Eisboch wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 04:32:22 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"Boater" wrote in message
...
My understanding is that the Toyota we have was not built by non-union
workers in the USA.

Why did I choose it? Because at the time I purchased it, the
corresponding
Ford and GM vehicles were too large.

I assume you bought a used Tundra.

Eisboch

I believe he said he had a 4Runner.
--
John H.


Oh. I was wrong. I thought he mentioned a Tundra.
I assume it is an older, used model.

Eisboch



4Runner with 100,000 miles. Still in good shape, but only used as a boat
ramp tow vehicle these days. When we got it, Ford and GM didn't make a
mid-sized SUV with similar tow capacity, as I recall, and, of course, I
wouldn't take a Chrysler product on a bet, not with those old-tech
pushrod engines.

That was almost six years ago, though. I haven't stayed "current" with
what is being offered by Ford or GM these days. In fact, I'm not really
that interested in cars these days.

I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers, if
good foreign management took over there, management from Japan or Korea.
with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a new unionized
deal for new hires, with a quality "national" health care plan so the
employers aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school mentality.

On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 07:57:53 -0500, "D.Duck" wrote:


"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 19:30:09 -0600, wrote:

From my perspective, eventually, several major car manufacturers are
going to fail anyway. There seems to be a glut of manufacturers with
very few open markets.

You know - you have good points, I think I have good points, Dick has
good points - we've all got some really good points.

And then there's bull**** like this.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...0_favor07.html

I mean seriously - the taxpayer gets f'd over everyday with crap like
this -what's 34 billion to keep Union workers from not working at 95%
of their base pay.

Nothing.

I've changed my mind - bail everybody out. I'm going to do something
like Eisboch - start a new business and apply for a bail out six
months down the road.

What the heck - might as well get in on the deal.

F 'em all, let's secede from the Union.

Yeah!!

And then we can apply for the real money - foreign aid...

On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 08:07:17 -0500, Boater
wrote:


4Runner with 100,000 miles. Still in good shape, but only used as a boat
ramp tow vehicle these days. When we got it, Ford and GM didn't make a
mid-sized SUV with similar tow capacity, as I recall, and, of course, I
wouldn't take a Chrysler product on a bet, not with those old-tech
pushrod engines.

Nothing wrong with a good pushrod engine, especially for a truck.
BTW, wheels and levers are old-tech.

--Vic

"Boater" wrote in message
...

I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers, if
good foreign management took over there, management from Japan or Korea.
with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a new unionized deal
for new hires, with a quality "national" health care plan so the employers
aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school mentality.



Overall, I agree. I am not sure that fresh, innovative management cannot be
found here in the US, but I won't argue the need to get away from
traditional business and MBA concepts.

I also believe in and respect the concept of a contract. The current
organized employees need to be considered and fairly treated. However,
contracts, by design, can be renegotiated, particularly in troubled times
when absolute adherence to them puts the whole operation at risk.

I couldn't agree more that businesses should not be the administrators of
health plans.

Eisboch

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 08:07:17 -0500, Boater
wrote:


4Runner with 100,000 miles. Still in good shape, but only used as a boat
ramp tow vehicle these days. When we got it, Ford and GM didn't make a
mid-sized SUV with similar tow capacity, as I recall, and, of course, I
wouldn't take a Chrysler product on a bet, not with those old-tech
pushrod engines.

Nothing wrong with a good pushrod engine, especially for a truck.
BTW, wheels and levers are old-tech.

--Vic

At least with a pushrod you typically just lost a cylinder if one broke. If
the timing belt goes on some of the overhead cams because you forgot to
replace it at 70k miles, the engine can completely self destruct.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers, if
good foreign management took over there, management from Japan or Korea.
with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a new unionized deal
for new hires, with a quality "national" health care plan so the employers
aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school mentality.



Overall, I agree. I am not sure that fresh, innovative management cannot be
found here in the US, but I won't argue the need to get away from
traditional business and MBA concepts.

I also believe in and respect the concept of a contract. The current
organized employees need to be considered and fairly treated. However,
contracts, by design, can be renegotiated, particularly in troubled times
when absolute adherence to them puts the whole operation at risk.

I couldn't agree more that businesses should not be the administrators of
health plans.

Eisboch




I haven't seen the numbers, but I wonder what American corporations
would have to do if they were required to fund their pension liabilities.

My union's pension fund has *no* unfunded liabilities, and we intend to
keep it that way, for moral and legal reasons. The hourly contributions
go where they are supposed to go, and, even though we do not invest in
stocks, we are still several percentage points ahead in earnings so that
we can handle distributions.

Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 04:32:22 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"Boater" wrote in message
...
My understanding is that the Toyota we have was not built by non-union
workers in the USA.

Why did I choose it? Because at the time I purchased it, the
corresponding
Ford and GM vehicles were too large.

I assume you bought a used Tundra.

Eisboch

I believe he said he had a 4Runner.
--
John H.


Oh. I was wrong. I thought he mentioned a Tundra.
I assume it is an older, used model.

Eisboch


4Runner with 100,000 miles. Still in good shape, but only used as a boat
ramp tow vehicle these days. When we got it, Ford and GM didn't make a
mid-sized SUV with similar tow capacity, as I recall, and, of course, I
wouldn't take a Chrysler product on a bet, not with those old-tech
pushrod engines.

That was almost six years ago, though. I haven't stayed "current" with
what is being offered by Ford or GM these days. In fact, I'm not really
that interested in cars these days.

I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers, if
good foreign management took over there, management from Japan or Korea.
with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a new unionized
deal for new hires, with a quality "national" health care plan so the
employers aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school mentality.

Your lack of faith is apparent. GM is Better off in chapter 11 with no
bailout money. Pay the union members off with 10 cents per benefit
dollar and lock out the unions permanently. Executive bonus should be
tied to profit. Worker bonus and pay should be tied to individual
productivity. Simply put. "Earn your pay"

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers, if
good foreign management took over there, management from Japan or Korea.
with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a new unionized
deal for new hires, with a quality "national" health care plan so the
employers aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school mentality.



Overall, I agree. I am not sure that fresh, innovative management cannot
be found here in the US, but I won't argue the need to get away from
traditional business and MBA concepts.

I also believe in and respect the concept of a contract. The current
organized employees need to be considered and fairly treated. However,
contracts, by design, can be renegotiated, particularly in troubled times
when absolute adherence to them puts the whole operation at risk.

I couldn't agree more that businesses should not be the administrators of
health plans.

Eisboch


I haven't seen the numbers, but I wonder what American corporations would
have to do if they were required to fund their pension liabilities.


I don't know because I am not very familiar with corporations with pension
plans.
Most small businesses (that employs the most people) typically don't have
pension plans.
They may have 401k's and/or similar and may make some form of matching
contributions, along with matching contributions to SS benefits. That's
about it, and that's how the majority of people plan for retirement.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers, if
good foreign management took over there, management from Japan or Korea.
with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a new unionized
deal for new hires, with a quality "national" health care plan so the
employers aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school mentality.


Overall, I agree. I am not sure that fresh, innovative management cannot
be found here in the US, but I won't argue the need to get away from
traditional business and MBA concepts.

I also believe in and respect the concept of a contract. The current
organized employees need to be considered and fairly treated. However,
contracts, by design, can be renegotiated, particularly in troubled times
when absolute adherence to them puts the whole operation at risk.

I couldn't agree more that businesses should not be the administrators of
health plans.

Eisboch

I haven't seen the numbers, but I wonder what American corporations would
have to do if they were required to fund their pension liabilities.


I don't know because I am not very familiar with corporations with pension
plans.
Most small businesses (that employs the most people) typically don't have
pension plans.
They may have 401k's and/or similar and may make some form of matching
contributions, along with matching contributions to SS benefits. That's
about it, and that's how the majority of people plan for retirement.

Eisboch




Ahhh 401k's.... Too bad about those.

Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers,
if good foreign management took over there, management from Japan
or Korea. with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a
new unionized deal for new hires, with a quality "national" health
care plan so the employers aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school
mentality.


Overall, I agree. I am not sure that fresh, innovative management
cannot be found here in the US, but I won't argue the need to get
away from traditional business and MBA concepts.

I also believe in and respect the concept of a contract. The
current organized employees need to be considered and fairly
treated. However, contracts, by design, can be renegotiated,
particularly in troubled times when absolute adherence to them puts
the whole operation at risk.

I couldn't agree more that businesses should not be the
administrators of health plans.

Eisboch

I haven't seen the numbers, but I wonder what American corporations
would have to do if they were required to fund their pension
liabilities.


I don't know because I am not very familiar with corporations with
pension plans.
Most small businesses (that employs the most people) typically don't
have pension plans.
They may have 401k's and/or similar and may make some form of matching
contributions, along with matching contributions to SS benefits.
That's about it, and that's how the majority of people plan for
retirement.

Eisboch



Ahhh 401k's.... Too bad about those.

And that's about how we feel about bailing out union pensions. Too bad.
So sad.