That is why Toyota is building a R&D and a Development plant here in
michigan. That is why they assemble and make parts here in michigan. Not
just the cars. They plan to employ some some 15-30k people by time they are
done with it. The number 2 automaker is apparantly reinvesting where they
make their money. However, it is still a foreign company since you have to
pay the foreign tax on your stock dividend. But still, I would be more apt
to buy a Toyota who is building more plants and other facilities here, then
a company that is looking to push more facilities out of the country. Not
that I think any particular area should be strictly dependent on one
industry. But now I am just babbling.
| On Sun, 15 Aug 2004, James C. Reeves wrote:
| > You can knock Chrysler off your list...Daimler owns them now (German),
| > so it is no longer considered "domestic" by most.
| Perhaps not by you, but you are not "most".
| Cars built in North America of primarily North American parts are
| considered "domestic" for legal purposes, regardless of whether the
| nameplate says "Dodge" or "Nissan" or whatever.
The car may be "domestic", from a legal definition, however the company that
produced it is not. A larger percentage of the profits, as a general rule,
leave the US on its way to the high wage salaries, R&D, design teams, etc. of
the host country where the HQ is location as a result.
Yes. For instance:
"Wagoner's total 2002 compensation package reached $14.7
million in 2002, compared with $7.43 million in 2001, when
the company failed to achieve financial targets, according
to the company's proxy released Thursday."
Do you really think the guy running GM is worth $14.7
million dollars? I don't.
I don't think it's any of my damn business what he or anyone else earns
in their paycheck. His salary is the result of a deal struck between
that Wagoner and his employer, and he was well-served to negotiate the best deal
for himself that he could, whether you or I or anyone else thinks that he's
'worth' that or not. Obviously, if the board of directors thought he was
overpaid, they'd cut his salary. If they were somehow in cahoots
together and the overly large salaries were really causing actual harm
to the company, the stock price would plummet as the company failed to
perform. These things have not happened, so I think it is fair to
conclude that Mr. Wagoner has struck a fair deal for himself with
General Motors, which in case you didn't know, is currently the largest
automobile manufacturer *in the world*. Would I want fourteen million
dollars to live with the headache of running and being made accountable for an
operation that large? You're goddamned right I would, and I think I would
deserve it. Half of the freaking State of Michigan is relying upon that
man to make good decisions and keep the General Motors empire -- with finances
larger than many individual countries -- rolling along making a profit.
*My* income depends, in part, on his making good decisions.
Do you mean to tell me that GM shouldn't reward an individual for an
effort of that magnitude?
Do you mean to tell me that GM shouldn't try to attract the best and the
brightest among us to positions that have that sort of responsibility?
Do you mean to tell me that GM should place that sort of responsibility
in the hands of somebody who's willing to do the job cheap?
Do you mean to tell me that somehow *your own* contribution to society
at large is commensurate with his, and therefore he is not deserving of
his salary because *you* do not make as much?
What I would like to know is who nominated you as being the arbiter of who
should get paid and how much? I would also like to know how your
system of values has gotten so completely f**ked over that you think
that the people who *make it possible* for half of an entire state to
have good employment, homes over their heads, food in their mouths and
educations for their children shouldn't get paid more than X dollars,
regardless of what X happens to be. Are the people of the State of
Michigan unimportant to you, because they happen to be distant from
where you are? Is America's industrial economy something that is to be
subject to the snivelling whims of people such as yourself who think
that the fat cat CEOs are overpaid and 'there outta be a law?'! Do you
think the shareholders of GM are so stupid they are willing to let Mr.
Wagoner rip them off?
Thankfully, folks such as you *aren't* running the country. I can only
hope that this condition persists in November.
I'll tell you one more thing while I'm at it: I don't make $14 million
dollars a year. You probably don't make $14 million dollars a year
either. Want to know why? Because neither one of us has the talent,
drive, skill, experience, willingness and commitment that Mr. Wagoner
manifests in his daily life. That's why he is WORTH $14 million a year,
and you and I aren't. Period. I'm happy with what I earn. I would
suggest that if you aren't happy with you earn, that you do something
about it, and quit complaining about those who have risen to the top.
