1 SCPrepTalk • View topic - Trump v Toyota
1

Trump v Toyota

Discussion topics that may not fit in other categories - minimal moderation

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby osu-grad » Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:08 pm

3-3 Stack wrote:
Wild Snorlax wrote:
LessThanTolerant wrote:After reading Wild Snortax response, all I can say is no wonders liberals create people like Streep.

The flip-flopping Bronze Blowhard praised Streep before she blasted him yesterday.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/t ... treep-2015

Now the thin-skinned president-elect acts out like a child through Twitter to defend his fragile ego. Trump looks like a fool to all but his Deplorable base.

LessThanTolerant wrote:It is obvious trying to debate someone so total devoid of logic and economic acumen is simply a waste of time.

My take is you just can't make a decent argument to support your position. But go ahead and quit; I'm OK leaving it like that.

Toyota to invest 10 billion MORE in U.S. Go figure

...which is a five year investment that is equal to what they invested in the US the last five years.

Now if Trump tells them they can't import Mexican built Corollas, well ... that US investment...
Veritas wrote:And did they account for the post totals, post time and date formats?
User avatar
osu-grad
Byrnes Rebels
 
Posts: 1974
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:49 am
Location: Duncan, SC

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby thechuckster » Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:23 pm

The government doesn't set wages for Ford, or any other car company in the US......says OSU-grad.

Well I think the goobermint will disagree with you considering the strings that were attached to the automobile industry bailout. With the bailout the unions got a seat at the management table and I'll bet that many high paying wages prior to the bailout disappeared. Courtesy of the government controlling costs to insure taxpayer payback......which never was fully paid pack BTW.

Now lets talk about the federal minimum wage......goobermint doesn't set that?! What planet are you living on. :lol:
thechuckster
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:25 am

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby osu-grad » Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:48 pm

thechuckster wrote:The government doesn't set wages for Ford, or any other car company in the US......says OSU-grad.

Well I think the goobermint will disagree with you considering the strings that were attached to the automobile industry bailout.

If you knew what you were talking about you'd know that Ford never received a bailout.

thechuckster wrote:With the bailout the unions got a seat at the management table and I'll bet that many high paying wages prior to the bailout disappeared.

Existing wage structures were mainly grandfathered. The only wage changes affected new employees and those were negotiated jointly between the car companies and the unions.

thechuckster wrote:...which never was fully paid pack BTW.

The payback was far better than that from your Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
Veritas wrote:And did they account for the post totals, post time and date formats?
User avatar
osu-grad
Byrnes Rebels
 
Posts: 1974
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:49 am
Location: Duncan, SC

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby LessThanTolerant » Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:05 pm

Again we see why liberals should recommend movies and let the adults hand economics.

1. "The government doesn't set wages for Ford" This on its face is correct, yet the government writes regulations and laws to force business to set minimum wages and forces business to meet these regulations in order to have government contracts. Read the following regulations written by these slugs.

https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversig ... =Standards

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversig ... ries-wages

HOWEVER, since the government has nothing to do with wages, lets disband these agencies since they are useless.

2. "All new manufacturing plants are green" Not sure what this ahs to do with anything, but again on the surface it s true. I guess this useless statement intends to state that if not for bureaucrats and regulations, business would not be smart about reasonable green issues.

HOWEVER, this is what bureaucrats can achieve:
"Project managers thought the regulatory requirements would be simple. The Federal Energy Regulation Commission, which oversees the permitting of hydropower projects across the country, did grant the city an exemption designed for small projects, but it made little difference. The city had to meet a laundry list of other regulations to comply with the Endangered Species Act, the National Historic Preservation Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, among others.
Logan City expected to spend a maximum of $1.4 million, but instead the project cost almost $3 million — which doesn't include the four years of effort the city poured into it. The city's assistant engineer said that the city will never undertake anything similar after "the permitting headache and the nightmare and the frustration of the process."

Federal funding made the Logan City project possible, and federal regulations strangled it. This is a case of "Green versus Green," when policies that are intended to protect the environment end up obstructing environmental progress."

Having a liberal tell me "I need to learn a little on the subject" is amusing. I have forgotten more on these issues than a silly liberal like you could ever teach me.

In summation, since you obviously know so very little on the subjects you babble about, I really am wasting my time with you. But you keep trying, I like the entertainment.
LessThanTolerant
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 502
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 4:41 pm
Location: Spartanburg

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby osu-grad » Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:28 pm

LessThanTolerant wrote:1. "The government doesn't set wages for Ford"

This on its face is correct

I accept your apology.

LessThanTolerant wrote:yet the government writes regulations and laws to force business to set minimum wages and forces business to meet these regulations in order to have government contracts. Read the following regulations written by these slugs.

https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/wages

Yeah, your link shows the minimum wage @ $7.25/hr so, naturally, the car companies pay in excess of $27.79/hr because that's what the government slugs want them to do. :roll:

https://uaw.org/app/uploads/2015/10/641 ... -final.pdf

($27.79 is the lowest wage rate in the chart above!)

LessThanTolerant wrote:2. "All new manufacturing plants are green" Not sure what this ahs to do with anything, but again on the surface it s true. I guess this useless statement intends to state that if not for bureaucrats and regulations, business would not be smart about reasonable green issues.

