Ford Reports $5.8 Billion 3Q Loss

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Nearly 6 billion in one qtr, yikes! And they are announcing restating every qtr going back to 2001.

In contrast big oil and gas will be announcing their earnings shortly so will probably be seeing around a 15 billion dollar difference in quarterly earnings.

-------------------------------------------------
Ford reports $5.8 billion 3Q loss
By TOM KRISHER, AP Business Writer

DEARBORN, Mich. - Ford Motor Co. said Monday its loss widened to $5.8 billion in the third quarter, weighed down by the costs of its massive restructuring plan aimed at reshaping the company and cutting expenses so it can compete better against lower-cost rivals from overseas.


http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20061019/capt.fd9c8e5e792b4073bd90ef18fbf60a65.the_last_tau rus_nybz143.jpg?x=380&y=222&sig=VfrWyODxV2XZl.FJGYPI.A--
A Ford Taurus assembly line is shown at Ford's Chicago Assembly Plant in this May 16, 2002, file photo in Chicago. Sometime next week, the assembly line at a Ford plant near Atlanta will come to a halt, signaling the end of a family sedan so revolutionary that its 1985 debut changed forever the way cars look, feel and drive. After 21 years and sales of nearly 7 million cars, Ford Motor Co. is giving up on what some call the most influential automobile since Henry Ford's Model T. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green, file)


Ford's new Chief Executive, Alan Mulally, called the latest results "clearly unacceptable." It was the largest quarterly loss for the nation's second biggest automaker in more than 14 years.

Ford also said it plans to restate its earnings for 2001 due to accounting errors involving derivative transactions. The restatement is expected to affect financial results from 2001 until the third quarter of this year.

The company expected the restatement would improve results for 2002, but said other periods are under study.

Ford's net loss of $3.08 per share for the July-September period was larger than last year's third-quarter loss of $284 million, or 15 cents per share.

Revenue fell 10 percent to $36.7 billion from the same period a year ago.

Excluding restructuring costs, the company said it lost $1.2 billion, or 62 cents per share, from continuing operations. Excluding special items in the third quarter of last year, Ford lost $191 million, or 10 cents per share.

Wall Street had been expecting a loss of 61 cents per share for the quarter, according to a survey of analysts by Thomson Financial.

Ford shares fell 15 cents to $7.86 in premarket trading.

"We are committed to dealing decisively with the fundamental business reality that customer demand is shifting to smaller, more efficient vehicles," Mulally said in a statement. "Our focused priorities are to restructure aggressively to operate profitably at lower volumes, and to accelerate the development of new, more efficient vehicles that customers really want.

Dearborn-based Ford's turnaround plan aims to cut $5 billion in costs by the end of 2008 by slashing 10,000 white-collar workers and offering buyouts to all of its 75,000 unionized employees.

The loss including restructuring costs was Ford's largest quarterly loss since the first quarter of 1992, when the company lost $6.7 billion due mainly to accounting changes.

Excluding charges, Ford would have lost $2 billion on its North American automotive operations in the latest quarter. It blamed its decline in market share, intense competition, a drop in U.S. and European sales and a market shift away from its high-profit trucks and sport utility vehicles.

The company lost $1.2 billion in North America in the third quarter of last year.

Ford said special charges for the third quarter of 2006 totaled $5.26 billion before taxes. The charges included $2.2 billion to re-value assets in North America and $1.6 billion to decrease the value of Jaguar and Land Rover assets.

Ford also took at $861 million charge for jobs bank benefits and employee separations due to its plans to idle factories in North America, a $259 million charge for continued global personnel reduction and a $437 million charge for the cost of employee retirements that occurred earlier than planned.

The company also reported a $99 million gain due to the release of a reserve from excise taxes in South America due to a recent court ruling.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061023/ap_on_bi_ge/earns_ford_4

[W*GS]

That's what happens in a capitalist system when a company tries to sell things consumers aren't interested in buying.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Ten year chart for Ford. And if anyone is interested in buying some Berkshire A securities check out how they're trading now.




http://img303.imageshack.us/img303/4386/berkrn6.png



http://img305.imageshack.us/img305/206/fordxx9.png

[bronclvr]

Yep! Keep buying them Hondas-

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Yep! Keep buying them Hondas-

Apparently, everyone is. There's no secret in who makes the superior vehicles and which companies are moving forward with innovative products these days. If you have any doubts, just check out the latest bottom lines of all the major makers.

Of course you know most Toyota's and Honda's are manufactured here in the U.S.? And of course, you knew that and that my Chevy truck was assembled in Canada.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Today, the Toyota Camry is one of the most American cars you can buy, more American than even the Ford Mustang.

There’s more, too, much more, enough for us to compile a list of All-American “Imports” -- cars you think are American, but aren’t. The list includes the ‘Stang, and such apple pie marquees as the Chevrolet Tahoe, Dodge Charger and Chrysler 300. Some are made here, but carry fewer than the AALA’s mandated 75 percent parts mandate. Others are built in Canada, or Mexico. For the purpose of this list, we took the top sellers for 2006 with domestic nameplates that were either assembled elsewhere, or failed the AALA’s requirement. With some vehicles assembled in multiple locations, we kept the list to vehicles assembled in one location. For example, the Dodge Caravan/Grand Caravan is built in the United States and Canada. In this case, along with the Dodge Ram, we chose the US plant as the home locations. Shoppers should know, however, that Chrysler’s minivans are basically split by wheelbase: the long-wheelbase versions, or “Stow and Go” models, are built in Canada, while the short-wheelbase vehicles are assembled in St. Louis, Missouri. We also disqualified vehicles that face elimination by 2009, thus disqualifying the Pontiac Grand Prix. For poncho fans out there, the Grand Prix is built in Canada, with 92 percent US-sourced plants. It’s simple: in order to be “American Made,” a vehicle must be assembled here, with 75 percent of its content sourced from the US. The top selling cars that failed the test, in alphabetical order:

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td>Chevrolet Equinox

Chevrolet HHR

Chevrolet Impala

Chevrolet Tahoe

Chrysler 300

Chrysler PT Cruiser

Dodge Charger

Ford Focus

Ford Fusion

Ford Mustang
It’s enough to send a good ol’ boy off on a beer-soaked crying jag, and then straight to his local Honda dealer. And that’s a good thing. As automakers continue to turn to global solutions in the manufacture and assembly of vehicles, fewer cars can realistically claim one source of origin. Indeed, if car buyers want to buy cars “Made in America,” they should focus on cars assembled here (not Canada or Mexico), with a healthy amount of US content. These are the cars that matter, because they support local economies and put Americans to work.



http://tinyurl.com/tbjne

</td></tr></tbody></table>

[ak1971]

Ten year chart for Ford. And if anyone is interested in buying some Berkshire A securities check out how they're trading now.




http://img303.imageshack.us/img303/4386/berkrn6.png



http://img305.imageshack.us/img305/206/fordxx9.png



I have some B's, Makes it look damn cheap when it was trading in the $82K range earlier this year :rofl:

[bendog]

I still haven't figured out the "logic' for killing the Taurus name. Sure the 90s remake sucked in terms of style, but it was a functional auto. It would seem young Bill Ford simply was out of his league as a CEO. His instinct was to go green, but in the wake of the explorer debacle, they simply went bigger.

F-150 is probably the best "big" truck, but with gas forever at 2bucks plus, seems to me it'' be a niche vehicle. The Ranger is now pretty much that. You can get a regular cab Tacoma or Frontier and have about as much room as the ranger extended cab, but the ranger is cheaper, and arguably the ranger with the extended cab is more useful cause you can get bucket seats. I thought of one last summer, when I got my timing belt replaced, but I don't think Henry will fit in the extended cab. Of course he pretty much sits on me in the car now anyway.

[bronclvr]

Beerslug,

Glad to hear you drive a Chevy! I am not concerned about where they are Manufactured, I'm concerned about where the Tax Money ends up-

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Beerslug,

Glad to hear you drive a Chevy! I am not concerned about where they are Manufactured, I'm concerned about where the Tax Money ends up-

What tax money, state, federal? Maybe you're concerned where the profits end up you mean?

I have some B's, Makes it look damn cheap when it was trading in the $82K range earlier this year :rofl:
LOL

If only we (well me anyway) had the foresight to buy MS and Berk back in the late 80s.





http://img47.imageshack.us/img47/3565/berk1fe8.png

[bronclvr]

Corporate-you know, the stuff that builds Roads, Defense Systems, Senior Citizen's Programs, etc., etc.-

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Corporate-you know, the stuff that builds Roads, Defense Systems, Senior Citizen's Programs, etc., etc.-You don't think Toyota and Honda pay federal and state taxes to do business here?

[bronclvr]

Federal and State, yes-Corporate, no-

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Federal and State, yes-Corporate, no- You're going to have explain to me (show me a link?) why GM and Ford pay corporate taxes and Honda and Toyota don't.

[bronclvr]

No I don't-the Japenese Auto makers do pay Corporate Taxes (I don't dispute that)-but they pay them in their Parent Countries-those Taxes are used to pay for their Infrastructure-our is used for ours-as much as we hate WalMart (and I do), they do significantly contribute to our Tax Base, not only through State and Federal Taxes, but their contribution on the Corporate level is huge-

[Bronco_Beerslug]

No I don't-the Japenese Auto makers do pay Corporate Taxes (I don't dispute that)-but they pay them in their Parent Countries-those Taxes are used to pay for their Infrastructure-our is used for ours-as much as we hate WalMart (and I do), they do significantly contribute to our Tax Base, not only through State and Federal Taxes, but their contribution on the Corporate level is huge-MNC's (Multi-National Companies) taxation is applied pretty evenly among most nations to keep overlapping and double taxation to a minimum where possible. This applies to American companies operating worldwide also who, if they're smart, try and report as much income as possible to low tax countries as opposed to higher tax countries.

