VABills Posted June 28, 2005 Author Share Posted June 28, 2005 You are mighty determined to lay this square on the union, but let me ask you:You have not addressed any of my points about the bad business decisions that GM's made. Or do you believe that they've benefited the company? 369564[/snapback] Saab purchase made sense to get the engineering. Just like Ford buying Volvo. The problem has been integrating those technologies because the union workers wil not let it in, without renegociating the training and new techniques. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Gee, and here I thought that Japanese bashing went awayin the '90s, when China started rising. (Let's hear VABills's take on Gung Ho) A cinematic masterpiece. Michael Keaton is truly one of the brilliant actors of our time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted June 28, 2005 Author Share Posted June 28, 2005 A cinematic masterpiece. Michael Keaton is truly one of the brilliant actors of our time. 369570[/snapback] Okay moron, you want me to start again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Please cite the laws that rig things for the unions. 369539[/snapback] Pretty much all of the ones that allow organized labor, allow them to force management to pay them more via arbitration, allow them to strike, and make it illegal for management to terminate them as a response. You'll have to search the case law on your own. Funny, at my job I have the right to either accept the raise given to me or quit. But I guess that's not good enough for union workers (apparently because of labor abuses in the 1880s). Whatever. I won't argue that incompetent management has created problems in the auto (and others) industry, but it might be nice to see what they could accomplish if they weren't drowning under the weight of labor costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Okay moron, you want me to start again? 369571[/snapback] How come GG is the one who always tosses these little barbs but always seems to skate out of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 How come GG is the one who always tosses these little barbs but always seems to skate out of it? 369585[/snapback] Who, me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted June 28, 2005 Author Share Posted June 28, 2005 How come GG is the one who always tosses these little barbs but always seems to skate out of it? 369585[/snapback] I expect stupidity out of him. You should hold yourself to a higher standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 What I don't get in several of the posts here is any sort of admission that mgmt has played a role in this predicament. I find that amazing and an extremely narrow view of the situation. 369547[/snapback] Yeah, management is stupid for giving in to the crazy demands of their local union socialists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 So American car makers are being run into the ground over all the union perks, So are you absolving GM's management from having anything to do with their plight? Read some topics on GM management and golden parachutes and you'll see what I'm getting at. (Mind you, I'm not disagreeing that the unions are certainly part of the problem as well.) 369496[/snapback] I see your point. The Ford Taurus is/has been a good car. It is probably 8K cheaper than a Camry, perhaps more. They have been a big seller for many years. Who gets the credit for this good, reasonably priced product? I once rented a Ford Escort. It was a complete piece of garbage. Who takes the blame for this bad product? I don't know the exact details of the medical coverage of unionized UAW workers, but if it is truly out of control, perhaps the union was short sighted during negotiations. Most workers would prefer having a job if it meant coughing up a 10 dollar co-payment, you know? I dont know the exact details of why a Ford Escort is so bad, but perhaps Ford management is stupid and greedy to sell junk to American consumers who are offered better products. So, we have a short-sighted union and greedy stupid corporate bosses, or so it seems. Sounds to me as if there is enough blame for everybody, not just the unionized workers. PS: I think that the Taurus was discontinued and now only sold in fleets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Sounds to me as if there is enough blame for everybody, not just the unionized workers. 369691[/snapback] The fact that they have to pay so much for labor means they need to cut costs elsewhere. Guess where that elsewhere is? You guessed it: the quality of the car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 The fact that they have to pay so much for labor means they need to cut costs elsewhere. Guess where that elsewhere is? You guessed it: the quality of the car. 369705[/snapback] I wish that something other than socialization (which I fully oppose) could be done to curb rising health costs. If it was the doctors making the cash I wouldn't really mind, but it is the insurance company. A trip to the doctor for a sore throat and a bottle of anti-biotics can impact a working class family in a big way if one has no insurance, let alone a serious illness/injury. My rates were recently increased, the co-payment was raised, and the doctor gets NONE of this money. It isn't fair, and is an issue that extends beyond unions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave in VA Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I wish that something other than socialization (which I fully oppose) could be done to curb rising health costs. If it was the doctors making the cash I wouldn't really mind, but it is the insurance company. A trip to the doctor for a sore throat and a bottle of anti-biotics can impact a working class family in a big way if one has no insurance, let alone a serious illness/injury. My rates were recently increased, the co-payment was raised, and the doctor gets NONE of this money. It isn't fair, and is an issue that extends beyond unions. 