Weren't you just complaining about regulations? Your conclusion is exactly the opposite of reality, that is, auto assembly plants today are built 'green' independent upon what bureaucrats say.

LessThanTolerant wrote:The Federal Energy Regulation Commission, which oversees the permitting of hydropower projects across the country,

Now you're changing the subject just to complain, because that's what ignorant conservatives do.

LessThanTolerant wrote:Having a liberal tell me "I need to learn a little on the subject" is amusing.

No need to thank this Independent on your schooling. I'm sure it won't be the last time I'll have to straighten you out...
Veritas wrote:And did they account for the post totals, post time and date formats?
User avatar
osu-grad
Byrnes Rebels
 
Posts: 1974
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:49 am
Location: Duncan, SC

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby LessThanTolerant » Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:34 pm

OMG OSUgrad thinks it has a point.

Thanks again for the entertainment, still unaware of why you should only be allowed to recommend movies.
LessThanTolerant
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 502
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 4:41 pm
Location: Spartanburg

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby thechuckster » Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:50 pm

There he goes again......thinking.....OSU-grad should stay away from that.

Where did I say FORD took a bailout. I said the auto industry. And everyone knows what auto manufacturers took a bailout. That is precisely why I awarded Ford with my purchase of one of their products.

Where-o-where did I say Ford. In fact I did not list any manufacturer of any auto.

Never assume what someone is thinking.

In fact stay away from those thinking pills. They do not do you any good.
thechuckster
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:25 am

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby osu-grad » Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:57 pm

thechuckster wrote:Where did I say FORD took a bailout.

thechuckster wrote:The government doesn't set wages for Ford, or any other car company in the US......says OSU-grad.

Well I think the goobermint will disagree with you considering the strings that were attached to the automobile industry bailout.

:?
Veritas wrote:And did they account for the post totals, post time and date formats?
User avatar
osu-grad
Byrnes Rebels
 
Posts: 1974
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:49 am
Location: Duncan, SC

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby thechuckster » Tue Jan 10, 2017 10:33 pm

Wild Snorlax wrote:
LessThanTolerant wrote:
Wild Snorlax wrote:
LessThanTolerant wrote:Trump firing a warning across Toyota's bow is in fact a wise action. We saw Ford, Boeing, LHM, Carrier and Black & Decker respond.

I thought conservatives were all about free markets and not picking winners and losers? Will the Bronze Blowhard lobby Congress to put tariffs on his foreign made ties and shirts? Doubt it.

What of the US manufacturers that are already shipping product across the border, under the legally binding NAFTA agreement? Will the cost of a Ford Fusion now go up 35%? The question remains if the Republicans in Congress, including free trade champion Paul Ryan, will grow a pair and stand up to Trump. LTT, our 401Ks hang in the balance.

I built several plants in Mexico, I can tell you from experience why they failed.

We can pretty much guess why they failed. ;)

LessThanTolerant wrote:We now know NAFTA was in fact a failure

No we don't. Trade with the US increased 500% predominately with Mexico and Canada. There are BOTH successes and failures depending upon where you stand. The uneducated in the US were losers; no surprise there.

LessThanTolerant wrote:Build a state of the art plant which paid on average $18 an hour for production of solar products. Their competition? China, which built similar products in a facility which averaged less than $18 a day. So, China could manufacture and ship their product to America cheaper than America could in the states. Know how? Lower labor costs, no regulations and state provided funding for cost loss control.

Result? Solyndra fails, American taxpayers loses over 800 million dollars in investment. By the way, my company made over $5 million in profits off of Solyndra. :lol:

Tough call on Solyndra. Hindsight is always 20-20 after a failure. You, of all people should have learned that after all your mistakes in Mexico. Without government help, Solyndra would never had a chance to compete against government backed Chinese companies. You may not like it, and may make a good argument to apply tariffs to protect a fledgling industry, but some government support will be needed in some high tech industries like solar. Heck, without government financial backing we would never have had railroads built out west in the late 19th century.

LessThanTolerant wrote:In answer to your question, should Ford have a tariff on their Mexican manufactured vehicles? Yes. But, better yet, let business look at an economic model which allows them to manufacture here.

Know how to do that?

Cut stupid government required wages, labor, and environmental regulations.

The government doesn't set wages for Ford, or any other car company in the US or Mexico. :roll: All new manufacturing plants are green, including those built in Mexico. Independent of the social benefits, it makes financial sense too. You clearly need to learn a little next time on the subject before showing your ignorance.

LessThanTolerant wrote:Your silly snarky comment about his shirts and ties just shows your minimal knowledge of finance and economic.

Your lack of a serious rebuttal to this simple business model, manufacturing ties, is very telling.


For your reading pleasure OSU-grad/Wild Snorlax.

We can copy and paste as well.
thechuckster
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:25 am

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby osu-grad » Tue Jan 10, 2017 11:15 pm

Isn't it something how easy it is to hang you with your own words?

Really, it's all too easy...
Veritas wrote:And did they account for the post totals, post time and date formats?
User avatar
osu-grad
Byrnes Rebels
 
Posts: 1974
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:49 am
Location: Duncan, SC

PreviousNext

Return to The Rubber Room - Society, Politics, Humor, Miscellaneous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

1