What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy finds gold in Iowa. view!
youtube.com - Best Buy employee, Danielle Kelly, sings her way into holiday campaign.
240 Comments
- jakiao, on 12/02/2008, -3/+85Them: "Please give us money!! ;___;" Congress: "Would you take a cut in your pay?" Them: "... ... ... why should we?"
- WordsnCollision, on 12/02/2008, -3/+74"Should U.S. taxpayers really be providing billions of dollars to bailout companies (GM, Ford and Chrysler) that compensate their workers 52.5 percent more than the market (Toyota wages and benefits), 54 percent more than management and professional workers, 132 percent more than the average manufacturing wage, and 157 percent more than the average compensation of all American workers?"
- ingoldsby, on 12/02/2008, -7/+60You can thank the UAW for that business. It's absurd.
- elnerdo, on 12/02/2008, -1/+33More like:
Congress: "We're love to throw money at you, but we fear that we've already thrown out too much money. We might not get re-elected if we throw anymore. Come back later, so we can do it more discretely" - docbaily, on 12/02/2008, -5/+37They buried themselves a long time ago. They shouldn't get a penny.
- orangetiki, on 12/02/2008, -0/+28Bring the car industry into the 21st century. Then we'll talk
- grungegbunny, on 12/02/2008, -2/+26I'm against all bailouts but if I had to choose between giving an industry that actually makes products and has real factories with hard workers vs choosing companies like large banks that just give loans or insurance I'd rather my money go to the production industry.
- RedHeadedFreak, on 12/02/2008, -0/+23I am suspicious about the Big 3 CEOs. This little conspiracy part of my brain is telling me these guys knew what they were doing all along, and that the only reason they came to Washington was to put on a show for the UAW. I think this because I tell myself there's no way in hell these guys could be that stupid. you don't make it to their position by being stupid. It seems to me if anyone would want bankruptcy in order to throw the UAW contracts in the toilet and start over, it would be the CEOs who surely realize the current ridiculous operating conditions the American car manufacturers have to endure.
But then again, they could be just plain dumb. - bytor4232, on 12/02/2008, -0/+19You do realize that GM workers get paid 26 dollars an hour to install seat belts?
- MrFurious2k, on 12/02/2008, -2/+21I'm sure if we bail out just one more industry, the whole economy will turn around. Yup. I'm positive.
- quaxon, on 12/02/2008, -0/+15Why dont they just take out a loan from the banks? i hear they have trillions.
- groo68, on 12/02/2008, -0/+15My family has never bought an american car, why should i pay to save them, they haven't been good at their business, so they should close their business and hopefully a new breed of american cars can rise from the ashes.
- commentposted, on 12/02/2008, -2/+17Those dirty little bastards.
- RedHeadedFreak, on 12/02/2008, -1/+15Amen. I worked for a unionized grocery store back in high school, and I didn't join the union. I was intimidated by union bosses on at least one occasion to join--big guy, just stuck papers in my face and said, sign here. They told workers they were leeching off the hard work of others since they still had to provide union benefits to non-union workers (state law). But all the while, the full-time workers there didn't realize that they were hurting the company in the long run. They were all afraid of Wal-Mart coming in and slowing business, but if they were going to fail, it was going to be partly their fault because the store would not have the agility to compete as non-union Wal-Mart has.
- inigomntoya, on 12/02/2008, -1/+14I think you are on to something. They do need to pander to the UAW right before they give them the finger.
I wish I could be in that meeting with the UAW: "Sorry, we did everything we could. Now get the hell out of my office!"
Unions did their job in the early 1900's, but they are dead now. They are just sucking the life out of companies and their blue-collar workers.
Bankruptcy is the best option for GM. Like chemotherapy for a cancer patient - it sucks. It sucks bad for a little while. But at least you aren't dying a slow painful death. - method7670, on 12/02/2008, -0/+13That's what you get when you put all your chips into the SUV basket.
- Dustin00, on 12/02/2008, -0/+12They fought tooth and nail to keep milage standards low.
They won.
Now their competitors get to slice them up and keep the pieces they find useful.
Same as any other industry when the top management executes an Epic Fail. - TFGeditor, on 12/02/2008, -1/+13I regret that I have but one Digg to give for this insightful, accurate, much-needed article.
Would that more such honesty and forthrightness prevail. - Lucas123, on 12/02/2008, -1/+13Want to save the American auto industry? Force them to make good cars.
Here's the litmus test:
1) Close your eyes and think of what the average American auto manufacturing worker looks like. OK. Now imagine the average American auto executive.
2) Now imagine the same, but replace those workers with Japanese or Germans.
Get the picture? - flip2trip, on 12/02/2008, -2/+14Quit grouping all conservatives under one umbrella. I've called and written all my representatives and let them know, in no uncertain terms, if they vote for the bailout of these companies they will not get my vote.
