Sorry, when you represent a group, and speak for a group, and act for a group, that is not individualism.Dilbert_X wrote:
No they protect the individual.
There is no such thing as 'the collective' except in 'Dark Skies'. Wow I miss that.
-> Spark
Shit no, it was a wig.
Shit no, it was a wig.
Fuck Israel
I see, so your President is by default a communist?Lowing wrote:
Sorry, when you represent a group, and speak for a group, and act for a group, that is not individualism.
Fuck Israel
Thank godDilbert_X wrote:
-> Spark
Shit no, it was a wig.
How else should you define leadership then?lowing wrote:
Sorry, when you represent a group, and speak for a group, and act for a group, that is not individualism.Dilbert_X wrote:
No they protect the individual.
There is no such thing as 'the collective' except in 'Dark Skies'. Wow I miss that.
Last edited by Spark (2008-12-02 02:07:49)
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Still not true,Dilbert_X wrote:
There, fixed.Dilbert_X wrote:
Because no doubt the average Pakistani LAME wouldn't get a job fixing US aircraft, even if they're cheaper, better qualified and have better moustaches than you.
Plumbers, construction workers, masons, dry wallers etc.......... all are losing money and business to cheaper labor from mexico.
So, in my industry, if my employer can get it done cheaper, they will and they have. They only set back for them is, this cheap labor is not quality labor, and since safety is paramount in our industry they can not get away with cheap labor for long before they get bitten in the ass.
As a matter of fact.............Dilbert_X wrote:
I see, so your President is by default a communist?Lowing wrote:
Sorry, when you represent a group, and speak for a group, and act for a group, that is not individualism.
So what is it called when you ARE the group speaking for YOURSELVES and acting AS a group?lowing wrote:
Sorry, when you represent a group, and speak for a group, and act for a group, that is not individualism.Dilbert_X wrote:
No they protect the individual.
There is no such thing as 'the collective' except in 'Dark Skies'. Wow I miss that.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
sorry, if you are a group, speaking as a group, acting as a group, then by default you are NOT speaking for yourself then are you?Spark wrote:
So what is it called when you ARE the group speaking for YOURSELVES and acting AS a group?lowing wrote:
Sorry, when you represent a group, and speak for a group, and act for a group, that is not individualism.Dilbert_X wrote:
No they protect the individual.
There is no such thing as 'the collective' except in 'Dark Skies'. Wow I miss that.
FAP FAP FAPDilbert_X wrote:
Is it just me or is Shakira the best booty shaker on earth?
Interesting..... GM, Ford and Chryslers CEO's fly to Washington in separate corporate jets, pulling down salaries of around 20 mill each. All the while they recieve these salaries they are watching their companies turn to absolute shit. And Lowing has a problem with unions giving workers a fair wage. The change has to come from the top not the bottom. CEO's should not be allowed to draw huge salaries when their company is tanking, yet they do anyway, then have the cheek to beg for government money. They should be responsible for poor performance of their company, not blame the workers.
And before you say " shareholders determine the wages of the execs", I have been a shareholder for many years and dont get a say in the wages of execs.
Lowing is a big fan of supply and demand, so let me make it simple. GM, Ford and Chrysler are supplying cars that their is much less demand for. As a consequence the companies are suffering because no one is buying their cars. Other car companies (Toyota, Mazda, euro cars) are making cars people want and are doing OK, even in these tough economic times.
It doesnt suprise me that UAW is standing up for the auto workers by encouraging govt help. They are looking after their workers, which is their job.
And before you say " shareholders determine the wages of the execs", I have been a shareholder for many years and dont get a say in the wages of execs.
Lowing is a big fan of supply and demand, so let me make it simple. GM, Ford and Chrysler are supplying cars that their is much less demand for. As a consequence the companies are suffering because no one is buying their cars. Other car companies (Toyota, Mazda, euro cars) are making cars people want and are doing OK, even in these tough economic times.
It doesnt suprise me that UAW is standing up for the auto workers by encouraging govt help. They are looking after their workers, which is their job.
