Cameron Posted January 3, 2012 Report Posted January 3, 2012 What do all your people propose the government do? About the corporate taxes. You say companies sit on their revenue when taxes are low. What do you think they will do if you raise them? Probably the same thing they are doing now, constrict their business in Canada and move it. Quote Economic Left/Right: 3.25 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.26 I want to earn money and keep the majority of it.
MiddleClassCentrist Posted January 3, 2012 Author Report Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) I always thought that the Feds tried to support the economy, which supports jobs, union or not. The economy only exists because of you, I and all of us regular folk. We spend money we earn. If we earn less, we spend less. The economy shrinks. Especially when money saved in Canada, just goes overseas. Edited January 3, 2012 by MiddleClassCentrist Quote Ideology does not make good policy. Good policy comes from an analysis of options, comparison of options and selection of one option that works best in the current situation. This option is often a compromise between ideologies.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 3, 2012 Report Posted January 3, 2012 The economy only exists because of you, I and all of us regular folk. We spend money we earn. If we earn less, we spend less. The economy shrinks. Especially when money saved in Canada, just goes overseas. Money spent in Canada goes "overseas" as well. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted January 3, 2012 Report Posted January 3, 2012 Welcome to Harperland where the government agrees to let non-Canadian companies buy out successful ones at the cost that they pay nice for a year then shut down the company until workers agree to take huge cuts. That is the country we live in for right now I guess. That would also be Martinland and Chretienland....direct solicitation of foreign investment has been the mainstay of Canadian business and industry strategy for at least a generation. Tell them darn foreigners to just go home and take their money with them! actually, a little learning curve for me... turns out the 'Investment Canada Act' law was a Mulroney extension of Trudeau's Foreign Investment Review Agency; a law intended to promote foreign investment and, presumably, protect Canadian business by providing a limiting level on foreign ownership. Neither Mulroney, Chretien or Martin ever invoked the law to prevent a foreign investment; rather, as it turns out, apparently, a Harper government has been the only government to ever invoke the law (re: BHP Billiton's bid to acquire Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan). As I suggested earlier, given the resulting Caterpillar strategy to apparently shutter Electro-Motive, Harper Conservatives never should have allowed the takeover... in hindsight, ICA should have been invoked... or at least, Caterpillar should have been held to guarantees to keep the plant/factory viable for its existing work-base... viable to a level to match pre-takeover conditions. And if Caterpillar wasn't accepting to those guarantees/conditions, then so be it... no foreign takeover! Quote
sharkman Posted January 3, 2012 Report Posted January 3, 2012 The economy only exists because of you, I and all of us regular folk. We spend money we earn. If we earn less, we spend less. The economy shrinks. Especially when money saved in Canada, just goes overseas. Yes, I agree wholeheartedly with that statement. But we don't live in a vacuum. There are also items called taxes and monetary policy whose adjustments can heat up or cool down an economy quite effectively, which would be how jobs are added. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 3, 2012 Report Posted January 3, 2012 ... in hindsight, ICA should have been invoked... or at least, Caterpillar should have been held to guarantees to keep the plant/factory viable for its existing work-base... viable to a level to match pre-takeover conditions. And if Caterpillar wasn't accepting to those guarantees/conditions, then so be it... no foreign takeover! Then I hope CAT shutters the plant and teaches Canada a lesson in globalization. Wanna play with the big boys and take their capital investment for over 50 years? Then be prepared to take some lumps. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted January 3, 2012 Report Posted January 3, 2012 Then I hope CAT shutters the plant and teaches Canada a lesson in globalization. Wanna play with the big boys and take their capital investment for over 50 years? Then be prepared to take some lumps. takeover date: June 2010..... not quite 50 years, hey? Quote
Topaz Posted January 3, 2012 Report Posted January 3, 2012 I just heard on the TV, that if Cat wants to sell locomotives in the US they have to MADE in the US and so they have built a new plant down there. So just like Navistar they are on their way out and the workers don't have a pray if Tony Clements didn't put a clause in the5 million agreement CAT borrowed and since we are talking about a party that gives the US anything it wants, they didn't put a safety clause in the agreement. Quote
