[QUOTE=chirorob;2912130]The you know different minimum wage people than I do. I employee people that spend over half their income on a car payment, because they have to have a Lexus. I have had people tell me there is no way they can pay for treatment because of their low paying jobs, yet have enough money to smoke 2 packs a day.
I have friends that work 60 hours a week, barely pay their mortgage on a little house, have no cash, no savings, but have 2 big TV's a motorcycle, and a SUV.
Believe it or not, a lot of people with low income have horrible spending habits. That's part of the problem of why they can't advance economically. You seem to hate people with education, or upper management types. 3 years ago, I worked 30 hours a week and made about 200K. I sold that business, and after some setbacks, I'll be right back where I was.
Do you hate me because I went to grad school, (on a student loan no less), I don't work a "real job" where I get my hands dirty, and I make good money? So many of your posts show disdain for upper management types, or dislike of people who went to continuing education, as if that is a bad thing.[/QUOTE]
No...not at all. My posts are just a reflection of your disdain for low income people ;):D
Besides, minimum wage people don't buy flat screens...they rent them from Rent-A-Center and then move and keep them.
Last edited by PlumberKhan; 12-15-2008 at 09:13 AM.
[QUOTE=chesapeakejet;2908484]I can't say I can argue on the cars, but I have a 2004 Ford F150 Super Crew that's been a dynamite truck for me! When I bought it in 2004, it rode better, handled nicer and had better quality interior than all of the competition. On the other hand, we also have a 2004 Toyota Sienna which has been a great minivan, much better than the Plymouth Voyager we had before.[/QUOTE]
When I graduated from college in 2001 and got my first job, I bought a fully loaded, brand new Ford Ranger pickup. Almost 8 years and over 100,000 miles later, I still have that sucker, using it move stuff around, tailgaiting at football games and going off-roading on the beach and upstate. My little truck is fantastic. No major problems and its excellent in bad road conditions. I love that truck and plan on driving it until it dies on me.
The American cars may be crap (I honestly don't know) but their trucks are quite good. I have no complaints.
At the same time, I drive a little Honda Civic to and from work. That car lives up to the hype that Japanese cars are exceptionally well-built and reliable.
[QUOTE=PlumberKhan;2909098]Japanese company owners will fall on their own sword. And American business owner will do everything and anything possible to absolve themselves from blame for anything and wrap it around the necks of the people below them, just ask anyone who worked for Enron and is now a WalMart greeter.
The reality is that the average UAW member earns about $28 an hour, about $58,000 a year, according to the impartial Center for Automotive Research. What the news media fail to report is that the UAW made significant concessions over the years, including wage cut-backs at Chrysler and a 2007 contract for all three auto makers that created a “second tier” wage level of $14.50–$16.23 per hour ($30,160–$33,758 per year, still below U.S. average wage of $40.405, according to the Census Bureau), reduced benefits, and a retirement plan now administered by the UAW not the Big Three.
Others who attack organized labor claim that UAW worker earn far more an hour than their counterparts at non-American non-unionized auto manufacturers in the U.S., and that’s a reason why the Big Three are failing. However, the reality is that the average wage at the international automakers is estimated at $24–$25 an hour, less than a $3 differential an hour for UAW first tier workers. Even the most casual observer understands that it costs more to live in the Detroit area than the rural areas where foreign auto makers established their plants.(well, maybe all)[/QUOTE]
I'm sure the picture would look different if benefits were taken into account, not just salary. Salary is only one component of the compensation. And legacy costs are the killer, they make up between $1,000-1,600 of every car GM sells. The Big 3 overpromised and underfunded.
[QUOTE=BrooklynBound;2912524]I'm sure the picture would look different if benefits were taken into account, not just salary. Salary is only one component of the compensation. And legacy costs are the killer, they make up between $1,000-1,600 of every car GM sells. The Big 3 overpromised and underfunded.[/QUOTE]
Of course the "legacy" costs are different. I don't know if you remember or not...but our relationship with Japan used to be a bit more icy...because, I don't know...we fought a war against them. So they haven't been manufacturing cars in the US for as long, because Ford had plants here in the 40's and 50's while we had Japanese people in internment camps.
It's less "over promised" and more quantity. But nice try.
God this isn't a Left-Right Debate... its ****ING ECONOMICS!
This argument is stupid.... if a company does not make enough money to survive they should fail. Its a shame because low-income people will be out of work, but thats economic tough love. If allowed to fail the resources used by the inefficient Big Three would be better allocated in the rest of the economy. By propping up the Big Three other efficient companies may fail because the credit used by the auto industry takes credit away from the rest of the market. Yes the bailout will save the jobs of the auto industry, but at what cost? Other people in sound industries will be put out of work by the lack of credit available especially during this credit crunch. The auto bailout does not save jobs or the auto industry, it merely destroys efficient jobs in favor of inefficient jobs and it holds over the auto industry until they come back to Washington begging for more.
[QUOTE=chirorob;2912774]I was a low income people for years. Going to school, working when I could. Got out of school, worked 2 jobs, 60-70 hours a week for about 4 years to get things going.
But that has nothing to do with cars. I just think if the big 3 made a car people actually want, people would buy them, even if they cost an extra grand or 2[/QUOTE]
It doesn't have anything to do with cars.
I was just playing a role. Lumping all low income people together as lazy welfare queens who spend all their money on flat screens is just a bad as me lumping all upper management people together as a** kissing blowhards who screw over people to make their bucks. I respect educated people who have worked to be business managers...my good friend and boss is a Cornell graduate and my supervisor is a lawyer with a degree from Michigan. They are both sharp as a tack and are very accomplished people. My wife graduated from UPenn with a bach in Anthropology. Me? I'm a dropout plumber turned suit and tie guy who has these people fooled :D