Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
turningrite

GM packing its bags in Oshawa

Recommended Posts

I think GM and Ford's business move are un-patriotic and short sighted. They've basically moved all their sedan production to China while making nothing but Large SUV and Trucks for exuberant prices. This is silly because gas is a limited commodity and will eventually bounce back up. Once oil prices goes back to 150 a barrel no one will be buying these large vehicles. But I'm sure the business analyst at GM and Ford knows this. They're just banking on having their core business in China and not America. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

I think GM and Ford's business move are un-patriotic and short sighted. They've basically moved all their sedan production to China while making nothing but Large SUV and Trucks for exuberant prices. This is silly because gas is a limited commodity and will eventually bounce back up. Once oil prices goes back to 150 a barrel no one will be buying these large vehicles. But I'm sure the business analyst at GM and Ford knows this. They're just banking on having their core business in China and not America. 

I think once governments in North America started abandoning anti-climate change policies, that signalled government support of low tech guzzlers and the old economy. Those aren’t the products advanced economies will be demanding. Why not be ready with the government policies and products when the emission cutting starts?  Because it will.  The longer we wait the more drastic the cuts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

I think once governments in North America started abandoning anti-climate change policies, that signalled government support of low tech guzzlers and the old economy. Those aren’t the products advanced economies will be demanding. Why not be ready with the government policies and products when the emission cutting starts?  Because it will.  The longer we wait the more drastic the cuts. 

because france? ....https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46460445

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zeitgeist said:

Yes but your gas prices are less than half of France’s. 

Slow down there ted kaczynski, GM's short sightedness is one thing, tying it to trump's deregulation which helps the economy is another. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

Slow down there ted kaczynski, GM's short sightedness is one thing, tying it to trump's deregulation which helps the economy is another. 

No they’re they’re closely connected. Greenhouse gas regulations shape production. 

Edited by Zeitgeist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

Slow down there ted kaczynski, GM's short sightedness is one thing, tying it to trump's deregulation which helps the economy is another. 

 

Agreed...the climate change alarmists are desperate to link the two, when there are many factors in play. 

GM already lost its ass once on the EV1...made more money with Hummers.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, eyeball said:

1.  My recent renovation and conversion of a portion of my home to an AirBnb rental is not just mere speculation. Its a game-changing investment that will make a huge difference in my retirement.  It remains to be seen how far the local powers that be will be lobbied into tilting the internet-based vacation rental playing field towards the big resorts hereabouts but they're trying.  It reminds me of the battle Uber is up against.  It may appear on the face of it that these internet based economic sectors have little local constituency but homeowners do vote and a lot of us are moving in the same direction. Hopefully that'll help.

2. It seems whenever the little guy around here finds a way to make decent money it triggers some sort of automatic spasm oriented towards control and greed amongst governments and vested interests alike, I thought innovation was supposed to be the ticket?  

3. I guess it remains to be seen what will happen when the pool of potential paying customers shrinks due to everyone being laid off. Fortunately I seem to live in a busy attractive tourist destination in what might be a climate change sweet spot that's benefiting from the changes, at least in the relative short-term of the rest of my life.  Hopefully my stack will be okay but I'm nervous about how property values are rising so much, especially in light of the way rising fortunes trigger vested interests and governments to become overly and often mutually concerned/interested.

1.  Hmm.  Well good for you.  Message me some shots of the location I'm interested.

2. :D 

3. Sounds good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Agreed...the climate change alarmists are desperate to link the two, when there are many factors in play. 

GM already lost its ass once on the EV1...made more money with Hummers.

And yet Hummers have almost completely disappeared.  Monster gas-guzzlers are out.  Even GM seems to realize that going electric is the future. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Iznogoud said:

And yet Hummers have almost completely disappeared.  Monster gas-guzzlers are out.  Even GM seems to realize that going electric is the future. 

 

Not really....derivatives of the GMT800 light truck platform soldier on in the form of Suburbans, Escalades, Yukons, etc.

GM is under no obligation to produce low margin, low sales volume models, especially in high cost areas like Ontario.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Iznogoud said:

And yet Hummers have almost completely disappeared.  Monster gas-guzzlers are out.  Even GM seems to realize that going electric is the future. 

Umm I think you failed to realize why hummer when out, it was for economic reasons and not environmental. If I could afford to drive a hummer everyday I would. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Capitalism giveth and taketh. On the bright side, any older GM worker who owns a home in Oshawa has some fairly valuable real estate to sell and could move somewhere much cheaper in Canada. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, paxamericana said:

Umm I think you failed to realize why hummer when out, it was for economic reasons and not environmental. If I could afford to drive a hummer everyday I would. 

And what were the economic reasons?  I suspect that one of them may have been that the demand for the Hummer declined, possibly due to the fact that they were expensive to run, hard to park, and not particularly traffic friendly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2018 at 11:55 AM, cannuck said:

Let's think about some of those "good old days" technologies and technological devices.

The fastest air breathing airplane in history was conceived in the late '50s and flying in '62.  Now, it SEEMED very simple, but if you look at the science behind (and used extensively) to solve all of those "simple" problems - you come to realize that those simple components were extremely complex.  People in general were less aware, I guess, but the whole business of making a simple 3,000 mph airplane was incredibly complex.   Yes, it  COULD be done today with computers (but it has not been) but the cold hard work that gave us the technologies to write the programmes today came long before the digital revolution.

You think these basic things were easy when the technology seemed simple?  Ever set up a lineup of Weber carbs on a new installation?  The skill and experience required to select choke tubes, mains, air corrections, emulsion tubes, pilot jets, accel jets, velocity stacks (or air cleaners) was quite considerable - as each one of those things interacted with the other, and there were literally thousands of possible components with millions of permutations and combinations to make the car run right.  Today, I can buy a dirt cheap ECU (megatune) and build a very simple fuel injection (and ignition) system that anyone can be taught to programme in a few hours - and it will run rings around even a perfect set of Webers and distributed HV ignition.

I'm not arguing electronic technology hasn't improved  operation of complex machines. I love the fact that if the machine has the energy in the batteries and fuel all I need to do is turn the key and it is running, fuel management and ignition are all taken care of. 

BUT, the fact that I need a two hour course just to figure out how to use a machine that was formerly logical and intuitive has totally defeated the technology developed for this purpose. We have two generations of this same machine the older version you turn the key, it starts the electronically controlled engine, you release the park brake, you push or pull the MFH and the machine begins to move, the farther you move the lever the faster it goes, simple. You can inch it forward or reverse, it gives you infinite control from zero to max speed and the reponce is quick and firm. The newer generation you start the engine, you must flip two switches and push a button before it moves, it has a similar MFH but you don't move it a certain distance, you must bump it forward or back to achieve movement, then it moves at a preset low speed then you must bunp it up or hold the MFH until it is traveling at the desired speed. It makes the unit difficult to control and potentially dangerous for doing some tasks. The MFH is moved sideways to stop or set the machine traveling at a preset speed. You can set the responce time and aggressiveness but it requires adjustment of another switch. This is just one example of what appears to be overzealous engineers fixing problems that didn't exist. 

Why change the simplest operation of a rotary light switch to three buttons with three pushes each? 

Also it's not just simple programming these people have used to achieve this, the new unit has four additional modules and probably another hundred feet of wire with it's own set of potential problems. 

On 12/6/2018 at 11:55 AM, cannuck said:

Ever tried FEA calculating by hand?   That's how we used to do it, and the odd bridge that fell down tells you it wasn't all that exact a science.   Today, any goofball can whiz up a CAD drawing and feed it to an FEA programme (or in the case of aerodynamic stuff, some CFD programmes) and very quickly and simply get results that were almost or literally impossible a half century ago.

There are still bridges standing a thousand years old and there are new bridges still falling down. Failures have more to do with shortcuts and poor workmanship then technology. 

FEA and CFD programs may give you a shortcut to the desired results but it is not infallible. You still need real world testing. 

 

On 12/6/2018 at 11:55 AM, cannuck said:

Now, let's think about some of those very simple devices: power transformers and their protection gear (circuit breakers).   The science behind them is exactly the same, and just as complicate as it ever was.  Once again, those "simple" parts are just the expression of some very complex design work.  BUT: in the "good old days" a voltage excursion (spike) that could and often DID take overcome the BIL values of the insulating system would simply blow the thing to bits.  The reason is that those simple breakers took time to heat something up to cause them to disconnect (as happens in the panel in your house).  Today, modern electronics can look at the sine wave in real time and spot a difference in value for voltage to ground or phase to phase and operate a very fast switch before the insulation system of the multi-million dollar "simple" transformer is destroyed.

Again, technology in the right places is very beneficial. 

