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)
16701 messages, Last post on Nov 20, 2009 at 3:39 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: iluvmysephia1 (Jan 10, 2009 11:59 am) Talk like a pirate day isn't until September.  State of the auto industry from a union perspective (taxes, trade policy, health care and energy) : Did the Four Horsemen destroy the auto industry? (Delaware County Daily Times) |
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 10, 2009 12:22 pm)  Yep, keep them perky high-quality cars off our soil. Force everyone here to buy higher priced/less desireable US made cars.  The best is force the transplants to use domestic parts(the same junk used in my Yukon Denali that keep failing) instead of the good parts produced elsewhere.  When all cars/parts are made through robotics to get the highest quality and the US has not been at the forefront to get this achieved first, good-bye industry. You can tax and manipulate all you want but if the product is not competitive and does not sell, oh well.... HIT THE ROAD, JACK! Regards, OW |
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 10, 2009 12:22 pm) Is he trying to explain why many wealthy car buyers would rather spend $55K or more on a 5-series BMW or E-class Mercedes than $45K on a Cadillac? I don't get it. Every so often, someone will suggest that the U.S. adopt its own VAT - either to raise more revenue or to reduce reliance on the income tax. But anyone who pays attention to tax policy here knows that the states are fiercely protective of their power to levy sales taxes & will never willingly share that with the Federal government. I'd also like to see Mr. Galley cite a source for his assertion that the Japanese manipulate the yen to give their auto exports a big cost advantage.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 09, 2009 8:22 pm) By Ben Furnas | January 8, 2009 Introduction 2009 presents a rare opportunity for health care reformers to achieve their goals of affordable, accessible, and effective health care for all. American families and businesses are ready for sweeping changes after years of skyrocketing costs, increasing numbers of uninsured, and inconsistent quality of care. President-elect Barack Obama has promised to make health care a top priority, and congressional majorities are eager to pass reform. Fifteen years ago, the United States had a similar opportunity to reform health care. But conservatives and insurance industry lobbyists defeated Bill Clinton's efforts by claiming the plan would "socialize medicine," and arguing that there was "no health care crisis." Today, their successors are making the very same arguments against Barack Obama's plan. If opponents of reform succeed, the next 15 years are likely to resemble the last 15. The result is predictable: higher and higher costs for a health care system that leaves out more and more people. Like today, businesses will be burdened with spiraling costs, states will spend more for safety nets for high-risk populations and the uninsured, and the whole system will encourage excessive and unnecessary spending while leaving millions behind. Looking back at the last 15 years, we can assess the quality of the American health care system and how we got here. Examining the consequences of the 1994 failure to reform health care should be a stark warning for those who would once again choose to continue our deeply flawed health care system. Rising costs Since 1994, the cost per person of American health care has more than doubled, with an annual growth rate regularly more than twice that of inflation. Fueled by rising costs of prescription drugs, inefficient outpatient care, expensive and unnecessary medical procedures, and ballooning insurance premiums, these costs are a burden on state and federal governments, businesses, and families. Per-person health care expenditures in the United States have risen 6.5 percent per year since 2000, and 5.5 percent per year on average since 1994. In contrast, consumer inflation has averaged just 2.6 percent per year. Health care costs burden American employers, who are forced to cut back on providing coverage and benefits or suffer a competitive disadvantage against international companies who don't bear health costs. Premiums for employer-provided health care have doubled since 2000 (the earliest year the Medical Expenditures Panel Survey has on record). That year the average family premium was $6,800. By 2008, it had risen to $12,700. This premium growth eats away at wages and pressures firms to reduce coverage. The share of American firms offering health benefits shrank to 60 percent today, from 66 percent in 1999. And the percentage of Americans covered through their employers, where coverage is of a much higher quality than in the individual market, was 59 percent in 2007, down from 64 percent in 1999. Without workplace health insurance, Americans must struggle to find coverage in the unregulated private market (where people with pre-existing conditions find it difficult or impossible to secure coverage), go on public assistance, or become uninsured. Our productive capacity is suffering, too. The United States spent approximately 16 percent of its 2006 gross domestic product on health care, up from 8 percent in 1975. Without reform, the Congressional Budget Office projects that health expenditures will rise to 25 percent of GDP by 2025. Health care spending among other rich, developed countries in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development averaged just 9 percent of GDP in 2006. These costs are increasingly painful for American families, who face higher premiums, deductibles, and co-pays. According to Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer expenditure data, the share of household income spent on medical expenses has crept up since 1994. A recent study by the Commonwealth Fund found that, "accelerated growth in health care spending has translated into increased burdens on family budgets." According to the most recent data, an average of 13 million families (11 percent of American families) spent 10 percent or more on out-of-pocket health care expenses in 2000-01. That's up from 8 percent in 1996-97. American spending on health care is wildly out of sync with other large developed economies. A recent McKinsey study found that the United States spent $650 billion more on health care than peer OECD countries even after adjusting for wealth. Americans spend well over twice as much as the OECD median in annual per-person health care expenditures, and around 150 percent of the next highest-spending country. In 2006 (the most recent data available), the United States spent $6,700 per capita on health care, over double the OECD median expenditure of $3,100. Norway, the second biggest spender, spent $4,500 per person. Higher medical costs are also taking a toll on America's fiscal health. As the CBO has warned, "the rate at which health care spending grows relative to the economy is the most important determinant of the country's long-term fiscal balance." Federal health care expenditures, including Medicare and Medicaid, have risen to over $800 billion, or $2,650 per person, in 2008, from $300 billion, or $1,600 per person, in 1994 (in constant 2008 dollars). The burden on states has increased as well, to $300 billion in health care costs in 2008, from $190 billion in 1994 (including each state's share of the Medicaid program). These trends are projected to speed up, with per-person federal expenditure nearing $6,000 by 2017 and state and local expenditures projected to increase to $2,000 per-person (in 2008 dollars) over the same period. While some of this increase is attributable to population growth, an aging population, and changes to the policy structures of Medicare and Medicaid (including an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program), much of it comes from the underlying inefficiencies and excess costs of the American health care system. Vanishing coverage Despite surging expenditures, the number of Americans going without insurance has risen to 46 million, or 15 percent of the population in 2007, up from 38 million, or 14 percent, in 1999. Among people aged 18-65, the uninsurance rate increased to almost 20 percent in 2007, up from 17 percent in 1999. If the 1999 rate had stayed constant, 4.5 million more American adults would have health insurance today. In 36 states, the percentage of adults aged 18-65 going without health insurance has increased since 1999. Millions more are living with subpar or insufficient coverage. The Commonwealth Fund found that in 2007 there we
|
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 10, 2009 1:46 pm) All he is doing is pointing out what we all know. He gives no practical solutions to rising health care cost. There is no way that a government run health care will cut costs. A close examination of the rampant fraud in Medicare/Medicaid should make that clear. So how would you bring those costs down? How would you cut the malpractice insurance premiums down to a reasonable level? I have heard of certain specialties like OBGYN that pay more in Malpractice than the doctor nets per year. Drugs could be cut way back by people using generics. My wife's prescriptions from Kaiser are all generic. Costs her $5 copay for as much as 90 days of prescription. Every time tort reform is mentioned the Congress quickly shut that door as they are all attorneys and may end up back out on the road chasing ambulances. As I gave you data we have over 10 times the facilities per person that Canada has. For just twice the price. That makes me wonder where all the money is going in Canada. Do you think we should get rid of 8000 MRI machines so we have the same coverage as Canada. Give us some solutions. If you do not want to pay your own health care. That means you expect the government to pay the premiums without raising your taxes. How do you suppose that will work? The money has to come from somewhere. We are running out of ink with all the funny money being printed. PS If you are holding your breath until they squeeze the money out of the fat cats like Bill Gates, Buffett or Oprah. You are going to die from lack of oxygen. The rich have never given up their money in the history of the country. They are not going to start now. |
