Alexander Hamilton was an ardent federalist. But even so the idea of business moving offshore would have terrified him and angered him. Their doing so weaken our economy and if the economy weakens so goes national security.
Obama successfully saved jobs at GM with a loan restructuring and bankruptcy reorganization that saved the company and preserved tens of thousands of jobs, over the criticism of RepubliCON obstructionists (remember Mitt R-money’s infamous op-ed titled “Let General Motors go bankrupt”).
Trump PROMISED to keep jobs at GM, but after he gave them billions in tax breaks that they used, NOT FOR JOBS but for stock buybacks to increase the wealth of an ever-narrowing circle of elites, Trump then imposed punitive tariffs that were structured in a way that does not hurt the Chinese or other foreign economies, but kills jobs here in the United States, including 14,000 at GM — the opposite of what he promised.
More proof that it’s not ever going to be 1958 ever again. This nation has bled manufacturing jobs for decades, a consequence of high income density compared to the rest of the planet. Corporations, like governments, take the low bidder (in this case, on labor rates). If the Mexican minimum wage was the same as Australia’s you’d never see a single manufacturing job go south….
Well… When you come with a plan to make it illegal to work on you own car; what do you expect. Then your bill does not pass. So you make your cars so complicated as to make it impossible to work on. Like the Chevy Cruze.
When you concentrate all the country’s wealth into the hands of the top 1%, you’ll have 1% looking to buy another yacht. It’s great for the yachting industry…
The stockholders tell the CEO’s “Gimme more money for my investment.” The CEO’s cut corners and move production to countries with low wages and then say “Gimme a big bonus and a golden parachute.” The company board says “Gimme tax breaks, less regulation and cut benefit laws, and cut jobs and close plants.” Congress says “Gimme a yuge slush fund contribution.” The citizens say “Please God, gimme a break.”
When the CEO’s and stockholders forget the concerns of the bulk of those connected (stakeholders) in making their business decisions, you get the situation chmsam describes above. It really is a matter of ethics and basic morality in the final analysis.
Don’t get me wrong, but as a result of technical progress in automation, layoffs are inevitable in mature industries where the market is not expanding fast anymore. GM was cutting already 100.000s of jobs (already 10.000 in 2009, or 2000 in 2016, but much more earlier, e.g. more than 70.000 between 1992 and 1994 alone). The actual number of 1600 is making up 1% of the workforce, much less than normal yearly fluctuation. The planned 14.000 is a guite considerable number, though. But if all the people having worked for the auto manufacturers 40 years ago would still work there (resp. their quantity), who would work now in the hitech, computer, and service industries? And where are the millions of cabmen, grooms, shoemakers, smiths and farmers from olden times? Of course, this doesn’t comfort somebody having lost their job. But it is necessary to understand that such change is inevitable and even necessary. GM can not be forced to keep their workforce at the level of the 1970s. I think, what the US lacks, is a social welfare system better adressing the problems caused by such necessary changes to avoid existence-threatening situations for the workers based on disruptive decisions of their employers.
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] over 5 years ago
Alexander Hamilton was an ardent federalist. But even so the idea of business moving offshore would have terrified him and angered him. Their doing so weaken our economy and if the economy weakens so goes national security.
DD Wiz Premium Member over 5 years ago
Obama successfully saved jobs at GM with a loan restructuring and bankruptcy reorganization that saved the company and preserved tens of thousands of jobs, over the criticism of RepubliCON obstructionists (remember Mitt R-money’s infamous op-ed titled “Let General Motors go bankrupt”).
Trump PROMISED to keep jobs at GM, but after he gave them billions in tax breaks that they used, NOT FOR JOBS but for stock buybacks to increase the wealth of an ever-narrowing circle of elites, Trump then imposed punitive tariffs that were structured in a way that does not hurt the Chinese or other foreign economies, but kills jobs here in the United States, including 14,000 at GM — the opposite of what he promised.
Obama = results
Trump = talk
Spun_G over 5 years ago
More proof that it’s not ever going to be 1958 ever again. This nation has bled manufacturing jobs for decades, a consequence of high income density compared to the rest of the planet. Corporations, like governments, take the low bidder (in this case, on labor rates). If the Mexican minimum wage was the same as Australia’s you’d never see a single manufacturing job go south….
Radish the wordsmith over 5 years ago
But at least the rich people got their tax breaks.
magicwalnut Premium Member over 5 years ago
Hooray for the rich! /s
wolfhoundblues1 over 5 years ago
Well… When you come with a plan to make it illegal to work on you own car; what do you expect. Then your bill does not pass. So you make your cars so complicated as to make it impossible to work on. Like the Chevy Cruze.
feverjr Premium Member over 5 years ago
When you concentrate all the country’s wealth into the hands of the top 1%, you’ll have 1% looking to buy another yacht. It’s great for the yachting industry…
Display over 5 years ago
The stockholders tell the CEO’s “Gimme more money for my investment.” The CEO’s cut corners and move production to countries with low wages and then say “Gimme a big bonus and a golden parachute.” The company board says “Gimme tax breaks, less regulation and cut benefit laws, and cut jobs and close plants.” Congress says “Gimme a yuge slush fund contribution.” The citizens say “Please God, gimme a break.”
martens over 5 years ago
When the CEO’s and stockholders forget the concerns of the bulk of those connected (stakeholders) in making their business decisions, you get the situation chmsam describes above. It really is a matter of ethics and basic morality in the final analysis.
Bookworm over 5 years ago
“What’s good for General Motors is good for the USA.” Charles Erwin Wilson. Right? Of course, Right.
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] over 5 years ago
1960:I.B.M. computer says the best thing to do is to train new people. I don’t think it is done much in the 30 years.
Spock over 5 years ago
Don’t get me wrong, but as a result of technical progress in automation, layoffs are inevitable in mature industries where the market is not expanding fast anymore. GM was cutting already 100.000s of jobs (already 10.000 in 2009, or 2000 in 2016, but much more earlier, e.g. more than 70.000 between 1992 and 1994 alone). The actual number of 1600 is making up 1% of the workforce, much less than normal yearly fluctuation. The planned 14.000 is a guite considerable number, though. But if all the people having worked for the auto manufacturers 40 years ago would still work there (resp. their quantity), who would work now in the hitech, computer, and service industries? And where are the millions of cabmen, grooms, shoemakers, smiths and farmers from olden times? Of course, this doesn’t comfort somebody having lost their job. But it is necessary to understand that such change is inevitable and even necessary. GM can not be forced to keep their workforce at the level of the 1970s. I think, what the US lacks, is a social welfare system better adressing the problems caused by such necessary changes to avoid existence-threatening situations for the workers based on disruptive decisions of their employers.