quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel Go and run along now.

Sorry random internet guy! Me and the other kids will go run along while you and adults continue this discussion on TranceAddict.com.

___________________
think stasis | latest mix

quote:

Originally posted by Stasis Sorry random internet guy! Me and the other kids will go run along while you and adults continue this discussion on TranceAddict.com.

don't forget that in our discussion, we actually read the articles that we post as references

ITT: Arrogant idiots.

No one is right. Everyone is wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Stasis Whoa, what's with all the anti-union nonsense? Anyone who thinks autoworkers in the big 3 are overpaid compared to their non-unionized counterparts in Honda/Toyota/Nissan factories is just ill-informed: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/b...onhardt.html?em Secondly, how can you be so short-sighted? Unions have outlived their utility?? I can't believe what I'm hearing. Look dudes, we don't have to hypothesize about what a union-free market looks like. We literally lived through one in the late 1800s and early 1900s. You get robber barons, company towns and the inevitable race for the bottom of the pay scale. That sort of unrestrained capitalism was as much as failure as socialism.

did you happen to notice the little graph on the left hand side of the page your link brings up? the one that shows the total worker pay of US vs Japanese automakers? the one that shows the US automakers pay $16 an hour in legacy costs vs. $3 an hour for the Japanese. Thats the UAW for you right there!

and like I said before, the labor market in 2008 != to the labor market in the late 1800s

1. Yes, of course I read the article.

2. The additional cost of Big-3 labor is overwhelmingly due to legacy costs (which was the point of the article and thus my point, ugh, but whatever, I'm getting the impression you guys looked at the numbers in the first few paragraphs, saw that one was bigger and were like, "Case closed!", but I'm getting off track). Anyway, the legacy costs just a function of GM, Chrysler and Ford existing for decades longer that any of the foreign factories. Now, if you have problems with pensions generally, or think that we should have universal health care or whatever else to eliminate that sort of variable in the big-3's labor costs, then that's just fine, but for now, it is what it is.

The article flat out rejects the notion that the actual workers at the big-3 earn significantly more than a worker at a foreign factory.

___________________
think stasis | latest mix

quote:

Originally posted by XaNaX did you happen to notice the little graph on the left hand side of the page your link brings up? the one that shows the total worker pay of US vs Japanese automakers? the one that shows the US automakers pay $16 an hour in legacy costs vs. $3 an hour for the Japanese. Thats the UAW for you right there! and like I said before, the labor market in 2008 != to the labor market in the late 1800s

I said something like this in my post. The costs that Ford has over the Japs is $22/hr per person more. When they have a work force of something like 100k between the US and Canada, it is US$2.2m per person per hour worked.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by bas Dual exhaust tips on dual exhaust = QUAD EXHAUST = 300 gain in horsepower. Duh

quote:

Originally posted by bas Undies with a dickhole aren't good for guys. Your balls can get caught in them. That's why I prefer to go over the gate instead of through the fence.

quote:

Originally posted by Stasis 1. Yes, of course I read the article. 2. The additional cost of Big-3 labor is overwhelmingly due to legacy costs (which was the point of the article and thus my point, ugh, but whatever, I'm getting the impression you guys looked at the numbers in the first few paragraphs, saw that one was bigger and were like, "Case closed!", but I'm getting off track). Anyway, the legacy costs just a function of GM, Chrysler and Ford existing for decades longer that any of the foreign factories. Now, if you have problems with pensions generally, or think that we should have universal health care or whatever else to eliminate that sort of variable in the big-3's labor costs, then that's just fine, but for now, it is what it is. The article flat out rejects the notion that the actual workers at the big-3 earn significantly more than a worker at a foreign factory.

In the long run they do make more! Between pension, health benefits, amount worked, etc, they are making a lot more!

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by bas Dual exhaust tips on dual exhaust = QUAD EXHAUST = 300 gain in horsepower. Duh

quote:

Originally posted by bas Undies with a dickhole aren't good for guys. Your balls can get caught in them. That's why I prefer to go over the gate instead of through the fence.

quote:

Originally posted by Stasis 1. Yes, of course I read the article. 2. The additional cost of Big-3 labor is overwhelmingly due to legacy costs (which was the point of the article and thus my point, ugh, but whatever, I'm getting the impression you guys looked at the numbers in the first few paragraphs, saw that one was bigger and were like, "Case closed!", but I'm getting off track). Anyway, the legacy costs just a function of GM, Chrysler and Ford existing for decades longer that any of the foreign factories. Now, if you have problems with pensions generally, or think that we should have universal health care or whatever else to eliminate that sort of variable in the big-3's labor costs, then that's just fine, but for now, it is what it is. The article flat out rejects the notion that the actual workers at the big-3 earn significantly more than a worker at a foreign factory.

are you sure that you are reading the same article?

ummm re read 10 times and come back

___________________
Le Freak - Set Archive

Le Freak - A.D.D & Chimichurri [Techno/Tech House/Music to put on burritos.]*click bitches*

fuck no, i dont see toyota asking for money, fucking dumb ass GM niggas.

quote:

Originally posted by Stasis The article flat out rejects the notion that the actual workers at the big-3 earn significantly more than a worker at a foreign factory.

how is $22 an hour more not significantly more?

quote:

Originally posted by Stasis The article flat out rejects the notion that the actual workers at the big-3 earn significantly more than a worker at a foreign factory.

um, no it doesn't.

quote:

The first category is simply cash payments, which is what many people imagine when they hear the word “compensation.” It includes wages, overtime and vacation pay, and comes to about $40 an hour. (The numbers vary a bit by company and year. That’s why $73 is sometimes $70 or $77.) The second category is fringe benefits, like health insurance and pensions. These benefits have real value, even if they don’t show up on a weekly paycheck. At the Big Three, the benefits amount to $15 an hour or so. Add the two together, and you get the true hourly compensation of Detroit’s unionized work force: roughly $55 an hour. It’s a little more than twice as much as the typical American worker makes, benefits included. The more relevant comparison, though, is probably to Honda’s or Toyota’s (nonunionized) workers. They make in the neighborhood of $45 an hour, and most of the gap stems from their less generous benefits.

$10 an hour for 40 hours = 400
400 a week for 48 weeks = $19,200
$19,200 times 100,000 employees (although GM has 300,000 worldwide employees) = 1.92 billion dollars.

that's pretty significant.

quote:

Originally posted by bas I thought this thread said "This is why unicorns are gay..."

I read exactly the same thing when I got up this morning and saw this thread I actually just went back a moment ago and checked to see if Jay had edited the title to 'unions'

___________________