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 10, 2009 1:46 pm) Since the Democrats control the executive and legislative branches, then the Democrats and could pass national health care without a single Rep.vote. Aren't you then blaming the Dem. for selling out to the insurance lobbyists? Could you also explain if all the uninsured do get insurance, the total cost of healthcare goes up. Or does the total system cost stay the same, and everyone gets less healthcare per person? I can see how GM would be happy not having to pay for the UAW and its white collar employees health insurance anymore. But how would this help the UAW worker who will either pay more taxes to fund the 45 million to be covered, OR receive less care?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Jan 10, 2009 2:21 pm) Our research indicates that the United States spends $650 billion more on health care than might be expected given the country’s wealth and the experience of comparable members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Why_Americans_pay_more_for_health_care_2275 The US health care payment system, which processes $1.9 trillion a year, is ripe for transformation. The system is inefficient, consuming 15 percent or more of each dollar spent on health care, compared with about 2 percent for the payment system in retailing. Expenditures on the processing of bills, claims, and payments; bad debt; and other transactions total more than $300 billion a year. http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Health_Care/Hospitals/Overhauling_the_US_health- _care_payment_system_2012
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 10, 2009 12:22 pm) Last time Bank of Japan intervened in the currency market was March 2004. And that was to counter a very sharp appreciation of the Yen (breaching 100Yen/USD). Today it is more like 90 Yen / USD - So it has been appreciating in the last four years, with no intervention by BOJ. And if we go back further, in 1985 Yen was 240/USD. Thus in the last 23 years, it has appreciated against the USD by 266%. So if Japan is manipulating its currency, then it is not doing a very good job of it. The Auto industry blogs repeatedly bring up this issue (without any specific data to back it up....), however one has to consider a) If companies like Toyota keep on moving production outside Japan, how relevant is Yen manipulation?; b) If Japanese manufacturing is benefiting from currency manipulation, how is it that Mazda or Isuzu (domestic production only) are not "benefiting" (in terms of improving profitability), but Toyota and Honda (moving production overseas) are?
|
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Jan 10, 2009 3:53 pm) A criminal's perspective on easy fraud In a recent interview with NBC News, a man who made millions of dollars by defrauding Medicare before his arrest explained how easy it was to steal from the government. "First of all, you create a corporation," he said. "There are some people who are like facilitators, who tell you what it is that Medicare requires." One requirement is to buy some props -- medical equipment and office furniture -- that can help make the corporation appear legitimate during rare inspections by Medicare officials. "A lot of times an inspector doesn't visit a corporation more than once a year," he claimed. One thing he found shocking was how agreeable Medicare was in paying his phony claims, even after patients whose names were used without permission filed complaints. "Why is Medicare paying" he asked. "Medicare keeps on paying, so who's at fault? I think the government is at fault, the government doesn't have any control of this." The man said stealing from Medicare can be a very lucrative endeavor. "If in a year you want $6 million or $8 million you can do it." One Medicare fraud suspect, who is now a fugitive, used to drive a $200,000 Phantom Rolls Royce. "Everyone should be outraged by it," said Ogrosky, "and should be concerned about their taxpayer dollars going to fund this personal wealth that we're seeing in these people who are a really just thieves." Federal law enforcement official said they've seen other Medicare criminals also living extravagantly from their ill-gotten gains. "We've seized luxury homes on waterfront properties. We've seized boats, we've seized bank accounts, jewelry worth thousands of dollars," said Delaney. "They're just killing the Medicare program and living the high-life off of it." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22184921/page/2/ The Federal government needs to fix their broken Medicare program, before they expand further. I don't think they are capable of doing that with so many levels of incompetence in our government. They have managed to hose up the banking system, now we want them to totally destroy our health care system.
|
|
|
Replying to: manegi (Jan 10, 2009 4:15 pm) You have to consider that article was written by a UAW leader with an agenda. He would like to dump the blame for the mess in the Auto industry, he and his colleagues have created, onto anyone or any country. The UAW would say anything to deflect from their own part in the collapse. The 4 Horsemen was a very lame attempt, with little or no truth in fact, mostly fiction. Just one example: In the late 1990s a barrel of oil sold for $10. The Big 3 enjoyed strong sales and consistent profits GM did not make a decent profit throughout the 1990s when they were selling SUVs and PU trucks as fast as their little fingers could go. Of course it did not help that the UAW decided to strike right in the middle of a chance at making a decent profit. Wagoner is to blame. When the UAW went on strike in 1998 he could have gotten rid of the UAW millstone around his neck for good. He could have just shut down and moved every plant out of the country. It would have cost a few billion, while they still had a few billion in the bank. Now they are so broke they will have to borrow money just to pay the bankruptcy attorneys. |
|
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
