The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 27 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 261

Thread: Talk about Ideological Idiocy

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by menmon View Post
    Letís begin with what really killed Detroit! Inflation and a very weak Yen!!!!!!!! Why did we have inflation in the late seventies and eighties.......bad monetary policy. Detroit had to use lessor quality materials to manufacture its cars. Japan on the other hand could sell a car in America for 1/3 less the cost, because of this bad monetary policy and free trade with Japan. And the American public felt slighted by American auto companies, so for years all you heard was how much better Japanese cars were compared to Ford, GM and Chrysler and that was true but not because they wanted it so. So in an effort to make better cars with high material cost and less market share, the US auto plants move much of their manufacturing to Mexico where wages are much lower than our minimum wage. But trust had been lost by the consumer and it has taken until this decade for that trust to be regained. However, the silver-lining is we have some really well made American cars now, but getting here bankrupted the auto industry in America.
    Now these politicians that oppose collective barging want you to believe that union wages is what killed Detroit and it is a big- big-fu#$ing lie! But from that bad government policy that resulted from tax payers not wanting to pay for the war in Vietnam and the printing of money to pay for it, the auto industry in America was damaged almost beyond repair. Now like all politicians, no accountability for the damage they caused and letís blame it on someone else....and the easy target was the working man and the unions that represent him. So the unions got smeared with the same lack of trust as the US automotive industry did...and the consumer blamed them!!!
    Now let turn this to our advantage, lets bust the unions and how better to do that than play the blame game for all the ills in America when the pain that folks were experiencing was the pain of deflation, and let have a new hero Ronald Regan and the republicans. Now letís not forget how he eased the pain, fiscal spending with borrowed money. Now what happened next is interest finally went down and companies began to spend and Clinton looked like a hero as the economy roared. But then came 911 and industry saw another opportunityÖ.war and the spending continued and because of the prosperity of the nineties money was easy and higher wages came not from the employer but from the appreciation of the house and the ability to borrow equity at low interest rates.
    Now who caught the blame for the bad before was the unions and remember how good that worked. I hope Americans can see that they have been sold a pile of goods and realize that as a whole they are better than one as opposed to the boot-strap bull sh%t they have been being fed!!!!
    The late 70's and 80"s caused Detroit's problems eh? The SAME TIME Nisson was building a HUGE auto plant in Tennessee that is still today quite successful. I guess for YOU that makes sense.

    PS I like your language. It gets more attention than your logic. In fact as it should.
    Last edited by caryalsobrook; 02-11-2014 at 07:45 AM.

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    836

    Default

    Lets throw some more wood on the fire. If it was not for the TVA (big government) you folks would not have any electricity to build your give away auto plants. Examine the Republican/Democratic governors/state legislatures in the following states falling all over themselves giving away tax subsidies/infrastructure construction-improvements.
    VW (TN)
    Mercedes (Alabama- SC)
    BMW (SC)
    Hyundai(Alabama)
    Kia (GA)
    Toyota (Kentucky - MS)
    Honda (Alabama)
    Nissan (TN - MS)

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swliszka View Post
    Lets throw some more wood on the fire. If it was not for the TVA (big government) you folks would not have any electricity to build your give away auto plants. Examine the Republican/Democratic governors/state legislatures in the following states falling all over themselves giving away tax subsidies/infrastructure construction-improvements.
    VW (TN)
    Mercedes (Alabama- SC)
    BMW (SC)
    Hyundai(Alabama)
    Kia (GA)
    Toyota (Kentucky - MS)
    Honda (Alabama)
    Nissan (TN - MS)
    Add lower taxes, less government, fewer unions and union laws, right to work states. You keep whining and making EXCUSES and we will keep building more cars.

  4. #14
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caryalsobrook View Post

    PS
    By the way buzz, is it really a law that a company cannot have a works council without a union or is it just a rule created by the NLRB? Just curious.

    I thought that I addressed that in post #3. Did you read it? It even addressed the reason for the law.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    836

    Default

    Stay on the argument and less vitriol. Auto manufacturers could be making other products. They happen to make vehicles in pursuit of profit/money. Factor in raw materials , fabrication costs , transportation costs , markets and most importantly labor costs these "southern" plants are simply participating in the export of profits elsewhere. If these states did not provide the subsidies under capitalism these plants should have done it alone. How about the Military-Industrial- Complex that Eisenhower warned us about. No state government is willing to forgo pork barrel legislation ie. F-35 etc. if their folks don't get a piece of the "pork!" Further all those states mentioned in my previous post send less money to the Feds than other regions but get more back % wise than other states. Politics as usual.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    I thought that I addressed that in post #3. Did you read it? It even addressed the reason for the law.
    You are right. I did not read all the labor history you quoted. But I see NO REASON to require a union in order to have a works council. That is also the reason I asked whether it was a law or a regulation. I did not know an was curious. After reading all your post 3, maybe it is time to get rid of these worthless laws.

    You might be surprised that I agree with you a works council is a good idea. A marriage between the workers of a company and it's workers that creates constructive communication that focuses on both the welfare of the worker and the company is a good thing. But it does not need some national union to get in the way. That is the problem I have with these national unions. Today's unions are nothing more than a legalized monopoly of labor. Something that is abhorred when it comes to business. A company union, a Ford union, GM union, Bridgestone-Firestone union, ect. Not a United Steel Workers Union that also represents not only ALL steel workers but also represents Bridgestone-Firestone workers. How can the same union represent the welfare of both steel workers and tire workers??? The answer is they can't. The so called labor movement is today nothing more than an attempt through law to create a monopoly of labor. by doing so, exercise monopolistic powers. funny, at the same time almost everyone decries business monopolies(legally) for the very reasons they want to create labor monopolies. This is what I am against.

