Finally, something I can agree with Obama on!


tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
With the exception of his comments on the housing market, I agree with him here.


Link Removed

CHICAGO — President-elect Barack Obama fired a warning shot today at the top executives of the Big Three auto companies, saying that they should either agree to drastic reforms or be sacked.

“If this management team that’s currently in place doesn’t understand the urgency of the situation and is not willing to make the tough choices and adapt to these new circumstances, then they should go,” Obama said at a brief Sunday afternoon news conference here.

In similarly plain terms, he portrayed the Bush administration as dragging its feet on the home mortgage crisis, and pledged that he would act immediately upon being sworn in next month.

“We have not seen the kind of aggressive steps in the housing market [from the administration] to stem foreclosures that I would like to see,” he said.

Without going into details, he said his transition team had had conversations with Bush officials on the mortgage issue and is preparing plans.

“If it is not done during the transition it will be done by me,” he promised.

But Obama tempered his language toward Detroit and the White House with notes of caution and patience.

“If on the other hand they are willing, able and show themselves committed to making those important changes then that raises a different situation,” he said of the auto company executives.

“I think the administration understands the severity of the problem,” Obama said of President Bush, offering a more generous assessment than he'd made during the campaign. “I think they want to do the right thing.”

Obama, who warned during an appearance on Meet the Press earlier today that the economic news "is going to get worse before [it] gets better," expounded at length upon the jobs and economic growth package he began to outline in his Saturday radio address.

Citing his plans to spend money on energy efficiency, school construction, broadband and medical information technology, he explained why he was proposing infrastructure investment beyond the typical fare of roads and bridges.

Mixing job growth and technology upgrades, he said, was aimed at getting people back to work now and benefiting them again down the line.

“All of these things are designed to have long-term payoffs for taxpayers, not just for individual businesses,” Obama said.

Obama spoke for just under 20 minutes, taking three questions from reporters.

The purpose of the session was to officially announce that retired Army Gen. Eric Shinseki would serve as secretary of veterans affairs in the new administration.

Obama, wearing an American flag lapel pin and standing before eight flags, used the occasion to mark the anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, vowing to honor today’s veterans in the same fashion as those who fought in World War II.

“We owe it to all our veterans to honor them as we honored our Greatest Generation – not just with words, but with deeds.”

Shinseki, a combat-wounded Vietnam veteran and former chief of staff of the Army who famously clashed with the Pentagon’s civilian leadership over Iraq war policy, also singled out the unique needs of those who have served there and in Afghanistan.

“They deserve a smooth, error-free, no-fail benefit-assured transition into our ranks of veterans,” Shinseki said. “That is our responsibility, not theirs.”
 

Last edited:

Sheldon

New member
If the Democrats do not give them the bail our they will loose the support of the AFLCIO and that is what helped get him there.
 
B

boyzoi

Guest
if the presidents of the big 3 need to go, so do Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, etc as well as the president of the union. imho......:victory:
 

Glockster20

Clinging to God and guns
heck get rid of the union!!! Here in AL we have a Honda plant, Mercedes, and Hyundai plant. There are always people in line to get these jobs. No shortage of workers whatsoever. And guess what??? If you talk to the union, they fire you!! And guess what else?? These companies actually make money!! Who would of thunk it???
 
G

gpbarth

Guest
heck get rid of the union!!! Here in AL we have a Honda plant, Mercedes, and Hyundai plant. There are always people in line to get these jobs. No shortage of workers whatsoever. And guess what??? If you talk to the union, they fire you!! And guess what else?? These companies actually make money!! Who would of thunk it???

And those workers are very happy with the pay they're making, too. The unions claim to fight for the "middle class," but they want all of their workers to get paid exorbitant salaries for doing even menial tasks. Union wages, when bennies are figured in, make about $70 per hour. What? For welding a part on every bumper? For operating a robot? The unions want most of the profits the companies make, because "without them the companies wouldn't make any money." Weird thinking, eh?

I worked 24 years for Motorola, a non-union company, and every few years the unions would try to get in. They were always voted out by the employees. I worked my way up from technician to network engineer, and ended up making $76K per year, which I never had any problems with. And I was salaried, which meant I worked a lot of OT with no extra compensation.

Unions? What unions? We don' got no unions! We don' need no steenkin' unions!
 
Last edited:

toreskha

Titles are un-American.
It doesn't matter if the companies agree to "drastic reforms" or not - they shouldn't be bailed out, regardless of the short-term consequences. We shouldn't have bailed out the banks, either.