dre Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 Why yes...I do. I don't know why one would continue to champion disenfranchising global labor in favor of an unsustainable wage and benefit structure in Canada or the USA, especially when such products are sold around the world. Did the CAW feel sorry for the loss of American union jobs when parts of US operations were outsourced to Canada? I think not.... unsustainable wage and benefit structure Also know as "having a middle class". Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 Also know as "having a middle class". Yes, a very recent development. Easy come...easy go. The world will still have a "middle class"...somewhere. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 takeover date: June 2010..... not quite 50 years, hey? Doesn't matter whether it was 2010 or 1960....we know what it is about, the only argument is how much it will cost. EMD is no stranger to that trick: Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc. traces its roots to the Electro-Motive Engineering Corporation, founded in 1922. In 1930, General Motors Corporation purchased the Winton Engine Co. and Winton's primary customer of gasoline engines, Electro-Motive Corporation (a gasoline-electric car manufacturer), combining the two to form GM's Electro-Motive Division (EMD) on January 1, 1941. In 2005, GM sold EMD to Greenbriar Equity Group LLC, Berkshire Partners LLC and certain related parties, which formed Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc., to facilitate the purchase. On August 2, 2010, Progress Rail Services Corporation completed the purchase of Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc. from Greenbriar, Berkshire, et al. making Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc. a wholly owned subsidiary of Progress Rail Services Corporation. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 Doesn't matter whether it was 2010 or 1960....we know what it is about, the only argument is how much it will cost. EMD is no stranger to that trick: Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc. traces its roots to the Electro-Motive Engineering Corporation, founded in 1922. In 1930, General Motors Corporation purchased the Winton Engine Co. and Winton's primary customer of gasoline engines, Electro-Motive Corporation (a gasoline-electric car manufacturer), combining the two to form GM's Electro-Motive Division (EMD) on January 1, 1941. In 2005, GM sold EMD to Greenbriar Equity Group LLC, Berkshire Partners LLC and certain related parties, which formed Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc., to facilitate the purchase. On August 2, 2010, Progress Rail Services Corporation completed the purchase of Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc. from Greenbriar, Berkshire, et al. making Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc. a wholly owned subsidiary of Progress Rail Services Corporation. excellent wiki prowess... but... what's your point? GM wanted to do business in Canada - ergo... in 1949 it established GM Diesel as the Canadian subsidiary of its Electro Motive division... effectively the standard end-around to Canadian import tariff protections. And then, in 2005, GM divested itself of its locomotive manufacturing and Electro-Motive was "Romneyfied", ala U.S. investment groups purchase, reestablishing the Canadian subsidiary GM Diesel as Electro-Motive Canada. The standard investment group, corporation 'flip' move, took a few years longer than the norm, but eventually Caterpillar bit and gobbled-up a key competitor, Electro-Motive, from the stalwart corporation flippers, Berkshire Partners/Greenbriar Equity. again, what was your point? Quote
Wild Bill Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) excellent wiki prowess... but... what's your point? GM wanted to do business in Canada - ergo... in 1949 it established GM Diesel as the Canadian subsidiary of its Electro Motive division... effectively the standard end-around to Canadian import tariff protections. And then, in 2005, GM divested itself of its locomotive manufacturing and Electro-Motive was "Romneyfied", ala U.S. investment groups purchase, reestablishing the Canadian subsidiary GM Diesel as Electro-Motive Canada. The standard investment group, corporation 'flip' move, took a few years longer than the norm, but eventually Caterpillar bit and gobbled-up a key competitor, Electro-Motive, from the stalwart corporation flippers, Berkshire Partners/Greenbriar Equity. again, what was your point? I had some personal insight into this very plant, Waldo. I sold parts to them throughout the 90's. Frankly, I'm surprised they stayed in business this long! This plant, along with virtually all Westinghouse, General Electric and other "old names" was woefully mired in the past. They were stuck in 1965! They all just kept downsizing and downsizing, shedding employees by retirement and attrition. Their main difficulty is that all of them had smaller or larger portions of their market in the military world, where specifications and quality control methods were left far behind in the dust during the high tech wave of the 80's and 90's. The only reason they lasted as long as they did was because there was a clause in the Defence Agreements that said the companies had to keep some capacity in Canada. So they would give their Canadian branches the older, becoming obsolete stuff. In the 90's when I was there GM was beginning to face hard competition on locomotive engines from China. I would imagine that has increased, not gone away! Even GM's locomotive division had the same problems. Under the same roof they built military vehicles, like the present armoured personnel carriers. Such businesses tended to share the same sort of paperwork and quality control methods, for thinking the long past notion that military specs ensured better quality. With many modern materials, especially electronics, this has long been false! So when you couple old age, obsolescence and general stodginess together it's no wonder people like me that got to see behind the curtain have been expecting them to die off for decades now! Now the American masters are pulling the plug. Quelle Surpriz! This argument reminds me of a similar situation when I worked for what was left of the old Westinghouse Vacuum Tube manufacturing division, in the late 80's. There was only a half dozen or so older employees left, waiting to retire while they re-branded vacuum tubes under the Westinghouse name to sell for replacements. One old timer at the desk beside mine told me one day that what had killed their business was the entry of cheap Japanese vacuum tubes into our market. He went on to say that the company and the union both had petitioned the federal government to put up tariffs on the Japanese product so that Westinghouse could continue to compete. I asked my friend what time frame was he talking about. "Around 1978", he replied. 1978! I was shocked! The entire world had gone solid state in the early 60's! Sales had fallen off because no one was using them anymore! No vacuum tube radios, or tvs, or hifi's! I held my tongue, because I suddenly realized that my older friends had never noticed how the world had changed around them. Pointing it out would have done no good. It only might have offended them. This Electro Motive situation seems exactly the same. Edited January 4, 2012 by Wild Bill Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