    I remember when I worked for IBM, no union. It BEGGED for suggestions and complaints. Suggestion boxes were everywhere. Managers were constantly asking for suggestions or complaints. Didn't work very well. To many employees were mistakenly afraid of consequences. Company even wanted both and did not care if they were unsigned. Like you I like the fact that you were on the floor regularly. Just by the mere fact that the workers knew you, they will more readily voice any objections to change you make, if they see some. A good friend of mine who worked for Bridgestone-Firestone and a union member once related to me that since he worked the night shift that he almost NEVER saw the plant manager. Personally, I can't imagine that he didn't see him AT LEAST once a week. If I were the plant manager's boss, I would fire him or he WOULD be on the floor every shift at least once a week. Can't imagine anything more important in his job.

    I can't imagine paying the sorriest most worthless worker the same wage as the best worker. I can't imagine a union fighting for that sorry worker keeping his job. I can't even imagine a company wanting to fire the good worker and keeping the sorry worker. I don't think such a company would last long. By the same token, a company forced to keep a sorry worker and lay off a good worker has little chance of success.

  7. #17
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    7,096

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    I thought that I addressed that in post #3. Did you read it? It even addressed the reason for the law.
    Seems that the law would allow the employees do take action themselves if the employees felt that they needed a form of redress, they could organize themselves and simply hire an attorney to represent them to the attorney (or some independent labor relations specialist). This could be a fee-for-service that would only be used when the employees' association felt a need to do so. They wouldn't have to support such "independent contractors" for life; and they could also hire someone else if they felt their representative was not doing a good job for them.

    It also appears that over time employers have come to their own conclusion that keeping good workers happy in their jobs is a real benefit to both employer and employees. Good employees are not made happy when less-good employees are rewarded for inferior performance with equal pay or promotions. Equal opportunity does not mean equal results. The results will depend on the employees' individual competence and work ethic.

    Menmon, to deny that union benefits were not a factor in Detroit's demise is having your head in the sand. Even today we see the thuggery that unions will resort to in order to retain the power they have become accustomed to. Govt corruption added to the mix, along with corporate corruption. It was a fatal mix for Detroit.

    Denying the varied factors that led to Detroit's demise is akin to repeating the same policies and expecting a different outcome. We now know what did not work ... and the right-to-work states and the employers there may be showing us what does work.

    The govt spends large sums of money on grants to study why "sex workers" have high rates of STDs (duh?), they might better spend sums of money to find out why workers in those VW, Nissan, Hyundai, and Toyota plants are happy with their jobs or not.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  8. #18
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,815

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post

    Denying the varied factors that led to Detroit's demise is akin to repeating the same policies and expecting a different outcome. We now know what did not work ... and the right-to-work states and the employers there may be showing us what does work.

    The govt spends large sums of money on grants to study why "sex workers" have high rates of STDs (duh?), they might better spend sums of money to find out why workers in those VW, Nissan, Hyundai, and Toyota plants are happy with their jobs or not.

    It seems to me that Mike did provide some factors involved in Detroit's demise, and that you are denying them in favor of saddling labor with all the blame. Labor has very little say in the design of the vehicles that they produce.

    On your other point, nothing like hitting a hot-button. I'm not sure why the government should spend money studying if these workers are happy with their jobs or not. I started this thread because I thought that it was outrageous that politicians should threaten a company for wanting to run it's company by legal means. What they are doing is attempting forcing their ideology on VW. VW knows what works for them and if I were them I would tell them to go take a flying leap and do my expansion in Mexico.

    And while were at it, I might as well express my distaste with subsidies and tax breaks. When I lived around Detroit, I saw many plants close right when their tax abatements went away and move their plants to southern states who they had squeezed subsidies and tax abatements out of.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swliszka View Post
    Stay on the argument and less vitriol. Auto manufacturers could be making other products. They happen to make vehicles in pursuit of profit/money. Factor in raw materials , fabrication costs , transportation costs , markets and most importantly labor costs these "southern" plants are simply participating in the export of profits elsewhere. If these states did not provide the subsidies under capitalism these plants should have done it alone. How about the Military-Industrial- Complex that Eisenhower warned us about. No state government is willing to forgo pork barrel legislation ie. F-35 etc. if their folks don't get a piece of the "pork!" Further all those states mentioned in my previous post send less money to the Feds than other regions but get more back % wise than other states. Politics as usual.
    I thought the topic was the auto industry. Never the less we do agree on one thing. The major problem is WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. The states would forego the pork IF THE FED. GOV. did not provide it. In my opinion, the Fed. Gov. has NO BUSINESS in housing, energy, food, fire, police, labor, agriculture, and retirement just to name a few things. Those things should be left to the states and let them compete and test ideas. My meat axe would cut deep across all areas and would not discriminate.

  10. #20
    Senior Member roseberry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Alabama
    Posts
    2,107

    Default

    imho history shows that:
    "bad" monetary poicy(i.e. that of keynesians) was fianlly ended in the 70's with jimmy carter's appointment of paul volker as chairman of the federal reserve.
    to simplify, when the "money supply" stopped being constantly "monkeyed around" with by the keynesians, the cost of capital rose and market uncertainty was created(both temporary) by the "new positive monetary policies" in the late carter and early reagan years.
    high interest rates and market worries were replaced in the '80's by great market certainty around monetary policy. this gave business a stable platform to act from. add tax reform and the '80's and 90's boomed.
    now somehow, we have reinstituted the same "bad monetary policies" that were responsible for all the problems our country ever experienced between ww2 and 1978?

    i was there!
    john mccallie

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •