|
Whooopeee!!!!!
"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in message anews.com... "Charles Momsen" wrote in message ... "Dave" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 14:26:38 -0500, said: Most of the money for healthcare is made by drug companies, followed by insurance companies. Once again, Dave blames the bottom rungs of the ladder for problems on the roof. Typically fuzzy thinking, Not at All. Blaming "companies" or "the corporations" makes for nice easy propaganda for consumption by the dimmer bulbs on the tree, but thinking people know better. "Companies" are collections of people. So tell me, who makes more money on average, a brain surgeon, or a researcher or manager employed by a Pharma company? Dave, I must commend you on the beatings you are delivering. They are outstanding! Yeh, but I'd really like to see what he could do with people who weren't clueless morons. . . Bwahahahahahahaaaaa!!!!!! |
Whooopeee!!!!!
"Dave" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:19:56 -0800, "Capt. JG" said: You didn't Google far enough, Jon. Add "two fleet rule" to your search terms and repeat your search, and then you might be able to begin to answer my question. Or at least perhaps fool somebody into thinking you have a clue. I stand by my answer. Bzzzzzt. Wrong. You can lead a horse to water..... The answer is that unless the cars Ford sells have at least 75% domestic content, Ford can't count those cars against its separate U.S. fleet CAFE requirements. This is the result of a rule the Congress critters enacted at the behest of the UAW, designed to insure that domestic manufacturers couldn't meet their fuel economy requirements by selling cars produced by more efficient or less expensive labor offshore.The effect is that they have to produce and sell enough small cars built with U.S. labor to offset the low mileage larger vehicles they produce here, even if they have to sell those domestically produced small cars at a loss. It's a UAW job protection boondoggle. Smackdown! |
Whooopeee!!!!!
"Dave" wrote in message
... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:19:56 -0800, "Capt. JG" said: You didn't Google far enough, Jon. Add "two fleet rule" to your search terms and repeat your search, and then you might be able to begin to answer my question. Or at least perhaps fool somebody into thinking you have a clue. I stand by my answer. Bzzzzzt. Wrong. You can lead a horse to water..... The answer is that unless the cars Ford sells have at least 75% domestic content, Ford can't count those cars against its separate U.S. fleet CAFE requirements. This is the result of a rule the Congress critters enacted at the behest of the UAW, designed to insure that domestic manufacturers couldn't meet their fuel economy requirements by selling cars produced by more efficient or less expensive labor offshore.The effect is that they have to produce and sell enough small cars built with U.S. labor to offset the low mileage larger vehicles they produce here, even if they have to sell those domestically produced small cars at a loss. It's a UAW job protection boondoggle. Bzzzzt. Wrong again Dave. You can try to reason with a right-wingnut, but..... So, you're trying to claim that Toyota doesn't have at least that percentage in it's US sold cars??? Think again dude. As I said, I stand by my original answer. For example, "Toyota Tundra's solid domestic-parts content rating, up to 80 percent for 2008 from 75 percent for 2007." "The '08 Ford Focus dropped to 65 percent from 75 percent in domestic-parts content." Why don't you try and blame the UAW again, if it makes you feel better. LOL -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Whooopeee!!!!!
Dave wrote:
question. Or at least perhaps fool somebody into thinking you have a clue. This from the man who's first line of defence is to shout "ad hominem!" Cheers Martin |
Whooopeee!!!!!
"Marty" wrote in message
... Dave wrote: question. Or at least perhaps fool somebody into thinking you have a clue. This from the man who's first line of defence is to shout "ad hominem!" Cheers Martin But I have two clews, at least active anyway.... -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Whooopeee!!!!!
Dave wrote:
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:19:56 -0800, "Capt. JG" said: You didn't Google far enough, Jon. Add "two fleet rule" to your search terms and repeat your search, and then you might be able to begin to answer my question. Or at least perhaps fool somebody into thinking you have a clue. I stand by my answer. Bzzzzzt. Wrong. You can lead a horse to water..... The answer is that unless the cars Ford sells have at least 75% domestic content, Ford can't count those cars against its separate U.S. fleet CAFE requirements. This is the result of a rule the Congress critters enacted at the behest of the UAW, designed to insure that domestic manufacturers couldn't meet their fuel economy requirements by selling cars produced by more efficient or less expensive labor offshore.The effect is that they have to produce and sell enough small cars built with U.S. labor to offset the low mileage larger vehicles they produce here, even if they have to sell those domestically produced small cars at a loss. It's a UAW job protection boondoggle. What hogwash; it's the UAW's fault that Ford can't engineer a vehicle to get a decent milage? Honda, Kia, Subaru, Mazda, Nissan, to name just a few have no problem? How many of those engineers are members of the UAW? Dave, you clearly feel that it would be better for us all if we still had 12 year olds working six and half days a week, eighty hours for barely enough compensation to pay for their own food.... Martin |
Whooopeee!!!!!
"Marty" wrote in message
... Dave wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:19:56 -0800, "Capt. JG" said: You didn't Google far enough, Jon. Add "two fleet rule" to your search terms and repeat your search, and then you might be able to begin to answer my question. Or at least perhaps fool somebody into thinking you have a clue. I stand by my answer. Bzzzzzt. Wrong. You can lead a horse to water..... The answer is that unless the cars Ford sells have at least 75% domestic content, Ford can't count those cars against its separate U.S. fleet CAFE requirements. This is the result of a rule the Congress critters enacted at the behest of the UAW, designed to insure that domestic manufacturers couldn't meet their fuel economy requirements by selling cars produced by more efficient or less expensive labor offshore.The effect is that they have to produce and sell enough small cars built with U.S. labor to offset the low mileage larger vehicles they produce here, even if they have to sell those domestically produced small cars at a loss. It's a UAW job protection boondoggle. What hogwash; it's the UAW's fault that Ford can't engineer a vehicle to get a decent milage? Honda, Kia, Subaru, Mazda, Nissan, to name just a few have no problem? How many of those engineers are members of the UAW? Dave, you clearly feel that it would be better for us all if we still had 12 year olds working six and half days a week, eighty hours for barely enough compensation to pay for their own food.... Martin Thank you sir. I'll take another.... -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Whooopeee!!!!!
Dave wrote:
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:24:02 -0500, Marty said: Dave, you clearly feel that it would be better for us all if we still had 12 year olds working six and half days a week, eighty hours for barely enough compensation to pay for their own food.... I haven't visited those plants in SC, Alabama, etc. where the Japanese companies are beating the pants off Detroit using non-union labor. Is the above an accurate description of the workforce in those plants? Whoooosh....... ------------ And now a word from our sponsor ------------------ Do your users want the best web-email gateway? Don't let your customers drift off to free webmail services install your own web gateway! -- See http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_webmail.htm ---- |
Whooopeee!!!!!
"Dave" wrote in message
... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:08:00 -0800, "Capt. JG" said: So, you're trying to claim that Toyota doesn't have at least that percentage in it's US sold cars??? Another red herring thrown out. You must have quite a supply. They used to say in law school that if you can't answer the question asked on the exam, answer some other question that you can answer. Looks like you took that as your motto. Dude... I did answer the question. You have refused. Not sure what they would say in law school about that. Did you take the 5th? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Whooopeee!!!!!
wrote in message
... On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:16:10 -0800, "Capt. JG" wrote: ?? Toyota/Honda/Kia, etc. have the same standards. Where's the beef? Another Wendy's reference! Chairman Dave must be loving this! It's from an old political add, but yes, Wendy's also. -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:14 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com