Rick Posted January 5, 2012 Report Posted January 5, 2012 Why can't people see this! The government is giving customers money back to buy products, as well as give the company a tax break. It seems CAT has ulterior motives.... So in other words the Conservatives think it's good business to cut someone's taxes so I pay more so they can export equipment and jobs?Jesus...no wonder this economy is as messed up as it is with asinine economic leadership like that.... Quote “This is all about who you represent,” Mr. Dewar (NDP) said. “We’re (NDP) talking about representing the interests of working people and everyday Canadians and they [the Conservatives] are about representing the fund managers who come in and fleece our companies and our country. Voted Maple Leaf Web's 'Most Outstanding Poster' 2011
CPCFTW Posted January 5, 2012 Report Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) So in other words the Conservatives think it's good business to cut someone's taxes so I pay more so they can export equipment and jobs? Jesus...no wonder this economy is as messed up as it is with asinine economic leadership like that.... Taxes aren't a business... You don't pay more... Yes it's good business, these 500 workers made $35 per hour for many years... presumably they paid taxes and spent their money on products and services. It's a shame for them that workers in the US are willing to do their job for half as much. Edited January 5, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
Rick Posted January 5, 2012 Report Posted January 5, 2012 Taxes aren't a business... You don't pay more... Yes it's good business, these 500 workers made $35 per hour for many years... presumably they paid taxes and spent their money on products and services. It's a shame for them that workers in the US are willing to do their job for half as much. In what part of your myopic fantasy world does less workers making less money paying less tax and having less to spend on products and services not add up to being bad business for the Canadian economy... Quote “This is all about who you represent,” Mr. Dewar (NDP) said. “We’re (NDP) talking about representing the interests of working people and everyday Canadians and they [the Conservatives] are about representing the fund managers who come in and fleece our companies and our country. Voted Maple Leaf Web's 'Most Outstanding Poster' 2011
CPCFTW Posted January 5, 2012 Report Posted January 5, 2012 In what part of your myopic fantasy world does less workers making less money paying less tax and having less to spend on products and services not add up to being bad business for the Canadian economy... In what part of your fantasy world are businesses isolated to the Canadian economy? Quote
Rick Posted January 5, 2012 Report Posted January 5, 2012 In what part of your fantasy world are businesses isolated to the Canadian economy? Nice dodge...Afraid to answer the question? Quote “This is all about who you represent,” Mr. Dewar (NDP) said. “We’re (NDP) talking about representing the interests of working people and everyday Canadians and they [the Conservatives] are about representing the fund managers who come in and fleece our companies and our country. Voted Maple Leaf Web's 'Most Outstanding Poster' 2011
MiddleClassCentrist Posted January 5, 2012 Report Posted January 5, 2012 (edited) $35/hr?!! No wonder they're packing up! I know you are just a forum troll with little to add in any discussion. But, these are SKILLED people with college background and required training. These aren't jobs that high school drop outs can do. They can't find enough people in Indiana to do the jobs for $18/hour. General Electric pays the same position on average $30/hour. Read up on it a little and stop proving that you are nothing more than an internet troll to be ignored Edited January 5, 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.
Tilter Posted January 5, 2012 Report Posted January 5, 2012 On January 1st, 2012 Electro-Motive Canada locked out workers for refusing to take a 55% pay cut, along with numerous other benefit reductions. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-mum-on-lockout-at-plant-harper-used-to-tout-corporate-tax-cuts/article2291661/ This after the Canadian tax payer sunk millions of dollars into the Company. Ironically, back in 2008, Stephen Harper used the London plant to tout the Tories inane tax cuts and giveaways as a job creators and protectors. In true Con style these 'no string attached' giveaways have failed, and worse still the tax payer is now out millions of dollars with only a few 'mc jobs' to show for it. Seems the cons have no problem wasting money on their corporate friends, while the funding of healthcare and other essential services is on the table. PS: The real gem in this story comes from the Cons claim that they don't involve themselves in private labour disputes. How does this rant end up on the government's plate? Is Harper on the company's board of directors? Aside from that They want the workers to to take a 50% pay cut and dump the pension plan??? Are these people NUTS? Quote
segnosaur Posted January 5, 2012 Report Posted January 5, 2012 But, these are SKILLED people with college background and required. These aren't jobs that high school drop outs can do. They can't find enough people in Indiana to do the jobs for $18/hour. General Electric pays the same position on average $30/hour. Just out of curiosity... Where exactly is your proof that the jobs lost in London truly are jobs of a technical nature that require college background (presumably in a technical field)? Quote