waldo Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 Now the American masters are pulling the plug. Quelle Surpriz! thanks for your interesting personal insights; however, if one takes Caterpillar at it's word, they would carry on in Canada... just so long as the workers are prepared to slash their existing wages/benefits to match those of Caterpillar's like American workforce. So, 'pulling the plug' is a relative term. I recently read an article that showcased how U.S. corporations were now beginning to pull-back "some" offshore manufacturing... in several cited cases, this was expansion to existing U.S. factories that had earlier been partially outsourced overseas. In the cited cases, wage/benefit provisions were agreed to by labour such that new employees were to receive less than half the wage and reduced benefits of existing U.S. employees doing the same work, in the same plants... for the U.S. unions it seems to be more about getting the jobs back then concerns over wage/benefit parity - at least for now. Caterpillar seems to be trying for it's own wrinkle on this theme by "forcing" existing London workers to lower wages/benefits to the now considerably lowered U.S. wages/benefits. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 again, what was your point? LOL!...You have already made my point splendidly, with a nice follow-up from member WB... What the Americans giveth...the Americans can taketh away. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 Also know as "having a middle class". There's plenty of "middle class" that operate under sustainable wages and benefits. Quote
waldo Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 LOL!...You have already made my point splendidly, with a nice follow-up from member WB... What the Americans giveth...the Americans can taketh away. was it self-serving on your part to ignore just how Canada allowed GM to initially establish it's Canadian GM Diesel division? You know... forcing GM to create a Canadian plant to allow it to 'bypass' import tariffs? I guess in that case, the viewpoint taken becomes one of what the Americans wanted... and the Canadians desired... the Canadians can giveth - hey? Quote
waldo Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 There's plenty of "middle class" that operate under sustainable wages and benefits. define 'sustainable wages and benefits', particularly as it applies to what Caterpillar is imposing in terms of reduced wages/benefits Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 define 'sustainable wages and benefits', particularly as it applies to what Caterpillar is imposing in terms of reduced wages/benefits Lot's of people can live on the "sustainable" wages and benefits that the CAW looks down on. Wages are not imposed....they are either accepted by contract or the plant closes down. Welcome to reality. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 was it self-serving on your part to ignore just how Canada allowed GM to initially establish it's Canadian GM Diesel division? You know... forcing GM to create a Canadian plant to allow it to 'bypass' import tariffs? I guess in that case, the viewpoint taken becomes one of what the Americans wanted... and the Canadians desired... the Canadians can giveth - hey? Works either way for me...in the end, will EMD exist or not? Stop pissing and moaning about American investment if not prepared to go without it. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 Lot's of people can live on the "sustainable" wages and benefits that the CAW looks down on. Wages are not imposed....they are either accepted by contract or the plant closes down. Welcome to reality. are 'sustainable wages and benefits' those deemed sustainable by corporations? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 are 'sustainable wages and benefits' those deemed sustainable by corporations? Of course...DUH! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 Works either way for me...in the end, will EMD exist or not? Stop pissing and moaning about American investment if not prepared to go without it. why be so narrowly simplistic? This isn't about new investment... this isn't about a new application or a new Canada Investment Act decision. This is a decades established plant with a new owner attempting to leverage off the backs of long-serving employees; nothing more, nothing less. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) why be so narrowly simplistic? This isn't about new investment... Don't be so narrow and simplistic...decades old and now unsustainable wages and benefits are off the table. If the "long serving" employees don't like it, they can go be "long serving" someplace else. Nobody is holding a registered gun to their heads. The new owners get do do what they want within labor law limits....look up the meaning of owner. Edited January 4, 2012 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted January 4, 2012 Report Posted January 4, 2012 Don't be so narrow and simplistic...decades old and now unsustainable wages and benefits are off the table. If the "long serving" employees don't like it, they can go be "long serving" someplace else. Nobody is holding a registered gun to their heads. The new owners get do do what they want within labor law limits....look up the meaning of owner. the 'registered gun to the head', in this case, should have been imposed Harper Conservative guarantees, ala the Canada Investment Act decision... quite clearly, in the overall scheme of it, the difference in wages/benefits is mice-nuts to Caterpillar's bottom line. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.