I think you fail to realize that what drove customers AWAY from the big 3 wasn't the UAW, it was poor quality. Not necessarily poor BUILD quality, but poor QUALITY. The UAW didn't decide to put engines together with RTV instead of gaskets, GM management did!!!! UAW workers didn't wave a magic wand over a Rocket 350 and say "Voila-You're a diesel", management did. Management decided active fuel management was a good idea in 1979, even though the computer processors were slower than molasses, NOT THE UAW!!!
Now, you are correct to point out the $2500 gap in legacy costs. That's fine. But if GM offers you a Buick Lacrosse for $22,500 and you feel that's a reasonable price for a resonable car of it's quality, comfort and options, you'll buy one, provided there isn't a car of equal value you like better. I doubt you'd get that Lacrosse for $20,000 if there were no legacy costs, GM would just make $2500 more.
As far as market share, I think it has MORE to do with the fact that there are more choices today than even 10 years ago. This is much like the situation the big 3 TV networks find themselves in with competition from cable networks.
Do you think if the Japanese big 3 were unionized in this country it would level the playing field? Financially, maybe. But more importantly, they , like the American big 3 are going to have to be more innovative and risky with the products they put out to get your attention, much like the Big 3 networks do to get your attention from cable networks. Maybe 20% market share will be considered the new 50%.
I don't think there's anything you can do to save the domestic car companines while keeping production in this country. I've said it before, and I'll say it agin; americans have on average, reached a level of education and technical skill that will keep them from working manufacturing jobs. I don't think there is anything we can do to keep those kinds of jobs in this country at their current pay. Its too automated, to simple, and to repetive to pay high wages to. Manufacturing jobs (for the most part) are simply low to no skill jobs that any tom dick or harry can be trained to do in a week or so's time. They just don't justify 70-100 dollars an hour in pay+bennifits. Thats why foriegn companis can build plants here, announce they're hiring 3000 positions with an average pay of $20, and get 15,000 applications.
50 years ago manufacturing was a great job. But now we've kind advanced beyond that to the point where those manufacturing jobs arn't so great. Now, people aspire to be doctors, lawyers, IT specialists, engineers, programmers, computer tecnitions, open their own bussines, and so on. Not work 2nd shift on an assembly line. and because a college education is available to most anyone, they can become those things.
Sure our economy is growing but very slow. The bottom line is average folks money doesn't come close to going as far as it once did due to the sheer cost of living in this country. :sick:
Its not growing slow. up untill the last 6 monts its been growing between 3% and 5%, which is exactly where they want it. Much faster than that and you run into inflation problems. And that's the big one, there has been virtually no inflation. sure, some things like gas have gone up, but over the last 5 years or so inflation has only been running at a few 10th's of a percent per quater. On top of that, you have unemployment rates hovering arround 5%. and 5% or lower is considered full employment.
Truth be told, average folks money probably goes farther than it used too. and thats due to wal-mart. Back in 2004-2005 the feds were actually worried about deflation.
The economy will be fine as long as we are supporting troops in all parts of the World. The mortgage problem is greed. Both on those that wanted a bigger house and bit off more than they could handle. And the lenders that gave out mortgages to people that could not qualify under standard economic rules. Every one wants the latest in cars, TVs, Stereos and vacations. Many use credit to get what they want. Then pay some fat cat banker high interest. This is a better economy than many periods in the past 50 years.
That WalMart comment is pretty much the whole story...cheap goods made by glorified sweatshop labor in what is more or less a rogue state (with nukes aimed at us) sent over to compensate for a lack of real income growth. It will appease the masses for the time being.
This is a better economy than many periods in the past 50 years.
Sure compared to pre-1950 that might be true but other wise we've taken a few steps backwards. When I judge an economy I look at more than just the stock market. Take for instance where Fintail, lives in Washington. It is super expensive there. Hell even lemko, has said a small home will run you north of $250K. Factor in the cost of food, utilities, gasoline, housing, price of a car, and a individuals income to debt ratio continues to break historic records each passing day. I can't see how some you believe this is a great economy ? Especially for some one in their 20's and 30's and have to forge their first borns signature to the mortgage just to afford a house. :confuse:
The bottom line is for regular folks like the UAW autoworkers it's getting to the point when they retire they need a second income coming in to keep what they got.
don't forget to add in those obnoxious utility costs. Now, who knows if we are paying more on scale now for our utilites than we paid in...oh, I don't know...how about 1985? Aren't we paying more for sewer-water-ghastly(duh, of course we're paying more, it's ghastly!)-refuse now in 2007 than we paid in adjusted dollars in 1985?
I think we would be remiss to not acknowledge what rockford is saying-costs are high. I moved out of Washington state having been smacked in the back from the Boeing door after 20 years at the Everett 747-767-777-787 factory. Boeing saved a tiny fraction on labor by laying off thousands of years of experienced workers. What a bunch of idiots. After a few CEO's had torrid affairs at their "stressful" Boeing's jobs and were fired, the company suddenly lifts back off. Oh, please come back, we need y'all back to help us build the "Dreamliner!" Yeah, right, you dear hearts got rid of us all and saved your job but dumped lots of loyal workers. That's the way it goes now...only I would rather listen to 150 hours straight of Britney Spears CD's than go back to Boeing and slave for those that feel they always know it all come what may. If they could only harness some of that know-it-all energy from the Puget Sound and use it to solve their traffic problems and save the Supersonics from going to OKC.(ICKKYPOO-POO...Oklahoma City...please!)
rock is right on lots of these issues...costs are going up and wages are staying stagnant and those that have are lording it over those that need more than ever before.
There may still be a middle-class but their worth after deductions is diminishing yearly. Oh, yes, many are getting rich. Agreed. More than those rich just need better jobs and they are not out there. They pay $7.66/hr. and they smell of strong Seattle coffee. Just the truth, that's all.
But rock, GM, Ford and Chrysler should have reacted quicker to the import onslaught, man. Too schlowman. Too bad. Now it's time to get re-trained in healthcare and reap some of those overly-high medical care costs, right. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
It might not have been the type of warm welcome that Jim Press, the top Toyota exec who defected to Chrysler this week, hoped for.
But it was a welcome, nonetheless.
During a question-and-answer session with the Detroit Economic Club, UAW chief Ron Gettelfinger was asked his thoughts on Chrysler nabbing Press from the Japanese automaker.
Gettelfinger, who has worked hard to organize the growing number of U.S. plants owned by foreign carmakers, smiled broadly.
"I think it's a great move on Chrysler's part. I certainly want to welcome Mr. Press to the Chrysler family and to the UAW," he said, eliciting laughs from the crowd.
It might not have been the type of warm welcome that Jim Press, the top Toyota exec who defected to Chrysler this week, hoped for.
But it was a welcome, nonetheless.
During a question-and-answer session with the Detroit Economic Club, UAW chief Ron Gettelfinger was asked his thoughts on Chrysler nabbing Press from the Japanese automaker.
Gettelfinger, who has worked hard to organize the growing number of U.S. plants owned by foreign carmakers, smiled broadly.
"I think it's a great move on Chrysler's part. I certainly want to welcome Mr. Press to the Chrysler family and to the UAW," he said, eliciting laughs from the crowd.
rock is right on lots of these issues...costs are going up and wages are staying stagnant
depends what you do for a living. many, many, many occupations are are seeing very significan wage gains, far more than are staying stagnant. For those with manufacturing/industrial jobs, yea, times have been tough.
And you think its expensive here, the list of the 10 most expensive cities in the world to live in, doesn't even inclued 1 from this country. :surprise:
another interresting thing on wages is the effect of immigrants (leagal or illegal) on them. they have quite an effect on things like wages, poverty levels, nuber of uninsured and so on.
here is an interesting article on the current state of poverty in the US link title
Ah the Heritage Foundation...it always amuses me when one lists the appliances that somehow make a person not impoverished. Mainly equipment created in Chinese sweatshops, of course.
In other words, the US still has enormous poverty compared to the rest of the first world , but American poor are better off than those in Sudan or Myanmar, so all is well!
no, it means poverty in this country (I hardly consider 15% enormous) is quite different from what most people consider poverty.
what difference does it make where an appliance is made :confuse: any decent washer is still going to run you at least 400-500 bucks. but it goes far beyond appliances. The number that own more than 1 vehicle is kind of surprising, the fact over 30% own their own home , (homes that average 3 bedrooms), and of course that the poor are "supernourished". As the saying goes, america is the only country in the world where the poor people are fat. :P
Poverty in this country is much more widespread than in the rest of the developed world. Owning a few Chinese made trinkets or a couple of $500 cars or a house worth 30K doesn't mean you aren't poor.
The fat thing is even more amusing...throughout modern history, I suspect you will see more fat poor people than fat wealthy people. It isn't about the quantity of food, but the quality and menality surrounding it.
America is the only country where most people are fat, as well :P
After a few CEO's had torrid affairs at their "stressful" Boeing's jobs and were fired,
For the Second time, there was only one affair by a Boeing exec and he brought her to Boeing from MD which is where the relationship began. That same jerk also behaved the same way when he was at GE. Get over it. :sick:
I am sure I am not far off the mark for what many people have paid in the rust belt or the deep south. Or even if it is 60K, what is that, a $400 mortgage payment? And seeing for the past 6 or 7 years credit was granted to anyone who could fog a mirror...
trouble anyway. Oh, I'm completely over them. More so it's your peers at Boeing that love to stab at your hind-side. Or better yet, it's your manager's manager that causes the trouble. It's not how you do your job at Boeing's, it's who wants to take your entire group, pick them up by their nosehairs and plop them somewhere else.
They are a short-sighted company that can rot forever in hell.
Me? I'm fine. I'm working a good job in the Allied Health field. Good pay and benefits and I get to help people feel better. Not such a bad deal. And we get to get out of that hell-hole they call the Puget Sound, too.
In sharp contrast to Boeing, where dorky people who think they know it all about jet-aircraft production get to call the shots they've buffaloed others in to believing they know something about. I'm absolutely thrilled to be out of that circus and happily employed in the desert SW.
Wow, I like the one on the corner lot. Too bad someone bought it for $5,900. That is like 1960s prices. Those must be dead towns. A few years back you could get buys like that in downtown Detroit. No work, no need for a home. People that want to work move where the jobs are.
Buy now before the ethanol boom hits there too. :shades: I have friends with cheap rentals down around Sweetwater TX, and you can find a few houses in the low 30's there if ND doesn't appeal. Ditto the UP of MI if you want country that's more UAW friendly.
It is appealing. However I have one rental and it is in Hawaii. That is more than enough headaches. It does point out that there are other opportunities for those that are willing to get out and look for them. I cannot imagine getting laid off and staying put until I was flat broke. All in hopes that a Union or the government would save my hide. I can understand being devastated if the job you have worked at for 25 years evaporates. Survival instincts need to be put into play at that point. I would take a job at Church's Chicken or as a WalMart greeter before I would go hungry.
We have a friend that worked 11 years for VON's when that big strike/lockout took place. The first week she went to an independent grocer and took a job. They needed people as many shoppers switched because of the strike. She is now an assistant manager. She would probably still be a union checker making less money if she had stayed on the picket line for the whole strike.
The UAW workers are given ample warning of plant closings. Pack up the kids and head south where the work and lower cost of living exists. We have gotten soft. We should look at the mess in the EU. I would not want to live in any of those countries as a worker. I just read an article on Germany. There are more people leaving than immigrating into Germany. Many consider Germany very progressive. The major reasons for the exits are best left for a different forum.
fintail: Ah the Heritage Foundation...it always amuses me when one lists the appliances that somehow make a person not impoverished. Mainly equipment created in Chinese sweatshops, of course.
The main definition of poverty is "lack of income," and it takes income (i.e., money) to buy appliances (and automobiles). Therefore, the number of appliances poor people have IS a good indicator of how poor they really are, especially compared to the rest of the world.
Appliances are labor-saving devices - if you doubt that, compare the work required to do laundry with a washboard, as opposed to with a washing machine. Ownership of appliances can improve a person's life by reducing the amount of time spent on back-breaking but mundane tasks. Ownership of appliances DOES improve the quality of a person's life, even if they are poor, and the appliance came from China.
Noting this does provide a more accurate vision of just how "the poor" are really living.
It's one thing when people are defined as "poor" because they lack access to potable water, cannot bathe regularly or don't have enough to eat.
It's quite different when being "poor" means driving a 15-year-old Ranger as opposed to a brand-new Camry, relying on room units for air conditioning as opposed to a centralized system, or being overweight because of poor nutritional and exercise habits.
If you put most of America's poor in even a middle-class household in Sudan and Myanmar, they would be begging to come back to America.
You just have to know how and where to buy your house.
I paid $196,000 for my house and could have gotten a nearly identical one for $170,000, perhaps less with some good negotiation, but that house was a little too close to a main road and had only a one car garage.
I low balled the family I bought my house from a little bit but I put an enormous deposit down and promised to close within 30 days. The accepted my first offer the next day and after the inspection accepted all my amendments one week later.
I bought in the right place at the right time though. If I had bought one town to the west I would have paid 300,000 for the same house. If I had bought in the town I worked in I would have paid 450,000 and if I had bought in the next town over it would have been over 500,000.
So I live 20 miles and 30 minutes from work instead of 5 minutes but I will do that to save 300,000 dollars.
fintail: The fat thing is even more amusing...throughout modern history, I suspect you will see more fat poor people than fat wealthy people. It isn't about the quantity of food, but the quality and menality surrounding it.
Throughout most of human history, it was about the quantity of food, because even the rich were concerned with famines. People were at the mercy of the weather, and diseases could wipe out a staple crop and cause mass starvation.
