> > Orn, it wasn't moi that said the consumer was fickle...I'm the one that > thinks the Corpse provides the lure and we buy it:) Also, my Dad has been > telling me gas pricing should be attributed to our side of the water and not > OPEC because they are just doing what we allow them to in a sense. Correct > me if I mis-understood, but I think we are on the same page on that.
Really appreciate this thread:) > On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 11:40 AM, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > "…fickle tastes of the consumer…" – CB > > Uhh, I'm not so sure the responsibility goes to the consumer. Perhaps, > IF we had truth in advertising return to the airwaves and other media > things would be different. Clearly, other countries are doing OK. > Regulation has helped in places like some of the EU. Downtown London > requires small cars or there is a very large 'tax' for not doing so. > > And, yes, the price of gas can be one factor. This, in the long run > will take care of itself in that we will, and are, running out of it. > Also, since 'W' took office, since it is now a commodity and bought > and sold on the open markets, you have been able to see the result of > this bit of avarice. Gas was about $1.47 when 'W' took office. Gas was > deregulated and tied to the global markets. There is no more gas > available in the world. There have been no more processing plants > built. Y2K didn't make much difference. So, exactly why has gas > dropped from well over $4/gal., to under $2 again in just a few weeks? > It is because over half of what 'we' were paying for it was the > 'profits' made by investors and had nothing to do with the product > itself. This is something we NEVER hear on corporate media today. > > I have been using public transit for years. When I lived in NYC, I > only used the trains, busses and on occasion a taxi. Here in Portland, > I am luck in that we have a great public transport system too. I like > the time to read and not have to fight traffic, taking the train down > town. The entire center of town has free busses, trains and street > cars. http://www.trimet.org/ > > As a senior, I only pay 95 cents for a trip and if I purchased a > monthly pass, I could ride anywhere any time for a month for $23. Car > insurance is more than this! > Again, public transit, a type of return to the old interurban days is > long overdue. And, IF GM dies, I will say that the dinosaurs did too… > and rightly so. > > End of current rant. > > > On Nov 23, 9:27 am, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Question is: should we upset the current inport/export fracas and > > force American Producers to sell the technology they possess?" – CB > > > > I'll start out with an analysis of the assumptions included within > > your initial question. > > ASSUMPTIONS; > > 1. 'We' CAN upset [whatever this means] the current inport/export > > situation > > 2. The 'situation' is based on inport/export. > > 3. The situation is a 'fracas'. > > 4. 'We' CAN force 'American Producers' to sell anything. > > 5. Automobile producers are 'American'. > > 6. 'We' SHOULD, IF we could force 'em. > > 7. There exists technology not currently in use. > > 8. Such technology might be purchased if available in the US. > > > > First, I don't think that 'we' can do much when it comes to > > corporations other than purchase or sell stock. At least, not as the > > laws are currently structured. > > IF by 'we' you mean the US legislature, clearly 'they' are bought and > > paid for. Otherwise, for both the auto industry and banking industry > > there would be a clear demand for a reasonable return on the > > investment of at minimum $1,000,000,000,000.00. There has been none. I > > sat next to a banker at a conference the other day who was in hospital > > when the bailout was presented. This gave him the time and opportunity > > to read the 107 page document. He said that it contained exactly what > > the bankers did…the opportunity to buy/sell other banks and it did not > > contain what the news agencies were saying it did. I haven't read it > > so, will suggest others do so if interested. Also, for both banking > > and the auto industry, I never heard the 'N' word come up. Did you? In > > lieu of a contractual guarantee of a reasonable return on the > > investment in both industries, clearly to nationalize them was a real > > option at the time. No one even discussed this. It has happened all > > over the world, even here in the US over time. And, this was a good > > opportunity for it with a possible preferable result….nada! > > Secondly, it hasn't been an inport/export situation for decades. Most > > foreign automakers have been invited into the US and have plants all > > over the place. The notion of tariffs started to die after the civil > > war. Until that time, the entire revenue of the US government was from > > tariffs. Until WWI the revenue was about 2/3s tariffs. From WWI until > > WWII it was about 1/3rd. Today it has been reduced to almost nothing. > > As globalization and multinationals have replaced countries, tariffs > > have been seen, by the corporations, as nothing but impediments to > > profit and something to abhor. So much for 'We the people…'! > > Regardless, most "foreign" cars on the road here today were built > > mostly in the US or Canada. And, due to clean air standards, we keep > > affordable cars out, like India's Tata, a $2,000 car with 50mph or > > better. > > I see no 'fracas' at all. I see an outmoded industry (GM etc.) that > > has for decades ignored the long term views of business that other > > countries and corporations have been taking. They focused on the 'now'… > > profit today and merely ignored the future. Of course, some of this is > > caused by US code when it comes to the legal and fiduciary > > responsibility of corporations. Their allegiance is only to the stock > > holders (and CEOs) and care not a whit for anyone else. > > So, UNLESS we nationalize the corporations, 'we' will not be able to > > force them to do anything. The day for consumer influence died long > > ago. This is one reason Ralph Nader decided to switch to politics > > rather than consumer advocacy. This is in his own words. There was a > > point in time when lobbyists were deregulated to the point where they > > held (hold) more power than 'We the people.', do. > > A lot would have to change to reverse this and after giving so much > > money away without any guarantee at all of anything in return it is > > too late to use what leverage was available to congress a while back. > > The US had successful cars that ran on steam more than a century ago. > > There used to be an 'interurban' network of electric trains going into > > and out of all major cities that was clean and successful. That is > > until GM and the oil companies started to influence local governments > > into purchasing busses and the result today is obvious. 'We' had the > > electric car that was loved and the 'owners' of it shredded them ALL! > > Oh, yes, and as to 'ownership' of technology, that is another bugbear. > > Public money (tax money) is used for the majority of research and > > advancements in the US, mostly within higher institutions of learning. > > Today, there is no return on that investment either. Corporations take > > the advances and claim their rights to ownership of them. Those who > > originally funded the research, you and me, are not given any sort of > > rebate nor 'deal' of any kind when we then have to purchase that which > > we already paid to develop. Clearly capitalism has never worked for > > the people. We learned this about communism a while back now we have > > to learn it about that which owns our entire media. A difficult > > proposition at best. > > So, for your first sentence, I find little hope. > > And, I don't understand the notion of reverse engineering in this > > context at all. US companies have known how to do it all along. They > > have opted for the profit margin rather than anything else over the > > last few decades, at least since consumers lost their voices. Yes, we > > can buy/not buy cars. Yes, some people buy Hummers. Yes, most cars > > purchased today in the US are NOT GM cars. Yes, there is a reason for > > this and the reason will NEVER be solved by giving GM public money. > > If you haven't figured it out yet, I'm rather radical and adamant > > about this. > > As to the rest of your rhetorical questions, trade ins, donations, > > recycles etc., I think that our land fills will merely continue to > > overflow. When it comes to throwing things away, there IS NO "AWAY"! > > > > "if they cut the pork"???? Even Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio is for the > > auto industry bail out! And, he is one of the most progressive and > > radical congressmen we have! > > > > As to any 'myth' about imports, in my eyes at least, I don't care > > where a car is made as long as it is practical. This would have to > > include being economical to use and green in result. > > > > Sorry for the rant, but if you think that you have been 'bitching > > about this for …years'….I've been ranting about it for decades! > > > > Oh, and as for the media created 'enemy to US corporations', the US > > workers, when carefully examined, this bit of corporate media > > propaganda is easily dissolved as being the lie it is. The 'American > > auto worker' does not decide which design to produce. They do not set > > the prices. They do not determine how 'green' the car is. They do not > > set emission standards. They no longer are protected by labor laws nor > > have much influence at all when it comes to US laws and congress. Did > > anyone at all see the movie "Roger And Me"? > > Some of Michael's current thought can be found at: > http://www.michaelmoore.com/ > > > > Oh, one small thing when it comes to 'unrealistically high average > > wage'….perhaps, IF one factors in the wage of the CEOs it is > > unrealistic and bloated. Otherwise, even auto workers have a hard time > > being able to afford US cars and the associated maintenance. Please > > don't drink the Kool-Aid when it comes to the US labor/management > > (ownership) battles. The situation was much much worse prior to labor > > unions. The history is readily available to study. > > > > OK, again, sorry for the rant! This is an enormously big button for > > me, clearly!!! > > > > On Nov 23, 7:46 am, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > <<You can rent a ford in Europe that gets 40 mpgs. >> > > > > > American auto companies can't produce small cars profitably in the > > > US. The unrealistically high average wage rate for the American auto > > > worker probably has a lot do with that, but I'm sure there is a lot of > > > fat throughout the companies. Although I would love to blame the > > > general incompetence of the auto companies, they're probably hamstrung > > > by the labor laws.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > -- gnothe se auton --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