That won't get you anywhere, and it sure as hell doesn't help anyone
If the world was a fair place, I wouldn't care what
executives make. However, most large corporations are run
like the '60 era Soviet Union. The Board of Directors are
members of an exclusive club and they slap each other on the
back while running their corporate empires for their
personal benefit. Sometimes, a few crumbs reach the average
investor, but that is usually a mistakle that is rectified
in the next quarter. Board of Directories routinely reward
incompetence with huge raises and sweet heart stock deals.
They are little more than reverse Robin Hood Gangs - steal
from the poor and give to the rich. If stock holders
exercised any real control, then I could live with it. But
for the most part, small investors are just gambling when
they invest in the stock market. The big players (banks,
mutuals, etc.) are all part of the big Casino that people
think is a stock market. They make sure they (the BIG boys)
get theirs and they don't give a d%^m about the little guy,
except to have him feed more money into their coffers so
that they can live like a Sultan. Having kept a job during
the reign (and I do mean reign) of one of the greatest flim
flam artist of the 20th century, I can tell you that the
picture from the bottom of the food chain is a lot different
than the one portrayed in the media. When you aren't allowed
to buy pencils for a month, because the company must make
arbitrary 3rd quarter numbers, or some other such nonsense,
you know the people running the company are insane, or that
they are cooking the books to make themselves look good.
Here's a big, time-saving hint, Ed: Life ain't fair. It isn't supposed
to be. Get over it.
However, most large corporations are run
Oh, geeze. Here we go with the class envy.
Yep, that's why GM is in business: to rip off the little guy.
Silly me, I thought they built vehicles and provided financing.
If stock holders
Well, duh! Did you just figure this out? Of *course* it's gambling,
*who* told you otherwise? Some MBA?
The big players (banks,
Guess what, Ed: everyone tries to cast their job performance in the best
possible light. That is simple human nature. If you really expect
otherwise, you're badly misinformed.
As far as living like a Sultan is concerned: I've got *no* argument with
anybody who has the means to live in the manner they so choose. They
don't bother me, and I'm quite sure I don't bother them. Most
contribute *far* more than their fair share to society through their
efforts and taxes, and dammit, I'm not going to be the one to try and
take their chosen lifestyle away from them. I may not always agree with
how they live, and I may not want to be like them, but does it hurt me
that they do so? Absolutely not. I just hope they buy enough cars and
computers to make for a persistent, positive upswing in the parts of the
economy that concern me, and as for the rest, that's between them and
their maker (if any.)
Right.... A car manufacturer that is unable to retain it's massive
market share and is forced to go after a completely different market
in order to survive. (tells one more about the banking industry than
it does the auto sector)
The stock market is not supposed to be gambling. Ever heard of a
prospectus? or an Audit? The people at Enron & Tyco forgot about
those as well.
Hmm... If you realized how little effort many of these people at the
top put in to get or retain their positions you may well change your
view (perhaps time will be a patient enough educator for you) if it
doesn't upset you at the moment because you do not feel affect feel
blessed. However don't forget another place and time ("let them eat
cake") where there was a similar massive class divide. ("Petite
Bourgeois") which was followed by a change in the economic structure &
the ensuing "removal of the heads" of various establishments.
The people of France suffered quite badly, the elite's only suffered
very briefly whilst their heads were removed.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. We
should be striving for a Meritocracy not a return to Feudal rule under
any other name.
PS this isn't intended as a personal attack, merely a critique of your
Look, the world changed in the 1970s, and America's borders started to
open up. You expected GM to retain the market share it had in the 1960s
when there was virtually NO foreign competition worth mentioning?
Like I said before, what they make and what they do to get it is none of
my damn business, and I think it ought to be viewed as same by everyone
else. That said, I posited some *really good* reasons why the people on
top make the money they do. Debate those, whydontcha?
However don't forget another place and time ("let them eat
Good Lord, 'class divide'? Horsepucky. The 'class divide' is being
manufactured by the American Left. It's a complete fabrication!
Everyone else seems to realize that you get what you want in this country
through creativity, dedication and effort.
