Top 8% Own 85%

[Andylusion]

And you don't either you can't tell me how much money these whiners would have made.

WHat does a top paid software engineer make

Ranking Glassdoor's 25 Highest Paying Companies for Software Engineers

This week Glassdoor published the study, 25 Highest Paying Companies for Software Engineers 2013. Juniper Networks JNPR +3.25% leads all 25 companies tracked in the study with an average base salary of $159,990, followed by LinkedIn LNKD +3.17%, who offers an average base salary of $136,427. Yahoo YHOO +1.64%’s average base salary for software engineers is $130,312 and Google GOOG +1.61%averages $127,143. Twitter’s average base salary for software engineers is $124,883. The following infographic shows the top 25 companies and average base salaries.


Seems to me we are talking about a couple or three percent of their income spread over a span of years



AHHHHHH THE HORROR

It had no effect on the economy

Economists disagree with you. You are the king of low information.

They are wrong. So are you. You are the king of wrong information.

The little child screams again.

Sorry but economists are not wrong. You are obviously the one who is wrong. Now stop your little tantrum.

The little child whines again.

Sorry, but the economists who agree with you, are wrong. And you are wrong, and you can keep repeating wrong, as long as you like, and it doesn't change that you are wrong.

Now stop your little whine fest.

Yes you just keep crying wrong wrong wrong.

I'll still be right with the DOJ, the judge who increased the settlement, economists...

As if that matters. "We had a poll, and the poll says I'm right, so therefore the poll determines truth".

I've given dozens of arguments now, not one of which have you even been able to acknowledge. Here's another.

You are driving your car, and you are pulled over, for going too fast. A mile later, you are pulled over, for going too slow. A mile later, you are pulled over for driving the same speed as everyone else.

At that point, what credibility does the law have? Zero. It's immoral.

So a corporations is attacked for paying too low wages. Another is attacked for paying too high wages. And now they are attacked for paying the same wages. What credibility does the law have? "But economists blaw blaw blaw!" What credibility does a law that attacks corporations no matter what they do, have? "But the DOJ!"

I would much rather be right, and have the entire world think I'm wrong.... than be like you, and be wrong, and have the world think I'm right.

I just gave direct conclusive proof of Microsoft being attacked by people like you, and the government, for doing exactly, what these companies are being attacked for not doing.

You argument, and all your "DOJ and Economists agree" blaw blaw blaw, was completely destroyed. You can keep repeating wrong as long as you want. It changes nothing.

 

[Andylusion]

Economists disagree with you pinhead. You say just a few thousand? What percent is that of their pay?

Over all the years this has allegedly been going on not a whole lot

These whiners could have made more than that driving part time for Uber

That doesn't answer the question. You keep babbling and you don't know any facts. You haven't provided a single link to support your ridiculous claims. Sorry I'll go with economists over you idiot.

And you don't either you can't tell me how much money these whiners would have made.

WHat does a top paid software engineer make

Ranking Glassdoor's 25 Highest Paying Companies for Software Engineers

This week Glassdoor published the study, 25 Highest Paying Companies for Software Engineers 2013. Juniper Networks JNPR +3.25% leads all 25 companies tracked in the study with an average base salary of $159,990, followed by LinkedIn LNKD +3.17%, who offers an average base salary of $136,427. Yahoo YHOO +1.64%’s average base salary for software engineers is $130,312 and Google GOOG +1.61%averages $127,143. Twitter’s average base salary for software engineers is $124,883. The following infographic shows the top 25 companies and average base salaries.


Seems to me we are talking about a couple or three percent of their income spread over a span of years



AHHHHHH THE HORROR

It had no effect on the economy

Economists disagree with you. You are the king of low information.

And you can't think for yourself

You can't even tell me how much these people lost in income because of the alleged collusion

Absolutely right. We have beaten this guy over the head with facts and arguments, and he hasn't been able to answer ANYTHING. All he does is repeat himself like a mindless parrot.

 

[Andylusion]

The American people are being programmed to be poor, stupid, working class, government dependents. Our education system is not designed to turn out highly educated individuals. It is designed to produce 'slaves' who will keep 'feeding the machine'.

People bitch about '8% owning 85%' yet do not say a word about the piss-poor education system, a government that claims the 'success' of it's social programs 'designed to help people' is how many people are dependent on them rather than how many people have improved their lives and gotten off of them.

If you started from scratch and tried to design a plan / process to keep yourself in power, in control, rich you could not come up with one better than what has been created here in America. ... and most people have not caught on yet.

LBJ's focus, after civil rights passed - due to his own racial bias - was on blacks. He declared in order to control the blacks and con them into forfeiting their newly-won rights the government had to 'give them something, but not enough to make a difference'...and that is exactly what he did. He said that his plan would make 'those ni@@ers vote Democrat the next 200 years'.

The idea was simple - give blacks 'freebies', getting them addicted to govt handouts - dependent on them to the point where their survival depended on receiving them. To do this they had to keep them uneducated and poor, tell them they were 'victims' who were 'owed this'. Great plan...and it worked. More than 50 years later Democrats have blacks believing the DNC is the only party that cares for them (because they keep doling out the 'free stuff upon which they are dependent) and things have only gotten worse, not better.

LBJ had a great plan, but his vision was too small, narrowed by his own racism. He lacked the greater vision / conviction of applying this new 'economic slavery' to those of his own color as well. LBJ sought to make whites the 'ruling class'. Years later color has pretty much been eliminated from the equation to where there is just a 'ruling class' and those who 'feed the machine', who perpetuate 'economic slavery' by becoming addicted to, becoming satisfied with, and dependent upon government handouts.

The middle class is slowly being eliminated in this country, as the nation is being forced to evolve into 2 groups - the ruled and the rulers. Need proof? Nancy Pelosi demonstrated it - put it right out there for the entire US to see...and no one blinked an eye...when she declared about the ACA: 'Americans have no right to know what is in legislation (edicts) until they (Congress - the self-appointed 'rulers') force it into law.

As America continues to decline I have no real hope that this nation will wake up to what is going on before it is too late. It isn't a 'GOP Vs DNC' thing, as the two parties have conned people into thinking (which is why we can't hardly tell the difference between the two these days). It is 'us' - the 'ruled' - against 'them' - the self-appointed rulers.

Our education system sucks, that's true, but it's because of the people. The public has demanded that they have Black History month, and focus on social crap, and save the polar bears, and other mindless crap that serves no purpose.

They also demand that they focus on sports, and football, and other trivial crap, that has no value. Additionally, you can't get rid of bad students. No matter how much they act up, and refuse to learn, schools can't ditch bad students. If that's not bad enough, teachers Unions make it nearly impossible to get rid of bad teachers.

When you look at private schools that routinely out perform the public ones, what do you see? A primary focus on academics, and sports and athletics is minimal. Bad students are eliminated very quickly, and bad teachers even faster.

People point to Finland education as being some of the best schools in the world... and shockingly, they nearly the exact same policy. Bad students are removed from schools very quickly. And the schools focus on academic success, not social crap, and save the yellow finch, and hug the trees, and love minorities.

The problem in our education system, is the public's fault. That's all there is to it.

But it's not "designed to produces slaves". Please. The only people slaves in our society, are people who choose to be slaves. Life is work dude. Get over it. You have to serve someone, or you don't live. It's true anywhere in the world. Get over it.

If you started from scratch and tried to design a plan / process to keep yourself in power, in control, rich you could not come up with one better than what has been created here in America. ... and most people have not caught on yet.

Nah, you are crazy. That's bonker talk. The list of people in this country that have built massive wealth, and ended up in poverty, is endless. Most of the top richest families, end up with no wealth by the 3rd generation.

Vanderbilt was arguably the richest man this country has ever known. The Vanderbilt's have zero. Nothing. All the money was squandered.

The reason rich people are rich, is because they produce things that have value. The reason poor people are poor, is because they blow their money. When a poor person does rich people actions, they end up rich.

The Mexican immigrant who set up a global drone firm - BBC News

When rich people do poor people actions, they end up poor.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/arts/design/20hartford.html?_r=0

Heir to hundreds of millions, ended up declaring bankruptcy.

You are crazy if you think the system protects the wealthy.

The middle class is slowly being eliminated in this country, as the nation is being forced to evolve into 2 groups - the ruled and the rulers.

Stop blaming others for the publics failures. There is only one reason Nancy Pelosi is in office. The public voted her there. This idea that somehow "we're being conned into blaw blaw" is more blame shifting. As long as you shift blame, the situation will not improve. Go to any AA meeting, and the first thing they teach is that before you do anything at all, to help anyone, they have to accept responsibility.

Trying to blame "society" or whatever, is a great way to continue to the problem.

 

[Brain357]

Over all the years this has allegedly been going on not a whole lot

These whiners could have made more than that driving part time for Uber

That doesn't answer the question. You keep babbling and you don't know any facts. You haven't provided a single link to support your ridiculous claims. Sorry I'll go with economists over you idiot.

And you don't either you can't tell me how much money these whiners would have made.

WHat does a top paid software engineer make

Ranking Glassdoor's 25 Highest Paying Companies for Software Engineers

This week Glassdoor published the study, 25 Highest Paying Companies for Software Engineers 2013. Juniper Networks JNPR +3.25% leads all 25 companies tracked in the study with an average base salary of $159,990, followed by LinkedIn LNKD +3.17%, who offers an average base salary of $136,427. Yahoo YHOO +1.64%’s average base salary for software engineers is $130,312 and Google GOOG +1.61%averages $127,143. Twitter’s average base salary for software engineers is $124,883. The following infographic shows the top 25 companies and average base salaries.


Seems to me we are talking about a couple or three percent of their income spread over a span of years



AHHHHHH THE HORROR

It had no effect on the economy

Economists disagree with you. You are the king of low information.

And you can't think for yourself

You can't even tell me how much these people lost in income because of the alleged collusion

Absolutely right. We have beaten this guy over the head with facts and arguments, and he hasn't been able to answer ANYTHING. All he does is repeat himself like a mindless parrot.

Your have babbled on and whined. You don't have a single link that supports any of your stupidity. You are clowns and I just keep laughing.

 

[Skull Pilot]

That doesn't answer the question. You keep babbling and you don't know any facts. You haven't provided a single link to support your ridiculous claims. Sorry I'll go with economists over you idiot.

And you don't either you can't tell me how much money these whiners would have made.

WHat does a top paid software engineer make

Ranking Glassdoor's 25 Highest Paying Companies for Software Engineers

This week Glassdoor published the study, 25 Highest Paying Companies for Software Engineers 2013. Juniper Networks JNPR +3.25% leads all 25 companies tracked in the study with an average base salary of $159,990, followed by LinkedIn LNKD +3.17%, who offers an average base salary of $136,427. Yahoo YHOO +1.64%’s average base salary for software engineers is $130,312 and Google GOOG +1.61%averages $127,143. Twitter’s average base salary for software engineers is $124,883. The following infographic shows the top 25 companies and average base salaries.


Seems to me we are talking about a couple or three percent of their income spread over a span of years



AHHHHHH THE HORROR

It had no effect on the economy

Economists disagree with you. You are the king of low information.

And you can't think for yourself

You can't even tell me how much these people lost in income because of the alleged collusion

Absolutely right. We have beaten this guy over the head with facts and arguments, and he hasn't been able to answer ANYTHING. All he does is repeat himself like a mindless parrot.

Your have babbled on and whined. You don't have a single link that supports any of your stupidity. You are clowns and I just keep laughing.

And you have not shown me that these people actually did lose any income

 

[Brain357]

And you don't either you can't tell me how much money these whiners would have made.

WHat does a top paid software engineer make

Ranking Glassdoor's 25 Highest Paying Companies for Software Engineers

This week Glassdoor published the study, 25 Highest Paying Companies for Software Engineers 2013. Juniper Networks JNPR +3.25% leads all 25 companies tracked in the study with an average base salary of $159,990, followed by LinkedIn LNKD +3.17%, who offers an average base salary of $136,427. Yahoo YHOO +1.64%’s average base salary for software engineers is $130,312 and Google GOOG +1.61%averages $127,143. Twitter’s average base salary for software engineers is $124,883. The following infographic shows the top 25 companies and average base salaries.


Seems to me we are talking about a couple or three percent of their income spread over a span of years



AHHHHHH THE HORROR

It had no effect on the economy

Economists disagree with you. You are the king of low information.