You see the point here, right? And the revenues generated through state and federal taxes from Honda, Toyota, etc... plants here is enormous.

[bronclvr]

Keep trying-whatever the Japs are spending here, the AMERICAN Corporations are paying more-(remember that when you drive down that Interstate)-

[bendog]

Looks to me that toyota paid more.

Ford is just building cars people don't want. The new focus or whatever it's called seems to be a stretched mazda 6. The baby lincoln .... nice, but I'd rather have a lexus off lease.

http://www.toyota.se/media/global/download/2002databook.pdf#search='toyota%20nissan%20ford%20 corporate%20income%20tax%20united%20states'

http://www.fordmotorcompany.com/en/company/investorInformation/companyReports/annualReports/2003annualReport/notes.htm

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Keep trying-whatever the Japs are spending here, the AMERICAN Corporations are paying more-(remember that when you drive down that Interstate)-
Keep trying what? I'm open anything that shows Ford and GM are paying more than Toyota and Honda. If I were one of those companies I'd be complaining loudly if it's true. Do you have a link that shows this?

I guess there is something else one could think about driving down the interstate, both Ford and GM are firing employees and Toyota and Honda are hiring employees.

[bronclvr]

Go ahead and live in your dream world-it's this type of an idiot's attitude that is keeping our Trade Deficits at record levels-

[bendog]

Actually, you're an idiot to think that what's killing the big 3 is anything other than the effect of unions on employee costs. Ford additionally made some really stupid moves in new product development. But to say ford paid more income tax than toyota when ford's reporting negative income is beyond belief. Good bye.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Go ahead and live in your dream world-it's this type of an idiot's attitude that is keeping our Trade Deficits at record levels-
Actually, it's the Walmarts' that are creating the record trade deficits not the lack of innovation and foresight from GM and Ford.

[bronclvr]

Before I go into a 4 Paragraph tirade I will sign-off-enjoy your ignorance Gentlemen!

[bendog]

Actually, it's the Walmarts' that are creating the record trade deficits not the lack of innovation and foresight from GM and Ford.

What I really hate about Wal-mart is that it's about the only place to get really big jars of pickled banana peppers and jalepenos really cheap. I'd pay more, but not the price for the little jars in the grocery stores. But buying frozen fish from Vietnam and meat that's got all the coloring and preservatives is just unnecessary. I hate going there. Even the shoppers look like they're from a third world country. James Lee Burke put it as something like the shoppers are buying goods made by people in foreign countries making less than liveable wages, and whose lives are only marginally less liveable than the wal-mart shoppers themselves.

[W*GS]

Actually, it's the Walmarts' that are creating the record trade deficits

It's your fellow Americans spending beyond their means.

Wal-Mart doesn't make a dime without customers, so if you want to blame someone for the current trade deficit, blame your neighbors. But that's not as populist as blaming Wal-Mart, which is the easy (and safe) target.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

It's your fellow Americans spending beyond their means.

Wal-Mart doesn't make a dime without customers, so if you want to blame someone for the current trade deficit, blame your neighbors. But that's not as populist as blaming Wal-Mart, which is the easy (and safe) target.
You have to give Walmart credit I guess, for seeing the invasion of the country by millions and millions of people under the poverty line and the growing millions of people making less money needing some place to go to.

Of course they're failing in Europe and some other countries. CNBC featured them all day today. China is their new target opening as many stores there as possible. Parts of it was hilarious. Store associates running all over the stores, fish flopping out of the fresh fish bins on the floors and they were extremely crowded so it'll probably work over there.

Before I go into a 4 Paragraph tirade I will sign-off-enjoy your ignorance Gentlemen!
I hate being ignorant shine the light my way.

[W*GS]

You have to give Walmart credit I guess, for seeing the invasion of the country by millions and millions of people under the poverty line and the growing millions of people making less money needing some place to go to.

I get it - the trade deficit isn't the fault of white Americans; it's those Mexicans who are to blame!

Thanks for clearing that up.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I get it - the trade deficit isn't the fault of white Americans; it's those Mexicans who are to blame!

Thanks for clearing that up.No, you don't get it but you have a problem with "getting it" more times than not, it seems. It's the money barons in control who have steered our economy to the service economy we now enjoy.

