Uncle Sam wants to warranty your car
03-31-2009, 07:39 PM
#22
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Originally Posted by TYSON' post='919633' date='Mar 31 2009, 08:22 PM
bleh, if the government would just take over the pension and healthcare of all the retired UAW members GM, Ford and Chrysler would recover on their own.
While I don't really understand why GM and the USPS are "too good" to go on medicare like the rest of the over 65 population and i certainly don't see an issue with all together cancelling their retirement healthcare, I do not feel the gov't should take over and provide them with the current healthcare plan they have, furthermore taking over their retirement is a complete ****, where is the corporate responsibility? Should a corporation not be required to put enough money into a retirement plan to fund it each year, that money only being made available to retirees so that even after the company has gone broke the retirees are not the responsibility of the tax payer? When did it become me, the taxpayers responsibility to fund the mistakes of corporations? If they plan to provide these "bonuses" or benefits to these employees, they should be required to fund those benefits for the forseeable future, or they should not offer them in the first place. It is not the responsibility of the tax payer to make corporations profitable and companies that provide these services should under no circumstances expect ME to pick up the tab. They can collect social security and enroll in medicare just like the rest of the retired people in america.
Insolvent companies should not be propped up by the taxpayer and the taxpayer should not be on the hook because they offered a retirement plan that was in fact too good to last......
Company retirement plans should be just like state lotteries, they are required to put a certain amount of money aside for each winner, that money is enough to pay the winner the agreed upon amount over the maturity of the contract, the state cannot touch it and after 20 years they get the principle back, it ain't rocket science. What's the motivation for a company to come up with profitable business model at all? Meanwhile we prop up these goliath corporations with no fiscal, moral or corporate responsibility and **** all over the small businessman paying his employees well over minimum wage and we DO FORCE HIM TO SEND HIS EMPLOYEE MATCHING TO A THIRD PARTY.
Where does it end? Can I start a company selling golf carts and promise my employees 1 million a year once they retire, not put any money aside to fund the agreed upon retirement and just expect the taxpayer to pick up the tab. Hell maybe I could also sell those golf carts at 25% below what it costs me to make them and expect to the taxpayer to pick up the slack, afterall I plan to employ thousands, hell I'll be the only golf cart manufacturer around, I'll be selling them for 30 to 40% less then everyone else.
03-31-2009, 08:22 PM
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,016
When it comes to a stock vehicle I'm sure you understand what happends to lap times on something thats 8 minutes long when you change from tires saved for grandma to something a little more aggresive!
03-31-2009, 11:04 PM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 2,871
Originally Posted by phinsup' post='919635' date='Mar 31 2009, 08:39 PM
While I don't really understand why GM and the USPS are "too good" to go on medicare like the rest of the over 65 population and i certainly don't see an issue with all together cancelling their retirement healthcare, I do not feel the gov't should take over and provide them with the current healthcare plan they have, furthermore taking over their retirement is a complete ****, where is the corporate responsibility? Should a corporation not be required to put enough money into a retirement plan to fund it each year, that money only being made available to retirees so that even after the company has gone broke the retirees are not the responsibility of the tax payer? When did it become me, the taxpayers responsibility to fund the mistakes of corporations? If they plan to provide these "bonuses" or benefits to these employees, they should be required to fund those benefits for the forseeable future, or they should not offer them in the first place. It is not the responsibility of the tax payer to make corporations profitable and companies that provide these services should under no circumstances expect ME to pick up the tab. They can collect social security and enroll in medicare just like the rest of the retired people in america.
Insolvent companies should not be propped up by the taxpayer and the taxpayer should not be on the hook because they offered a retirement plan that was in fact too good to last......
Company retirement plans should be just like state lotteries, they are required to put a certain amount of money aside for each winner, that money is enough to pay the winner the agreed upon amount over the maturity of the contract, the state cannot touch it and after 20 years they get the principle back, it ain't rocket science. What's the motivation for a company to come up with profitable business model at all? Meanwhile we prop up these goliath corporations with no fiscal, moral or corporate responsibility and **** all over the small businessman paying his employees well over minimum wage and we DO FORCE HIM TO SEND HIS EMPLOYEE MATCHING TO A THIRD PARTY.
