The aviation industry is keeping their technology within our capacity to pay so why can't the auto industry?
Bail out the Big 3?
- Thread starter Trex
- Start date
The aviation industry is keeping their technology within our capacity to pay so why can't the auto industry?
If Canada buys, let say in a six billion dollar bail-out.....two billion shares, and these are
spread out upon many Canadians....they make what we want or we buy Honda's and
such, and each person is out maybe $1000 average in shares, and the Big 3 can rot in Hell.
Still think Big 3 should get together and find their own way to success!..It's a bottomless money pit!.....Avoid the void!..or get suckered in..Again!.
It's a raw deal I agree, but the punch-line isn't the Big 3 and their exec's that have pilfered
and squirreled away big $$$ already and are insulated from an industry collapse...it's the
what (?) 15,000 employee's directly employed in Canada, and that number by a factor of
(?) for the peripheral industries like parts and shipping and dealers (100,000+) and all of the
peripheral business's (restaurants, stores,etc...) supported by that...that's the punch-line.
If (or more likely when, based on the "Monkey see Monkey do" philosophy with respect to
Canada being the tail on the U.S. dog) we contribute, it's with clear cut conditions. Salary
caps for Exec salaries and bonus's, enforced intelligence of their products for the Canadian
market, realistically competitive pricing, or no go. The Big 3 pull out of Canada, then we
follow ScottFree's guidance with respect to lawsuits, tariffs, and the like...
(P.S. I'm not in favor of a Bail-out either....but playing Devils Advocate)
If by bailout we mean hading them billions of dollars, not a good idea. How do we know that this money will do any good? If they continue with the same loss making practices as before, the money will just go down the rat hole.
I think the solution is bankruptcy. Let them declare chapter 11 bankruptcy. That doesn’t mean they go out of business, just that they are then able to restructure.
First, the can get rid of the union. Then they can reduce the wages and benefits. It used to cost the big three 77 dollars per hour per worker. They negotiated with the unions and it has come down to 70 $ per hour. However, the competitors (Toyota etc.) spend about 48 $ per hour per worker. So big 3 are at a huge disadvantage.
If they declare Chapter 11, they can reduce the wages and benefits to match their competitors. The whole workforce can be fired and rehired at reduced wage and benefits.
Chapter 11 will also give them time with the creditors, it will buy them more time. When they are in Chapter 11, they are in a position to make changes quickly. I personally think Chapter 11 is the way to go.
The only drawback with Chapter 11 is that sales may fall way down. Who wants to buy a car from a company which may not be around a year from now to honor its warrantee? This is where the government can step in. It can guarantee the warrantees of the cars sold by the bid 3, so that even if they go under, buyers are still covered by the warrantee, government will honour it.
I think Chapter 11 is the answer, it is a free market solution (I am a great believer in free market), it does not need any government handout. Let them declare bankruptcy, restructure and come out of it leaner, meaner and sounder companies.
I think the solution is bankruptcy. Let them declare chapter 11 bankruptcy. That doesn’t mean they go out of business, just that they are then able to restructure.
First, the can get rid of the union. Then they can reduce the wages and benefits. It used to cost the big three 77 dollars per hour per worker. They negotiated with the unions and it has come down to 70 $ per hour. However, the competitors (Toyota etc.) spend about 48 $ per hour per worker. So big 3 are at a huge disadvantage.
If they declare Chapter 11, they can reduce the wages and benefits to match their competitors. The whole workforce can be fired and rehired at reduced wage and benefits.
Chapter 11 will also give them time with the creditors, it will buy them more time. When they are in Chapter 11, they are in a position to make changes quickly. I personally think Chapter 11 is the way to go.
The only drawback with Chapter 11 is that sales may fall way down. Who wants to buy a car from a company which may not be around a year from now to honor its warrantee? This is where the government can step in. It can guarantee the warrantees of the cars sold by the bid 3, so that even if they go under, buyers are still covered by the warrantee, government will honour it.
