm not saying there shouldn't be Unions. But when it cost $40 (over 100% of the base hourly pay) an hour to have them and we still turn out an inferior product and our companies are going bankrupt then there's something wrong.
I think it's on both. The companies a poorly ran and Unions are fleecing them.
-
There's that broad-minded pragmatic compassionate opinion that you're so famous for.
They came in with out a plan asking for money and when asked how much, they couldn't answer because they didn't know. The government was not formed to bailout people. Don't give me that compassionate crap, I'm not paying for handouts, if you want to, send them a check.
-
I'm not saying there shouldn't be Unions. But when it cost $40 (over 100% of the base hourly pay) an hour to have them and we still turn out an inferior product and our companies are going bankrupt then there's something wrong.
I think it's on both. The companies a poorly ran and Unions are fleecing them.
To me, this issue is VERY SIMPLE.
GM, FORD, AND CHRYSLER, cannot produce a cheap, reliable decent product that people want because the cost of labor and producing the product is too high to be viable. They simply cannot produce a good car at 20k or less because they would lose money doing so.
The only money that these companies make money on are the big trucks and SUVS well over 30K in price.
This is why these companies need to go bankrupt and end the UAW contracts.
There is a very solid reason by toyota, bmw, and honda make products here and are not in need of a bailout.
Unions, inovation, rational managment, and a GOOD PRODUCT!
-
Decker, your right about the purpose of unions and what they traditionally represent..but what they are now doing and what they are supposed to be doing are not the same. They are making it very difficult to compete internationally. Unions and greedy CEOs are both a problem, thats why they need to file for bankrupcy and restructure the management, the union contracts, and the actual products they make.
Going to washington asking for billions of our dollars without a detailed plan is an insult to the American people and to the government. These greedy SOBs assumed the gov would just give them our $? Thank god some good repubs and dems said no...for now...
-
To me, this issue is VERY SIMPLE.
GM, FORD, AND CHRYSLER, cannot produce a cheap, reliable decent product that people want because the cost of labor and producing the product is too high to be viable. They simply cannot produce a good car at 20k or less because they would lose money doing so.
The only money that these companies make money on are the big trucks and SUVS well over 30K in price.
This is why these companies need to go bankrupt and end the UAW contracts.
There is a very solid reason by toyota, bmw, and honda make products here and are not in need of a bailout.
Unions, inovation, rational managment, and a GOOD PRODUCT!
You bring up a good point. foreign automakers in this country don't have the same problems
-
To me, it seems overtime pay is also a problem. If you talk to people who have worked in the auto industry, they try to work more than 40hrs/week because they get double time or time and a half. Thats how some of these workers get paid nearly $100,000 per yr. Why do companies and unions allow this? Why don't they limit overtime and force the company to hire more people? ...probably the overall costs of benefits and union representation. The point is that it costs 40-45% more for a unionized American auto worker compared to the asian auto counterpart.
If we reorganized unions to reduce needless expense, pooled benefits, limited double time pay for overtime, limit extra paid leave and lay offs and cut wages to better represent the work the employees are doing, we could lessen the cost of vehicles and provide more jobs overall.
Again, CEO, COO and corporate management also needs restructuring. Tie bonuses only to company profits.
-
You bring up a good point. foreign automakers in this country don't have the same problems
Check this out. I have a 2002 Explorer and a 2007 BMW 3 Series.
At 36000 miles the transmission went on the Explorer. i did some research and found out that ford knew about the problem and didnt event issue a recall because of the cost involved. It cost me a lot of money and they very rude about it!
I have had to replace the thermostat because the car overheated due to some relay malfunction. I need new struts and shocks already at 50,000 miles and just this damn morning the Check Engine Light went on again. I will never ever buy a Ford again. I also had a mustang which was nothing but trouble.
The BMW???? Best car I have ever owned by far. The service is great and never a problem. no rattles, no shakes, no problems, no recalls, nothing.
The domestic companies did this to themselves.
-
They came in with out a plan asking for money and when asked how much, they couldn't answer because they didn't know. The government was not formed to bailout people. Don't give me that compassionate crap, I'm not paying for handouts, if you want to, send them a check.
I agree. let them fail. Otherwise, it's going to be $25 Bill MORE, every 2 months, as they keep leading us along with "great product innovation coming in 2010... we just need help til then!".
-
Its just insulting they had no f'n plan when they asked congress for another 25billion dollars of our tax money. WTF!?!
-
Its just insulting they had no f'n plan when they asked congress for another 25billion dollars of our tax money. WTF!?!
The money is just going to be used to meet payroll and other ongoing obligations.
-
Check this out. I have a 2002 Explorer and a 2007 BMW 3 Series.
At 36000 miles the transmission went on the Explorer. i did some research and found out that ford knew about the problem and didnt event issue a recall because of the cost involved. It cost me a lot of money and they very rude about it!
I have had to replace the thermostat because the car overheated due to some relay malfunction. I need new struts and shocks already at 50,000 miles and just this damn morning the Check Engine Light went on again. I will never ever buy a Ford again. I also had a mustang which was nothing but trouble.
The BMW???? Best car I have ever owned by far. The service is great and never a problem. no rattles, no shakes, no problems, no recalls, nothing.
The domestic companies did this to themselves.
I had a similar experiences with my Escalade which i got rid of in May and got a C240 which i freaking love.
Why can't they make good cars? Is it because they (the CEO's) are only concerned about the shareholders?
-
They came in with out a plan asking for money and when asked how much, they couldn't answer because they didn't know. The government was not formed to bailout people. Don't give me that compassionate crap, I'm not paying for handouts, if you want to, send them a check.
And how do the autoworkers differ from the wall street bankers who received a big piece of the 700 billion Bush Bailout?
-
And how do the autoworkers differ from the wall street bankers who received a big piece of the 700 billion Bush Bailout?
