On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 23:32:43 GMT, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:10:04 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:45:54 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

That's why he likes his trawler...he's a slowski.

Hmm, let's see, you don't like people that like speed, you don't like
people who go slow, you don't like slow trawlers (while claiming to
own a lobster boat!), you don't like anyone who disagrees with your
ignorant positions on issues....

I think I've nailed it, you are just a bitter old *******.

Who, quoting the old Kingston Trio song, "Doesn't like anybody very
much".

Pathetic.

One of my favorites.

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

They're rioting in Africa. They're starving in Spain. There's
hurricanes in Florida and Texas needs rain.
The whole world is festering with unhappy souls. The French hate the
Germans. The Germans hate the Poles.
Italians hate Yugoslavs. South Africans hate the Dutch and I don't
like anybody very much!
But we can be tranquil and thankful and proud for man's been endowed
with a mushroom shaped cloud.
And we know for certain that some lovely day someone will set the
spark off and we will all be blown away.
They're rioting in Africa. There's strife in Iran. What nature doesn't
do to us will be done by our fellow man.

"hk" wrote in message
. ..
D.Duck wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
...
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
D.Duck wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
news "Wayne.B" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:31:17 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

I have a 2005 version of that same truck and it will barely tow
my
Ranger 20' 200 C center console - boat, engine, trailer weigh
in at
just over 5,000 lbs. I get 5 mpg on average over 900 miles of
towing
just last week and the average speed was 50 mph.

Do what you will, but you need a bigger truck.
Hmmm. Apples and oranges, but when I pull Yo Ho, I get about 12
mpg
with my V8 SUV. I think we are pulling about the same weight,
too.
Of course it does.

You are the master.
My old 24 ft cuddy cabin runabout weighed a little over 5,000 lbs,
6300 lbs with aluminum trailer. We trailered it 1400 miles from
CT to
FL behind my 4.7L V8 Tundra, averaging 9 mph at interstate highway
speeds of 65 to 70 mph.

Funny you mention the Tundra. I've been resisting an itch to go
trade the little Ranger in on one. If I cave, I'll go for the 5.7
liter engine (381 hp). It actually is rated to get better mpg
than the 4.7 liter, although not by much.

So far, I've successfully resisted the urge. The little Ranger
does everything I need for now. But ... damn it's tough when you
get bored and need a new toy.

Eisboch

Talked to a guy at a Yosemite campground with a new Tundra. He said
the mileage was about 14 coming from San Diego to Tuolumne Meadows.
The new Hybrid Silverado got a good write up in Car and Driver or
what ever car mag I was reading at the Dermatologist this morning.
20 mpg city / highway.
But where will you get parts when GM goes out of business?
The ever present ray of sunshine.

Just how long do you think the US automakers will last, not as
corporate entities or shells, but as actual companies building actual
products in the United States?

GM is trading at about $11. Ford reported losses yesterday of $9
billion for the quarter. Only god knows what Chrysler's real numbers
are.

Which one do you think will fold first?





Why do I sense that you enjoy seeing major US companies in trouble. What
country are you rooting for to come out on top? Why are you so down on
the US? Why are you so negative in general? According to you, you are
quite well to do. It doesn't make sense that you are prospering while
being so hateful. There are lots of inconsistencies with your stories.


You beat me to it.


The U.S. auto companies are in trouble because their management sucks and
has sucked for years, and they grossly overpay their mid and upper level
white collar workers, as do many American corporations.

I expect the rug will be pulled out from under Chrysler in a year or two,
and perhaps one or more of its brands or product lines sold off to some
other entity. Ford and GM are "multinational" corporations, and the
management there doesn't give a crap whether they make cars in the USA or
not. All three corporations are dumping their blue collar workers in this
country as quickly as they can.

I believe the UAW can share in that blame.

"hk" wrote in message
. ..


The U.S. auto companies are in trouble because their management sucks and
has sucked for years, and they grossly overpay their mid and upper level
white collar workers, as do many American corporations.


The bulk of layoffs at GM and Ford right now are white collar jobs.


Ford and GM are "multinational" corporations, and the management there
doesn't give a crap whether they make cars in the USA or not.


Nonsense.

I can understand why you think the way you do Harry. I suspect very much
that you never held a job that had a bottom line accountability or
responsibility.

You seem to simply observe and complain about those that do.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"hk" wrote in message
. ..


The U.S. auto companies are in trouble because their management sucks and
has sucked for years, and they grossly overpay their mid and upper level
white collar workers, as do many American corporations.


The bulk of layoffs at GM and Ford right now are white collar jobs.


Ford and GM are "multinational" corporations, and the management there
doesn't give a crap whether they make cars in the USA or not.


Nonsense.

I can understand why you think the way you do Harry. I suspect very much
that you never held a job that had a bottom line accountability or
responsibility.

You seem to simply observe and complain about those that do.

Eisboch

Didn't he run his own company?

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"hk" wrote in message
. ..


The U.S. auto companies are in trouble because their management sucks
and has sucked for years, and they grossly overpay their mid and upper
level white collar workers, as do many American corporations.


The bulk of layoffs at GM and Ford right now are white collar jobs.


Ford and GM are "multinational" corporations, and the management there
doesn't give a crap whether they make cars in the USA or not.


Nonsense.

I can understand why you think the way you do Harry. I suspect very
much that you never held a job that had a bottom line accountability or
responsibility.