Your main man Bush in a exclusive CNBC interview today said it best when asked about Walmart impacting our economy negatively. Not exactly in these words but here's what he said.... 'Walmart is good for America even though thousands of small businesses are put out into the street where ever they locate and they pay decent wages'. http://www.digital-inn.de/images/smilies/anims/46.gif

[yavoon]

Actually, it's the Walmarts' that are creating the record trade deficits not the lack of innovation and foresight from GM and Ford.

lets just face reality, we can't pay our ppl 10 times more to make the same product. how is that reasonable? our trade deficits will lead to largescale inflation that will eventually make american products more competitive(if the asians allow this). if the asians dont allow this we might very well just crash down to earth instead of float down.

to be sure though, the world can/will/should catch up. its just part of the game, we can't fight it like our natural position is to be on top by a lot, because that will only lead to disaster.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Before I go into a 4 Paragraph tirade I will sign-off-enjoy your ignorance Gentlemen!

Translation:

"I can't provide any actual evidence to support my claim that Ford and GM are paying more taxes than Toyota and Honda, so I guess my only recourse is to go for the ad hominem and congratulate myself on my imaginary victory."

[yavoon]

You have to give Walmart credit I guess, for seeing the invasion of the country by millions and millions of people under the poverty line and the growing millions of people making less money needing some place to go to.

Of course they're failing in Europe and some other countries. CNBC featured them all day today. China is their new target opening as many stores there as possible. Parts of it was hilarious. Store associates running all over the stores, fish flopping out of the fresh fish bins on the floors and they were extremely crowded so it'll probably work over there.


I hate being ignorant shine the light my way.

they're failing in europe because the european beaurocracy is hammering them. just like european gov'ts hammer microsoft.

someone I believe wrote a book saying that walmart should be given the nobel peace prize as it has done more for america's standard of living than any other individual entity. as well as what its done for the standard of living of ppl around the world, including china.

[W*GS]

It's the money barons in control who have steered our economy to the service economy we now enjoy.

You're almost as bad as gaffney.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

they're failing in europe because the european beaurocracy is hammering them. just like european gov'ts hammer microsoft.

someone I believe wrote a book saying that walmart should be given the nobel peace prize as it has done more for america's standard of living than any other individual entity. as well as what its done for the standard of living of ppl around the world, including china.

They're failing in Europe because Europeans aren't accepting their low wages and benefits dragging down their economies.

Nobel Peace Prize? Walmart has raised America's standard of living? I remember that book now...










http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/6352/waltoncopyjf7.jpg

[W*GS]

They're failing in Europe because Europeans aren't accepting their low wages and benefits dragging down their economies.

I thought it was because Europe doesn't have lazy, poor, brown Mexicans.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I thought it was because Europe doesn't have lazy, poor, brown Mexicans.
LOL
It's obvious you "thinking" rivals Gaffney's at times.

And just what is a "brown" Mexican?

[yavoon]

They're failing in Europe because Europeans aren't accepting their low wages and benefits dragging down their economies.

Nobel Peace Prize? Walmart has raised America's standard of living? I remember that book now...










http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/6352/waltoncopyjf7.jpg


ur just wrong economically. walmart has improved the standard of living for millions of ppl by large amounts. what they did for childrens clothes and groceries they are now doing for drugs. and they could do it in europe, but europe is keeping them out w/ their bloated inefficient unions.

trust me europe is not someone u want to copy economically.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/story/0,,1928453,00.html

[Bronco_Beerslug]

ur just wrong economically. walmart has improved the standard of living for millions of ppl by large amounts. what they did for childrens clothes and groceries they are now doing for drugs. and they could do it in europe, but europe is keeping them out w/ their bloated inefficient unions.

trust me europe is not someone u want to copy economically.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/story/0,,1928453,00.html
France doesn't represent all Euro countries. And I think 7 of the top ten countries in the world to live in are Euro.


http://www.economist.com/theworldin/international/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3372495&d=2005


http://www.economist.com/images/worldin2005/qualitytable.gif

[yavoon]

France doesn't represent all Euro countries. And I think 7 of the top ten countries in the world to live in are Euro.


http://www.economist.com/theworldin/international/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3372495&d=2005


http://www.economist.com/images/worldin2005/qualitytable.gif

borrowed time, though some countries are probably healthier then others. I think ireland(very pro business), switzerland(efficient democracy) and norway(assloads of oil) are all gna be ok, but a lot of those others derive their standard of living on unaffordable means, just like the french article, the old ppl live well in france. but its not an affordable life for the country, u know britain now might want to stop smokers from getting major health procedures as part of their "universal health care?"

[Bronco_Beerslug]

borrowed time, though some countries are probably healthier then others. I think ireland(very pro business), switzerland(efficient democracy) and norway(assloads of oil) are all gna be ok, but a lot of those others derive their standard of living on unaffordable means, just like the french article, the old ppl live well in france. but its not an affordable life for the country, u know britain now might want to stop smokers from getting major health procedures as part of their "universal health care?"
If you smoke you have to pay for your lung cancer treatment? Sounds reasonable to me.

