Ford Gives Finger to America and American Employees

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 21:44:05 -0400, Jerry wrote:

>
> "The Trucker" > wrote in message
> news
>> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 09:45:43 +0200, John Galt >
>
>> National Health Insurance is key to the survival of the middle class in
>> the United States. And so too is the return of a highly progressive income
>> tax that truly does tax more of the economic rent.
>
> Sorry, but National Health Insurance has been dragged out over and over and
> over and over and over and over again. In country after country after
> country after country after country, those nations basically democratic and
> those not. In free nations, National Health has FAILED over and over and
> over and over and over and over and over and over. It is a leftist, liberal
> pipe dream that sounds good, but fails to deliver on its promise. It
> BANKRUPTS nations, places its citizens under the thumb of the elite who can
> afford health care on their own.. Still it is trotted out by the far left
> as the magic solution to all. It-is-a-lie, a utopian dream. Just like the
> all the other socialist ideas that have failed before. Yet each generation
> of left-leaning would-be idealists dust off the SAME old warmed-over ideas,
> dust them off, and try to sell them: same old sh**, different label!

Ahh... A lying moron.

>> --
>> "I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
>> of society but the people themselves; and
>> if we think them not enlightened enough to
>> exercise their control with a wholesome
>> discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
>> them, but to inform their discretion by
>> education." - Thomas Jefferson
>> http://GreaterVoice.org/extend
>>
--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org/extend

In article <48454b1c$1@kcnews01>,
C. E. White > wrote:
>
>As for your calculation of how executive pay affects employee
>salaries. IBM CEO Palmisano gets direct pay of over 7 million a year,
>another $5 million a year in "benefits" and will eventually get a
>pension worth $5 million a year. His stock options are worth millions
>more. I would guess his yearly cost to the company is well over 12
>million dollars. Now this is only about 0.1% of recent profits (and
>$31 per employee per year), but can't you imagine that the company
>could do better things with 12 million dollars than pay one person?

Speaking as one of IBM's stockholders (and a former employee) and
looking at recent IBM stock prices.... nope.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On 2008-06-04, > wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 21:44:05 -0400, "Jerry" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"The Trucker" > wrote in message
>>news
>>> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 09:45:43 +0200, John Galt >
>>
>>> National Health Insurance is key to the survival of the middle class in
>>> the United States. And so too is the return of a highly progressive income
>>> tax that truly does tax more of the economic rent.
>>
>>Sorry, but National Health Insurance has been dragged out over and over and
>>over and over and over and over again. In country after country after
>>country after country after country, those nations basically democratic and
>>those not. In free nations, National Health has FAILED over and over and
>>over and over and over and over and over and over.
>
>
> You're so full of ****. You clearly have no idea. Most of the
> developed world has national health care and better health and
> mortality than the US because of it. And they do it at half the cost
> per capita. Sheesh you ****ing parrots ought to stop echoing and
> actually read something that doesn't come from the GOP big corp
> machine.

Where central planning takes over health care, it becomes rationed.
Those bueracrats who run central planning decide if you are worth the
rationed health care and how many weeks, months, or years you'll wait
before your turn comes up. That's how everything that is government run
becomes as there is no reason to increase supply to meet demand.

The worst thing about the government system is that you lose all
control over your own health care. Want something that you can pay for
yourself? Sorry, it's rationed, you can't have. Want to get health care
at all? Well you have to obey government's rules. What? you don't want
that new vaccine that the political class decided was a good idea? Well
you'll get it or no health care for you. What? you like to drink wine?
Sorry, the political class has decided that's bad for you.

The insurance companies have done enough damage thanks to the previous
government interventions. More government intervention is just going to
ruin what's left. But the scariest thing is giving the American control
freaks new powers to exploit. The FDA is bad enough in protecting those
with political connections and being a tool of control freaks to deny
the american people whatever they decide the people shouldn't have.
Nationalized health care will MUCH worse.

Since the typical left-right nonsense is being employed here, I'll put
it all of you this way. Imagine that all the power of a nationalized
health care system ends up in the hands of the group you're not one of.
Do you democrats really want republicans having that sort of control
over your lives? Do you republicans really want democrats having it?
Once it's in the political system, you no longer get to make individual
decisions. Group decisions will be made for you by those who control
the central government. Those decisions will very often be wrong.
That's just the nature of central planning.

On 2008-06-04, Matthew T. Russotto > wrote:
> In article >,
> Dave Head > wrote:

>> falling wages,
>
> Haven't seen them.

Not in numerical dollar terms. In value terms wages are falling.

On 2008-06-04, JerryD(upstateNY) > wrote:
> Yeah - they wonder why we don't graduate more engineers compared to, say,
> India and China.
>
>
> Watch this and you will understand why.
>
> Shift Happens.....
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fqfun...eature=related

lol... one of the products I worked on is in that video...

On 2008-06-04, Scott in SoCal > wrote:
> In message >, Brent P
> wrote:
>
>>On 2008-06-03, Scott in SoCal > wrote:
>>
>>> Funny you should use that example. Most of the scientists and
>>> engineers I know and work with are NOT unionized, yet are quite well
>>> paid. Gosh, how did they manage to pull that off without a union, I
>>> wonder?
>>
>>Engineering pay has not even kept up with inflation since 1913.
>
> So what did a typical software engineer make in 1913?

Computing was a division of mechanical engineering in 1913... later it
became a division of electrical engineering after the demise of
mechanical computers.

A mechanical engineer made $5000, no speciality was attached to the
figure. Adjusted for inflation, that $5000 is $108K today according to:
http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 14:51:55 -0500, Brent P wrote:

> On 2008-06-03, The Trucker > wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 10:44:42 -0500, Brent P wrote:
>>
>>> On 2008-06-03, The Trucker > wrote:
>>>
>>>>> That's what happens to engineers at big US corporations too. It is an
>>>>> over supply of labor that drives it, because the people in the US have
>>>>> to out-work those in India and China. They have to produce as much or
>>>>> more per dollar and they need a lot more dollars just to get by in the
>>>>> US.
>>>
>>>> There cannot be an oversupply of labor. There can only be an oversupply
>>>> of people living in a fixed environment. We have not yet reached that
>>>> point where there is an oversupply of people here in the USA. But the
>>>> Republicans are doing all they can to get us there.
>>>
>>> I already explained this... engineering and other professions have to
>>> compete with people overseas.
>>
>> No. They do not _have_ to compete with people overseas and the ONLY reason
>> such a thing would be true is because of oil. There is virtually
>> _NOTHING_ else that we need to trade for. Screw em.
>
> It's the information age. modern communication makes it possible. It is
> not about competing with a company overseas, but rather the same company
> one works for hiring people overseas.

Then why not tax the companies so thoroughly that they cannot operate
here? I see this crap all the time. "If we tax these assholes they will
leave and relocate to China". I will go down to the boat docks and throw
flowers as these "managment MBS's" sail away. Why do you not ask yourself
"if they are not going to hire Americans then why do I want them here
lording it over the rest of us with their multimillion dollar incomes?"
They use those incomes to buy the Congress and make it even more difficult
for you.

>>> Often the engineer in the USA has to deal
>>> with all sorts of burdens built up over the decades a company has been
>>> in business. Meanwhile the new design center in China is far away and
>>> doesn't have to meet the burdens. Management sees them getting more done
>>> faster for less money. Management doesn't see that even moving a hole
>>> 1mm takes 40 man hours of work in their US office because of all the BS
>>> paperwork and politics that have built up over 3 decades. In China they
>>> just do it. The engineer in the US has to produce the same results per
>>> dollar. The engineer in China can live on far fewer dollars, has less
>>> people blocking him from doing his job.... see where this goes?
>
>> Oil is the only thing that keeps us from trading on _OUR_ terms. If the
>> engineer in China can actually produce stuff as good or better then so be
>> it. The problem we are having is in the distribution of the wealth that
>> is being generated by that slave labor in China. Right now all the
>> benefit of that wealth goes to the financial sector and to the
>> stockholders and the management. It could be that there is, in fact, a
>> glut of engineering expertise in this world. But that just says that WE
>> are working too much (we can't control what the Chinese do). We need to
>> cut our work week in half and take advantage of the bounty. We can't do
>> that because of the contrived need for competition and the current
>> structure of the American economy that pushes all the wealth to the top.
>
> You're missing the point. early 20th century notions of labor don't
> apply to knowledge/creative professions.

No. You are missing the point. The technological innovation and the
development of _real_ capital have reached the pint where we the people
simply do not have to work so much. The ENTIRE reason for division and
specialization of labor and the advent of real capital (tools, etc) is the
improve productivity so that people need not work so much to get along.
That is the REASON for that stuff. Economic success is not measured in
how may Lear jets the boss owns.

>>>>> part why the fiat money system, the federal reserve system, has been
>>>>> sucking the wealth of the nation away.
>>>
>>>> While that is true, it is not _NECESSARILY_ true.
>>>
>>> That's what happens to fiat money. Faster or slower....
>>
>> It happens because we do not have a true representative government where
>> the middle class has representation. Follow the link in my signature to
>> see an example of what can be done about the problem. It is presented in a
>> way that the first 200 words probably make the point. The rest is just
>> dealing with the "You can't do that or yer ass will fall off" knee jerk
>> responses.
>
> When the wealthy bankers got the federal reserved installed in 1913,
> that was the begining of the end. The only way representation does
> anything is if that representation repeals the federal reserve act.

Fine... I think that is well within the bounds of what can be done.

> Unless that happens, we have fiat money and all the problems that go
> with it.

I do not agree with your negative position of fiat money though I do agree
on the demise or a Fed that is on autopilot and programmed to react in
certain ways.

>>>> So what do you want to do about the control of money? Maybe we should use
>>>> "whales teeth".
>
>>> Silver and gold coin per the USC would be a good start. gasoline is less
>>> than 35 cents a gallon in old US 90% coin.
>
>> A commodity money system is not the answer.
>
> Anything else allows the bankers to turn your savings into toilet paper.

