Get rid of car unions - then we'll talk

Discussion in 'Politics' started by RisingTide, Nov 23, 2008.

  1. UAW are the biggest leaches in business history. These guys are about to bring down the auto business.

    Get rid of UAW and just maybe, the car industry MIGHT succeed in the future. Otherwise, it's a lost cause.

  2. seems to me it works like this.

    Without unions, the workers were exploited. With unions now the corporations are exploited. Perhaps there is another way like maybe the company is owned by all the people that work there.
  3. when you have no marketable skills and perform work that a chimp could do, you're easily replaced by the employer. you'll call that "being exploited", someone else might just say it's the business doing what business does in a capitalist economy: trying to be competitive and make a profit
  4. Yes, big business is always right. Dick Fuld did a heck of a job driving Lehman into the ground for example. Chuck Prince was awesome.

    There are VERY FEW people whose jobs can't be done by someone else in India or Eastern Europe for example.

    Unions have zero fault for the current GM predicament. GM managers in 50s,60s,70s had zero long term vision and did not invest enough money/effort to build quality entry level cars.
  5. US auto unions are so powerful they increase the average cost of a car by $2,000. By increasing the price GM and Ford cannot compete.

    Publix maybe you should look at the numbers sometime instead of being the ignorant fuck you are.

    Basically claiming that ALL of big business is shit when not even 1% of them fail is not stating a logical argument. It is stating a hugely anti capitalistic agenda.

    Also publix you don't know the first thing about good managment. Neither does Keith Olbermann or Chris Mathews but it's the only tool they can use so they can deny the blame on the liberals.

    I don't despise you because you are anti-capitalistic. I despise you because you don't admit your true beliefs.
  6. Well you can stick your despising where the sun don't shine. You just don't know shit about anything.

    Was Ford Pinto the result of unions? Or was it management? Was it unions who did not care about entry level cars, or fuel economy or who fought fuel standards EVERY step of the way? Was Edsel the fault of unions?

    Until recently, FORD used to have the following luxury or quasi luxury car brands:

    Land Rover

    It was the MORONIC MANAGEMENT who acquired those brands and created a monstrosity without focus or purpose and was forced to sell most of them to raise cash.

    GM has an insane number of brands and frequently engages (engaged) in badge engineering and brand cannibalism.

    GM and US automakers are in todays position precisely because of the stupidity and lack of long term focus of its management. Now if you get your head out of your ass you would stop parroting $2000 cost disadvantage.

    When toyota started out(and for a long time afterwards), it had nowhere near the money to invest in R&D that either GM/FORD/ or Chrysler did. Fact of the matter is, American car industry should have crushed Toyota with technologically superior products before Toyota made a beachhead here (UPS&FedEx took out DHL from the US market for example)

    That it did not happen is 100% the fault of management.

    P.S Since you don't have a brain anyway, I would like to point that since I am a trader I cannot be anti capitalistic. I just don't believe in the inherent goodness of corporations, nor do I believe that unrestricted greed is good for the economy, a fact which is only underscored by present times. Now get lost.

    N.B BTW, Honda started out as a company in the production of MOTORCYCLES and only switched to making cars in the 60s. You will not be able to find a legitimate reason why the big three that made cars since the early 20th century are getting thumped by Toyota and a company that has only been making cars since the 60s. And before I forget, Japan and industrial base were BOMBED out by WWII and yet you still blame the unions.
  7. Brandonf

    Brandonf ET Sponsor

    I don't think anyone in their right mind would try to claim that the US Automakers have a better product, the Japanese and German car makers clearly win there. They are also smart enough not to have Unions involved at their plants. I would argue it's a case of both being at fault, terrible managment and unions. I think that the head of the UAW and the heads of GM could all be held equally accountable for the mess the US automakers are in. Anyone who would try to argue otherwise has an agenda.
  8. Let's not forget that most of the import transplants don't have any healthcare costs associated with their product. In addition to that, most Honda and Toyota products are manufactured in the South which is anti-union.
  9. The knowledge level of certain people on this forum (almost always republicans) is apalling.

    Do you people know about Total Quality Management? What about Deming? Just in time manufacturing? Incremental improvement? Why was not GM the one to come up with it?

    The first cars that toyota and honda were making were not particularly good. They were called tin cans and were prone to rusting in the winter. So what did they do? Incremental improvement. Those little cars were simply laughed off by american automobile executives. They thought of fuel economy as the domain of the poor and that nobody makes money on small cars.

    How dense do you have to be to not realize those were fatal beliefs?

    In the 90s american auto companies decided to build high margin SUVs instead of spending money to improve entry level cars(mid size too).

    And most importantly, US automobile companies had an inherent advantage both in terms of cash but because US industrial base was not bombed out during WWII. That makes the current situation even more shameful for US auto companies.
  10. Great thought bj7. You should call them about your idea about replacing their workers with chimpanzees. Ingenius!!!:D
    #10     Nov 24, 2008