Jump to content
CaddyInfo Cadillac Forum

Paid to do nothing


Marika

Recommended Posts

Of course, from a quaility standpoint, the biggest issue in the 1970s was decreased sheet metal gauge and corrosion, the cars were for the most part 'rust buckets'. The auto industry will eventually get the mills to develop 'galvalume' or 'galvanneal' sheet metal, which dramatically improved the stampings, coordinated with paint adhesion

And the dreaded SAGING HEADLINER!

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply
KHE Posted on Jul 5 2005, 04:50 PM

(TexasAxMan @ Jul 5 2005, 07:02 PM)

GM built crap in the late 70's and 80's. I'm not disputing that GM is building the finest quality cars now, but in the past there have been issues.

I hear this over and over...I have had a few GM cars from the '70s and the '80s and none of them would qualify as "crap"....

Wish I could say that. Actually, the car was a pretty good one, so was the concept. However, it the execution of the project that sisn't turn out so good. I'm refereing to the 79-81 (?) gas to diesel experiement. And to boot, the transmission (Turbo 200) went out @ 40,000 miles just like the dealer mechanics said it would.

Otherwise, I've been happy with them.

Jim

I don't believe the Oldsmobile Diesel was a converted gasoline engine. The number one cause of failure to that engine was owners using the incorrect engine oil which resulted in loss of compression.

I think the Oldsmobile Diesel was used until 1984 or 1985 and by that time, it was bulletproof.

Kevin
'93 Fleetwood Brougham
'05 Deville
'04 Deville
2013 Silverado Z71

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe the Oldsmobile Diesel was a converted gasoline engine. The number one cause of failure to that engine was owners using the incorrect engine oil which resulted in loss of compression.

I think the Oldsmobile Diesel was used until 1984 or 1985 and by that time, it was bulletproof.

Yes and no. It wasn't just a straight conversion, but it was based on the gasoline 350 block. The block was heavier, and the crank journals were enlarged, but it was still mostly a standard gasoline block with 22.5:1 compression!

Jason(2001 STS, White Diamond)

"When you turn your car on...does it return the favor?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't the 80s when there was the 'dark' era, it was the early 70s. The Fed.s regulated compression ratios to a maximum of 9.5:1 in 1970, 9.0:1 in 1971, then finally 8.0:1 in 1973.

Corrected, as bolded:

It wasn't the 80s when there was the 'dark' era, it was the early 70s. The Fed.s regulated compression ratios to a maximum of 9.5:1 in 1971, 9.0:1 in 1972, then finally 8.0:1 in 1973.

Typing too fast,...1970 was a great year for performance engines, probably the best, Dodge 426 Hemi, Ford Boss 429 and the Chevy 427/454's...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe the Oldsmobile Diesel was a converted gasoline engine.  The number one cause of failure to that engine was owners using the incorrect engine oil which resulted in loss of compression.

I think the Oldsmobile Diesel was used until 1984 or 1985 and by that time, it was bulletproof.

Yes and no. It wasn't just a straight conversion, but it was based on the gasoline 350 block. The block was heavier, and the crank journals were enlarged, but it was still mostly a standard gasoline block with 22.5:1 compression!

I don't know if it was a "straight conversion" or not but I had one. It ate an injection pump and head gasket before 60K and I used the proper oil. It couldn't get get out of it's own way. Didn't get as good of milage as my Northstar and not much better than the 4100. About the only good thing I can say about it is it didn't leak oil like others were reported to do. It is not one of my fonder Cadillac memories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe the Oldsmobile Diesel was a converted gasoline engine.  The number one cause of failure to that engine was owners using the incorrect engine oil which resulted in loss of compression.

I think the Oldsmobile Diesel was used until 1984 or 1985 and by that time, it was bulletproof.

Yes and no. It wasn't just a straight conversion, but it was based on the gasoline 350 block. The block was heavier, and the crank journals were enlarged, but it was still mostly a standard gasoline block with 22.5:1 compression!

I don't know if it was a "straight conversion" or not but I had one. It ate an injection pump and head gasket before 60K and I used the proper oil. It couldn't get get out of it's own way. Didn't get as good of milage as my Northstar and not much better than the 4100. About the only good thing I can say about it is it didn't leak oil like others were reported to do. It is not one of my fonder Cadillac memories.

There was a design change to the injector pump in the later years - by 1983 or 1984, that engine was pretty much bulletproof. Unfortunately, it was dropped.

If GM offered a diesel in a passenger car today, I would be interested.

Kevin
'93 Fleetwood Brougham
'05 Deville
'04 Deville
2013 Silverado Z71

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, conversion or not (I've always heard it was a conversion) Ranger's analysis pretty much sums it all up.

I believe that 1971 was the curtain call for GM compression ratios. Ford & Chrysler followed in 1972.

My favorite GM cars .... can't say that I've had a bad one except the 79 Olds. I've owned a 1970 Trans Am since 1978 and guess what ... no sagging headliner!

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, conversion or not (I've always heard it was a conversion) Ranger's analysis pretty much sums it all up.

I believe that 1971 was the curtain call for GM compression ratios. Ford & Chrysler followed in 1972.

My favorite GM cars .... can't say that I've had a bad one except the 79 Olds. I've owned a 1970 Trans Am since 1978 and guess what ... no sagging headliner!

Jim

The "conversion" story is just that - an urban legend... I think the transmission in my Dad's '85 Fleetwood Brougham d'Elegance and my bud's '84 Coupe deVille was the 200-4R....they made 200,000+ and 172,000 miles respectively.

I know the 1970 model year was NOT the beginnning of the reduced compression ratios/reduced horespower. My Dad's 1970 Sedan deVille had the 472 cu-in V8 with 375 ft-lbs of torque. It required premium fuel - and in those days, it was leaded premium. He sold the car in 1977 as premium fuel was getting very hard to find. I think that elgine had a compression ratio of 11.5:1. That car was one runnin' SOB.....

Kevin
'93 Fleetwood Brougham
'05 Deville
'04 Deville
2013 Silverado Z71

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the transmission in my Dad's '85 Fleetwood Brougham d'Elegance and my bud's '84 Coupe deVille was the 200-4R....they made 200,000+ and 172,000 miles respectively.

Are we talking about the same transmission? As I recall, it was designated as a T200 but I could be mistaken. It's been over 20 years since I had that car.

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the transmission in my Dad's '85 Fleetwood Brougham d'Elegance and my bud's '84 Coupe deVille was the 200-4R....they made 200,000+ and 172,000 miles respectively.

Are we talking about the same transmission? As I recall, it was designated as a T200 but I could be mistaken. It's been over 20 years since I had that car.

Jim

As far as I know, the Turbo-200 was the 200-4R.

Kevin
'93 Fleetwood Brougham
'05 Deville
'04 Deville
2013 Silverado Z71

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KHE,

Back in those days I knew of four people who had 1978-1981 GM cars with that transmission (mine was the only diesel) and everyone of them failed before 50,000 miles. So out came the T200 and in went the T350.

Certainly these failures cannot be considered a true outlook, but the "trending data" certainly didn't look to good! Perhaps by the mid 80's the bugs were worked out, presuming they're the same transmission.

The car in itself was a nice vehicle. But in the 373 days I owned it more dollars went into repairs, (blown head gaskets, injector pump failure (x2) a transmission & an oil pump) than payments on the car. The car was three years old when I got it and had 36,000 miles.

Certainly, not a stellar performance. That vehicle really turned me against diesels.

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were two TH-200 transmissions of the day. The TH-200 and TH-200-C was a relatively cheap 3-speed automatic. Operated via a TV cable (not a vacuum modulator like the TH-350). TH-200 did not have a lockup torque converter, but the TH-200-C did. I had a 200-C in my '84, and had to have it rebuilt at about 100k miles. Extremely common failure mode for these is losing reverse gear...or having to rev the engine up and the transmission would BANG into reverse.

The other 200 transmission was the TH-200-4R. It was not merely a TH-200 with an OD gear; it was a different animal. Much more reliable. These all had lockup torque converters. I bought an '87 Regal with a knocking 307 engine with a good TH-200-4R transmission. 130k miles on both. I swapped out the 307 for a 403 and kept the same tranny. I made a mistake and kept the same 1600 rpm stall converter, but other than that, the transmission never missed a beat. The TH-200-4R was much better than the TH-200/TH-200-C trannys.

Jason(2001 STS, White Diamond)

"When you turn your car on...does it return the favor?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, like I said in my prior post, I thought I was entitled to an opinion. If this is the Guru site, then I will only ask technical questions that I know you are qualified to answer (I’m hoping, but are not sure you will). It is obvious that we do not share the same political and fiscal opinions, that should not make us mortal enemies, but if that’s what you want, so be it.

Guru said: Texas...sorry you find my tone offensive. I find your comments offensive, however, so at least we are on equal footing.

No I was respectful, you were not.

Guru said: My engineering degree "qualifies" me "to be an expert on social and economic issues" about as much as your CPA certification qualities you to comment on them....so we are on equal footing on that too. Besides, we are talking about a subject that is very close to home for me and my profession and I doubt that you have ever seen an automobile assembly plant much less been in one so I feel perfectly qualified to talk about things that I know about from first hand observation.

My CPA certification was achieved after several economics classes. and an economics minor, so I do believe I am more qualified to speak of economic issues than an engineer. I have also audited the Texaco retirement plan, and have a lot of insight on issues regarding company funded retirement plans. You may have had “higher learning” which might qualify you higher, but I have read nothing that tells me that. Also, knowledge about auto manufacturing has nothing to do with global economics.

Guru said: I don't understand why you feel imposed upon with my remarks. You make a statement, that, despite your claim of not wanting to offend anyone, includes quite a few untruths and uncomplementary statements about GM, the UAW, autoworkers in general and the quality of the cars we produce. Now you cop an attitude at me because I post some facts that fly in the face of that....??? Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black, I'd say. Every one is totally free to state their opinion and I am totally free to re-state mine and include facts that refute your "claims". If what I post doesn't fit your preconceived notions of what is going on them go find facts of your own and prove me wrong. Everyone has "opinions" but not everyone can back them up with facts.

What “facts” have you quoted? You have simply ranted on about the quality of cars GM is producing TODAY, but you have yet to discuss the past. The past quality of GM cars is of issue, and why Americans are buying foreign made cars now. I never said that Americans were smart to abandon the US auto manufacturers, but they have done so in great abundance. BTW, ‘uncomplementary” is spelled “uncomplimentary.”

Guru said: I read your post very carefully before I replied. You comment, in the PRESENT TENSE, that " The average auto line worker makes in excess of $25 per hour for putting in three bolts in every car, and they do it poorly!" and "union contracts are so ridiculous these days, they let people clock in and do nothing for their paychecks." Neither of these is true, neither references the 70's or 80's and you did NOT state that it referenced an earlier era anywhere. Stick to what you stated and don't try to make it out that people are twisting your words and have poor reading comprehension.

It is simply my opinion that US autoworkers are overpaid for the tasks they perform. Yet men who are in the line of fire in Iraq don’t make anywhere near what an autoworker makes. If I remember correctly, the title of this post is “Paid to do nothing, General Motors will pay laid-off workers” or something like that. I have got to ask, how is it that foreign auto makers (that make their cars in America) can compete in the current market with the tariffs that are already imposed on them, even though they have to ship their product inputs overseas? Simple, they pay their workers a REASONABLE wage for the work they perform. The quality of life in Japan and Korea is pretty high these days, so what gives?

Guru said: You talk about the 70's and 80's...??? Have you noticed many Hondas or Nissans or Toyotas from back then running around...?? NO. That is because they all rusted out and the suspensions collapsed due to the body rotting out. Just what Americans wanted, I'm sure. I have seen those cars fall apart like that myself so don't tell me how much "better" those cars were back then if that is your frame of reference.

Actually, I see 70’s and 80’s Hondas, Toyotas and Nissans/Datsuns with the same degree of regularity that I see 70’s and 80’s American cars ( however, the US made cars catch my attention more). It could be because I live in a southern state where rust is not an extensive problem, but they (foreign cars) are out there, especially when you consider the relative production quantities. I never said that they were producing superior cars, just that the American public saw it that way. The truth is that early era US cars are sought after as “collector cars” and are pampered as such. If you treat an Impala like you would a Rolls Royce, it is likely to last as long. Again, I’m not saying that the foreign automakers produced a superior product, just that the American public saw it that way.

Guru said: There are a lot of people that do not make what autoworkers do. So what. That was never the issue at hand. Manufacturing costs are something that GM and other manufacturing companies must contend with, yes, but that is NOT the reason that GM is in the trouble that it is in currently. The overwhelming legacy costs from past success is the issue raised and discussed in this thread and the facts I mention regarding other companies not having to deal with that while being allowed to sell cars here is what is unfair and needs correcting.

