Let them file bankruptcy.. see what happens to their contracts after that.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I agree... the poor worker is getting the short end of the stick... What i'm saying is that the car companies and UAW are not in a position to make demands.... the govt has the money... the Big3 and Union need the money to keep operating...
Now... way more little people will be out of work...
Unions were a good idea to take care of the little guy originally... and somewhere along the way... the Unions got corrupt and now they have priced the little guy they purport to look out for.... right out of a job... and I forgot to include the ridiculous CEO packages... that needs to end... and i'm guessing it will now...
Now... way more little people will be out of work...
Unions were a good idea to take care of the little guy originally... and somewhere along the way... the Unions got corrupt and now they have priced the little guy they purport to look out for.... right out of a job... and I forgot to include the ridiculous CEO packages... that needs to end... and i'm guessing it will now...
Love is the answer
No union can stop layoffs.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
exactly... I do vid game modding and i'm working towards getting hired by a game company... but for now i'm working in a restaurant and it has slowed down quite a bit and money per shift has dropped... i'm not complaining... i still have a job...lol...
Love is the answer
Automotive industry bailout should be done.
But done like this.
Just put a contract to tender to supply the federal government and all of it's various branches and departments (FBI etc.) with 4 door, fuel efficient, reliable and affordable cars + spare parts for the forseeable future.
But done like this.
Just put a contract to tender to supply the federal government and all of it's various branches and departments (FBI etc.) with 4 door, fuel efficient, reliable and affordable cars + spare parts for the forseeable future.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Then my car count duh!The#1Spot wrote:
A stripped out car with a bucket seat does not count.Roger Lesboules wrote:
I have an American car right now, not too much plastic tbh. The exterior is about 90, 95% metal compared to rice bomb.ghettoperson wrote:
Have you ever driven an American car? There's a fuckload more plastic in them than any Jap car I've ever been in. I swear you could hose down the interior of some of them it's so bad.
So what if it didn't pass the Senate. All that's going to happen is that it's going to go back in, in a few days/hours time and then get passed the second time around (after everyone who voted no has got what they wanted if you get me) just like with the $700bn Bank Bailout (and I think there's been a few more of those since then)
You guys seriously need to rethink the way your legislature works.Mekstizzle wrote:
So what if it didn't pass the Senate. All that's going to happen is that it's going to go back in, in a few days/hours time and then get passed the second time around (after everyone who voted no has got what they wanted if you get me) just like with the $700bn Bank Bailout (and I think there's been a few more of those since then)
It's the first trick in the book of political bullshit.
They do it all the time in the US, and here in the EU too with them getting Ireland (Southern) to vote again on the Lisbon treaty (and they did it before with another country, infact I think it was Ireland back then too).Political Bullshit Volume 1, 2008 edition wrote:
(1) Shall things not go your way when it comes to vote outcomes, throw it back in there and let them vote on it again, rinse and repeat if necessary until success is achieved
No. What a stupid move by the unions.TheAussieReaper wrote:
"Republican demands for swift wage cuts."usmarine wrote:
lol...stupid unions.
A $14 billion emergency bailout for U.S. automakers collapsed in the Senate Thursday night after the United Auto Workers refused to accede to Republican demands for swift wage cuts.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081212/ap_ … ress_autos
Of course the unions shot that down. Why should the workers be forced to have lower pay as a condition of the bailout?
The only reason the pay is higher than that of the Japanese counterparts is due to health care benefits, holiday pay and pension funds. You want these workers to be under increased pressure during a recession by taking away holidays and pension plans? Get real. There was no talk of slashing bankers wages when the major banks were bailed out. The CEO's didn't see the millions they have in pensions suffer one cent.
"Republicans also bitterly opposed tougher environmental rules car makers would have to meet as part of the House-passed version of the rescue package and the Senate dropped them from its package."
The reason those environmental rules are in place is to provide a research and development expansion which would create more jobs, make these companies more competitive globally and also tackle climate change.
What a stupid move by the Republicans.
The fact is that other car manufacturers pay their workers substantially less at their US plants than the US manufacturers do. This is clearly not a competetive way to run a business. No wonder they're losing money - that's before you factor anything else in.
Also most of the bank bailouts have had salary related conditions attached to them (in the UK at least).
Last edited by Bertster7 (2008-12-12 11:49:03)
This confirms my opinion of how stupid unions are grasping the full picture, they should stand up against greed not be a part of it in order to save jobs ...
GG UAW
GG UAW
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
no. most people i know say "good" to what they did last night. so, it appears doing what the people want it stupid now.TheAussieReaper wrote:
What a stupid move by the Republicans.
I say hell yea to that. Did you hear MI socialist governor? What a twit. Calling the Senate un-American for not passing a socialist bailout bill.usmarine wrote:
no. most people i know say "good" to what they did last night. so, it appears doing what the people want it stupid now.TheAussieReaper wrote:
What a stupid move by the Republicans.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
I'm on the fence on this one....Bertster7 wrote:
No. What a stupid move by the unions.TheAussieReaper wrote:
"Republican demands for swift wage cuts."usmarine wrote:
lol...stupid unions.
A $14 billion emergency bailout for U.S. automakers collapsed in the Senate Thursday night after the United Auto Workers refused to accede to Republican demands for swift wage cuts.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081212/ap_ … ress_autos
Of course the unions shot that down. Why should the workers be forced to have lower pay as a condition of the bailout?
The only reason the pay is higher than that of the Japanese counterparts is due to health care benefits, holiday pay and pension funds. You want these workers to be under increased pressure during a recession by taking away holidays and pension plans? Get real. There was no talk of slashing bankers wages when the major banks were bailed out. The CEO's didn't see the millions they have in pensions suffer one cent.
"Republicans also bitterly opposed tougher environmental rules car makers would have to meet as part of the House-passed version of the rescue package and the Senate dropped them from its package."
The reason those environmental rules are in place is to provide a research and development expansion which would create more jobs, make these companies more competitive globally and also tackle climate change.
What a stupid move by the Republicans.
The fact is that other car manufacturers pay their workers substantially less at their US plants than the US manufacturers do. This is clearly not a competetive way to run a business. No wonder they're losing money - that's before you factor anything else in.
Also most of the bank bailouts have had salary related conditions attached to them (in the UK at least).
On the one hand, the "parity pay" stipulation makes sense. The Republicans made a great point by forcing unions to accept competitive pay in exchange for the money.
On the other hand, rejecting greener standards is very myopic. For the most part, we have the most lenient emission standards and fuel mileage standards in the First World. This is part of what allowed the Big 3 to get lazy. If they had to focus on complying with the same strict standards that Europe and Japan impose, they'd be building better cars that would compete better with companies like Honda and Mercedes.
So, the move was both bad and good, although since I'm against the bailout altogether, it was more good than bad.
This is where I actually stand. What I hate though, is that the bailout wasn't shot down because paying out billions to failing companies is going to do nothing but weaken the dollar, cause greater inflation and not change the way the businesses function. This bailout included a few clauses like going for greater research and development into greener technology, to create jobs and a competitive advantage globally.Turquoise wrote:
So, the move was both bad and good, although since I'm against the bailout altogether, it was more good than bad.
That was the only good that would have come form this bailout.
What I am pissed about is that it was shot down for the wrong reasons. It was shot down because workers wanted their pay and conditions to remain under what they had signed to. Which they should have been entitled to regardless.
It should have been shot down because this money could have already been taken from the first bailout packages which still haven't made it into the smaller banks or other financial institutions where it is needed. The small banks take loans from the bigger banks and this is where most of the problem lies.
Bailing out failed companies instead of propping up sound infrastructure building projects and the businesses likely to survive the recession should have been the priority.
Do the car manufacturers who are still doing okay relative to this recession receive any monetary incentive in the form of billions of dollars for staying open and creating better and\or greener cars?
No. It's the top 3 failed businesses they get paid.
If they're gunna toss trillions of dollars to wall street without the least consideration, I really don't give a shit if detroit gets 15 billion or 50 billion, it's pocket change. AIG is handing out million dollar "retention payments" to their executives, on our dime. Who cares about a couple billion anymore?
To be honest, I'm inclined to say "screw 'em". If they don't want to make better products once they get on their feet, then they deserve to go.
And I do wonder if this would have happened in such grandiose scale if regulations and quality hadn't flatlined for two decades.
And I do wonder if this would have happened in such grandiose scale if regulations and quality hadn't flatlined for two decades.
Last edited by Spark (2008-12-12 22:31:54)
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
The best thing for the American auto industry would be to let them fail...restructure under Chapter 11 and come back stronger. Maybe one or two of them will be gone, but whatever is left will be better in the long term.
Giving out bailouts to failing businesses (and I wouldn't had given bailouts to finacial companies like BofA that just laid off 35,000 workers AFTER getting $25 billion), will have businesses fail later unless there's actually a chance (like Chrysler in the 80's), that they'll be solvent because of the loan.
Giving out bailouts to failing businesses (and I wouldn't had given bailouts to finacial companies like BofA that just laid off 35,000 workers AFTER getting $25 billion), will have businesses fail later unless there's actually a chance (like Chrysler in the 80's), that they'll be solvent because of the loan.
Obama is for change. Change is the solution to the things that are bad right now. Millions of sheep, umm I mean Americans can't be wrong.
Good point... Someone needs to blow up the AIG corporate building.Reciprocity wrote:
If they're gunna toss trillions of dollars to wall street without the least consideration, I really don't give a shit if detroit gets 15 billion or 50 billion, it's pocket change. AIG is handing out million dollar "retention payments" to their executives, on our dime. Who cares about a couple billion anymore?
I'd argue that Bush brought about change also.Lotta_Drool wrote:
Obama is for change. Change is the solution to the things that are bad right now. Millions of sheep, umm I mean Americans can't be wrong.
So you're saying Obama is more of the same... lolTheAussieReaper wrote:
I'd argue that Bush brought about change also.Lotta_Drool wrote:
Obama is for change. Change is the solution to the things that are bad right now. Millions of sheep, umm I mean Americans can't be wrong.
Love is the answer
lol Don't know where your drawing that from.[TUF]Catbox wrote:
So you're saying Obama is more of the same... lolTheAussieReaper wrote:
I'd argue that Bush brought about change also.Lotta_Drool wrote:
Obama is for change. Change is the solution to the things that are bad right now. Millions of sheep, umm I mean Americans can't be wrong.
I'm saying Bush brought about change. Compare his policies to Clintons.
Obama is also for change. Compare his polices to Bush.
And the next President is going to be about change also.
Unless you think that Obama is going to undo Bush and follow the Clinton polices. But we already know he hasn't.
Change doesn't really mean anything. It's achieved whether a candidate pushes for it or not.
Well, parity pay is a reasonable contingency to apply to this bailout, because there's no way the Big 3 will be competitive otherwise. As long as GM workers get paid more than workers at Honda or Toyota, they're going to hurt because of it.TheAussieReaper wrote:
This is where I actually stand. What I hate though, is that the bailout wasn't shot down because paying out billions to failing companies is going to do nothing but weaken the dollar, cause greater inflation and not change the way the businesses function. This bailout included a few clauses like going for greater research and development into greener technology, to create jobs and a competitive advantage globally.Turquoise wrote:
So, the move was both bad and good, although since I'm against the bailout altogether, it was more good than bad.
That was the only good that would have come form this bailout.
What I am pissed about is that it was shot down for the wrong reasons. It was shot down because workers wanted their pay and conditions to remain under what they had signed to. Which they should have been entitled to regardless.
It should have been shot down because this money could have already been taken from the first bailout packages which still haven't made it into the smaller banks or other financial institutions where it is needed. The small banks take loans from the bigger banks and this is where most of the problem lies.
Bailing out failed companies instead of propping up sound infrastructure building projects and the businesses likely to survive the recession should have been the priority.
Do the car manufacturers who are still doing okay relative to this recession receive any monetary incentive in the form of billions of dollars for staying open and creating better and\or greener cars?
No. It's the top 3 failed businesses they get paid.
Pay is about the same, its the benefits piled on top of them which are the problem.
Keg of beer, dental plan, etc etc.
Keg of beer, dental plan, etc etc.
Fuck Israel