Big 3 blows it again, Japs eating their lunch

Simon wrote:
> Bill,
>
> no, i'm not a troll. i actually didn't notice how old the threads were that
> i was replying to and have already posted an apology for that.

I understand now.

> as for your specific arguments below, i don't have time to respond fully
> right now but my general concern is that there seems to be a general mindset
> developing that auto manufacturing in the "western" world can only be
> sustained by returning employees to "third world" levels of compensation and
> working conditions. and before you ask, i am not a production worker nor a
> union member, i own my own business, and i own two older Dodge vans, so i
> have no vested interest whatsoever in the welfare of blue-collar workers.
>
> so my question to Americans (just for the record I am British but live in
> Canada) is; do you want your auto industry to survive by creating difficult
> or impossible working conditions for the employees? do you want more
> Wal-Mart level of employment in your country?

Under existing union rules, their jobs will not survive. If you
maintain the existing rules, they will be worse off than if they had to
work under *reasonable* conditions like everybody else. I'm not
proposing coal mine working conditions - just some reasonable rules, not
elitist union rules.

So you think a company ought not to be allowed to move its people around
within a factory for the most efficient operation, profitability, and
protection of jobs? That's all I was pointing out, yet you seem to be
taking issue with that. A strange philosophy for anyone who understands
economics to even a basic level, especially someone who owns their own
business.

> at the end of the day there may not be much choice but i just get the sense
> that there is a bit of an "i'm all right jack, i'm a white-collar guy" kind
> of mentality developing where people want "somebody else" to do all the hard
> work and live in ghettos for their trouble while they (we) carry on serenely
> in our suburbs.

If you think the typical U.S. auto worker has been living a ghetto
lifestyle, then you are ignorant of what you are discussing.

> now, i am not a "leftie" and i know society will always be somewhat
> stratified but i am just concerned that we shouldn't be taking deliberate
> steps to make things worse than they are.
>
> well, that is a very simplified version of my viewpoint. it is a complex
> issue for sure and the greatest minds on the planet may well not solve the
> conundrum.

I disagree. I think some intelligent and honest economists *could*
solve it, but, unfortunately we have some of the biggest idiots in the
world working on it in Washington as we speak and doing everything they
can to make it worse.

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Hmm... I must not be expressing myself very well because your accusations
against me are totally off what I actually think. Maybe I'll come back to
this and try again later. Or not. Really, sometimes internet discussions are
depressingly futile as they actually achieve the square root of **** all.
LOL


"Bill Putney" > wrote in message
...
> Simon wrote:
>> Bill,
>>
>> no, i'm not a troll. i actually didn't notice how old the threads were
>> that i was replying to and have already posted an apology for that.
>
> I understand now.
>
>> as for your specific arguments below, i don't have time to respond fully
>> right now but my general concern is that there seems to be a general
>> mindset developing that auto manufacturing in the "western" world can
>> only be sustained by returning employees to "third world" levels of
>> compensation and working conditions. and before you ask, i am not a
>> production worker nor a union member, i own my own business, and i own
>> two older Dodge vans, so i have no vested interest whatsoever in the
>> welfare of blue-collar workers.
>>
>> so my question to Americans (just for the record I am British but live in
>> Canada) is; do you want your auto industry to survive by creating
>> difficult or impossible working conditions for the employees? do you want
>> more Wal-Mart level of employment in your country?
>
> Under existing union rules, their jobs will not survive. If you maintain
> the existing rules, they will be worse off than if they had to work under
> *reasonable* conditions like everybody else. I'm not proposing coal mine
> working conditions - just some reasonable rules, not elitist union rules.
>
> So you think a company ought not to be allowed to move its people around
> within a factory for the most efficient operation, profitability, and
> protection of jobs? That's all I was pointing out, yet you seem to be
> taking issue with that. A strange philosophy for anyone who understands
> economics to even a basic level, especially someone who owns their own
> business.
>
>> at the end of the day there may not be much choice but i just get the
>> sense that there is a bit of an "i'm all right jack, i'm a white-collar
>> guy" kind of mentality developing where people want "somebody else" to do
>> all the hard work and live in ghettos for their trouble while they (we)
>> carry on serenely in our suburbs.
>
> If you think the typical U.S. auto worker has been living a ghetto
> lifestyle, then you are ignorant of what you are discussing.
>
>> now, i am not a "leftie" and i know society will always be somewhat
>> stratified but i am just concerned that we shouldn't be taking deliberate
>> steps to make things worse than they are.
>>
>> well, that is a very simplified version of my viewpoint. it is a complex
>> issue for sure and the greatest minds on the planet may well not solve
>> the conundrum.
>
> I disagree. I think some intelligent and honest economists *could* solve
> it, but, unfortunately we have some of the biggest idiots in the world
> working on it in Washington as we speak and doing everything they can to
> make it worse.
>
> --
> Bill Putney
> (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address
> with the letter 'x')