GM Closes 4 Suv and Truck Plants

I'm not, and I agree with him. GM is laying off hundreds of workers, and
the CEO gets a bonus?

I actually think instead of Japanese management, GM should consider
getting some Chinese managers.

When they phuque up, either they hang themselves...
or the government doesit for them.


GM should have anticipated this a long time ago. They *never* learn! This
has happened at least 5 times in the past 30 years, GM gets stuck making
vehicles nobody wants and the Japanese surge ahead.

But this time, even Toyota is getting stuck with supplies of Sequoias.

 

It's a stressful job. I guess you've never been in charge of anything, so
it's no wonder you don't understand, dimwit.

The "shareholders" are the real idiots here. Next to you, of course.

 

How much he makes in comparison to other executives (especially
foreigners) is completely irrelevant. He was paid an amount that was
decided upon by the board of directors, who are supposed to be the direct
representatives of the shareholders. Blame the board, and the
shareholders, for paying him too much, if you must blame someone.

Jesus, did none of you ever study economics and the free enterprise
system? This isn't a commune trying to spread the wealth amongst everyone
equally. This is a fucking American business, whose goals are (and should
be) to make the maximum profit possible for the company. How that company
decides to compensate it's directors/executives and other workers is
decided by the company. Rick Wagoner didn't set his own salary, the
goddam board of directors (and shareholders) did. Don't blame the dude
for accepting what they offer to pay him.

We've got enough socialism in the country already. Just look at the
circus which is the Democrat party if you want to see that.

 

He sounds more like a capitalist shareholder.

Why did GM do so well under the reign of "Engine" Charlie Wilson, who
was a socialist/lib/Democrat?

 

Don't know, don't care. I wasn't referring to the political leanings of
the current GM CEO, or how he ran the company.

I was talking about the troll's attempt at making it seem "unfair" that
the CEO makes more money than Joe-assembly-line-worker.

 

An excellent point.

 

I agree, but the executives are workers, and GMs paying higher than the
industry rate for executives.

 

I'm a capitalist, but overcompensating executives that don't perform and
expecting the company to survive is stupidity that will kill the company.
Do you need proof? Also, do you have to defame the Lord to make your point?

 

A law against it? Hell no. I think the tax tables need to be
adjusted. And when he tries to pass on this tremendous wealth to
whatever progeny might share his genetic makeup, that transfer should
be heavily taxed. If the company then wants to make a major
contribution (albeit indirect) to the US Treasury, they can knock
themselves out.

And unions are not run for the benefit of the company.

Tell that to the GM shareholders. I bet not 0.1% of them make as much
as Wagoner.

 

"supposed to" being the operative statement here.

Blame the Board (aka his golf buddies), sure. The stockholders' only
real vote is to sell. Considering that GM stock is worth no more now
than it was in 1960, I think a lot of them have already voted.

I agree, that should be the goal. I am telling you that you are
naive. The purpose of the company is to make the top executives as
rich as possible.

And when he sits on the board of their company, don't blame them for
accepting what Rick Wagoner gives them.

Democracy is so untidy. Let's just make Bush dictator like he said he
wanted.

 

I usually stay away from Usenet politics, but here I must weigh in.

If you have a problem with the current state of corporate governance, I
have two terms for you to look up and study:
the Williams Act of 1968, and
the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1993.

There are other bad laws also to blame, but these two are the chief modern
troublemakers.

The problem here is not the machinations of ordinary individuals in their
ordinary course of life, but those of ordinary individuals able to exercise
state power over those who lack it.

Often the cure for a political disease is far worse than the disease that
prompted the cure.

 

isn't that the decision of the company BOD(and the shareholders in a round-
about way) rather than the government?

What business is it of the government? (in a Capitalist society...)

 

WHERE do you see any authority under the US Constitution for government to
make such decisions as to what a private company's execs are paid?

 

Ah,so everybody DOESNT get treated equally under the law.
If you work smarter,earn more,you get taxed at higher rates as punishment.

DOUBLE taxation? The guy's income was taxed once,and he should be able to
pass on his private property(assets) to his progeny without being taxed
on the same income again.

You must be a Socialist-Communist;everything is property of the State.
Or simply jealous of those who do better than you,and want government to
strip them of their earnings and life's accumulations.

But it is STILL *THEIR* decision,not the US Government.
Not in a non-Communist society.

 

It appears YOU are the one who wants to assign "dictator" powers to the
government.
YOU want the government to dictate to companies how much they can pay for
certain jobs.

 

Tell me,did you once post by the name "krztalizer"?

 

I am still trying to figure out what any of this guy's posts have to do
with Honda products....

 

Why should the shareholders be pissed? They voted to hire the CEO,
and they approved his contract. If they are upset, they only have
themselves to blame.

 

So? If the decisions of the board are bad for the company, the
company goes out of business. Tough shit. Someone else will take
their place, and likely be better run. The shareholders have noone
but themselves to blame. And the workers will just have to find new
jobs. It happens to most of us at some point...

And which lord are you talking about? Personally, I don't answer to
one, so I have none to defame... Not that I care about your personal
religious choices, but don't assume that everyone you are talking to
shares them...

 

let's say, joe got a job cleaning urinals and phucked up..

why should joe's boss be pissed? she decided to hire joe and she
approved joe's contract. if joe doesn't wipe the urinals clean, the
boss only has herself to blame.

conclusion: joe is a communist!