Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackbird45
First, I don’t understand how the topic that was concentrated on the UAW strike evolved into EVs and climate change. CEOs represent business and let’s be honest their ideal goal is to create a produced without people entirely. No work force, no expense, no expense, more profits. The problem with this scenario, is one company gets rid of their work force it will be followed by another, until one day they wake up and realized everyone is unemployed and there are no shoppers for their produces.
Look there has been many posting that the unions are demanding too much and don’t deserve it and because of their demands their jobs will be shipped offshore. Let make it perfectly clear if the union members agreed to take a 40% cut in their salaries and a company believes they can save a buck they will still move offshore or innovate them out of a job. Business operates on profits people are just an annoyance.
The people these companies should really be interested in is the stockholders and if I had stock in one of these companies, I would demand a 40% cut in CEOs salaries and make them get rid of these golden parachutes.
|
Nobody would buy stock in these companies as long-term investments. May have some value as short-term speculative trades. Ford stock peaked in 1997 and (old) GM went to zero in 2009. These new contracts will make them even less competitive with the rest of the world. Even now the Chicoms can make EV's 40% cheaper. The legacy US auto companies will need large tariffs and government subsidies in order to survive.