[yavoon]

If you smoke you have to pay for your lung cancer treatment? Sounds reasonable to me.

no, its like the old ppl thing. because smokers are a health risk they dont want to waste the "money" on u getting a major procedure, this includes transplants, bypass heart surgery, not just related to ur illness. though I mean if ur not willing to treat smokers for lung cancers should u treat anyone for a heart attack if they ate steak?

they already deny procedures to old ppl in a similar way.

I imagine next its fat ppl.

[W*GS]

If you smoke you have to pay for your lung cancer treatment? Sounds reasonable to me.

Only if you get a credit for all the tobacco taxes you've already paid.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

no, its like the old ppl thing. because smokers are a health risk they dont want to waste the "money" on u getting a major procedure, this includes transplants, bypass heart surgery, not just related to ur illness. though I mean if ur not willing to treat smokers for lung cancers should u treat anyone for a heart attack if they ate steak?

they already deny procedures to old ppl in a similar way.

I imagine next its fat ppl.
I think it's generally accepted that smokers suffer all kinds of major medical problems and cost taxpayers billions of dollars.

Let me ask you this, should companies have the right NOT to hire smokers and overweight people?

Only if you get a credit for all the tobacco taxes you've already paid.Weak. OK offset their tobacco taxes they paid by the billions they cost everyone else.

[W*GS]

Weak. OK offset their tobacco taxes they paid by the billions they cost everyone else.

Smokers also tend to die earlier and save taxpayers billions in pension and other healthcare costs.

Kip Viscusi has done research in this area.

In any case, it's safe to say that as much as smokers are addicted to cigarettes, governments are far more addicted to cigarette taxes.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Smokers also tend to die earlier and save taxpayers billions in pension and other healthcare costs.

Kip Viscusi has done research in this area.

In any case, it's safe to say that as much as smokers are addicted to cigarettes, governments are far more addicted to cigarette taxes.
Smokers also tend to kill other people (with second hand smoke), what's your dollar offset for that?

[W*GS]

Smokers also tend to kill other people (with second hand smoke), what's your dollar offset for that?

Ask Viscusi.

The problem you're running into is twofold. You apparently accept the idea that society has the right to recoup the costs imposed upon it by the actions of individuals. That's questionable in and of itself.

The bigger issue is whether or not society has the right to force changes in behavior upon individuals in order to lessen those costs. That gets into a significantly grey area. Are we individuals with rights, or are we merely cost and benefit entries in some ledger sheet?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Ask Viscusi.

The problem you're running into is twofold. You apparently accept the idea that society has the right to recoup the costs imposed upon it by the actions of individuals. That's questionable in and of itself.

The bigger issue is whether or not society has the right to force changes in behavior upon individuals in order to lessen those costs. That gets into a significantly grey area. Are we individuals with rights, or are we merely cost and benefit entries in some ledger sheet?

You left out one thing. People have the right to not be made ill or killed by other people. If smokers didn't do those two things there would be no need for protection laws.

As far as a group of people costing the whole billions of dollars from a deadly and easily preventable action, yeah, I'm for taxing those people to help recover my costs.

[W*GS]

People have the right to not be made ill or killed by other people. If smokers didn't do those two things there would be no need for protection laws.

Do those principles apply to folks who transmit disease?

As far as a group of people costing the whole billions of dollars from a deadly and easily preventable action, yeah, I'm for taxing those people to help recover my costs.

Taxes on cigarettes already exist.

What sorts of limitations on individual behavior do you support in order to keep the costs imposed on society by those behaviors to a minimum?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Do those principles apply to folks who transmit disease?
Knowingly, of course.

Taxes on cigarettes already exist.
Exactly.

What sorts of limitations on individual behavior do you support in order to keep the costs imposed on society by those behaviors to a minimum? You're responsible for your own behavior and actions, makes sense?

[W*GS]

Knowingly, of course.

That was a poor choice. How about a better one - folks who drive cars?

Exactly.

So, you already have what you want.

You're responsible for your own behavior and actions, makes sense?

How far does that responsibility go?

Let's cut to the chase - can society force you to quit eating unhealthy foods, force you to get exercise, force you to avoid dangerous actions, all in the name of lessening societal costs of your behaviors?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Let's cut to the chase - can society force you to quit eating unhealthy foods, force you to get exercise, force you to avoid dangerous actions, all in the name of lessening societal costs of your behaviors?Depends on what society you live in I guess. In the U.S., maybe so. Don't corporations have the right not to let you work for them if they think overweight people and or smokers cost them money?

[W*GS]

Depends on what society you live in I guess. In the U.S., maybe so. Don't corporations have the right not to let you work for them if they think overweight people and or smokers cost them money?

One can work for another company, or start a company.

Unless you leave the US, changing governments isn't an easy option. Starting your own is impossible.