The concept of a bailout should simply not exist - it should be off the table as an option. This is going to happen again in another 30 years, just as it did a while back with Chrysler. Clearly, that was a learning experience - now they're back for more.

So what, in a few more decades we'll be bailing out everyone from Chrysler (yeah, again!) to probably even foreign companies? Awesome.
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
heck get rid of the union!!! Here in AL we have a Honda plant, Mercedes, and Hyundai plant. There are always people in line to get these jobs. No shortage of workers whatsoever. And guess what??? If you talk to the union, they fire you!! And guess what else?? These companies actually make money!! Who would of thunk it???

Exactly as it should be. And, while these companies' profits are less than they have been in previous years, they're still profitable. They don't have to rely on taxpayer money to survive; all they have to do is cut back on production until things pick back up again, and they don't have to lay off anyone.
 

Sheldon

New member
A big part of this that is kicking me in the rear is the part about how the "Unions" must take concessions to help keep the companies afloat, how the lower wages of the other companies is a contributing factor to the high prices and lack luster sales...

As a retiree and ex union member Unions are a very necessary evil, if you have ever worked someplace, any place that has a total A$$ for a supervisor, one that thinks they are Gods gift to the world, one that has a goal of making every ones life miserable, tries to make them work to standards that a robot could not adhere too, then your union is your only recourse. Believe me I have seen this situation many times in my 40+ year work history, you need someone on your side that can act as a counsel with upper management.

It is a Fallacy that labor adds significant cost to the end price of anything in a union shop vs non union. Yes they have been posting the 2K figure for a union shop but what is the price for a non union shop 1.8K? Doubtful, in fact my guess would be closer to 8 hundred per, management has a real bad habit if inflating numbers like that when it is to their advantage, and I mean hugely inflating.

Do this how long does it take to produce a car, start of production line to end of... X 1 -2 laborers per hour and that is the actual number, not the one they provide. Let me guess 8 hours to assemble a vehicle end to end. let's give them 28 bucks a hour, times two laborers per unit, even though ti is usually only one. But 8 hours two workers is 16 man hours to assemble, times 28 bucks equals less than 450 bucks even if you double it and call that the cost of benefits it is only just a bit underr a K still way bellow the cost stated.

So how about the money the execs make, bonus's, perks, AKA free cars to drive, country club memberships, huge homes that are supplemented by the company, the list goes on and on... Now the fact that the average high end exec makes as much as 100 laborers make no that is not a typo and it can be significantly higher in the US has nothing to do with this I suppose, now times that by every one on the board, and the trickle down effect through managment.... Just like the fiscal institutions want to take a huge amount of the bail out and hand it to their execs as bonus's to keep them around is total BULL SHIT!

The only way the Union should agree to any reductions is if the Execs do first, here is a novel idea, if the company prospers then the execs get a wage or bonus based upon the performance of that company and not the big salary's they get regardless now.

So how many of you remember a number of years back when GM was negoating a contract, times were hard, the Union members took a huge concession, and the contract was signed... How was this greeted by management... they gave them self bonus's ranging in the Millions, a sum that exceeded the amount that the Union members had to give up.
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
The proof is in the pudding. The American companies, whose workers are represented by the UAW, are failing, while the foreign companies, while not doing as well as in years past, are still surviving. Why is that? I'll tell you why. The unions are placing such unreasonable demands upon the companies that the cost of doing business has become unsustainable.
 
G

gpbarth

Guest
What non-union comapny pays the people they lay off almost a full salary for - what is the figure? - 18 months? A year? I don't care what job you do - if it ain't some professional or hi-tech job, it ain't worth $70/hr. I agree that the management has been making a LOT of money in the deal, too. And they ought to get caught in the same vice. The company tanks, so does their income - no "golden parachutes!" But, damn!, just how much longer are we going to be expected to pay all these guys so they can bask in comfort while the rest of us are failing? These manufacturers have been doing bad business for years, and it just caught up to them. Them and their unions, who have been right along for the ride.

Chapter 11, re-org, and bite the bullet (how apropos!). We're all down on our luck, and these guys shouldn't be getting any special treatment.
 

Sheldon

New member
The proof is in the pudding. The American companies, whose workers are represented by the UAW, are failing, while the foreign companies, while not doing as well as in years past, are still surviving. Why is that? I'll tell you why. The unions are placing such unreasonable demands upon the companies that the cost of doing business has become unsustainable.