Up until the early 20th century, voluptuous women were the ideal (Kirstie Alley was born a century too late), and pot-bellies made men more attractive and distinguished. Why? Because, in the age before modern farming, efficient distribution of food and mass refrigeration, being able to overeat was a sign of wealth. Look at photos of working class men and women. They are all relatively thin (especially the men).
The fact that obesity is more common among the poor, because now THEY can afford to overeat, is, from a historical perspective, simply astonishing.
Also, the fact that you and other people who aren't rich can afford to be worried about the quality of food, as opposed to its mere availability, is another amazing aspect of modern life.
Yes exactly, which is why food quantity in the first world is not an indicator of economic position. Food is relatively easy for nearly everyone to acquire...technology at work.
Credit can make up for income deficits. Also, no mention made to the age and purchase price of said appliances. Not that one should expect the Heritage Foundation to bother with such details.
Poverty is relative to the global position of the nation in question. Shouldn't Americans be expected have a higher standard than godforsaken places like Myanmar or Sudan to begin with? Although as globalization progresses, it will not.
fintail: Yes exactly, which is why food quantity in the first world is not an indicator of economic position. Food is relatively easy for nearly everyone to acquire...technology at work.
It's also why malnutrition or even poor nutrition in the United States is not necessarily the result of low income. It is, most of the time, about poor choices.
fintail: Credit can make up for income deficits. Also, no mention made to the age and purchase price of said appliances. Not that one should expect the Heritage Foundation to bother with such details.
Perhaps I'm older than you, but I can remember when poor people simply did not have access to any legitimate credit, other than the local loan shark or the check cashing store.
And they didn't have appliances at all - old or new. It was unheard of for poor people to possess air conditioners, deluxe televisions or dishwashers, which, when I was a kid, were still considered luxury items.
That's not just because of expanded availability to credit. The prices of most appliances have been falling in real terms for several years. That helps everyone - especially the poor.
fintail: Poverty is relative to the global position of the nation in question. Shouldn't Americans be expected have a higher standard than godforsaken places like Myanmar or Sudan to begin with? Although as globalization progresses, it will not.
Remember that immigrants - both illegal and legal - affect the picture of poverty in America.
And go to France or Great Britain - both countries have slums that will rival anything found in the U.S.A.
Exactly...in raw dollars, a nice TV or other electronic gear cost as much in raw dollars 25 years ago as today. My parents paid something like $900 for a VCR in 1981! Today, a DVD player can be had for $30. Technology trickles down. This does not really affect economic status, it simply enables one to have more trinkets.
Credit is used for people of low income to buy more cars and larger items, much moreso than in the past. Savings and debt stats support this.
I have been to France and the UK, both nations facing serious problems in the near future. Similar problems will eventually find their way to this continent, just as the violent crime found here is spreading there.
Yes, just as being fat is not an indicator of wealth, and is actually more likely to be found in lower income groups. It is 2007, not 1807. Poor choices tend to be made by those who have not been educated otherwise, and education usually is positively associated with wealth.
I think you, and a couple other are missing the whole point. It's not about weather there is poverty, or poor people in the country. there is, and always will be. The point is, that contray to some opinions that the country is heading to hell in a handbasket, that we're on our way back to 30's era soup kitchens; things have actually improved quite a bit. The fact that the people who fill our lowest income levels can own a home, cars, major appliances, have access to healthcare, not worry about food, is sign of just how far we've come.
You guys can be as pessimistic as you want. I'll pass though. There is unlimited opportunity out there. The catch though is, you have to take it. continue to wait arround for a union or government or whatever entity you choose to "give" you what you want, and you'll probably remain disgruntled and pessimistic. Set yourself goals and go after what you want and you'll probably surprise youself.
In the end, there is really nothing stoping you but you.
only thing I've heard is that the big three are trying to pass their HC cost to the union. that, and something about the union trying to organize a toyota parts supplier. It somehow ties in because the big three are trying (i think they use the supplier too) to get the supplier to stay neutral in the organizing attempt. It has something to do with fund the union would use to pay the hc cost, the the parts supplier access to it or something.
fintail: Exactly...in raw dollars, a nice TV or other electronic gear cost as much in raw dollars 25 years ago as today. My parents paid something like $900 for a VCR in 1981! Today, a DVD player can be had for $30. Technology trickles down. This does not really affect economic status, it simply enables one to have more trinkets.
It's not just about trinkets. Dishwashers, washing machines, clothes dryers, air conditioners and even televisions really do improve the quality of life. Unless one prefers to wash dishes and clothes by hand, sweat through the summer months, and be completely out of the loop regarding news and popular culture. I haven't met any of those people.
Even those who criticize the purchase of appliances (not on this board - on the national stage) are curiously reluctant to give up said appliances and do all of those chores by hand.
Maybe they've spent time talking to my 94-year-old grandmother, who tells me that the "good old days" really weren't so good for those who actually lived through them.
She, for one, really appreciates her trinkets and appliances. And, incidentally, if one looks at her income, she would be considered poor.
fintail: Credit is used for people of low income to buy more cars and larger items, much moreso than in the past. Savings and debt stats support this.
And 35 years ago, they couldn't buy them, period, because they couldn't get credit, or if they got credit, it was from people who weren't content to rely on annoying phone calls when the payments were late. They had more "direct" methods of making debtors pay.
The quality of life is determined by more than easily purchased gadgetry. The poor have gained some trinkets, what has everyone else gained? In the past 20 years, how has the bottom 95% fared compared to the top 5%?
The good old days were not always so good, indeed. And the same can be said for today.
fintail: Many are simply unable to take an opportunity, and this is determined from a very young age.
And why are they not able to take advantage of those opportunities? Because they have parents who do not care, and think that their responsibilities end after giving birth (or, in the case of males, after conception).
My wife was a social worker, and is now a special education teacher in an inner-city schools. Unlike the "armchair" critics, she has a very different view of poverty and its causes, because she deals with it every day.
The problems of the truly poor have nothing to with rich people, tax cuts or free trade. They have everything to do with a dysfunctional culture that, is in many ways, subsidized by the government.
fintail: Direct comparisons to 1930s poverty are not really valid. It is all relative.
No, it is valid. Poverty is deprivation, and improved standards of living alleviate deprivation over time. It is therefore entirely valid to compare people's standards of living today with those in the 1930s and 1950s.
fintail: The quality of life is determined by more than easily purchased gadgetry.
I hardly consider major appliances to be trinkets, and neither does anyone else, and you don't either, unless you are willing to stop using them.
The fact that the poor have these in greater number shows that they have improved their standards of living over time, along with everyone else.
fintail: The poor have gained some trinkets, what has everyone else gained?
Longer life spans, more travel opportunities, greater comfort, improved opportunities to control their health, and that's just for starters.
fintail: In the past 20 years, how has the bottom 95% fared compared to the top 5%?
An irrelevant question. What matters is how I fare today, compared to 10 years ago, or my father 30 years ago. By those standards, I'm doing quite well, and so is everyone else I know.
The idea that because someone else gets richer means someone else automatically becomes poorer has long been discredited among serious students of the economy.
Of which there will be more as American manufacturing continues to fade.
If thats what it takes to kill the UAW, its worth it. Its destroying the domestic automobile industry and the sooner we can rid ourselves of that 60's throwback, the better.
Yes fintail, I'm afraid you will be correct pal. :sick: Then these arm chair pseudo-capitalist millionaires will find out their company doesn't give flying leap about them.
It still amazes me how many regular folks in our country are so anti-union. If the workers don't group togeather for a common cause who is going to look out for them ? Sure the capitalist response is obtain the neccessary skills, educate, educate, retrain, retrain, etc, a bunch of hyperbole to make your self important to your employer. Not every one is cut out for the health care field or college. The fact of the matter is these same people don't see the writing on the wall as people from not only in this country have those skills but foreign workers willing to do the job for half the amount are trying to get in here and take those good jobs away.
So yeah jd10013, will some day get his wish if this trend continues. Like my family has said who is going to buy the stuff like automobiles if regular folks in this country and other 1st world country's like Canada, don't have good paying jobs ????? :surprise:
Comments
Now, you are correct to point out the $2500 gap in legacy costs. That's fine. But if GM offers you a Buick Lacrosse for $22,500 and you feel that's a reasonable price for a resonable car of it's quality, comfort and options, you'll buy one, provided there isn't a car of equal value you like better. I doubt you'd get that Lacrosse for $20,000 if there were no legacy costs, GM would just make $2500 more.
As far as market share, I think it has MORE to do with the fact that there are more choices today than even 10 years ago. This is much like the situation the big 3 TV networks find themselves in with competition from cable networks.
Do you think if the Japanese big 3 were unionized in this country it would level the playing field? Financially, maybe. But more importantly, they , like the American big 3 are going to have to be more innovative and risky with the products they put out to get your attention, much like the Big 3 networks do to get your attention from cable networks. Maybe 20% market share will be considered the new 50%.
50 years ago manufacturing was a great job. But now we've kind advanced beyond that to the point where those manufacturing jobs arn't so great. Now, people aspire to be doctors, lawyers, IT specialists, engineers, programmers, computer tecnitions, open their own bussines, and so on. Not work 2nd shift on an assembly line. and because a college education is available to most anyone, they can become those things.
-Rocky
Truth be told, average folks money probably goes farther than it used too. and thats due to wal-mart. Back in 2004-2005 the feds were actually worried about deflation.