[bendog]

Beer, I don't want to get into it with you and Wags, but I'm not sure you are correct in understanding the wal-mart model. Wal-mart simply buys what customers want. They'll float a product they think might interest, and if people don't buy it, they kill it. If it's bought, they make the producer cut costs to the pt where he won't make it, then they find someone who can produce for less than his bottom line.

In Europe what they find, I think, is that consumers are more producer oriented. Europe saves more of gnp and consumes less. It's just not consumer driven socially. More people want to buy from their local butcher.

I agree that what's happened in the US is that with union wage controlled manftring jobs going overseas where there are no unions, wages are going down. But, there's no reason service jobs need be lower paying than those exported. Not all jobs can be exported. Spider can't be exported. Some products have base components that aren't subject to import, like grain. But we've had 25 years of anti-labor/worker govt. All WJC got done was an EITC, which doesn't effect the middle class. The gop wouldn't give us a min wage increase and mandating health care benefits in employment.

So in the US, Wal-mart's found a social niche. It's not inherently evil though.

[alkemical]

Depends on what society you live in I guess. In the U.S., maybe so. Don't corporations have the right not to let you work for them if they think overweight people and or smokers cost them money?

Well then we should tax everything to setup trust funds.

Infact, i think we should setup where noone owns property - and all of your food, housing, clothing, entertainment are provided by the state. That way all the money we make, we can just hand over to the motherland - since all will be provided and we will all be equal.

Sorry man, you can bash smokers all you want. But as long as i see fat people, and people drinking in bars that drove there - to people killing people with bats, pipes, guns, knives - etc

It's why R.A.W states a dishonest politician is less intrusive than an honest politician.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Beer, I don't want to get into it with you and Wags, but I'm not sure you are correct in understanding the wal-mart model. Wal-mart simply buys what customers want. They'll float a product they think might interest, and if people don't buy it, they kill it. If it's bought, they make the producer cut costs to the pt where he won't make it, then they find someone who can produce for less than his bottom line.

In Europe what they find, I think, is that consumers are more producer oriented. Europe saves more of gnp and consumes less. It's just not consumer driven socially.

I agree that what's happened in the US is that with union wage controlled manftring jobs going overseas where there are no unions, wages are going down. But, there's no reason service jobs need be lower paying than those exported. Not all jobs can be exported. Spider can't be exported. Some products have base components that aren't subject to import, like grain. But we've had 25 years of anti-labor/worker govt. All WJC got done was an EITC, which doesn't effect the middle class. The gop wouldn't give us a min wage increase and mandating health care benefits in employment.

So in the US, Wal-mart's found a social niche. It's not inherently evil though.
I think I understand it pretty well. Walton seen a way to sell to Americans in poverty or near poverty by paying poverty wages and no benefits to his employees. He knew he could get away with this in the South where more people are less educated and without job skills than people everywhere else in the country.

He found out he could then almost completely eliminate all local competition by keeping prices low instead of reaping all his profits at one time. He was able to continue this practice by keeping employee wages at the minimums and paying little or no benefits.

Years later, finally expanding into the Midwest he found this strategy worked there and eventually the rest of the country.

There's really no pressure to increase employee wages or benefits because of the huge (and ever growing) pool of poverty or near poverty wage earners to draw from.

So the Chinese now have their outlet stores located throughout the country where Americans can hand over their dollars directly to them.

[bendog]

I think I understand it pretty well. Walton seen a way to sell to Americans in poverty or near poverty by paying poverty wages and no benefits to his employees. He knew he could get away with this in the South where more people are less educated and without job skills than people everywhere else in the country.

He found out he could then almost completely eliminate all local competition by keeping prices low instead of reaping all his profits at one time. He was able to continue this practice by keeping employee wages at the minimums and paying little or no benefits.

Years later, finally expanding into the Midwest he found this strategy worked there and eventually the rest of the country.

There's really no pressure to increase employee wages or benefits because of the huge (and ever growing) pool of poverty or near poverty wage earners to draw from.

So the Chinese now have their outlet stores located throughout the country where Americans can hand over their dollars directly to them.

But Wal-mart only exists because we don't force wages up. It's not something the American voters just have to take up the ass. Moreover, Wal-mart employees who got stock sharing in the 80s and early 90s did well. It was Sam's wife who did that, though.

[W*GS]

I think I understand it pretty well. Walton seen a way to sell to Americans in poverty or near poverty by paying poverty wages and no benefits to his employees. He knew he could get away with this in the South where more people are less educated and without job skills than people everywhere else in the country.

He found out he could then almost completely eliminate all local competition by keeping prices low instead of reaping all his profits at one time. He was able to continue this practice by keeping employee wages at the minimums and paying little or no benefits.

Years later, finally expanding into the Midwest he found this strategy worked there and eventually the rest of the country.

There's really no pressure to increase employee wages or benefits because of the huge (and ever growing) pool of poverty or near poverty wage earners to draw from.