That is a Fallacy, the union worker contributes less than $1,000.00 to the cost of a new car, yeah they claim over 2k but that is the so called benefits, the problem with that number is most of the big companies use a insurance company that allows them to be self insured there by cutting the actual benefits cost radically. Think about it, 1-3 workers per car, lets say it takes 8 hours for a car to go from end to end, which if I remember from the plant tour I did is about right, times lets round it up to 30 bucks a hour, now do the math and it is a lot less than two grand. Heck their CEO and board's bonus adds as much to the end cost as the worker dose but you do not hear anyone yelling cap the upper echelon.

Americans buying more foreign cars and trucks, Foreign companies importing more materials to build their cars here, placing their newer hence more efficient factories in parts of the county where the wage base is lower, being in the south means lower energy costs for them. Just a few of the factors of why they are doing better.

So real quick how many of you all drive a foreign car??? BTY not me, Other than my 55 Jag, I have Chevy, Ford, and Jeep, in the garage or on the road. Don't want to hear the "they are more reliable" the big three have gone a long way on quality control since the 80's, don't want to hear they are cheaper, you can deal on any vehicle in the lot if you do your research first. Don't want to hear "reliability" I had junk Honda's back in the 70's and 80's they were a maintenance nightmare when major stuff happened and it did. You can get 250,000 miles out of a American built car that is unless you live in Michigan where the road salt will kill it before it's time.
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
That is a Fallacy, the union worker contributes less than $1,000.00 to the cost of a new car, yeah they claim over 2k but that is the so called benefits, the problem with that number is most of the big companies use a insurance company that allows them to be self insured there by cutting the actual benefits cost radically. Think about it, 1-3 workers per car, lets say it takes 8 hours for a car to go from end to end, which if I remember from the plant tour I did is about right, times lets round it up to 30 bucks a hour, now do the math and it is a lot less than two grand. Heck their CEO and board's bonus adds as much to the end cost as the worker dose but you do not hear anyone yelling cap the upper echelon.

Americans buying more foreign cars and trucks, Foreign companies importing more materials to build their cars here, placing their newer hence more efficient factories in parts of the county where the wage base is lower, being in the south means lower energy costs for them. Just a few of the factors of why they are doing better.

So real quick how many of you all drive a foreign car??? BTY not me, Other than my 55 Jag, I have Chevy, Ford, and Jeep, in the garage or on the road. Don't want to hear the "they are more reliable" the big three have gone a long way on quality control since the 80's, don't want to hear they are cheaper, you can deal on any vehicle in the lot if you do your research first. Don't want to hear "reliability" I had junk Honda's back in the 70's and 80's they were a maintenance nightmare when major stuff happened and it did. You can get 250,000 miles out of a American built car that is unless you live in Michigan where the road salt will kill it before it's time.

If it were such a fallacy, the auto companies would not be doing so poorly, would they? As I said in my previous post, the proof is in the pudding.
 

ricbak

New member
RE:

That is a Fallacy, the union worker contributes less than $1,000.00 to the cost of a new car, yeah they claim over 2k but that is the so called benefits,
This number is realistic.. or closer to a real number than the media is reporting. This is especially so after last falls round of contracts.

... I Think about it, 1-3 workers per car, lets say it takes 8 hours for a car to go from end to end,
That varies between car/truck lines. A Focus is easier to build than a Suburban.
Americans buying more foreign cars and trucks, Foreign companies importing more materials to build their cars here, placing their newer hence more efficient factories in parts of the county where the wage base is lower, being in the south means lower energy costs for them. Just a few of the factors of why they are doing better.
Then figure in the tax breaks and infrastucture improvments given to M-Benz and Toyota by Alabama. So much for patroitism. And yes there are people trying to get to the numbers but are being stonewalled. I am afraid it will take a FOI law suit to get to the truth.
...So real quick how many of you all drive a foreign car??? BTY not me, Other than my 55 Jag, I have Chevy, Ford, and Jeep, in the garage or on the road. Don't want to hear the "they are more reliable" the big three have gone a long way on quality control since the 80's, don't want to hear they are cheaper, you can deal on any vehicle in the lot if you do your research first. Don't want to hear "reliability" I had junk Honda's back in the 70's and 80's they were a maintenance nightmare when major stuff happened and it did. You can get 250,000 miles out of a American built car that is unless you live in Michigan where the road salt will kill it before it's time.
Good point. With more use of Dip Phosphate Solution (ELPO) and more galvanized sheet metal, even road salt problems are not what they used to be.
I have worked for 5 of the majors in the USA and Canada. The 3 Detroit Manufacturers are leaders in Tech and Producivity. Second to none.
During my travels, I was amazed at the number of foreign cars on the road on both "Coasts", east or west. Look around a little bit. We have to fix the credit markets before any of the majors do better. There are buyers out there, They can not get finacinng. Tarp money is a band aid, we have to sell vehicles. I am truely insulted that Tarp Money is used for Xmas Bonuses, yet the UAW is being told to take more cuts. What is wrong with that picture?
I do apologize for losing my composure. Merry Chrstmas All
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
Look at the sales numbers, volume is lowest it has been in years, I repeat FALLACY.