Sure compared to pre-1950 that might be true but other wise we've taken a few steps backwards. When I judge an economy I look at more than just the stock market. Take for instance where Fintail, lives in Washington. It is super expensive there. Hell even lemko, has said a small home will run you north of $250K. Factor in the cost of food, utilities, gasoline, housing, price of a car, and a individuals income to debt ratio continues to break historic records each passing day. I can't see how some you believe this is a great economy ? Especially for some one in their 20's and 30's and have to forge their first borns signature to the mortgage just to afford a house. :confuse:
The bottom line is for regular folks like the UAW autoworkers it's getting to the point when they retire they need a second income coming in to keep what they got.
-Rocky
I think we would be remiss to not acknowledge what rockford is saying-costs are high. I moved out of Washington state having been smacked in the back from the Boeing door after 20 years at the Everett 747-767-777-787 factory. Boeing saved a tiny fraction on labor by laying off thousands of years of experienced workers. What a bunch of idiots. After a few CEO's had torrid affairs at their "stressful" Boeing's jobs and were fired, the company suddenly lifts back off. Oh, please come back, we need y'all back to help us build the "Dreamliner!" Yeah, right, you dear hearts got rid of us all and saved your job but dumped lots of loyal workers. That's the way it goes now...only I would rather listen to 150 hours straight of Britney Spears CD's than go back to Boeing and slave for those that feel they always know it all come what may. If they could only harness some of that know-it-all energy from the Puget Sound and use it to solve their traffic problems and save the Supersonics from going to OKC.(ICKKYPOO-POO...Oklahoma City...please!)
rock is right on lots of these issues...costs are going up and wages are staying stagnant and those that have are lording it over those that need more than ever before.
There may still be a middle-class but their worth after deductions is diminishing yearly. Oh, yes, many are getting rich. Agreed. More than those rich just need better jobs and they are not out there. They pay $7.66/hr. and they smell of strong Seattle coffee. Just the truth, that's all.
But rock, GM, Ford and Chrysler should have reacted quicker to the import onslaught, man. Too schlowman. Too bad. Now it's time to get re-trained in healthcare and reap some of those overly-high medical care costs, right. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
But it was a welcome, nonetheless.
During a question-and-answer session with the Detroit Economic Club, UAW chief Ron Gettelfinger was asked his thoughts on Chrysler nabbing Press from the Japanese automaker.
Gettelfinger, who has worked hard to organize the growing number of U.S. plants owned by foreign carmakers, smiled broadly.
"I think it's a great move on Chrysler's part. I certainly want to welcome Mr. Press to the Chrysler family and to the UAW," he said, eliciting laughs from the crowd.
It might not have been the type of warm welcome that Jim Press, the top Toyota exec who defected to Chrysler this week, hoped for.
But it was a welcome, nonetheless.
During a question-and-answer session with the Detroit Economic Club, UAW chief Ron Gettelfinger was asked his thoughts on Chrysler nabbing Press from the Japanese automaker.
Gettelfinger, who has worked hard to organize the growing number of U.S. plants owned by foreign carmakers, smiled broadly.
"I think it's a great move on Chrysler's part. I certainly want to welcome Mr. Press to the Chrysler family and to the UAW," he said, eliciting laughs from the crowd.
depends what you do for a living. many, many, many occupations are are seeing very significan wage gains, far more than are staying stagnant. For those with manufacturing/industrial jobs, yea, times have been tough.
And you think its expensive here, the list of the 10 most expensive cities in the world to live in, doesn't even inclued 1 from this country. :surprise:
REAL WAGES 1947-2000 (Working Life)
Real Wages Fail to Match a Rise in Productivity (NY Times)
Real wages are having trouble keeping up with prices (CNN Money)
US real wages fall at fastest rate in 14 years (Financial Times)
The Real Story on "Stagnant" Wages (Heritage Foundation)
Wages up for the well-off, but not for others (Christian Science Monitor)
here is an interesting article on the current state of poverty in the US
link title
link title
deffinitly some interresting numbers
In other words, the US still has enormous poverty compared to the rest of the first world , but American poor are better off than those in Sudan or Myanmar, so all is well!
what difference does it make where an appliance is made :confuse: any decent washer is still going to run you at least 400-500 bucks. but it goes far beyond appliances. The number that own more than 1 vehicle is kind of surprising, the fact over 30% own their own home , (homes that average 3 bedrooms), and of course that the poor are "supernourished". As the saying goes, america is the only country in the world where the poor people are fat. :P
The fat thing is even more amusing...throughout modern history, I suspect you will see more fat poor people than fat wealthy people. It isn't about the quantity of food, but the quality and menality surrounding it.
America is the only country where most people are fat, as well :P
For the Second time, there was only one affair by a Boeing exec and he brought her to Boeing from MD which is where the relationship began. That same jerk also behaved the same way when he was at GE. Get over it. :sick:
They are a short-sighted company that can rot forever in hell.
Me? I'm fine. I'm working a good job in the Allied Health field. Good pay and benefits and I get to help people feel better. Not such a bad deal. And we get to get out of that hell-hole they call the Puget Sound, too.
In sharp contrast to Boeing, where dorky people who think they know it all about jet-aircraft production get to call the shots they've buffaloed others in to believing they know something about. I'm absolutely thrilled to be out of that circus and happily employed in the desert SW.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Try North Dakota. Beautiful sunsets.
Everyone is talking health care, but Seniority is a hot issue for workers. (Detroit Free Press)
And these are only the ones listed with the Realtor Union group. There are 3200 homes listed in the general area.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
We have a friend that worked 11 years for VON's when that big strike/lockout took place. The first week she went to an independent grocer and took a job. They needed people as many shoppers switched because of the strike. She is now an assistant manager. She would probably still be a union checker making less money if she had stayed on the picket line for the whole strike.
The UAW workers are given ample warning of plant closings. Pack up the kids and head south where the work and lower cost of living exists. We have gotten soft. We should look at the mess in the EU. I would not want to live in any of those countries as a worker. I just read an article on Germany. There are more people leaving than immigrating into Germany. Many consider Germany very progressive. The major reasons for the exits are best left for a different forum.
The main definition of poverty is "lack of income," and it takes income (i.e., money) to buy appliances (and automobiles). Therefore, the number of appliances poor people have IS a good indicator of how poor they really are, especially compared to the rest of the world.
Appliances are labor-saving devices - if you doubt that, compare the work required to do laundry with a washboard, as opposed to with a washing machine. Ownership of appliances can improve a person's life by reducing the amount of time spent on back-breaking but mundane tasks. Ownership of appliances DOES improve the quality of a person's life, even if they are poor, and the appliance came from China.
Noting this does provide a more accurate vision of just how "the poor" are really living.
It's one thing when people are defined as "poor" because they lack access to potable water, cannot bathe regularly or don't have enough to eat.
It's quite different when being "poor" means driving a 15-year-old Ranger as opposed to a brand-new Camry, relying on room units for air conditioning as opposed to a centralized system, or being overweight because of poor nutritional and exercise habits.
If you put most of America's poor in even a middle-class household in Sudan and Myanmar, they would be begging to come back to America.
I paid $196,000 for my house and could have gotten a nearly identical one for $170,000, perhaps less with some good negotiation, but that house was a little too close to a main road and had only a one car garage.
I low balled the family I bought my house from a little bit but I put an enormous deposit down and promised to close within 30 days. The accepted my first offer the next day and after the inspection accepted all my amendments one week later.
I bought in the right place at the right time though. If I had bought one town to the west I would have paid 300,000 for the same house. If I had bought in the town I worked in I would have paid 450,000 and if I had bought in the next town over it would have been over 500,000.
So I live 20 miles and 30 minutes from work instead of 5 minutes but I will do that to save 300,000 dollars.
Throughout most of human history, it was about the quantity of food, because even the rich were concerned with famines. People were at the mercy of the weather, and diseases could wipe out a staple crop and cause mass starvation.
Up until the early 20th century, voluptuous women were the ideal (Kirstie Alley was born a century too late), and pot-bellies made men more attractive and distinguished. Why? Because, in the age before modern farming, efficient distribution of food and mass refrigeration, being able to overeat was a sign of wealth. Look at photos of working class men and women. They are all relatively thin (especially the men).
The fact that obesity is more common among the poor, because now THEY can afford to overeat, is, from a historical perspective, simply astonishing.
Also, the fact that you and other people who aren't rich can afford to be worried about the quality of food, as opposed to its mere availability, is another amazing aspect of modern life.
Poverty is relative to the global position of the nation in question. Shouldn't Americans be expected have a higher standard than godforsaken places like Myanmar or Sudan to begin with? Although as globalization progresses, it will not.
It's also why malnutrition or even poor nutrition in the United States is not necessarily the result of low income. It is, most of the time, about poor choices.
Perhaps I'm older than you, but I can remember when poor people simply did not have access to any legitimate credit, other than the local loan shark or the check cashing store.
And they didn't have appliances at all - old or new. It was unheard of for poor people to possess air conditioners, deluxe televisions or dishwashers, which, when I was a kid, were still considered luxury items.