I thought the original bailout was a mistake as well. It set a terrible precedent.
-
Check this out. I have a 2002 Explorer and a 2007 BMW 3 Series.
At 36000 miles the transmission went on the Explorer. i did some research and found out that ford knew about the problem and didnt event issue a recall because of the cost involved. It cost me a lot of money and they very rude about it!
I have had to replace the thermostat because the car overheated due to some relay malfunction. I need new struts and shocks already at 50,000 miles and just this damn morning the Check Engine Light went on again. I will never ever buy a Ford again. I also had a mustang which was nothing but trouble.
The BMW???? Best car I have ever owned by far. The service is great and never a problem. no rattles, no shakes, no problems, no recalls, nothing.
The domestic companies did this to themselves.
I have an F250 that I had a similar experience with. The clutches on the manual transmissions are junk. Ford knows this, yet refused to recall them or replace them, citing that they are 'wear and tear' items, much like tires, windshield wipers and brake pads. Then Ford chooses to charge $1800 for replacement clutch, which you can only get from the dealers. I put a high-preformance clutch in for a few hundred less.
It is also a bitch to get Ford to warranty anything. You go into any Ford dealer and the guys there are rude as hell. I waited almost 20 minutes the last time I was in to get a camshaft sensor replaced for the guy to get off the damn phone with his buddy. Good, solid union work.
Then I have an 01 5 series BMW. Never had any issues other than the brake rotors warping a little.
We only buy Toyota and Euro cars now. Cheaper in price, and twice the car.
-
I had a similar experiences with my Escalade which i got rid of in May and got a C240 which i freaking love.
Why can't they make good cars? Is it because they (the CEO's) are only concerned about the shareholders?
Dude, Ozmo... I am a GM shareholder... and we are getting royally screwed across the board.
The management is covering the union contracts, and nothing else.
-
Decker, your right about the purpose of unions and what they traditionally represent..but what they are now doing and what they are supposed to be doing are not the same. They are making it very difficult to compete internationally. Unions and greedy CEOs are both a problem, thats why they need to file for bankrupcy and restructure the management, the union contracts, and the actual products they make.
Going to washington asking for billions of our dollars without a detailed plan is an insult to the American people and to the government. These greedy SOBs assumed the gov would just give them our $? Thank god some good repubs and dems said no...for now...
How do you know this: "They are making it very difficult to compete internationally."?
Doesn't practically any US based manufacturer get killed on the cost of labor b/c our competitors pay pennies on the dollar comparativley speaking?
Is our country doomed to race to the bottom for labor so that we are 'on par' with the lowest paying unregulated shithole country on the planet?
These are the things I think about instead of doing my damn job.
-
How do you know this: "They are making it very difficult to compete internationally."?
Doesn't practically any US based manufacturer get killed on the cost of labor b/c our competitors pay pennies on the dollar comparativley speaking?
Is our country doomed to race to the bottom for labor so that we are 'on par' with the lowest paying unregulated shithole country on the planet?
These are the things I think about instead of doing my damn job.
Not necessairily. If they put ourt a preimum product that commanded and justified the higher prices, they would be ok. the proble is that they put out a product that cant compete with similarly priced BMW, Merceds, Toyota, Honda, etc.
For the same money, the other companies put out a much better product.
-
Not necessairily. If they put ourt a preimum product that commanded and justified the higher prices, they would be ok. the proble is that they put out a product that cant compete with similarly priced BMW, Merceds, Toyota, Honda, etc.
For the same money, the other companies put out a much better product.
Is choice and design of the product the responsibility of rank and file unionized labor? Or is that the province of ownership/management?
-
Dude, Ozmo... I am a GM shareholder... and we are getting royally screwed across the board.
The management is covering the union contracts, and nothing else.
The union is getting theirs but the shareholders aren't?
-
Is choice and design of the product the responsibility of rank and file unionized labor? Or is that the province of ownership/management?
No, but the costs they impose on the company mean that they cant produce a decent low priced reliable vehicle.
Without the high unions legacy costs, at least they could be competitive on price.
-
Yep - pricing themselves out of a job doesn't seem very wise.
It is.
Because on matter how much you slash the salaries in USA, you will never be able to compete with low-wage countries like India and Vietnam.
What USA needs to compete with, is quality.
And right now German cars, Jap cars, French cars, et al, are much better.
The union in Germany is strong - it has forced the car industry to be effective and build very good cars.
The car industry in Germany is also in continuous transformation - rationalisations, new divisions opening, old closening, et al.
One of the reasons is because the union pushes for good salaries - BUT DOESN'T TRY TO PREVENT OBSOLETE INDUSTRIES TO CLOSE.
To ask the unions to lower the salaries won't fix the problem of bad cars.
Neither will any deregulation of environmental laws.
Quite the opposite - the reason why American cars are so bad, except for a few of Ford's products, is because the cars were made to fit the gas price in the US, whereas in Europe and Asia the gas price has always been higher - forcing the carmakers to build smaller and more efficient cars, and even alternative fuel sources.
However, I think if any nation will find something to replace gas with, then it is USA.
USA has a record of getting science projects done.
-
And how do the autoworkers differ from the wall street bankers who received a big piece of the 700 billion Bush Bailout?
They don't, I didn't agree with that at all.
-
It is.
Because on matter how much you slash the salaries in USA, you will never be able to compete with low-wage countries like India and Vietnam.
What USA needs to compete with, is quality.
And right now German cars, Jap cars, French cars, et al, are much better.
The union in Germany is strong - it has forced the car industry to be effective and build very good cars.
The car industry in Germany is also in continuous transformation - rationalisations, new divisions opening, old closening, et al.
One of the reasons is because the union pushes for good salaries - BUT DOESN'T TRY TO PREVENT OBSOLETE INDUSTRIES TO CLOSE.
