"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Bbn2k.240$1x.195@trndny06...
Jeff, nice post,
as to Mike:

> Mike hunt wrote:

> No, your opinion is not factual. The most fuel efficient model of
> each type of car (midsize, subcompact, etc.) is made by a foreign
> automaker, often a Japanese automaker. For example, each of the two
> biggest automakers make more cars that get more than 30 mpg CITY
> than GM and more cars that get 40 mpg highway than GM, too.

Impala with V-6 beats the Toyota Avolon and its bigger,
tied with the Camery v-6, and again the Chevy is bigger.
To beat the Malibu 22/32 mpg you have to buy a hybred Camery 33/34 at
substanially more money, the Pirus is listed as well, but its smaller
than the Malibu, as is the Nissan smaller. Honda has nothing
in the mid size class, although as far as I am concerned the Accord is
a mid size, not a full size.
The corolla wins over the Aveo (sedan 4 door) by 2 mpg highway, but
has less passenger space
in the subcomapct range, Cobalt XFE has higher mpg on highway then
most everything in the class and ties the Honda /civic, yet has more
horsepower, and more passenger room
Its intertesting that www.fuleeconomy.gov stuck the Chevy HHR in with
SUVs, still does better than most of them, and as in my opinion its a
minivan it beats just about all in that class.
The chevy 1500 with the small V-8 gets better gas mileage than the
imports with a v-6, beats the Tundra with a V-6 by 1 mpg, the V-8
model by 2 mpg.
In small trucks the Tocoma 4 banger beats the Colorado by 1 mpg, but
has a smaller engine with less hp.

To get 40mpg you have to buy a hybrid, and its a beer can most models,
which is ok for city driving I guess.

>
> Interestingly, one can get higher power by using a lower gear.
> That's why there is a transmission on the cars.
>
and dropping a gear raises the rpm substantionally and blows the fuel
mileage out the window.

Whitelightning

 

In article <Bbn2k.240$1x.195@trndny06>, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Interestingly, one can get higher
>power XXX Nope, power is HP.
TORQUE
>by using a lower gear. That's
> why there is a transmission on the cars.
But your point is valid anyway.

The facts are BIG displacement engines get poor urban fuel economy.
It better to use a small engine with more flexible gearing.
Top keep costs low some manufacturers, such as GM with the base Impalla,
use only a 4 spd auto, which results in very poor driving flexibility.

 

On 2008-06-07, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote:

> GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENT-ELECT: I told all four that
> there were going to be some times where we don't agree with each
> other. But that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a
> lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.
>
> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../18/nd.01.html

I am no fan of Georgie's, but this was clearly a joke. He never
claimed he wanted to be dictator. He deadpanned that things would be
a lot easier to get done if he were.

Release your hate... It's not doing you any good...

--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
time..." - Danny, American History X

 

In article <Dio2k.642$8q2.168@trnddc02>,
"Whitelightning" <white.lightning2@verizon.net> wrote:

> Impala with V-6 beats the Toyota Avolon and its bigger,
NOPE!
The Impalla V6 with it's 4 spd auto is a shitty car to drive. EPA 18/29
The Impalla I rented had far too much spacing between 3rd and 4th gears.

Avalon EPA 19/28 is the same for practical purposes.
The Avalon has a slightly larger passenger volume and with it's 6 spd
auto I know it will be much nicer to drive.

The Camry 4 cyl 5 spd auto is EPA 21/31.
IMO the Camry is the better mid sized car for mostly urban use.
Carries 4 large adults, has a large trunk, and is easier to park than
either the Impalla or Avalon.

 

On Jun 7, 12:40 am, "Whitelightning" <white.lightni...@verizon.net>
wrote:

>
>
> and dropping a gear raises the rpm substantionally and blows the fuel
> mileage out the window.
>
> Whitelightning

that's a valid point!

however, proper transmission designs (auto) and shifting techniques
(manual) are meant to save the engine's life, not fuel. Racing
bicyclists know this too well. If a bicyclist doesnt drop gears when
going uphill then he may save himself from some frenzied pedaling, but
he'll get burned out before reaching the final line.

 

Dan C <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> wrote in
newsan.2008.06.04.12.42.25.114116@moria.lan:

> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 03:39:50 +0000, Larry in AZ wrote:
>
>>> It's a fact of life, Junior. Sometimes shareholders lose money.
>>> That's the way the stock market and the free enterprise system
>>> works. As for the CEO making an "insane" amount of money... well,
>>> it's certainly more than other GM employees make, but that's (also)
>>> how things work. Those in charge get paid more. Simple fact of
>>> life. Perhaps if you had more education, you could make some money,
>>> yourself!
>
>> Hey -for-brains... For presiding over a $39 Billion loss, he got
>> a 64 percent raise.
>
> It's a stressful job. I guess you've never been in charge of
> anything, so it's no wonder you don't understand, dimwit.
>
> The "shareholders" are the real idiots here. Next to you, of course.
>
>


I have a stressful job, too. And a Master's. I make .01 percent of that
and if I were in charge of a division that lost that kind of money, I'd
be out on my *** in a heartbeat. Stressful job, yeah right.

 

<bi241@scn.org> wrote in message
news:ec09add3-a634-4176-8bf9-453764095d71@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 7, 12:40 am, "Whitelightning" <white.lightni...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> and dropping a gear raises the rpm substantionally and blows the
>> fuel
>> mileage out the window.
>>
>> Whitelightning
>
> that's a valid point!
>
> however, proper transmission designs (auto) and shifting techniques
> (manual) are meant to save the engine's life, not fuel. Racing
> bicyclists know this too well. If a bicyclist doesnt drop gears when
> going uphill then he may save himself from some frenzied pedaling,
> but
> he'll get burned out before reaching the final line.

Point being on extreme grades, like the passes through the Rockies
yeah its going
to come out of over drive. But the engine should have enough torque
and horsepower
to pull light and moderate grades with out shifting like a yoyo. I
can pull moderate
grades at 65-70 mph in my Caviler with it loaded to the gunnels, its
normal state of
being for my current career and it delivers 32-34 mpg. It did the
same on vacation earlier
this year when we went up to upstate New York from Florida running
through the Blue Ridge mountains. And then up through Fancy Gap then
through central PA and finally up into the Adirondacks. We meandered a
bit, I been in flat lands too long and needed a mountain fix bad lol.
Point being these fuel efficient small engines have no guts, they
depend on rpm to compensate. My Cavilear is the same way if I want to
go like hell it will, and do it quickly, but it has to drop gears and
wind out to do it and the gas mileage plunges like a rock. That
makes them just fine for local driving, and urban living buts that's
all. Then again the places building them that's all they are used for.
People seem to forget that most countries that manufacture cars aren't
as big as most of our states, and have used the trains for ever for
travel. I should know as I lived in Europe for 4 1/2 years. Cant
wait for the new GM 4.5 diesel to come out for light trucks.

Whitelightning

 

"Spam away" <Trashhere@spam.net> wrote in message
news:Trashhere-E05A9C.22153906062008@news.telus.net...
> In article <Dio2k.642$8q2.168@trnddc02>,
> "Whitelightning" <white.lightning2@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
> The Camry 4 cyl 5 spd auto is EPA 21/31.
> IMO the Camry is the better mid sized car for mostly urban use.
> Carries 4 large adults, has a large trunk, and is easier to park
> than
> either the Impalla or Avalon.

In your opinion you're correct the camry IS a mid size.
The Impala on the other hand is a full size, or at least as close
to a full size as you can get today.
Whitelightning

 

Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in
news:votj44deln9pv2oeslqfeo3d7hpkkir17q@4ax.com:

> On 5 Jun 2008 00:03:02 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>
>>Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in
>>news:dm8e449ihd25pj0mcsq1ch16lh84evmf1d@4ax.co m:
>>
>>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 07:48:29 -0500, Dan C
>>><youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 23:27:46 -0500, Gordon McGrew wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>It's a fact of life, Junior. Sometimes shareholders lose money.
>>>>>>That's the way the stock market and the free enterprise system
>>>>>>works. As for the CEO making an "insane" amount of money... well,
>>>>>>it's certainly more than other GM employees make, but that's
>>>>>>(also) how things work. Those in charge get paid more. Simple
>>>>>>fact of life. Perhaps if you had more education, you could make
>>>>>>some money, yourself!
>>>>
>>>>> Here is a fact for you. Rick Wagoner, CEO of GM got total
>>>>> compensation last year of over $14 million. That is more than the
>>>>> compensation of the CEO and the 36 board members of Honda Motor
>>>>> Company combined. Honda had record sales last month. How is GM
>>>>> doing? Oh, that's right, the death spiral thing - never mind.
>>>>
>>>>How much he makes in comparison to other executives (especially
>>>>foreigners) is completely irrelevant. He was paid an amount that
>>>>was decided upon by the board of directors, who are supposed to be
>>>>the direct
>>>
>>> "supposed to" being the operative statement here.
>>>
>>>>representatives of the shareholders. Blame the board, and the
>>>>shareholders, for paying him too much, if you must blame someone.
>>>
>>> Blame the Board (aka his golf buddies), sure. The stockholders'
>>> only real vote is to sell. Considering that GM stock is worth no
>>> more now than it was in 1960, I think a lot of them have already
>>> voted.
>>>
>>>>> Anyway, US executives are paid obscene amounts of money not just
>>>>> in comparison to "other employees," but compared to their foreign
>>>>> counterparts. Hard to see the value here. The truth is that
>>>>> American companies are - more and more - being run for the benefit
>>>>> of the executives rather than the stockholders or, god forbid, the
>>>>> mainstream workers.
>>>>
>>>>Jesus, did none of you ever study economics and the free enterprise
>>>>system? This isn't a commune trying to the wealth amongst
>>>>everyone equally. This is a ing American business, whose goals
>>>>are (and should be) to make the maximum profit possible for the
>>>>company.
>>>
>>> I agree, that should be the goal. I am telling you that you are
>>> naive. The purpose of the company is to make the top executives as
>>> rich as possible.
>>>
>>>> How that company
>>>>decides to compensate it's directors/executives and other workers is
>>>>decided by the company. Rick Wagoner didn't set his own salary, the
>>>>goddam board of directors (and shareholders) did. Don't blame the
>>>>dude for accepting what they offer to pay him.
>>>
>>> And when he sits on the board of their company, don't blame them for
>>> accepting what Rick Wagoner gives them.
>>>
>>>>We've got enough socialism in the country already. Just look at the
>>>>circus which is the Democrat party if you want to see that.
>>>
>>> Democracy is so untidy. Let's just make Bush dictator like he said
>>> he wanted.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>It appears YOU are the one who wants to assign "dictator" powers to
>>the government.
>
> GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENT-ELECT: I told all four that
> there were going to be some times where we don't agree with each
> other. But that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a
> lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.

He's NOT saying he wants a dictatorship.
Evidently you missed where Bush said "IF". Seems he was making a joke,or
an observation about dictators.
(dictatorships are "fine" as long as -you- are the dictator...)

>
> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../18/nd.01.html
>
>
>>YOU want the government to dictate to companies how much they can pay
>>for certain jobs.
>
> I have clearly stated otherwise.

You seem to be inconsistent then,as you complain about the BOD not being
responsive to the shareholders,but you offer no other solution.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 18:01:01 -0400, "Mike hunt" <mikehunt22@lycos.com>
wrote:

>What color is the sky in your world? The fuel economy of American cars the
>same size as made by the Japanese is as good as or better than Japanese
>cars, look at the CAFE lists. GM for example, offers more car that get 30
>MPG or more than does ANY import brand.

I don't recall mentioning mpg. I think I mentioned QUALITY. Deming
taught them to continuously improve quality as a way to long term
success. GM concentrates on continuously reducing "costs". Those two
approaches are diametrically opposed.

GM is also the most pig headed corporation around, but that's another
discussion for another day.

 

On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:09:20 -0500, Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com>
wrote:

>On 2008-06-07, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENT-ELECT: I told all four that
>> there were going to be some times where we don't agree with each
>> other. But that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a
>> lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.
>>
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../18/nd.01.html
>
>I am no fan of Georgie's, but this was clearly a joke. He never
>claimed he wanted to be dictator. He deadpanned that things would be
>a lot easier to get done if he were.

Many a truth is spoken in jest.

>Release your hate... It's not doing you any good...

Why is it hate when I point out that Bush acts like a dictator and
endorsed himself for the position, but not hate when you accuse me of
advocating dictatorship when I point out that $13 million might be
excessive compensation for driving a company into the ground?

 

On 7 Jun 2008 19:11:08 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

>Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in
>news:votj44deln9pv2oeslqfeo3d7hpkkir17q@4ax.com :
>
>> On 5 Jun 2008 00:03:02 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>>
>>>Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in
>>>news:dm8e449ihd25pj0mcsq1ch16lh84evmf1d@4ax.com :
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 07:48:29 -0500, Dan C
>>>><youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 23:27:46 -0500, Gordon McGrew wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>It's a fact of life, Junior. Sometimes shareholders lose money.
>>>>>>>That's the way the stock market and the free enterprise system
>>>>>>>works. As for the CEO making an "insane" amount of money... well,
>>>>>>>it's certainly more than other GM employees make, but that's
>>>>>>>(also) how things work. Those in charge get paid more. Simple
>>>>>>>fact of life. Perhaps if you had more education, you could make
>>>>>>>some money, yourself!
>>>>>
>>>>>> Here is a fact for you. Rick Wagoner, CEO of GM got total
>>>>>> compensation last year of over $14 million. That is more than the
>>>>>> compensation of the CEO and the 36 board members of Honda Motor
>>>>>> Company combined. Honda had record sales last month. How is GM
>>>>>> doing? Oh, that's right, the death spiral thing - never mind.
>>>>>
>>>>>How much he makes in comparison to other executives (especially
>>>>>foreigners) is completely irrelevant. He was paid an amount that
>>>>>was decided upon by the board of directors, who are supposed to be
>>>>>the direct
>>>>
>>>> "supposed to" being the operative statement here.
>>>>
>>>>>representatives of the shareholders. Blame the board, and the
>>>>>shareholders, for paying him too much, if you must blame someone.
>>>>
>>>> Blame the Board (aka his golf buddies), sure. The stockholders'
>>>> only real vote is to sell. Considering that GM stock is worth no
>>>> more now than it was in 1960, I think a lot of them have already
>>>> voted.
>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, US executives are paid obscene amounts of money not just
>>>>>> in comparison to "other employees," but compared to their foreign
>>>>>> counterparts. Hard to see the value here. The truth is that
>>>>>> American companies are - more and more - being run for the benefit
>>>>>> of the executives rather than the stockholders or, god forbid, the
>>>>>> mainstream workers.
>>>>>
>>>>>Jesus, did none of you ever study economics and the free enterprise
>>>>>system? This isn't a commune trying to the wealth amongst
>>>>>everyone equally. This is a ing American business, whose goals
>>>>>are (and should be) to make the maximum profit possible for the
>>>>>company.
>>>>
>>>> I agree, that should be the goal. I am telling you that you are
>>>> naive. The purpose of the company is to make the top executives as
>>>> rich as possible.
>>>>
>>>>> How that company
>>>>>decides to compensate it's directors/executives and other workers is
>>>>>decided by the company. Rick Wagoner didn't set his own salary, the
>>>>>goddam board of directors (and shareholders) did. Don't blame the
>>>>>dude for accepting what they offer to pay him.
>>>>
>>>> And when he sits on the board of their company, don't blame them for
>>>> accepting what Rick Wagoner gives them.
>>>>
>>>>>We've got enough socialism in the country already. Just look at the
>>>>>circus which is the Democrat party if you want to see that.
>>>>
>>>> Democracy is so untidy. Let's just make Bush dictator like he said
>>>> he wanted.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>It appears YOU are the one who wants to assign "dictator" powers to
>>>the government.
>>
>> GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENT-ELECT: I told all four that
>> there were going to be some times where we don't agree with each
>> other. But that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a
>> lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.
>
>He's NOT saying he wants a dictatorship.
>Evidently you missed where Bush said "IF". Seems he was making a joke,or
>an observation about dictators.
>(dictatorships are "fine" as long as -you- are the dictator...)
>
>>
>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../18/nd.01.html
>>
>>
>>>YOU want the government to dictate to companies how much they can pay
>>>for certain jobs.
>>
>> I have clearly stated otherwise.
>
>You seem to be inconsistent then,as you complain about the BOD not being
>responsive to the shareholders,but you offer no other solution.

But I did offer a solution. If we tax all compensation above say $2
million at an 80% tax rate, it will greatly diminish the incentive to
award yourself a huge pay day. If you jack up the compensation to
compensate for the tax rate, it will be even more unjustifiable in
terms of cost to the company and at least the stolen money will go
into the Treasury rather than the pockets of these thieves.

Do you really believe they couldn't find someone at least as competent
as Wagoner for $2 million?

 

Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in
news:dmun44top01oa8d8bhpr6jjshkm62q55ip@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:09:20 -0500, Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On 2008-06-07, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>> GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENT-ELECT: I told all four that
>>> there were going to be some times where we don't agree with each
>>> other. But that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a
>>> lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.
>>>
>>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../18/nd.01.html
>>
>>I am no fan of Georgie's, but this was clearly a joke. He never
>>claimed he wanted to be dictator. He deadpanned that things would be
>>a lot easier to get done if he were.
>
> Many a truth is spoken in jest.

that's just BDS;Bush Derangement Syndrome.

>
>>Release your hate... It's not doing you any good...
>
> Why is it hate when I point out that Bush acts like a dictator and
> endorsed himself for the position,

Bush did no such thing.That is just what you read into it.
You're deluded if you believe Bush "acts like a dictator".
He did a lot of diplomacy before he decided on action.Talk alone doesn't
always succeed.

> but not hate when you accuse me of
> advocating dictatorship when I point out that $13 million might be
> excessive compensation for driving a company into the ground?
>
>

it probably is,but that's still no reason to involve gov't regulation,and
you haven't suggested any -other- method of correcting "excessive
compensation. You just whine that it's a "boy's club" and that shareholder
voting is ineffective.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in
news:utun44tb09e9eu3vntuhsvaabshdbg0obl@4ax.com:

> On 7 Jun 2008 19:11:08 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>
>>Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in
>>news:votj44deln9pv2oeslqfeo3d7hpkkir17q@4ax.co m:
>>
>>> On 5 Jun 2008 00:03:02 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVrEew@mindspring.com> wrote in
>>>>news:dm8e449ihd25pj0mcsq1ch16lh84evmf1d@4ax.co m:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 07:48:29 -0500, Dan C
>>>>><youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 23:27:46 -0500, Gordon McGrew wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>It's a fact of life, Junior. Sometimes shareholders lose money.
>>>>>>>>That's the way the stock market and the free enterprise system
>>>>>>>>works. As for the CEO making an "insane" amount of money...
>>>>>>>>well, it's certainly more than other GM employees make, but
>>>>>>>>that's (also) how things work. Those in charge get paid more.
>>>>>>>>Simple fact of life. Perhaps if you had more education, you
>>>>>>>>could make some money, yourself!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is a fact for you. Rick Wagoner, CEO of GM got total
>>>>>>> compensation last year of over $14 million. That is more than
>>>>>>> the compensation of the CEO and the 36 board members of Honda
>>>>>>> Motor Company combined. Honda had record sales last month. How
>>>>>>> is GM doing? Oh, that's right, the death spiral thing - never
>>>>>>> mind.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>How much he makes in comparison to other executives (especially
>>>>>>foreigners) is completely irrelevant. He was paid an amount that
>>>>>>was decided upon by the board of directors, who are supposed to be
>>>>>>the direct
>>>>>
>>>>> "supposed to" being the operative statement here.
>>>>>
>>>>>>representatives of the shareholders. Blame the board, and the
>>>>>>shareholders, for paying him too much, if you must blame someone.
>>>>>
>>>>> Blame the Board (aka his golf buddies), sure. The stockholders'
>>>>> only real vote is to sell. Considering that GM stock is worth no
>>>>> more now than it was in 1960, I think a lot of them have already
>>>>> voted.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyway, US executives are paid obscene amounts of money not just
>>>>>>> in comparison to "other employees," but compared to their
>>>>>>> foreign counterparts. Hard to see the value here. The truth is
>>>>>>> that American companies are - more and more - being run for the
>>>>>>> benefit of the executives rather than the stockholders or, god
>>>>>>> forbid, the mainstream workers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Jesus, did none of you ever study economics and the free
>>>>>>enterprise system? This isn't a commune trying to the
>>>>>>wealth amongst everyone equally. This is a ing American
>>>>>>business, whose goals are (and should be) to make the maximum
>>>>>>profit possible for the company.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree, that should be the goal. I am telling you that you are
>>>>> naive. The purpose of the company is to make the top executives
>>>>> as rich as possible.
>>>>>
>>>>>> How that company
>>>>>>decides to compensate it's directors/executives and other workers
>>>>>>is decided by the company. Rick Wagoner didn't set his own
>>>>>>salary, the goddam board of directors (and shareholders) did.
>>>>>>Don't blame the dude for accepting what they offer to pay him.
>>>>>
>>>>> And when he sits on the board of their company, don't blame them
>>>>> for accepting what Rick Wagoner gives them.
>>>>>
>>>>>>We've got enough socialism in the country already. Just look at
>>>>>>the circus which is the Democrat party if you want to see that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Democracy is so untidy. Let's just make Bush dictator like he
>>>>> said he wanted.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>It appears YOU are the one who wants to assign "dictator" powers to
>>>>the government.
>>>
>>> GOV. GEORGE W. BUSH (R-TX), PRESIDENT-ELECT: I told all four that
>>> there were going to be some times where we don't agree with each
>>> other. But that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of
>>> a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.
>>
>>He's NOT saying he wants a dictatorship.
>>Evidently you missed where Bush said "IF". Seems he was making a
>>joke,or an observation about dictators.
>>(dictatorships are "fine" as long as -you- are the dictator...)
>>
>>>
>>> http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../18/nd.01.html
>>>
>>>
>>>>YOU want the government to dictate to companies how much they can
>>>>pay for certain jobs.
>>>
>>> I have clearly stated otherwise.
>>
>>You seem to be inconsistent then,as you complain about the BOD not
>>being responsive to the shareholders,but you offer no other solution.
>
> But I did offer a solution. If we tax all compensation above say $2
> million at an 80% tax rate, it will greatly diminish the incentive to
> award yourself a huge pay day.


And you thus LIE when you say you don't want to involve government.
Taxation IS a government function.

AND you want to use taxation punitively.
Taxation is for raising revenue,not for punishment.
You WOULD be a "dictator".You want to dictate arbitrary limits on exec
pay,without any factual basis.

> If you jack up the compensation to
> compensate for the tax rate, it will be even more unjustifiable in
> terms of cost to the company and at least the stolen money will go
> into the Treasury rather than the pockets of these thieves.

Ah,yes,expanding government.
Then your socialists can dish it out for pet projects and costly,useless
social programs that make things worse,long-term,as they have in the past.
>
> Do you really believe they couldn't find someone at least as competent
> as Wagoner for $2 million?
>



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

"Mike hunt" wrote:

The fuel economy of American cars the same size as made
by the Japanese is as good as or better than Japanese
cars, look at the CAFE lists. GM for example, offers more
cars that get 30 MPG or more than does ANY import brand.
________________________________________________

"still just me" wrote:

I didn't mean mpg. I meant QUALITY.
GM is also the most pig-headed corporation around.
_______________________________________________

That'll put Mike in his place. He can talk of measurable
things like mpg but he can't deny that you have personal
opinions about 'quality' and 'pig-headedness'.

Touche.

Rodan.