That's not just because of expanded availability to credit. The prices of most appliances have been falling in real terms for several years. That helps everyone - especially the poor.
fintail: Poverty is relative to the global position of the nation in question. Shouldn't Americans be expected have a higher standard than godforsaken places like Myanmar or Sudan to begin with? Although as globalization progresses, it will not.
Remember that immigrants - both illegal and legal - affect the picture of poverty in America.
And go to France or Great Britain - both countries have slums that will rival anything found in the U.S.A.
Credit is used for people of low income to buy more cars and larger items, much moreso than in the past. Savings and debt stats support this.
I have been to France and the UK, both nations facing serious problems in the near future. Similar problems will eventually find their way to this continent, just as the violent crime found here is spreading there.
You guys can be as pessimistic as you want. I'll pass though. There is unlimited opportunity out there. The catch though is, you have to take it. continue to wait arround for a union or government or whatever entity you choose to "give" you what you want, and you'll probably remain disgruntled and pessimistic. Set yourself goals and go after what you want and you'll probably surprise youself.
In the end, there is really nothing stoping you but you.
It's not just about trinkets. Dishwashers, washing machines, clothes dryers, air conditioners and even televisions really do improve the quality of life. Unless one prefers to wash dishes and clothes by hand, sweat through the summer months, and be completely out of the loop regarding news and popular culture. I haven't met any of those people.
Even those who criticize the purchase of appliances (not on this board - on the national stage) are curiously reluctant to give up said appliances and do all of those chores by hand.
Maybe they've spent time talking to my 94-year-old grandmother, who tells me that the "good old days" really weren't so good for those who actually lived through them.
She, for one, really appreciates her trinkets and appliances. And, incidentally, if one looks at her income, she would be considered poor.
fintail: Credit is used for people of low income to buy more cars and larger items, much moreso than in the past. Savings and debt stats support this.
And 35 years ago, they couldn't buy them, period, because they couldn't get credit, or if they got credit, it was from people who weren't content to rely on annoying phone calls when the payments were late. They had more "direct" methods of making debtors pay.
At least, I hope so....
Many are simply unable to take an opportunity, and this is determined from a very young age.
Direct comparisons to 1930s poverty are not really valid. It is all relative.
The good old days were not always so good, indeed. And the same can be said for today.
And why are they not able to take advantage of those opportunities? Because they have parents who do not care, and think that their responsibilities end after giving birth (or, in the case of males, after conception).
My wife was a social worker, and is now a special education teacher in an inner-city schools. Unlike the "armchair" critics, she has a very different view of poverty and its causes, because she deals with it every day.
The problems of the truly poor have nothing to with rich people, tax cuts or free trade. They have everything to do with a dysfunctional culture that, is in many ways, subsidized by the government.
fintail: Direct comparisons to 1930s poverty are not really valid. It is all relative.
No, it is valid. Poverty is deprivation, and improved standards of living alleviate deprivation over time. It is therefore entirely valid to compare people's standards of living today with those in the 1930s and 1950s.
I hardly consider major appliances to be trinkets, and neither does anyone else, and you don't either, unless you are willing to stop using them.
The fact that the poor have these in greater number shows that they have improved their standards of living over time, along with everyone else.
fintail: The poor have gained some trinkets, what has everyone else gained?
Longer life spans, more travel opportunities, greater comfort, improved opportunities to control their health, and that's just for starters.
fintail: In the past 20 years, how has the bottom 95% fared compared to the top 5%?
An irrelevant question. What matters is how I fare today, compared to 10 years ago, or my father 30 years ago. By those standards, I'm doing quite well, and so is everyone else I know.
The idea that because someone else gets richer means someone else automatically becomes poorer has long been discredited among serious students of the economy.
Thanks.
I will refrain from replying to the pseudo-capitalists who do not see their homeland leads the first world in poverty...
Of which there will be more as American manufacturing continues to fade.
If thats what it takes to kill the UAW, its worth it. Its destroying the domestic automobile industry and the sooner we can rid ourselves of that 60's throwback, the better.
We do have a Politics discussion where people expect to cover a wider range of issues than in a more narrowly focused discussion like this one.
It still amazes me how many regular folks in our country are so anti-union. If the workers don't group togeather for a common cause who is going to look out for them ? Sure the capitalist response is obtain the neccessary skills, educate, educate, retrain, retrain, etc, a bunch of hyperbole to make your self important to your employer. Not every one is cut out for the health care field or college. The fact of the matter is these same people don't see the writing on the wall as people from not only in this country have those skills but foreign workers willing to do the job for half the amount are trying to get in here and take those good jobs away.
So yeah jd10013, will some day get his wish if this trend continues. Like my family has said who is going to buy the stuff like automobiles if regular folks in this country and other 1st world country's like Canada, don't have good paying jobs ????? :surprise:
-Rocky