OT: does obama bring change?

[1bad65]

You might need to go ahead and describe it in the longer way, because at the moment you're still just basically saying "because it doesn't work" without any explanation of why. You say the government can't create wealth, but where's the difference between me making purchases or investments and the government doing it?

When you make a purchase, it's with your money. However, when the government does it, And they are running a deficit, they have to print the money. This leads to inflation. Perfect examples are the Carter years and the Weimar Republic. The Weimar Republic actually printed so much money people were literally burning paper money because it was cheaper than buying firewood and heating oil!

What prevents government spending from creating wealth in the same way that private spending does?

See above. Also, if I invest say $10k in a start-up business, and they become profitable, I benefit from the wealth they created. Can you name anyone who got rich by investing in the Government?

If the government spends a few billion in taxes hiring private companies for large public works projects, doesn't that put a lot more money into the hands of the private sector and, in turn, create a lot more wealth (as well as immediate benefit to the public good) than having a bunch of random people each deciding to do whatever they want with their individual, small amounts of money?

Good question. Yes, that puts money in the hands of the private sector, BUT.... First, the Government did not create that money. If they printed it and they are in debt (like ours currently is), inflation is a very distinct possibilty. Second, business does not 'do whatever they want'. If they spend money foolishly, and don't get returns on it, they go out of business. On the other hand if the government does that, they just borrow more.

[1bad65]

Honestly.... are you THAT dense?

Do you even have to ask?

[1bad65]

Must be pretty easy. They're doing it right now by offering early retirement.

It's not easy. They are doing it now because the union HAS to budge or they know they get NOTHING. And fyi, early retirement is not the same as a layoff.

Also, can you tell us when the last layoff of auto workers was before this recession?

[1bad65]

"The last major strike by the UAW also occurred in 1970. After that, management continually gave in to the union demands in all future contract negotiations. They promised tremendous pension benefits, lifetime healthcare benefits, huge pay increases, and onerous work rules that gave management no flexibility. GM evidently didn’t have any bean counters who could extrapolate past a five year horizon. If they had, they would have seen that they would eventually have an unsustainable cost structure with more retirees being paid than workers on the assembly line. The troubling facts were ignored because GM still had a 45% market share during the 1970s. GM's U.S. employment reached 618,365 in 1979, making it the largest private employer in the country. Worldwide employment broached 853,000. It has been downhill ever since."

Thank you.

It looks like my earlier explanation hit the nail on the head.

[BoulderDawg]

Has it occured to the village idiot that GM is slightly larger (sarcasm) and makes a few more (sarcasm again) cars than it was/had 50 years ago?

Once again I'm talking to a 5th grader.

Of course one would hope the company has grown in 50 years. However size doesn't matter when talking about labor as a percentage of expense.

Also, considering advancements made, one would hope that the number of employees would have drastically decreased since 1979.

[BoulderDawg]

It's not easy. They are doing it now because the union HAS to budge or they know they get NOTHING. And fyi, early retirement is not the same as a layoff.

You do know of course that the union has suspended the jobs bank during these hard economic times.

That sounds like budging to me!

[Drake]

Here...solid evidence they are overpaid. I won't go any further on this, unless you have some much more compelling evidence.

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploa...gm5_thumb1.jpg

[BoulderDawg]

Here...solid evidence they are overpaid. I won't go any further on this, unless you have some much more compelling evidence.

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploa...gm5_thumb1.jpg

I think it's evidence that everyone else is underpaid!

[Reverend Tap]

When you make a purchase, it's with your money. However, when the government does it, And they are running a deficit, they have to print the money. This leads to inflation. Perfect examples are the Carter years and the Weimar Republic. The Weimar Republic actually printed so much money people were literally burning paper money because it was cheaper than buying firewood and heating oil!

Good question. Yes, that puts money in the hands of the private sector, BUT.... First, the Government did not create that money. If they printed it and they are in debt (like ours currently is), inflation is a very distinct possibilty. Second, business does not 'do whatever they want'. If they spend money foolishly, and don't get returns on it, they go out of business. On the other hand if the government does that, they just borrow more.

Fair enough, that answers my question. Thanks.

See above. Also, if I invest say $10k in a start-up business, and they become profitable, I benefit from the wealth they created. Can you name anyone who got rich by investing in the Government?