To ask the unions to lower the salaries won't fix the problem of bad cars.
Neither will any deregulation of environmental laws.
Quite the opposite - the reason why American cars are so bad, except for a few of Ford's products, is because the cars were made to fit the gas price in the US, whereas in Europe and Asia the gas price has always been higher - forcing the carmakers to build smaller and more efficient cars, and even alternative fuel sources.
However, I think if any nation will find something to replace gas with, then it is USA.
USA has a record of getting science projects done.
Good post. The issue is quality. People will pay more for what they perceive as a good product. That is why I did not mind spending more for a BMW. i knew I was getting a great product. When I get in the car in the morning, my first thought is not what is going to break down or did I remember the phone number of AAA.
The US car companies and the unions did this to themselves and need to go bankrupt in order to possibly save themselves.
Even now the Unions are resisting change. Its unreal.
-
Some fun facts about the American worker and what WE are up against:
1. American workers are the most productive workers in the world;
2. Average inflation-adjusted wages today are only 15% higher than in 1980, despite a 67% increase in productivity;
3. Employees’ pay declined to 51.6% of national income, from the previous low of 52.4% in both 2005 and 2004, according the CBPP’s analysis of federal government data. Small percentage declines can make a big difference because each one-tenth of 1 percent amounts to $117 billion in national income, CBPP said. In contrast, corporate profits’ share of national income has increased sharply each year since the 2001 recession, when they bottomed out at 8.5 percent, and hit 13.8 percent in 2006, matching the record high set in 1942.
4. Since 1960, the average federal tax rates for middle-income households have increased and then declined modestly. Over the same period, high-income households saw sharp drops in their federal tax rates. As a result, writes the CBPP:
the share of the nation’s total income going to the top 1 percent of households jumped from 8.4 percent in 1970 to 19.3 percent in 2005, an increase of 10.8 percentage points. In 2005 terms, that increase works out to about $550,000 more in income per household for those in the top 1 percent. In other words, households in this income group received an average of about $550,000 more in income in 2005 than they would have if the group’s share of national had remained constant since 1970.
5. Of the slightly less than $2.7 trillion the federal government spent in fiscal year 2006, some 21 percent of the budget, or $557 billion, went to pay for defense, homeland security and security-related international activities. Another 21 percent of the budget, or $549 billion, went to Social Security, which provided retirement benefits averaging $964 per month to 34 million retired workers (and dependents of retirees) in the last month of fiscal year 2006. Meanwhile, social safety net programs—such as unemployment insurance, child care assistance and low-income housing—made up only 9 percent of the budget hardship.
6. While U.S. workers are feeling the pain of a decline in compensation and decreasing share of the national budget pie, those with jobs have even more to fear: Under the Bush corporate-greed economy, nearly any worker in the United States also faces the same risks as the 3,400 Circuit City workers laid off because they are being paid too much and the 17,000 Citigroup workers, professional employees who are seeing their presumably safe jobs shipped overseas.
Now, I know I am stepping out of subject here, and I apologize for it, but I must say what I have in mind. It's not the American worker who is fucking up the economy, WE ARE THE FUCKING ECONOMY! All we have to do is look at income disparity graphs, JUST ONE GRAPH, and you tell me, with a straight face, that it's the unions who are fucking up the economy. I'm not asking you to trust my word, reasearch it yourself, just one graph please.
(http://www.forthgo.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/image11.png)
The productivity vs wages relationship:
(http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhile_canadian_initi/images/uswages.png)
Union activity is not anywhere close to what it used to be back in the 20s to the 50s. You connect the dots.
Warning: The disconect between productivity and wages is now so large that even though you may be getting paid more than your father did, in real terms, meaning time vs compensation, you are getting paid a lot less than your dad did. Furthermore, the cost of living has gone up dramatically, so in essence, again, in REAL TERMS, we are, as a whole, making less money.
-
In essence, IN ANY ECONOMY, it's foundation if you will, is the activity of creating something of value. Doing each other's laundry does not create any economic value. Manufacturing jobs create a lot of value. Building houses creates a lot of value. Selling shares of a company creates no value. Sitting on the board of a company creates no value. Hence, as the story goes, and this has happened time and time again before: Once the value-creating jobs go, the economy goes too.
So, if you ask me, who is the likely culprit of all these companies going bankrupt, the "overpaid" workers or the CEOs of these companies I'd point at the CEOs. I mean, I'm speaking from a logical point of view here.
(http://mwhodges.home.att.net/mfg-worker.gif)
-
You cant force people to buy sub-par overpriced products.
The other fact is that state and local taxes are destroying the economy and middle class.
The govenment and those who vote for ever increased spending on everything for cradle to the grave programs is to blame for most of our problems.
Where I live, the average person pays 10k per year in property taxes alone! The government is the biggest thief in the nation and is robbing all productive people to pay for non-productive people.
Things are only going to get worse as this continues.
-
Slapper, the problem is that the companies have been trying to sell cars on price and size, not on quality.
The unions are to blame as well.
Instead of accepting factory closings and demanding new laboring market strategies from the congress and the president, they've tried to save old factories, thus making it harder for the Big Three to compete with foreign cars.
The unions have to be wealthy and able to support their members when they lose their jobs, otherwise you'll be stuck with unions who fights for obsolete plants with no future.
-
You cant force people to buy sub-par overpriced products.
Right, so you ship the jobs to China and the Chinese sell them back to you for Ľ the price, much higher quality mind you, for about 2 years and then develop a serious case of liver disease because the product contained some type of chemical harmful to humans. That is a fair trade off.
The other fact is that state and local taxes are destroying the economy and middle class.
No, local and state taxes pay for most everything (infrastructure-wise) that you see around you. What is really unfair is the Income Tax and the majority of federal taxes.
