reply to post by nyk537
Businesses don't save arbitrarily. They save only if they know it will bring in profit somewhere down the road. The optimal savings of any business
is zero. That's the goal. Any business should be doing good enough so that they don't need to store any sort of fund in case of disaster. Otherwise,
if they had relied on such a fund, they wouldn't even be in business or at least close to bankruptcy, and thus don't deserve to be in business at
all. And, those savings would mean inefficiency, as all its resources aren't being used. They could be employing more workers, raising profits, for
example.
The motor companies are just poor businesses. Plain and simple. They employ millions of people, sure, but those people aren't really contributing
much to society. They COULD be, if the companies actually knew what they were doing. The argument that economic recession is causing this is moot. It
was only a catalyst to the industry's quicker demise. It was inevitable, ever since we hit peak oil. You don't produce inefficient vehicles when the
price of gas is obviously rising in the long run. The economic crisis only expedited consumer's concerns for gas consumption. All this would have
happened perhaps thirty years from now, if we hadn't experienced the recent economic crisis.
The real argument is whether or not new industries could take form out of a failed auto industry. The government isn't willing to spend their time
divesting resources from the auto industry to create new ones, because of well, the cost of retraining potentially millions of people, and the
pressure from unions, which basically provide Congress with a considerable lot of its funds and votes.
It's the interests of nations which prevent a true capitalist society from forming. We don't seem to be able to tolerate the redistribution of
wealth and capital to foreign corporations, even if they are capable of producing better products (i.e. Toyota) and providing a more fair wage for its
workers. We always put the interest of our own corporations first, and sometimes that means letting the world economies fail, and then, putting our
own people out of work. Kind of defeats the purpose, eh? Yeah, short term planning, without foresight, usually does. As it stands, workers in the auto
industry are overpaid for the value of its product. Now if 100% of our production was allocated towards electric vehicles, then auto workers, at the
pay level they are getting today, would be receiving a fair wage. In fact, they would deserve enough more. It's just that the production of gas
guzzling cars shouldn't merit the pay that workers are currently receiving, because that product is of low valuable to society.
What really makes me boil is that at the beginning of the twentieth century, and all throughout, we had no problem basically infiltrating and
abducting foreign markets, especially China at the turn of the century, which basically prevented them from producing their own products. This kind of
sent all of Asia into conflict and civil strife and provided for all the animosities between Japan and China all the way into World War II.
God damn. When will the Capitalists realize that we created Communism? We deprived China of its capital, and that's where the extremism came from,
not from the lunatics Marx and Engels.
The whole world is evolving. And we are sitting here complacent with the "fact" we are the most advanced nation in the world. That will quickly not
be the case. We can keep giving concessions to poor business, but that will only lead the inevitable buy-out of every single American corporation by
foreign entities. That will induce war, there is no doubt.
[edit on 19-11-2008 by cognoscente]