I am a big fan of supply and demand, and if the big 3 go under good riddance. However, when a company that tries to increase profeciency and productivity and flexablity has their hands tied tied behind their backs by unions, is it any wonder those jobs disappear to another country. Are you really all that shocked and surprised? When a company tried to stop the bleeding and the union does nothing but open the wound even more, am I really supposed t olisten to the UAW and fee lsorry for their dumb asses? I do not think so.Burwhale the Avenger wrote:
Interesting..... GM, Ford and Chryslers CEO's fly to Washington in separate corporate jets, pulling down salaries of around 20 mill each. All the while they recieve these salaries they are watching their companies turn to absolute shit. And Lowing has a problem with unions giving workers a fair wage. The change has to come from the top not the bottom. CEO's should not be allowed to draw huge salaries when their company is tanking, yet they do anyway, then have the cheek to beg for government money. They should be responsible for poor performance of their company, not blame the workers.
And before you say " shareholders determine the wages of the execs", I have been a shareholder for many years and dont get a say in the wages of execs.
Lowing is a big fan of supply and demand, so let me make it simple. GM, Ford and Chrysler are supplying cars that their is much less demand for. As a consequence the companies are suffering because no one is buying their cars. Other car companies (Toyota, Mazda, euro cars) are making cars people want and are doing OK, even in these tough economic times.
It doesnt suprise me that UAW is standing up for the auto workers by encouraging govt help. They are looking after their workers, which is their job.
Non-US car manufacturers also have unionized workers.
They seem to be doing just fine.
They seem to be doing just fine.
Yeah and?PureFodder wrote:
Non-US car manufacturers also have unionized workers.
They seem to be doing just fine.
What does this have to do with the UAW cock blocking any money saving initiatives set forth by the car company that streamlines its efficiency, productivity, and flexibility? Oh and then turn around and beg for money.
Last edited by lowing (2008-12-02 05:23:22)
A union that becomes too powerful is nothing more than a hindrance. I believe in the concept of unions but, like everything in life, moderation is required.
A union should not be involved in the direction and economic decisions of any company. Safety and other inside details is still something that the Union can help assure though. Every state should be a right to work state also.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
The union isn't the problem, the US healthcare system is. Everyone country has unions that look out for their workers. The pay and pensions that US workers recieve in comparison to average US wages is worse than German and Japaneese auto workers. The difference comes from the fact that the US car companies have to support the bloated US healthcare system. Also they seem to make unpopular cars which doesn't help either.lowing wrote:
Yeah and?PureFodder wrote:
Non-US car manufacturers also have unionized workers.
They seem to be doing just fine.
What does this have to do with the UAW cock blocking any money saving initiatives set forth by the car company that streamlines its efficiency, productivity, and flexibility? Oh and then turn around and beg for money.
If I recall correctly GM thinks that moving to a Canadian style healhcare system will increase the profit margins 4 fold.
Man I miss those UPS Health benefits. They're going on 102 years now. Sweet feathery Jesus.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
If everyone else started picking up my health care tabs, I'd have more money, too.PureFodder wrote:
If I recall correctly GM thinks that moving to a Canadian style healhcare system will increase the profit margins 4 fold.lowing wrote:
Yeah and?PureFodder wrote:
Non-US car manufacturers also have unionized workers.
They seem to be doing just fine.
What does this have to do with the UAW cock blocking any money saving initiatives set forth by the car company that streamlines its efficiency, productivity, and flexibility? Oh and then turn around and beg for money.
I am not sure how you figure that it is the car companies and not everyone that supports the Us healthcare system.PureFodder wrote:
The union isn't the problem, the US healthcare system is. Everyone country has unions that look out for their workers. The pay and pensions that US workers recieve in comparison to average US wages is worse than German and Japaneese auto workers. The difference comes from the fact that the US car companies have to support the bloated US healthcare system. Also they seem to make unpopular cars which doesn't help either.lowing wrote:
Yeah and?PureFodder wrote:
Non-US car manufacturers also have unionized workers.
They seem to be doing just fine.
