patrick.net

Strategist says

GM had 60% market share in the 50's and 60's. Then the Japanese came, and the rest is history.

Damn unions.

Japanese workers are unionized too. So are German.

Perhaps it was just poor management decisions that killed the US automakers? Like being late to the show on quality and fuel efficiency?

joeyjojojunior says

Strategist says

GM had 60% market share in the 50's and 60's. Then the Japanese came, and the rest is history.


Damn unions.

Japanese workers are unionized too. So are German.

Perhaps it was just poor management decisions that killed the US automakers? Like being late to the show on quality and fuel efficiency?

Nope. The greedy American unions and the lazy, disloyal American workers are the problem.
The Japanese workers are ferociously loyal to their companies. They care for their company, thus turning out quality products. There was a guy who worked for Chrysler, who said he would leave out a screw, every time he got mad at his supervisor. The unions in America create an "us vs them" mentality against the management.

Strategist says

Nope. The greedy American unions and the lazy, disloyal American workers are the problem.

Of course they are. Making shit cars had nothing to do with the decline of US auto makers.

Strategist says

The Japanese workers are ferociously loyal to their companies. They care for their company, thus turning out quality products. There was a guy who worked for Chrysler, who said he would leave out a screw, every time he got mad at his supervisor. The unions in America create an "us vs them" mentality against the management

And why are they like that?? You don't think management has any culpability?

The difference in management styles between the Japanese car companies and the US car companies was about as stark as they come. It's funny how the same US workers care when they work for Honda or Toyota in the US....

joeyjojojunior says

Strategist says

The Japanese workers are ferociously loyal to their companies. They care for their company, thus turning out quality products. There was a guy who worked for Chrysler, who said he would leave out a screw, every time he got mad at his supervisor. The unions in America create an "us vs them" mentality against the management

And why are they like that?? You don't think management has any culpability?

The difference in management styles between the Japanese car companies and the US car companies was about as stark as they come. It's funny how the same US workers care when they work for Honda or Toyota in the US....

I would agree. Management style can make a hell of a difference. We have a lot to learn.

Strategist says

joeyjojojunior says

Strategist says

The Japanese workers are ferociously loyal to their companies. They care for their company, thus turning out quality products. There was a guy who worked for Chrysler, who said he would leave out a screw, every time he got mad at his supervisor. The unions in America create an "us vs them" mentality against the management

And why are they like that?? You don't think management has any culpability?

The difference in management styles between the Japanese car companies and the US car companies was about as stark as they come. It's funny how the same US workers care when they work for Honda or Toyota in the US....

I would agree. Management style can make a hell of a difference. We have a lot to learn.

I would agree too. Unions are used to bilk money and benefits in the US. In Japan there is actually pride of work, something that I believe has been lost to US union workers.

Heraclitusstudent says

Goran_K says

So it's not a jobs problem, it's a skills problem.

Most people are too dumb to be data scientists. It's not something that's actionable unless you're considering genetic engineering.

This means for average human beings it's not a skill problem, it's a job problem.

That's exactly my point. A majority of human beings will soon be useless. Factor that in when you say "redistribution is theft."

In general are people dumb or lazy? I would contend that it's a lot more of the latter.

joeyjojojunior says

Goran_K says

According to the survey, 86% of respondents said the #1 problem facing their firm was "Trouble filling salaried and/or hourly positions".

Actually what they say is

"Trouble filling salaried and/or hourly positions at the pay they are offering"

No it doesn't say "that" at all. At 86%, they are talking about market rate.

Market rate is the rate at which jobs get filled. So, if the jobs aren't getting filled, it's not market rate

Kids these days are just entitled and lazy when brought up by parents who don't teach value of hard work. I know parents like that, their kids are going to be hit with a dose of reality one day when they have to be on their own. Haven't worked a day in their life or paid taxes, but they sure are Democrats all right.

joeyjojojunior says

Market rate is the rate at which jobs get filled. So, if the jobs aren't getting filled, it's not market rate

That's such a ridiculous point.

If there are 10 job openings for a plumber, and there are only 2 people available who will only become a plumber for $10,000 an hour, that doesn't mean $10,000 is the market rate. It's called a transitional supply shortage (basic economic concept). When horse buggy makers started losing business due to technology, it took time for those people to convert themselves to become car makers.

But this wasn't caused by technology changing, it was caused by leftist indoctrination and culture which slowly decreased the supply of tradesmen in the market.

Regardless at 86%, the data is indicating a supply shortage, not a wage deficiency.

If the response rate was under 20%, then your theory might have some legs. But at 86%, it's completely off in left field.

But, but, but... companies can't afford to pay workers more money

joeyjojojunior says

But, but, but... companies can't afford to pay workers more money

The God of Capitalism will dictate who will survive and who will perish. It's the survival of the fittest.