From the NY Times. I thought it was an interesting read. And since "Detroit" is mentioned half-a-dozen times I figured most of y'all wouldn't mind taking a gander at it. :D
http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-bud...ers-capitalism
Printable View
From the NY Times. I thought it was an interesting read. And since "Detroit" is mentioned half-a-dozen times I figured most of y'all wouldn't mind taking a gander at it. :D
http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-bud...ers-capitalism
"The result was a lot of job cutting, not something you might have expected from an administration elected with union support. The unions lost their generous pay for laid-off workers. To be sure, the union health plans were not treated as harshly as some creditors were, but in the end creditors and workers all paid for the sins of past managements."
Well, anyone with an objective mind knows the union has been long overdue to be taken down a few notches, but in the case of Chrysler, it's unfortunately probably too little too late - as even John McCain has recently acknowledged. We can always continue to cross our fingers and hope for the best, but the fact remains that in order to succeed, Chrysler is going to have to convince a lot more people across the entire country - not just local Detroit loyalists - to buy products for which there has been too little demand for too many years - even before it went dependent on taxpayer support merely to survive. Barring that it's going to have to hope for further bailouts at taxpayer expense - not likely to happen after the 2010 elections if the current mood of the country continues.
Contrary to the above, Chrysler was on par with Honda, saleswise, prior to all the bad publicity - the two were going back and forth in the fourth and fifth sales positions until about March of this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by EMG
It had long been known that the industry was overcapacitized at 125% even before the downturn. It wasn't all about the unions by any means.
Those who can't do...teach...those who can't teach, teach automaking [[apparently).
From AllparQuote:
Originally Posted by lilpup
Rattner: Chrysler’s survival depended on dumping Cerberus management
http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php...rus-management
"Steve Rattner, former head of the Obama Administration’s Auto Task Force, said replacing the management team installed by Cerberus Capital Mangement was one of the task force’s objectives in restructuring Chrysler."
We should listen to the communist Rattner?
Rattner has never been a registered Communist Party USA member or donor.
What a well thought-out response. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by ccbatson
Can you provide proof of this that would hold up in a legal setting? Aside from labeling everyone who disagrees with you as being a "Fascist", "Socialist" or "Communist". Yeah, that's what I thought.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azDnT3_FSSE
Ouch Mopardan...but you did ask for it.
You showed a clip of Ron Bloom, not Rattner.Simply saying that free market economic theory is nonsense or that you agree with Mao on one point does not a communist make.
Interesting that many of the self-proclaimed conservatives I know have actually quoted the Mao view of political power & agree with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Devil
And you are quite correct in that it's Ron Bloom, not Steven Rattner. Even so, Rattner was 100% on target in getting rid of the Cerberus garbage.
Afraid of ideas that differ from your own, Cc? That's what I thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by ccbatson
I listen to his words FIRST...then disagreed with him...no fear, no avoidance. Can liberals say the same? Not if you judge the response on my thread referring them to watch a Glen Beck program.