What does this have to do with the UAW cock blocking any money saving initiatives set forth by the car company that streamlines its efficiency, productivity, and flexibility? Oh and then turn around and beg for money.
If I recall correctly GM thinks that moving to a Canadian style healhcare system will increase the profit margins 4 fold.
It's not just car companies, but general US manufacturing industries that have to compete with foreign good that are manufactured without having to pay a huge percentage of their profit margins on the healthcare costs of their workers.lowing wrote:
I am not sure how you figure that it is the car companies and not everyone that supports the Us healthcare system.PureFodder wrote:
The union isn't the problem, the US healthcare system is. Everyone country has unions that look out for their workers. The pay and pensions that US workers recieve in comparison to average US wages is worse than German and Japaneese auto workers. The difference comes from the fact that the US car companies have to support the bloated US healthcare system. Also they seem to make unpopular cars which doesn't help either.lowing wrote:
Yeah and?
What does this have to do with the UAW cock blocking any money saving initiatives set forth by the car company that streamlines its efficiency, productivity, and flexibility? Oh and then turn around and beg for money.
If I recall correctly GM thinks that moving to a Canadian style healhcare system will increase the profit margins 4 fold.
Go ask GM. They said that the US healthcare system cost them an additional $1500 per car to make in the US in comparison to countries such as Canada with public health systems.
It shouldn't be wages or pensions that are causing US companies problems, as they are around average for auto workers in the richer countries.
Making cars that people don't want is also a factor.
Ok, so if money is the problem why would the UAW want to stop the company from improving itself, and help "their" improve the bottomline? As if we already didn't know the answer to that.PureFodder wrote:
It's not just car companies, but general US manufacturing industries that have to compete with foreign good that are manufactured without having to pay a huge percentage of their profit margins on the healthcare costs of their workers.lowing wrote:
I am not sure how you figure that it is the car companies and not everyone that supports the Us healthcare system.PureFodder wrote:
The union isn't the problem, the US healthcare system is. Everyone country has unions that look out for their workers. The pay and pensions that US workers recieve in comparison to average US wages is worse than German and Japaneese auto workers. The difference comes from the fact that the US car companies have to support the bloated US healthcare system. Also they seem to make unpopular cars which doesn't help either.
If I recall correctly GM thinks that moving to a Canadian style healhcare system will increase the profit margins 4 fold.
Go ask GM. They said that the US healthcare system cost them an additional $1500 per car to make in the US in comparison to countries such as Canada with public health systems.
It shouldn't be wages or pensions that are causing US companies problems, as they are around average for auto workers in the richer countries.
Making cars that people don't want is also a factor.
Tell the UAW to screw off... fixed.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I was just involved in the exact same real life debate 2 days ago...nice.
I am usually pro-union in order to protect the "little people" from corporate screw overs...but with the way things are...we need the industry more than we need the unions...GM workers are "in some cases" grossly overpaid for the work they do. Even if they took a steep pay cut...they would still be in the upper tier salary wise for their skills.
this is a rare occasion indeed...I kinda sorta agree with lowing...except for the whole.."we could do without the big 3"
I am usually pro-union in order to protect the "little people" from corporate screw overs...but with the way things are...we need the industry more than we need the unions...GM workers are "in some cases" grossly overpaid for the work they do. Even if they took a steep pay cut...they would still be in the upper tier salary wise for their skills.
this is a rare occasion indeed...I kinda sorta agree with lowing...except for the whole.."we could do without the big 3"
...
Well lowing, this brawl has been going on for a bit with you so.......
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=114464
and
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=102455
You have shown that you WILL NOT consider an opinion other then your deep seated distrust of unions due to your experience with the collapse of the US airline industry's.
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=114464
and
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=102455
You have shown that you WILL NOT consider an opinion other then your deep seated distrust of unions due to your experience with the collapse of the US airline industry's.
They supported Obama. I supported McCain. Shouldn't Obama be magically beaming money-rays into their bank account with his smile?lowing wrote:
Awww, *sniffle sniffle* a heart felt plea by the UAW