segnosaur Posted January 5, 2012 Report Posted January 5, 2012 The company recently posted a record $1.14-billion dollar profit - not revenue, but profit - in its latest quarter. Despite this unprecedented success, Electro-Motive workers (perhaps in recognition of the economy?) are not demanding a 44% increase in wages. They’re not holding out for a 4% increase, or even a 0.4% hike. They’re willing to accept a wage freeze. Caterpillar, on the other hand, wants to cut wages from $35 an hour to $16.50. The company says, at least publicly, the reason for such a dramatic rollback is the time honored “need to remain competitive.” Who are they competing against? Their main competitor, General Electric, agreed in 2010 to a four-year deal that pays most of its American workers $30 an hour plus benefits. The reality of corporate greed Yeah, CAT is really hurting... (Maybe you should research your comments before making them) Caterpillar profits rose 44% by October These 2 posts were basicaly saying the same thing so I will address them together.... - Pointing to the overall profits of a large company as proof of "greed" isn't necessarily fair. A company has the right to run its affairs as it sees fit, and no company should be forced to keep a part of its business open if it feels it is not in their best corporate interest - Pay cutbacks may seem unfair, but that's the nature of wages. A company can be in a situation where it overpays its employees; the fact that they were overpaid before doesn't mean their newly proposed wages are unfair, only that they've been decreased. - Even if general electric agreed to a larger contract, so what? Each company should run their own affairs as they see fit. If general electric can be competitive offering their employees higher wages, then hopefully they'll be successful enough to drive up the average salary of all people working in that manufacturing area - Everyone likes to jump in and blame 'corporate greed' as if corporations are some sort of anonymous entity. However, the fact is, CAT is owned by shareholders. Many of those shares are held by pension plans and individuals who are far from wealthy. By favoring the workers over 'corporate profits' you are in effect taking money from individuals who may be trying to save for their environment. (If you take a look at the Caterpillar stock prices, its not like their company value has been skyrocketing. Their stock value is roughly where it was a year earlier.) See: http://ca.advfn.com/p.php?pid=qkquote&symbol=NY^CAT Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 These 2 posts were basicaly saying the same thing so I will address them together.... - Pointing to the overall profits of a large company as proof of "greed" isn't necessarily fair. A company has the right to run its affairs as it sees fit, and no company should be forced to keep a part of its business open if it feels it is not in their best corporate interest - Pay cutbacks may seem unfair, but that's the nature of wages. A company can be in a situation where it overpays its employees; the fact that they were overpaid before doesn't mean their newly proposed wages are unfair, only that they've been decreased. - Even if general electric agreed to a larger contract, so what? Each company should run their own affairs as they see fit. If general electric can be competitive offering their employees higher wages, then hopefully they'll be successful enough to drive up the average salary of all people working in that manufacturing area - Everyone likes to jump in and blame 'corporate greed' as if corporations are some sort of anonymous entity. However, the fact is, CAT is owned by shareholders. Many of those shares are held by pension plans and individuals who are far from wealthy. By favoring the workers over 'corporate profits' you are in effect taking money from individuals who may be trying to save for their environment. (If you take a look at the Caterpillar stock prices, its not like their company value has been skyrocketing. Their stock value is roughly where it was a year earlier.) See: http://ca.advfn.com/p.php?pid=qkquote&symbol=NY^CAT While I find no flaw in your argument, the fact remains that optics are everything in politics and if I was a member of the opposition I would be laughing all the way to the bank! In addition, those poor bastards that were locked out and screwed over have clear memories and a long list of friends. The pattern is very clear and there is much political mileage to be made from it. The Lord works in mysterious ways. Quote
CPCFTW Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 I know you are just a forum troll with little to add in any discussion. But, these are SKILLED people with college background and required training. These aren't jobs that high school drop outs can do. They can't find enough people in Indiana to do the jobs for $18/hour. General Electric pays the same position on average $30/hour. Read up on it a little and stop proving that you are nothing more than an internet troll to be ignored Yes read up on it like you have done by reading an editorial posted earlier in this thread. Thank you for reciting facts already mentioned in that article that everyone has read. You are clearly an expert on the subject now! Yes $35/hr, or around 70k/yr full-time for college graduates is a lot. Do you know any college graduates? It is the fallback for people who can't get into University (and university isn't hard to get into). Obviously these workers would not be locked out if it was not a lot. Use your head man and quit calling everyone who has a different opinion than you a troll. It is pathetic. Quote
CPCFTW Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 Just out of curiosity... Where exactly is your proof that the jobs lost in London truly are jobs of a technical nature that require college background (presumably in a technical field)? His proof is an editorial posted earlier in this thread which he read and which now qualifies him as an expert on the subject. You better read that link or you're nothing more than a troll to be ignored!! Quote
CPCFTW Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 (edited) These 2 posts were basicaly saying the same thing so I will address them together.... - Pointing to the overall profits of a large company as proof of "greed" isn't necessarily fair. A company has the right to run its affairs as it sees fit, and no company should be forced to keep a part of its business open if it feels it is not in their best corporate interest - Pay cutbacks may seem unfair, but that's the nature of wages. A company can be in a situation where it overpays its employees; the fact that they were overpaid before doesn't mean their newly proposed wages are unfair, only that they've been decreased. - Even if general electric agreed to a larger contract, so what? Each company should run their own affairs as they see fit. If general electric can be competitive offering their employees higher wages, then hopefully they'll be successful enough to drive up the average salary of all people working in that manufacturing area - Everyone likes to jump in and blame 'corporate greed' as if corporations are some sort of anonymous entity. However, the fact is, CAT is owned by shareholders. Many of those shares are held by pension plans and individuals who are far from wealthy. By favoring the workers over 'corporate profits' you are in effect taking money from individuals who may be trying to save for their environment. (If you take a look at the Caterpillar stock prices, its not like their company value has been skyrocketing. Their stock value is roughly where it was a year earlier.) See: http://ca.advfn.com/p.php?pid=qkquote&symbol=NY^CAT Great post, but you also forgot to mention the fact that just because a company as a whole is profitable, doesn't mean that the particular division facing a wage reduction generates profits. Profits are not uniformly distributed between divisions. The workers in an unprofitable division or subsidiary are not somehow entitled to a share of the parent company's profits generated by more profitable divisions. Edited January 6, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
Rick Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 In what part of your myopic fantasy world does less workers making less money paying less tax and having less to spend on products and services not add up to being bad business for the Canadian economy... Well CPCFTW..you going to answer the question or not?Because your continued avoidance of it leads me to believe that MiddleClassCentrist has you pegged correctly imo.....troll. Quote “This is all about who you represent,” Mr. Dewar (NDP) said. “We’re (NDP) talking about representing the interests of working people and everyday Canadians and they [the Conservatives] are about representing the fund managers who come in and fleece our companies and our country. Voted Maple Leaf Web's 'Most Outstanding Poster' 2011
CPCFTW Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 (edited) Well CPCFTW..you going to answer the question or not? Because your continued avoidance of it leads me to believe that MiddleClassCentrist has you pegged correctly imo.....troll. I already answered your question. It's not my problem you don't understand that taxing isn't a business and that multinational corporations "business" isn't limited to 500 Canadian workers and consumers. Run along now little Marx. Edited January 6, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
waldo Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 Great post, but you also forgot to mention the fact that just because a company as a whole is profitable, doesn't mean that the particular division facing a wage reduction generates profits. Profits are not uniformly distributed between divisions. The workers in an unprofitable division or subsidiary are not somehow entitled to a share of the parent company's profits generated by more profitable divisions. another related thread's post has identified the Electro-Motive division's recent quarter... quarter... net profit as over $1Billion. You earlier beaked-off about your "portfolio" gains - care to speculate on the impact to your "portfolio" if the London plant wages/benefits were kept at today's status-quo level? C'mon, Mr. Numbers... just how much of a hit would your "portfolio" take, hey? Quote
Rick Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 I already answered your question. It's not my problem you don't understand that taxing isn't a business and that multinational corporations "business" isn't limited to 500 Canadian workers and consumers. Run along now little Marx. I can't believe anyone could be so obtuse or incapable of basic reading comprehension...but apparently you are.Now instead of more of your useless right wing drivel...how about you answer the question. In what part of your myopic fantasy world does less workers making less money paying less tax and having less to spend on products and services not add up to being bad business for the Canadian economy... Quote “This is all about who you represent,” Mr. Dewar (NDP) said. “We’re (NDP) talking about representing the interests of working people and everyday Canadians and they [the Conservatives] are about representing the fund managers who come in and fleece our companies and our country. Voted Maple Leaf Web's 'Most Outstanding Poster' 2011
Rick Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 another related thread's post has identified the Electro-Motive division's recent quarter... quarter... net profit as over $1Billion. You earlier beaked-off about your "portfolio" gains - care to speculate on the impact to your "portfolio" if the London plant wages/benefits were kept at today's status-quo level? C'mon, Mr. Numbers... just how much of a hit would your "portfolio" take, hey? You know waldo, I read this elsewhere yesterday but I think it sums this up perfectly...Amazing that it's still considered wrong for a skilled tradesworker to get paid $80K a year but it's perfectly OK for some ridiculous upper-class yuppie fratboy who took commerce or management at university to get paid a half-million or more per year when their only meaningfull accomplishments in life consist of financial market gambling, shutting down viable companies, and hollowing out the middle class by just a tad more every day.Our society is well and truly fucked when these types of evil scavengers and carrion eaters are seen as the heroes of our economy. Quote “This is all about who you represent,” Mr. Dewar (NDP) said. “We’re (NDP) talking about representing the interests of working people and everyday Canadians and they [the Conservatives] are about representing the fund managers who come in and fleece our companies and our country. Voted Maple Leaf Web's 'Most Outstanding Poster' 2011
segnosaur Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 Just out of curiosity...Where exactly is your proof that the jobs lost in London truly are jobs of a technical nature that require college background (presumably in a technical field)? His proof is an editorial posted earlier in this thread which he read and which now qualifies him as an expert on the subject. You better read that link or you're nothing more than a troll to be ignored!! Yes, I did read the part in the editorial that claimed that the people were "overwhelmingly" college graduates/etc. But that doesn't mean the requirements of the job require such an education. If the workers there were doing high-tech design work or something of a similar nature they might command a higher salary. However, its possible that the majority of workers are merely assembly line workers and the company had "college graduate" as a requirement simply to thin out the collection of resumes that they were receiving. Quote
segnosaur Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 another related thread's post has identified the Electro-Motive division's recent quarter... quarter... net profit as over $1Billion. You earlier beaked-off about your "portfolio" gains - care to speculate on the impact to your "portfolio" if the London plant wages/benefits were kept at today's status-quo level? First of all, pointing out overall "net profits" may be misleading if we don't have some sort of context. Is that $1 billion on $2 billion revenue? $10 billion revenue? I have to admit, I am a bit skeptical of the $1 billion profit claim made in the opinion pieces. After all, the parent company (Caterpillar) had a 3rd quarter net income of just over $1billion (and the overall company was much larger than their elector-motive subsidiary. See: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/25/business/caterpillar-profit-rises-44.html?_r=1 Another thing that must be considered: In order to be successful, a company must attempt to be proactive, planning for any future occurrences. If they are paying high salaries this year and their sales go in the toilet, they could be in serious trouble. The economy is volatile right now... being able to handle such a rough situation is necessary. Quote
Rick Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 Despite the neo-cons and Harper faithful's desperate attempts to derail the truth in the matter, Canadians know this is, the truth... Quote “This is all about who you represent,” Mr. Dewar (NDP) said. “We’re (NDP) talking about representing the interests of working people and everyday Canadians and they [the Conservatives] are about representing the fund managers who come in and fleece our companies and our country. Voted Maple Leaf Web's 'Most Outstanding Poster' 2011
Cameron Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 How original, Rick. Quote Economic Left/Right: 3.25 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.26 I want to earn money and keep the majority of it.
Rick Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 How original, Rick. Original maybe not. Truthful, most definitely. Quote “This is all about who you represent,” Mr. Dewar (NDP) said. “We’re (NDP) talking about representing the interests of working people and everyday Canadians and they [the Conservatives] are about representing the fund managers who come in and fleece our companies and our country. Voted Maple Leaf Web's 'Most Outstanding Poster' 2011
CPCFTW Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 (edited) First of all, pointing out overall "net profits" may be misleading if we don't have some sort of context. Is that $1 billion on $2 billion revenue? $10 billion revenue? I have to admit, I am a bit skeptical of the $1 billion profit claim made in the opinion pieces. After all, the parent company (Caterpillar) had a 3rd quarter net income of just over $1billion (and the overall company was much larger than their elector-motive subsidiary. See: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/25/business/caterpillar-profit-rises-44.html?_r=1 Another thing that must be considered: In order to be successful, a company must attempt to be proactive, planning for any future occurrences. If they are paying high salaries this year and their sales go in the toilet, they could be in serious trouble. The economy is volatile right now... being able to handle such a rough situation is necessary. Yup. I checked CAT's 2010 10K last night and saw this: In August 2010, we acquired 100 percent of the equity in privately held Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc. (EMD) for approximately $901 million, consisting of $928 million paid at closing less a final net working capital adjustment of $27 million received in the fourth quarter of 2010. According to Waldo, EMD was valued for less than 0.3 P/E (assuming 1B earnings/Quarter). Also this: Management has excluded Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc. (EMD) from our assessment of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010 because we acquired EMD in August 2010. EMD is a wholly owned subsidiary of Caterpillar Inc. whose total assets and total revenues represent approximately 2 percent and 1 percent, respectively, of the related consolidated financial statement amounts as of and for the year ended December 31, 2010. CAT's 2010 Revenue was 42 Billion, 1% of that is 420 million. Assuming the percentages above are based on 4Q 2010 only (since EMD was acquired in Aug 2010), a 1B profit would indicate that Waldo believes that EMD has over 200% profit margin, or has grown sales by over 100% since being acquired (even with 100% sales growth in one year, the profit margin would be over 100%!). I didn't bother responding to that nonsense. Edited January 6, 2012 by CPCFTW Quote
MiddleClassCentrist Posted January 6, 2012 Report Posted January 6, 2012 How original, Rick. It represents Harper fairly well. Crush unions. Let the top earners flourish. Kill the middle class. 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.
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.