What could have saved 30,000 jobs?
Thread Starter
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 21,573
Likes: 0
What could have saved 30,000 jobs?
http://boortz.com/nuze/200601/01242006.html
i wonder if the UAW will finally be happy when there's no ford nor GM to go to. maybe then they'll start suing honda and toyota for hiring non-union labor. what a fucking farce...
WHAT COULD HAVE SAVED 30,000 JOBS?
The news from Ford Motor Company's CEO hit hard across the country yesterday. Ford is going to cut from 25,000 to 30,000 jobs and will close 14 Ford plants over the next six years. The plant in Atlanta is one of those that will close. This is going to hurt a lot of people. That's sad. It's also sad that this could have been prevented.
Blame can be spread, though not equally shared, to Ford management, the workers and the federal government. No doubt management made mistakes in design, innovation and marketing. The workers made mistakes because they forgot who was actually providing them with paychecks, and the federal government takes a huge share of the blame for our punishing corporate tax code.
Let's talk unions for a moment. I saw some clips on TV this morning from plant workers who were understandably upset over losing their jobs. One woman was saying that Ford gave her everything she had. It wasn't a gift, she worked for it. Another woman was saying that McDonalds just can't absorb all these workers. How's that for ignorance? She actually thinks that those are the choices? Build cars for Ford or flip burgers? There's a woman whose knowledge of the job market is practically nonexistent. The fact is, however, that the United Auto Workers have played a huge role in making Ford and other American auto manufacturers non-competitive in the worldwide automobile market.
Have you been around a major union auto plant lately? Look at the bumper stickers on the cars. You'll see many more bumper stickers that say "UAW" than you will that say "Ford." Watch the workers as they arrive or leave on a chilly day. They're wearing UAW jackets, not Ford or Chevy jackets. Many of these people have far more loyalty to their union than they do to the company that is actually writing their paychecks. The financial burden that has been on these automakers by inflated union contracts has been crippling. Many years ago the UAW developed a game plan for bleeding the automakers dry. They would pick one of the big-three, either Ford, Chrysler or General Motors. They would then hit the target automaker with a demand for huge pay and benefit increases. That automaker would balk, and the UAW would go out on strike. Finally, after huge loses, the automaker would cave. A new contract would be signed, and the unions would then force that contract on the other automakers. Over the years these contracts created a burden on the automakers that could not be sustained. In some cases these automakers can't even lay off employees without having to continue their paychecks years into the future.
Now .. the government. Do not for one moment discount the effect our onerous tax code has on companies like Ford The United States has perhaps the most crushing tax burden of any major player in the industrialized world. Our politicians, eager for money to spend on vote-buying programs, long ago figured out that they could hide the tax burden of the American working man and woman behind the illusion of corporate taxes. These politicians would play on the economic ignorance of the American people -- an ignorance fostered by our system of government education -- by pretending to shift a good portion of the tax burden from the people to those evil, greedy corporations. Some Americans are waking up to this ruse. More Americans have now learned that these corporations don't actually pay taxes, they merely collect the taxes from their customers, their shareholders and their employees and pass them off to the government.
Several years ago Chrysler Corporation merged with Daimler Benz. After the merger was announced the bean counters and lawyers started to work out the details. One detail would be just where the new corporation would be headquartered. A study was conducted comparing the tax consequences of being a U.S. corporation vs. being a German corporation. Germany won. The new corporation would save a huge amount of tax money being headquartered in Germany vs. the U.S., so it became Daimler-Chrysler.
Now ... what could have saved these jobs and plants? Better management? Sure! It also would have helped if the UAW members had actually remembered that they worked for Ford and not for their union. It also would have helped a great deal if Ford had been more competitive in the global market .. a competitive edge that our tax system would not allow.
This, of course, brings us to the FairTax. What if Ford Motor company could operate in the United States with no tax component whatsoever on capital or labor? What if every company operating in this country could operate free of tax consequences? It's not difficult to figure out what would happen. America would become the world's number one tax haven for businesses. A "To Let" sign would soon be posted on the Daimler-Chrysler headquarters in Germany, and 30,000 Ford employees wouldn't be wondering about their future.
Sadly, though, political power is more important than economic health. You've heard me say it before, but it's a central point you need to remember: The FairTax would be the biggest transfer of power from government to the people since our Republic was formed. Politicians won't go willingly to the FairTax .. they'll have to be pushed. They have to be threatened with a loss of their jobs. That's the only way they'll listen, and you're the only one who can deliver the message.
The news from Ford Motor Company's CEO hit hard across the country yesterday. Ford is going to cut from 25,000 to 30,000 jobs and will close 14 Ford plants over the next six years. The plant in Atlanta is one of those that will close. This is going to hurt a lot of people. That's sad. It's also sad that this could have been prevented.
Blame can be spread, though not equally shared, to Ford management, the workers and the federal government. No doubt management made mistakes in design, innovation and marketing. The workers made mistakes because they forgot who was actually providing them with paychecks, and the federal government takes a huge share of the blame for our punishing corporate tax code.
Let's talk unions for a moment. I saw some clips on TV this morning from plant workers who were understandably upset over losing their jobs. One woman was saying that Ford gave her everything she had. It wasn't a gift, she worked for it. Another woman was saying that McDonalds just can't absorb all these workers. How's that for ignorance? She actually thinks that those are the choices? Build cars for Ford or flip burgers? There's a woman whose knowledge of the job market is practically nonexistent. The fact is, however, that the United Auto Workers have played a huge role in making Ford and other American auto manufacturers non-competitive in the worldwide automobile market.
Have you been around a major union auto plant lately? Look at the bumper stickers on the cars. You'll see many more bumper stickers that say "UAW" than you will that say "Ford." Watch the workers as they arrive or leave on a chilly day. They're wearing UAW jackets, not Ford or Chevy jackets. Many of these people have far more loyalty to their union than they do to the company that is actually writing their paychecks. The financial burden that has been on these automakers by inflated union contracts has been crippling. Many years ago the UAW developed a game plan for bleeding the automakers dry. They would pick one of the big-three, either Ford, Chrysler or General Motors. They would then hit the target automaker with a demand for huge pay and benefit increases. That automaker would balk, and the UAW would go out on strike. Finally, after huge loses, the automaker would cave. A new contract would be signed, and the unions would then force that contract on the other automakers. Over the years these contracts created a burden on the automakers that could not be sustained. In some cases these automakers can't even lay off employees without having to continue their paychecks years into the future.
Now .. the government. Do not for one moment discount the effect our onerous tax code has on companies like Ford The United States has perhaps the most crushing tax burden of any major player in the industrialized world. Our politicians, eager for money to spend on vote-buying programs, long ago figured out that they could hide the tax burden of the American working man and woman behind the illusion of corporate taxes. These politicians would play on the economic ignorance of the American people -- an ignorance fostered by our system of government education -- by pretending to shift a good portion of the tax burden from the people to those evil, greedy corporations. Some Americans are waking up to this ruse. More Americans have now learned that these corporations don't actually pay taxes, they merely collect the taxes from their customers, their shareholders and their employees and pass them off to the government.
Several years ago Chrysler Corporation merged with Daimler Benz. After the merger was announced the bean counters and lawyers started to work out the details. One detail would be just where the new corporation would be headquartered. A study was conducted comparing the tax consequences of being a U.S. corporation vs. being a German corporation. Germany won. The new corporation would save a huge amount of tax money being headquartered in Germany vs. the U.S., so it became Daimler-Chrysler.
Now ... what could have saved these jobs and plants? Better management? Sure! It also would have helped if the UAW members had actually remembered that they worked for Ford and not for their union. It also would have helped a great deal if Ford had been more competitive in the global market .. a competitive edge that our tax system would not allow.
