US Auto makers may become extinct, caused by Unions

So you two could bond?

Sorry it was there I had to.

Roy

Thank you, and thanks for setting the example so I can be a complete one.

So you enjoy or gain some vicarious pleasure out of making fun of people's limitations and health problems . . .you are the one that is sick.

Nope, I said what I meant. I don't want your advice. Quit spinning and read what is written.

I don't want your email address. Gawd, you spun this right around opposite of what I wrote. Can't you even read?

I had asked you to let me know who you were to see if you were someone I knew and you could have used MY EMAIL ADDRESS AND ASKED ME TO NOT REVEAL OR KEEP YOURS AND I WOULD HAVE HONORED THAT REQUEST, but you didn't so you are now no one, as far as I'm concerned.

Not according to those that keep telling me I'm (insert preferred derogatory term), like yourself.

More apathy . . . .

Doesn't mean you have the right or responsibility to "correct" anyone either.

Sorry Budd, but the emotion behind a crime is not a crime itself. If the emotions were a crime, you would have been convicted of my murder MANY times by now

I never said that he did but he has yet to post anything either and for him, it appears to be much easier.

And I appreciate the offer but there would be no point in doing it. Max has never been man enough to admit any type of error, especially to me so what would be the point. At best, he would claim that his different year manual didn't cover what I said and then come up with excuses not to back it up. I have been down this road with him before and know better than to do it again.

Well Budd, the reality of the situation is that Max is your friend so you will assume him to be the correct one, regardless of the facts.

Many in here including myself use IMHO or IMO to declare an opinion. I don't use it that much because many in here don't give a damn about my opinion so I tend to keep my opinions out of my posts but when I do have on and that is all that it is, I do use it so I guess that it does apply to you as well.

Whatever.

ok, i'll let it slide, i walked into that one.

that was a joke budd. just trying to lighten things up. look, in reality you are absolutely correct. you have the right to be who you chose to be. and i don't always package what i say so well. one of my big shortcomings is patience. i wich i had some, i try but it is my weakness. i see several people here try to help you. from my perspective it looks like they are really trying to hlep you.........just to help you out. you just don't want to look or listen...........so i make it worse by getting pissed as you and saying what i have to say in a shitty way. i honestly apologize for the way i say some things. i do not apologize for what i said budd, i said it because i hoped you would listen and it would help you out........but again, i am impatient and i say it poorly. that doesn't help. in the end, you are who you chose to be. i am not on a jump on budd deal so this is it for me. i do wich you the best and i hope it isn't too late when you do decide to stop and listen.

Still having trouble reading, Tom? I said it was behind the crimes, I did not mention it being a sin, which, according to the Bible and God's laws, is illegal.

Hardly. You're in God's hands as far as that is concerned.

Talk to Him about it.

Let's see, you email it to me and I post it in the group as soon as I download it. . . .that's one ( count 'em!!!) step difference.

Can you spell, "CREDIBILITY"?

To be honest, Tom, admitting an error around you is fraught with danger, since you like to throw them back into discussions and then claim the author never admitted the mistake or you corrupt it in some way to try and make yourself look better.

Btw, Max has admitted to more of his errors than you have to yours. You just launch into a flame fest against the person that catches you in the screw-up. That's not an admission of error.

Gee, Tom, how many of us have "been down that road before" with you? Hmmm?

Really? And who was it that gave you the chance to redeem yourself? Who, Tom? Come on, you can admit it.

Really? Then you need to proof read your own posts more, and by the way, Tom, to you, it matters not if I use those acronyms or not, you still jump all over any opinions I post demanding proof.

I didn't find it at all funny. If you were someone I knew well enough to accept the teasing, maybe I could have seen some humor in it.

Think on this: I've met Denny and we can tease each other quite a bit, I've met Bryon Foust and we used to tease quite a bit, Nate and I got to know each other by email and have teased considerably, Max and I got to know each other in the "Great Torque Wrench Debate".

You have decided to hide yourself behind a screen name, and your past treatment of me doesn't give me the freedom to accept it as levity.

Generally, I can get the gist of your posts. You're not as bad as some that have driifted thru here.

I appreciate help, I do not appreciate condemnation / abuse for having reported my conditions to friends that ASKED ABOUT ME.

Odd, I'm not angry. I am tired of you and others trying to tell me how to behave, making fun of my medications / health issues or what kind of person I should be.

Wouldn't you?

Conditions on an apology destroys the apology . . .I think you said that to me at least once, or words to that effect, maybe it was someone else, but it applies.

It helps to know who is trying to help so you can determine if they really care or just being nosey and manipulative.

I don't know who the heck you are and you don't want anyone to know.

That destroys your credibility about giving me health advice, and severely limits in in other areas. That is because of your choice.

And yet, even with one step easier, he has not doen it either.

Yep, and it has nothing to do with this.

Just spin on your part. Your admission of error was nothing more than a desperate attempt to cover. You did not say you were wrong, only that you didn't see something which also shows just how desperate you are to try and prove me wrong about something. Since the ignition module in his vehicle gets its power directly from the ignition switch and not from the ballast resistor, you were still wrong, regardless of what you didn't see.

Really, name 2.

LOL, you really don't have a clue. When I'm wrong, I admit to it but just because I do something a different way than the "industry standard" doesn't make me wrong and many of these flame wars as you put them are more based on opinion.

PKB

Redeem myself in what way???? The fact that you just said that more than proves my point. I have done nothing wrong (other than disagree with your buddy) and yet you feel that I need to redeem myself, LOL.

Really, show me one time.

ROFL!! You try to tell me it's illegal for unions to subsidize individual contractors so they can outbid non-union companies. You haven't a clue at all to come up with that statement. It's just your personal belief with zilch to support it and yet again you try to tell me you must be right if I don't name a company other than my families. Sorry TBone, you're wrong. It is legal and is done on a routine basis. Prove your statement true. Show me some law that says unions can't bankroll companies to outbid non-union companies. Back your claim up.

Sure thats true. There are poorly managed corporations. I have said repeatedly that unions are needed in some cases where a natural market balance is not present for whatever reasons. In the majority of work sectors unions are simply not needed and have a negative benifit to society as a whole.

Often they run into trouble as a direct result of exhorbant labor costs caused by powerfull unions. Look at the massive rise in health costs companies must pay out. Unions use their power to resist absorbing their share of the rise in costs. It's much easier to just say the owners are greedy and should pay.

Huh? A company makes a product or provides a service for ONE purpose. To make money. A company will change its product or service as the market dictates. Why? To MAKE MONEY. That is why a person starts a company. You really believe it's just to make a product and the money is an incidental benifit of doing so? Too funny.

Just in the USA or the rest of the world? If a union chokes the life out of a company then how does that benifit the workers?

Your reply is to TBone, not me. I agree with you on your statement above.

Teachers union still exists.

No you did not. You said 'come on miles' and then explained that money is the reason corporations exist...EXACTLY what I said in the first place. Your reply was in disagreement with TBone, NOT ME!

That is very true. Problem is you only see that greed from the corporate owner and not from a union worker. You don't seem to think that unions and their employees are very much greedy as well.

The concept of the government being everyones social provider for all their needs is not my ideal situation. So your statement is wrong.

In many cases unions workers take what they want because they can. They are paid above market value and that is pure greed.

They pay above the unions benifits which is exactly why they have continually voted down joining the union. It benifited the employees because the union lost. Had the union won these people would have been out of a job.

what the f*ck does that have to do with the issue anyhow? what the f*ck crawled up your ass and died?