The government and those who vote for ever increased spending on everything for cradle to the grave programs is to blame for most of our problems.
The problem is not in the spending, it's on the collecting. What has happened here is that the US government has had a rather large increase in spending without being accompanied by an increase of taxes on the 1% of the richest Americans, who've actually seen the real tax liability reduced during the past decades. REDUCED dude, REDUCED. So, in essence the government is spending inflationary money that will eventually have to be paid by the middle class somehow (most likely the Social Security system). The biggest problem is that we are not allowed to convene in public in order to protest our representatives DIRECTLY, with the only option available being writing to these representatives, who are amongst the most corrupt in the world.
Where I live, the average person pays 10k per year in property taxes alone! The government is the biggest thief in the nation and is robbing all productive people to pay for nonproductive people.
I pay more than you and I am extremely happy with the choice I made (I used to live in NYC). Local and state taxes make that possible.
Things are only going to get worse as this continues.
Well, we've got a media that is simply not telling us the truth. We've got representatives in power that sell their vote on every possible measure that is pro-people for an all-inclusive trip to Bora Bora for the entire family. We've got seriously UNINFORMED people running around doing exactly that: uninforming. All of this gives everyone a sense of helplessness, a "what the fuck is going on?!" kind of feeling.
-
Slapper, the problem is that the companies have been trying to sell cars on price and size, not on quality.
Look, I'm in no better position to make bold statement as to whose fault it is. All I've said about the problem is that I remember doing a case study on the auto industry, while in graduate school, and reading interviews with some operation management gurus openly criticizing American auto makers for making some stupidly moronic moves and being unwilling to adapting new production methods. I also vividly remember, and this I am repeating, discussing some of the communications between the industry insiders (including CEOs) and none of what was being said involved unions (so I presume they were not a problem).
The unions are to blame as well.
I'm sure they have some blame to share. Nonetheless I totally disagree with the misconception that unions ARE the problem. Well, they may be the problem but they are also the solution. By this I mean that there isn't a more interested party for the company's success than the workers themselves. The CEOs and the rest of the officers do care to the extent they have FULL control. Unions challenge a very old order based on a firm belief that those who accumulate do not like to share, bottom line, and unions are often framed as The Cause of any company going down the drain. Look at the economic state of affairs nowadays: plenty of companies going down the drain, some with minimal union representation and going down the drain any way. Look at the massacre of the Internet Bubble: no unions involved whatsoever and all these companies went belly up anyway.
Instead of accepting factory closings and demanding new laboring market strategies from the congress and the president, they've tried to save old factories, thus making it harder for the Big Three to compete with foreign cars.
Well, most of the factory closing crap is caused by the fact that some companies have a vested interest in totally destroying the American union and the American worker. They do not want people making $50.00 an hour. They want slaves to work for $ 10.00 an hour in some foreign country with minimal working conditions, 7 days a week, for 12 hours straight. These new class of CEOs just do not want to share the decision-making process. Bottom line. They do not take any input from unions, even though they've gone very far in making concesions to Big Car. Instead, Big Car has made Detroit a virtual war-ravaged city, where unemployment is rampant and bankrupcies are increasing every day. Instead, the media does its role of propagandist making it seem as though it's always the union's fault (even though today's working conditions: 5-day workweek, paid overtime, retirement and heath benefits are ALL battles the unions won) and the companies semi-enslavement of foreign workers seem like they're running a charity event from which all Americans are eventually benefit. Wait until all these companies that are now selling you the shit you used to pay $ 5 dollars for for $ 2.50 turn around and sell it to ya at $ 7.00 when all competition is gone and balance sheets require profits go up so that a particularly bad quarter could be "painted over" with unforeseen profits. Nike is already doing it. Starbucks is already doing it. I mean Nike pays $ 5.00 for assembling their sneakers in Vietnam and retails the very same pair of sneakers back in the American market for $ 100.00. Believe me on this: ALL PRODUCTS THAT HAVE SEEN THEIR PRICED REDUCED BECAUSE OF OUTSOURCING WILL GO BACK UP IN A DECADE OR SO. These people are ruthless, they want more for themselves and less for us (check the graphs if you do not believe me!). The "us" being 99% of the population of course, aka The Economy.
-
I will say it again, you cant force people to buy overpriced sub par products unless you want a communist state.
also, if you think taxing people more is a way to success, you are seriously delusioned.
-
I will say it again, you cant force people to buy overpriced sub par products unless you want a communist state.
Again, are you implying ALL American products are overpriced?
also, if you think taxing people more is a way to success, you are seriously delusioned.
No dude, I AM NOT saying more taxes is the answer. I am saying quite the opposite: less spending. The problem is we live is a hidden pseudo-communist system in which every game is rigged: companies have to be bailed out, trariffs have to be raised, taxes have to be cut (for the rich of course), etc. Since there are so many "mouths" to "feed", such a large system of privilege to maintain, it is no wander that spending is going out of control. This has been discussed many times before. This ain't new. Capitalism will be gone and will make a comeback in the future. Same with communism and any other economic or totalitarian system that has existed and will exist. There's, however, "CONSTANTS" in this whole equation: Labor and wages. People who need money vs people who have money. Companies that have jobs vs people who need jobs. Et cetera. What defines us as humans is how much we fight to keep that ratio tilted toward a more "humane" level. Note: By humane I mean 5% of people owing 80% of the shit. Seem rather unfair but at this point, seeing what people are willing to settle for, seems like a plausible alternative.
-
No, the automobiles are overpriced.
Ask yourself - if you have 35k to purchase a car - is a chevy or ford on the top of your list?????????????
-
No, the automobiles are overpriced.
All of them?
Ask yourself - if you have 35k to purchase a car - is a chevy or ford on the top of your list????????????
You're losing me. What are you trying to say?
-
All of them?
You're losing me. What are you trying to say?