I think Chapter 11 is the answer, it is a free market solution (I am a great believer in free market), it does not need any government handout. Let them declare bankruptcy, restructure and come out of it leaner, meaner and sounder companies.
Total material and labour for an auto whether a pick up truck or a cadillac is $5000-$6000. If labour is the culprit where did the $10K to $40K profit go?
It's a straight idea and if they retool and shore up the decrepit buildings that they work in (six months out of the market-- isn't the union dissolved -- it was that way) and if they give their competitors' product a good look , it just might work.
scratch
scratch
The game is to blame labour but the real culprit is return on investment.
If you have a factory that costs 400 million and costs millions to run then you better get a good return otherwise it's better to close the plant and invest somewhere else. Capitalists view labour as an expense which eats into their ROI so no matter what labourers get paid it is always too much. They just don't seem to be able to get over the whole slavery thing - they want the good times back.
Have you been down to IPSCO Place and strolled around at the tractor ballet? The price gouging is even worse in the agribiz sector. I'd rather see my tax money going to those who feed me. If the agribiz goes under we all go under....six feet under if they bother to bury the dead.
If you want to repair the trouble at the top of the money game you have to boost the very bottom. Nothing stands without a firm foundation. They keep crying for us to spend and buy but how is that possible when we have less and less to spend due to the greed of 1% of the populus who controll 90% of the wealth.
If things are rough on the top sell the Bentley or the beach house. Don't come begging to me and my family because you got too greedy and in over your head. They are going to have to swallow their pride just like all the others that are lined up at the foodbank because of the rich people that are now begging from the poor. Cowardly doesn't even come close to what they are suggesting.
Those who had their chance to sit at the top have shown they are incapable and must go. They won't die. Their bellies won't go empty. They still have healthcare, welfare, public schools foodbanks. It far cheaper to let that 1% take their knocks than it is to support the other 99%.
If they already have 90% of the wealth they are obviously more than able to sort it out on their own
They sure do!!
5 Salaries of Auto Industry CEOs
Auto industry CEOs in the United States and around the world are raking in big bucks
1. Rick Wagoner, General Motors: Wagoner received $14.4 million in compensation in 2007, including a salary of $1.56 million.
2. Alan Mulally, Ford: His compensation in 2007 was $21.7 million, with a salary of $2 million.
3. Wendelin Wiedeking, Porsche: He is thought to have earned more than ¤60 million ($89 million) last year.
4. Carlos Ghosn, Renault-Nissan: In 2006, he took home $45.5 million.
5. Dieter Zetsche, Daimler: Forbes calculates his total compensation to be €8,550,000.
Sources: Bloomberg, Motor Authority, Forbes, The Guardian
General Motors, The New York Times and Marxism 101
By Shamus Cooke
Global Research, November 24, 2008
As Socialists, we are consistently asked to present our ideas in a clearer, easier to understand manner. To achieve this goal, I’ll enlist the help of former Governor of Massachusetts and candidate for the Republican Presidential nomination, Mitt Romney, who appeared in the New York Times Op-Ed section on Nov. 19th.
Romney’s piece, entitled “Let Detroit Go Broke,” laid bare the intent behind the angry rhetoric used by politicians against the proposed bailout for the “Big Three” automakers. Whereas the giant Wall Street banks received over 1 trillion dollars – so far— without barely having to ask, an industry that actually produces something has to beg for a handout. Why the difference?
Romney doesn’t mix words, and makes it known that money can’t simply be thrown at the Big Three: they have to fix the problems that landed them in this mess. It soon becomes clear that the biggest problem needing fixing is the wages and benefits of the autoworkers.
“First, their [the automakers] huge disadvantage in costs relative to foreign brands must be eliminated. That means new labor agreements to align pay and benefits to match those of workers at competitors like BMW, Honda, Nissan and Toyota. Furthermore, retiree benefits must be reduced so that the total burden per auto for domestic makers is not higher than that of foreign producers.”