And you can't think for yourself

You can't even tell me how much these people lost in income because of the alleged collusion

Absolutely right. We have beaten this guy over the head with facts and arguments, and he hasn't been able to answer ANYTHING. All he does is repeat himself like a mindless parrot.

Your have babbled on and whined. You don't have a single link that supports any of your stupidity. You are clowns and I just keep laughing.

And you have not shown me that these people actually did lose any income

That is because you are a moron. I have shown why they lost wages through real economists. The DOJ found them guilty. I have shown the judge with all the facts increased the amount. And we all know they were paid 415 million. You can keep asking stupid questions, but they are irrelevant. You can't even offer a single link to support anything.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Economists disagree with you. You are the king of low information.

And you can't think for yourself

You can't even tell me how much these people lost in income because of the alleged collusion

Absolutely right. We have beaten this guy over the head with facts and arguments, and he hasn't been able to answer ANYTHING. All he does is repeat himself like a mindless parrot.

Your have babbled on and whined. You don't have a single link that supports any of your stupidity. You are clowns and I just keep laughing.

And you have not shown me that these people actually did lose any income

That is because you are a moron. I have shown why they lost wages through real economists. The DOJ found them guilty. I have shown the judge with all the facts increased the amount. And we all know they were paid 415 million. You can keep asking stupid questions, but they are irrelevant. You can't even offer a single link to support anything.

HOW MUCH DID THEY LOSE

If you break it down even the court only thought the lost a couple percent spread out over a number of years

The fact is that it is all conjecture if these people really lost any income and you certainly can't prove they did or how much they lost

 

[Brain357]

And you can't think for yourself

You can't even tell me how much these people lost in income because of the alleged collusion

Absolutely right. We have beaten this guy over the head with facts and arguments, and he hasn't been able to answer ANYTHING. All he does is repeat himself like a mindless parrot.

Your have babbled on and whined. You don't have a single link that supports any of your stupidity. You are clowns and I just keep laughing.

And you have not shown me that these people actually did lose any income

That is because you are a moron. I have shown why they lost wages through real economists. The DOJ found them guilty. I have shown the judge with all the facts increased the amount. And we all know they were paid 415 million. You can keep asking stupid questions, but they are irrelevant. You can't even offer a single link to support anything.

HOW MUCH DID THEY LOSE

If you break it down even the court only thought the lost a couple percent spread out over a number of years

The fact is that it is all conjecture if these people really lost any income and you certainly can't prove they did or how much they lost

415 million.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Absolutely right. We have beaten this guy over the head with facts and arguments, and he hasn't been able to answer ANYTHING. All he does is repeat himself like a mindless parrot.

Your have babbled on and whined. You don't have a single link that supports any of your stupidity. You are clowns and I just keep laughing.

And you have not shown me that these people actually did lose any income

That is because you are a moron. I have shown why they lost wages through real economists. The DOJ found them guilty. I have shown the judge with all the facts increased the amount. And we all know they were paid 415 million. You can keep asking stupid questions, but they are irrelevant. You can't even offer a single link to support anything.

HOW MUCH DID THEY LOSE

If you break it down even the court only thought the lost a couple percent spread out over a number of years

The fact is that it is all conjecture if these people really lost any income and you certainly can't prove they did or how much they lost

415 million.

Show me the calculation

You can't can you?

Give a break down of exactly how much income each of those 65000 people lost in income and give me proof that they were actually denied higher paying jobs

The number was partly conjecture and partly a punitive assessment it was pulled out of the judges ass

 

[Brain357]

Your have babbled on and whined. You don't have a single link that supports any of your stupidity. You are clowns and I just keep laughing.

And you have not shown me that these people actually did lose any income

That is because you are a moron. I have shown why they lost wages through real economists. The DOJ found them guilty. I have shown the judge with all the facts increased the amount. And we all know they were paid 415 million. You can keep asking stupid questions, but they are irrelevant. You can't even offer a single link to support anything.

HOW MUCH DID THEY LOSE

If you break it down even the court only thought the lost a couple percent spread out over a number of years

The fact is that it is all conjecture if these people really lost any income and you certainly can't prove they did or how much they lost

415 million.

Show me the calculation

You can't can you?