This, of course, brings us to the FairTax. What if Ford Motor company could operate in the United States with no tax component whatsoever on capital or labor? What if every company operating in this country could operate free of tax consequences? It's not difficult to figure out what would happen. America would become the world's number one tax haven for businesses. A "To Let" sign would soon be posted on the Daimler-Chrysler headquarters in Germany, and 30,000 Ford employees wouldn't be wondering about their future.
Sadly, though, political power is more important than economic health. You've heard me say it before, but it's a central point you need to remember: The FairTax would be the biggest transfer of power from government to the people since our Republic was formed. Politicians won't go willingly to the FairTax .. they'll have to be pushed. They have to be threatened with a loss of their jobs. That's the only way they'll listen, and you're the only one who can deliver the message.
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 682
Likes: 0
Well written, but a few problems.
First let me say, I agree with the union part. Unions can create good (ie, end Carnegie-type business), but can also create an equal amount of bad (demanding higher wages when the profits are not there).
However, the trickle-down tax idea will not work without controls. For example, my dad recently worked at Hoover in Canton, Ohio. Eventually he got layed off, along with hundreds of other employees. This would be understandable, if it wasn't for the fact that the president was getting paid millions a year plus benefits (stock options, etc). If you give money to a corporation, they will give it right back to themselves. The idea of a 'big bad corporation' didn't appear out of nowhere. In many cases, it is right on the dot.
Plus, with the absence of corporate tax, the burden would be shifted to the people. If you want this, expect a huge increase in taxes.
A few easy fixes that would only help all:
1. Create more dependable cars. People want cars that last, so they buy foreign.
2. Create cars that get better MPG. Once again, foreign cars.
3. Create cars styled toward the younger generation. Young people want small, dependable, and stylish. Perfect example? Honda Civic. The perfect college car. Everyone has one. Brand loyalty. When they get a 'real' car, they will remember the great Civic they owned.
4. Hire managers who know what they are doing...and pay them less.
Taxes really have little to do with it. American companies will stay in America if there is a market. As soon as the quality becomes equal or less than foreign goods, people will start buying the cheaper foreign.
Honestly? I cringe when I see 'Made In America'. It will usually be a piece of shit.
First let me say, I agree with the union part. Unions can create good (ie, end Carnegie-type business), but can also create an equal amount of bad (demanding higher wages when the profits are not there).
However, the trickle-down tax idea will not work without controls. For example, my dad recently worked at Hoover in Canton, Ohio. Eventually he got layed off, along with hundreds of other employees. This would be understandable, if it wasn't for the fact that the president was getting paid millions a year plus benefits (stock options, etc). If you give money to a corporation, they will give it right back to themselves. The idea of a 'big bad corporation' didn't appear out of nowhere. In many cases, it is right on the dot.
Plus, with the absence of corporate tax, the burden would be shifted to the people. If you want this, expect a huge increase in taxes.
A few easy fixes that would only help all:
1. Create more dependable cars. People want cars that last, so they buy foreign.
2. Create cars that get better MPG. Once again, foreign cars.
3. Create cars styled toward the younger generation. Young people want small, dependable, and stylish. Perfect example? Honda Civic. The perfect college car. Everyone has one. Brand loyalty. When they get a 'real' car, they will remember the great Civic they owned.
4. Hire managers who know what they are doing...and pay them less.
Taxes really have little to do with it. American companies will stay in America if there is a market. As soon as the quality becomes equal or less than foreign goods, people will start buying the cheaper foreign.
Honestly? I cringe when I see 'Made In America'. It will usually be a piece of shit.
#CustomUserTitle
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 63,855
Likes: 1
From: glass case of emotion
Everything ties back to union woes. US based Toyota and Honda plants are extremely efficient. Achieving maximum efficiency is never possible, but with less waste comes less overhead, which increases profit.
To re-tool and re-lay entire plants isn't cheap, but it pays off in the long run. Ford recognized this issue years ago, but never had the available funds to attempt the Japanese style. Due to the UAW bleeding them dry, Ford was only able to brute force car manufacturing , hoping sales would carry the load. If profits were available, Ford needed to:
- Invest in new car development. They were extremely late comers to the Hybrid models.
