Looks like the bailout is not being accepted and bankruptcy may be in the horizon.
Some people are saying that we should allow them to go bankrupt. It is a natural step in the process of improving the industry. The stock goes way down and someone buys it up, cuts over head,and does a better job in the future. But if the government takes it all over they are just that much closer to totally controlling the private sector. Is that what we want ? Sure people will loose their jobs. But they will also find new jobs later. I don`t think they are going to allow all those automobile factories to just sit there not being productive for too long. And whoever takes the companies over will need the same people to run the plants. So let them go through a transfer of
power at the top. We will get over it. Eventually.
Some people are saying that we should allow them to go bankrupt. It is a natural step in the process of improving the industry. The stock goes way down and someone buys it up, cuts over head,and does a better job in the future. But if the government takes it all over they are just that much closer to totally controlling the private sector. Is that what we want ? Sure people will loose their jobs. But they will also find new jobs later. I don`t think they are going to allow all those automobile factories to just sit there not being productive for too long. And whoever takes the companies over will need the same people to run the plants. So let them go through a transfer of
power at the top. We will get over it. Eventually.
|
|
|
|
コメント(53)
>>Kamuix99
Capitalism didn't fail. The big 3 did. It's called a correction. It happens in many mismanaged industries or even mismanaged national
economies (USA). It hurts but it needs to happen every once in a
while.
This whole credit crunch is also a correction. "Some" people are
finally learning you can't borrow eternally.
With that said, there will be people that never learn.
The real problem is there are just way too many people on earth.
They should implement a global 1 child only policy every other year for about 10 yrs.
*I realize that sounds crazy and it'll never happen but I see
no other resolution. This is why it angers me when I see all
these poor people having 12 kids running around the store. If
you can't feed and raise your kids, don't have kids.
Capitalism didn't fail. The big 3 did. It's called a correction. It happens in many mismanaged industries or even mismanaged national
economies (USA). It hurts but it needs to happen every once in a
while.
This whole credit crunch is also a correction. "Some" people are
finally learning you can't borrow eternally.
With that said, there will be people that never learn.
The real problem is there are just way too many people on earth.
They should implement a global 1 child only policy every other year for about 10 yrs.
*I realize that sounds crazy and it'll never happen but I see
no other resolution. This is why it angers me when I see all
these poor people having 12 kids running around the store. If
you can't feed and raise your kids, don't have kids.
>まぁアレだ
I think capitalism did fail, as solely capitalism created this crisis at first. People selling things they don't posses on a superfast reacting market. Billions of Dollars got burned for nothing and not only Banks broke down but also car companies and further industries are on the edge of bankruptcy.
It's not something happening every once in a while, rather it's an global crisis. Without any support from governments the economies would have broken down by now - otherwise they wouldn't pump in so massive amounts of money. And even with these sums, nearly all countries now facing an recession. Unemployment is on the rise in a large scale too. Economies which are optimized for just in time production and profit maximization are crippled severely.
The problems aren't overpopulation or too many kids, the problems are unethical and unscrupulous business methods used by a few to the damage of many others. The original ideas for free market meant participation and personal motivation of everyone to create an prospering community where everyone can win. What we have now, is a game of some few with financial power blocking out everyone else, maintaining an unhealthy ratio of turnover increases. It all will come back like a boomerang - those who pay their workers with peanuts, don't have to wonder if their customers break away or that they can't sell their products anymore.
Unlimited capitalism proved to be as more destructive then communism
I think capitalism did fail, as solely capitalism created this crisis at first. People selling things they don't posses on a superfast reacting market. Billions of Dollars got burned for nothing and not only Banks broke down but also car companies and further industries are on the edge of bankruptcy.
It's not something happening every once in a while, rather it's an global crisis. Without any support from governments the economies would have broken down by now - otherwise they wouldn't pump in so massive amounts of money. And even with these sums, nearly all countries now facing an recession. Unemployment is on the rise in a large scale too. Economies which are optimized for just in time production and profit maximization are crippled severely.
The problems aren't overpopulation or too many kids, the problems are unethical and unscrupulous business methods used by a few to the damage of many others. The original ideas for free market meant participation and personal motivation of everyone to create an prospering community where everyone can win. What we have now, is a game of some few with financial power blocking out everyone else, maintaining an unhealthy ratio of turnover increases. It all will come back like a boomerang - those who pay their workers with peanuts, don't have to wonder if their customers break away or that they can't sell their products anymore.
Unlimited capitalism proved to be as more destructive then communism
The governments were created by the people. People make up the governments.
To believe that there is a difference between the government and the pubic is just being naive.
The governments control the infrastructure that approves the business licenses that allow the businesses and schools to do what they do. Which means they control them. Big business controls
populations because we rely on them for everything. It may be too late to fix this. It`s just complicated and intertwined.
To believe that there is a difference between the government and the pubic is just being naive.
The governments control the infrastructure that approves the business licenses that allow the businesses and schools to do what they do. Which means they control them. Big business controls
populations because we rely on them for everything. It may be too late to fix this. It`s just complicated and intertwined.
>Without any support from governments the economies would have broken down by now
It is the job of government to protect the welfare of its people in the event of an emergency. I think financial crisis falls under this category.
Regardless of economic system, that is one of the roles of
government.
>The problems aren't overpopulation or too many kids, the problems are unethical and unscrupulous business methods used by a few to the damage of many others.
Partially agree. But overpopulation and lack of resources is
a problem. Yes, I'm sure there is enough to distribute to everyone on earth evenly, but that will never happen. So
based on "real available resources" there are way too many
people. And poor people haing too many kids.
I'm not rich either, guess what I'm NOT gonna do...I'm not going to
have 12 kids!
Sorry I live in Socal and it's a huge problem around here. We're
even feeding children that are not American citizens with our
tax money because the illegals have million kids they can't afford
(but that's whole another issue).
>What we have now, is a game of some few with financial power blocking out everyone else, maintaining an unhealthy ratio of turnover increases.
I agree with you on this. But on the whole, that's how it's been since the beginning of time. Human beings are competitive by nature. As
great as it would be, there is no possible way that human beings in my lifetime will ever get beyond that. The best we can hope for is
"as comfortable for as many as possible".
Sorry but I'm being realistic.
It is the job of government to protect the welfare of its people in the event of an emergency. I think financial crisis falls under this category.
Regardless of economic system, that is one of the roles of
government.
>The problems aren't overpopulation or too many kids, the problems are unethical and unscrupulous business methods used by a few to the damage of many others.
Partially agree. But overpopulation and lack of resources is
a problem. Yes, I'm sure there is enough to distribute to everyone on earth evenly, but that will never happen. So
based on "real available resources" there are way too many
people. And poor people haing too many kids.
I'm not rich either, guess what I'm NOT gonna do...I'm not going to
have 12 kids!
Sorry I live in Socal and it's a huge problem around here. We're
even feeding children that are not American citizens with our
tax money because the illegals have million kids they can't afford
(but that's whole another issue).
>What we have now, is a game of some few with financial power blocking out everyone else, maintaining an unhealthy ratio of turnover increases.
I agree with you on this. But on the whole, that's how it's been since the beginning of time. Human beings are competitive by nature. As
great as it would be, there is no possible way that human beings in my lifetime will ever get beyond that. The best we can hope for is
"as comfortable for as many as possible".
Sorry but I'm being realistic.
>TokyoOG
I think control is a good keyword here. Though for people the word control can mean differen things. For one person control might mean to be in direct charge of every action and give your agreement or disapproval. For another person control mean, that people are aware of how processes or circles are running and keep them going and alive, fixing damages or errors.
I follow the second version and share your thought whether it may be too late for governments to retake control of their economies for the greater good of their citizens and society
>まぁアレだ
I think you can't limit governments job just only to reacting in crisis situations. Firstly because this would mean they are always behind actual developements and just "react" and follow but never "act" and regulate or lead as their function as provider of laws and regulations entitle them to. Secondly every duty also includes rights and I don't know anyone who would be satisfied by just taking care of the shit that other people left without any benefit. But you also wrote yourself "that is one of the roles of government" - meaning it has other roles too.
So my point is that these very other roles, have been lacking. As we spoke of reaction after a crisis, there must be also actions to prevent crisis and to regulate things. But in these roles the US government and many other governments around the globe failed, which - and that is my point here - rest upon the blind believe of free and unlimited capitalism. "People with a lot of money are educated, smart and intelligent. They know what they are doing and we should take an example on them to become successfull too"
Then regarding overpopulation. It's deficile, but it's hard not to differ cause and effect here. In most 3rd world countries there are many children. In most 1st world countries there are too few children. In most 3rd world countries there are no established social security systems, while in most 1st world countries they are. Looking back 100 years, also in nowadays 1st world countries there have been bigger families. I think this is because children are seen as social security in most any culture. They will have to help their parents working on fields or in workplaces in those countries without social insurances and they keep on working once when their parents can't continue anymore.
Finally I have to disagree with you on the point of how "dynamic" people or communities have grown in the hisory of mankind. From start of industrialization up to maybe 1970s, companies were very satisfied with growth rates from about 5 - 15%.. Everything above was rather big luck or a sensational year. But then in recent years, some people thought everything below 20% turnover a year is bad and still have to increase, maybe beyond 50% even.
How can anyone hope to gain such huge amouns of money on a regular base each year compared to the amounts they did in previous year? Allready basic physics tell us, there are no unlimited energies and no unlimted forces either. So how can some people think they are smarter then the laws of nature? Where to get these phantastic ammounts and numbers from?
As we talked before, population in industrial countries are not rising but rather decreasing, it's logical the amount of customers can't increase. So you can't make these profits not by just only selling more, but rather reducing costs. So everything is done to prevent "unnecessary costs", for example reducing staff, reducing stock, reducing own capital, etc. etc. All the principles and believings that company founders had, the time and work they invested got washed away by people who think they know everything better.
And right now we see, how well they knew better. Well, like a protestor wrote on a sign "JUMP YOU FUCKERS!"
I think control is a good keyword here. Though for people the word control can mean differen things. For one person control might mean to be in direct charge of every action and give your agreement or disapproval. For another person control mean, that people are aware of how processes or circles are running and keep them going and alive, fixing damages or errors.
I follow the second version and share your thought whether it may be too late for governments to retake control of their economies for the greater good of their citizens and society
>まぁアレだ
I think you can't limit governments job just only to reacting in crisis situations. Firstly because this would mean they are always behind actual developements and just "react" and follow but never "act" and regulate or lead as their function as provider of laws and regulations entitle them to. Secondly every duty also includes rights and I don't know anyone who would be satisfied by just taking care of the shit that other people left without any benefit. But you also wrote yourself "that is one of the roles of government" - meaning it has other roles too.
So my point is that these very other roles, have been lacking. As we spoke of reaction after a crisis, there must be also actions to prevent crisis and to regulate things. But in these roles the US government and many other governments around the globe failed, which - and that is my point here - rest upon the blind believe of free and unlimited capitalism. "People with a lot of money are educated, smart and intelligent. They know what they are doing and we should take an example on them to become successfull too"
Then regarding overpopulation. It's deficile, but it's hard not to differ cause and effect here. In most 3rd world countries there are many children. In most 1st world countries there are too few children. In most 3rd world countries there are no established social security systems, while in most 1st world countries they are. Looking back 100 years, also in nowadays 1st world countries there have been bigger families. I think this is because children are seen as social security in most any culture. They will have to help their parents working on fields or in workplaces in those countries without social insurances and they keep on working once when their parents can't continue anymore.
Finally I have to disagree with you on the point of how "dynamic" people or communities have grown in the hisory of mankind. From start of industrialization up to maybe 1970s, companies were very satisfied with growth rates from about 5 - 15%.. Everything above was rather big luck or a sensational year. But then in recent years, some people thought everything below 20% turnover a year is bad and still have to increase, maybe beyond 50% even.
How can anyone hope to gain such huge amouns of money on a regular base each year compared to the amounts they did in previous year? Allready basic physics tell us, there are no unlimited energies and no unlimted forces either. So how can some people think they are smarter then the laws of nature? Where to get these phantastic ammounts and numbers from?
As we talked before, population in industrial countries are not rising but rather decreasing, it's logical the amount of customers can't increase. So you can't make these profits not by just only selling more, but rather reducing costs. So everything is done to prevent "unnecessary costs", for example reducing staff, reducing stock, reducing own capital, etc. etc. All the principles and believings that company founders had, the time and work they invested got washed away by people who think they know everything better.
And right now we see, how well they knew better. Well, like a protestor wrote on a sign "JUMP YOU FUCKERS!"
Ah it is so nice to see all these financial wizards debating economic policy in here.
First of all the auto market is not crashing only 3 are having problems the rest are doing fine in the US. Their problem is that they have grandfathered in union contracts that cost too much and that they make crappy cars.
Since we are on the subject of economics I wonder how many Westerners here are in Japan because they could not survive economically in their own country? You know couldn't get a job, or girl, or build a life there so they have to go some place else where the standards are lower for them?
You can start it off with another 3 page essay about your life Kamuix99.
First of all the auto market is not crashing only 3 are having problems the rest are doing fine in the US. Their problem is that they have grandfathered in union contracts that cost too much and that they make crappy cars.
Since we are on the subject of economics I wonder how many Westerners here are in Japan because they could not survive economically in their own country? You know couldn't get a job, or girl, or build a life there so they have to go some place else where the standards are lower for them?
You can start it off with another 3 page essay about your life Kamuix99.
>Inquisitor
Thank you very much for your great interest in my life, i feel touched. Please send love letters to my by private mail
Anyways, I found your question about westerners in Japan rather interesting. Looking at things seriously, it comes to notice that for most all persons (and we're talking about westerners from Europe, USA, Canada, Autralia now) surviving in their own country will naturally be easier then doing so in abroad. And that's simply because, you are an native speaker, you are aware of the culture, you went to schools there, you gained certificates there, you gained work experience there and you're participating within the social security system there. To go abroad then means to leave these connections or security links behind and start almost from zero. Also Japan is not a country where milk and honey just flows for everyone but people work and have to be productive. So in my point of view your thesis - westerners work in Japan since they can't survive economically at home - is wrong or at least lacking in certain aspects.
Thank you very much for your great interest in my life, i feel touched. Please send love letters to my by private mail
Anyways, I found your question about westerners in Japan rather interesting. Looking at things seriously, it comes to notice that for most all persons (and we're talking about westerners from Europe, USA, Canada, Autralia now) surviving in their own country will naturally be easier then doing so in abroad. And that's simply because, you are an native speaker, you are aware of the culture, you went to schools there, you gained certificates there, you gained work experience there and you're participating within the social security system there. To go abroad then means to leave these connections or security links behind and start almost from zero. Also Japan is not a country where milk and honey just flows for everyone but people work and have to be productive. So in my point of view your thesis - westerners work in Japan since they can't survive economically at home - is wrong or at least lacking in certain aspects.
RE 22
It was not a question it was a statement. Most westerners that live long term in Asia do so because they can't hack it in their home country for whatever reason. they can survive in Asia due to the ESL market which provides plenty of jobs for which the requirement is little more than having a pulse. They also get the fringe benefits of feeling like a VIP which mostly takes the form of getting 1000x more female attention then they would at home.
Like I said it is not a question it is a statement and those reading know don't have to reply they and just know it is true.
It was not a question it was a statement. Most westerners that live long term in Asia do so because they can't hack it in their home country for whatever reason. they can survive in Asia due to the ESL market which provides plenty of jobs for which the requirement is little more than having a pulse. They also get the fringe benefits of feeling like a VIP which mostly takes the form of getting 1000x more female attention then they would at home.
Like I said it is not a question it is a statement and those reading know don't have to reply they and just know it is true.
> Inquisitor
I'm sorry but the way I see it, it's a personal statement of yours which is not so much motivated by an objective background but rather personal anger. I'm not working as ESL and also I haven't experience in the teaching business yet - however looking at the websites of companies as NOVA or ECC, they request Bachelor degree or native level english speakers. The mere fact that these business models exist in that form in Japaan and not in Germany shows me rather, that in Japan there is an active desire for learning conversation from native speakers and therefore such people are hired. If there would be no demand for EIKAWA, there wouldn't also be an job offer for foreigners.
Now you mentioned two times female factors. Firstly when you wrote "You coldn't get a job or girl" and second time "...of getting 1000x more female attention". May I ask you a question, though it's really none of my business. Do you have a gf? Do you feel that foreigners take away oportunities for you for dating females? Or did a former gf of you turned her attention to a foreigner? In any case, it has nothing to do with either the capitalism debate, nor with working possibilities in abroad. It's your personal matter, I'm sorry should you have made bad experiences and hope you'll find your girl soon.
> ブンブン
The invisible hand as entitled by Adam Smith in his work "wealth of nation" was formalized in 18th century. That was nice and fine for it's time, but back then people wouldn't have expected that single persons would gather up so much money that they easily could buy a whole nation. They also wouldn't have expected an stock market like it is today, or that people would sell things they even don't have property rights on.
It's more like that the logics and backgrounds of market models wich are taught on Unis date back from 18th till early 20th century. Their basic ideas are still that people found an company to maintain a certain company goal, like manufacturing certain components or products or establishing infrastructures. In short, most all of these theories have the idea that people are interested in material progress and by that also create jobs and incomes, so then following social progress. The idea that people actually would buy large bonds or stocks for mere financial reasons, got mostly ignored.
As mentioned before, what we've seen in the past few years is in direct contradiction to all laws of natural science. I can't get something from nothing - that's not possible. So when managers think they can rise company turnovers by reducing staff or lowering employers wages, they think to short. In the same way they cut off staff, they also cut off customers buying their company's products and have to rely on customers in abroad. And that's where we are now with car industry, which facing problems to sell their cars in abroad and then notices "Oh, people in our country aren't buying our cars either! Why is that?"
I'm sorry but the way I see it, it's a personal statement of yours which is not so much motivated by an objective background but rather personal anger. I'm not working as ESL and also I haven't experience in the teaching business yet - however looking at the websites of companies as NOVA or ECC, they request Bachelor degree or native level english speakers. The mere fact that these business models exist in that form in Japaan and not in Germany shows me rather, that in Japan there is an active desire for learning conversation from native speakers and therefore such people are hired. If there would be no demand for EIKAWA, there wouldn't also be an job offer for foreigners.
Now you mentioned two times female factors. Firstly when you wrote "You coldn't get a job or girl" and second time "...of getting 1000x more female attention". May I ask you a question, though it's really none of my business. Do you have a gf? Do you feel that foreigners take away oportunities for you for dating females? Or did a former gf of you turned her attention to a foreigner? In any case, it has nothing to do with either the capitalism debate, nor with working possibilities in abroad. It's your personal matter, I'm sorry should you have made bad experiences and hope you'll find your girl soon.
> ブンブン
The invisible hand as entitled by Adam Smith in his work "wealth of nation" was formalized in 18th century. That was nice and fine for it's time, but back then people wouldn't have expected that single persons would gather up so much money that they easily could buy a whole nation. They also wouldn't have expected an stock market like it is today, or that people would sell things they even don't have property rights on.
It's more like that the logics and backgrounds of market models wich are taught on Unis date back from 18th till early 20th century. Their basic ideas are still that people found an company to maintain a certain company goal, like manufacturing certain components or products or establishing infrastructures. In short, most all of these theories have the idea that people are interested in material progress and by that also create jobs and incomes, so then following social progress. The idea that people actually would buy large bonds or stocks for mere financial reasons, got mostly ignored.
As mentioned before, what we've seen in the past few years is in direct contradiction to all laws of natural science. I can't get something from nothing - that's not possible. So when managers think they can rise company turnovers by reducing staff or lowering employers wages, they think to short. In the same way they cut off staff, they also cut off customers buying their company's products and have to rely on customers in abroad. And that's where we are now with car industry, which facing problems to sell their cars in abroad and then notices "Oh, people in our country aren't buying our cars either! Why is that?"
I realize that there is no absolute invisible hand, and thank you for the history lesson. I'm just saying there shouldn't be more than necessary government intervention IMO.
"they also cut off customers buying their company's products and have to rely on customers in abroad."
ssscwhat?
Escalades aree $20,000 off!
Buy one, get one free Dodge!
and you're saying that the Big3 cut off the customers from buying their products?
"they also cut off customers buying their company's products and have to rely on customers in abroad."
ssscwhat?
Escalades aree $20,000 off!
Buy one, get one free Dodge!
and you're saying that the Big3 cut off the customers from buying their products?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2008435203_apmeltdownautos.html
-------------------------
Also, CEO Alan Mulally said he'll work for $1 per year if the automaker has to take any government loan money.
The plans Ford submitted to Congress on Tuesday also say the company will cancel all management employees' 2009 bonuses and will not pay any merit increases for its North American salaried employees next year.
-------------------------
Finally a step in the right direction.
-------------------------
Also, CEO Alan Mulally said he'll work for $1 per year if the automaker has to take any government loan money.
The plans Ford submitted to Congress on Tuesday also say the company will cancel all management employees' 2009 bonuses and will not pay any merit increases for its North American salaried employees next year.
-------------------------
Finally a step in the right direction.
>ブンブン
I talked not only about the 3 great car manufacturers, i talked about companies in general. In your second pic, car prices range from 10.988$ to 22.195$. So how long does someone who just got dismissed have to save in order to get at least 10.988$ together? How long does a normal employee in US or elsewhere have to soave to get 10.988$ together? Needless to say he/she also have to pay for insurances, foods, energy, water, and other living costs. That is the point, people can only spent money if they actually have money.
I talked not only about the 3 great car manufacturers, i talked about companies in general. In your second pic, car prices range from 10.988$ to 22.195$. So how long does someone who just got dismissed have to save in order to get at least 10.988$ together? How long does a normal employee in US or elsewhere have to soave to get 10.988$ together? Needless to say he/she also have to pay for insurances, foods, energy, water, and other living costs. That is the point, people can only spent money if they actually have money.
Isn't this thread about bailing out the Big3? Since when did this thread turn into a discussion about cost of living? I'll stick with it either way, and thanks for not writing a 5 page essay.
How long does a normal (someone define normal) employee take to save $10,988? I don't know, and I don't care. Thats why we have this great thing called a car loan and this thing called a bank and interest rates. Not many people buy cars straight up cash.
Now can we please get back on topic?
How long does a normal (someone define normal) employee take to save $10,988? I don't know, and I don't care. Thats why we have this great thing called a car loan and this thing called a bank and interest rates. Not many people buy cars straight up cash.
Now can we please get back on topic?
Kamuix99: hahaha what the hello would I have to be angry about? First I am not Japanese, 2nd I am not living in Japan. Feel like a fool now with some of those questions and assumptions now huh? so feel bad away pal. you can try that pseudo-cultural-speak on someone else. Yeah I recognize that too.
As for the Wealth of Nations, holy crap you just need a few 100 years of economic updates and refinements. And actually l economics is based on the principle that ceteris paribus people try to make rational choices. Seriously stop trying to wax intellectual, if you had all that talent you would be back in your own country in successful career. This is not a bad thing just the it's just the reality of most westerners living in Asia.
RE #28 Alan says that because he knows there is ZERO chance of it happening. It is a statement that sounds good to the uninformed but goes against every accepted economic incentive principle. That is a "step in the right direction" for everyone who has never passed a microeconomics class.
As for the Wealth of Nations, holy crap you just need a few 100 years of economic updates and refinements. And actually l economics is based on the principle that ceteris paribus people try to make rational choices. Seriously stop trying to wax intellectual, if you had all that talent you would be back in your own country in successful career. This is not a bad thing just the it's just the reality of most westerners living in Asia.
RE #28 Alan says that because he knows there is ZERO chance of it happening. It is a statement that sounds good to the uninformed but goes against every accepted economic incentive principle. That is a "step in the right direction" for everyone who has never passed a microeconomics class.
> ブンブン
Sometimes we should not only count the number of pages on an essay, but also what's actually written in it
Well, it's nice that you have loan, bank and interest rates, but you know where the initial crisis came from? Yep, from banking sector that lead to the crisis for the big 3. And that's why my essay is covering not only big 3 car companies but overall current economy system. And we're on topic with that
> Inquisitor
I find it strange that if you're neither japanese nor live in Japan, you still have to complain about westerners going to Japan and getting attention there from females. Not feeling bad at all, but being curious on what's the connection there. Can you enlighten me?
Going on with intellectual, ceteris paribus which interested readers my find here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceteris_paribus that's what i said allready in my post. Under the assumption that people take logic and reasonable decisions, the market and the economy would be running fine. But in real, they don't and here we got the problem.
For your information, I am actually living in the country i was born, maybe time for you now to feel bad pal. Wonder also where you got the idea from that talent alone, however you may define that, can gurantee an successfull career.
Sometimes we should not only count the number of pages on an essay, but also what's actually written in it
Well, it's nice that you have loan, bank and interest rates, but you know where the initial crisis came from? Yep, from banking sector that lead to the crisis for the big 3. And that's why my essay is covering not only big 3 car companies but overall current economy system. And we're on topic with that
> Inquisitor
I find it strange that if you're neither japanese nor live in Japan, you still have to complain about westerners going to Japan and getting attention there from females. Not feeling bad at all, but being curious on what's the connection there. Can you enlighten me?
Going on with intellectual, ceteris paribus which interested readers my find here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceteris_paribus that's what i said allready in my post. Under the assumption that people take logic and reasonable decisions, the market and the economy would be running fine. But in real, they don't and here we got the problem.
For your information, I am actually living in the country i was born, maybe time for you now to feel bad pal. Wonder also where you got the idea from that talent alone, however you may define that, can gurantee an successfull career.
#31 "This is not a bad thing just the it's just the reality of most westerners living in Asia. "
You have no idea what the hello you are talking about. How can you make remarks about a group of international people that are making lives for themselves in the place of their choice? We don`t all move here with women or business in mind. Many come here for the culture and to pursue studies in the Oriental arts ( there are many). One year turns into 5 , 5 into 10 and before you know it you are succeeding at whatever, or you are not and you might consider returning home.
The notion that we are here because we can`t make it in our own countries is totally incorrect.
