"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:41:31 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:03:13 -0800, Bill McKee wrote:


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even
less, if
the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies
and
taxpayers.

Funny, instead of focusing on bottom up, perhaps more focus
should
be
placed on top down. Toyota's top 37 executives earned a
combined
$21.6
million. That bum Wagoner's compensation, alone, was $14.4
million.
At
Honda, the top 21 executives earned $11.1 million combined.
Ford's
CEO
Mulally's compensation was $17.7 million in 2008. If the boss
thinks
there's that kind of money floating around, why wonder if the
working man
wants a piece.

Or, is this just another example of voodoo economics, you know,
Reagan's
"tinkle down" economics?

Yes, the **** poor managment of the Big 3 auto companies is
famous.
And they are overpaid. But why should the guy on the assembly
line
with maybe a GED putting on lugnuts also be overpaid. As I said
bad
management also. As to the lower pay of the Japanese. Is true,
but
is not a true picture of the pay. They basically have unlimited
expense accounts, which mitigates a lot of personal taxes.

How do you determine if s/he is overpaid? What the criteria? Seems
to
me either union or non-union it's a negotiation that ends up at
the
market rate.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Compare her wage to what you would have to pay anywhere else
including
shipping and time value and you have a valid market wage.

Anywhere else? How about Mexico, since it's pretty close. Something
manufactured in TJ, delivered to San D. That's the valid market rate
in
TJ, but the living expenses are pretty different.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Yup, used to not be that huge differential in pay between the 2
countries. We did not pay our people 10x, but maybe 3x even mexico.

Right on. And, who's standard of living is better? What do we get for
the
taxes we pay vs. what those in Mexico pays?

--
Nom=de=Plume


What do we get from our excess taxation?

The greatest country in the world?

The most fertile climate for business start ups, expansion, financing,
educated population, semi-efficient transportation, clean air, water,
medical research, etc., etc.

If you don't like it you can always relocate. I'm sure Mexico would
be pleased to host you.

Sorry if you consider this lying.

We used to be the most fertile climate for business. Now? We rank low
in education, even through the Federal government took over education
control from the states, We are exporting our manufacturing and techical
jobs. This is a good business climate. Mexico is a country with a very
strong central government and you see what that country is going through.
Look at the permitting required for a lot of business. 10-15 different
agencies with conflicting requirements. We have lost the edge. And I
do not see with the present politicians from both sides of the aisle that
we have a clue on how to fix it.

If that's how you feel, you should vote Libertarian next goround..
--
Nom=de=Plume


I voted Obama in the primary as I dislike Hillary. I screwed up in that.
Did vote Libertarian for President. Did not like what either party was
supplying. And I will anybody but Boxer.

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:19:09 -0800, Bill McKee wrote:


We used to be the most fertile climate for business. Now? We rank low
in education, even through the Federal government took over education
control from the states, We are exporting our manufacturing and
techical jobs. This is a good business climate. Mexico is a country
with a very strong central government and you see what that country is
going through. Look at the permitting required for a lot of business.
10-15 different agencies with conflicting requirements. We have lost
the edge. And I do not see with the present politicians from both sides
of the aisle that we have a clue on how to fix it.

Huh? The World Bank ranks us #4 on Ease of Doing Business, and by the
way, Mexico is ranked #55.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ease_of...Business_Index


It's Obama's fault we're not number one!

--
Nom=de=Plume


Nope, but he is making sure we will be hurting financially with the printing
of excess money.

"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:19:09 -0800, Bill McKee wrote:


We used to be the most fertile climate for business. Now? We rank low
in education, even through the Federal government took over education
control from the states, We are exporting our manufacturing and
techical jobs. This is a good business climate. Mexico is a country
with a very strong central government and you see what that country is
going through. Look at the permitting required for a lot of business.
10-15 different agencies with conflicting requirements. We have lost
the edge. And I do not see with the present politicians from both sides
of the aisle that we have a clue on how to fix it.

Huh? The World Bank ranks us #4 on Ease of Doing Business, and by the
way, Mexico is ranked #55.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ease_of...Business_Index

Ease of doing business and starting and running a business are 2 different
items.

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:12:09 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:16:32 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news:uKmdnUunEfEGa2jXnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@earthlin k.com...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in
message
...
"JohnH" wrote in
message
...
...will last until the union or the government
figures
out a way to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its
unionized work force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited
by
the United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another
round of labor
concessions that would have roughly matched
concessions that workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the
spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its
vice
president in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a
statement
that the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of
the
contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay


Why should they cave to demands from management?
How
about producing decent products that people want to
buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They are decent products. But if you are paying
some
low skilled laborer excess money, then the decent
product is priced out of the market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should
seek
to renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a
contract.
If there's good management in place, then the union
members will feel better about consessions.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Yup, they should pay the workers what they are worth.
A
lot less than they are making. $65 bundled labor cost
to
install a lug nut?

Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who
determines this? You?

--
Nom=de=Plume


The market place. Not the union strong arming the
company.
Between the union and **** poor management over the at
least
40 years before the crash, there is no way the car
companies
can succeed.

Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the
market
rate. Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is
doing
better. Chrysler I think is on the way out completely.

--
Nom=de=Plume


The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the
reason for those egregious contracts. American car
companies
at the time had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why worry
about fiscal responsibility when you could pass on the
cost
and produce crappy cars. Now the real market rate is
maybe
25% of the negotiated rate. My daughter bought a used
Hyundai
station wagon a couple years ago. 100k warrantee, good
car,
70% the price of a comparable American car. Buy American?
Not when it comes with a 42% premium. For a car with less
warrantee.

Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes.
****-poor management. I agree. Thus, unions came into
being.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Look at what the non union successful car companies are
paying
and a valid market rate is less than that.

Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market rate?
How
do you figure that one?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay
even
less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt
companies and taxpayers.

So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate, which
is
fine if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union.
It
doesn't happen that often, but I have no problem with it per
se.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will
build
a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop
goes
union.

Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by
"enough." Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with
different facts involved. They will also build a plant somewhere
else
if they need more capacity union or no union.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced
then
it
will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech
factory in Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives were
assembled overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above $35
an
hour. Due to government overspending and excess union contracts
we
have priced America out of most manufacturing jobs. Government
has
added to this. Most government contracts require "prevailing
wages".
They mean union wages and not what the prevailing market rate is.



You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you don't
want
to name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We can
compete on quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be the
McDees of disk drives.

--
Nom=de=Plume


We used to compete with Malasia and all the 3rd world countries.
But
due to overspending by our government and lots of excess regulations
we
priced ourselves out of most markets.

I thought it was the unions' fault.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Right and Harry and you and the unions added to the excess cost. Glad
you
realized that, and pointed it out.

Bill, everything "adds" to costs. That's the nature of the world.

I *am* glad I pointed it out, since you didn't understand previously.

By Bill's definition, you are lying.

Everyone who doesn't agree with Bill is lying.

Another lie.

OMG, now you're lying about lying. I can't believe what a liar you
are.

Believe what you want. Since you believe in Change, no matter that we are
getting changed in to a 3rd world financial entity, you will believe
anything.

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:19:09 -0800, Bill McKee wrote:


We used to be the most fertile climate for business. Now? We rank
low
in education, even through the Federal government took over education
control from the states, We are exporting our manufacturing and
techical jobs. This is a good business climate. Mexico is a country
with a very strong central government and you see what that country is
going through. Look at the permitting required for a lot of business.
10-15 different agencies with conflicting requirements. We have lost
the edge. And I do not see with the present politicians from both
sides
of the aisle that we have a clue on how to fix it.

Huh? The World Bank ranks us #4 on Ease of Doing Business, and by the
way, Mexico is ranked #55.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ease_of...Business_Index


It's Obama's fault we're not number one!

--
Nom=de=Plume


Nope, but he is making sure we will be hurting financially with the
printing of excess money.

It'll be interestig to see if the World Bank changes our ranking...

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:19:09 -0800, Bill McKee wrote:


We used to be the most fertile climate for business. Now? We rank low
in education, even through the Federal government took over education
control from the states, We are exporting our manufacturing and
techical jobs. This is a good business climate. Mexico is a country
with a very strong central government and you see what that country is
going through. Look at the permitting required for a lot of business.
10-15 different agencies with conflicting requirements. We have lost
the edge. And I do not see with the present politicians from both sides
of the aisle that we have a clue on how to fix it.

Huh? The World Bank ranks us #4 on Ease of Doing Business, and by the
way, Mexico is ranked #55.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ease_of...Business_Index

Ease of doing business and starting and running a business are 2 different
items.

So, then you should be able to supply a citation for this...

Never mind... I'll do it for you. We're number 8 as of 2009. There are a
bunch of other interesting ranking numbers here as well.

http://www.doingbusiness.org/economy...ion=Asc&sort=2

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:54:05 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:12:09 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:16:32 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news:uKmdnUunEfEGa2jXnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@earthli nk.com...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in
message
...
"JohnH" wrote in
message
...
...will last until the union or the government
figures
out a way to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its
unionized work force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited
by
the United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another
round of labor
concessions that would have roughly matched
concessions that workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the
spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its
vice
president in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a
statement
that the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of
the
contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay


Why should they cave to demands from management?
How
about producing decent products that people want to
buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They are decent products. But if you are paying
some
low skilled laborer excess money, then the decent
product is priced out of the market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should
seek
to renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a
contract.
If there's good management in place, then the union
members will feel better about consessions.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Yup, they should pay the workers what they are worth.
A
lot less than they are making. $65 bundled labor cost
to
install a lug nut?

Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who
determines this? You?

--
Nom=de=Plume


The market place. Not the union strong arming the
company.
Between the union and **** poor management over the at
least
40 years before the crash, there is no way the car
companies
can succeed.

Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the
market
rate. Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is
doing
better. Chrysler I think is on the way out completely.

--
Nom=de=Plume


The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the
reason for those egregious contracts. American car
companies
at the time had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why worry
about fiscal responsibility when you could pass on the
cost
and produce crappy cars. Now the real market rate is
maybe
25% of the negotiated rate. My daughter bought a used
Hyundai
station wagon a couple years ago. 100k warrantee, good
car,
70% the price of a comparable American car. Buy American?
Not when it comes with a 42% premium. For a car with less
warrantee.

Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes.
****-poor management. I agree. Thus, unions came into
being.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Look at what the non union successful car companies are
paying
and a valid market rate is less than that.

Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market rate?
How
do you figure that one?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay
even
less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt
companies and taxpayers.

So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate, which
is
fine if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union.
It
doesn't happen that often, but I have no problem with it per
se.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will
build
a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop
goes
union.

Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by
"enough." Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with
different facts involved. They will also build a plant somewhere
else
if they need more capacity union or no union.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced
then
it
will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech
factory in Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives were
assembled overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above $35
an
hour. Due to government overspending and excess union contracts
we
have priced America out of most manufacturing jobs. Government
has
added to this. Most government contracts require "prevailing
wages".
They mean union wages and not what the prevailing market rate is.



You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you don't
want
to name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We can
compete on quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be the
McDees of disk drives.

--
Nom=de=Plume


We used to compete with Malasia and all the 3rd world countries.
But
due to overspending by our government and lots of excess regulations
we
priced ourselves out of most markets.

I thought it was the unions' fault.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Right and Harry and you and the unions added to the excess cost. Glad
you
realized that, and pointed it out.

Bill, everything "adds" to costs. That's the nature of the world.

I *am* glad I pointed it out, since you didn't understand previously.

By Bill's definition, you are lying.

Everyone who doesn't agree with Bill is lying.

Another lie.

OMG, now you're lying about lying. I can't believe what a liar you
are.

Believe what you want. Since you believe in Change, no matter that we are
getting changed in to a 3rd world financial entity, you will believe
anything.

I'm sorry, I didn't hear a peep from you when Bush was handing out tax
cuts to billionaires and spending money like water in Iraq.

Did the cat have your tongue?

Liar.

"jps" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:54:05 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:12:09 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
m...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:16:32 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news:uKmdnUunEfEGa2jXnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@earthl ink.com...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in
message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in
message
...
"JohnH" wrote in
message
...
...will last until the union or the government
figures
out a way to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its
unionized work force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason
cited
by
the United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting
another
round of labor
concessions that would have roughly matched
concessions that workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the
spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and
its
vice
president in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a
statement
that the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of
the
contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay


Why should they cave to demands from management?
How
about producing decent products that people want
to
buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They are decent products. But if you are paying
some
low skilled laborer excess money, then the decent
product is priced out of the market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should
seek
to renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a
contract.
If there's good management in place, then the union
members will feel better about consessions.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Yup, they should pay the workers what they are
worth.
A
lot less than they are making. $65 bundled labor
cost
to
install a lug nut?

Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who
determines this? You?

--
Nom=de=Plume


The market place. Not the union strong arming the
company.
Between the union and **** poor management over the at
least
40 years before the crash, there is no way the car
companies
can succeed.

Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the
market
rate. Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is
doing
better. Chrysler I think is on the way out completely.

--
Nom=de=Plume


The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the
reason for those egregious contracts. American car
companies
at the time had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why
worry
about fiscal responsibility when you could pass on the
cost
and produce crappy cars. Now the real market rate is
maybe
25% of the negotiated rate. My daughter bought a used
Hyundai
station wagon a couple years ago. 100k warrantee, good
car,
70% the price of a comparable American car. Buy
American?
Not when it comes with a 42% premium. For a car with
less
warrantee.

Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes.
****-poor management. I agree. Thus, unions came into
being.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Look at what the non union successful car companies are
paying
and a valid market rate is less than that.

Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market
rate?
How
do you figure that one?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay
even
less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the
bankrupt
companies and taxpayers.

So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate,
which
is
fine if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union.
It
doesn't happen that often, but I have no problem with it per
se.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will
build
a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop
goes
union.

Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by
"enough." Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with
different facts involved. They will also build a plant
somewhere
else
if they need more capacity union or no union.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced
then
it
will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech
factory in Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives
were
assembled overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above $35
an
hour. Due to government overspending and excess union contracts
we
have priced America out of most manufacturing jobs. Government
has
added to this. Most government contracts require "prevailing
wages".
They mean union wages and not what the prevailing market rate
is.



You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you don't
want
to name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We can
compete on quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be
the
McDees of disk drives.

--
Nom=de=Plume


We used to compete with Malasia and all the 3rd world countries.
But
due to overspending by our government and lots of excess
regulations
we
priced ourselves out of most markets.

I thought it was the unions' fault.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Right and Harry and you and the unions added to the excess cost.
Glad
you
realized that, and pointed it out.

Bill, everything "adds" to costs. That's the nature of the world.

I *am* glad I pointed it out, since you didn't understand previously.

By Bill's definition, you are lying.

Everyone who doesn't agree with Bill is lying.

Another lie.

OMG, now you're lying about lying. I can't believe what a liar you
are.

Believe what you want. Since you believe in Change, no matter that we are
getting changed in to a 3rd world financial entity, you will believe
anything.

I'm sorry, I didn't hear a peep from you when Bush was handing out tax
cuts to billionaires and spending money like water in Iraq.

Did the cat have your tongue?

Liar.

I complained about Bush also. He just did not pay off Wall Street like the
present resident of the White House.

On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 12:04:13 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:54:05 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:12:09 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
om...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:16:32 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news:uKmdnUunEfEGa2jXnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@earth link.com...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in
message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in
message
...
"JohnH" wrote in
message
...
...will last until the union or the government
figures
out a way to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its
unionized work force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason
cited
by
the United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting
another
round of labor
concessions that would have roughly matched
concessions that workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the
spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and
its
vice
president in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a
statement
that the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of
the
contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay


Why should they cave to demands from management?
How
about producing decent products that people want
to
buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They are decent products. But if you are paying
some
low skilled laborer excess money, then the decent
product is priced out of the market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should
seek
to renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a
contract.
If there's good management in place, then the union
members will feel better about consessions.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Yup, they should pay the workers what they are
worth.
A
lot less than they are making. $65 bundled labor
cost
to
install a lug nut?

Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who
determines this? You?

--
Nom=de=Plume


The market place. Not the union strong arming the
company.
Between the union and **** poor management over the at
least
40 years before the crash, there is no way the car
companies
can succeed.

Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the
market
rate. Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is
doing
better. Chrysler I think is on the way out completely.

--
Nom=de=Plume


The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the
reason for those egregious contracts. American car
companies
at the time had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why
worry
about fiscal responsibility when you could pass on the
cost
and produce crappy cars. Now the real market rate is
maybe
25% of the negotiated rate. My daughter bought a used
Hyundai
station wagon a couple years ago. 100k warrantee, good
car,
70% the price of a comparable American car. Buy
American?
Not when it comes with a 42% premium. For a car with
less
warrantee.

Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes.
****-poor management. I agree. Thus, unions came into
being.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Look at what the non union successful car companies are
paying
and a valid market rate is less than that.

Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market
rate?
How
do you figure that one?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay
even
less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the
bankrupt
companies and taxpayers.

So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate,
which
is
fine if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union.
It
doesn't happen that often, but I have no problem with it per
se.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will
build
a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop
goes
union.

Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by
"enough." Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with
different facts involved. They will also build a plant
somewhere
else
if they need more capacity union or no union.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced
then
it
will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech
factory in Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives
were
assembled overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above $35
an
hour. Due to government overspending and excess union contracts
we
have priced America out of most manufacturing jobs. Government
has
added to this. Most government contracts require "prevailing
wages".
They mean union wages and not what the prevailing market rate
is.



You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you don't
want
to name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We can
compete on quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be
the
McDees of disk drives.

--
Nom=de=Plume


We used to compete with Malasia and all the 3rd world countries.
But
due to overspending by our government and lots of excess
regulations
we
priced ourselves out of most markets.

I thought it was the unions' fault.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Right and Harry and you and the unions added to the excess cost.
Glad
you
realized that, and pointed it out.

Bill, everything "adds" to costs. That's the nature of the world.

I *am* glad I pointed it out, since you didn't understand previously.

By Bill's definition, you are lying.

Everyone who doesn't agree with Bill is lying.

Another lie.

OMG, now you're lying about lying. I can't believe what a liar you
are.

Believe what you want. Since you believe in Change, no matter that we are
getting changed in to a 3rd world financial entity, you will believe
anything.

I'm sorry, I didn't hear a peep from you when Bush was handing out tax
cuts to billionaires and spending money like water in Iraq.

Did the cat have your tongue?

Liar.

I complained about Bush also. He just did not pay off Wall Street like the
present resident of the White House.

Oh really. Do you think those 1% live on main street?

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"jps" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:54:05 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:12:09 -0800, "Bill McKee"
wrote:


"jps" wrote in message
om...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:16:32 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news:uKmdnUunEfEGa2jXnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@earth link.com...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in
message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in
message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote
in
message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in
message
...
"JohnH" wrote
in
message
...
...will last until the union or the government
figures
out a way to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its
unionized work force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason
cited
by
the United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting
another
round of labor
concessions that would have roughly matched
concessions that workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the
spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and
its
vice
president in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a
statement
that the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence
of
the
contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay


Why should they cave to demands from management?
How
about producing decent products that people want
to
buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They are decent products. But if you are paying
some
low skilled laborer excess money, then the decent
product is priced out of the market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should
seek
to renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a
contract.
If there's good management in place, then the
union
members will feel better about consessions.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Yup, they should pay the workers what they are
worth.
A
lot less than they are making. $65 bundled labor
cost
to
install a lug nut?

Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who
determines this? You?

--
Nom=de=Plume


The market place. Not the union strong arming the
company.
Between the union and **** poor management over the
at
least
40 years before the crash, there is no way the car
companies
can succeed.

Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the
market
rate. Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is
doing
better. Chrysler I think is on the way out completely.

--
Nom=de=Plume


The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is
the
reason for those egregious contracts. American car
companies
at the time had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why
worry
about fiscal responsibility when you could pass on the
cost
and produce crappy cars. Now the real market rate is
maybe
25% of the negotiated rate. My daughter bought a used
Hyundai
station wagon a couple years ago. 100k warrantee, good
car,
70% the price of a comparable American car. Buy
American?
Not when it comes with a 42% premium. For a car with
less
warrantee.

Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes.
****-poor management. I agree. Thus, unions came into
being.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Look at what the non union successful car companies are
paying
and a valid market rate is less than that.

Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market
rate?
How
do you figure that one?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay
even
less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the
bankrupt
companies and taxpayers.

So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate,
which
is
fine if you can convince the workers to get rid of the
union.
It
doesn't happen that often, but I have no problem with it per
se.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and
will
build
a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop
goes
union.

Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by
"enough." Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with
different facts involved. They will also build a plant
somewhere
else
if they need more capacity union or no union.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced
then
it
will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech
factory in Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives
were
assembled overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above
$35
an
hour. Due to government overspending and excess union
contracts
we
have priced America out of most manufacturing jobs. Government
has
added to this. Most government contracts require "prevailing
wages".
They mean union wages and not what the prevailing market rate
is.



You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you
don't
want
to name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We
can
compete on quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be
the
McDees of disk drives.

--
Nom=de=Plume


We used to compete with Malasia and all the 3rd world countries.
But
due to overspending by our government and lots of excess
regulations
we
priced ourselves out of most markets.

I thought it was the unions' fault.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Right and Harry and you and the unions added to the excess cost.
Glad
you
realized that, and pointed it out.

Bill, everything "adds" to costs. That's the nature of the world.

I *am* glad I pointed it out, since you didn't understand previously.

By Bill's definition, you are lying.

Everyone who doesn't agree with Bill is lying.

Another lie.

OMG, now you're lying about lying. I can't believe what a liar you
are.

Believe what you want. Since you believe in Change, no matter that we
are
getting changed in to a 3rd world financial entity, you will believe
anything.

I'm sorry, I didn't hear a peep from you when Bush was handing out tax
cuts to billionaires and spending money like water in Iraq.

Did the cat have your tongue?

Liar.

I complained about Bush also. He just did not pay off Wall Street like
the present resident of the White House.



Never heard of Paulson I guess....

--
Nom=de=Plume