Conclusions such as these are inescapable within a market economy Marx gave similar examples long ago to explain how competition between capitalists inevitably forced an attack on the workers, since it is more difficult to cut the costs of raw materials and machines.
To accomplish the destruction of workers’ wages, Romney demands new management, too, and says that “the new management must work with labor leaders to see that the enmity between labor and management comes to an end”. This has always been a dream of the capitalist: eliminating the hostility of workers towards management, especially when management is hell-bent on destroying workers’ standard of living. Unfortunately for shareholders, class conflict is inherent in an economic system that is divided between workers and owners.
The bureaucracy which controls the autoworkers union (UAW) has done its best to dampen this intrinsic conflict. The UAW “leaders” have “cooperated” in drastically lowering workers’ wages and benefits, and as recently as last year, pushed through a devastating contract for workers.
But it wasn’t enough.
Romney—and the corporate establishment as a whole are demanding that the Big Three declare bankruptcy so that existing labor contracts can be torn up. Then the real “restructuring” will begin.
The lack of compassion that the ruling class shows for the families that would be affected by such polices shouldn’t come as a surprise. An economic system that produces goods for a market— instead of social need— will always produce similar outrages to the conscience.
As the economic crisis deepens, similar attacks on workers will develop. This is foreshadowed by Romney’s comment, “Companies in the 21st century cannot perpetuate the destructive labor relations of the 20th.” In the same paragraph Romney implies that unions in general are to blame for the sad state of the economy. This is not merely the opinion of one man, but one social class. Again it should be stated: the current crisis is being used as a justification for an unprecedented assault on the living standards of workers, to begin with the auto industry.
A defeat for the autoworkers in this fight will set a devastating precedent for workers all over the country. It is the absolute duty of every working-class person to stand in solidarity with the autoworkers in their coming struggle. It is likewise in the interest of all who work for a wage to oppose the continuing bailout of the Big Banks at taxpayer expense. Taxing the Super Rich is the common sense solution to the problem you’ll never hear from a politician’s mouth.
"Go ahead **** on labour. There's nothing stupider than ****ting on unionized labour if your not of the capitalist class, the wealthy love you, you're to stupid to believe. The owners will reward you with wage and benifit cuts and longer hours and if you suck right they'll find a dirty low paying dangerous job for your children too. The economy can't be fixed by chopping the take home of labour as a matter of fact it accellarates the decline by keeping purchasing power from circulation at the bottom where it is most needed.
Rubbung the rich will get you nothing but chapped hands a pat on the head and a bag of wet dreams." DB
By Shamus Cooke
Global Research, November 24, 2008
As Socialists, we are consistently asked to present our ideas in a clearer, easier to understand manner. To achieve this goal, I’ll enlist the help of former Governor of Massachusetts and candidate for the Republican Presidential nomination, Mitt Romney, who appeared in the New York Times Op-Ed section on Nov. 19th.
Romney’s piece, entitled “Let Detroit Go Broke,” laid bare the intent behind the angry rhetoric used by politicians against the proposed bailout for the “Big Three” automakers. Whereas the giant Wall Street banks received over 1 trillion dollars – so far— without barely having to ask, an industry that actually produces something has to beg for a handout. Why the difference?
Romney doesn’t mix words, and makes it known that money can’t simply be thrown at the Big Three: they have to fix the problems that landed them in this mess. It soon becomes clear that the biggest problem needing fixing is the wages and benefits of the autoworkers.
“First, their [the automakers] huge disadvantage in costs relative to foreign brands must be eliminated. That means new labor agreements to align pay and benefits to match those of workers at competitors like BMW, Honda, Nissan and Toyota. Furthermore, retiree benefits must be reduced so that the total burden per auto for domestic makers is not higher than that of foreign producers.”
