GM Closes 4 Suv and Truck Plants

That is just how YOU -feel-.

More accurately,the purpose of the execs was to make themselves as rich as
possible.
The purpose of the company is to make a profit.

that is NOT what you said earlier;

I said; "YOU want the government to dictate to companies how much they can
pay for certain jobs".
your reply;"I have clearly stated otherwise."

It proves what I said originally; "It appears YOU are the one who wants to
assign "dictator" powers to the government."

What a WEASEL.

A DEFACTO limit.
you set some arbitrary limit;some number you picked out of your ass.
that you FEEL should be the max salary.
That's how socialists/liberals work;they don't work on any factual
basis,they operate on their FEELINGS.

if those countries are so great,why don't you move there?
Instead of trying to drag the US down to their level.

you'd fit in well.

 

I doubt it. Yahoo just turned down a generous take-over offer from
Microsoft.

 

It is interesting that you consider health care useless. I assume
that you have declined any health insurance that is available to you
and intend to wave Medicare coverage.

Blow me. America is not defined by the denial of health care. We are
a democratic country and we can vote it in. At that point, *you* can
leave for whatever godforsaken third world country you choose which
lacks universal healthcare. I would ask you to write us and let us
know how it is, but I doubt you will be able to get Internet service
there.

This is the question I have asked many times and no one can answer.
What is the second richest country that doesn't have universal
healthcare?

 

And the guys running the company are whom?

Correcting a typo, the above should read: "the government should
*not* dictate how much an executive is paid."

Or a sloppy typist. The corrected posting is consist ant with my
previous statement.

Are you ignorant of math? The only limit is the amount of money in
the company's bank account and any line of credit. If they are stupid
enough to pay that much, why shouldn't the government tax it at 80%?
We already have a tax on stupid poor people. It is called the LOTTO.

Aren't all the tax brackets arbitrary? If you want to lobby for a
flat tax, knock yourself out. But don't tell me the government cant
set arbitrary tax brackets.

And speaking of arbitrary, why is there an arbitrary limit (about
$115,000 IIRC) on the maximum amount of salary taxed for Social
Security?

Again, max salary limited only by company coffer.

Beats operating on the basis of what makes your buddies in the oil,
defense, healthcare, etc. industries rich.

But if you like, I have a felling that if the maximum salary available
on the open market were $2 million or so, these brilliant business
minds wouldn't just go home and bake cookies.

 

Jim Yanik said;
GMG said;

Do I get a refund of tax monies of mine that go towards that program?

anytime government gets involved,the costs go wild and there's a huge
amount of waste.Look at the Veterans Hospitals.
Heck,govt couldn't even run the Senate or House cafeterias without losing
huge amounts of money and providing poor service.Dianne Feinstein even
admits it.

and creating such a social program means MORE government employment;another
government bureaucracy wasting money.

Look at what a mess Social Security is.

 

Nice try, but that isn't what I said. Go back and read it again. Now,
what I actually said was that "the universal health care *social program*
was useless and costly. Not the same thing as what you attempted to twist
my words into.

No, I have good health insurance. The difference is that I pay for it.
What a concept!

Why would I want to leave? I have good health care, and I'm not the one
complaining about how fucked up America is. Damn, man, try to stay
focused.

Who cares?

Go spew your socialism to idiots that want to hear it. This is America.

 

LOL... GM is pig-headed. Yahoo is just plain stupid

 

I disagree. Yahoo is both stupid and pig-headed.

 

Oh, I dunno. GM has steadfastly refused to recognize marketplace
realities since the 1970's. I think they far exceed the pig-head
count. Just last year Roger what's-his-name was complaining that
raising the CAFE standards wasn't fair because "the Japanese sell more
small cars than we do" "we sell mostly trucks". Later in the same
speech he complained that "truck sales are down". Apparently
connecting those two dots was impossible for him.

GM has also forced any knowledgeable business person who has joined
their board off of it within a couple years simply by refusing to
listen to anything new. They've also been doing that for decades.

Yahoo has a long way to go to reach that kind of attitude.

 

I would gladly grant that, but you have to refuse any care you can't
pay for. The hospitals have enough uninsured patients who can't pay
for their medical care without have to deal with fools who had
coverage available and turned it down.

Medicare is far from perfect but it does provide coverage for everyone
over 65 - obviously the most expensive demographic for healthcare. It
does so for a mere 2% income tax, a rate that is affordable to
everyone. By contrast, if you are younger than 65 and seek private
health insurance outside of employment, you could be paying $500 or
$1000 a month or more or it might not be available at any price. If
you don't have insurance, you pay triple what the insurance companies
pay. If you have a serious illness or accident, you will be amazed
how fast you can run up a half million dollars in medical treatments.
No wonder more than half of the bankruptcies in the US are caused by
medical bills.

The current private healthcare system in the US is in chaos. It is
completely broken and the only people who are not aware of this are
those who have the good fortune to not have been seriously ill.

 

You think Medicare is useless and costly? That is the closest thing
to a "universal health care social program" we have ever had in this
country. Unless you have quality insurance through an employer, you
probably can't get it or can't afford it even if you are a younger
person in average health. Can you imagine what the premium would be
if you had to seek private health insurance at age 68 if you had been
cured of cancer five years earlier? It would have to be north of
$10,000 a month - with big deductibles, co-pay and minimal drug
coverage.

I know a woman - under 30 - who had never had anything beyond routine
healthcare in her life. She paid a hefty premium for private health
insurance from Blue Cross (she is a full time student). Two months
after she got the insurance she started having excruciating headaches.
After several weeks of hospital admissions, diagnostic tests, etc. it
was determined that she had a potentially dangerous condition which,
in her case, abated on its own. It is possible that it may return or
it may not. Blue Cross cancelled her coverage and is refusing to pay
the $25,000 in medical bills. She had failed to disclose that she had
had a sinus infection years earlier that was treated with antibiotics.
Prior sinus infections are correlated with the condition she suffered.
Now she is 20-something, unemployed, uninsurable and $25,000 in debt.
Do you think she would consider a "universal health care social
program" useless and costly?

Really? Do you pay all of it or, does your employer chip in? Most
healthy people with insurance think they are immune to the crises in
US healthcare. Every year, a small but significant percentage of them
experience a set of circumstances which throws them into healthcare
hell so fast they don't know what happened.

So you wouldn't leave if America adopted a "universal health care
social program" which turned us into "a nice, cozy fucking
communist/socialist bullshit country"?

America is a country where I can say what I want. If you don't like
that, you can move to some third-world fascist hellhole.