Only a very misinformed person could come to a conclusion like that. And no doubt you will defend your opinion to the very end. The good part is no one gives a fuck. You are entitled to your opinion. No matter how stupid it may be.
You have no idea what the hello you are talking about. How can you make remarks about a group of international people that are making lives for themselves in the place of their choice? We don`t all move here with women or business in mind. Many come here for the culture and to pursue studies in the Oriental arts ( there are many). One year turns into 5 , 5 into 10 and before you know it you are succeeding at whatever, or you are not and you might consider returning home.
The notion that we are here because we can`t make it in our own countries is totally incorrect.
Only a very misinformed person could come to a conclusion like that. And no doubt you will defend your opinion to the very end. The good part is no one gives a fuck. You are entitled to your opinion. No matter how stupid it may be.
#31 Kamuix99: Once again your assumptions are unfounded and erroneous. I have not complained about anything I have only made an observation of the life of westerners in Asia. I have no reason to complain, or be angry or care less about it. Just to make sure you notice it the observation is about Asia in general not just Japan. With the notable exception of Hong Kong. Probably because you need to have an education degree and be a certified teacher in your home country to work there, result the western community is of a higher caliber than the rest of Asia.
#33 TokyoOG: It is not a notion of mine it is a statistic and I believe it is accurate. While some do as you have described that would be a very small portion of the statistics. And you 2 know you are lying to yourselves if you say the life of the average westerner in Asia is not as I have described. So suck it up you are who you are. If it is not you then don't care, if it is you then deal with it.
#33 TokyoOG: It is not a notion of mine it is a statistic and I believe it is accurate. While some do as you have described that would be a very small portion of the statistics. And you 2 know you are lying to yourselves if you say the life of the average westerner in Asia is not as I have described. So suck it up you are who you are. If it is not you then don't care, if it is you then deal with it.
> Inquisitor
Well I assume that if someone says, writes or tell something in an public discussion, there is a background to it or at least he/she has a reason to talk about. What you wrote is clearly an criticism - namely about westerners and females, which you describe in a negative way. That is nothing else but complaining and if you really wouldn't care, then you also would have had no reason to write it down twice.
In your post #20 you stated "...how many Westerners here are in Japan because they could...."Nevertheless, I'm also looking forward to see that information source which made this observation. Last but not least, I'd like to hear whether you have been to Japan then and seen these things that you described yourself.
Well I assume that if someone says, writes or tell something in an public discussion, there is a background to it or at least he/she has a reason to talk about. What you wrote is clearly an criticism - namely about westerners and females, which you describe in a negative way. That is nothing else but complaining and if you really wouldn't care, then you also would have had no reason to write it down twice.
In your post #20 you stated "...how many Westerners here are in Japan because they could...."Nevertheless, I'm also looking forward to see that information source which made this observation. Last but not least, I'd like to hear whether you have been to Japan then and seen these things that you described yourself.
You must be gay then if you take it as a criticism to say westerners get more female attention. No problem I am sure gays get more attention too so you can be happy now.
I have made no complaints only observations. However I can understand if these observations apply to you they would sound negative.
In other words I think it is personal for you and you are. Like I said if these observations do not apply to anyone but all the people who suddenly feel defensive or need to justify something that is your problem.
To put it simply you are all upset because it is true not because you found some observation that has nothing to do with you at all but you feel the need to say it is absolutely 100% wrong and impossible. No reason why just that it is. To put it simply, thou doth protest too much.
I have made no complaints only observations. However I can understand if these observations apply to you they would sound negative.
In other words I think it is personal for you and you are. Like I said if these observations do not apply to anyone but all the people who suddenly feel defensive or need to justify something that is your problem.
To put it simply you are all upset because it is true not because you found some observation that has nothing to do with you at all but you feel the need to say it is absolutely 100% wrong and impossible. No reason why just that it is. To put it simply, thou doth protest too much.
I love American cars but I also think they may also need to learn a lesson. While other auto makers were spending money on R&D for building economical car such as hybrid, focusing on cost cutting in many ways, I think American auto companies kept building cars with big engine with terrible gas miliage. I think it may had something to do with union, but they could not achieve much of cost cut, either. Toyota, for example, when they introduced the Prius, they were in red for several years but kept promoting it. From that, they established their position today. As for big 3, by the time when they realized it, it was too late. Also when I heard that Big 3 CEO's went to Washington by their private jets, and could not get the money they needed from the government, I thought it was so funny. I loved it when they were asked to raise their hands if they are going to sell the private jets or not. (of course no one raised their hands.. looked at each other) I feel bad for the people working for those companies when they have such an ignorant boss / bad managements.. CEO 's now saying that they will cut their annaul income to $1. I think $1 is even too much. They should give back to the company and to all workers to be responsible for all of bad decision makings they made in the past... This is just my opinion. Again, I love Corvette, Camaro, Mustang, Viper.. But the company need to have much more than that.
> Inquisitor
"You must be gay then if you take it as a criticism to say westerners get more female attention..."
Thanks for this very informative and qualified explanation. From this point on my need for further details from your side have been fully satisfied and no further comments are necessary.
> Tokyo OG
You're 100% right
"You must be gay then if you take it as a criticism to say westerners get more female attention..."
Thanks for this very informative and qualified explanation. From this point on my need for further details from your side have been fully satisfied and no further comments are necessary.
> Tokyo OG
You're 100% right
TYPE-R (#39)
>> CEO 's now saying that they will cut their annaul income to $1.
Yeah, it's as symbolic as them driving hybrids to the Congress instead of using their corporate jets this time. I thought it was hilarious, too.
I just don't understand how a corporation like GM did not take any decisive measures to save itself until the very last minute. They should have seen it coming.
>> CEO 's now saying that they will cut their annaul income to $1.
Yeah, it's as symbolic as them driving hybrids to the Congress instead of using their corporate jets this time. I thought it was hilarious, too.
I just don't understand how a corporation like GM did not take any decisive measures to save itself until the very last minute. They should have seen it coming.
It would be better to just apply the Federal bunkrupsy law to the Big 3 if you really want to revitalize them. Nobody's never heard of bailing out an ordinal company (not a bank) by tax payers money, which might cause moral hazzard. Providing them with that money is just going to let those zombies live a little bit longer, which means no problem is going to be solved. Also, it is said the amount of money they are currently begging will not be enough to save them. They actually need more. These companies needs to be restructured, not making the CEO's salary to $1. (About 50% of the entire GM group's profit now comes from not car manufacturing business, but financial business. Is this car company? This sounds "Livedoor (Horiemon)" to me.)
Sadly, If the Big 3 go bunkrupt, US economy, not mentioning Japanese economy as well, will be shattered.
Sadly, If the Big 3 go bunkrupt, US economy, not mentioning Japanese economy as well, will be shattered.
The CEO`s have put away enough money over the years to last them and their children`s children
for the rest of their lives without working at all! I am sure they used all their salaries and
bonuses from last year (while they knew they were already in the red) to beef up their private
off shore bank accounts that will never be able to be touched incase they go bankrupt.
That is why they waited until the last minute.
They need to go bankrupt. And the companies need to be restructured with all new corporate executives. If they did this very quickly most of the world would not even know it happened. If they keep the same people in place at the top ( even with no salary) nothing will change.
for the rest of their lives without working at all! I am sure they used all their salaries and
bonuses from last year (while they knew they were already in the red) to beef up their private
off shore bank accounts that will never be able to be touched incase they go bankrupt.
That is why they waited until the last minute.
They need to go bankrupt. And the companies need to be restructured with all new corporate executives. If they did this very quickly most of the world would not even know it happened. If they keep the same people in place at the top ( even with no salary) nothing will change.
Well the economic wizards of Mixi have had there fun, now lets me explain for anyone reading what WILL happen.
#1 The auto industry WILL receive the loans. $25 billion was already scheduled to be given to them by summer 2009 for the development of electric cars. Giving it to them 6 months early is all that''s happening.
#2 The auto industry is the largest in the US we will NOT let it go bankrupt.
#3 The Big 3 going bankrupt would scare the crap out of all the foreigners they would think when the largest industry in the US goes bankrupt that the world is coming to an end making the economy in their countries that much worse.
#4 The Big 3 is not asking for anything that Japan, China and Europe are not already doing for their car companies.
#5 This whole thing is a plan to introduce national health insurance to the US. The #1 advantage that foreign manufactures like Japan has had over US auto makers is that they do not need to provide health insurance or retirement plans for their workers like US companies do because the government does it. this is going to be used to start the debate on national health care to make America more competitive with foreigners. Can you imagine if Japan manufacturers suddenly had to provide health care and retirement plans for all their work?
#6 The Big 3 are having a money problem ONLY in the US for this reason. The Big 3 have no problem making profits in Europe, South America and Australia because they do not have to pay health insurance or retirement in those countries.
44 posts no one has mentioned these basic facts and yet so many feel so strongly they understand the US, economics and the world. Amusing to read but now you have the truth.
America is simply restructuring it health care and social security system, to make changes that big you need to create a crisis first and then "fix"it. for those that do not know social security was created during the last economic disaster. It is not a surprise that national health care gets created during this one.
There is going to be a LOT of change over the next few years.
#1 The auto industry WILL receive the loans. $25 billion was already scheduled to be given to them by summer 2009 for the development of electric cars. Giving it to them 6 months early is all that''s happening.
#2 The auto industry is the largest in the US we will NOT let it go bankrupt.
#3 The Big 3 going bankrupt would scare the crap out of all the foreigners they would think when the largest industry in the US goes bankrupt that the world is coming to an end making the economy in their countries that much worse.
#4 The Big 3 is not asking for anything that Japan, China and Europe are not already doing for their car companies.
#5 This whole thing is a plan to introduce national health insurance to the US. The #1 advantage that foreign manufactures like Japan has had over US auto makers is that they do not need to provide health insurance or retirement plans for their workers like US companies do because the government does it. this is going to be used to start the debate on national health care to make America more competitive with foreigners. Can you imagine if Japan manufacturers suddenly had to provide health care and retirement plans for all their work?
#6 The Big 3 are having a money problem ONLY in the US for this reason. The Big 3 have no problem making profits in Europe, South America and Australia because they do not have to pay health insurance or retirement in those countries.
44 posts no one has mentioned these basic facts and yet so many feel so strongly they understand the US, economics and the world. Amusing to read but now you have the truth.
America is simply restructuring it health care and social security system, to make changes that big you need to create a crisis first and then "fix"it. for those that do not know social security was created during the last economic disaster. It is not a surprise that national health care gets created during this one.
There is going to be a LOT of change over the next few years.
> 45 Inquisitor
> #4 The Big 3 is not asking for anything that Japan, China and Europe are not already doing for their car companies.
This may be true.
Also, it is true that US governmnent has to issue more US bond to collect money for bailing out the Big 3 or whatever.....then, it will be Japan, EU or China etc. that purchase the bond, anyway.
> #2 The auto industry is the largest in the US we will NOT let it go bankrupt.
The "bunkrupt", or applying the Federal Bankrupt law does not neccessarily mean to crash the 3 companies away. Rather, to restucture them; firing the current CEOs or excutive members, or merging the 3 to 1, or revising the current business model (making tons of big cars....) and so forth.
> #4 The Big 3 is not asking for anything that Japan, China and Europe are not already doing for their car companies.
This may be true.
Also, it is true that US governmnent has to issue more US bond to collect money for bailing out the Big 3 or whatever.....then, it will be Japan, EU or China etc. that purchase the bond, anyway.
> #2 The auto industry is the largest in the US we will NOT let it go bankrupt.
The "bunkrupt", or applying the Federal Bankrupt law does not neccessarily mean to crash the 3 companies away. Rather, to restucture them; firing the current CEOs or excutive members, or merging the 3 to 1, or revising the current business model (making tons of big cars....) and so forth.
plus,
> #1 The auto industry WILL receive the loans. $25 billion was already scheduled to be given to them by summer 2009 for the development of electric cars.
Actually, GM (I guess...) had already developed, produced and sold an electric car during the 80's. However, at that time the oil price was way lower, therefore basically nobody paid much attention to that. I hope GM will produce a nice marketable and affordable eco (electric??? or non-fossil-fuel) car near future. *** I also hope the electric power charge cost will be much lower for the eco car. For this, not only US but Japan, EU, China etc. have to construct enough nuclear power plants all over, though.........
> #1 The auto industry WILL receive the loans. $25 billion was already scheduled to be given to them by summer 2009 for the development of electric cars.
Actually, GM (I guess...) had already developed, produced and sold an electric car during the 80's. However, at that time the oil price was way lower, therefore basically nobody paid much attention to that. I hope GM will produce a nice marketable and affordable eco (electric??? or non-fossil-fuel) car near future. *** I also hope the electric power charge cost will be much lower for the eco car. For this, not only US but Japan, EU, China etc. have to construct enough nuclear power plants all over, though.........
plus,
>> #1 The auto industry WILL receive the loans. $25 billion was already
>> scheduled to be given to them by summer 2009 for the development of electric cars.
According to the New York Times, the money is intended for developing fuel-efficient cars, not necessary electric cars.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/06/business/06auto.html?_r=1&hp
Besides, $25 billion is not nearly enough to rescue Big Three. What's coming out of this budget is merely a bridge loan that will help GM and Chrysler survive through the end of March. The "real" help must follow if the government is serious about helping the U.S. auto industry.
>> #1 The auto industry WILL receive the loans. $25 billion was already
>> scheduled to be given to them by summer 2009 for the development of electric cars.
According to the New York Times, the money is intended for developing fuel-efficient cars, not necessary electric cars.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/06/business/06auto.html?_r=1&hp
Besides, $25 billion is not nearly enough to rescue Big Three. What's coming out of this budget is merely a bridge loan that will help GM and Chrysler survive through the end of March. The "real" help must follow if the government is serious about helping the U.S. auto industry.
> 45 inquisitor
> #5 This whole thing is a plan to introduce national health insurance to the US. The #1 advantage that foreign manufactures like Japan has had over US auto makers is that they do not need to provide health insurance or retirement plans for their workers like US companies do........
I have heard that GM (I donot know about the other two) has their health insurance or retirement plan.....True?
> #5 This whole thing is a plan to introduce national health insurance to the US. The #1 advantage that foreign manufactures like Japan has had over US auto makers is that they do not need to provide health insurance or retirement plans for their workers like US companies do........
I have heard that GM (I donot know about the other two) has their health insurance or retirement plan.....True?
Not exactly regarding the car companies, but....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shUXP2VU6y8&eurl=http://www.allthingsjimrogers.com/2009/02/11/jim-rogers-on-bloomberg-2-11-09/&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2V_2T5WgYo&eurl=http://www.allthingsjimrogers.com/2009/02/11/jim-rogers-on-cnbc-2-10-09/&feature=player_embedded
What is the world going to be?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shUXP2VU6y8&eurl=http://www.allthingsjimrogers.com/2009/02/11/jim-rogers-on-bloomberg-2-11-09/&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2V_2T5WgYo&eurl=http://www.allthingsjimrogers.com/2009/02/11/jim-rogers-on-cnbc-2-10-09/&feature=player_embedded
What is the world going to be?
plus,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndoJHxX3cKA&eurl=http://www.allthingsjimrogers.com/2009/02/04/jim-rogers-asian-financial-forum/&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkYAam_nkqg&eurl=http://www.allthingsjimrogers.com/2009/02/04/jim-rogers-asian-financial-forum/&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndoJHxX3cKA&eurl=http://www.allthingsjimrogers.com/2009/02/04/jim-rogers-asian-financial-forum/&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkYAam_nkqg&eurl=http://www.allthingsjimrogers.com/2009/02/04/jim-rogers-asian-financial-forum/&feature=player_embedded
- mixiユーザー
- ログインしてコメントしよう！
|
|
|
|
☆ENGLISH ONLY☆ 更新情報
-
最新のアンケート
