Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is GM going bankrupt?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 21
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 21 template Next
  • #181
    Originally posted by Ted Striker
    Hmmm.. well according to that link, the max someone can get per year is 45K.

    Not bad. But it sounds like a big pay cut for alot of them.
    I don't know the formula. In any event, a $45k pension is rather handsome for somebody doing 30 years of work.
    I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

    Comment

    • #182
      Yeah, hell I'd retire on it if I could.

      But I know alot of them probably have some fat pensions, especially upper level management I bet.
      We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. - Abraham Lincoln

      Comment

      • #183
        Silly. Management has its own plan separate from the line workers.
        I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

        Comment

        • #184
          You know... I'm looking here at the wreckage of ATT, GM, Sears, UAL, Polaroid, Bethlehem Steel, Westinghouse, Kodak, Delta, the big-three networks, hundreds upon thousands of dot.bombs and telecons, MCI, Chrysler, Ford, Enron, etc etc, and I just have to wonder what is going on: why is it that America's largest corporations are seemingly failing across the board? It's like the Grim Reaper is taking a leisurely stroll over the Forbes 500

          I'm beginning to think that Corporations are inherently unstable, that as an agglomeration of competing interests they act as if the Law of the Commons is in effect and they do as much as they can to extract every pound of flesh from the company. This deprives the corporation of needed funds to stay current with ever-changing practices, and slowly dooms it to obsolescence. Now, not all corporations or industries are like this (an obvious example being banks: the same banks that were movers and shakers in the 18th century are movers and shakers now), but enough industrial organizations are.

          Look at GM. In the 1950s you had Harlowe Curtice, the first President/CEO to make over $1,000,000/year, GM the first company to have $1billion in profits, giving their shareholders rich dividends, and it's employees were raking in the benefit of newly conceded UAW contracts.

          They all took this money: labor, management, and shareholders, and they pocketed it and spent it on bowling leagues and/or 2nd homes in the Rockies. And they did this, together in lock-step, for, ****, what: 30 years? In the early-80s, GMs labor force was 700,000 people strong, a number reduced more than half by 1994, when GM reported 312,000 people on their North American (NA) payroll (another decade, another halving as GM reported 161,000 people on NA payroll in 2004.)

          And if you look closely at the history of the companies in the first sentence, you'll see the same. A period of growth and riches where the company is increasing stock price, followed by a plateau, where dividends (taking cash out of the company) rule the day. And then... the rules change, beginning the long, slow, inevitable fall, whereupon within a mere quarter century, a company with a monopoly over the entire nations phone network (and the most widely-held stock in America for 30+ years running) can be reduced to a mere brand name, owned by one of its own post-monopoly spinoffs.

          So while it's fine to invest in corporations for purposes of capital appreciation, I'm coming to the opinion that it is a foolish thing to trust retirement funds to an organization that has a very good chance of not being around as long as I am.

          In short: who is the Corporation for? The shareholders? The workers? The consumers of the companys products/services? Is it possible to balance out the needs of the Corporation itself from that of the competing interests that create it? Is what happened to GM et al doomed to repeat itself, over and over, just with different names (Intel, MS, Red Hat, IBM)?

          Comment

          • #185
            Corporations are human institutions. They don't know what is going to happen in the future. They have glaring flaws. They may have strong competitors. They may have incredible inertia to do new things.

            It seems to me that a corporate life cycle is a natural phenomenon.

            So while it's fine to invest in corporations for purposes of capital appreciation, I'm coming to the opinion that it is a foolish thing to trust retirement funds to an organization that has a very good chance of not being around as long as I am.
            Properly diversified, you don't have to rely on the stability of indivdual corporations.
            I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

            Comment

            • #186
              Not my point. My point is that GM is liable for it's pensions, but GM itself (and all corporations, by their very structure), is inherently unstable and should not be responsible for the task of maintaining its workers retirement funds for the simple reason that the company will likely collapse before the majority of workers finish retiring!

              Edit: You DanS'd me!

              Comment

              • #187
                Hey, I agree with you. That's why we're moving toward defined contribution retirement systems across the board. 401(k)s are the sh!t.
                I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                Comment

                • #188
                  A perfect example of the inherent instability of even the largest corporations. Such teamwork!

                  Comment

                  • #189
                    Add Xerox to your list
                    We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. - Abraham Lincoln

                    Comment

                    • #190
                      [Roland]

                      http://www.****edcompany.com/

                      [/Roland]
                      We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. - Abraham Lincoln

                      Comment

                      • #191
                        Faceless shareholders do not demand things that would make a company better able to build things and employ workers. They demand returns. Get a few bean counters into the act and you can get some really shortsighted decisions being made.
                        (\__/)
                        (='.'=)
                        (")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.

                        Comment

                        • #192
                          And that's how Enron/WorldCom/Global Crossing was born!
                          We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. - Abraham Lincoln

                          Comment

                          • #193
                            The move to defined contribution pensions is regreatable but economically necissary for everyone but government workers (who get paid no matter how crappy their final product is).
                            Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.

                            Comment

                            • #194
                              Originally posted by JohnT

                              In short: who is the Corporation for? The shareholders? The workers? The consumers of the companys products/services? Is it possible to balance out the needs of the Corporation itself from that of the competing interests that create it? Is what happened to GM et al doomed to repeat itself, over and over, just with different names (Intel, MS, Red Hat, IBM)?
                              Obviously corporations are designed to fulfil the desires of their shareholders. It's when they stray from this and become tools for the enrichment of their employees (management or labor) that they tend to get into real trouble. Neither management nor labor should be allowed to have a stranglehold on the future of the company through stock options, outrageous pay or contracts that weigh the company down in perpetuity.
                              He's got the Midas touch.
                              But he touched it too much!
                              Hey Goldmember, Hey Goldmember!

                              Comment

                              • #195
                                Originally posted by Ted Striker
                                And that's how Enron/WorldCom/Global Crossing was born!
                                See above.
                                He's got the Midas touch.
                                But he touched it too much!
                                Hey Goldmember, Hey Goldmember!

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 21 template Next
                                Working...
                                X