Meant that the other way around, actually; government helping to create wealth by investing/spending into the private sector. Basically another way of saying the same thing as the public works projects bit.

[Reverend Tap]

Here...solid evidence they are overpaid. I won't go any further on this, unless you have some much more compelling evidence.

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploa...gm5_thumb1.jpg

1. The chart doesn't address actual pay, it addresses employer cost per labor hour. As the article I posted showed, there's not much of a disparity between the average pay of "big 3" autoworkers and those of Japanese companies.

2. I checked the sources on the chart. The numbers given for the Japanese companies are Chrysler's "estimates," based on unknown data. I'm not going to say they're lying, I'm not even going to say it's necessarily inaccurate, but it's not really academically reliable data.

3. According to the same Chrysler website cited by the chart, Chrysler's workforce has a much higher percentage of "skilled trade" workers than do the workforces of the Japanese companies: 21% versus 7%. As anyone who's ever looked through job listings for unskilled work can tell you, there's a huge jump in pay and benefits when you get skilled trade work. Logically, that disparity in skilled workers will necessarily translate into much higher overall operating costs.

[BoulderDawg]

Probably by the end of the week we'll have the decision of the Churchill trial.

I consider it a "can't lose" for Ward. Historical freedom of speech cases always come out on the short end at trail, "Scopes Monkey" "Chicago 8" and the list goes on and on. Only in appeal does the constitutionality of the case really get reviewed with the right decision being made. I think we'll win out in the end.

Just from an objective viewpoint, I feel we have about a 35-40% chance of winning this. The jury is probably going to be objective as they can be but they will still allow their personal views against Ward to color their decision.

Several things that were established during the case:

CU, the board of Regents and Gov Owens were planning to fire Ward before any investigation of his work took pace

Professor Churchill had excellent reviews and a stellar record. He is recognized as one of the top experts in his field.

Professor Churchill has written over two dozen books but yet the committee could only find a handful of very debatable errors.

It was shown that other professors had much worst violations than Ward yet these professors were not even being investigated.

*************

I see it as a "Hope for the best" situation. If we lose it's only the first step. However if we win at trial I think it will be a long haul for CU in the appeals process.

[sanjuro_ronin]

1. The chart doesn't address actual pay, it addresses employer cost per labor hour. As the article I posted showed, there's not much of a disparity between the average pay of "big 3" autoworkers and those of Japanese companies.

2. I checked the sources on the chart. The numbers given for the Japanese companies are Chrysler's "estimates," based on unknown data. I'm not going to say they're lying, I'm not even going to say it's necessarily inaccurate, but it's not really academically reliable data.

3. According to the same Chrysler website cited by the chart, Chrysler's workforce has a much higher percentage of "skilled trade" workers than do the workforces of the Japanese companies: 21% versus 7%. As anyone who's ever looked through job listings for unskilled work can tell you, there's a huge jump in pay and benefits when you get skilled trade work. Logically, that disparity in skilled workers will necessarily translate into much higher overall operating costs.

Like I mentioned before, its a question of SALES.
When slaes were high in the past, much was excused and "tolerated".
Not they case anymore.
Sell or Die, that's the crux of the matter.

[1bad65]

I am still in shock Obama fired the CEO of GM.

That's the kind of stuff dictators do.

[1bad65]

Several things that were established during the case:

He lied about his ancestry to get a job reserved for a REAL Indian.

He is a plagiarist.

He is a fraud.

He was the ONLY arts professor there who did not have a PhD.

He has an 'honorary' doctorate, but likes to be referred to as "Doctor".

He said he had permission to use other people's work, but he never called ANY of them to the stand to testify for him.

[Mr Punch]

I am still in shock Obama fired the CEO of GM.

That's the kind of stuff dictators do.

OK, so what's your problem with this? I'm not being facetious, I really want to know. Weren't you the one who didn't want the auto industry bailout in the first place?

Three companies that have lost $54bn in one year through mismanagement, and are now desperate for $15bn in taxpayers' dollar SHOULD have fired their own CEOs anyway by now.

Here's what I always thought, regardless of not liking or agreeing with the guy who wrote it most of the time.

I just wish Obama (and especially Brown too since my country's about to hit the skids in such a way that it'll lose all its remaining world influence to become roughly equivalent to say, Cuba, if it didn't have cigars) would play the same hardball with the finance companies and banks.