Conclusions such as these are inescapable within a market economy Marx gave similar examples long ago to explain how competition between capitalists inevitably forced an attack on the workers, since it is more difficult to cut the costs of raw materials and machines.
To accomplish the destruction of workers’ wages, Romney demands new management, too, and says that “the new management must work with labor leaders to see that the enmity between labor and management comes to an end”. This has always been a dream of the capitalist: eliminating the hostility of workers towards management, especially when management is hell-bent on destroying workers’ standard of living. Unfortunately for shareholders, class conflict is inherent in an economic system that is divided between workers and owners.
The bureaucracy which controls the autoworkers union (UAW) has done its best to dampen this intrinsic conflict. The UAW “leaders” have “cooperated” in drastically lowering workers’ wages and benefits, and as recently as last year, pushed through a devastating contract for workers.
But it wasn’t enough.
Romney—and the corporate establishment as a whole are demanding that the Big Three declare bankruptcy so that existing labor contracts can be torn up. Then the real “restructuring” will begin.
The lack of compassion that the ruling class shows for the families that would be affected by such polices shouldn’t come as a surprise. An economic system that produces goods for a market— instead of social need— will always produce similar outrages to the conscience.
As the economic crisis deepens, similar attacks on workers will develop. This is foreshadowed by Romney’s comment, “Companies in the 21st century cannot perpetuate the destructive labor relations of the 20th.” In the same paragraph Romney implies that unions in general are to blame for the sad state of the economy. This is not merely the opinion of one man, but one social class. Again it should be stated: the current crisis is being used as a justification for an unprecedented assault on the living standards of workers, to begin with the auto industry.
A defeat for the autoworkers in this fight will set a devastating precedent for workers all over the country. It is the absolute duty of every working-class person to stand in solidarity with the autoworkers in their coming struggle. It is likewise in the interest of all who work for a wage to oppose the continuing bailout of the Big Banks at taxpayer expense. Taxing the Super Rich is the common sense solution to the problem you’ll never hear from a politician’s mouth.
"Go ahead **** on labour. There's nothing stupider than ****ting on unionized labour if your not of the capitalist class, the wealthy love you, you're to stupid to believe. The owners will reward you with wage and benifit cuts and longer hours and if you suck right they'll find a dirty low paying dangerous job for your children too. The economy can't be fixed by chopping the take home of labour as a matter of fact it accellarates the decline by keeping purchasing power from circulation at the bottom where it is most needed.
Rubbung the rich will get you nothing but chapped hands a pat on the head and a bag of wet dreams." DB
Some things are best dealt with through the bankruptcy courts.
An old lenders saying, "The first loss is the least loss".
An old lenders saying, "The first loss is the least loss".
Welcome to CC, Taxslave. Good points. That software lumber deal was a dandy, no. My BP goes way way up every time I think of it. Thanks for reminding me.............:angry3:.........kidding. And, "they", our government told us it was a GOOD DEAL!!! Christ, would I ever like to play some poker with those fools.
I notice Harpo, in his speeches, keeps saying he hopes there's no pressure to abrogate the NAFTA...........like it's a good thing. All we're seeing in Canada is factories closing and jobs going south or China. And he doesn't want to "abrogate' NAFTA.
Whatever.8O
I guess it somewhat depends on whether or not your an American.
Workers in the American Big 3 assembly plants are considered "force or worker multiplier's".
Each American auto worker represents an additional 7.5 workers.
The other guys who make the tires, the radios, the paint,the wiring, the upholstery, the oil and refinery guys who make the gas and diesel and so on and so forth.
Compare that to a lawyer or banker. Those guys are lucky if their multiplier is 2.
So the potential job losses are enormous.
Bailing out the companies could be cheaper than than resultant welfare and social security costs if they close.
Obama has promised change and a "new and improved" USA.
I think his hands are tied.
Plus he is an interventionist.