On 12/6/2018 at 11:55 AM, cannuck said:

It just goes on forever.  ANYTHING simple that was designed long ago might have had some extremely good science behind it - and definitely did if it was well designed.  The only difference today is that the technologies we use as tools are right under our noses, not hidden away in some ivory tower.

Why is there such a desire to overdo it though? Just because it's right under our noses doesn't mean we have to use it even if it makes life more complex and frustrating. 

On 12/6/2018 at 11:55 AM, cannuck said:

You see, ignorance really was bliss.

, simpler and more intuitive in many cases. 

I think we're drifting off topic though... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are too few big companies own by Canadians, too many companies acquired by the US. when Canadians pay too much tax for the interests of government loan, the cost of Canadian product goes very high, and can not compete with the product of foreign products. In this situation, job loss is inevitable. 

If Canada can stop paying debt interest for private banks, new government loan are only from Bank of Canada, and prevent US from acquiring companies from Canada, Canada economy will start to grow very fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bjre said:

There are too few big companies own by Canadians, too many companies acquired by the US. when Canadians pay too much tax for the interests of government loan, the cost of Canadian product goes very high, and can not compete with the product of foreign products. In this situation, job loss is inevitable. 

If Canada can stop paying debt interest for private banks, new government loan are only from Bank of Canada, and prevent US from acquiring companies from Canada, Canada economy will start to grow very fast.

Corporate taxes are low in Canada.  Our lower dollar and universal healthcare are also benefits for business.  There are many large Canadian owned companies, but not as many as exist in some bigger countries.  Also, there’s no such thing as a central bank giving direct loans to individuals.  The banking system exists because of the higher interest banks charge than the Bank of Canada charges them.  Same goes for the US or any developed democracy.  Canada’s national debt is still among the lowest in the G7.  The reason individuals pay higher taxes in Canada is because the country provides more services to citizens, and we fully fund our Canada Pension Plan and other items.  We try not to live beyond our means, though Trudeau is overspending, as many other PM’s have. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Also, there’s no such thing as a central bank giving direct loans to individuals.

I was not talking about loan to individuals. It is about loan to government and pay interest by tax to private bank. All Canadians have been suffering this exploitation for so many years. This is the key reason that our product cost is so high.

Quote

http://www.debtclock.ca/

Why did Pierre Elliot Trudeau move Canada from having a public debt (printed money from the Bank of Canada) - Edit - this should state that the bank of Canada loaned money to the government before 1974, this was very manageable as the public debt was only 18 billion dollars in 1974 before Trudeau drove it to over 100 billion dollars which got the compounding private bank monster rolling) to borrowing money from private banks and issuing bonds (money) that pay interest?

This was essentially a criminal act, there was never any referendum of Canadian taxpayers that agreed to let the government start borrowing money from banks and investors. Approximately 70% of the 600+ Billion dollar federal debt is from compounding interest. If they had just printed the money from the Bank of Canada we would only have a 200 billion dollar excess currency in circulation instead of this monsterous 600 billion debt that is compounding and threatening to destroy our civilization.

The whole mess was started by the Liberals, a bunch of lawyers who know how to pass laws and spend money but cannot run a business, no business can just pile up debt with no intention of paying anything back and neither can a country, it just takes longer for a country to finally go bankrupt. With interest rates at record lows now there is great danger that as rates swing back up (like a pendulum that has built up momentum) Canada's debt service charges will become overwhelming, taking from vital government services, just when the demand for those services will be rising as the baby boomers retire. Currently 14% of tax dollars are going to service the debt as interest rates rise that number could double, triple or worse until the system collapses. Government cannot continue to raise taxes and inhibit the productive members of society from creating wealth so that the capital can be wasted on debt and overpaid civil servants, including Pierre Trudea's offspring Justin who has now moved up to the trough.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bjre said:

I was not talking about loan to individuals. It is about loan to government and pay interest by tax to private bank. All Canadians have been suffering this exploitation for so many years. This is the key reason that our product cost is so high.

 

I’m afraid that’s misinformation.  The government borrows money by issuing debt like most governments. The Bank of Canada does earn interest. The central banks trade with each other.  Private banks don’t own that debt.  You should visit the Bank of Canada in Ottawa. It’s a fascinating place. I’ve asked direct questions and received clear and direct answers.  It is not a private bank. 

Edited by Zeitgeist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2018 at 12:02 PM, Zeitgeist said:

I’m afraid that’s misinformation.  The government borrows money by issuing debt like most governments. The Bank of Canada does earn interest. The central banks trade with each other.  Private banks don’t own that debt.  You should visit the Bank of Canada in Ottawa. It’s a fascinating place. I’ve asked direct questions and received clear and direct answers.  It is not a private bank. 

