On 2/23/2014 8:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/23/2014 7:57 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/23/14, 1:17 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 21:53:02 -0500, "Earl! " . wrote:

F*O*A*D wrote:

The state's politicians poisoned the well with direct and indirect
threats to jobs.
Cite?

It is another stretch of the facts from Harry. What the state said is
they *might* rethink FUTURE tax incentives for NEW plants. It had
nothing to do with current employees.


Uh-huh, sure, Gregg. Right. Of course. And Senator Corker didn't play a
role at the end, either, and the workers weren't left with the
impression that if they voted union the state might play fun and games
with their employer. Well, we shall see what happens. Corker said if the
workers voted no, VW would be building another plant in their state
then...he reneged on that statement after the vote, and that had nothing
to do with the vote, either. Luckily, VW's workers in Germany will have
something to say about future plants in the United States.


I had two business associates who were executives in a major German
engineering and manufacturing company. Both left Germany and relocated
to the US. One joined and later started a similar company here. The
other joined my company. Why? Because the German style of
management/employee co-running the business drove them nuts.

I had a very democratic philosophy in the running of the business I had
but soon realized that there were limits to how much control employees
should have in decision making. It's not that the corporation's goals
were at odds with the employee's ... it's simply a case where the
employees typically were looking at issues from a personal point of view
rather than a more global view required to successfully manage and run a
company. We all have jobs to do, all are important but people are
better at some things than others.

We had a very knowledgeable thin films engineer on our staff. We would
meet with a prospective customer who also had thin film engineers who
typically wrote the technical specifications and requirements for a
system they wanted us to design and build. In several cases, our
"expert" would start challenging the customer's approach because he
didn't agree with it, promoting *his* way of doing it. This happened
two or three times, resulting in customers becoming uneasy with awarding
a contract to us. To me, it's ok to offer alternative ways of doing
things if you think they will benefit the customer, but not to the point
where you are actually insulting them or causing them to think their
system will not receive our best efforts.

He didn't last long in my democracy. He ended up starting his own
company that fell flat on it's face in a short period of time.



It's kind of you to offer Harry a little insight into what business
management is all about.

On 2/23/2014 9:26 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/23/14, 9:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/23/2014 8:47 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/23/14, 8:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/23/2014 7:57 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/23/14, 1:17 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 21:53:02 -0500, "Earl! " . wrote:

F*O*A*D wrote:

The state's politicians poisoned the well with direct and indirect
threats to jobs.
Cite?

It is another stretch of the facts from Harry. What the state said is
they *might* rethink FUTURE tax incentives for NEW plants. It had
nothing to do with current employees.


Uh-huh, sure, Gregg. Right. Of course. And Senator Corker didn't
play a
role at the end, either, and the workers weren't left with the
impression that if they voted union the state might play fun and games
with their employer. Well, we shall see what happens. Corker said if
the
workers voted no, VW would be building another plant in their state
then...he reneged on that statement after the vote, and that had
nothing
to do with the vote, either. Luckily, VW's workers in Germany will
have
something to say about future plants in the United States.


I had two business associates who were executives in a major German
engineering and manufacturing company. Both left Germany and relocated
to the US. One joined and later started a similar company here. The
other joined my company. Why? Because the German style of
management/employee co-running the business drove them nuts.

I had a very democratic philosophy in the running of the business I had
but soon realized that there were limits to how much control employees
should have in decision making. It's not that the corporation's goals
were at odds with the employee's ... it's simply a case where the
employees typically were looking at issues from a personal point of
view
rather than a more global view required to successfully manage and
run a
company. We all have jobs to do, all are important but people are
better at some things than others.

We had a very knowledgeable thin films engineer on our staff. We would
meet with a prospective customer who also had thin film engineers who
typically wrote the technical specifications and requirements for a
system they wanted us to design and build. In several cases, our
"expert" would start challenging the customer's approach because he
didn't agree with it, promoting *his* way of doing it. This happened
two or three times, resulting in customers becoming uneasy with
awarding
a contract to us. To me, it's ok to offer alternative ways of doing
things if you think they will benefit the customer, but not to the
point
where you are actually insulting them or causing them to think their
system will not receive our best efforts.

He didn't last long in my democracy. He ended up starting his own
company that fell flat on it's face in a short period of time.





Perhaps part of the fault with much corporate management these days is
in thinking that capital is many times superior to labor. To me, capital
and labor should be on the same step. Capital is not more valuable than
labor. I'm not advocating workplace democracy...someone has to be in
charge...but I am advocating treating everyone and everything involved
as valuable assets.



Treating everyone as valuable assets is critical but so is treating the
company and it's future as a valuable asset as well. Again, it's a team
and each group or person has a job to do based on their area of
expertise. I can't see having the worker's having equal say in a major
decision such as in the case of the German model whereby they can
control where VW builds a plant in the USA. It may work or be
traditional in Germany (or at least be the norm) but that doesn't
necessarily mean it will work everywhere.

The German system is not without it's problems, be assured. It might
sound like utopia for someone like yourself with strong union
ties/interests but I've had many discussions with the two German
associates that indicate otherwise. The shear bureaucratic complexity
of how they must operate is one of the reasons my little company often
kicked the major German company's rear time and time again after we got
rolling. The German competitor was no slouch either. They were a
multi-billion dollar company with a world-wide market.



I would assume every complex system has its problems.

If the German auto workers prevent VW from building another factory in
Tennessee or another anti-worker state, it'll make me smile.



Of course it would. Luddite is wasting his time trying to teach you
anything.

On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 07:57:29 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 2/23/14, 1:17 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 21:53:02 -0500, "Earl! " . wrote:

F*O*A*D wrote:

The state's politicians poisoned the well with direct and indirect
threats to jobs.
Cite?

It is another stretch of the facts from Harry. What the state said is
they *might* rethink FUTURE tax incentives for NEW plants. It had
nothing to do with current employees.


Uh-huh, sure, Gregg. Right. Of course. And Senator Corker didn't play a
role at the end, either, and the workers weren't left with the
impression that if they voted union the state might play fun and games
with their employer. Well, we shall see what happens. Corker said if the
workers voted no, VW would be building another plant in their state
then...he reneged on that statement after the vote, and that had nothing
to do with the vote, either. Luckily, VW's workers in Germany will have
something to say about future plants in the United States.

I'm sure they'll choose to go to Detroit. After all, the experienced workers are all there, eh?

On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 09:26:42 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 2/23/14, 9:13 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/23/2014 8:47 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/23/14, 8:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/23/2014 7:57 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/23/14, 1:17 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 21:53:02 -0500, "Earl! " . wrote:

F*O*A*D wrote:

The state's politicians poisoned the well with direct and indirect
threats to jobs.
Cite?

It is another stretch of the facts from Harry. What the state said is
they *might* rethink FUTURE tax incentives for NEW plants. It had
nothing to do with current employees.


Uh-huh, sure, Gregg. Right. Of course. And Senator Corker didn't play a
role at the end, either, and the workers weren't left with the
impression that if they voted union the state might play fun and games
with their employer. Well, we shall see what happens. Corker said if
the
workers voted no, VW would be building another plant in their state
then...he reneged on that statement after the vote, and that had
nothing
to do with the vote, either. Luckily, VW's workers in Germany will have
something to say about future plants in the United States.


I had two business associates who were executives in a major German
engineering and manufacturing company. Both left Germany and relocated
to the US. One joined and later started a similar company here. The
other joined my company. Why? Because the German style of
management/employee co-running the business drove them nuts.

I had a very democratic philosophy in the running of the business I had
but soon realized that there were limits to how much control employees
should have in decision making. It's not that the corporation's goals
were at odds with the employee's ... it's simply a case where the
employees typically were looking at issues from a personal point of view
rather than a more global view required to successfully manage and run a
company. We all have jobs to do, all are important but people are
better at some things than others.

We had a very knowledgeable thin films engineer on our staff. We would
meet with a prospective customer who also had thin film engineers who
typically wrote the technical specifications and requirements for a
system they wanted us to design and build. In several cases, our
"expert" would start challenging the customer's approach because he
didn't agree with it, promoting *his* way of doing it. This happened
two or three times, resulting in customers becoming uneasy with awarding
a contract to us. To me, it's ok to offer alternative ways of doing
things if you think they will benefit the customer, but not to the point
where you are actually insulting them or causing them to think their
system will not receive our best efforts.

He didn't last long in my democracy. He ended up starting his own
company that fell flat on it's face in a short period of time.





Perhaps part of the fault with much corporate management these days is
in thinking that capital is many times superior to labor. To me, capital
and labor should be on the same step. Capital is not more valuable than
labor. I'm not advocating workplace democracy...someone has to be in
charge...but I am advocating treating everyone and everything involved
as valuable assets.



Treating everyone as valuable assets is critical but so is treating the
company and it's future as a valuable asset as well. Again, it's a team
and each group or person has a job to do based on their area of
expertise. I can't see having the worker's having equal say in a major
decision such as in the case of the German model whereby they can
control where VW builds a plant in the USA. It may work or be
traditional in Germany (or at least be the norm) but that doesn't
necessarily mean it will work everywhere.

The German system is not without it's problems, be assured. It might
sound like utopia for someone like yourself with strong union
ties/interests but I've had many discussions with the two German
associates that indicate otherwise. The shear bureaucratic complexity
of how they must operate is one of the reasons my little company often
kicked the major German company's rear time and time again after we got
rolling. The German competitor was no slouch either. They were a
multi-billion dollar company with a world-wide market.



I would assume every complex system has its problems.

If the German auto workers prevent VW from building another factory in
Tennessee or another anti-worker state, it'll make me smile.


In Don's words...there's that liberal compassion.

On 2/23/14, 10:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 07:57:29 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 2/23/14, 1:17 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 21:53:02 -0500, "Earl! " . wrote:

F*O*A*D wrote:

The state's politicians poisoned the well with direct and indirect
threats to jobs.
Cite?

It is another stretch of the facts from Harry. What the state said is
they *might* rethink FUTURE tax incentives for NEW plants. It had
nothing to do with current employees.


Uh-huh, sure, Gregg. Right. Of course. And Senator Corker didn't play a
role at the end, either, and the workers weren't left with the
impression that if they voted union the state might play fun and games
with their employer. Well, we shall see what happens. Corker said if the
workers voted no, VW would be building another plant in their state
then...he reneged on that statement after the vote, and that had nothing
to do with the vote, either. Luckily, VW's workers in Germany will have
something to say about future plants in the United States.

I'm sure they'll choose to go to Detroit. After all, the experienced workers are all there, eh?


Matters not to me where they go, so long as it isn't an anti-worker state.

On 2/23/2014 10:26 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/23/14, 10:15 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 07:57:29 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 2/23/14, 1:17 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 21:53:02 -0500, "Earl! " . wrote:

F*O*A*D wrote:

The state's politicians poisoned the well with direct and indirect
threats to jobs.
Cite?

It is another stretch of the facts from Harry. What the state said is
they *might* rethink FUTURE tax incentives for NEW plants. It had
nothing to do with current employees.


Uh-huh, sure, Gregg. Right. Of course. And Senator Corker didn't play a
role at the end, either, and the workers weren't left with the
impression that if they voted union the state might play fun and games
with their employer. Well, we shall see what happens. Corker said if the
workers voted no, VW would be building another plant in their state
then...he reneged on that statement after the vote, and that had nothing
to do with the vote, either. Luckily, VW's workers in Germany will have
something to say about future plants in the United States.

I'm sure they'll choose to go to Detroit. After all, the experienced
workers are all there, eh?


Matters not to me where they go, so long as it isn't an anti-worker state.


I honestly don't think I know of an "anti-worker" state. There are
states that promote "right to work" and others that are historically
union. But all states require "workers" for revenue generation, so to
be anti-worker is counterproductive.

On 2/23/14, 10:50 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 07:57:29 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 2/23/14, 1:17 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 21:53:02 -0500, "Earl! " . wrote:

F*O*A*D wrote:

The state's politicians poisoned the well with direct and indirect
threats to jobs.
Cite?

It is another stretch of the facts from Harry. What the state said is
they *might* rethink FUTURE tax incentives for NEW plants. It had
nothing to do with current employees.


Uh-huh, sure, Gregg. Right. Of course. And Senator Corker didn't play a
role at the end, either, and the workers weren't left with the
impression that if they voted union the state might play fun and games
with their employer. Well, we shall see what happens. Corker said if the
workers voted no, VW would be building another plant in their state
then...he reneged on that statement after the vote, and that had nothing
to do with the vote, either. Luckily, VW's workers in Germany will have
something to say about future plants in the United States.

Do you have any facts or are you just repeating the UAW talking
points?



Corker's statements and retractions were widely reported.

On 2/23/14, 11:02 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 08:47:57 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:


Perhaps part of the fault with much corporate management these days is
in thinking that capital is many times superior to labor. To me, capital
and labor should be on the same step. Capital is not more valuable than
labor. I'm not advocating workplace democracy...someone has to be in
charge...but I am advocating treating everyone and everything involved
as valuable assets.

The problem with American companies is that they understand the global
nature of labor and they go where they get the most for their money.

Trying to turn Tennessee into Detroit only makes Mexico more
attractive and we lose the jobs we had there

If you are really as interested in world poverty as you say you are
you should welcome this.
Just the fact that we are holding the price of labor down may be
biggest reason our recession was not accompanied by runaway inflation
like Carter had. Another reason is that the rich (corporations) are
sequestering that $3.5 trillion in counterfeit money the fed printed
to monetize our debt and create a "recovery" when there wasn't one.
If they actually threw that money out of the windows of their limos
like the left wants them to, prices for everything would go up.


Right because the universe exists only to make the rich richer.

On Sunday, February 23, 2014 1:23:55 PM UTC-6, wrote:




Yup, The CBO says 12 million people will get a small raise and a half

million will lose their job completely.

The CBO is always optimistic about things like this.

Is that anything like a step forward and a half a step back?

On 2/22/2014 9:53 PM, Earl! wrote:
F*O*A*D wrote:
On 2/15/14, 12:47 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 09:41:52 -0500, Poco Loco
wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/lp99as6

Damn shame. That'll put some folks in a real sour mood. I reckon
those Southerners aren't so stupid
after all.

Perhaps the union organizer said it best:

"Unfortunately, politically motivated third parties threatened the
economic future of this facility
and the opportunity for workers to create a successful operating
model that would grow jobs in
Tennessee," UAW Southern Region organizer Gary Casteel said."

Those damn politically motivated third parties. Of course, the UAW
Southern Region is in no way
politically motivated.

Right, FOAD?

It appears that they rejected the idea of a union that was in bed with
the company they were working for. That is the way unions are in most
of those foreign country union people like to cite.


The state's politicians poisoned the well with direct and indirect
threats to jobs.
Cite?

It's something MSNBC made up, but they will run with it to the courts...
I hope they spend another 5 million and get their parasite asses handed
to them again. **** the Unions, they are as useless as a washed up union
hack...