• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GM goes bankrupt and gets nationalised

Government will not be able to succeed in the Auto business. Government has too many favors that they like to bestow on their "friends". It will be a porky mess.
 
Hey Slippery Slope...get caught up, you are way behind here.
 
Someone else is willing to do the same thing cheaper.
Right, meaning they make less and can afford to buy less.

That is how it works, people in places with a lesser cost of living naturally don't need as much money compared to people in places with higher costs of living.
OK, so why do some places have a lower cost of living? Environment, job availability and wages.
 
So why have labor laws at all then? To prevent corporations from taking advantage of their labor force and to provide a safe and healthy work environment.

That's the way you think it ought to be?
 
Right so all corps should move to the south where it's cheaper and then all the people will move to the south thereby raising the cost of living. When the tech bubble busted Californians started moving out to Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, Arizona... guess what happened? I know, because we looked at these states too. The housing prices shot up as well as the cost of living. Because people with money moved in and could afford to pay more.
 
Then why do people focus on the union wages? Because cons hate unions because they don't allow employers to take advantage of their labor and cons believe that if you can hold an employee upside down and shake the pennies out of their pockets then the corporation deserves to have those pennies.
 
How are you planning to do that exactly? Tell Toyota is has to pay more, so they move out of the country?
No... the usually proposed solution is to unionize everyone -- so as to artifically raise labor costs, thus either raising the cost of the product or lowering the margin of profit.

"Leveling the playing field" like this in no different that raising average class scores by making the test easier.
 

High salary does not prosperity make.
 

Because union wages and more importantly union benefit packages are a big part of the problem, and libs like unions as a rule(with me being an exception in some ways), so they are a convenient target. And the unions are rightfully a very large part of the problem, and does have to make concessions. You will notice however that the concessions don't include pay hourly pay cuts as I understand it.
 

I gave you a thanks for that. Don't get used to it or start thinking I like you, but good post.
 
Right, because GM hasn't been selling cars at the current price, which somehow means that Toyota wouldn't sell them at that price point either. :doh
 
How are you planning to do that exactly? Tell Toyota is has to pay more, so they move out of the country? Are you going to expect suppliers to pay more too, or would you just shift more work from automaker plants to suppliers?
Unionize Toyota. The Big 3 did just fine selling cars before foreign competition. Competition is good, but not unfair competition.
 
Right, because GM hasn't been selling cars at the current price, which somehow means that Toyota wouldn't sell them at that price point either. :doh

This fails on every level.

1) GM has been selling plenty of cars.

2) GM's pricing is largely in line with the market, as is Toyota's.

3) You're the one gung-ho to raise car prices, not me.
 
Unionize Toyota. The Big 3 did just fine selling cars before foreign competition. Competition is good, but not unfair competition.

You would force people who do not want to be in a union to be in one? I am pretty sure that is illegal. It is certainly a bad idea.
 
No... the usually proposed solution is to unionize everyone -- so as to artifically raise labor costs, thus either raising the cost of the product or lowering the margin of profit.
How is raising wages "artificial"?

"Leveling the playing field" like this in no different that raising average class scores by making the test easier.
That is a specious argument and not a valid analogy.
 
Why are unions, in your opinion, a very large part of the problem? Because of increased labor costs (labor costs include honoring contracts made with retirees which they wish to renege on now)? So here we are still talking about labor costs being higher for GM than nonunion companies.
 
Unionize Toyota. The Big 3 did just fine selling cars before foreign competition. Competition is good, but not unfair competition.

Unionizing Toyota? Are you kidding? The only reason the Big 3 wages aren't soaring is because they couldn't sell cars for any higher price. If you unionize all of them, then they will all raise their prices.

I'm fine with employees unionizing themselves, but I'm also fine with that union getting fired for demanding too much. As we're seeing with the American car companies, the unions demanding too much is now forcing them out of a job. Great job guys!

And you say that Toyota and other Japanese auto manufacturers are subsidized. So what? They still have to sell a good product to us. However, that just means that their other industries are that much weaker. If there are two industries A & B in countries C & D, and B subsidizes A in C, then D will not have a very strong A industry, but B will be booming in D because B from C cannot compete in D what with their profits being tapped to pay for A in C. In short, it doesn't matter that they're being subsidized. In fact, there is an inherent inefficiency in subsidization and so we don't have to worry about another country doing that. You can't subsidize every industry. At some point, someone has to make money.
 
Last edited:
Why wouldn't people want to be protected by a union?

Ask the workers in those plants, and in many plants here in Michigan who have repeatedly turned away the UAW.
 
Why wouldn't people want to be protected by a union?

If I'm a part of a union that demands too much, then I have to still go along with them and I risk getting fired. Some wage is better than no wage.

But if a union gets a company to demand that new employees join the union, then that's their prerogative. However, if the competition has no union, then I wouldn't expect that company to last too long (barring government favoritism).
 

Would you rather just have GM close it's doors? Then no one gets anything except a few creditors. GM loses, the retirees lose, the creditors lose, the workers lose. It is not in the workers best interest to not renegotiate.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…