Give a break down of exactly how much income each of those 65000 people lost in income and give me proof that they were actually denied higher paying jobs

The number was partly conjecture and partly a punitive assessment it was pulled out of the judges ass

What is your point? My point is that collusion held down their wages. Economists agree, the DOJ agrees, the judge with all the facts agrees, the 415 million agrees. When it is to then tune of 415 million for a single case that shows it is significant. Your questions continue to be pointless.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And you have not shown me that these people actually did lose any income

That is because you are a moron. I have shown why they lost wages through real economists. The DOJ found them guilty. I have shown the judge with all the facts increased the amount. And we all know they were paid 415 million. You can keep asking stupid questions, but they are irrelevant. You can't even offer a single link to support anything.

HOW MUCH DID THEY LOSE

If you break it down even the court only thought the lost a couple percent spread out over a number of years

The fact is that it is all conjecture if these people really lost any income and you certainly can't prove they did or how much they lost

415 million.

Show me the calculation

You can't can you?

Give a break down of exactly how much income each of those 65000 people lost in income and give me proof that they were actually denied higher paying jobs

The number was partly conjecture and partly a punitive assessment it was pulled out of the judges ass

What is your point? My point is that collusion held down their wages. Economists agree, the DOJ agrees, the judge with all the facts agrees, the 415 million agrees. When it is to then tune of 415 million for a single case that shows it is significant. Your questions continue to be pointless.

My point is that you can show me absolutely no empirical proof to prove they lost any income at all. This was all based on a possible loss of wages

The original 3 billion was a number picked by the filing attorney, the original settlement was 10 cents on the dollar, the judge just decided it wasn't enough so he upped it by an amount he pulled out of his ass

It was a purely punitive judgement an the amount had absolutely nothing to do with actual income lost

 

[Brain357]

That is because you are a moron. I have shown why they lost wages through real economists. The DOJ found them guilty. I have shown the judge with all the facts increased the amount. And we all know they were paid 415 million. You can keep asking stupid questions, but they are irrelevant. You can't even offer a single link to support anything.

HOW MUCH DID THEY LOSE

If you break it down even the court only thought the lost a couple percent spread out over a number of years

The fact is that it is all conjecture if these people really lost any income and you certainly can't prove they did or how much they lost

415 million.

Show me the calculation

You can't can you?

Give a break down of exactly how much income each of those 65000 people lost in income and give me proof that they were actually denied higher paying jobs

The number was partly conjecture and partly a punitive assessment it was pulled out of the judges ass

What is your point? My point is that collusion held down their wages. Economists agree, the DOJ agrees, the judge with all the facts agrees, the 415 million agrees. When it is to then tune of 415 million for a single case that shows it is significant. Your questions continue to be pointless.

My point is that you can show me absolutely no empirical proof to prove they lost any income at all. This was all based on a possible loss of wages

The original 3 billion was a number picked by the filing attorney, the original settlement was 10 cents on the dollar, the judge just decided it wasn't enough so he upped it by an amount he pulled out of his ass

It was a purely punitive judgement an the amount had absolutely nothing to do with actual income lost

Economists say it does. Sorry but you have nothing. You think the companies do illegal activities for no gain? That is funny.

 

[Skull Pilot]

HOW MUCH DID THEY LOSE

If you break it down even the court only thought the lost a couple percent spread out over a number of years

The fact is that it is all conjecture if these people really lost any income and you certainly can't prove they did or how much they lost

415 million.

Show me the calculation

You can't can you?

Give a break down of exactly how much income each of those 65000 people lost in income and give me proof that they were actually denied higher paying jobs

The number was partly conjecture and partly a punitive assessment it was pulled out of the judges ass

What is your point? My point is that collusion held down their wages. Economists agree, the DOJ agrees, the judge with all the facts agrees, the 415 million agrees. When it is to then tune of 415 million for a single case that shows it is significant. Your questions continue to be pointless.

My point is that you can show me absolutely no empirical proof to prove they lost any income at all. This was all based on a possible loss of wages

The original 3 billion was a number picked by the filing attorney, the original settlement was 10 cents on the dollar, the judge just decided it wasn't enough so he upped it by an amount he pulled out of his ass

It was a purely punitive judgement an the amount had absolutely nothing to do with actual income lost

Economists say it does. Sorry but you have nothing. You think the companies do illegal activities for no gain? That is funny.

SHOW ME EXACTLY HOW MUCH THEY LOST WITH ACTUAL EVIDENCE.

 

[Brain357]

415 million.

Show me the calculation

You can't can you?

Give a break down of exactly how much income each of those 65000 people lost in income and give me proof that they were actually denied higher paying jobs

The number was partly conjecture and partly a punitive assessment it was pulled out of the judges ass

What is your point? My point is that collusion held down their wages. Economists agree, the DOJ agrees, the judge with all the facts agrees, the 415 million agrees. When it is to then tune of 415 million for a single case that shows it is significant. Your questions continue to be pointless.

My point is that you can show me absolutely no empirical proof to prove they lost any income at all. This was all based on a possible loss of wages

The original 3 billion was a number picked by the filing attorney, the original settlement was 10 cents on the dollar, the judge just decided it wasn't enough so he upped it by an amount he pulled out of his ass

It was a purely punitive judgement an the amount had absolutely nothing to do with actual income lost

Economists say it does. Sorry but you have nothing. You think the companies do illegal activities for no gain? That is funny.

SHOW ME EXACTLY HOW MUCH THEY LOST WITH ACTUAL EVIDENCE.

Irrelevant. 415 million.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Show me the calculation

You can't can you?

Give a break down of exactly how much income each of those 65000 people lost in income and give me proof that they were actually denied higher paying jobs

The number was partly conjecture and partly a punitive assessment it was pulled out of the judges ass

What is your point? My point is that collusion held down their wages. Economists agree, the DOJ agrees, the judge with all the facts agrees, the 415 million agrees. When it is to then tune of 415 million for a single case that shows it is significant. Your questions continue to be pointless.

My point is that you can show me absolutely no empirical proof to prove they lost any income at all. This was all based on a possible loss of wages

The original 3 billion was a number picked by the filing attorney, the original settlement was 10 cents on the dollar, the judge just decided it wasn't enough so he upped it by an amount he pulled out of his ass

It was a purely punitive judgement an the amount had absolutely nothing to do with actual income lost

Economists say it does. Sorry but you have nothing. You think the companies do illegal activities for no gain? That is funny.

SHOW ME EXACTLY HOW MUCH THEY LOST WITH ACTUAL EVIDENCE.

Irrelevant. 415 million.

So you can't prove anything and you just won't admit it

That number was pulled out of a judge's ass you're just too fucking stupid to realize it

 

[Brain357]

What is your point? My point is that collusion held down their wages. Economists agree, the DOJ agrees, the judge with all the facts agrees, the 415 million agrees. When it is to then tune of 415 million for a single case that shows it is significant. Your questions continue to be pointless.

My point is that you can show me absolutely no empirical proof to prove they lost any income at all. This was all based on a possible loss of wages

The original 3 billion was a number picked by the filing attorney, the original settlement was 10 cents on the dollar, the judge just decided it wasn't enough so he upped it by an amount he pulled out of his ass

It was a purely punitive judgement an the amount had absolutely nothing to do with actual income lost

Economists say it does. Sorry but you have nothing. You think the companies do illegal activities for no gain? That is funny.

SHOW ME EXACTLY HOW MUCH THEY LOST WITH ACTUAL EVIDENCE.

Irrelevant. 415 million.

So you can't prove anything and you just won't admit it

That number was pulled out of a judge's ass you're just too fucking stupid to realize it

415 million.

 

[xband]

This is another one of those bonkers things people say, that doesn't fit with reality.

"cars nobody wanted"

Really? Nobody wanted them? Really? You can prove that?

So throughout the entire recession, from 2007 to 2010, GM had the largest chuck of US market share. More than any other manufacturer in the US.

In other words, they were selling more of the "cars nobody wanted" than any other car maker in the US, apparently to customers who didn't want them.

BS. No, the problem wasn't that people didn't want their cars. The problem was Unions.

BS. All their problems were management problems. Had nothing to do with unions. The downfall began in the 80's when the imported cars were fuel efficient and what customer wanted. The US companies continued to make big gas guzzlers. US cars haven't even had good styling until the last 5 years maybe.

Again, looking at the FACTS, now your opinion..... GM sold more cars, than any other car company in the country. This is a "Fact".

How is it a management problem, that you are selling more cars than any other company in the country? What 'management problem' is that?

Here's what the problem was. The cost of labor was too high, compared to the price the cars fetched. Toyota... can change their labor costs. Honda.... can change their labor costs. GM and Chrysler could not, because they were under Union contracts, enforced by the government.

That's the problem. You can't blame management, or that "no one wanted" when they were out selling everyone. It goes back to my simple explanation of business. Price of product minus cost of production. When Unions jack up the cost of production, eventually you end up in bankruptcy.

The problem is that US companies put money into their union workers instead of their product. This was explained to me by my mechanic when I last owned an American car.

So after I got rid of that piece of junk, I went to Toyota and never been happier. Never been towed, never been late for work, never been stranded anywhere, because Toyota put their money into quality than labor. That's why Toyota can give you a 100,000 mile 7 year warranty on their products and American companies can't.

If you go to an American dealership, and compare a 50,000 mile used car compared to the price of a new one, you'll find a huge gap. Do the same at Toyota, and you'll see how much value their used cars have kept.

YES!!!

I don't know why people don't grasp this.

You have two cars. Both cost $20,000.

If the cost of labor is $10,000 of the first car, then what can the company do? They can put more call stuff, higher quality stuff, into the car, and still make a profit.

IF the cost of labor is $18,000 of the second car..... what does the company have no choice but to do? They have to put cheaper lower quality stuff in the car.

Unions drive the company, in the long run, to make crappy products. Money doesn't grow on trees. If more money goes to Union benefits, then something has to be cut.

It ends up being the quality of the car.

Yes, but you can't explain that enough to the left. Whatever the problem, it's the rich guys fault.

I didn't make assumptions when I told him that, I got that first had from several mechanics. These are the same mechanics that told me they seldom have to work on a Japanese car unless it's an older one.

Personal experience? Like I said, my Camry never seen a tow truck yet, and neither did my last one. The one I have now has 80,000 miles on it. Never been tuned up, never seen any work other than oil changes.

Cars don't have good or bad luck. Cars are made to last a short time or a long time.

Toyota has a Camry auto plant in Georgetown, Ky. new built in the nineties and I had a maintenance contract there. Talk about automated!

 

[Skull Pilot]

My point is that you can show me absolutely no empirical proof to prove they lost any income at all. This was all based on a possible loss of wages

The original 3 billion was a number picked by the filing attorney, the original settlement was 10 cents on the dollar, the judge just decided it wasn't enough so he upped it by an amount he pulled out of his ass

It was a purely punitive judgement an the amount had absolutely nothing to do with actual income lost

Economists say it does. Sorry but you have nothing. You think the companies do illegal activities for no gain? That is funny.

SHOW ME EXACTLY HOW MUCH THEY LOST WITH ACTUAL EVIDENCE.

Irrelevant. 415 million.

So you can't prove anything and you just won't admit it

That number was pulled out of a judge's ass you're just too fucking stupid to realize it

415 million.

Prove it. you know with actual evidence

If you went to court and said That guy cost me 1 million dollars you would have to prove it

So show me how they proved that they lost a few grand each

BUt you can't can you

 

[Brain357]

Economists say it does. Sorry but you have nothing. You think the companies do illegal activities for no gain? That is funny.

SHOW ME EXACTLY HOW MUCH THEY LOST WITH ACTUAL EVIDENCE.

Irrelevant. 415 million.

So you can't prove anything and you just won't admit it

That number was pulled out of a judge's ass you're just too fucking stupid to realize it

415 million.

Prove it. you know with actual evidence

If you went to court and said That guy cost me 1 million dollars you would have to prove it

So show me how they proved that they lost a few grand each

BUt you can't can you

There was already a court case. They provided the evidence and it got them 415 million. Look it up if you want more details.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Prove it. you know with actual evidence

If you went to court and said That guy cost me 1 million dollars you would have to prove it

Here come da judge here come da judge, skull pilot in da courtroom saying he is da judge.

Hey skull, prove those companies didn't conspire. Can you do that? They paid out a substantial sum of money for something. Prove it was for nothing.