No. It does not.

> Fiat money, fractional reserve banking, and all that comes from it make
> juggling numbers and playing with money more profitable than actual
> creation of goods and services.

No. Fiat money done properly by the representatives of the people who can
be lynched for screwing things up is not a problem.

>> And when you speak of the
>> current devaluation of the dollar you are simply citing the larceny of
>> Republicans. The value of the dollar has not been in any way controlled by
>> anyone other than Republicans for the last 12 years. The same sort of
>> thing (inflation) did, in fact, happen during the 60's and 70's. But the
>> difference was that wages and support for the poor kept pace with the
>> inflation. Trickle down Republican economics of "deficits don't matter"
>> and the participation of the Republican controlled Fed is the cause of the
>> current monetary problems. No Democrats were anywhere near any of that
>> ****.
>
> I'm sorry you see is D vs. R. Here's a hint, the wealthy that own the
> federal reserve own both political parties.

I am sorry that you can't see what is right in front of your face.

> ----
>
> "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great
> industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of
> credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our
> activities are in the hands of a few men... Who Necessarily, by very
> reason of their own limitations chill and check and destroy genuine
> economic freedom.
>
> We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely
> controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a
> government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the
> vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a
> small group of dominant men." President Woodrow Wilson 1916

I said I was not for a Fed. You can't seem to separate the use of "whales
teeth" for money from the stupidity of an independent central bank.

--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org/extend

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:19:28 -0500, Brent P wrote:

> On 2008-06-03, The Trucker > wrote:
>> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 11:30:41 -0500, Brent P wrote:
>>
>>> On 2008-06-03, Mani Deli > wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 10:09:41 -0500, Brent P
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>There is no shortage of oil. There hasn't been a shortage of oil.
>>>>>There's a dollar problem. Gasoline is less than 35 cents a gallon in
>>>>>90% silver US coin. This is a dollar problem.
>>>>
>>>> There's a dollar problem and a sortage of oil.
>>>
>>> There is no shortage. There's a high price in dollars. If you have gold
>>> or silver oil and gasoline is little changed.
>>
>> Ahh but it _IS_ changed and it will continue to change very rapidly
>> upward. AT present there is a lot of lose money and a lot of speculation
>> and a lot of attempts to "corner the market". But underneath all of that
>> and devaluation of the dollar the oil _is_ a piggy bank that is not being
>> replenished.
>
> I'll ignore that oil creation is an on-going process on the planet.

If you want to stretch the production function to a million years then
land itself is elastic. Other than that you are simply wrong.

> But
> you could say that about just about anything. So, where's the panic of
> 'peak aluminium' or anything else? I don't think I can overcome your
> programing. You can have the last word.
--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org/extend

"The Trucker" > wrote in message
news
> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 00:58:59 -0700, Clave wrote:
>
>> "Dave Head" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> <...>
>>
>>> And without unions, you see what happens by looking at the software
>>> industry -
>>> routine 80 hour workweeks, falling wages, generally poor working
>>> conditions,
>>> etc.
>>
>> You have no idea what you're talking about.
>
> I do have an idea of what I am talking about and I don't like labor
> unions...

a) I wasn't referring to you, and b) I wasn't talking about unions per se as
much as Head's ignorance of the software industry.

Jim

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 22:04:04 -0500, Brent P wrote:

> On 2008-06-04, > wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 21:44:05 -0400, "Jerry" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"The Trucker" > wrote in message
>>>news >>>> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 09:45:43 +0200, John Galt >
>>>
>>>> National Health Insurance is key to the survival of the middle class in
>>>> the United States. And so too is the return of a highly progressive income
>>>> tax that truly does tax more of the economic rent.
>>>
>>>Sorry, but National Health Insurance has been dragged out over and over and
>>>over and over and over and over again. In country after country after
>>>country after country after country, those nations basically democratic and
>>>those not. In free nations, National Health has FAILED over and over and
>>>over and over and over and over and over and over.
>>
>>
>> You're so full of ****. You clearly have no idea. Most of the
>> developed world has national health care and better health and
>> mortality than the US because of it. And they do it at half the cost
>> per capita. Sheesh you ****ing parrots ought to stop echoing and
>> actually read something that doesn't come from the GOP big corp
>> machine.

<<<Massive brain fart deleted.>>>

> Since the typical left-right nonsense is being employed here, I'll put
> it all of you this way. Imagine that all the power of a nationalized
> health care system ends up in the hands of the group you're not one of.

Imagine that you actually had the intelligence to go to the link in my
signature and absorb what it says. It resolves this strawman crap of
yours.

> Do you democrats really want republicans having that sort of control
> over your lives? Do you republicans really want democrats having it?
> Once it's in the political system, you no longer get to make individual
> decisions. Group decisions will be made for you by those who control
> the central government. Those decisions will very often be wrong.
> That's just the nature of central planning.

I trust the medical profession to make those decisions and that is who
will be making those decisions. I certainly do not want you making such
decisions and given a proper representative government I will not be EVER
have to worry about you getting anywhere close to such a decision making
position.

--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org/extend