So the Chinese now have their outlet stores located throughout the country where Americans can hand over their dollars directly to them.

This combination of Sinophobia, elitism, and crass populism is most disgusting.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

This combination of Sinophobia, elitism, and crass populism is most disgusting.
LOL
Walton's business model is pretty repulsive to most people with a conscience, to people who could care less how corporations acquire money, they have no problem with it, or with Exxon, Enron, etc...

[yavoon]

Beer, I don't want to get into it with you and Wags, but I'm not sure you are correct in understanding the wal-mart model. Wal-mart simply buys what customers want. They'll float a product they think might interest, and if people don't buy it, they kill it. If it's bought, they make the producer cut costs to the pt where he won't make it, then they find someone who can produce for less than his bottom line.

In Europe what they find, I think, is that consumers are more producer oriented. Europe saves more of gnp and consumes less. It's just not consumer driven socially. More people want to buy from their local butcher.

I agree that what's happened in the US is that with union wage controlled manftring jobs going overseas where there are no unions, wages are going down. But, there's no reason service jobs need be lower paying than those exported. Not all jobs can be exported. Spider can't be exported. Some products have base components that aren't subject to import, like grain. But we've had 25 years of anti-labor/worker govt. All WJC got done was an EITC, which doesn't effect the middle class. The gop wouldn't give us a min wage increase and mandating health care benefits in employment.

So in the US, Wal-mart's found a social niche. It's not inherently evil though.


unions have proved themselves to be an evil in america, I'm glad they're getting owned. they are anti competitive.

[bendog]

LOL
Walton's business model is pretty repulsive to most people with a conscience, to people who could care less how corporations acquire money, they have no problem with it, or with Exxon, Enron, etc...

I really don't have a problem with Walton's original biz model. yes, he drove mom and pop's out of biz, but what's wrong with the concept of giving the consumer the best product at the best price he wants? The employees of Wal-mart IN HIS LIFETIME got retirement options far better than the mom and pops offered. He promoted AMERICAN made products.

Wal-mart today is a bit different. What it does is drive producers out of a market, and essentially gives consumers the ****tiest product that they'll accept for the lowest price Wal-mart can squeeze out of producers. It wouldn't be a bad thing even now, IF employers had to pay liveable wages and provide health/retirement benefits.

[alkemical]

unions have proved themselves to be an evil in america, I'm glad they're getting owned. they are anti competitive.

Artist/Band: Classic Country
Lyrics for Song: Sixteen Tons - Tennessee Ernie Ford
Lyrics for Album: Classic Country: 1950-1964
Some people say a man is made outta mud
A poor man's made outta muscle and blood
Muscle and blood and skin and bones
A mind that's a-weak and a back that's strong

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

I was born one mornin' when the sun didn't shine
I picked up my shovel and I walked to the mine
I loaded sixteen tons of number nine coal
And the straw boss said "Well, a-bless my soul"

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

I was born one mornin', it was drizzlin' rain
Fightin' and trouble are my middle name
I was raised in the canebrake by an ol' mama lion
Cain't no-a high-toned woman make me walk the line

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

If you see me comin', better step aside
A lotta men didn't, a lotta men died
One fist of iron, the other of steel
If the right one don't a-get you
Then the left one will

You load sixteen tons, what do you get
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

[bendog]

unions have proved themselves to be an evil in america, I'm glad they're getting owned. they are anti competitive.

Please, we're trying to have an intelligent conversation. Thanks, in advance.

[yavoon]

Please, we're trying to have an intelligent conversation. Thanks, in advance.

union leaders slaughtered the steel industry instead of being flexible to allow it to reform. w/o unions the ford/GM problem would probably be a 5-10 year problem, w/ unions it will be a 30 year problem, and god knows maybe longer.

the world changes, unions never allow for this, they are all about guarentees, guarentee this, guarentee that. if u have guarentees in a changing world it creates massive liabilities for companies and freezes their ability to adapt.

a non-union company will slaughter a union company over any period of time assuming the rest of their structure is equal, UNLESS the union company uses its union as a huge voter base to vote itself protections, which only exascerbates the evil anti capitalist ways.

[yavoon]

I really don't have a problem with Walton's original biz model. yes, he drove mom and pop's out of biz, but what's wrong with the concept of giving the consumer the best product at the best price he wants? The employees of Wal-mart IN HIS LIFETIME got retirement options far better than the mom and pops offered. He promoted AMERICAN made products.

Wal-mart today is a bit different. What it does is drive producers out of a market, and essentially gives consumers the ****tiest product that they'll accept for the lowest price Wal-mart can squeeze out of producers. It wouldn't be a bad thing even now, IF employers had to pay liveable wages and provide health/retirement benefits.

ppl need to save for their own retirement, now I'm ok w/ walmart having a program that u put into and u get out of. but arbitrary guarentees 30 years into the future is just playing w/ fire.

and walmart has a health care plan. its part of the new high deductable low monthly payment model(as low as 11$ a month).

