Reply With Quote
there's not a single day you don't
there's not a single day you don't
it's not a timestamp, it's a failure date
Oh my! eighteen people reported problems!
Yes, 18 total people ever.Oh my! eighteen people reported problems!
Oh look, Spurs Homer signed into his rage account.
my list of alts keeps growing!
And I've fat fingers because I'm DMC. Of course you already know that since you're keeping tabs on me.
my list of alts keeps growing!
...and you support white supremacy
this we know.
Rattling off tenants of your cult doesnt make your LOLies true.
The reality is that if GM needs to ramp up production on any parts, China is the place to do it, tbh... both from a speed and economics sense...
With the current standards of living (applies to both Canada and the US), we're just not compe ive.
It's not a taxes problem either (see Foxconn). It's a labor and logistics issue. China has dormant factories they can spin up and ramp up production at any time, and labor is much, much cheaper and willing to work many hours.
The rest of the world has pretty much forego manufacturing hoping one day Chinese workers become too rich/expensive and the tide turns, but with their government manipulating the Yuan and controlling the actual money that reaches the worker's pockets, it's not happening.
The idea that because GM got a bailout with no strings attached 10 years ago we should expect it to now act against the best interest of its shareholders by avoiding layoffs is ludicrous. If the US wanted to make sure people at GM would keep their jobs then it should have been a condition as part of the bailout (that one's on Obama & Bush, not Trump). The plans GM announced yesterday were received very well by the markets, which means GM made the correct decision.
Corporations are always going to do what's best for the bottom line, not because they're "evil" and not because they don't care about their employees, but because they have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders. This is why the Conservative wet dream that deregulation will somehow lead to corporations being more charitable and voluntarily giving more money to employees and less money to shareholders is re ed.
IMO Chucho is dead on that the right move was not bailing GM out at all. Giving bailout money to banks to avoid complete calamity in the financial markets made sense (the terms were way too generous though), but bailing out a car manufacturer that produces an inferior product and has underfunded its pension plan for decades while letting god knows how many small businesses die during the financial crisis is a stupid way to interfere with the marketplace.
winning!
Did you get another invite to the Playboy Mansion yet?
The worst part of bailing the banks out was that funds were allocated to pay Executives bonuses and those bonuses are/were huge. The Execs that created the need for the bailout were rewarded instead of terminated.
Ashes make great a great fertilizer component and new business will always rise from those ashes and faulty/shoddy/eroded ins utions burn fastest and best to let those fires burn out themselves and the bail out funds, in the case of the financial ins utions should have been controlled almost fully by the Government while GM and the other domestic auto makers should have been left to die and the salvagers would have taken what's left and made the most of it.
Cut their subsidies and they'll cut more jobs.
Good thinking.
David Dennison delivered Fake News to Warren, Michigan
"It doesn't make sense"
Hey Dan, could you clarify what that means?
"It just doesn't make sense"
Thanks Dan.
You asking for someone else to clarify is rich
The problem with the banks was that Bernanke & Paulson required all of the big ones to take bailout money when some of them (i.e. Goldman and Wells Fargo) didn't need or want any bailout money. They couldn't tell that there would be conditions tied to the money they didn't need but were told they needed to take.
As you said, the right move would have been a full blown government takeover of banks like Citi/other ins utions like AIG that needed a bailout and firing the people who ed up. If you require a government bailout then you should lose the ability to make your own decisions.
This guy's stuff is funny. Mahk.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions