Anyway, the actual history of the death of American auto industry is popularly blamed on unions, when the real greater blame lays with the Greenies and the "OMG CARS ARE DANGEROUS!" folks. It was the end of the decades long the truly great design, creatively and uniquely American history and love-affair with the automobile. Cars actually used to have STYLE!
Even running around Detroit ten years ago, you got a clear idea why they chose that as the setting for Robocop. The cass corridor looks like something from an urban warzone in africa
In the near future, Detroit, Michigan is on the verge of collapse due to financial ruin and unchecked crime. The mega-corporation Omni Consumer Products (OCP) enters into a contract with the city to run the police force. OCP plans to demolish "Old Detroit" and redevelop it as a high-end utopia called "Delta City." To address the city's crime, OCP tests several projects to engineer robotic law enforcement. During a presentation of a project spearheaded by the senior president, Dick Jones (Ronny Cox), the ED-209 enforcement droid malfunctions and kills a junior executive. With Delta City's construction scheduled to begin within months, the OCP Chairman (Dan O'Herlihy) immediately advances an alternative put forth by an ambitious, middle-ranking executive named Bob Morton (Miguel Ferrer). Morton calls his cyborg project "RoboCop."
Yes, there's no question that the latter groups you mention will contribute nothing to the recovery, and that has to be consitered.
So if you were the judges, what would you do regarding people on pensions for city work?
It's a crappy situation, to be sure. But Bondholders come first in a bankruptcy - that's the law.
Tax payers and teachers got screwed over. Teachers that went to retire after 30 years received an average pension of $23,000 to live off of until they died. Of course, that got them half a year and then they went on welfare. I suppose you could say poor tax payers because they ended up paying out for welfare until these teachers died. Pension systems (that are not corrupt) save the tax payers money. Just a fact.
Ah yes - serve the needs of the rich corporations over the needs of the common people. Got it. :doh:roll:
Is she a teacher or administrator? I'd like to see that link.
Now that is bull****. The American auto industry did not innovate and change with the times, that is why they failed.
The only American car company that did not fail was Ford, and that is solely due to the fact that Ford had a big stake overseas in Europe where regulations forced them, and European and Japanese car makers, to innovate and improve their cars.
And that all happened while GM and Chrysler pushed out the same crap cars in a new design year after year.
According to what I read, in 1991 it was $25,000, but whatever. How much do you think the average Social Security recipient receives today?? $14,760 a year. What's the maximum a Social Security recipient can receive today? $30,000. Today. Why are public sector workers not a part of the system that's good enough for everyone else?
Pretty sure most people know the answer to that...
1. No. Whose interests are served are irrelevant (or should be) to a judge. What the law is is what matters - and the law is pretty clear. Bondholders come first. Otherwise, other municipalities will find it increasingly difficult and costly to borrow, and more of them will go into bankruptcy, and more public workers will suddenly find their pensions disappearing. Your proposed policy will have the opposite of the effect you are hoping to achieve.
2. Alot of those bondholders are retirees themselves, or pension funds that pay out to retirees. Not a little bit of your argument comes down to "we should screw over private sector retirees in order to better benefit public sector retirees".
She was a teacher with administrative responsibilities. I'm sorry I can't give you that for privacy reasons.
So if you were the judges, what would you do regarding people on pensions for city work?
Try $25,000 for a life time not a year. They were receiving around that amount a year when they had pensions. Contribution plans do not work the same as defined benefits.
Now that is bull****. The American auto industry did not innovate and change with the times, that is why they failed.
The only American car company that did not fail was Ford, and that is solely due to the fact that Ford had a big stake overseas in Europe where regulations forced them, and European and Japanese car makers, to innovate and improve their cars.
And that all happened while GM and Chrysler pushed out the same crap cars in a new design year after year.
I was incorrect. I read the article wrong. (I'm very familiar with defined contribution vs defined benefit plans. I set one up for my employees. We cancelled it and paid out tons of money to our employees in order to do that. I didn't begrudge our employees that payout, but we could simply not afford the defined benefit plan -- went to 401K's.)
When the West Virginia legislature switched those teachers to 401K's? They were wrong not to put them into Social Security. That was a complete ****-up.
Bankruptcy in regular order. No political favors.
Yes, and when you look at the cost, pensions actually costs the tax payers less. They benefit from the social security money teachers put into the system but will not collect. They benefit when teachers contribute more to the pension system. The important thing is that these pensions need to be be protected from corruption like any system does.
And one of the biggest reasons they did not innovate and the quality of their cars went down was the fact that they had to pay double or triple what their Japanese and European competition had to pay for labor. There was a lot less money to put into the cars. It was only much later, when the industry in the US was facing collapse, that unions started making concessions.
I just love it how the right libertarians constantly expose their disdain for the common American and in turn favor corporations and the wealthy.
Sounds a lot like Public employees paid by the taxpayers who have disdain for that taxpayer by demanding more than the taxpayer is willing to fund. It does seem that many PUBLIC servants don't understand they are paid by the public through state taxes and not the bureaucrats who gave them those benefits.
A lot of states do not participate in SS and have their own pension plans. That isn't right or wrong just reality. If you don't contribute to SS then you don't get any social security benefits except as a survivor to someone who does get those benefits.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?