[W*GS]

Walton's business model is pretty repulsive to most people with a conscience, to people who could care less how corporations acquire money, they have no problem with it, or with Exxon, Enron, etc...

Wal-Mart is different than Enron.

I don't shop at Wal-Mart, but I don't deride those who shop or work there as idiots and gutter-class, like you do.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I really don't have a problem with Walton's original biz model. yes, he drove mom and pop's out of biz, but what's wrong with the concept of giving the consumer the best product at the best price he wants? The employees of Wal-mart IN HIS LIFETIME got retirement options far better than the mom and pops offered. He promoted AMERICAN made products.

Wal-mart today is a bit different. What it does is drive producers out of a market, and essentially gives consumers the ****tiest product that they'll accept for the lowest price Wal-mart can squeeze out of producers. It wouldn't be a bad thing even now, IF employers had to pay liveable wages and provide health/retirement benefits.

I can't find anything that shows past Walmart employees received good benefits, maybe they did.

I'd rather have a government basic health plan for everyone than make companies responsible for providing it. That alone, is killing a lot of companies these days. Without that burden more companies would be able to expand, hire more employees and pay them better.

Wal-Mart is different than Enron.
I don't shop at Wal-Mart, but I don't deride those who shop or work there as idiots and gutter-class, like you do.
Of course you don't, you can't be caught in the same company as "idiots and gutter class".

[W*GS]

Of course you don't, you can't be caught in the same company as "idiots and gutter class".

That's your description of Wal-Mart patrons and employees, not mine.

I merely find what Wal-Mart sells not a good value for the money, so I go elsewhere.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

That's your description of Wal-Mart patrons and employees, not mine.
You're a liar. Those are your exact words not mine. Pretty stupid to suggest otherwise but lately you've taken a turn down the "stupid" path.

[W*GS]

You're a liar. Those are your exact words not mine. Pretty stupid to suggest otherwise but lately you've taken a turn down the "stupid" path.

You said:

"Walton seen a way to sell to Americans in poverty or near poverty by paying poverty wages and no benefits to his employees. He knew he could get away with this in the South where more people are less educated and without job skills than people everywhere else in the country."

In short, idiots and gutter class.

Next time you should think about parading your elitism for all the world to see.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

You said:

"Walton seen a way to sell to Americans in poverty or near poverty by paying poverty wages and no benefits to his employees. He knew he could get away with this in the South where more people are less educated and without job skills than people everywhere else in the country."
In short, idiots and gutter class.
Next time you should think about parading your elitism for all the world to see.

My words ...Americans in poverty or near poverty
people are less educated and without job skills


Your words... idiots and gutter class


You are a liar, no other way to put it. Your posts have generally degenerated to this type of drivel lately though so I shouldn't be surprised.

[W*GS]

My words ...Americans in poverty or near poverty
people are less educated and without job skills


Your words... idiots and gutter class

The problem is your elitism, not my oh-too-correct-for-your-tastes interpretation of it.

[bendog]

Beer,

Here's a warning about the potential for loses to Wal-mart employees. It references that the "switch" to 401K status was to "diversify" from the profit sharing. I have no doubt there's great potential for loss because the 401k's probably aren't diversified, as the article says.

http://www.walmartsurvivor.com/profitsharing.html

However, as the article also notes, msft profit sharing and employee stock ownership worked very nicely for early entry msft guys.

Similarly, wal-mart stock split SIX time from 80-92, and the price increased at least ten times the 80 price.
Those workers, if they got out and diversified, did very nicely. Currently, I wouldn't wish many wal-mart jobs on any person I didn't really dislike.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=WMT&t=my&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

[Bronco_Beerslug]

The problem is your elitism, not my oh-too-correct-for-your-tastes interpretation of it.

Your problem is your vanity and arrogance is being worn on your sleeve these days.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Beer,

Here's a warning about the potential for loses to Wal-mart employees. It references that the "switch" to 401K status was to "diversify" from the profit sharing. I have no doubt there's great potential for loss because the 401k's probably aren't diversified, as the article says.

http://www.walmartsurvivor.com/profitsharing.html

However, as the article also notes, msft profit sharing and employee stock ownership worked very nicely for early entry msft guys.

Similarly, wal-mart stock split SIX time from 80-92, and the price increased at least ten times the 80 price.
Those workers, if they got out and diversified, did very nicely. Currently, I wouldn't wish many wal-mart jobs on any person I didn't really dislike.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=WMT&t=my&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=
I wonder how many employees were a part of the sharing and 401's and how many today are?

[W*GS]

Your problem is your vanity and arrogance is being worn on your sleeve these days.

Your problem is that you let your elitism slip.