He will bail out GM and Ford and let Dodge fail.
I also think that Obama is no friend of Canada's.
His bail out package will include provisions that the saved jobs will all be American.
Which is fair enough.
However it also means the Canadian plants will be relocating south of the border.
Should we Canadians try and cut a deal with Obama and kick in some funding to save some jobs?
Or let it all go?
Trex
Workers in the American Big 3 assembly plants are considered "force or worker multiplier's".
Each American auto worker represents an additional 7.5 workers.
The other guys who make the tires, the radios, the paint,the wiring, the upholstery, the oil and refinery guys who make the gas and diesel and so on and so forth.
Compare that to a lawyer or banker. Those guys are lucky if their multiplier is 2.
So the potential job losses are enormous.
Bailing out the companies could be cheaper than than resultant welfare and social security costs if they close.
Obama has promised change and a "new and improved" USA.
I think his hands are tied.
Plus he is an interventionist.
He will bail out GM and Ford and let Dodge fail.
I also think that Obama is no friend of Canada's.
His bail out package will include provisions that the saved jobs will all be American.
Which is fair enough.
However it also means the Canadian plants will be relocating south of the border.
Should we Canadians try and cut a deal with Obama and kick in some funding to save some jobs?
Or let it all go?
Trex
Dunno, Trex.
Any bail out would have to make definite positive arrangements for the well being of factory workers affected. That's just my opinion, and I don't know what they would be. The big 3 or the gov. should not be allowed just to chuck the workers, although that seems to be the Canadian way.
Especially if they can be denigrated as "union" workers, and as such, deserve a pile of poop upon their heads. I'm still waiting for this one. Won't be long till Harpo divides and conquers.
Return EI to UI, at the old rates and qualifying times, and welfare to its' former self. Would be a start, but employment is what's needed, roads, infrastructure, etc. Cain't see that happening with a talk talk no walk Con govt. Unfortunate.
Any bail out would have to make definite positive arrangements for the well being of factory workers affected. That's just my opinion, and I don't know what they would be. The big 3 or the gov. should not be allowed just to chuck the workers, although that seems to be the Canadian way.
Especially if they can be denigrated as "union" workers, and as such, deserve a pile of poop upon their heads. I'm still waiting for this one. Won't be long till Harpo divides and conquers.
Return EI to UI, at the old rates and qualifying times, and welfare to its' former self. Would be a start, but employment is what's needed, roads, infrastructure, etc. Cain't see that happening with a talk talk no walk Con govt. Unfortunate.
Stop and trhink about the US rules on bankruptcy. If the big files for Chapter 11 they get to continue to stay in business, reorganize the business structure and keep the employees working. Also, they simply have to renegotiate the labor contracts they have with the UAW here in the US. That is like an anchor around their neck. But also, about one third of their management force has to go too. I agree about the impacts this could have on the Canadian auto group and workers. The idea that this could be a NAFTA violation is sure worth exploring too. I'm now finding out that the totals of the non-transparent "rescue" monies is rapidly approaching $7.7 trillion US dollars. Everyone is not being told the whole story. Where does it stop??
So do I. Unions have made some concessions, but not nearly enough. Wages are still too high for the big 3 compared to other automakers, I think it is 70 $ per hour compared to 48 $ per hour.
As to the high compensation received by the top management, that is definitely an issue and any government help to the big 3 should be conditional on management limiting its compensation.
But I think Chapter 11 is the only way to solve all these problems in a short period of time. Under chapter 11, everything is up of grabs. Divisions which are not making profits could be shut down fairly quickly, workforce reduced, management brought under control and the emerging company probably will be lot smaller, but much more efficient and able to survive in the market.
Our labour force can go from 25 bucks an hour to minimum wage and that's not going to hurt business and investors. The economy? That just means rich are getting richer. Bail-outs? To hell with them. Let the greed at the top feel a pinch for a change.
Last edited: