Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Hurst who wrote (618056)	7/2/2011 11:43:54 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583406

>> Same union at Ford, and same contracts but Mulally and CFO Gilmour were ahead of the 2008 financial crunch. You and I aren't going to settle this left/right disagreement here. I really have a problem with wasting time on your posts, however, I'll make yet another exception in your case. Your argument is specious at best given two of the three American automakers were the ones that failed. Remember, Ford lost 12.7 Billion in 2006; that they happened to have enough cash in the bank (and assets they could borrow against) to weather the storm while Chrysler and GM didn't, well that's good for them, but hardly shows that unions weren't at fault for breaking the companies. On the contrary, at that time Japanese cars had an average cost to build of nearly $3,000 less than an American built car. Of that, $1,420 per vehicle was retired worker health care cost. In addition, insane contract terms -- like giving workers the ENTIRE WEEK OF JULY 4 OFF, FULLY PAID (WHO IN HELL GETS THAT?) -- and stupid work line rules, added costs of $630 per vehicle that Toyota doesn't have to deal with. The cost of paying union employees FOR NOT WORKING when plants are closed down? $350/vehicle. In a normal, non-union business, if an assembly plant is idled because of a lack of orders, there are some costs, but not much. With UAW plants, NOT SO. To idle a GM assembly plant for a week costs nearly $8 million in union benefits -- in effect, about $1,500 for each of the vehicles that WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE had they stayed open. None of this even takes into account the quality issues which result in the inability to sell the piles of crap they were turning out as a result poor work rules. (Some of this undoubtedly can be blamed on management; not all of the lousy work rules are the fault of unions, and I don't suggest they are). Finally, the $3,000 per vehicle difference in cost for American automakers was the difference in making it and not. While Ford was losing nearly $1,500 per vehicle, Nissan was MAKING $1,800 apiece. Trying to claim that unions weren't at fault on the basis of Ford making while GM didn't is just utterly stupid. Ford just happened to be able to hold out longer than GM could because their asset base was bigger. They still posted their biggest loss ever in '06, and and continued to lose money thereafter.

To: Don Hurst who wrote (618056)	7/2/2011 12:22:55 PM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1583406

this guy just breaks law after law, does he think he is above the Law ? Obama Raffle Video Not Legal, Election Law Experts Say Friday, July 01, 2011 By Matt Cover obama and dali lama The Dali Lama and President Barack Obama in the Map Room of the White House. (White House photo.) (CNSNews.com) – A video of President Barack Obama filmed in the White House and included in a fundraising e-mail sent to supporters is not legal, two election law experts told CNSNews.com. The video was included in an e-mail sent to supporters of President Obama promoting a fundraising drive that offered participants a chance to win an invitation to dinner with Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. The video was filmed in the White House and, because it is intended to raise funds, constitutes a violation of federal law, according to two election law experts contacted by CNSNews.com. “I think this is a violation [of the law],” Cleta Mitchell, a member of the American Bar Association’s election law committee, told CNSNews.com. “It is a specific prohibition on solicitation [of money] by the president, the vice president, or any member of Congress on any federal property,” she said. obama and map room President Barack Obama preparing for a radio address in the Map Room of the White House. (White House photo.) According to federal law (Title 18, subsection 607 U.S.C.), “It shall be unlawful for an individual who is an officer or employee of the Federal Government, including the President, Vice President, and Members of Congress, to solicit or receive a donation of money or other thing of value in connection with a Federal, State, or local election, while in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties.” The White House contends that the video is legal, noting that the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) issued a memo in 1979 explaining that the president can solicit funds in the White House, so long as he does so in the residential portion of the mansion, not in a room used for official business. cnsnews.com