On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:28:18 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:

Here is a solution for GM that will work.

Each and every employee of GM is to buy stock in the company. Proceeds
will be used to fund GM financial needs.

Workers owning the company? Isn't that communism?

wrote in message
t...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:28:18 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:

Here is a solution for GM that will work.

Each and every employee of GM is to buy stock in the company. Proceeds
will be used to fund GM financial needs.

Workers owning the company? Isn't that communism?

Nope. Not at all. Some very successful companies have many employees
financially involved it its well being. Which is precisely GMs problem,
making them shareholders diffuses 30 years of union rant.

For example, say people are not buying a model of car. Having 1600 plant
employees hammering on invested management is going to see change quickly
and decisively. For it they don't they too loose. Nice motivation. But if
they are successful, $3 becomes $6 becomes $60.... And most importantly,
turn their brains back on how capitalism is supposed to really work.

But then again, the only thing UAW/CAW wants is a free lunch on the rest of
us. Change? Why change? Just like deer looking into headlights. No
consideration at all on who bails out the many more thousands who have lost
jobs, just a me-me attitude of selfishness. Tax then for us attitude is
just ludicrous.

Buzz Hargrove knew when to save his ass. Bet he locked in his pension
before Chrysler "adjusts" it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buzz_Hargrove

Socialists do eat their young, just remove capitalist to find out.

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
t...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:28:18 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:

Here is a solution for GM that will work.

Each and every employee of GM is to buy stock in the company. Proceeds
will be used to fund GM financial needs.

Workers owning the company? Isn't that communism?

Nope. Not at all. Some very successful companies have many employees
financially involved it its well being. Which is precisely GMs problem,
making them shareholders diffuses 30 years of union rant.

That's fine if the financial involvement is voluntary. Mandatory investment
by workers is essentially socializing ownership - the same principles as
Marxism.

100% employee-owned businesses generally do well. That is because as
owners, if they want to exploit and mismanage the company, they are only
exploiting and mismanaging themselves. There is a direct realtionship for
financial reward, such as performing well, rather than getting rewarded
whether the company is failing or succeeding (the norm for today's
executives).

However, even if employees flocked together to buy some of GM, as a class
they would still be in a minority position. Why would anyone allow a
minority shareholder to call the shots? It just doesn't work that way.

"Chom Noamsky" wrote in message
news:AJDUk.1538$o15.781@edtnps83...
"Canuck57" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
t...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:28:18 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:

Here is a solution for GM that will work.

Each and every employee of GM is to buy stock in the company. Proceeds
will be used to fund GM financial needs.

Workers owning the company? Isn't that communism?

Nope. Not at all. Some very successful companies have many employees
financially involved it its well being. Which is precisely GMs problem,
making them shareholders diffuses 30 years of union rant.

That's fine if the financial involvement is voluntary. Mandatory
investment by workers is essentially socializing ownership - the same
principles as Marxism.

100% employee-owned businesses generally do well. That is because as
owners, if they want to exploit and mismanage the company, they are only
exploiting and mismanaging themselves. There is a direct realtionship for
financial reward, such as performing well, rather than getting rewarded
whether the company is failing or succeeding (the norm for today's
executives).

However, even if employees flocked together to buy some of GM, as a class
they would still be in a minority position. Why would anyone allow a
minority shareholder to call the shots? It just doesn't work that way.

Limp excuses. I guess then CAW doesn't want the jobs.

The government is just starting to realize how many people are being laid
off from other than CAW (Canadian Auto ******) as they get this from EI
registration. They have the civil service white as a sheet. I even know of
a company you least expect preparing year end severances for thousands. We
actually might clock the year out at better than 10% unemployed if GM keeps
working! Even government revenue is plummeting. Yes, the government is
worried for their own CUPE asses!!

Now the amount of money to bail out a GM employee is really about $2 million
dollars each with wages, debt, liabilities and pensions etc. EI is maybe
$15k, you do the math. GM is really to a point where they have to go down.
Even the US government where a trillion is trivial is touching this turkey.

Who do you think is going to win, CUPE or CAW??

LOL. Going to be fun to watch. Investors will not be paying taxes this
year. Most companies will not. With spending halted (GST/excise) and
gasoline down, unemployment skyrocking with income taxes collected
plummeting....

Bet the government is in about a 30 billion a year shortfall in burn rate
right now if it was annualized. The CN Tower isn't for sale because this is
a good time to sell. And even Ottawa can't get credit. LOL.

In message AJDUk.1538$o15.781@edtnps83 "Chom Noamsky"
was claimed to have wrote:

That's fine if the financial involvement is voluntary. Mandatory investment
by workers is essentially socializing ownership - the same principles as
Marxism.

Is a bail-out not equally socialist?

100% employee-owned businesses generally do well. That is because as
owners, if they want to exploit and mismanage the company, they are only
exploiting and mismanaging themselves.

People still want to exploit and mismanage the company to their own
benefit. What going employee-owned does is put into action the best
feature of capitalism, self-interest.

Not every employee can exploit the company at the same time, there
simply isn't enough company to go around and if you try everyone loses.

Rather then just exploiting "the company" that everyone hates, you're
exploiting your coworkers directly, which means each and every coworker
has an incentive to say "Is 'x' good for the company?"

There is a direct realtionship for
financial reward, such as performing well, rather than getting rewarded
whether the company is failing or succeeding (the norm for today's
executives).

Yeah, this one needs to be fixed in general. Executives pay should be
solely driven by the profit a company generates, just like that of the
owners. Forcing executives to be owners helps.

However, even if employees flocked together to buy some of GM, as a class
they would still be in a minority position. Why would anyone allow a
minority shareholder to call the shots? It just doesn't work that way.

Even if they're ultimately a minority, if the union as a class becomes
the single largest shareholder then they have a ton of voting power.

wrote in message
t...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:28:18 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:

Here is a solution for GM that will work.

Each and every employee of GM is to buy stock in the company. Proceeds
will be used to fund GM financial needs.

Workers owning the company? Isn't that communism?

Of course not.

Think UPS
Think Harley-Davidson.
There are several more examples I can't think of at the moment.

I was going to try it with the company I owned prior to the unexpected,
surprise offer of acquisition by another company.
The idea was an employee buyout, over time, at a price that now, as I
reflect back, was incredibly cheap.
I would have been paid out over a 10-15 year period that would help fund my
retirement.

I turned the "keys" over to a young, smart guy (this wasn't my son ... he
came later) who wanted to run the company in the future.
After three months, he handed the keys back and said he didn't realize the
time and stress requirements of the job.
It was understandable. He had a young family, two small kids, and the
demands of the job takes it's toll on the family.

In the case of Harley, the employee buyout from Brunswick is what
transformed it back to being a profitable company.
The quality of the bikes also improved dramatically.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
t...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:28:18 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:

Here is a solution for GM that will work.

Each and every employee of GM is to buy stock in the company. Proceeds
will be used to fund GM financial needs.

Workers owning the company? Isn't that communism?

Of course not.

Think UPS
Think Harley-Davidson.
There are several more examples I can't think of at the moment.

I was going to try it with the company I owned prior to the unexpected,
surprise offer of acquisition by another company.
The idea was an employee buyout, over time, at a price that now, as I
reflect back, was incredibly cheap.
I would have been paid out over a 10-15 year period that would help fund
my retirement.

I turned the "keys" over to a young, smart guy (this wasn't my son ... he
came later) who wanted to run the company in the future.
After three months, he handed the keys back and said he didn't realize the
time and stress requirements of the job.
It was understandable. He had a young family, two small kids, and the
demands of the job takes it's toll on the family.

In the case of Harley, the employee buyout from Brunswick is what
transformed it back to being a profitable company.
The quality of the bikes also improved dramatically.

Eisboch
====================

Excellent way to go and maybe the only way for the future.
Isn't Canwest in this picture too. I'm sure there's many more but you can
bet the CEOs will fight it to the end unless the government forces it on
them.
As the next poster mentions , the old them/us mentality can be a problem
but once your paycheck is tied to your input, that mentality can change
quickly.

The strike should be a relic of the past, it can be damaging to both the
employee and/or the company. The auto industry is where it's at because of
strong unions as well as bad management. As owners , workers will have an
option vote to just having a strike vote.

Now the workers can lose everything including their pensions, so there has
to be a better way than handing out million dollar bonuses to non-performing
CEOs., while the paychecks and the pensions goes down the drain.

I'm a firm believer that the best ideas can most often come from the shop
floor and not the boardroom.

On Nov 18, 8:07*am, "Len McLaughlin" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...



wrote in message
et...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:28:18 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:

Here is a solution for GM that will work.

Each and every employee of GM is to buy stock in the company. *Proceeds
will be used to fund GM financial needs.

Workers owning the company? *Isn't that communism?

Of course not.

Think UPS
Think Harley-Davidson.
There are several more examples I can't think of at the moment.

I was going to try it with the company I owned prior to the unexpected,
surprise offer of acquisition by another company.
The idea was an employee buyout, over time, at a price that now, as I
reflect back, was incredibly cheap.
I would have been paid out over a 10-15 year period that would help fund
my retirement.

I turned the "keys" over to a young, smart guy (this wasn't my son ... he
came later) *who wanted to run the company in the future.
After three months, he handed the keys back and said he didn't realize the
time and stress requirements of the job.
It was understandable. *He had a young family, two small kids, and the
demands of the job takes it's toll on the family.

In the case of Harley, the employee buyout from Brunswick is what
transformed it back to being a profitable company.
The quality of the bikes also improved dramatically.

Eisboch

====================

Excellent way to go and maybe the only way for the future.
Isn't Canwest in this picture too. *I'm sure there's many more but you can
bet the CEOs will fight it to the end unless the government forces it on
them.
As the next poster mentions , the old them/us mentality can be *a problem
but once your paycheck is tied to your input, that mentality can change
quickly.

The strike should be a relic of the past, it can be damaging to both the
employee and/or the company. The auto industry is where it's at because of
strong unions as well as bad management. *As owners , workers will have an
option vote to just having a strike vote.

Now the workers can lose everything including their pensions, so there has
to be a better way than handing out million dollar bonuses to non-performing
CEOs., while the *paychecks *and the pensions goes down the drain.

I'm a firm believer that the best ideas can most often come from the shop
floor and not the boardroom.



It would be interesting to see if the companies and the unions would
agree to say a 20%-25% wage reduction and freeze at that level for say
a 30% total share in the company, making the union the largest share
holder. The union would them be responsible for providing best trained
labour for the joint enterprise.

On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:58:02 -0600, wrote:

On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:28:18 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:

Here is a solution for GM that will work.

Each and every employee of GM is to buy stock in the company. Proceeds
will be used to fund GM financial needs.

Workers owning the company? Isn't that communism?

The company logo of the Chicago&Northwestern railroad said "Employee
Owned" I always figure they had raided the pension fund.

Casady

On Nov 18, 1:27*pm, (Richard Casady)
wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:58:02 -0600, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:28:18 -0700, Canuck57 wrote:

Here is a solution for GM that will work.

Each and every employee of GM is to buy stock in the company. *Proceeds
will be used to fund GM financial needs.

Workers owning the company? *Isn't that communism? *

The company logo of the Chicago&Northwestern railroad said "Employee
Owned" I always figure they had raided the pension fund.

Casady

Screw the unions.. My wife just called from Motor Vehicle in Enfield.
They have been on a work slow down for a couple of years now. I was in
Old Saybrook this morning, they moved 15 people in front of me in
about 12 minutes with three to four windows. As usual, my wife just
called me from Enfield and they have moved 10 people in 1 hour, with 4
- 5 windows but says they are taking breaks after every person...
Bull****, they aren't worth 10 cents an hour...