Hi y'all - "First, ‘the Govt.’ (We the people.) can be in any business ‘we’ want to be in. ‘We’ set it up that way. There is no ‘should’ about it. And, ‘we’ in fact have little to no control over spending. At least not directly. Also, there are no real ‘strings’ when it comes to such things. If studied long enough, this will become obvious. And, as contradictory as it looks, you now seem to think it is OK for ‘us’ to turn a profit! Strange! "
Indeed I have only been in this country for 21 years but I have studied the effect of Govt. ovwnership of business in the Eastern Bloc, and I've seen the results. If Govt. becomes involved in a business it necessarily sets up a huge bureaucracy in its own image to run it. I've seen these grow from nothing - layer upon layer. It drains the economy slowly and exhaustively. I've never seen one function efficiently in the long term. We can't say what strings are attached to the Auto deal yet as it has not been completed, but so far it looks more promising, from a taxpayer point of view, than the Bank debacle. During the recent collapse of many banks the FDIC (and I don't normally praise the Govt.) has done a fine job of ensuring stability and guaranteeing accounts. Note the difference in the UK where no FDIC existed and we were treated to videos of Building Society customers lined up and screaming for their money. Eventually the UK Govt. were forced to step in and offer their version of the FDIC. On Dec 10, 11:30 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > “Hi y'all - I can't agree with you on this. Neither the Govt. nor the > whole citizenry of this country should be in the car business. As the > Govt. controls the spending I have no objections to loans in the > interest of the country with strings to ensure repayment, and > hopefully, a profit. The Govt. does a good job of backing up our bank > accounts FDIC (so far.) > I do agree about the banks. They should have been offered the same > deal.” – clog > > Clog, I know you weren’t born here nor are you old enough to know what > all has transpired when it comes to such issues here in the US. So, I > don’t blame you much for being what appears to be quite naïve. > > First, ‘the Govt.’ (We the people.) can be in any business ‘we’ want > to be in. ‘We’ set it up that way. There is no ‘should’ about it. > And, ‘we’ in fact have little to no control over spending. At least > not directly. Also, there are no real ‘strings’ when it comes to such > things. If studied long enough, this will become obvious. And, as > contradictory as it looks, you now seem to think it is OK for ‘us’ to > turn a profit! Strange! > Anyway, no, the Govt. (We the people.) do not do a good job of backing > up our bank accounts. Think “Savings and Loan Crisis’. The thing that > McCain was deeply involved in among others. > And, what is ‘common knowledge’ (about the banks) is in fact not the > reality. IF one reads the 108 pages or so of the first bank bailout, > what it said was that the banks should just take the money and buy > other banks! It said nothing about helping people and businesses who > couldn’t get loans. Look it up. Most of what is presented on corporate > TV is half truths at best. At worst, much of it makes the old USSR’s > Pravda look like a comic book! > > On Dec 10, 7:25 am, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi y'all - I can't agree with you on this. Neither the Govt. nor the > > whole citizenry of this country should be in the car business. As the > > Govt. controls the spending I have no objections to loans in the > > interest of the country with strings to ensure repayment, and > > hopefully, a profit. The Govt. does a good job of backing up our bank > > accounts FDIC (so far.) > > I do agree about the banks. They should have been offered the same > > deal. > > > On Dec 9, 10:49 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Again, the notion of nationalization isn't being mentioned. I would be > > > for that. At least that way, 'we the people' would get some sort of > > > return on our investment. By now, we should own almost every US bank. > > > > On Dec 9, 2:30 pm, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > <<$70/hr. with no reference to benefits. I >> > > > > > That includes benefits to *retirees*. > > > > > According to my limited accounting, the benefits that retirees receive > > > > should be expensed as they occurred and not attached to future > > > > employees. I'd like to see this topic explored in greater detail. > > > > > On Dec 9, 2:39 pm, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi y'all - I've just done some further research on payscales and I've > > > > > come up with no solid answer. The UAW (I'd expect them to be biased) > > > > > mention $30/hr plus benefits (what do the benefits amount to?) Faux > > > > > news and the like mention (I'd expect them to be biased too) $70/hr. > > > > > with no reference to benefits. I suppose the truth is somewhere in > > > > > between In any event, these rates seem rather high to a poor old Mid > > > > > Southerner for manual labor. Why don't they locate their factories > > > > > (not overseas) where labor is cheaper? I don't know what the pay rates > > > > > are at the Tennessee Saturn Plant - they seem to be struggling too. > > > > > I'm sure a plant located in North Mississippi would be more > > > > > economical, but would the drug free, semi skilled, reliable labor > > > > > force be available? > > > > > > On Dec 9, 11:26 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > The true average is represented below - it is not $70 per hour, per > > > > > > se. SPIN DOCTORS are at it again. > > > > > > > *"That $70 per hour figure is arrived at by dividing total labour > > > > > > costs by > > > > > > the total number of workers, then by average hours worked. It also > > > > > > happens > > > > > > to include pension obligations for GM, which is comprised of current > > > > > > payments accrued by past workers. So, while the average worker > > > > > > probably > > > > > > makes closer to **$30 per > > > > > > hour*<http://www.uaw.org/contracts/07/gm/gm02.php> > > > > > > *, the total wages paid out include payments to retirees who have > > > > > > chosen to > > > > > > defer payment of their wages."* > > > > > > > I personally don't have as much pity as I maybe should for the > > > > > > businesses > > > > > > that are drowning in overstock. It is hard to imagine Mom & Pop > > > > > > businesses > > > > > > with dangerous overstock - because it is not easy for them to get > > > > > > the > > > > > > capitol to get the inventory in the first place. No, I think it is > > > > > > the > > > > > > retail giant/corpses with excess inventory they cannot sell, with > > > > > > bloated > > > > > > expectations, that have also been charging too damn much for little > > > > > > (think > > > > > > inflation, right?). > > > > > > > Good Mom & Pops, like I work for, plan ahead, and use stable > > > > > > business > > > > > > practices to keep afloat. Most businesses flop in the first year > > > > > > due to > > > > > > crappy planning anyway..is it our responsability as a consumer to > > > > > > rescue > > > > > > them or the Corpses? Homoconsumerensis to the rescue? It's their > > > > > > job to do > > > > > > thier homework just like each individual needs to guard their credit > > > > > > score. I know about hard luck, it happens, but haven't we grown far > > > > > > too > > > > > > careless in our Hummer driving, McDonald's grubbing, plastic > > > > > > burning, > > > > > > reality tv watching, FUNK? As you can tell I am feeling miserly this > > > > > > morning... > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi y'all - welcome to capitalism. The good times are great, but > > > > > > > business is cyclical and must be prepared for. He who builds his > > > > > > > business out of unsupported credit will fail. The Govt. Bailout > > > > > > > of the > > > > > > > car industry is supposed to be a loan with strings - nothing wrong > > > > > > > with that, as long as the taxpayer benefits?? In the interest of > > > > > > > preserving some manufacturing base in this country, it would seem > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > be justified. Having said that, the strings must be tight - why > > > > > > > do GM > > > > > > > etc. workers average $70/hr when Toyota doing the same job in the > > > > > > > same > > > > > > > country average $40? That would be one of the strings if I was > > > > > > > making > > > > > > > the loan. > > > > > > > As for the retail sector - it is complex and unwieldy. I'm not > > > > > > > sure > > > > > > > what sort of Bailout the author is suggesting - perhaps low > > > > > > > interest > > > > > > > loans to qualified businesses. This brings us back to unsupported > > > > > > > credit. I'm afraid that those who cannot survive the present > > > > > > > downturn > > > > > > > are doomed, and if they have no backup plan, perhaps that is > > > > > > > warranted. The only alternatives are anarchism or communism? > > > > > > > > On Dec 9, 10:14 am, Morpheal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > WASHINGTON MUST BAILOUT RETAIL SECTOR > > > > > > > > > Keep in mind that retail needs an urgent bailout. They are not > > > > > > > > as big > > > > > > > > as GM, Ford and > > > > > > > > Chrysler. Most are far from being large corporations. Many are > > > > > > > > one > > > > > > > > person enterprises, or mom and pop shops, with family helping > > > > > > > > keep the > > > > > > > > business going. They do not have the resources of GM, Chrysler, > > > > > > > > Ford, > > > > > > > > to go to Washington to petition government for help, but they > > > > > > > > need > > > > > > > > help even more than GM, Ford, or Chrysler. > > > > > > > > > Late autumn and early winter sales statistics, (and that > > > > > > > > includes > > > > > > > > actual profit margins after costs are deducted from sales not > > > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > > panic sell off of severely discounted or very low margin items > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > create volume of sales without profits), are what keep the > > > > > > > > retail > > > > > > > > sector alive during the dismal after Boxing Day mid to late > > > > > > > > winter > > > > > > > > traditional slump. Total dollars of sales are not a reliable or > > > > > > > > meaningful statistic. You can sell billions of dollars in > > > > > > > > goods, but > > > > > > > > lose your shirt in the process, if margins are nonexistent on > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > bottom line. Bottom line visibility is not one of the immediate > > > > > > > > economic indicator that it should be. Consumer spend, in total > > > > > > > > dollars, is what politicians tend to measure the economy on. > > > > > > > > That is, > > > > > > > > in this crisis, very misleading. Unfortunately the bottom line > > > > > > > > numbers > > > > > > > > do not tend to get published into public view, in the month > > > > > > > > that they > > > > > > > > occur. Often they are severely delayed and usually fairly > > > > > > > > obscure > > > > > > > > numbers. > > > > > > > > > Without solid revenues in November and December, coming into > > > > > > > > January > > > > > > > > means total disaster, with no hope for many to meet their fiscal > > > > > > > > obligations to get through the traditional slump. Those stuck > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > excess inventory, and having to sell off at below cost, simply > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > reduce debt, are in even worse shape to weather through the > > > > > > > > latter > > > > > > > > part of January and most of February and March. This is even > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > true of the mom and pop shop, the small entrepreneur, the > > > > > > > > independent > > > > > > > > business, or loosely affiliated franchisee or owner in a group > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > independent merchants. Many a franchise, though providing > > > > > > > > services to > > > > > > > > franchisees (that they must pay for regardless of their current > > > > > > > > revenue situation), is largely an independent entity relying > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
