Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
16705 messages, Last post on Nov 25, 2009 at 6:56 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 06, 2009 7:19 am) I believe many of the statistics are misleading such as comparing life expectancy and numbers of uninsured. I've known many people over the years who've made good wages/salary that didn't have health insurance because they didn't want it. Yes, these were young males w/o a family. But to say that every person who is uninsured, doesn't have it because they don't have access or can't afford it is not 100% true. To my knowledge, life expectancy is based on death's per 1000 for the population. That is not a good way (IMO) to compare the effectiveness of health care systems. Every time a gang banger executes another gang member that effects mortality rates and no amount of health care can fix that. Add auto related deaths, the US is among the highest in per capita traffic fatalities. Many of our citizens are fat and generally unhealthy. This all affects our morality rates and health costs and is IMO hard if not impossible to accurately compare health care systems between nations. While that is all debatable and off topic. I whole heartedly disagree that health care is why the big 3 is in the position they are in. Sure, the health care costs are an issue, but I just turned 38 and for as long as I can remember the big 3 have built a lot of crap as I've witnessed customer after customer choose foreign cars after a horrible experience from the D3. If management would have invested the money when they were profitable into the product to build competitive cars they would be making money today (well pre recession anyway). I'm willing to bet the d3 would be in the same situation today if we had a national health care system over the past 30 years. Any funds these company's might have saved (granted someone would have to pay for it) would have been wasted somewhere else. Probably in the the form of a larger dividend, executive bonus's, poor acquisitions, and overly lucrative labor agreements.
|
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 06, 2009 6:39 am) From the 2007 records it looks like the golf course is being used for a higher class of citizen. Probably the UAW leadership bringing all their crony lobbyist friends up for a nice vacation at UAW member expense. Out of the 13,000 rounds of golf played last year only 4000 rounds were played by UAW members and retirees. You have said the course loses money. So how much UAW money was wasted on NON MEMBERS out playing golf? How many were lowlife Republicans playing a round of golf on the Members nickel? I have never mentioned selling the place. I have questioned if any of the money was out of a pension plan? If the the UAW had to pay $5.9 million to a pension plan last year then it would be easy to assume they borrowed money from one of the pension plans the UAW oversees. Spending interest from a strike fund for training I would consider legitimate. Spending it so some non member fat cat can go play golf would raise my eyebrows if I was a member. Then I did get involved in my Union and was on the carpet more than once for bucking the leadership's wasting money on pet projects. I can assure you I would not have worshiped Reuther any more than I would have Jess Carr. Even though I am sure they did much for organized labor.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 06, 2009 7:19 am) yet the refutation you supply is an anecdotal accounts of two ladies in your church who had their prenatal care and deliveries (less circumcison costs) paid for by the state of california. ok you have "proved" to me that i am off by 2-- how about the other 45, 999,998 americans without health insurance? i am finally beginning to understand that there are probably about that number of americans out there whose strong opinions are such that facts don't really matter.
|
|
|
Key note speech My favorite line "I also learned what a horrible disservice it is to let people's pay outgrow their skills, so when they lose their jobs they also lose their middle-class standard of living, many permanently.
|
|
|
Replying to: dieselone (Jan 06, 2009 7:54 am) My question is would be, if the UAW members were asked to pay 50% of their income in taxes as is the case in Canada would they be so gungho for government sponsored health care? As you have pointed out. IT IS NOT FREE except for those that are on welfare and not contributing to the country. The high paid UAW workers would be some of the hardest hit in any kind of redistribution of wealth, as proposed by our new President. |
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jan 06, 2009 4:29 am) On health, 47 million Americans have no health insurance Another 25 million are underinsured. (PBS) In UAW news (you know - the topic in here), GM starts seeking concessions from UAW, bondholders (Motor Authority) Up to 31,000 jobs will go, reduce wages to levels competitive with non-union foreign carmakers by 2009, and require the UAW to accept stock in the place of half the cash payments made to its health care trust fund by 2010 are among the concessions sought. |