Well, the recession is really just rubbing salt into the wound. If you look at sales for the past few years, prior to the recession, sales have been looking like this for the past several years now. What fallacy are you talking about?
 
W

wolfhunter

Guest
Haven't heard a figure from Chrysler, but both Ford and GM report a $300-$500 LOSS on each vehicle sold (not built). Toyota reports an average $1500 PROFIT on each sale. Either Toyota management/shareholders make a lot less, or the operating costs (including labor) are much lower than their counterparts. Simple business economics say the big three (and their unions) become competetive or extinct.
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
While I am no fan of the unions, let me also make it clear that the CEOs of these companies and their salaries don't exactly help things either. If their companies were doing well, then maybe their salaries, benefits, and, and other perks could be justified. However, why are they allowed to hold on to these things if their companies are faring so poorly?
 
Here is a remark from someone who has bassically worked for himself all his life.
First, anyone who works for me, who ever, ever, tries to tell me what to pay him, is fired. Period.If I am the boss, I make those descisions. I have never demanded anyone even come to work, as long as they call, and I could care less about most things, but do what you are told, when you are told to do it, for the pay that is offered, or leave. Anything else says to me that you aren't capable of gertting a job anywhere else, so I must have been getting taken for a ride all along, anyway.Now if a man wants to talk about his compensation, I am all ears. I can be swayed to increse or decresae hours, salary, whatever, but I stress that I can be swayed. utimateums will all get the same reaction.

The same goes for working for someone else. If I can't get along with someone, I don't do business with them anymore. Period. Adversarial relationships neer work, whether it is business or your personal life.

The last thing is this. The auto industy has from the beginning been a capital intensive business. If you wanted to start a new auto company today, what do you think your chances of success would be? None . The reasonsa are but few. Government regulation, the vast amount of capital neede, and distribution. Did I mention competition? The auto industry as we know it couldn't exist without government regulations, because that is the club that the auto makers use to keep out forign and domestic competition, as well as an excuse for more new models. If everyone has to comply with a new fedral regulation by 2020, then everyone pretty well knows what the competition will be doing. The moneymen can't lose. Unless we go throiugh one of these "recessions". Then they cry for a "bailout"

The auto workers nor the "manegement "get any sympathy from me. If they had to compete in a real "free market" they would all starve to death.
 

gdcleanfun

Banned
And those workers are very happy with the pay they're making, too. The unions claim to fight for the "middle class," but they want all of their workers to get paid exorbitant salaries for doing even menial tasks. Union wages, when bennies are figured in, make about $70 per hour. What? For welding a part on every bumper? For operating a robot? The unions want most of the profits the companies make, because "without them the companies wouldn't make any money." Weird thinking, eh?

I worked 24 years for Motorola, a non-union company, and every few years the unions would try to get in. They were always voted out by the employees. I worked my way up from technician to network engineer, and ended up making $76K per year, which I never had any problems with. And I was salaried, which meant I worked a lot of OT with no extra compensation.

Unions? What unions? We don' got no unions! We don' need no steenkin' unions!

$70 per hour? If I had ever made that kind of money including benefits while working on the assembly line I'd own a castle! I don't. That's a crock that auto workers made that kind of money, an urban legend that will never be squelched. I wish I'd have made that kind of money. I'd like to tan the hide of who ever started that rumor! With my benefits and my hourly wages it would never happen! You made more than I ever did @ $36 and change per hour to equal your $76,000 a year. I made $30 an hour, including all my benefits, while working on the line with the union representation. As well, workers in the construction industry made more than we did on the assembly line. Get real!
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,354
Messages
622,667
Members
74,170
Latest member
Strategicfirearmtraining
Top