[quote]ReignIB wrote:
UAW is one of the parties responsible for the situation with domestic auto manufacturers, no question here.
The money given to the big 3 though was not a bailout and is being paid back by them already at a 12% interest.
Ford and Chrysler are paying already, GM tried to pull some stint to make it seem like they are, but they aren’t yet.
In any case this was not a bailout, rather a loan that helped to save countless jobs at auto manufacturers, their suppliers etc.
Japanese, for example, get subsidies from their government for R&D, some engineering expenses on a constant basis, [b]not to mention their currency manipulation to make their products more attractive.[/b]
Just another example of unfair “globalization”.[/quote]
You might want to check this “fact.”[/quote]
At this point it’s safe to say this guy is talking out of his ass. Ford didn’t even take any bailout money, yet they are already paying the government back. Weird.
I don’t think I have ever worked at a job in which I did not see someone intoxicated in some form on the job at one point or another. This is not to say that it is right; BUT, the fact that this is a “bailed-out” company doesn’t change a thing in my mind.
A bad employee is a bad employee is a bad employee. Whether it is a private organization, a crown-corporation(government owned) or a bailed out company each worker is still just going through the motions to get his paycheck. Regardless of where said pay cheque comes from, he is in derelection of his duty if he does not properly fulfill it. Had this been happening at Ford it would still be wrong.
[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I don’t think I have ever worked at a job in which I did not see someone intoxicated in some form on the job at one point or another. This is not to say that it is right; BUT, the fact that this is a “bailed-out” company doesn’t change a thing in my mind.
A bad employee is a bad employee is a bad employee. Whether it is a private organization, a crown-corporation(government owned) or a bailed out company each worker is still just going through the motions to get his paycheck. Regardless of where said pay cheque comes from, he is in derelection of his duty if he does not properly fulfill it. Had this been happening at Ford it would still be wrong.
The bailout is not relevant.[/quote]
First, I’m trying really hard not to insult your career/job but I find that hard to believe. What are we, 16 all over again?
Second, I don’t think bailouts are ever a good idea. I think they’re morally wrong and I think they save companies that don’t deserve to be saved. I think the economy would benefit more in the long run to let companies die and something better will take their place.
That being said, a bailout would be much easier to swallow if I felt the companies were more deserving and not quite so incompetent as these videos show. So, yes, I believe the bailout is relevant.
Would you rather donate money to a charity that gives money to homeless crackheads (who then use that money for more crack) or a charity that helps people who have fallen victim to circumstances not under their control?
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I own 60,000 dollars in Toyota , I know they have never done ANY thing like that . Their Employees would never drink or smoke or even fuck on company time . Damn Obama [/quote]
Toyota was not bailed out, why should I pay for someone to get drunk, high, and fucked when I don’t even spend my money on those things? Especially when Obama is forcing me to?
[quote]MementoMori wrote:
I don’t think I have ever worked at a job in which I did not see someone intoxicated in some form on the job at one point or another. This is not to say that it is right; BUT, the fact that this is a “bailed-out” company doesn’t change a thing in my mind.
A bad employee is a bad employee is a bad employee. Whether it is a private organization, a crown-corporation(government owned) or a bailed out company each worker is still just going through the motions to get his paycheck. Regardless of where said pay cheque comes from, he is in derelection of his duty if he does not properly fulfill it. Had this been happening at Ford it would still be wrong.
The bailout is not relevant.[/quote]
Bullshit.
The bailout is relevant, because it involves MY (OUR) money. Ford can do this if they want, because it is THEIR money they are paying these employees with.
“Playing with my money is like playing with my emotions…”
[quote]ReignIB wrote:
UAW is one of the parties responsible for the situation with domestic auto manufacturers, no question here.
The money given to the big 3 though was not a bailout and is being paid back by them already at a 12% interest.
Ford and Chrysler are paying already, GM tried to pull some stint to make it seem like they are, but they aren’t yet.
In any case this was not a bailout, rather a loan that helped to save countless jobs at auto manufacturers, their suppliers etc.
Japanese, for example, get subsidies from their government for R&D, some engineering expenses on a constant basis, [b]not to mention their currency manipulation to make their products more attractive.[/b]
Just another example of unfair “globalization”.[/quote]
You might want to check this “fact.”[/quote]
At this point it’s safe to say this guy is talking out of his ass. Ford didn’t even take any bailout money, yet they are already paying the government back. Weird.[/quote]
In 2009 Ford took 5+ billion from the feds as a part of the “fuel efficiency” program.
Yeah, they said they could get by without federal money (even though their CEO was in DC with the other 2 asking for it) but they took what they were offered.
So it’s safe to say you don’t know jack shit about this subject either.
Gambit_lost - as for the Japanese manipulating their currency - it’s a pretty well known fact, at some point there was a bill introduced in Congress attempting to address it even. Have any “facts” that prove the opposite ?