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jan 06, 2009 4:29 am) Don't get me wrong - I would not care at all if those guys are slim or fat, lazy or most dedicated, if they made product that I want at price I can accept without coercion from the government or union mob. But if you think it's appropriate to coerce me into "supporting" them, I take a closer look at what I would be supporting, and I say, thanks, but no thanks. Just as an example, if somebody thinks it was an acceptable behavior to vandalize somebody else's property just because they didn't like that choice, I would rather have my hand severed than give them a penny of my money. I would rather my money go to Mexico, Germany, Japan, or China, just for the principle.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 06, 2009 7:55 am) I know trying to change your open mind is probably a wast of time--am i am about ready to quit trying to bother you with facts but in the faint hope that something sticks, here it goes. The public rate at the golf course is $95 ( uaw members get 20% off, and i as a uaw retiree get a 30% discount). that is a lot of money, but when my brothers and friends come up we sometimes play there since it is the best course within about 100 miles and probably one of the best in the entire state. i pay the discount but have to pick up my republican brother's full $95 rate. I have never seen these rates waived except for charity events or special fundraiser tournaments of which the center has many. ( i would be glad provide you with testimonial letters from these charities thanking the uaw golf club) if you do some web research on the black lake golf course you will find similar golf magazine opinions calling the course spectacular and the price as "well worth it". The UAW Black Lake Course advertizes golf packages heavily for public use and tries to attract the golfing elite over from the west side of the state (harbor springs, petoskey, traverse city) and south of here (gaylord) were most of the premier courses operate. these cities are big tourist meccas with lotsa republican high rollers. it is starting to work but the course only opened in 2000. northern michigan is a big resort area, heavily forested with hundreds of lakes. cheboygan county has more miles of waterfront land than any county in michigan. this is beautiful hemingway country but please don't spread it around. 3 of michigan's largest inland lakes(mullet, burt and black lake itself) are close by. mackinac island (big tourist mecca) is about 30 miles away. in short there are thousands of summer homes, cottages and visitors to the area and large numbers of retirees have settled here (after 5 feet of snow so far this year, some of us are having second thoughts) i suspect that the $95 public rate generates a modest "profit" for course operations and that the uaw wants to encourage even more full rate golf to break even. . i am told that most golf courses are losing money. things have been pretty bad in michigan for a couple years with high gas prices cutting down on vacation travel and the once again proven failure of trickle down economics. the big bucks in golf courses are in resale to developers or in developing homesites around the fairways. but there are no condos or homesites at the black lake golf course. i suppose the uaw could get rid of the "overpaid" local operating engineers who maintain the course and the club house attendants and restaurant employes and bring in some walmart level employees or foreign workers under temp visas. or the uaw could end the discounts for its cheap retirees and its "overpaid" members. see i know how to let the free market work too. i say all this because you apparently believe that there are no real "public golfers" up here but only lobbyists or uaw fatcats. How does the fact that 9000 black lake golfers didn't get the UAW discount lead you to conclude that they must all be lobbyists or uaw -corrupted politicians? are you beginning to see the absurdity of your attitude? the uaw doesn't manage any pension plans. to the best of my knowledge there were almost no taft hartley trust funds in the uaw system. almost all uaw pension funds are managed by independent bank trustees who make all the investment decisions without any input from the uaw. some of the right wing blogs have questioned an expense at the center listing a 5-6 million dollar contribution to a pension plan as a center expense. there are about 145 employees at the center. sometimes employers (here the uaw is an employer) decide to fund their pension plans at something other than ERISA minimum requirements. Indeed the law and common sense encourage (but do not require) that pension plans be fully funded (at full funding annual ERISA premiums used to pay the cost of PBGC insurance in the event of pension termination--are reduced). i do not know why the UAW used its members' dues money to fully fund the pension plans at its Black Lake Center--but i fail to see anything evil or sinister here. i'm sorry but i did worship walter reuther. think of all the great ones whose inspired purpose was to advance the cause of the little guy but whose lives were ended too soon. (mlk, the kennedys, reuther etc) there's a story about one of the right wing senator's questioning walter during the kefauver oversight hearings. like you this poor republican saw a report and made a wrong analysis more consistent with his firm opinion. you can look up the exact words in the congressional record but the senator said something like :' i see that one of our audits have discovered that the UAW spent almost half a million dollars on ammunition last year . i suppose your going to tell us that this is for self protection or recreational use but i don't thin your members dues money should be spent on ammunition and i'm sure the rest of america agree with me' reuther responded "ammuntion is the title of a booklet we publish every month that is sent to locals and members. it contains information, facts or "ammunition" to be used by local leadership to rebut the misrepresentations and half-truths put out by the right wing press and their friends in congress. I'm sure our next edition of "ammunition" will be used to recount this exchange and rebut your already written report on the 'findings' of uaw corruption you claim to have exposed.' the hearing room burst into applause and laughter! it is easy to get discouraged looking over these exchanges of entries from seemingly intelligent people who are like this republican senator have firm preconceived opinions and whose close minds don't wish to be cluttered with facts. i should stop wasting my time and just laugh.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