You seem to simply observe and complain about those that do.

Eisboch

Didn't he run his own company?

Sure wanted us to believe he did. He said he had a few employees and was
offering unbelievable benefits. Unbelievable is the key word here.

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

The U.S. auto companies are in trouble because their management sucks and
has sucked for years, and they grossly overpay their mid and upper level
white collar workers, as do many American corporations.


The bulk of layoffs at GM and Ford right now are white collar jobs.


Ford and GM are "multinational" corporations, and the management there
doesn't give a crap whether they make cars in the USA or not.


Nonsense.

I can understand why you think the way you do Harry. I suspect very much
that you never held a job that had a bottom line accountability or
responsibility.

You seem to simply observe and complain about those that do.

Eisboch



Are you maintaining that GM, Ford, and Chrysler have been well-run
corporations the last decade or so?




--
http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...ent=Voting.flv

- -

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...istiangene.flv

On Jul 30, 8:32 pm, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...

The U.S. auto companies are in trouble because their management sucks and
has sucked for years, and they grossly overpay their mid and upper level
white collar workers, as do many American corporations.

The bulk of layoffs at GM and Ford right now are white collar jobs.

Ford and GM are "multinational" corporations, and the management there
doesn't give a crap whether they make cars in the USA or not.

Nonsense.

I can understand why you think the way you do Harry. I suspect very much
that you never held a job that had a bottom line accountability or
responsibility.

You seem to simply observe and complain about those that do.

Eisboch

Are you maintaining that GM, Ford, and Chrysler have been well-run
corporations the last decade or so?

--http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b287/hank100/Videos/?action=view&cu...

- -

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...action=view&cu...

Aw, Harry. those are ridiculous.

"HK" wrote in message
...

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

The U.S. auto companies are in trouble because their management sucks
and has sucked for years, and they grossly overpay their mid and upper
level white collar workers, as do many American corporations.


The bulk of layoffs at GM and Ford right now are white collar jobs.


Ford and GM are "multinational" corporations, and the management there
doesn't give a crap whether they make cars in the USA or not.


Nonsense.

I can understand why you think the way you do Harry. I suspect very
much that you never held a job that had a bottom line accountability or
responsibility.

You seem to simply observe and complain about those that do.

Eisboch



Are you maintaining that GM, Ford, and Chrysler have been well-run
corporations the last decade or so?



Look for yourself.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=GM&a...g=m&z=66 &y=0

According to the historical stock price, starting in July, 1998, GM paid a
quarterly dividend of 50 cents every quarter until November of 2005. The
stock price appears to have fluctuated roughly between about $30 to $40 per
share. The quarterly dividend then dropped to 25 cents, but has still been
paid every quarter, the last being in May, 2008.
The decrease in the dividend corresponds to a decline in the stock value,
which happens to correspond to the increase in fuel costs.

So, in GM's case, yes, I'd say they are doing a reasonably good job
adjusting to a very difficult and changing market.

I didn't check Ford. Chrysler is a unique situation, having been acquired
by Mercedes, then recently sold to private investors.
I'd agree that Chrysler has not done well as a company over the past 10
years.

Eisboch

Tim wrote:
On Jul 30, 8:32 pm, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
The U.S. auto companies are in trouble because their management sucks and
has sucked for years, and they grossly overpay their mid and upper level
white collar workers, as do many American corporations.
The bulk of layoffs at GM and Ford right now are white collar jobs.
Ford and GM are "multinational" corporations, and the management there
doesn't give a crap whether they make cars in the USA or not.
Nonsense.
I can understand why you think the way you do Harry. I suspect very much
that you never held a job that had a bottom line accountability or
responsibility.
You seem to simply observe and complain about those that do.
Eisboch
Are you maintaining that GM, Ford, and Chrysler have been well-run
corporations the last decade or so?

--http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b287/hank100/Videos/?action=view&cu...

- -

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...action=view&cu...

Aw, Harry. those are ridiculous.


I think they are pretty funny, too.

Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

The U.S. auto companies are in trouble because their management sucks
and has sucked for years, and they grossly overpay their mid and upper
level white collar workers, as do many American corporations.

The bulk of layoffs at GM and Ford right now are white collar jobs.


Ford and GM are "multinational" corporations, and the management there
doesn't give a crap whether they make cars in the USA or not.

Nonsense.

I can understand why you think the way you do Harry. I suspect very
much that you never held a job that had a bottom line accountability or
responsibility.

You seem to simply observe and complain about those that do.

Eisboch


Are you maintaining that GM, Ford, and Chrysler have been well-run
corporations the last decade or so?



Look for yourself.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=GM&a...g=m&z=66 &y=0

According to the historical stock price, starting in July, 1998, GM paid a
quarterly dividend of 50 cents every quarter until November of 2005. The
stock price appears to have fluctuated roughly between about $30 to $40 per
share. The quarterly dividend then dropped to 25 cents, but has still been
paid every quarter, the last being in May, 2008.
The decrease in the dividend corresponds to a decline in the stock value,
which happens to correspond to the increase in fuel costs.

So, in GM's case, yes, I'd say they are doing a reasonably good job
adjusting to a very difficult and changing market.

I didn't check Ford. Chrysler is a unique situation, having been acquired
by Mercedes, then recently sold to private investors.
I'd agree that Chrysler has not done well as a company over the past 10
years.

Eisboch




We obviously have different standards by which we judge corporations.