- Invest in current car refinement. The cars they build are plagued with the same recalls from previous years. This raises warranty repair costs, which feeds the massive overhead and eats away at thin margins.
- Invest in proper plant management. This would have reduced operation costs.
- Properly brand the image though the Bridgestone crisis of 2001/2002.
Instead of looking to fix the company internally, Ford aquired company after company trying to find something that works. At this current pace, the entire Ford lineup will be nothing more than rebadged Mazdas.
To re-tool and re-lay entire plants isn't cheap, but it pays off in the long run. Ford recognized this issue years ago, but never had the available funds to attempt the Japanese style. Due to the UAW bleeding them dry, Ford was only able to brute force car manufacturing , hoping sales would carry the load. If profits were available, Ford needed to:
- Invest in new car development. They were extremely late comers to the Hybrid models.
- Invest in current car refinement. The cars they build are plagued with the same recalls from previous years. This raises warranty repair costs, which feeds the massive overhead and eats away at thin margins.
- Invest in proper plant management. This would have reduced operation costs.
- Properly brand the image though the Bridgestone crisis of 2001/2002.
Instead of looking to fix the company internally, Ford aquired company after company trying to find something that works. At this current pace, the entire Ford lineup will be nothing more than rebadged Mazdas.
Thread Starter
Moderator
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 21,573
Likes: 0
yeah, i don't think the fairtax is the end all solution. e3nine lays it out exactly as i see it.
unfortunately, i don't see any of that ever being solved, because the UAW will never allow it. that's what i wanted to get across with this article, that the UAW has effectively destroyed the US auto industry. it's pathetic. it really upsets me when i think about.
unfortunately, i don't see any of that ever being solved, because the UAW will never allow it. that's what i wanted to get across with this article, that the UAW has effectively destroyed the US auto industry. it's pathetic. it really upsets me when i think about.
Midwest Acurati
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,395
Likes: 0
From: Middle America
Well, you could pay the sticker price for a Ford or GM product and help subsidize the local high-cost producers! 
h:
The right question to ask is "what the hell took them this long to cut so few jobs at an organization that is obviously consuming great amounts of capital at an excessive rate?"
The $0.64 question is whether or not Ford will stock Lincoln with real luxury cars worth keeping the brand in business. Mark Fields' marketing BS gave me a headache. Mercury and Lincoln are to be niche brands, but they want to chase the same customers everything else wants. What will Ford bring to the table?
GM is already moving forward on getting Pontiac and Buick back on track, and maybe even Saturn. Chrysler slimmed down and appeals to a certain niche of the market [gaudy large chrome machines], which works for them.
Ford's 'American Innovation' advertising ... doesn't seem to have a lot behind it.
h: The right question to ask is "what the hell took them this long to cut so few jobs at an organization that is obviously consuming great amounts of capital at an excessive rate?"
The $0.64 question is whether or not Ford will stock Lincoln with real luxury cars worth keeping the brand in business. Mark Fields' marketing BS gave me a headache. Mercury and Lincoln are to be niche brands, but they want to chase the same customers everything else wants. What will Ford bring to the table?
GM is already moving forward on getting Pontiac and Buick back on track, and maybe even Saturn. Chrysler slimmed down and appeals to a certain niche of the market [gaudy large chrome machines], which works for them.
Ford's 'American Innovation' advertising ... doesn't seem to have a lot behind it.
Moderator
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,776
Likes: 0
What a pile of crap. While I agree with many of the points laid out in the article, the spin and bias is just distasteful.
Unions are "less neccessary" now only because employers are treating their employees better in order to prevent unionization.
Originally Posted by DVPGSR
Unions were once a good thing to help workers get fair and decent wages. Now the unions are only hurting the employees...but they don't care because they still get dues and membership fees.
Unions are "less neccessary" now only because employers are treating their employees better in order to prevent unionization.