On Dec 12, 10:47*am, Boater wrote:
wrote:
On Dec 12, 10:21 am, Boater wrote:
wrote:
On Dec 12, 8:50 am, wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:47:56 -0500, HK wrote:
Of course not. But the Senate Republicans in true GOP scorched earth
policy, figure if they aren't in charge, they might as well go into
destroyer mode.
I won't argue with that. *If you were trying to destroy this country, you
couldn't do a better job than the Republicans have done over the last 8
years.
Geeze, if you go back and look at all the numbers, we were doing fine
until Pelosi and Reid took over and created the most corrupt congress
in history.. Gas was low, Unemployment was low, housing was great,
stocks were great, only in the last two years, everything **** the
bed... go look for yourself...
Are you really as stupid as that post makes you appear?

Not really, go google the numbers, I got an A in math but then again I
didn't graduate from Yale *Listen Harry, if it was good for the
Union of Democrats you would tell me water isn't wet so your input
here in such conversation is pretty much useless..

Your attempt to tie the current recession/depression to Pelosi and Reid
are all the evidence one needs of your utter naivete and stupidity. You
have been told a million times here and elsewhere I am sure that while
the Dems have a majority in the current Congress, they do not have a
working majority, and therefore rarely have the ability to push through
any legislation to which the Republicans object. Further, the idiot
known as Bush sets policy, at least for the next five or so weeks.

Your adherence to the GOP bull**** is pretty laughable considering your
circumstances.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Top reciepients of Fannie and Freddie money, in order:
Chris Dodd
Barak Obama
John Kerry

wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:07:44 -0500, John wrote:

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 07:38:33 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 07:18:11 -0500, John wrote:

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:55:32 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

Two hydrogen atoms are floating in space, one atom turns to the other
and says, “I think I just lost an Electron!!”

To which the other atom says, “Are you sure?”

And the first atom responds, “I’m POSITIVE!!!”
Well!

There won't be any competing with you today. That was one hell of a start.
I've decided that competition is a tool of our Corporate Masters to
keep the working class from rebelling en mass.

Thus, I will no longer compete showing solidarity with the
proletariat.

And Yale graduates.
Speaking of competition, it looks like the UAW won last night. They get to
keep their high salaries. They won't have to accept the drivel given to the
employees at Toyota and Honda.


Pretty wild misrepresentation of the facts. Salaries are not the major
difference between Toyota and UAW workers. They make similar hourly
wages. The differences are that Toyota benefits are not as extensive,
and Toyota has far fewer (by an order of magnitude) retirees. That's
right - the big difference in "labor costs" will mostly even out on
it's own, as more Toyota employees retire.

Universal healthcare would eliminate most of the difference
immediately, and put to bed, the big three's idiotic story about not
being able to compete. Toyota seems to be competing by selling heir
cars for HIGHER prices than the American "competition". Why are the
big three forced to sell their cars for LESS while claiming to be
saddled with higher costs? If their cars were really any good, they
would at least sell for similar prices.

The retired workers already have universal health care, it is called
Medicare.

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:19:04 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


Speaking of competition, it looks like the UAW won last night. They get
to keep their high salaries. They won't have to accept the drivel given
to the employees at Toyota and Honda.

Of course, that's only for the next few weeks.

They must be Yale graduates also.
Well duh...

That's the dumbest F'n decision, I think I've seen in my life.
McConnell must like Russian Roulette. After already giving $350
billion to Wall Street to keep the markets afloat, he's unwilling to
spend $14 billion. That's one month's spending in Iraq.
If I'm not mistaken, there will be a bloodbath on Wall Street today.
Republicans sure know how to instill confidence in the economy.

One of the first steps any company needs to insure it's long term
viability is that it's cost structure is competitive. Since labor is
about 10% of the cost of the car, it makes sense for labor to agree to a
competitive salary to keep their jobs for the long term. It looks to me
that the UAW and the Senate are not playing Russian Roulette, it is more
like "Chicken" in a auto, to see who will swerve.



The southern Republicans in the Senate who turned down the deal did so
to protect the future sales of the foreign-owned car manufacturers on
their turf. It was patently obvious that they feel the failure of the
American automakers will increase marketshare for the plants in their
states.

