What about these gifts to Toyota

News wrote:
>
>
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>> News wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hachiroku ãƒ�ãƒ�ãƒ*ク wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 23:07:26 -0500, News wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> How do you figure?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Toyota is still turning a profit even though sales are down.
>>>>>> GM shows a loss on the auto business when cars are selling. They make
>>>>>> their money on financials.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Toyota keeps people employed even when the plant is shutdown.
>>>>>> All that adds up to taxes coming in.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, and less taxes, less services, less disposable income, less
>>>>> charity, less, less, less, less.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Huh? Why am I even discussing this with you?
>>>>
>>>> In some areas, all there were were minimum wage jobs. Toyota came in
>>>> and
>>>> started paying wages competitive with some Union scale jobs.
>>>>
>>>> So, rather than making $6.75 an hour, Joe Blow is now making $19 an
>>>> hour.
>>>>
>>>> And he doesn't have disposable income?
>>>> Please...explain this one to me. I *REALLY* want to hear how you
>>>> came up
>>>> with this.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I know this is difficult for you, but some other Joe Blow USED TO BE
>>> making $40/hr. Hence the race to the bottom.
>>
>>
>> If Joe Blow is making $40/hr to work on an assembly line, that is a
>> problem. That's $83,200 a year. That's certainly unsustainable when
>> plenty of people more skilled/educated aren't making that much. Hell,
>> I don't make that much, and housing prices etc. here are at least 4x
>> here what they are in Detroit. I didn't make that much as an engineer
>> at a Michigan-based auto industry supplier, either.
>>
>> Surely you are not suggesting that basically anyone with a high school
>> education and a little mechanical aptitude is *entitled* to 80K a year
>> plus benefits? Sure, it'd be sweet if we could do that, but we just
>> can't afford to. So you have a choice - get a living wage, or nothing
>> for the workers.
>>
>> Your "argument" has done nothing but bias me *against* the UAW,
>> assuming your numbers are factual...
>>
>> nate
>>
>
> Your bias is showing....
>
> The "race to the bottom" is a general theme. Applies widely, outside
> the auto industry. You see it everywhere outsourcing is involved. You
> see it when New Jersey subsidizes the move of Wall Street jobs across
> the river.
>
> Howe about YOUR job? Is it immune?

In my job, I am compensated fairly for the work that I do. I don't get
more for installing pieces parts on an assembly line than did the
engineer that designed those parts.

So, yes, in short, I feel that my job is more secure than that of a UAW
worker.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

News wrote:
>
>
> Mark A wrote:
>> "News" > wrote in message
>> t...
>>
>>> I know this is difficult for you, but some other Joe Blow USED TO BE
>>> making $40/hr. Hence the race to the bottom.
>>
>>
>> Maybe that other Joe Blow didn't deserve to be making $40 per hour.
>>
>
> How about you? Whatever you make, there's someone somewhere who will do
> a better job for less. Worried?

Introduce him to my boss. He'd love to get another one of me for less
money, and I'd still have my job.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

"News" > wrote in message
t...
> Or was it poor management, factory design, product development and
> quality?

Poor management? Yes, management acquiesced to outrageous union demands.

Factory Design? The union contracts did not allow them to automate if it
meant reduction in jobs.

Product development and quality? They designed cars that could be assembled
by a union workforce that doesn't give a damn about quality, so they have to
lower their expectations of what a union factory worker can build.

"News" > wrote in message
t...
> How about you? Whatever you make, there's someone somewhere who will do a
> better job for less. Worried?

There are lots of people who "claim" to be doing my job for less, mostly in
India. Those projects have a high failure rate and then they usually have
hire me to fix them.

"JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
...
> In some locales, vacant land is still assessed at hefty rates based on
> "potential", an absurd idea, but still, it happens.

In a few places, yes. But that is usually where the area is already
developed with other similar businesses and there happen to be a few empty
lots. This is not the situation when they decide to build an auto plant in
the South in rural undeveloped land. In fact, they usually have to get a
zoning change just to build there.

"JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
...
> No, it's nothing like that at all.

Yes it is.

> No, it's nothing like that at all.

Yes it is.

Maybe you should take a college level course in logic.

"Mark A" > wrote in message
...
> "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In some locales, vacant land is still assessed at hefty rates based on
>> "potential", an absurd idea, but still, it happens.
>
> In a few places, yes. But that is usually where the area is already
> developed with other similar businesses and there happen to be a few empty
> lots. This is not the situation when they decide to build an auto plant in
> the South in rural undeveloped land. In fact, they usually have to get a
> zoning change just to build there.


In Long Island many years ago, farm land used for cabbage & potatoes was
being assessed at rates meant for McMansion developments and fancy
vineyards. It was driving farmers out of business until the law was changed.

No more generalizations, please.

"Mark A" > wrote in message
...
> "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
> ...
>> No, it's nothing like that at all.
>
> Yes it is.
>
>> No, it's nothing like that at all.
>
> Yes it is.
>
> Maybe you should take a college level course in logic.
>


Are you assuming that I think all public assistance to corporations should
be eliminated?

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 09:31:26 -0500, Tim wrote:

>
> "...We know the direct subsidy is $350 million right off the bat. That’s
> the amount Mississippi will borrow to aid the Toyota plant. State
> officials have yet to disclose the amount of future tax breaks


You said it.

"JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
...
> In Long Island many years ago, farm land used for cabbage & potatoes was
> being assessed at rates meant for McMansion developments and fancy
> vineyards. It was driving farmers out of business until the law was
> changed.
>
> No more generalizations, please.

All observation about economics and politics is generalization. This is
especially true in a Republic like the USA, where we have state and local
governments that can do different things (much to the consternation of the
left who are basically totalitarians).

In the specific cases we are discussing, where companies are building plants
in the Southern part of the USA, I can assure you that things are quite
different than in Long Island NY (where the poor Walmart temporary worker
was crushed to death by the barbarians who live there).

In Mississippi, and other places in the South where manufacturers have
received tax breaks for building plants, the proposed land site yielded
extremely low property taxes before the factories were built there. So
there were no taxes to give away, because the companies would not build
there without the tax break.

But in reality, this whole argument has nothing to do with taxes or
economics, it is about race and regional warfare. Those in the Northern
parts of the US are at war with the South. Northerners believe that those
from the south (white or black) are inferior intellectually, and the
Northerners don't like it when the South starts stealing the manufacturing
base away from them.

All this other stuff about economics is a smokescreen. Do you really think a
Northerner cares whether the South makes a big financial mistake and gives
too many tax breaks and the government there goes bankrupt? No, they would
love that. The Northerners only care when the Southerners start stealing
their jobs. This is no different than if the job is offshore, because people
in the North hate Southerners just as much as they hate Mexican, or Indian,
or Chinese workers.