That has always been the issue, with me at least. Unions, that were once intended to make sure workers were not being treated unfairly, have made it a cause of theirs to get the highest wages for their constituents (don’t know if that’s the best word, but it will suffice), regardless of the long-term effects. While this may provide short-term benefits for their constituents, the long-term effect has now reared its ugly head.

Guru said: Besides, since you know nothing about what an autoworker does how do you figure you are qualified to say that it is OK for you to make well over $25 per hour while they shouldn't. Those folks devote just as much, if not more, of their lives toiling on an assembly line as you do CPA'ing so why shouldn't they make a good living..?? As I said, if you think that they do mindless jobs and are at work doing nothing (as you stated in the present tense) then you are simply wrong and have been mislead by bad information. Maybe you need to be straightened out by reading my posts.

You apparently don’t have any idea what a CPA does either. I don’t begrudge them a good living, but I have met two autoworkers on hunting trips, and they both bragged about not working hard but getting the wages because the UAW made firing them impossible. They get the wages whether they do a good job or not. I don’t know, and I sure don’t want to spoil a full barrel of apples with just two references, but their tales tell me that “quality of work” is a not an issue in American auto plants (BTW, both worked at the plant in Arlington, I don’t know if that makes a difference, but thought I should mention it). The way these guys drank booze, in addition to their comments, I’m wondering…..

Guru said: You made the jump from autoworkers to other workers and made the statement about "hungover idiots" so I assumed that whatever relevence your comments about the other workers had to do with auto workers must have carried thru to all the comments.

No jump, my original post was about unions in general. My original comment was that unions are outdated. I believe that, as do many others, based on the fact that several manufacturing facilities have shut down in Texas as a result of unions (which also may be a local issue). Also. “relevance” is spelled with an a, not an e.

Guru said: No, I do not think that tenure alone should override poor performance. That is not what you said. You indicated that "If a guy/gal has been working for the same company for 30 years, they are probably bored and not doing the quality of work they should be". I didn't see any exclusions there so I take THAT statement personally. If you want to be a hired gun and jump jobs for more money then that is your perogative. If the money is your motivator then have at it. There are a lot of people that take some degree of interest and pride in their jobs and in creating something, putting it into production and seeing it in the marketplace and driving around on the road beside them. You don't get that by jumping jobs every few years and I have found that the longer I work at GM and the more experience I get the more interesting the project and the more involved I get. If you think that people are over the hill after they have worked in the same place for 30 years you have another think coming. Maybe being a CPA is that boring but designing and developing cars certainly isn't. Besides, your tone implies that someone might go to the same desk for the same job for 30 years. Within GM, there are a LOT of different jobs and most guys like me have done MANY different jobs in MANY different areas from testing and devlopment to design and working in the manufacturing plant. Practically speaking I have probably had 20 totally different "jobs" within GM over the last 33 years so maybe your pre-conceived notions of what is involved with having a long career at one company is all about.

Accounting work IS boring, I’ll give you that, that’s why I don’t do it, I do CPA work instead, and you seemingly don’t know the difference. Also, you may be an exception, but in my experience, workers tend to lose their initiative after a few years. You state that you have had 20 different jobs at GM, I’m sure you deserved every promotion you received, and I’m sure they kept you challenged, which prompted your growth. Working in the design group is nowhere akin to the line autoworkers, you must admit. I’m talking about line workers who see the same old, same old every day. I can also spell “development” and “prerogative,” BTW.

Guru said: If you saw a beer can in your fender than I doubt seriously that a UAW worker put it there. Interestingly enough, I worked on a "sqeek and rattle" task force off and on for several years in an assembly plant and we never found any beer cans or bottles or other foreign objects in doors or fenders when investigating a problem car or a noise in the field.

Then how do you think it got there? The car was un-wrecked and had never been serviced. I can also spell “squeak”, BTW.

Guru said: I think my replies are pretty polite. Blunt and straightforward maybe, but you are used to that with me, right..?? Probably it is more funny to read when I am taking on someone else I guess, right...??? LOL LOL LOL

I don’t know you personally, but I have never had FUN reading your rants, most of the time I have agreed with you (or deferred to your judgment), but on this one, I can’t. Must be good having your c@*# sucked by some of the people on this and other boards (due to your position at GM) related to Cadillac’s, huh? Also, talking is spelled with an "L," as in "talking."

Like I said, I wasn’t looking for a pissing contest with you or anyone else. It seems as though you have singled me out for some reason, that’s fine, I’m a big boy now. I realize I have responded rather snottily to your accusations, but I am not going to let you respond to me in the manner you have without repercussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Texas,

You've had quite a beginning on this board. To be honest you remind me of a loud obnoxious drunken buffoon entering a fine restaurant. All of us are trying to enjoy our "meal" and here you come blasting in. I've received a couple PMs commenting on how you've had nothing constructive to say in any of your posts. Personally I read about half way through your last post and couldn't continue. Read through all your posts and perhaps you'll see why some of us are shaking our heads. I certainly hope you have admirers on the other board because I don't think you're going to have many here. If you feel the need to challenge Guru head to head then why not just PM him or e-mail him? Just a suggestion…unless alienation and looking like an *smurf* if more your taste.

What part of Texas are you from? I really have a thing for south Texas. I have lots of family there. Brownsville, Harlingon, Dallas, Houston, El paso, and now Lubbock. I always miss the terrific Tex-Mex food. I'm getting hungry just talking about it. I'll just have to settle for coffee since it's only 8:23am.

Texas, you may be partially right and Guru is always right (LOL) as well and after awhile the point is a mute point. I think some of the guys were trying to take this into a new and more productive direction. I've noticed and it's probably a good idea. What do you think?

"Burns" rubber

" I've never considered myself to be all that conservative, but it seems the more liberal some people get the more conservative I become. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 200-C still works well in the '84 Olds (184k).

Been running Mobile synth for years. Except the

speed sensor quit many moons ago. After rigging

a manual switch to the torque lock solenoid it would

not dissengage well (that didn't fair well for the lower

end of the 307). Now that the speed sensor is fixed

maybe the torque lock will work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>"First of all, like I said in my prior post, I thought I was entitled to an opinion."<

>"I don’t know you personally, but I have never had FUN reading your rants, most of the time I have agreed with you (or deferred to your judgment), but on this one, I can’t.  Must be good having your c@*# sucked by some of the people on this and other boards (due to your position at GM) related to Cadillac’s, huh?  Also, talking is spelled with an "L," as in "talking."<

Actually Tex, I do know 'Guru' personally, and you couldn't be more wrong. This guy takes a good deal of his personal time just to help people. Period. No ego gratification, not looking for thanks. Just because he believes it's the right thing to do.

>"Must be good having your c@*# sucked by some of the people on this and other boards (due to your position at GM) related to Cadillac’s, huh?"<

Very eloquent suggestion pardner.... I'm sure that all of us who have participated and contributed to this forum for some years now really appreciate that one. Tells us a lot about you actually, along with your nit picking spell check reminders..

So far your "opinion" has scored a lot of points with this boy....

'93 STS.. opened, dropped, wide...fast.

user posted image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes texas, if you were here for a longer time you would probably be ashamed of many things you had posted. Particularly those concern Guru, a man we all have a lot of respect for. You better to leave for other forums where expressions like "co#$^sucked" and such. are common. I am 100% for freedom of speach but we just do not need that crap here.

The saddest thing in life is wasted talent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought my last post would be the last on this subject but tex got me going. I think the old saying "dont judge a man untill you walk in his shoes" flew right by tex. I think his buddies on his hunting trip were giving him a ration of s--t because they knew he did not like unions or may be they did not like tex. In any case just this morning I was going over the new union contract at my old work place. The lead mechanics make the same money on jan1-05 as I did when I retired 12 years ago and the new contract makes them take a 3.9% cut in pay on top of that! Plus over the years their benefits have been reduced. I could not be a auto assembler the work is mind numbing and back breaking its takes a special type of guy to work 30yrs there I respect them and their profession. Another thing, I dont judge a man on how much or how little he drinks. I do take a lot of stake in how he treats others. Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

REMEMBER THE PYSCHO- WOMAN A WHILE BACH, THE ONE WITH THE CRACKED BLOCK, THE ONE WHO BAD MOUTH CADILLAC AND HAD A HATE CADILLAC WEB SITE....... THINK THESE TWO ARE RELATED?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that the speed sensor is fixed maybe the torque lock will work?

Probably not. It's most likely the TCC solenoid has gone bad. Normally (like on the 200-4R) these are easy to replace...just drop the pan and it's right there. However, on the 200-C, the solenoid is mounted up just behind the front pump area, making replacement extremely time-consuming. You gotta remove the trans. as I understand. If you go that far, you might as well swap in a 200-4R and some 3.73 gears and get some performance for your trouble. :)

Jason(2001 STS, White Diamond)

"When you turn your car on...does it return the favor?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hear! Hear!

Regards,

Warren :P

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TexasAxMan Posted on Jul 10 2005, 12:49 AM

Must be good having your c@*# sucked by some of the people on this and other boards

To all,

I've been visiting this board for about 3 years now. I don't post as often as others, but hardly a day goes by when I don't stop by and read some of the posted questions or subjects. If I have something to contribute I do & if not, I don't.

First of all: As we all know Guru has been very helpful (often repeating himself to newcomers) to all of us at one time or another. I for one appreciate the time he has taken to write the response(s) to our problems. As anyone knows who has been here for a while he just doesn't write two or three sentences. He gives a lot of detail(s) and that takes time ... a lot of time and again "I" appreciate it.

Second of all: Apparently this subject/post has apparently touched some ideology issues. Even from previous posts (in the past) some of us have expressed our own views on issues this country is dealing with (be it war, social security, labor unions government intrusion and so on). Each of us whether our ideology is conservative or liberal (or some where in between) has our own ideas on how to deal with the numerous challenges facing us all. I for one am conservative. But never have I been so pig-headed in my beliefs and ideas that I just toss my liberal friends thoughts aside. I try to be informed, not swayed by political correctness of the moment. Accordingly, I believe in the concept to treat others, as you would like to be treated.

Third of all: Through it all, this is the "first" time I've ever read a vulgar post (such as the one I posted) on this board. It's the one thing I have really enjoyed here ... treating each other with respect, even when we disagree. Hopefully that trend can continue. I would encourage everyone to try and remember when reading a post (or email), that if it sounds contentious, to try and think that the possibility does exist that it may have been written a sincere way, but may be taken as an contentious statement because of one's state of mind at the time. Remember, sarcasm is a free service I'm sure we all can offer at any given time. Here's hoping we don't have to stoop to these types of comments.

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Third of all: Through it all, this is the "first" time I've ever read a vulgar post (such as the one I posted) on this board. It's the one thing I have really enjoyed here ... treating each other with respect, even when we disagree. Hopefully that trend can continue. I would encourage everyone to try and remember when reading a post (or email), that if it sounds contentious, to try and think that the possibility does exist that it may have been written a sincere way, but may be taken as an contentious statement because of one's state of mind at the time. Remember, sarcasm is a free service I'm sure we all can offer at any given time. Here's hoping we don't have to stoop to these types of comments.

Jim

Well said.

Regards,

Warren

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The foreign companies (whether importing or manufacturing in a transplant plant) do NONE of this so they are doing absolutely nothing to support the US other than paying workers in their plants a menial wage with very little medical benefits and no retirement plans.

Guru, I hope you continue to read this thread, and maybe clear up a big misunderstanding that I might have. You claim that the foreign auto makers do not offer retirement plans for their line workers. Is that really true? The thousands of workers who work at Toyota and Honda and Nissan plants in this country have ZERO retirement benefits? I understand they're not under a union contract, and I understand that they're not old enough to draw pensions, but it was my understanding that the foreign makes would have 401(k) plans set up (as does GM now apparently), and they would be contributing to the workers' retirement plans NOW, instead of LATER (as with a pension).

If Toyota and Honda and Nissan plants really don't offer any retirement programs at all, and the workers aren't even under a union contract, I really have to wonder how they recruit new workers. Without a good retirement plan, I wouldn't work there. There's got to be SOME incentive to work there.

Jason(2001 STS, White Diamond)

"When you turn your car on...does it return the favor?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TexasAssMan,

Here's the sort of post we enjoy seeing around here:

"I have been reading this forum for some time now and just want to say how helpful it has been to me. I have to admit I was really surprised how helpful and accommodating the members are to each other, especially to newbies like myself. I think I had expected a lot of " Sounds like you have a problem, buddy" sort of replies. I just want to say thanks for a great forum. I'm still learning a lot about my car - '93 Eldorado - that I didn't know, but I hope I can contribute to the forum. Thanks for letting me into a great group."

See: http://caddyinfo.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6608

Your pissant whining is simply boorish.

Regards (of a sort),

Warren

Posted Image

There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved. - Ludwig von Mises

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...