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:45:04 -0500, Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:


One of the first steps any company needs to insure it's long term
viability is that it's cost structure is competitive. Since labor is
about 10% of the cost of the car, it makes sense for labor to agree to a
competitive salary to keep their jobs for the long term. It looks to me
that the UAW and the Senate are not playing Russian Roulette, it is more
like "Chicken" in a auto, to see who will swerve.

Of course labor has to be part of any long term solution, but it's quite
interesting that Corker wanted to concentrate on labor's 10% and forget
about the other 90%. Regardless, when this economy is in such perilous
condition, letting GM and Chrysler go out of business, is quite counter-
productive. As I have said before, under normal circumstances, if the
economy was healthy, I would agree to let GM take it's chances with
bankruptcy.

As it stands, both GM and Chrysler, have hired bankruptcy lawyers. I
don't think the next several years are going to be pretty.

On Dec 12, 10:54*am, Boater wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:





wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:19:04 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

Speaking of competition, it looks like the UAW won last night. They get
to keep their high salaries. They won't have to accept the drivel given
to the employees at Toyota and Honda.

Of course, that's only for the next few weeks.

They must be Yale graduates also.
Well duh...

That's the dumbest F'n decision, I think I've seen in my life. *
McConnell must like Russian Roulette. *After already giving $350
billion to Wall Street to keep the markets afloat, he's unwilling to
spend $14 billion. *That's one month's spending in Iraq.
If I'm not mistaken, there will be a bloodbath on Wall Street today. *
Republicans sure know how to instill confidence in the economy.

One of the first steps any company needs to insure it's long term
viability is that it's cost structure is competitive. *Since labor is
about 10% of the cost of the car, it makes sense for labor to agree to a
competitive salary to keep their jobs for the long term. *It looks to me
that the UAW and the Senate are not playing Russian Roulette, it is more
like "Chicken" in a auto, to see who will swerve.

The southern Republicans in the Senate who turned down the deal did so
to protect the future sales of the foreign-owned car manufacturers on
their turf. It was patently obvious that they feel the failure of the
American automakers will increase marketshare for the plants in their
states.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I don't suppose that given the chance, the northern Democrats in the
Senate would try to protect their interests, no would they?

wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:45:04 -0500, Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:


One of the first steps any company needs to insure it's long term
viability is that it's cost structure is competitive. Since labor is
about 10% of the cost of the car, it makes sense for labor to agree to a
competitive salary to keep their jobs for the long term. It looks to me
that the UAW and the Senate are not playing Russian Roulette, it is more
like "Chicken" in a auto, to see who will swerve.

Of course labor has to be part of any long term solution, but it's quite
interesting that Corker wanted to concentrate on labor's 10% and forget
about the other 90%. Regardless, when this economy is in such perilous
condition, letting GM and Chrysler go out of business, is quite counter-
productive. As I have said before, under normal circumstances, if the
economy was healthy, I would agree to let GM take it's chances with
bankruptcy.

As it stands, both GM and Chrysler, have hired bankruptcy lawyers. I
don't think the next several years are going to be pretty.


The Republicans wanted the UAW to engage in substantial pay package
givebacks in either 2009 or 2010, and apparently factored in the costs s
of the total absorbed payroll, too, which includes the retirees. There's
really not much difference between the hourly rates of the current
represented employees and the exploited employees of ForeignAutoMakersSouth.

I wonder if the Repubs want the unionized workers to give up health care
benefits, too?

On Dec 12, 11:16*am, wrote:
On Dec 12, 10:54*am, Boater wrote:





Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:19:04 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

Speaking of competition, it looks like the UAW won last night. They get
to keep their high salaries. They won't have to accept the drivel given
to the employees at Toyota and Honda.

Of course, that's only for the next few weeks.

They must be Yale graduates also.
Well duh...

That's the dumbest F'n decision, I think I've seen in my life. *
McConnell must like Russian Roulette. *After already giving $350
billion to Wall Street to keep the markets afloat, he's unwilling to
spend $14 billion. *That's one month's spending in Iraq.
If I'm not mistaken, there will be a bloodbath on Wall Street today. *
Republicans sure know how to instill confidence in the economy.

