Re: [Marxism] What killed the auto industry?

[Dennis Brasky <dmozart1756@xxxxxxxxx>]

>
>
>  What killed the auto industry?
>
> Gregg Shotwell, a retired GM/Delphi worker and founder of the Soldiers of
> Solidarity network, answers the myth that it was the UAW--and its demands
> for fair compensation for autoworkers--that led to the industry's decline.
>
> April 20, 2009
>
>  clip --
>
> IF YOU believe the Motley Fool and other "stock advisors" in the business
> press, 90 percent of GM's losses can be attributed to the United Auto
> Workers (UAW), which accounts for 10 percent of a vehicle's cost.
>
> The math may seem a bit obtuse but the politics is clear as fizz. The UAW's
> disproportionate responsibility for the automakers' unprofitability is based
> on the same sort of accounting whiz that led GM to claim they lost $39
> billion in November 2007 due to "deferred tax credits."
>
> If it smells like b.s. and it looks like b.s., trust your common sense and
> skip the taste test.
>
> Thanks to corporate welfare, GM accumulated more tax deductions than they
> could take in a year. So they deferred the tax deductions and booked them as
> an asset until the asset got so fat it attracted the attention of auditors
> who asked--"quote unquote"--What the f##k is this?
>
> Rick Wagoner was quick to assure the fools not to puzzle their pretty
> heads. The $39 billion wasn't actually a loss of cash, he said, since it
> never had a tangible, marketable existence. It was merely an accounting
> gimmick--a fancy--like paper wings.
>
> The fools refer to compensation like pension and health care as "welfare,"
> despite the fact that unlike "deferred tax credits," the compensation was
> earned by productive labor. It's no wonder the fools are having trouble
> figuring out what part of GM is losing what, and how much, and why. They
> ignore the obvious and thumb their noses at analysis. For example:
>
> -- GM sold 4.4 million vehicles in the U.S. in 1992 and employed 265,000
> UAW members.
> -- GM sold 4.5 million vehicles in the U.S. in 2007 and employed 73,000 UAW
> members.
>
> A company can't make productivity improvements as astounding as that and
> lose money on labor. Something else is shaking the timbers. Maybe we should
> question the competitiveness of salary workers? How do they compare with
> their Japanese counterparts in compensation and achievement? Or more
> precisely, who's controlling the money?
>
full article --

>   <http://socialistworker.org/2009/04/20/what-killed-the-auto-industry>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu