Reply With Quote
Bush may be the only real leader left in DC.
its a beautiful read, its just an excerpt but he tells it like it is
Excerpt
Where Have All the Leaders Gone?
By Lee Iacocca with Catherine Whitney
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
Had Enough?
Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the is our outrage? We should be screaming bloody murder. We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, "Stay the course."
Stay the course? You've got to be kidding. This is America, not the damned anic. I'll give you a sound bite: Throw the bums out!
You might think I'm getting senile, that I've gone off my rocker, and maybe I have. But someone has to speak up. I hardly recognize this country anymore. The President of the United States is given a free pass to ignore the Cons ution, tap our phones, and lead us to war on a pack of lies. Congress responds to record deficits by passing a huge tax cut for the wealthy (thanks, but I don't need it). The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs. While we're fiddling in Iraq, the Middle East is burning and nobody seems to know what to do. And the press is waving pom-poms instead of asking hard questions. That's not the promise of America my parents and yours traveled across the ocean for. I've had enough. How about you?
I'll go a step further. You can't call yourself a patriot if you're not outraged. This is a fight I'm ready and willing to have.
More..... http://www.bordersstores.com/feature...theleadersgone
Bush may be the only real leader left in DC.
I'm sure history, once all the facts about dubya's two disastrous Repug terms are out, will look back at these Repug years as totally insane, corrrupt, lying, murderous, incompetent, disgraceful, a chapter in American history written and upon by Repug sons of es.
are you trying to be funny, becuase you are not.
All my rights have been trampled. My phone is tapped and I'm afraid to leave the house. In fact, my life is in shambles since Bush took office. OH NOOOOOOO
QUOTE=xrayzebra]Bush may be the only real leader left in DC.[/QUOTE]
Ray, just might be right, Bush just might be the best Washington has to offer.
and that is not funny
These thing usually run in threes: First Don Imus, then Lee Iaocca...someone else has to pop up in the news this week to make the "People I didn't even know were still alive" trifecta.
No . I thought he was dead already.
Lies Lies, dow dow dow dow dow dow pow now, chicka pow, lies lies.
war for oil. War for oil..
Back in 1964, when Lee Iacocca was in his heyday after introducing the Mustang, America had a real leader for President, not some hucksterish, free-spending Texan getting the country embroiled in a questionable and protracted war in Asia.
Right down to the condescending bespectacled defense secretary who had to resign.
The only thing I don't get is why he mentions that no one is screaming. All I hear, read and see is screaming, whining, ing and moaning! Newspapers, television, internet, hollywood (watch ANY awards show lately!!???) What the do you people want? Assassination make you happy, be strong enough for you???
In the meantime, I'm gonna go back to my upper-middle (to lower upper-class) lifestyle, keep planning my Disney ing vacation spending that tax cut, and try to find some decent new hires in this environment because unemployment is so damned low - ALL the good ones are taken.
People have no ing perspective.
Can I only add: Amen. obviously Lee hasn't been
reading this forum. He wants screaming, anyone
know his email address. We can send him a link.
I guess if Lee still lives in Michigan, he has a different perspective, because the economy there is in the toilet. But that is the US auto industry's fault after 35 years of dysfunctional business practices, not Bush's.
Government interference, like giving unions all the power
and the companies little or none, except for closing the
doors. All three, Government, Unions and the auto makers
share the blame. And still Union and Government want
accept their share of blame and try to correct things.
The unions served their purpose in the 1930's. The threat of a union keeps exploitative businesses at bay.
But the UAW is a disaster. A union is supposed to assert itself as a stakeholder in the business, not as an enemy of the business.
And too many unions today either take their at ude, or function for the benefit and enrichment of the union bosses at the expense of the laborers.
That is why so much of America is anti-union.
^^Well it is fixing to occur here in SA with
Service Union getting a bill pushed thru the
Legs, right now, and our city council endorsing
it.
Out-of-control unions destroy their own jobs all over the world.
"as an enemy of the business."
The employer/employee relationship is by definition an adversarial one, just like all of capitalism. The employee tries the make the most money for the least work, while the employer tires to extract the most work for the least money.