Where does it end? Can I start a company selling golf carts and promise my employees 1 million a year once they retire, not put any money aside to fund the agreed upon retirement and just expect the taxpayer to pick up the tab. Hell maybe I could also sell those golf carts at 25% below what it costs me to make them and expect to the taxpayer to pick up the slack, afterall I plan to employ thousands, hell I'll be the only golf cart manufacturer around, I'll be selling them for 30 to 40% less then everyone else.
Insolvent companies should not be propped up by the taxpayer and the taxpayer should not be on the hook because they offered a retirement plan that was in fact too good to last......
Company retirement plans should be just like state lotteries, they are required to put a certain amount of money aside for each winner, that money is enough to pay the winner the agreed upon amount over the maturity of the contract, the state cannot touch it and after 20 years they get the principle back, it ain't rocket science. What's the motivation for a company to come up with profitable business model at all? Meanwhile we prop up these goliath corporations with no fiscal, moral or corporate responsibility and **** all over the small businessman paying his employees well over minimum wage and we DO FORCE HIM TO SEND HIS EMPLOYEE MATCHING TO A THIRD PARTY.
Where does it end? Can I start a company selling golf carts and promise my employees 1 million a year once they retire, not put any money aside to fund the agreed upon retirement and just expect the taxpayer to pick up the tab. Hell maybe I could also sell those golf carts at 25% below what it costs me to make them and expect to the taxpayer to pick up the slack, afterall I plan to employ thousands, hell I'll be the only golf cart manufacturer around, I'll be selling them for 30 to 40% less then everyone else.
As opposed to writing the corporate entity a fat check and paying to repair their cars for them? At least they have a system in place for handling healthcare and pensions, not sure how many people in washington know how to make cars profitably. But they sure decided they know how to make cars now didn't they?
04-01-2009, 09:45 AM
#28
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Originally Posted by TYSON' post='919668' date='Apr 1 2009, 12:04 AM
As opposed to writing the corporate entity a fat check and paying to repair their cars for them? At least they have a system in place for handling healthcare and pensions, not sure how many people in washington know how to make cars profitably. But they sure decided they know how to make cars now didn't they?
Screw it, I give up. I guess if I'm against bailing out their pension and healthcare I must be for all the other bailout ideas cause it's simply impossible that one be against all ideas that burden the taxpayer with trillions of dollars in debt, afterall we can't just let these unprofitable businesses fail. I can't help but shutter at the horror of large unprofitable businesses disappearing from our landscape, small businesses forced to take up the slack, selling and producing quality goods that people want, employing workers in the towns and cities that they sell their goods in, HORRIFYING, my god I just had an awful thought, what if GM went broke and a guy like Tucker came along again and started making cars that people actually wanted? woooh, i dont even want to think about it.
Maybe we should just start subsidizing their cars.
04-01-2009, 10:14 AM
#29
Administrator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stuart, FL
Posts: 24,416
Originally Posted by Rob x-7' post='919661' date='Mar 31 2009, 09:43 PM
try driving a car today with under inflated tires, ******* car rings and dings and flashes lights in your face
old people don't notice that **** at all Rob, they can drive for 4 days with a right turn signal on, what are the odds them hearing and/or seeing low tire pressure warnings LOL
04-01-2009, 10:29 AM
#30
Super Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: VA
Posts: 2,532
Originally Posted by phinsup' post='919681' date='Apr 1 2009, 10:14 AM
old people don't notice that **** at all Rob, they can drive for 4 days with a right turn signal on, what are the odds them hearing and/or seeing low tire pressure warnings LOL
Hell, half the time they don't even see a stopped school bus with flashers on. The impact wakes them up.... sometimes.