- geesamba, on 12/02/2008, -1/+12Adam Smith is rolling in his grave. Where is the invisible hand of the market? Oh yeah, it's being pre-empted by bailouts. You can't allow companies to run themselves into the ground and be "rewarded" with money from Congress. That starts a dangerous precedent of allowing businesses to take on an unhealthy amount of risk knowing they won't see bottom if that happens. This, I don't agree with.
Sure, it's very painful to have a shake-down of the financial industry and the auto industry around the same time, but it's a necessary part of free market capitalism. Not a nice thing in the short-term, but a necessary component of a healthy market in the long-term. - NonLeftistDiggr, on 12/02/2008, -1/+12Your average UAW employee makes 30 bucks an hour straight time for manual labor, with no benefits, business labor taxes, or retirement payments counted. That is a ***** for labor. If that's what the union and/or car company manager's think is appropriate, fine, but the tax payer doesn't owe any of them ***** if they go out of business, and the tax payer should not have to pay any portion of their pension if it fails either.
- FXNGLAS, on 12/02/2008, -2/+13Perry's solution: "Maybe the country would be better off in the long run if we let the Big Three fail, and in the process break the UAW labor monopoly, and then let Toyota, Honda and Volkswagen take over the U.S. auto industry and restore realistic, competitive, market wages to the industry."
That sounds fine by me. They all make better cars than Ford, Chrysler, and GM combined. - skipdog172, on 12/02/2008, -7/+17I just received a forward from my hardcore right-wing father saying that we should bail out the big 3 because they were the only ones who donated money to various programs after 9/11. This is what the "conservatives" have become. I hate it.
- cubicledrone, on 12/02/2008, -4/+12You do realize that middle management gets paid $150 an hour to hump Gantt charts and talk on the phone about golf?
- rowlodge, on 12/02/2008, -1/+9if they die then this country will be invaded with toyotas ,hondas, and mercedes benz...and...and...wait,thats not bad.
- digitalunit, on 12/02/2008, -7/+15There's way too many companies and employees involved in this.. Sure, let Ford, GM, and Chrysler die out, but let's take a look further down the line.. Who makes the body panels for those cars, the pieces of frame, the mirrors, the windows, the guages, contracts for tires and wheels and radios, software design, speakers, door handles, brakes, lights, locks, contracted lawyers, restaurants that thrive from auto workers, transmission and engine companies (Allison, Duramax) This whole thing extends way further than those 3 companies.
- JackSchittt, on 12/02/2008, -1/+9
$23,000 for every man, woman and child in the US. That's what it's costing us.
I've got a wife and two kids -- $96,000 total.
Instead of sending that $96k to the auto industry, send it to me. I'll pay off my debt, buy a nice car, a down payment on a house, and still have money left over to pump back into the rest of the economy. - inactive, on 12/02/2008, -4/+12Everyone is quick to badmouth the auto industry, but at least they are actually making a physical product that employs millions of Americans. What product does the financial industry make? And yet Congress gave them a ***** of money, which they squandered on a ***** party. And look at the recent additional bailout paid to Citigroup, another $20 BILLION, to total FORTY-FIVE BILLION DOLLARS OF TAXPAYER MONEY, just because they claim to be "too big to fail".
Why do you think the Big 3 are called THE BIG THREE--maybe they're TOO BIG TO FAIL as well?
I understand arguments saying that autoworkers are making too much money ($30/hr to operate a drill press with the education of a highschool dropout is a bit much, I agree), and maybe they should take a pay cut, but what about the financial industry salaries? Citigroup's CEO made $216 MILLION last year alone. Combined salaries of the Big 3 CEOs--$5 million. Total. Who needs the bailout more?
Listen to this for more (posted last week, but it didn't take off. I don't care if you digg it or not, just listen to it and then see what you think about the Big 3 vs financial companies) http://digg.com/business_finance/What_Hotwings_Thi ... - JQP123, on 12/02/2008, -2/+10The bailout is a FRAUD.
The only way the big 3 can make any significant, substantial changes going forward is to declare bankruptcy and petition the court to set aside their debt and their labor contracts. When their debt is set aside, the taxpayer is left holding the bag. They know this and Congress knows this so why *loan* them money now?
Any politiican who votes for a bailout deserves to lose his seat. - swicepick, on 12/02/2008, -2/+10First of all, the CEOs of the Big Three just announced that they would take a pay cut to $1 per year. Though I think that is good that they agreed to that, I think it is a bit naive to say that outrageous CEO salaries are the cause of the problems facing the domestic auto industry. It's really a bit of a perfect storm, created both by the market, as well as the companies themselves by short-sighted business strategies.
The unfortunate part of the story is that I think they are finally putting themselves on the right track, but now the financial meltdown that has taken place has essentially cramped down their restructuring efforts. Frankly, I'm glad that congress forced them to submit a long-term plan before giving them any bailout money. Let's just hope it works out like the Chrysler bailout did in the 80's, where the loaned money was paid out ahead of schedule. (Yes, I believe it is ridiculous that it is time to do another bailout for the auto industry, but it is the right thing to protect the economy.) - Godlike, on 12/02/2008, -0/+7If there's enough for CEO's to have private jets there is enough to pay the union workers.
I also readily admit that nobody screwing bolts on should be making 80,000 dollars a year. The unions have to compromise, too or there won't be automakers to pay them. - boneit, on 12/02/2008, -1/+7Their problem is that the have a history of fighting congress, e.g. fuel economy, and now they come begging to those they fought, arriving in their private jets (oops). They also pulled the $25bn from their arses, because they couldn't explain how they came up with the figure, no matter how many times they returned to it. And the smarmy attitude of the GM CEO expecting to walk out with a check there and then probably pissed off a few people too. "We're big, give us money". I don't think so.
If they need to raise capital they can sell some of their brands and pull in cash from the profitable markets they admitted to having. If they need cash flow, that can do a ridiculous promotion selling vehicles extremely cheap for a few weeks. They've already made them and they're going nowhere. Who wants to buy something that expensive when the company might go ***** up and credit isn't as easy to obtain? Anyone, if the price is right!
They also need to address their unionized handcuffs. If they can't complete with other companies building vehicles in this country, we might as well nationalize them instead of artificially keeping them alive.
I'd rather see them spend the money on infrastructure for the country, than keep these companies afloat for the sake of it. Which congress said they can start immediately instead of giving these companies what they asked for. Other countries have lost their auto industries and the country keeps going, why should these be treated any differently? Are we going to give IBM and Microsoft fat checks when their business takes a dive? Where will they draw the line? I fear this is a slippery slope as more and more companies feel the pinch. Clearly it's a shame when companies fold, but that's life all over. People will still be making vehicles, the badge on the front is just a badge. - inigomntoya, on 12/02/2008, -0/+6We'll call it the People's Car! All profits go the the government and all losses go to the people. This will work! it hasn't been tried before!
amiright?
/s - jlm408, on 12/02/2008, -2/+8They need their current salaries so that they can continue to pay for the upkeep of those private jets that they used to fly out to Congress in order to plea for taxpayer bailout.
- MtheoryX, on 12/02/2008, -0/+6I disagree. I realize how deep it runs. And I still say let them fail.
Also, see how I, too, can offer a comment with absolutely no substance, and still be equally as right in my mind, as you seem to be in yours? - inigomntoya, on 12/02/2008, -1/+7OK - so now the bailout task force is focusing on...
*Throws the dice*
The auto industry! - slanted, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5Fine by me too.
- wo0dy, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5Chapter 11 and start over.
- ChayesFSS, on 12/02/2008, -1/+6If you can't keep your house in order...
- Xpiatio, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5As much as I do not believe that we should be bailing out companies, (What ever happened to the bail out when the dot com bubble burst?) I think that there should be a stipulation that if we give them the money, they must come out with more fuel economic vehicles. It is the greed that is stopping any advancement in technology within the car industry. Why come out with more efficient vehicles if they can reap in the money through gas, tires and selling of inefficient cars.
- inactive, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5Well, you don't plug a leaky bucket by throwing more water into it.
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5I don't agree with it at all. The big 3 has seen this problem coming for more than a decade and stayed on that path nonetheless.
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5They MAKE vs. they COST, what they COST has to be included into the product price.
I agree with your figure based on my research, they make 28 per hour excluding very generous benefits, for manual labor. That is ridiculous. - inactive, on 12/02/2008, -1/+6I'm sure those CEO's first order of business is to figure out how to make a product consumers actually want and not how much they should get for bonuses this year...
- inactive, on 12/02/2008, -1/+6Jobs can be safe. foreign players from India, China or Russia can pick up those assets and then get the worker under a more fair contract. Might hit American pride but it might save jobs.
- Godlike, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5can of soda = 5 cents
the 'average' person had more buying power back then
fiat money ftl - stuffradio, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5Yeah, I'm conservative and I also think the big 3 should burn. I'm not sure why people so readily thinks a whole group of people think the same way just because their father thinks one way, or because some extreme right people did this other thing in this one city... it's pretty sad that that's how people think these days.
- inactive, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5Yeah, just like the heads of AIG and Citigroup, they should be fired too before they get tens of billions of taxpayer dollars with no strings attached...oh shi--
Too late. - Demener, on 12/02/2008, -0/+5Free market at work.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 244 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is