369707[/snapback] Take a look at the political contributions of the insurance and pharmacy industries over the last serveral election cycles and ask yourself why this is so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemur King Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I don't know who is to blame for the failings of the US cars. I really don't. I just buy the best product out there. And despite the fact that I have 2,500$ in GM dollars, I cannot buy a GM. Or a Ford. Or a Chevy. The last five times I've shopped for a car, new or used, I've bought a foreign car. In one case, I bought a POS in a 1981 VW Rabbit. Besides that one POS, all the Japanese cars I've owned have been superb. And when I bought my last two cars, both new, they anhillated the US competition we looked at. The Taurus and Saturn can't even impress in the test drive, while the Nissan, Toyota, and Honda excelled. One plus for US cars- my wife drove a 1993 Escort for a while- it was the same car as the Mazda 626. That car rode like crap, and was loud, but it was cheap and never had a single problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I see your point. The Ford Taurus is/has been a good car. It is probably 8K cheaper than a Camry, perhaps more. They have been a big seller for many years. Who gets the credit for this good, reasonably priced product? I once rented a Ford Escort. It was a complete piece of garbage. Who takes the blame for this bad product? PS: I think that the Taurus was discontinued and now only sold in fleets. 369691[/snapback] Ummm, no, and no way it's 8K cheaper than a Camry. Camry base price: $18,195 Taurus base price: $21,885. I could see an argument where the Taurus, with incentives and everything else could match the price of the Camry, but beat it by $8000? I don't think so. As far as the health care costs go, one of the big problems with GM is the way they extend the benefits to retirees. That, plus the $1B extra in health care costs that the Union health care costs over the health care that is provided to the white collar employees... An interesting story about GM's efforts to tame health care costs here: http://www.freep.com/money/business/gmpharm27e_20050627.htm Factoid: over $1500 per vehicle is paid to cover health care costs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted June 28, 2005 Author Share Posted June 28, 2005 Ummm, no, and no way it's 8K cheaper than a Camry. Camry base price: $18,195Taurus base price: $21,885. I could see an argument where the Taurus, with incentives and everything else could match the price of the Camry, but beat it by $8000? I don't think so. As far as the health care costs go, one of the big problems with GM is the way they extend the benefits to retirees. That, plus the $1B extra in health care costs that the Union health care costs over the health care that is provided to the white collar employees... An interesting story about GM's efforts to tame health care costs here: http://www.freep.com/money/business/gmpharm27e_20050627.htm Factoid: over $1500 per vehicle is paid to cover health care costs... 369776[/snapback] That's not even 10% of each car. How much of the cost goes to the even white shirted guys who do nothing but plan, buy other comapnies and sit in air conditioned offices doing nothing make? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 The reality is the US Companies are dinosaurs from top to bottom who've been disgustingly slow to adapt to an ever changing market. Management and Unions are both deserve plenty of blame and unless they do a complete 180 degree turn will continue to get their asses handed to them by the more worker friendly and innovative Japanese automakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kegtapr Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 If it was the doctors making the cash I wouldn't really mind, but it is the insurance company. A trip to the doctor for a sore throat and a bottle of anti-biotics can impact a working class family in a big way if one has no insurance, let alone a serious illness/injury. My rates were recently increased, the co-payment was raised, and the doctor gets NONE of this money. It isn't fair, and is an issue that extends beyond unions. 369707[/snapback] That is so far from the truth I don't even know where to begin. I hate to burst your view of the evil insurance company, but every time we raise rates it is to offset the rising cost of healthcare. You say a trip to the doctor can impact a family in a big way, well you're right. But who sets those prices? It's the doctors, not the insurance company. Why do doctors set those rates? Because that is the cost to do business for them. Trained professionals, expensive equipment, expensive pharmacuticals. Everytime they raise their rates, we have to either absorb the cost are pass it along through rate increases or high copays. You want to point a finger, point it at the drug companies. Point it at technological advances. You want the healthcare rates of 20 years ago then expect to get the care of 20 years ago. All of these technologies cost millions to develop. Common sense tells you in the end, the cost will be passed onto the end user. Point a finger at your neighbors too. Everytime a person goes to the doctor for a little cough it costs money. Everytime a guy goes to the emergency room for a twisted ankle instead of their PCP it wastes hundreds. Proper utilization is lost on most people which drives up the cost for everyone. This is why you will soon see American health insurance move towards CDHP (Consumer Driven Healthcare.) You'll have a pool of money for claims allocation for routine services. You'll be able to do what you want with it, but when it runs out tough luck. You'll get the bill for exactly what the services cost and most people will finally realize how expensive healthcare is. Maybe then people will wise up and improper utilization will lessen, helping to off-set the rising costs. So sorry, insurance companies aren't making millions and they aren't getting rich off your healthcare. Most are not for profit organizations. Every penny that comes in goes towards your healthcare whether it be through administrative cost or your claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 You want the healthcare rates of 20 years ago then expect to get the care of 20 years ago. Yup. For those here who are parents, compare the level of prenatal care now v. 20 or 30 years ago. Staggering difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Yup. For those here who are parents, compare the level of prenatal care now v. 20 or 30 years ago. Staggering difference. 369804[/snapback] How many of you actually went to the doctor as kids? I know we sure didn't, unless it was the emergency room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 How many of you actually went to the doctor as kids? I know we sure didn't, unless it was the emergency room. 369805[/snapback] Except for getting the shots, almost never. Well, aside from that heart surgery thing of course.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts