Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 137

Thread: Gm moves to China

  1. #111
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Gm moves to China

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    How big of a hit would you say GM could take?
    Judging by the success of other companies selling Chinese-made products, not much.



    It's because of the bail-out mostly.
    Why does that change it?



    They agreed to cuts to get the money. It didn't take them long to start demanding raises. I say it's the same.
    Looks like one thing that's the same, and one thing that different.

    Because this has been a response to my first post.
    What are you talking about? I didn't respond to you until you decided to respond to me when I was talking to someone else.

    Are you trying to pretend that this exchange is an offshoot from your first post?



    Just because you think differently.
    No, it's because your arguments to that point did not reflect reality. Particularly, the claim that "...those still on the hook for the money the government gave GM will not be able to pay it back because the jobs will be in China."

    Not only is that extremely short term thinking (immediate job loss =/= no different job in the future), it also has no basis in fact.



    I said that I did not have a problem with them expanding.
    False.

    You said that I should say it was a good business decision. I did. Just because i wished to discuss possible ramifications is no need for all these accusations.
    Where did you say "This is a good business decision"?

    Here it is so that you can refresh your memory:

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    This is incredibly convoluted. There would be nothing wrong with a company with the technology combining with a company with the need to come together for the benefit of both. That is, if GM helped a Chinese company build cars for the Chinese market that in itself is not a bad thing.

    The problem is, the Chinese people can not afford to buy these cars. That being the case, as the article notes, the government buys them for them. It allows these companies to continue paying their employee's just a few bucks keeping costs low which GM will see as an oppertunity to then ship these cars over here at the expense of American employee's.
    You said it wouldn't be a bad thing if it wasn't for the speculation that you give which does make it a bad thing.

    So you just remained quiet about your concerns?
    Where'd you get that silly idea from?

    But those with concerns and that expressed them were right, correct?
    I agreed with them as I was one of them. Whether or not we were right is another story altogether.

    But that has no bearing on the current reality.

    Technology is another subject.
    Not when you are making the claim that these jobs are sustainable. It's entirely on topic when you go making claims like that.


    By just doing it. 25 years ago we were told that we could not compete with the quality of the Japanese. Even if the U.S. produced television is a little higher there are many who will purchase it for the reason of it employing their neighbor.
    That's wishful thinking. There are people who will purchase something simply because it helps their neighbors. I'm actually one of those people. For example, I buy all of my produce locally through a CSA and I shop at locally owned stores as much as possible and I buy American-made products whenever I can.

    And I pay more for for things because I do this.

    I am willing to make that financial sacrifice in order to do my part to help my local economy. But I'm also realistic about how much (or, more correctly, how little) others are willing to do the same.

    Over the last 25 years, the only thing I've seen is people in general caring less and less about the "Made in the USA" label and more and more about getting cheap stuff.

    If everyone was like me, it'd be a different story, but most people aren't. In fact, if most people were like me, I'd actually agree whoeheartedly that Chinese-made GMs wouldn't sell here. But the fact that many foreign-made cars (including many GM cars) do sell here implies that most people are not like me.

    Bankruptcy is never the perfect solution. Listening to those who warned GM years ago would have been. No use worrying about future ramifications though, is there?
    You can't focus on future ramifications by pining away for the path that wasn't chosen. Dealing with reality and making decisions based on that reality is the only way to deal with those future ramifications.

  2. #112
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Gm moves to China

    Later....when I get a bit more time.

  3. #113
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    Re: Gm moves to China

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    It can be hopeless to reason with people, but your well written and thoughtful posts are appreciated by some.

    Posted from my phone
    Trying to reason with the unreasonable harry is a two way street..

  4. #114
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: Gm moves to China

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Judging by the success of other companies selling Chinese-made products, not much.
    Other companies weren't bailed out with U.S. dollars.

    Why does that change it?
    People didn't bail them out to build cars in China. As I said, it won't be a problem if the cars stay in China.

    Looks like one thing that's the same, and one thing that different.
    Or one thing the same and one thing out of desperation.

    What are you talking about? I didn't respond to you until you decided to respond to me when I was talking to someone else.

    Are you trying to pretend that this exchange is an offshoot from your first post?
    That's the way I recalled it but since I have no desire to go back and read through everything we'll go with the idea I was mistaken.

    No, it's because your arguments to that point did not reflect reality. Particularly, the claim that "...those still on the hook for the money the government gave GM will not be able to pay it back because the jobs will be in China."

    Not only is that extremely short term thinking (immediate job loss =/= no different job in the future), it also has no basis in fact.
    Other than we know how many jobs (well not exactly how many but it's alot) have been lost by companies making their products elsewhere.

    False.
    It would be good IF the things I note do not come about.

    Where'd you get that silly idea from?
    I'm asking. You answering?

    I agreed with them as I was one of them. Whether or not we were right is another story altogether.

    But that has no bearing on the current reality.
    No, other than to note that there is nothing wrong with pointing out the problems you can forsee in the future.

    Not when you are making the claim that these jobs are sustainable. It's entirely on topic when you go making claims like that.
    Technology will displace some jobs. It's best if it's displacing them here. Someone still needs to run the new technology.

    That's wishful thinking. There are people who will purchase something simply because it helps their neighbors. I'm actually one of those people. For example, I buy all of my produce locally through a CSA and I shop at locally owned stores as much as possible and I buy American-made products whenever I can.

    And I pay more for for things because I do this.
    So 100% of those in this discussion agree that they would pay more for a U.S. made product.

    I am willing to make that financial sacrifice in order to do my part to help my local economy. But I'm also realistic about how much (or, more correctly, how little) others are willing to do the same.
    I don't believe I'm all that special. On top of that I support things to encourage it.

    Over the last 25 years, the only thing I've seen is people in general caring less and less about the "Made in the USA" label and more and more about getting cheap stuff.
    Seems to me that they've had little choice.

    If everyone was like me, it'd be a different story, but most people aren't. In fact, if most people were like me, I'd actually agree whoeheartedly that Chinese-made GMs wouldn't sell here. But the fact that many foreign-made cars (including many GM cars) do sell here implies that most people are not like me.
    The domestic manufacturers got complacent. No doubt. People won't pay more for lower quality. There is no reason for that to be the case now.

    You can't focus on future ramifications by pining away for the path that wasn't chosen. Dealing with reality and making decisions based on that reality is the only way to deal with those future ramifications.
    People are going to consider that.

  5. #115
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Gm moves to China

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Correction: We received payment for a government loan with money that came from a government investment.

    It was actually smart of GM to do this because they don't pay interest on the government investment money (they'll actually earn interest on it), but they do pay interest on the loan. One harms the profit margin, the other doesn't.

    From the link you obviously didn't read or understand.


    Therefore, it is unclear how GM and the Administration could have accurately announced yesterday that GM repaid its TARP loans in any meaningful way. In reality, it looks like GM merely used one source of TARP funds to repay another. The taxpayers are still on the hook...

    The bottom line seems to be that the TARP loans were "repaid" with other TARP funds in a Treasury escrow account. The TARP loans were not repaid from money GM is earning selling cars, as GM and the Administration have claimed in their speeches, press releases and television commercials. When these criticisms were put to GMs Vice Chairman Stephen Girsky in a television interview yesterday, he admitted that the criticisms were valid:

    Question: Are you just paying the government back with government money?

    Mr. Girsky: Well listen, that is in effect true, but a year ago nobody thought wed be able to pay this back.

  6. #116
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Gm moves to China

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    Other companies weren't bailed out with U.S. dollars.
    See, from my perspective, this is why I'm less bothered by GM outsourcing than I am with a company like Ford outsourcing. I have a vested interest in GM's bottom line (so that we might recoup our losses from the bailout), whereas I don't care a lick about Ford's bottom line. The only reaosn I would have bought a Ford before was to help American's keep jobs. A foreign-made ford is of no value to me. Whereas there is some value in a foreign-made Chevy due to the bailout.

    People didn't bail them out to build cars in China. As I said, it won't be a problem if the cars stay in China.
    This doesn't make sense to me, though. they were already building cars in other countries when they got bailed out. They weren't expected to stop building cars in other countries, so why is China such a problem?




    Or one thing the same and one thing out of desperation.
    I don't disagree that it was done out of desperation, but that doesn't make it any less different. I'm no fan of the unions (I actually have a strong distaste for them form my time running a non-union carpentry company), but I will give them credit when they make the right decision, even if they only did the right thing out of pure desperation.

    I'm of the belief that urging over-priced workers to retire was the right thing for them to do. Whether or not they **** things up again from here on out is a different story, but that action (which is nothing to shake a stick at) does indicate that they are approaching things somewhat differently than they have in the past.



    That's the way I recalled it but since I have no desire to go back and read through everything we'll go with the idea I was mistaken.
    fair enough.


    Other than we know how many jobs (well not exactly how many but it's alot) have been lost by companies making their products elsewhere.
    But the overall effect of outsourcing on the total number of jobs has not been negative so much as it has been neutral, because while we lose jobs that are outsourced, we gain different kinds of jobs.

    In another thread I saw your description of what your father has done (with his job at sears). To me, it looks like we actually have a similar view on this. While a person may lose their job in one field, a motivated person will find another job elsewhere, often in a completely unrelated field.

    Perhaps my view of things is in part due to the fact that I used to do very well for myself in the construction industry, which was not outsourced but it was practically eradicated in this recession due to the housing bubble. Instead of chasing after jobs that weren't there, I've completely altered my career course. I tightened my belt and took on a job that pays a fraction of what I used to make in order to set myself up for that future career. I was more willing to do this than other might be because I did not entertain the fantasy that I could pull an undo on reality. Even if I did manage to land another carpentry job, it would be at a fraction of what I used to make anyway, and my hold on that job would be tenuous regardless of my skill at the job (and I happen to be pretty good at it, if I do say so myself).

    So, to be frank, I realize that this does add a degree of bias to my assessments on how to move forward form bad situations. I firmly believe that if I did not have a practical approach to things I would be in far worse shape now than I am (I'm actually not in bad shape at all, even though I make a lot less than I used to).

    It would be good IF the things I note do not come about.
    Fair enough. I think it can be good either way, as long as it is profitable. I'm not convinced that cars made in China won't sell here, and I think that massive profits can be had in China simply due to the immense size of that market.



    I'm asking. You answering?
    Yes.

    No, other than to note that there is nothing wrong with pointing out the problems you can forsee in the future.
    True. I have misunderstood your intentions, then. We essentially differ on our assessment of how much of a future problem the possibility of Chinese-made GM's being sold in the US would be. I think that the bigger threat to GM's domestic sales comes from the opposition to buying from a company that got bailed out (which, I have to say, is totally inconsistent, seeing how many people who are averse to buying GM vehicles will still patronize banks that were bailed out that outsource.)

    Technology will displace some jobs. It's best if it's displacing them here. Someone still needs to run the new technology.
    The people who run the technology are rarely the same people that it replaces.



    So 100% of those in this discussion agree that they would pay more for a U.S. made product.
    I don't care if they agree, the reality of the situation is that they would pay more to buy most U.S. made products.

    I know that to be the case because I do it. I'm not speculating about it being the case, I'm encountering it being the case.


    I don't believe I'm all that special. On top of that I support things to encourage it.
    If you are doing what I do -buying the majority of things locally and US made- then you are special (at least compared to the majority overall, your local region might be different, though). I also support things to encourage it. But I'm also fairly realistic about what percentage of people will be willing to go that route, at least in my region.

    Perhaps you live in a region of the US where a higher proportion of people are willing to go this route, or it's much easier to buy your food locally (which will make it cheaper)

    Seems to me that they've had little choice.
    They've had a choice, they've simply not made that choice. They weren't willing to make the necessary sacrifices that go along with that choice.

    It's silly to assume that since one choice is far easier, no other options exist. They can research the companies they patronize, they can look at labels, they can shop at locally owned stores, etc. If one is determined enough, they can still find American-made versions of most products

    The domestic manufacturers got complacent. No doubt. People won't pay more for lower quality. There is no reason for that to be the case now.
    There's one very important reason. No matter what, there will always be some country where cheaper labor can be found than what can be found here. And the part in bold is important. People typically won't pay more for equal quality products either. Just because something is American-made doesn't mean it'll be higher quality. That's part of the problem that got us here. Equal quality can be found cheaper.

    The only thing that can change the outsourcing issue would be if everyone took the stance of buying American-made products simply because they are American-made. If they boycotted products, regardless of quality and price, that are a product of outsourcing.

    People are going to consider that.
    I guess I don't have as much faith in people as you do.

  7. #117
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Gm moves to China

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    From the link you obviously didn't read or understand.
    No, I understood it. You clearly did to because you've stopped calling those "other TARP funds" loans.


    In reality, it looks like GM merely used one source of TARP funds to repay another.
    See?

    The bottom line seems to be that the TARP loans were "repaid" with other TARP funds in a Treasury escrow account.

    there it is again.

    The TARP loans were not repaid from money GM is earning selling cars
    I never said they were.

    You do understand that a government investment into a company would still be TARP funds, yes?

    You also understand that an investment is not a loan, yes?

    If the answers to those questions are "yes", then you are also aware that the statement you made of "We recieved payment for one gov loan with another gov loan" was false, which is why I corrected it.

    If the answers to those questions are "no", then you clearly do not know exactly how the bailout went down.

  8. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Gm moves to China

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    No, I understood it. You clearly did to because you've stopped calling those "other TARP funds" loans.




    See?




    there it is again.



    I never said they were.

    You do understand that a government investment into a company would still be TARP funds, yes?

    You also understand that an investment is not a loan, yes?

    If the answers to those questions are "yes", then you are also aware that the statement you made of "We recieved payment for one gov loan with another gov loan" was false, which is why I corrected it.

    If the answers to those questions are "no", then you clearly do not know exactly how the bailout went down.
    You live in your own little world of "clinton speak". I live in a real world with black and white right and wrong, we talk right past eachother.

  9. #119
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Gm moves to China

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    You live in your own little world of "clinton speak". I live in a real world with black and white right and wrong, we talk right past eachother.
    Correction: I live in a world where words shave specific meanings and you live in an alternate reality where words mean whatever you want them to mean.

  10. #120
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Gm moves to China

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Correction: I live in a world where words shave specific meanings and you live in an alternate reality where words mean whatever you want them to mean.
    I have learned to read between the lines, words have meanings yes but they are often as not meaningless.

Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •