Re: GM Closes 4 Suv and Truck Plants

Page 2 of 2  
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 17:27:51 -0500, Roadrunner NG wrote:


That's the company's problem. It's not your problem, nor mine. Companies go out of business every day, for many different reasons. Welcome to America, and the free enterprise system.

No.
Sometimes.
--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
Now filtering out all posts originating from Google Groups.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I am no fan of Georgie's, but this was clearly a joke. He never claimed he wanted to be dictator. He deadpanned that things would be a lot easier to get done if he were.
Release your hate... It's not doing you any good...
--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Many a truth is spoken in jest.

Why is it hate when I point out that Bush acts like a dictator and endorsed himself for the position, but not hate when you accuse me of advocating dictatorship when I point out that $13 million might be excessive compensation for driving a company into the ground?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

that's just BDS;Bush Derangement Syndrome.

Bush did no such thing.That is just what you read into it. You're deluded if you believe Bush "acts like a dictator". He did a lot of diplomacy before he decided on action.Talk alone doesn't always succeed.

it probably is,but that's still no reason to involve gov't regulation,and you haven't suggested any -other- method of correcting "excessive compensation. You just whine that it's a "boy's club" and that shareholder voting is ineffective.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Pulease.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And the guys running the company are whom?

Correcting a typo, the above should read: "the government should *not* dictate how much an executive is paid."

Or a sloppy typist. The corrected posting is consist ant with my previous statement.

Are you ignorant of math? The only limit is the amount of money in the company's bank account and any line of credit. If they are stupid enough to pay that much, why shouldn't the government tax it at 80%? We already have a tax on stupid poor people. It is called the LOTTO.

Aren't all the tax brackets arbitrary? If you want to lobby for a flat tax, knock yourself out. But don't tell me the government cant set arbitrary tax brackets.
And speaking of arbitrary, why is there an arbitrary limit (about $115,000 IIRC) on the maximum amount of salary taxed for Social Security?

Again, max salary limited only by company coffer.

Beats operating on the basis of what makes your buddies in the oil, defense, healthcare, etc. industries rich.
But if you like, I have a felling that if the maximum salary available on the open market were $2 million or so, these brilliant business minds wouldn't just go home and bake cookies.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Jim Yanik said;

GMG said;

Do I get a refund of tax monies of mine that go towards that program?
anytime government gets involved,the costs go wild and there's a huge amount of waste.Look at the Veterans Hospitals. Heck,govt couldn't even run the Senate or House cafeterias without losing huge amounts of money and providing poor service.Dianne Feinstein even admits it.
and creating such a social program means MORE government employment;another government bureaucracy wasting money.
Look at what a mess Social Security is.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I would gladly grant that, but you have to refuse any care you can't pay for. The hospitals have enough uninsured patients who can't pay for their medical care without have to deal with fools who had coverage available and turned it down.

Medicare is far from perfect but it does provide coverage for everyone over 65 - obviously the most expensive demographic for healthcare. It does so for a mere 2% income tax, a rate that is affordable to everyone. By contrast, if you are younger than 65 and seek private health insurance outside of employment, you could be paying $500 or $1000 a month or more or it might not be available at any price. If you don't have insurance, you pay triple what the insurance companies pay. If you have a serious illness or accident, you will be amazed how fast you can run up a half million dollars in medical treatments. No wonder more than half of the bankruptcies in the US are caused by medical bills.
The current private healthcare system in the US is in chaos. It is completely broken and the only people who are not aware of this are those who have the good fortune to not have been seriously ill.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

why haven't the SHAREHOLDERS corrrected this?

it's socialist/communist to think that involving Government in regulating such affairs is the solution. Or any sort of "excess profit" taxation.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not much risk of that with GM involved.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Yanik wrote:

Who mentioned the government?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As I said....

that is the usual demand;for Gov't to regulate something,when other means of control are not achievable.
Since shareholders are not forcing "appropriate" CEO salaries or denying unearned bonuses,what other way is there?
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Yanik wrote:

There is no other way, that I've ever seen. People start voicing their dissatisfaction (like the OP), a shareholders movement gathers steam, and finally they rein in the irresponsible management. A bit like the political process. Some want to stifle dissent, and label those that speak out as dissidents, trouble-makers, communists ...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

McCain-Feingold is such an attempt.The "Fairness Doctrine" was another. Liberals tossing pies in conservative speakers faces or shouting them down are attempts to stifle;anti-free speech.

Or,like Communists/Socialists,they call for government to enact laws against it.
Nobody is stopping shareholders from speaking out,debating,or adjusting their exec salaries and compensation. It simply has not happened.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.