One of the first steps any company needs to insure it's long term
viability is that it's cost structure is competitive. *Since labor is
about 10% of the cost of the car, it makes sense for labor to agree to a
competitive salary to keep their jobs for the long term. *It looks to me
that the UAW and the Senate are not playing Russian Roulette, it is more
like "Chicken" in a auto, to see who will swerve.

The southern Republicans in the Senate who turned down the deal did so
to protect the future sales of the foreign-owned car manufacturers on
their turf. It was patently obvious that they feel the failure of the
American automakers will increase marketshare for the plants in their
states.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I don't suppose that given the chance, the northern Democrats in the
Senate would try to protect their interests, no would they?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Only the ones North of the Equator! They do well at lockstep,
reguardless of the concequences. Remember they bragging about being
"the do nothing congress". Funny, they didn't run on that last time
around..

On Dec 12, 11:24*am, Boater wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:45:04 -0500, Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:

One of the first steps any company needs to insure it's long term
viability is that it's cost structure is competitive. *Since labor is
about 10% of the cost of the car, it makes sense for labor to agree to a
competitive salary to keep their jobs for the long term. *It looks to me
that the UAW and the Senate are not playing Russian Roulette, it is more
like "Chicken" in a auto, to see who will swerve.

Of course labor has to be part of any long term solution, but it's quite
interesting that Corker wanted to concentrate on labor's 10% and forget
about the other 90%. *Regardless, when this economy is in such perilous
condition, letting GM and Chrysler go out of business, is quite counter-
productive. *As I have said before, under normal circumstances, if the
economy was healthy, I would agree to let GM take it's chances with
bankruptcy.

As it stands, both GM and Chrysler, have hired Man, bankruptcy lawyers. I
don't think the next several years are going to be pretty.

The Republicans wanted the UAW to engage in substantial pay package
givebacks in either 2009 or 2010, and apparently factored in the costs s
of the total absorbed payroll, too, which includes the retirees. There's
really not much difference between the hourly rates of the current
represented employees and the exploited employees of ForeignAutoMakersSouth.

I wonder if the Repubs want the unionized workers to give up health care
benefits, too?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Man, did you get a transcript of the union rep's news conference,
cause you are chiming exactly the same sour grapes bull**** as he
threw up? Word for word... Who'd a thunk? The Unions refused any
reasonable concessions, just crying and fudging the numbers.

wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:19:04 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


Speaking of competition, it looks like the UAW won last night. They get
to keep their high salaries. They won't have to accept the drivel given
to the employees at Toyota and Honda.

Of course, that's only for the next few weeks.

They must be Yale graduates also.
Well duh...

That's the dumbest F'n decision, I think I've seen in my life. McConnell
must like Russian Roulette. After already giving $350 billion to Wall
Street to keep the markets afloat, he's unwilling to spend $14 billion.
That's one month's spending in Iraq.

If I'm not mistaken, there will be a bloodbath on Wall Street today.
Republicans sure know how to instill confidence in the economy.

When I looked this morning the DOW futures were down over 200 points,
On opening the Dow dropped those 200 points and was on its way further
down, possible another 3000 points like the plunge after pelosi's
failure at the end of September.

Thank god that President Bush is still with us and stepped in. He
averted the blood bath by making the auto bailout part of the original
wall street bailout. Whether he has stop the 3000 point plunge remains
to be seen, but at least he trying to do what is right for the county.

When will we get rid of the "do nothing" congress that flooded the
market with worthless paper by not restricting the clinton plan of by
giving any one who was breathing a loan.

Believe it or not there are some people who do not make enough money to
afford a million dollar home.

HK wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:41:58 -0500, HK wrote:


It's good this is happening now because when the economy tanks further,
we'll be able to remind the public that the Republicans sank the
domestically owned auto industry here and put millions out of work.

Harry, depressions aren't good for anybody.

Of course not. But the Senate Republicans in true GOP scorched earth
policy, figure if they aren't in charge, they might as well go into
destroyer mode.

Just a reminder the Republicans have not controlled congress for the
last two years from about the pont the DOW peaked at 14000 points.