There's no danger of a return to feudalism in America. And I
tire quickly of comparisons between (socialist) Europe and the United
States. Of course Europe's economy sucks and the U.S. people get paid
better and have a higher standard of living. This comes as a surprise to you?
Europe's problem is that it has been seduced by socialism and leftist
policy. Things will get far, far worse there before they improve.
I don't know how it works in the US but in the UK there is often little
connection between top executive pay and share-price performance. To think
that a plummeting stock-price always results in overpaid execs getting pay
cuts is a pipe dream. It's become an issue in the UK and, indeed, the CEO
of GlaxoSmithKline (world's second-largest pharma company, an Anglo-American
corporation) was recently forced to take an emoluments cut because of a
It may not be my business what a specific CEO gets if I am not a
shareholder, but it CAN BE viewed as a social issue. To think that
remuneration committees and executives are not in a back-scratching society
is naivety. In Europe many executives from, e.g. German and Dutch financial
institutions were shocked at the salaries in the Anglo-Saxon companies they
acquired in London. In fact, it has been rumoured that one reason that
Daimler-Benz was so keen to get involved in the USA and be listed on the
NYSE was so that its CEO (Juergen Schrempp) could have a vastly-inflated
Sorry, but NO person is worth a salary of 14 million dollars a year to run
even GM. Bill Gates and Steve Balmer are 'worth' their zillions because
they are owners/shareholders of a cash-manufacturing machine they started,
and good luck to them.
Does anybody honestly believe that a GM CEO would do the job less well if
paid a quarter of the present salary??? People at that level do that job
for many reasons, including power.
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
| On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Geoff wrote:
| > what they make and what they do to get it is none of my damn business,
| > and I think it ought to be viewed as same by everyone else.
| Ah. Everyone ought to think just like you do. Understood.
| > Good Lord, 'class divide'? Horsepucky. The 'class divide' is being
| > manufactured by the American Left. It's a complete fabrication!
| Sure. So then there's no such thing as Americans who lack access to basic
| healthcare, for instance?
Those that I know (including some family members) that don't have health
insurance is because they don't want to pay for it. They can easily afford it
and they simply choose not to get it. "Access" is truly not the problem some
politicians claim. Everyone can buy health insurance here in the states if
they choose to...it is available.
| > | On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Geoff wrote:
| > |
| > | > what they make and what they do to get it is none of my damn business,
| > | > and I think it ought to be viewed as same by everyone else.
| > |
| > | Ah. Everyone ought to think just like you do. Understood.
| > |
| > | > Good Lord, 'class divide'? Horsepucky. The 'class divide' is being
| > | > manufactured by the American Left. It's a complete fabrication!
| > |
| > | Sure. So then there's no such thing as Americans who lack access to basic
| > | healthcare, for instance?
| > |
| > Those that I know (including some family members) that don't have health
| > insurance is because they don't want to pay for it. They can easily afford
| > and they simply choose not to get it. "Access" is truly not the problem
| > politicians claim. Everyone can buy health insurance here in the states if
| > they choose to...it is available.
| Yup. The thousands of homeless americans should just
| run right out and buy it.
Those people likely have bigger problems than health insurance...like why they
aren't taking advantage of available social services that would remedy the
situation you describe. That is available also. At some point one has to
decide to help themselves.
| Unfortuantely those programs do not have the funds to handle the need. The
| money is going to Iraq.
No, the funds are there for those that seek it. Site a source that has
documented that large numbers of people are being turned down their request for
aid for lack of funds. Usually they're turned down because they won't meet the
conditions for the aid (things like submit job applications).
The homeless americans can get a J-O-B. I know its a rough situation here
for some people. I know I am in one myself. But there are jobs. Truth is
a lot of homeless people don't want to do anything. Thus if you don't want
to work for it, you shouldn't get it. This isn't a vacation.
Dunno what's it's like in the US but in the UK quite a few homeless are
mentally ill and need looking after and not instructions from warm and
comfortable people on high to get a job. They're on the streets because the
government closed many mental institutions and tipped the inmates into "Care
in the Community", a well-meaning move that assumed these people had
relatives who would take of them.
How many homeless have you spoken to or read about?
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
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.