Jump to content

Disclaimer

Members
  • Posts

    15,452
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

Posts posted by Disclaimer

  1. It was a cost/benefit analysis, like choosing between the lesser of two evils.

    Do you blame the UAW for pressuring the Big 3 or the Big 3 for succumbing to UAW pressure? It really doesn't matter.

    Ohh, but it does. Because that's why we're debating in this thread and that's why Michigan went to a "right to work" state. It's about the unions... that's the ONLY reason right to work laws are on the books -- to dissuade unions. So, it DOES matter. Yet, the coin always seems to fall on blaming the common blue collar worker.

    Using "the lesser of two evils / cost-benefit" argument for continuing to perpetuate something you think is bad for business makes you a bad businessman. If short term pain would cure a longterm ill, then that makes for a much better cost-benefit case. the Big3 aren't FORCED into signing a contract -- they can hire scabs or retrain commoners off the street for the low skill jobs that people claim the autoworkers have. If they're that low skill that they don't merit the wages they earn, then any burger flipper with or without a GED can be trained to do the same thing, and they'd be lining up around the building for a job like that.

    Luckily, in the last several rounds of negotiations the UAW has had to give concessions. During the auto bailout there were more concessions. Michigan going Right to Work (26th or 27th state to do so) will lead to further weakening of the UAW. The disadvantage of dealing with the UAW is shrinking.

    I find it sad you use the terms "Luckily" and "disadvantage" when describing blue collar folks trying to earning a living wage for their families. It's even more sad when you consider that it's open and collective bargaining, no one forces either party to sign paperwork. The UAW isn't some big bad boogeyman fighting to keep executive pay in the 7 figures and maintaining golden parachute bailouts for the people responsible for making the business decisions that put these companies in the mess they're in. It's trying to maintain a certain community standard of living for people.

    You are welcome to state all the theory you want and claim it's fact. I am not talking in theory and no it's not all public infomation that can be posted in a link.

    What theory? I cited articles that back up my opinions. I also have the firsthand experience and credentials that validate my opinions. :dunno:

    You have "Just trust me -- I know how things are" super top secret insider information that would never dare be broached in a public discussion so there's no way I can back it up. :confused: That's not really how a rational discussion works man.

  2. A Rebate is a demand manipulation, resource leveling tool that most auto makers utilize in one form or another.
    All automakers... so that is not inherent to unions. We agree.

    The reason that American auto makers offer relativelly larger rebates is directly related to workforce (in)flexibility. UAW contracts specify a number of workers on a specific line and a number of hours per week.

    Again, why is that the unions fault? Corporate agreed to a contract. I can't have a Ferrari because I agreed to a mortgage. Boo hoo for me.

    Regardless, even if that were true, cite your source that it's workforce related because I have firsthand experience that it's not. I'll stick with GM because that's what I know, but by all means, if you find evidence to the contrary in the other UAW constituent companies, present it.

    GM workers regularly go on shutdown, and GM has cut hours and production of the Volt due to reduced demand.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/03/business/gm-suspends-production-of-chevrolet-volt.html?_r=0

    You know what they give huge rebates on outgoing models? Trucks. You know what has the highest profit margin? Trucks.

    http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-gm-pickup-truck-deals-20121218,0,2258198.story

    So, not only can they afford it, it's got little to nothing to do with the inflexibility as you put it, of the union workforce (as demonstrated by the Volt capacity planning). You're wrong on that point.

    American auto makers know just as fast as anyone else when demand is below forecasts. Unfortunately, they cannot adjust output quickly due to an inflexible UAW workforce. In lots of cases, they must keep producing vehicles that they know ahead of time will be sold for deep discounts.

    I addressed this above. It's normally done with trucks and their truck sales have a lot of fleet and government orders that get shifted and moved in and out of the production planning schedule. Again, nothing to do with the inflexible workforce. At the present moment, truck inventories are up, but they're always up in Q3, plus GM is getting ready for a model changeover, so they've built excess old model while the change over occurs.

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/gm-to-debut-new-full-size-trucks-thursday/

    Japanese plants (including those in the US) are more successful in shifting workers to different jobs to adjust to shifting demand. They do it with a very good record of not laying off workers. As a result of this non-UAW flexibility, they aren't forced incent buyers with huge rebates on vehicles they didn't want to produce in the first place.

    Proof? I've just demonstrated it's not due to worker inflexibility. It's a corporate decision. Plus, the issue that management agrees to the UAW contract still goes unaddressed... but continue to blame the UAW for their "inflexibility"

    You could argue that this is partially due to bunring off inventory of supplies that have already been ordered. You could argue that, and you would be wrong. Japanese manufacturers have the similar agreements with their vendors so that is no different. The exception would be if vendor is also a UAW shop.

    Please, tell me more about my wrongness after I've just provided multiple sources saying I'm not. #CondescendingWonkaPic

    Every rebate dollar adds up and they are all added into the price of next years vehicles.

    The State Legislature of Michigan know this...hence the Right to Work Bill.

    And they'd be wrong... if they "know" this. Which I doubt they've made any statement as such, but feel free to present the evidence for your case.

  3. Like I said in the Hostess thread... it's funny how it's never the corporations fault.

    They agree to the union contracts. If it was bad for business then it's on them signing something detrimental to their business.

    And just like the cop threads -- you let a couple goobers spoil the entire barrel. I'm enjoying my vacation days from work right now. I'm not in a union, but I have these vacation days because of the Labor movement.

  4. I don't know whether this means there is actually hope that some people value some things more than money, or if this is just a horribly timed op-ed? (The links are cut off, but they are in fact two different stories).

    http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/wall-street-invested-in-firearms-is-unlikely-to-push-for-reform/?ref=business

    http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/cerberus-to-sell-gunmaker-freedom-group/?ref=business

  5. 1) Give me your money.

    2) ???

    3) Profit.

    I'd probably just add it to my already diversified mix of mutual funds/bonds. Reinvesting dividends, I've made around 15% over my initial cost basis since I started in 2009.

    I don't do the fancy schmantsy shittygsxr investing. I'd have to be good enough to make it my fulltime job if I wanted to setup Alaskan trusts (DAPT) and buy covered calls and whatnot. That's a lot of effort for what could end up being a zero sum game if you're not diligent.

×
×
  • Create New...