What I am trying to say is the consumers have many available choices to them in many price ranges. Dollar for Dollar, most consumers believe, rightly or wrongly, that their dollars are better spent on foreign vehicles due to quality issues.
If I have 35k to spend, I am looking at a BMW 3 Series, Honda Ridgeline, Mercedes, or maybe a Ford F150.
People want reliable good transportation without issues. For many years, the US auto has not been able to deliver that.
I have a Ford Explorer and will NEVER buy another. My next purchase id A nissan Frontier or a Ridgeline.
The service also stinks at Ford dealerships. STINKS!
-
The Jews...all the Jews... :o
-
What I am trying to say is the consumers have many available choices to them in many price ranges. Dollar for Dollar, most consumers believe, rightly or wrongly, that their dollars are better spent on foreign vehicles due to quality issues.
If I have 35k to spend, I am looking at a BMW 3 Series, Honda Ridgeline, Mercedes, or maybe a Ford F150.
People want reliable good transportation without issues. For many years, the US auto has not been able to deliver that.
I have a Ford Explorer and will NEVER buy another. My next purchase id A nissan Frontier or a Ridgeline.
The service also stinks at Ford dealerships. STINKS!
Well, I mean, that is your choice. My parents had a Chrysler, a Ford and a Chevy and had no major problems. I've had a Colorado, a Sable and now have a foreign car (Volkswagen) and will never buy another one in my life. That has been my experience. Everytime I need to change the oil I have to fork over almost $500 for an oil change and a tune up. I had to replace a fuse on the car's computer and had to wait 1 week to get it shipped from Germany. I have plenty of stories. Best car? The Mercury Sable. That thing was as heavy as a friggin tank, but it lasted me 15 years without any problems.
-
The Jews...all the Jews... :o
Hardcore.
-
No bailout.
My initial impulse was to bail out the automakers. The ripple effect of one or more of them going under or bankrupt would be horribly painful, but maybe it’s time for some pain. We can’t put it off forever and as the CEOs flap their tongues before congress it is clear that they still do not get it.
As one of their congressional interlocutors observed, there is something wrong when three CEOs fly in to Washington DC on three private jets (by definition a luxury) asking for taxpayer money. Couldn’t they have “jetpooled” together and come in on one private plane? Couldn’t they have downgraded to a First Class ticket on a commercial flight? They all talk about “scaling back” “reorganizing” and “changing the way they do business” but if they can’t set the example with their own perks what possible incentive do we have to believe that they will be any more responsible with taxpayer money?
And, yes, the unions are to blame too. The writing has been on the wall for some time; when you hitch your future to a sinking ship and continue to demand more from that ship, you have only yourself to blame when the shit hits the fan. :'(
I also agree with no bailout. Where the Hell did the first 290 billion go? The banks are holding onto the money, like stuffing it into the mattress.
If the automakers didn't see the handwriting on the wall 20 years ago, then that is shortsightedness on the corporate level.
If the bailout does come forth, it should come hand in hand with bankruptcy and other conditions. Kick all of those top people on the top out. It is obvious they don't know or don't care about anything but their own pockets
How many private jets does it take to go to washington to get in line for the the tax payers money? Each one takes his or her own private jet. The arrogance is astounding!
Let all of those who cry "welfare for lazy people is bad" apply that to multimillion dollar PRIVATE OWNED businesses.
It Is NOT my JOB to keep you in the style you have become accustomed. You are ready to chuck the hourly waged earner to the side... Well, right back at you!
Sandra
-
All of these overpaid slobs need to go.
Starting from the top.
Sandra
-
Let them deal with it on thier own, that's what we have bankruptcy laws for. F**k em.
BINGO!
This is what capitilism is all about.
So, if Coach's business falls, he has a backup plan or someone else will come in and pick up the slack.
otherwise it is socialism. The nation as a whole will "prop up" this PRIVATE business and hope for the best.
I, as a tax paying citizen would like to have a voice to say "NO" or "YES"
And if failing buisnesses and failing mortgages are online....
I have some bills that I want to be taken care of also, where is the end of the line?
Sandra
-
BINGO!
This is what capitilism is all about.
So, if Coach's business falls, he has a backup plan or someone else will come in and pick up the slack.
otherwise it is socialism. The nation as a whole will "prop up" this PRIVATE business and hope for the best.
I, as a tax paying citizen would like to have a voice to say "NO" or "YES"
And if failing buisnesses and failing mortgages are online....
I have some bills that I want to be taken care of also, where is the end of the line?
Sandra
Yeah, you have to wonder why. The tax payer bails out the company that does NOTHING for them (save of course the employees) and that company still makes crappy cars.
-
In my honest opinion the main victim of the economic slaughter we're about to be forced into, by these I-care-about-noone-but-myself capitalists and their bitches in congress and the white house, is people.
People just don't give a shit about other people. I mean, if you call yourself a patriot, an American, why would you not want your neighbor to have a well-paid job, his kid to have the same opportunity as yours (and I ain't talking about communism!). Where does this "overpaid slobs" bullshit come from? Aren't we all Americans?
-
In my honest opinion the main victim of the economic slaughter we're about to be forced into, by these I-care-about-noone-but-myself capitalists and their bitches in congress and the white house, is people.
People just don't give a shit about other people. I mean, if you call yourself a patriot, an American, why would you not want your neighbor to have a well-paid job, his kid to have the same opportunity as yours (and I ain't talking about communism!). Where does this "overpaid slobs" bullshit come from? Aren't we all Americans?
It comes from people like yourself who want to force others to buy overpriced items and not have competition.
I do not feel it is my responsibility or that of others to subsidize high wages for inferior products and services.
The overpaid slobs I was referring to are the executives who make insane money and do a terrible job.
-
In my honest opinion the main victim of the economic slaughter we're about to be forced into, by these I-care-about-noone-but-myself capitalists and their bitches in congress and the white house, is people.
People just don't give a shit about other people. I mean, if you call yourself a patriot, an American, why would you not want your neighbor to have a well-paid job, his kid to have the same opportunity as yours (and I ain't talking about communism!). Where does this "overpaid slobs" bullshit come from? Aren't we all Americans?
Another thing, my clients would fire me in a heartbeat if I provided a crap service and tried to overcharge them for it. The American people have told the car companies the same thing, dont produce over priced crap and expect us to buy it.
Companies exist to make money and profit, not be an employment program.
-
It comes from people like yourself who want to force others to buy overpriced items and not have competition.
What do you mean I "force" people to accept prices? The unions do not set prices, the companies do. Aside from this, the vast majority of companies going under are non-union. So there is no correlation WHATSOEVER that unions = higher prices = bankrupcy. As far as competition goes, I presume you're talking about the free market economy type, is a fallacy. There ARE sectors that have more freedom (within some preset economic parameters mind you) than others, but by and large having 4 to 5 conglomerates running the show is not "pure competition" at all, at least the way I was taugh about in school.
I do not feel it is my responsibility or that of others to subsidize high wages for inferior products and services.
Again, you keep saying "inferior products and services", which is YOUR OPINION, not fact. I happen to opine exactly the oposite. I think American products are generally good, some more than others, but compared to some of the shit that comes out the countries that YOU (a patriot for sure!) deem deserving to "subsidize" is ludicrous.
And yes, unionized assembly line workers make a lot more money that some of their counterparts in Japan, Korea or India, but I do not see the Koreans paying $500,000 for a house, $100,000 for their kid's education or $5 for a gallon of gas. Oh, wait, they have no car because they make so little money. Virtual slaves.
The overpaid slobs I was referring to are the executives who make insane money and do a terrible job.
Good, I guess we agree on something then.
-
Another thing, my clients would fire me in a heartbeat if I provided a crap service and tried to overcharge them for it. The American people have told the car companies the same thing, dont produce over priced crap and expect us to buy it.
Companies exist to make money and profit, not be an employment program.
Well, I hate to break it to ya, but companies are "employment" programs precisely because they NEED employees. On the other hand, employees do not need companies. Do you understand the difference? I mean, if you own a business and feel like you bring all this value to the community you SERVE... I hate to break it to you, but you're not needed. The community will go on without your business. If you want slaves, move your Korean ass back Korea. This ain't the place for you any more.
Now, the easy thing here is to blame the unions for what is taking place in the automobile industry. I, on the other hand, argue that since unions have NO SAY in the choice of products being sold or HOW they are made they get zero blame from my point of view. I am not saying that they do not make mistakes, they are human after all. All I'm saying is look at the data about car recalls and you TELL ME that unions are somehow involved in "design flaws", which is the # 1 problem with AAM.
Nowadays it's the UAW who is, hand by hand, working with Big Auto in order to get them the bailout funds they need to keep the industry going, going as far as laying out a plan of restructurization that some in Big Car are unwilling to accept because it requires the companies to pay out a dividend! These people want to get the money from the fed and pay out a fucking dividend for God's sake!!! This is the type of shit that drives ANY business down the drain.
-
Jews, it's the Jews.
-
No, but the costs they impose on the company mean that they cant produce a decent low priced reliable vehicle.
Without the high unions legacy costs, at least they could be competitive on price.
How do you know these things?
Why isn't it the tens of millions of dollars paid to a handful of auto executives that's causing the auto industry to lose its competitive edge? Don't the executive decisions re the type of car produced, the manner in which it's produced and the targeted market group have a bit more effect on the auto industry's failure rather than the modest wages of rank and file workers?
-
It comes from people like yourself who want to force others to buy overpriced items and not have competition.
I do not feel it is my responsibility or that of others to subsidize high wages for inferior products and services.
The overpaid slobs I was referring to are the executives who make insane money and do a terrible job.
Exactly. I'm not talking about someone who works hard for their well earned money.
I am talking about executives who raid pension funds, sends the company out of business and walk away with multimillion dollar payouts.
Executives flying to Washington in each of thier own private jets to ask for taxpayers money to sustain the business they have so badly mismanaged.
Sandra
-
Congress and the Bush administration are currently considering whether to spend $25 billion to rescue Detroit automakers. The proposal has generally been met with stiff resistance from conservatives, who have increasingly been pinning all the blame for the crisis in Detroit on labor unions:
Sen. Jim DeMint: “Some auto manufacturers are struggling because of a bad business structure with high unionized labor costs and burdensome federal regulations. Taxpayers did not create these problems and they should not be forced to pay for them.”
Sen. Jon Kyl: “For years they’ve been sick. They have a bad business model. They have contracts negotiated with the United Auto Workers that impose huge costs.The average hourly cost per worker in this country is about $28.48. For these auto makers, it’s $73. And for the Japanese auto companies working here in the United States, it’s $48.”
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger: “You know, if you pay the auto workers or the benefits and all of those things, are maybe too high. … We have, like, in America, you sell a car, and you have $2,000 of each car just goes to benefits. So I think that there’s a way of reducing all of that, make them more fiscally responsible.”
Unions do not deserve the blame placed on them by the right wing. In fact, unions have repeatedly made concessions to auto executives over recent years. Contrary to Kyl’s claim, new auto employees earn $25.65 an hour.
Big Three automaker CEOs and executives based their business model on a future of cheap oil, fighting fuel efficiency standards despite warnings against such a strategy. Detroit manufactured, as Tom Friedman pointed out, oversized gas-guzzling SUVs that reduced their competitive edge.
Financial firms AIG, Merrill Lynch, and Bear Stearns did not have unionized workers but still suffered economic collapses. Frozen credit markets and a spiraling recession were major contributors to Detroit’s current state. Today, the Center for American Progress urged Congress “to support legislation to grant a $25 billion bridge loan to the U.S. auto companies to ensure that they avoid bankruptcy” provided the automakers provide health and retirement security and invest in clean technology.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/17/unions-auto-bailout/
Why is it that any phenomenon that benefits the middle and lower class as a whole is targeted by rightwingers as THE problem. From Soc. Sec. to this topic, unions, they are decried as a problem.
I, for one, am glad that the 'every man for himself' tact is dying on the vine. It's too divisive a notion in these troubled times.
i approve of these loans with the conditions put forward by barney frank. all conditions must be agreed to before any funds are approved.
-
i approve of these loans with the conditions put forward by barney frank. all conditions must be agreed to before any funds are approved.
When Barney Frank is the financial guru now to manage loans to car companies, our country is really heading off the cliff.
Here is one of the congresscum who oversaw the housing disaster and now we are going to give him the reigns on automobiles??????
-
If I say "Give me what I want or I will financially ruin you" I am committing the crime of extortion. If however, I get together with a group of co-workers and say the same thing to a business, I am working man fighting an evil thieving corporation that exploits society. How does this make sense?
-
If I say "Give me what I want or I will financially ruin you" I am committing the crime of extortion. If however, I get together with a group of co-workers and say the same thing to a business, I am working man fighting an evil thieving corporation that exploits society. How does this make sense?
These car companies are a joke and need to go bankrupt if they refuse to do away with the UAW rules and costs.
No company can remain competitive in mfg with the high costs and burdens of Union labor.
-
What do you mean I "force" people to accept prices? The unions do not set prices, the companies do.
Part of the attraction of a union's is higher wages. In order for a company to make up for higher wages is raising the price of there products. So they do affect the price of products.
-
These car companies are a joke and need to go bankrupt if they refuse to do away with the UAW rules and costs.
No company can remain competitive in mfg with the high costs and burdens of Union labor.
I agree that they should be allowed to go bankrupt.
Union labor is like cancer they will keep killing the company until its dead.
-
What do you mean I "force" people to accept prices? The unions do not set prices, the companies do.
Part of the attraction of a union's is higher wages. In order for a company to make up for higher wages is raising the price of there products. So they do affect the price of products.
Of course the Unions help set the price of the vehicle. By imposing certain work rules, and the enormous legacy and health care costs for retirees, the cost of the car has to reflect these higher costs that other companies dont have.
Liberals like slapper dont understand this and still are completely ignorant as to why these companies are going bankrupt.
The executives should all be fired, I agree, but the basic costs to GM, Ford, and Chrysler, before they even build the car, are just too high to remain viable.
-
No, but the costs they impose on the company mean that they cant produce a decent low priced reliable vehicle.
Without the high unions legacy costs, at least they could be competitive on price.
How do you know these things?
Why isn't it the tens of millions of dollars paid to a handful of auto executives that's causing the auto industry to lose its competitive edge? Don't the executive decisions re the type of car produced, the manner in which it's produced and the targeted market group have a bit more effect on the auto industry's failure rather than the modest wages of rank and file workers?
-
How do you know these things?
Why isn't it the tens of millions of dollars paid to a handful of auto executives that's causing the auto industry to lose its competitive edge? Don't the executive decisions re the type of car produced, the manner in which it's produced and the targeted market group have a bit more effect on the auto industry's failure rather than the modest wages of rank and file workers?
You are such a naive person sometimes. What is the difference between Honda, Toyota, BMW on the one hand, and GM Ford, amd Chrysler in the US???????????????????
Answers:
1. Better products for the same money.
2. Union contracts and competent management who dont let their companies go Union.
3. No legacy costs and no paying people who dont work.
-
How do you know these things?
Why isn't it the tens of millions of dollars paid to a handful of auto executives that's causing the auto industry to lose its competitive edge? Don't the executive decisions re the type of car produced, the manner in which it's produced and the targeted market group have a bit more effect on the auto industry's failure rather than the modest wages of rank and file workers?
Many of the decisions of design and mfg are a result of the costs the company knows it has to cover due to the labor costs.
I read a stat that over $1600 in each car is for legacy costs alone.
-
You are such a naive person sometimes. What is the difference between Honda, Toyota, BMW on the one hand, and GM Ford, amd Chrysler in the US???????????????????
Answers:
1. Better products for the same money.
2. Union contracts and competent management who dont let their companies go Union.
3. No legacy costs and no paying people who dont work.
Thats the end of the discussion for most normal people, but Decker will continue lol.
-
Many of the decisions of design and mfg are a result of the costs the company knows it has to cover due to the labor costs.
I read a stat that over $1600 in each car is for legacy costs alone.
And how much of that cost is due to the 10s of millions of dollars in executive compensation paid to corporate elites...or due to horrible executive mismanagment in ignoring the production of fuel efficient cars?
The point I'm making is more about the way you argue. You present your highly jaded opinions as fact. You rarely, if ever, cite a source.
You lead and finish with your conclusion that Unions have ruined the auto industry but at the end of the day, that's only your opinion.
You look at one cost of doing business--unionized labor's pay and you've decided that that is to blame.
I do not think that's the case. It's too facile an answer. There's more to this than you are crediting.
-
Thats the end of the discussion for most normal people, but Decker will continue lol.
That's b/c people like you define an argument to meet your highly politicized prejudice that unions are bad.
You offer no facts. You offer no support.
Instead I see an insult and more unsupported conclusions.
This is how the plutocratic elites have conditioned you to think.
Besides the evil of unionized labor, I'm betting you believe that privatized social security is a good idea b/c the rate of return is higher.
I also bet that you think universalized healthcare is socialism and as such, is bad for this country.
Am I wrong about you?
-
Ok then, why dont you tell me why the US car mfg are doing so poorly since you dont agree with anything anyone says.