Employees are costs, like any other input to business, necessary evils, to be hired as a last resort, to be fired as soon as possible, to be paid as little as possible, to be intimidated under continuous threat of firing into doing the maximum amt of work, unpaid work/overtime if possible, with minimum concern for employees' health and welfare.
Unions, minimum wage/age laws, OSHA, etc are attempts to redress the balance of power so the employees aren't exploited and abused to the maximum by the business mgmt, which is what happens if business mgmt is left unchecked.
Now children you have the true
definition of socialism displayed above.
No where in the definition above does
it say: I offer these wages for this
amount of work and the worker saying
I accept those wages and will perform
that work for you.
In any case, the employer promises to
pay, and must, and the employee
promises to do the labor or skill and
must or be dismissed. It is a contract.
In most cases it is not adversarial. It
is consensual. And in many cases
the employer rewards the employee with
raises to increase his productivity.
Both the employer/employee have
obligations. And when either does not
deliver as obligated then things get
out of kilter. Does UAW ring a bell.
No, not all of capitalism is like that. American-MBA-style capitalism is very much like that, but in this world there exist business executives, even investors, who place value on things like human beings, and the long-term sustainability of their businesses. Taking an adversarial approach against that kind of management is cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.
In the case of the UAW, the management of the Big 3 back in the day has a lot to do with the rancorous relationship. But the UAW will die with the Big 3, because their confrontational tactics don't work in the Japanese and European transplant automakers who generally treat their employees well, so those workers see no benefit in organizing.
ES, I agree wholeheartedly. I must have, in my lifetime, taken at
least 100 management courses. Unfortunately, in most, especially
in the later part of my career, they left out two things. One,
people are your most important resource. Two, they never taught
what the employees responsiblities were.
Many years ago, when the old man Butt (HEB) was alive, I used to
marvel at his employees. I even made the suggestion we should
approach them and find out their selection process. Now I walk
into their stores since Charles has taken over and wonder, how
in the do they stay in business. Yeah I know they do, but
look at their workforce.
I do think your generation has a leg up on the baby boomers and subsequent generations (when you ran the economy), in that you all understood the intrinsic value of human beings. Maybe that was because of living through the end result of the denial of that value.
The generations before you treated people like animals. The generations after you have treated people like disposable consumer goods. Actually, they don't just treat people like that -- they actually believe people are nothing but disposable consumer goods.
I actually had some "Christian" explain his economic ideology to me, saying that he believed employers should have all the freedom to deal with employees that I would have in choosing which restaurant to eat at, or which brand of laundry detergent to buy. I responded that I didn't understand why somebody who valued people about the same as laundry detergent bothered showing up at church. He called me a "liberal idiot."
What I was mostly taught, which I didn't really buy,
maybe because I knew better, I hope was motivation.
Motivate, motivate, motivate. Crap. People come to
work for you because of several things. First, they want
a job, second, they thinl you may pay a decent wage
and thirdly they want a future. As someone who
employs them you are obligated to be sure they get
the wage you promised. Second if they do they job
and more then give them a raise. Be loyal to them and
hopefully they will be loyal to you. Most employees, and
remember most management are employees too, should
remember that if they don't do their job, then they have
no job. The business goes under. Efficiency reports
suck. They prove nothing. Oh, the politicians have made
it where you must do ent every damn thing to do
with employment and employee/employer relationship,
but they still prove nothing. Who wants to tell someone,
shape up or ship out on a six months basis. Not that
it doesn't happen. Daily contact with an employee
does that more dramatically. A good butt chewing does
more than anything, I found over the years. Like, you
know you like your job and want to stay here, if so lets
start seeing some improvement in your work. Old
fashion, but it worked.
"the long-term sustainability of their businesses. "
Exactly, the long-term sustainability of the employees quality of life is secondary to profits. Once those profits decrease or can be maintained or increased with fewer employees, the employees are let go.
Circuit City fired a lot of employees so they could hire cheaper ones.
A memo in Wal-mart said the 7-year employees made 55% more than first year employees but had the same productivity, so it's better for profits to let the veteran employees go and hire trainees.
etc, etc.
Wall Street loves it when a corp lays off 10's of 1000s of employees, but Wall Street es like when CitiBank or other Wall street firm starts firing people.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