They happen to tell you where this bottomless pool of money governments are borrowing from is? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Thinkinoutsidethebox said:

They happen to tell you where this bottomless pool of money governments are borrowing from is? 

Money is created as debt.  Government receives tax revenue.  When it overspends and borrows money from the Bank of Canada, it is borrowed at they key interest rate, lower than what we pay the banks in interest.  When a government becomes too indebted, there is great risk that other central banks and private banks/individuals will sell off the currency, devaluing it.  Printing more money in this case would likely devalue it further.  However, if the central bank raises interest rates, more investors will buy Canadian debt issues (bonds) because they can make more interest on the bonds.  The problem for the government in such cases is that it has to pay more interest to service the debt.  The central bank can lend as much money as it wants, but if the currency devalues, it must either raise interest rates to reverse inflation, or it can buy its own currency with foreign reserves.  No private banks are loaning the central bank money.  The money is created as debt that is either paid off, held onto (serviced), or defaulted on (which can lead to bankruptcy).   Countries with good credit ratings and low debt have less to worry about, obviously.  Overly leveraged governments with low revenues can get into a lot of trouble, such as Greece recently. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/15/2018 at 4:25 PM, Zeitgeist said:

The reason individuals pay higher taxes in Canada is because the country provides more services to citizens, and we fully fund our Canada Pension Plan and other items.  We try not to live beyond our means, though Trudeau is overspending, as many other PM’s have. 

The problem with this equation going forward is that despite continuing to pay high taxes the services Canadian citizens obtain from their governments are deteriorating, This is especially the case with health care. The social benefits model only works when there is a balance between contributions (i.e. taxes) and entitlements. This balance principle is otherwise sometimes described as the "social contract" model. But the model has largely broken down, mainly due to the influx of millions of immigrants over the past generation, too many of whom have become and have remained too dependent on government support. Successive governments have explained the "need" for this influx in misleading terms, such as addressing "labour shortages" and the "demographic deficit" when in fact the principal rationale is wage and income suppression.

The CPP/QPP is based on a contributory entitlement model, which might in fact become a solution going forward, whereby other social benefits might be allocated on a contributory basis. Otherwise, I fear the whole social benefits structure is doomed to fail as more taxpaying Canadians realize they've been duped into paying for programs they will never be able themselves to adequately access, at which point they will rebel against having to pay taxes to support the system.

Edited by turningrite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries ....

Chevy has introduced Employee Pricing discount for their vehicles over the holidays.  That's gotta sting for the thousands who will be out of work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2018 at 2:02 PM, Zeitgeist said:

I’m afraid that’s misinformation.  The government borrows money by issuing debt like most governments. The Bank of Canada does earn interest. The central banks trade with each other.  Private banks don’t own that debt.  You should visit the Bank of Canada in Ottawa. It’s a fascinating place. I’ve asked direct questions and received clear and direct answers.  It is not a private bank. 

Many countries are in debt trap. "Like most governments" is not an evidence to prove it is a good choice. Bank of Canada does not earn interest means it is a best choice for government to borrow money from.

Who received the interests of public debt? that is 10% of the tax dollars that Canadians pay to the government? Where does it go? I think the government should give us an clear answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2018 at 9:40 AM, Zeitgeist said:

Money is created as debt.  Government receives tax revenue.  When it overspends and borrows money from the Bank of Canada, it is borrowed at they key interest rate, lower than what we pay the banks in interest.  When a government becomes too indebted, there is great risk that other central banks and private banks/individuals will sell off the currency, devaluing it.  Printing more money in this case would likely devalue it further.  However, if the central bank raises interest rates, more investors will buy Canadian debt issues (bonds) because they can make more interest on the bonds.  The problem for the government in such cases is that it has to pay more interest to service the debt.  The central bank can lend as much money as it wants, but if the currency devalues, it must either raise interest rates to reverse inflation, or it can buy its own currency with foreign reserves.  No private banks are loaning the central bank money.  The money is created as debt that is either paid off, held onto (serviced), or defaulted on (which can lead to bankruptcy).   Countries with good credit ratings and low debt have less to worry about, obviously.  Overly leveraged governments with low revenues can get into a lot of trouble, such as Greece recently. 

So almost every country on earth is headed toward Greece's situation then? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...