I have stated my opinion and it is backed up by nearly all experts in the area. I dont have to spend time giving you reference anfter reeference look it up for yourself.
-
That's b/c people like you define an argument to meet your highly politicized prejudice that unions are bad.
You offer no facts. You offer no support.
Instead I see an insult and more unsupported conclusions.
This is how the plutocratic elites have conditioned you to think.
Besides the evil of unionized labor, I'm betting you believe that privatized social security is a good idea b/c the rate of return is higher.
I also bet that you think universalized healthcare is socialism and as such, is bad for this country.
Am I wrong about you?
I believe that even if workers got to put their 7.5 percent in a private account in a bond or CD they would be better off than the ponzi scheme called SS.
At least that way if the person died before they were able to collect they could pass it on to their heirs.
-
Ok then, why dont you tell me why the US car mfg are doing so poorly since you dont agree with anything anyone says.
I have stated my opinion and it is backed up by nearly all experts in the area. I dont have to spend time giving you reference anfter reeference look it up for yourself.
I told you already, it's a complex problem.
But when I hear the liberal media blame the unions, I know bullshit is afloat.
I also know that you did not answer my questions. How do you know it's the unions fault and not the profound mismanagment of greedy corporate executives?
I know you said it's both a few squares back, but now you're back on the "It's the Union's fault" kick.
-
First and foremost I was not insulting you. I respect you as a very informed guy. Who I could not disagree with more.
This thread is filled with facts go back and read it.
And no you are not wrong about me.
Social security is a joke and should be done away with all together.
Universal health care is a form of socialism.
Spin how you want but thats why it is called "socialized health care".
-
I believe that even if workers got to put their 7.5 percent in a private account in a bond or CD they would be better off than the ponzi scheme called SS.
At least that way if the person died before they were able to collect they could pass it on to their heirs.
If you would like to start a thread on the privatization of Social Security, I'm there.
It's amazing how you hit on every single elitest right wing talking point with out err.
-
First and foremost I was not insulting you. I respect you as a very informed guy. Who I could not disagree with more.
This thread is filled with facts go back and read it.
And no you are not wrong about me.
Social security is a joke and should be done away with all together.
Universal health care is a form of socialism.
Spin how you want but thats why it is called "socialized health care".
I see. I think we'll have to start a thread on the privatization of Soc. Sec. b/c I think we have to put it to rest.
-
I told you already, it's a complex problem.
But when I hear the liberal media blame the unions, I know bullshit is afloat.
I also know that you did not answer my questions. How do you know it's the unions fault and not the profound mismanagment of greedy corporate executives?
I know you said it's both a few squares back, but now you're back on the "It's the Union's fault" kick.
I have said time and time again, fire the execs. No bonuses, etc for a terrible job.
However, that is a drop in the bucket compared to the overall picture as to why these companies stink.
-
I have said time and time again, fire the execs. No bonuses, etc for a terrible job.
However, that is a drop in the bucket compared to the overall picture as to why these companies stink.
Critics say automotive executive paydays are out of line with what's happening in the industry. "It seems like something out of the gilded age," says Chris Kutalik, an editor at Labor Notes newspaper. "It's such a glaring disparity."
"There is a huge difference between Asia and here when it comes to the top executive compensation," says Han Kim, a professor of business administration at the University of Michigan. "Rarely in Asia, especially Japan and Korea, do the CEOs get paid more than a million dollars."
Chrysler's new CEO, Bob Nardelli,became a symbol of corporate excess when he left Home Depot early this year with a $210 million severance package. Ford's new CEO, Alan Mulally, got $27.8 million in salary and bonus in his first few months on the job, including an $18.5 million signing bonus.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2007-10-09-auto-exec-pay_N.htm
I think executive compensation is a problem. I think a worse problem was executive mismanagement. And they still get paid for the crap job they do.
-
If you would like to start a thread on the privatization of Social Security, I'm there.
It's amazing how you hit on every single elitest right wing talking point with out err.
I am self employed and have to 15% SS . If I were able to keep that money and buy CD's with it, not stocks or anything else, treasuries in the US govt, I would be far better off than with social security. Additionally, that money could be passed on to my heirs.
do you realize that of all people in society, blacks get screwed by social security more than any other group due to a lower life expectancy.
A black person typically works their entire life and pays into this mess and gets screwed when they die at 65 or 70 and the family gets squat.
Social Security is another time bomb waiting to go off since when it was created, there were far more workers per retiree and the life xpectancy was much less.
Now you have people collecting far more money than they paid in and for a longer time period than originally envisioned. There are also going to be far fewer workers to pay these benefits to the boomers.
I think SS needs to raise the ages to about 70 or 75 to remain sustanianable.
-
I am not disagreeing with you. CEO and top pay are OBSCENE for what the results have been.
Its not only the auto's, its every sector of the US economy.
-
I am self employed and have to 15% SS . If I were able to keep that money and buy CD's with it, not stocks or anything else, treasuries in the US govt, I would be far better off than with social security. Additionally, that money could be passed on to my heirs.
do you realize that of all people in society, blacks get screwed by social security more than any other group due to a lower life expectancy.
A black person typically works their entire life and pays into this mess and gets screwed when they die at 65 or 70 and the family gets squat.
Social Security is another time bomb waiting to go off since when it was created, there were far more workers per retiree and the life xpectancy was much less.
Now you have people collecting far more money than they paid in and for a longer time period than originally envisioned. There are also going to be far fewer workers to pay these benefits to the boomers.
I think SS needs to raise the ages to about 70 or 75 to remain sustanianable.
I'll start a thread on SS later today. Keep these points in mind, we have much to discuss.
-
I'll start a thread on SS later today. Keep these points in mind, we have much to discuss.
I think social security has become something far beyond what it was originally intended to do.