demort71

Thanks for the clarification. Since we can't hear what the other person is saying, or see that person or get to know them face-to-face, then a person's written word can be misconstrued. I also thank you for sharing your work and educational experience, which allows me to better understand where you are coming from.

Bear with me on this long post and read it to the end, so you fully understand where I am coming from. Some of it may piss you off and for that I am sorry. Some of it might get you to think about things from another perspective. What you do about anything I write here is totally up to you. I don't get paid for changing your mind.

Yes, during Clinton's last term (thanks for trying to be non-partisan here), the banking and finance industries were deregulated. Also during that time the Republican Party held the majority in the Congress, if I remember correctly. The Rep. Party has a well-known penchant for deregulation. So, whose doing was the deregulation of the banking industry really? I don't know, nor do I care to lay blame. I agree with your summary of what happened to American society's spending habits. It sounds essentially correct to me.

I have a BBA and an MS in marketing from St. Joe's-Philly and so I have had courses in econ too. I never cared to study econ in the depth you have. But you may be younger than I am and these courses probably didn't exist when I was studying. One can try to predict something as abstract as the economy, which is affected by so many factors, but it's like throwing darts blindfolded. You might "hit the wall" about some aspect of the econony, but making extremely accurate predictions is tough to do.

Obviously I don't use these degrees as a CNC machinist, but I once did. At the time I left the white collar world, I had became disillusioned with the greed that was becoming so obvious in it. At any rate, I am perfectly happy with the lack of pressure in my current job, and the money and the benies it offers, etc. I traded some prestige in the type of work I did for peace of mind and now I actually make a better living. Frankly I don't miss the brown nosing or the sacrifice of my basic values that was necessary in my former line of work, in order to be successful in it.

Regarding wage disparities. Perhaps that isn't fair-someone installing windshields making more money vs. someone saving lives-but that seems to be where the money is and the way our capitalistic system works. Should an oil field worker make more money than a fireman? Shouldn't a cop make more than a politician? Should an attorney get 33% of a settlement or an estate because he has a doctorates of jurisprudence? Should an army private make way less than a general? There are a lot of inequities in the world and we can't change them all. Should we take matters in our own hands and go out and shoot the oil worker because we are jealous of him or do something to make him lose his job? No.

I have heard about health care in Canada and it seems that gaining access to elective surgeries is where the rub is in getting care, not necessarily getting routine care or office visits. Of course Canadians' experiences would likely vary, depending on where they live and how many doctors choose to work in that city or area. Many parts of Cananda are remote. Further, I have met Brits and Europeans (several times) who were legal residents of the U.S., but they wouldn't give up their citizenship because of the health care system in their homelands. They wanted to continue to use their benies and have access to them. Yes, they often had to wait for elective operations and schedule them months in advance. But apparently emergencies were treated differently (i.e. you could get your broken leg set right away!).

How would you improve our health care system to make it better than what it is today and make it more affordable? The current system isn't working. What do you suggest we do, let people suffer because they can't afford it? Too many businesses won't give it to their employees, so do we go without? I have my own ideas, but you probably wouldn't like them. Let's hear something from you that works for everyone and not just the "elite" of our society. You are an intelligent person, let's hear your answer.

When I was a young man everyone who worked had health care insurance, made liveable wages, had pensions, etc. If you lost one job, there was no problem finding another good job. Companies wanted good workers to stick around and spend their entire careers with them. What changed between that time and today? What have you observed during your own life time on this matter or perhaps you studied this in your college business curriculum?

I just read a few minutes ago an Associated Press article in my Sunday paper about the average wages that a GM UAW worker earns and also the average U.S. auto maker hourly labor costs vs. foreign makers. UAW workers earn about sixty cents less per hour than non- assemblers at a Toyota plant in Georgetown, KY. They were both at or knocking on $30 an hour. The difference was in their benefits packages. The UAW worker had a superior retirement program. Here is how the UAW pension works. If you retire with 30 years before age 65, you get $3,100 a month, all paid by GM. After you reach the age you can start collecting social security, GM pays you the difference between $3,100 and the amount of social sec. you are eligible for. Say you qualify for $1500 soc. sec., then GM pays you $1600 and you make a combined pension of $3K a month.

I admit that's good money. The pension is something GM invested in over the course of the employee's 30 year career, so that by the time the employee retires, it's theoretically sitting there as long as GM fully vests the retirement fund. If the employee dies young, then the company keeps what's left in the pension fund.

You are off on the foreign companies overall labor costs vs. GM. Your GM cost is about right at $69. The foreign maker's costs are $48 (not $40). When the new lower wage scale is implemented at GM, its cost will be a few bucks more than the foreign makers, given the higher legacy costs of GM.

The article went on to say that the UAW agreed to a two tiered wage scale with GM. I'm sure the world's best and brightest assemblers will line up for these wages, or at the least the most hard-up unemployed will. New assemblers (when they need to hire them) will start at a lathargic $14 an hour, have no pension and reduced health care benefits. Maybe that's good money in some areas of the U.S., but it really isn't a wage you can get ahead with financially.

If you are going to waste your body on someone's assembly line, you ought to make it worth your while. Do you really think GM will be able to produce quality products with underpaid people? It doesn't make any difference if those people live in the Midwest or in central Alabama, GM will expect them to work at a certain pace and they won't feel sorry for them if they become disgruntled about their wages and how hard they have to work for it.

I once have worked on an assembly line before for my current employer, assembling diesel engines. I take it you and most members of this forum haven't. This isn't much different than what the auto makers do in their auto assembly plants. You get three scheduled breaks in an 8 hour shift-two ten minute breaks and a 20 minute lunch break. They run the line as fast as they want to and need to. Stopping the line is a no-no. My assembly line moved every 65 seconds in this situation I am talking about. You have to get the parts you are responsible for putting on the engine, installed correctly and be sure they are the right parts for that particular engine and you don't have much time to do any of it. If you are unable to do your job, the foreman may move you to another station to see if you can do that job. Eventually if there are no jobs you are qualified for, you will likely be fired. At any rate you are on your feet all day, not allowed to sit down or get a drink (unless you can gain a few extra seconds to do so). You can only go to the bathroom if someone takes your place and then you better hurry and get back to your station. You will get fired if you keep screwing up your job and the engines blow up in hot test or won't run because of your mistakes, so you better learn to do it right, as if it's brain surgery. At any rate, we would put together about 200 engines in an 8 hour shift. That was something of value that the company could sell to someone else, which justified paying us a fair wage.

The auto industry is always on the cutting edge of manufacturing, even more so than my "world class" employer. They are constantly updating their lines and processes with new methods, machinery and technology. They are on the cutting edge of manufacturing and automation.

I pay the UAW two hours of my wages for dues each month. It isn't going to break me to pay that. I can guarentee you that if I didn't have a contract, there is no way I would make what I do today, nor would I have a retirement and likely no employee would last more than a few years at the company I work for (it's cheaper to fire and hire new employees at a lower wage). The is the only thing keeping my employer half-way honest with its workers regarding compensation. The may not be perfect, but it's the best thing I have watching out for my interests.

Does it bother you that the UAW seeks to artificially redistribute wealth? Should the workers who create the products and services share in the sucess of the company? I think so. I create wealth daily in the form of parts, which the company sells and makes a profit on. Those profits pay the expenses of the company and create wealth for the stockholders. The profit also pays the wages of management personnel. Isn't this capitalism at work?

If it bothers you about workers sharing the wealth, but not really adding any value to the product, then why do we need half of the management people that most companies employ in mind-numbing duties of questionable value? I make something of value for my employer and so do the auto assembly workers busting their butts on the auto assembly lines. The engineer's ideas and blue prints are nothing until they are made into something tangible that can be sold.

What about the redistribution of wealth that corporate execs have been giving to themselves for the last twenty years? I can't name one exec who is worth the outragious compensation and severance packages they receive, can you? Wouldn't you agree that these CEOs are nothing more than thieves? Who sits on the board of directors of major corporations and run the boards? CEOs of other companies. Who hires the new CEO? The board of directors. Who sets compensation for the CEO? CEOs on the board of directors. We should worry more about the rape of corporate America and its stockholders (especially the little ones) by CEOs, before we worry about how the UAW uses or invests its piddly amount of dues. If you are the owner of a company, then I guess you can rob it blind if you want.

One last question on this subject, was Bob Nardelli worth a quarter billion dollars when he left Home Depot? That was redistributing the wealth wasn't it?! I will work for a dollar a year for the rest of my life if I had that kind of nest egg!

You mentioned my comments about southern protectionism and right-to-work laws, which seem to unsettle you. Where does a state govt. get the money from to give a foreign auto manufacturer tens of millions of dollars of free land, tax breaks and public services? Is that capitalism or socialism?

You point out that the foreign auto makers employ local, tax paying citizens who wouldn't have liveable wages if it weren't for a Toyota or Honda or VW plant being there. Wasn't it Southern senators who stood up a few weeks ago in the Senate and tried to stick it to Northern auto workers who are also tax paying citizens trying to make an honest living? The Southern senators stalled and swaggered about the high wages UAW workers were making and tried to deny a loan to the Big 3 in order to stick it to the and possibly bankrupt the Big 3 to benefit foreign automakers in their own state. Are Southern tax payers better than Northern tax payers? You are playing both sides of the field here? If the Northern auto workers and white collar workers of the Big 3 became unemployed, how will Republicans feel about supporting those unemployed workers, who may eventually have to seek welfare? I thought Republicans valued people who put in a honest day's work and earned their wages? Why the two faces on this situation? Is it jealousy?

One of the problems with the struggling U.S. auto industry is health care costs and state governments subsidizing new plants for foreign makers. How would you solve this side of the problem for Chrysler? Is it OK for state governments to spend tax payer money to subsidize foreign auto makers, but it isn't OK for the federal govt. to level the playing field for the Big 3 with a loan? Those foreign auto manufacturers made an economic invasion of the U.S. auto market years ago and got an unfair advantage over our domestic manufacturers. Let's be fair and admit that wasn't capitalism, nor was it fair. I have tried to be honest about the negatives of my side of the issue, it's your turn to 'fess up on what is blatantly obvious to me. Don't preach capitalism and then practice or defend socialism (which is something you claim to hate). That would be like the preacher letting his daughter run wild on Saturday night and claim she was a virgin on Sunday morning.

You aren't going to like it, but in the end the Fed govt. is going to give the Big 3 another loan. If they go down, so does our industrial base and complex in this country and the economic implications are mind-numbing. You should know that better than I do given all the econ you have studied. I have no doubt the Big 3 will do their utmost to move their restructuring plans forward in the next few months and that will win them further financing. So get ready to pay up son!

You say you value your own freedom and that you wouldn't like a socialistic or communistic govt. calling the shots in America. If that is true, I suggest you pray for the success of our industrial complex. Without it, how will we supply and equip the military? We can't import everything from China and assemble it here.

You are right that history repeats itself and it's been doing it again. Don't take this the wrong way, I'm a lover of history and I have studied the 19th century a lot, including how things were in the South during that century. Don't be duped like the people of the South of the 1850s were by propaganda. It cost them their country, economy and a lot of humble pie. They listened to the lies of the people who were the wealthy elite at that time. The poor man went to war, got killed and they have been trying to blame the wrong people ever since. The Republican Party has been using two key things to get elected-God and guns. Down your way they take advantage of the genteel and quiet nature of the average Southerner, throw in some racial bias, toss in a dash of patriotism and then start spoon-feeding lies. For having some of the best educated people in the country within their ranks, it just blows my mind to hear the absurd crap the Republicans put out.

Why is it that before 1964 most white Southerners were Democrats, going back into the early 19th century? Do you know why they became Republicans? I do. LBJ really made them mad when he supported the Civil Rights movement and then chastised Southerners for supporting the KKK. That made Southerners break ranks with the Democratic Party. Heck, even Georg McGovern was a Dem and he was one of the biggest racist to hold office. At any rate, the Republican party just reeled in the angry ex-Dems in the South. They played them to the hilt.

My brother and dad are both Republicans and niether one of them can logically explain their party's stance on a lot of issues. The other day my dad was complaining about rising premiums for his nursing home insurance (he's not in one) and was outraged he was paying more. He went round and round with the insurance company on that higher premium. He didn't like it when I pointed out this was the way the Republicans felt health care should be. The "free market" would determine what we all pay. Sorry but buck up dad!

Friend, if you are going to give your allegience to something, at least give it to something that actually works to benefit you. You deserve more in your future than what you have described to me. You can't trust your 401K any more than people could this past fall, who were planning on retiring in 2009. What are you going to do if your 401K falls on its face when you are 69 and in poor health? Starve? What if no insurance company wants to insure you when you are 59 because of a pre-existing condition? Die? If you work your whole life, pay into the system, be a tax payer, keep your nose clean, then don't you deserve to retire and shouldn't you expect something in your last years? If I were you, I wouldn't accept less.

Don't listen to people who suggest that you should be ashamed for wanting something for yourself. That's hog wash. A guy who makes $8.50 an hour isn't going to tell you that you deserve $16 an hour, cause he'd be jealous if you made it. Of course if you just accept things the way they are, then maybe that is all you will end up with. Take it from the big wheels in the Republican party, they are getting their hands on all the money they can. They think it's their birth right and if they have to step all over you to get it, that's OK because all is fair in love and war and life is both to them.

You went to college for a reason, to better yourself. Don't let someone lie to you, or make you feel guilty because inside you want a little piece of the pie. You are worth more than what you are giving yourself credit for. If I convince you that you're not worth more than a meager salary, you might start believing you should work until you die and that you should pay for your own health care. What I am talking about is social justice, not government handouts. We are in a class war and you are fighting for the rich. Whose side should you be on? I think your own side.

Obama is both pro- and pro-middle class-make no mistake about it. However, I do think he will try to be fair to everyone. The Republicans are right that the UAW supported Obama. Who else could they have supported? Certainly not the Republicans who have waged a bitter behind-the-scenes campaign to break s and destroy the middle class. What did the country get from W? Not much good in my book, but maybe a lot in yours.

If you want to see a Gen III Challenger in your future, then you are going to have to wish for Chrysler's success harder than what you seem be right now. I suggest you buy it before too many of those $14 an hour assembly workers are hired. They may not care too much about how well the cars go together, because they won't be planning on sticking around for any longer than necessary as an assembler. The current Challengers are excellent cars and very well built. Yes, we can agree on one thing, we love the Challenger.

In closing I hope I gave you and others some food for thought. You don't have to agree with it all, just a little bit would be fine with me. My heart is in the right place for people like yourself, even if I can't agree with you on everything. I got faith in your ability to change!