Sunday, April 5, 2009

POV (With Gratuitios Star Wars Clips) and the AOTW

As usual, someone's pissing someone off in my comments section. And as I hear it privately from both sides, I'm going to have to blog about it a little, and hopefully it will bring peace an harmony (and hot lesbo action) to my blog.

But first, a semi-relevant Star Wars clip on the topic (just because of the specific verbiage):



Okay, not nearly as relevant as I hoped (unless you're STILL a Star Wars noob and that was a spoiler), but it was fun.

One of the essences of blogging is addressing the myriad points of view that are out there. And I've noticed there are three groups out there. those of the conservative persuasion that are willing to listen (and disagree), those of the liberal persuasion that are willing to listen (and disagree), and the anonymous asshat anonydolts.

The point is that any well-thought out opinion out there has some merit, even if it's wrong. If nothing else, it provides clarity for what you're thinking.

And when we lose these points of view to the trolls (and I can think of bloggers on both sides that have given up) who drive off those who want to share their thoughts, we are diminished as a whole.

So I'm going to say this one more time, especially to those who are pulling back out of frustration or abuse. We bloggers who value opinion are with you. Don't give up. Tell the trolls to go fuck themselves with tinfoil wired to a 220v outlet. Tell them to piss into the wind in crowd of rabid, starved chihuahuas with beef tips hanging from their parts. And then start up the ol' comment moderation. Because no one needs hate.

How this all relates to POV porn, however, is the subject of another, not forthcoming, post that would suck (pun intended). So I'll include a completely gratuitous video instead, especially since it's better than sitting through the love scenes of Episode II:



And on to the asshattery....

Rick Wagoner is Asshat of the Week!

I remember my 1983 GMC pickup. It got me through my last two years of college. It was a rusted out piece of shit, but it kept going. It got me around Dayton at ridiculous speeds.

But I'm not buying GM anymore. Same goes for Chrysler (1978 Chrysler Cordoba). I might buy Ford ('77 Mercury Cougar XR7, 1994 Tempo) because they've had the sense to stay away from government bailout venom.

And Rick Wagoner, although he was not the sole reason, or even the main reason that GM is in the shitcan, was the captain that steered the bastard in to Bailout reef. Now GM stands for Government Motors, which, under the innovative boot heel of government, will most likely ditch their profitable lines for cars that will make us pine for that marvel of engineering known as the Yugo.

Rick, you let things get messy. You weren't ready for the gas price spike, despite seeing the mood of the country going toward electing the candidates of fuel-haters in the group known as greenies. And then, seeing how well the Dastardly Bastardly bailout was working, you took the dick of the Bush administration in your mouth, and bent over for the big one coming from behind wielded by Barack Obama (no racial jokes about that analogy please).

So now you're out of a job. Maybe you'll have the sense to move to Florida, where they won't hate you for your money. Or even better, there are countries around the world trying to attract executives. Of course, I'm not sure they'll want you. I hear they hire managers all the time in convenience stores. It's probably not the challenge you're looking for, but I think you deserve it.

So for helping to nationalize our once-proud auto industry, here's a titanium spork so you may eat my ass.

20 comments:

Satyavati devi dasi said...

because they've had the sense to stay away from government bailout venom.

Might it not be wiser to base your decision on whether they can build a decent car?

will most likely ditch their profitable lines for cars

If they were THAT profitable, would they have needed to be bailed out in the first place?

Detroit lost respect for their market ages ago. They thought they could ride forever on the glory laurels of the 50's, when American cars really were the world's best (I ought to know, I owned one). By building shiny pieces of shit that rolled just long enough to get them off the lot, and selling them for outrageous prices, they managed to alienate the public and open the door for foreign automakers, who had the sense to realize that all you actually need to do is build a decent car and sell it for a decent price.

The bottom line is that most foreign cars (I exclude the Tata in this assessment being that I don't believe they allow it off the subcontinent, lol) are simply better cars.

And the whole 'buy American' thing is so much bullshit. Most foreign automakers are building their cars here; my Tacoma was built somewhere in the midwest. Toyota employs over 35K people in the US, so no worries that buying a Toyota is putting your neighbour out of a job.

It's very simple. If you want to succeed, build a better product and sell it cheaper. Give it a good warranty and stand behind it. And don't underestimate your market's average IQ.

That was what caused Detroit's problems-oh!-dare I say it?-GREED.

Patrick M said...

Might it not be wiser to base your decision on whether they can build a decent car?

Yeah. But I don't see Government Motors doing that.

As for the profitable lines, the ones I expect to see on the chopping block are the SUV's. For political reasons. Which is why they won't be able to build a decent car.

oh!-dare I say it?-GREED

Oh, blow it out your ass with the greed, already. There are more precise explanations. :)

In fact, they failed to do this:

It's very simple. If you want to succeed, build a better product and sell it cheaper. Give it a good warranty and stand behind it. And don't underestimate your market's average IQ.

For a socialist, you seem to have a grasp of how the free market actually works.

TAO said...

Ah, Patrick....

Maybe a good grasp of how free markets work is why socialists become such....

GM has been reorgainizing, reinventing, retooling, and just 're-' a whole bunch of things since the early 80's. Everytime you turn around someone at GM announces that things are going to change and guess what? Nothing changes.

Too big to fail is also too big to change. Kind of wonder if that is not the paramount issue for our country also....

Satyavati devi dasi said...

For a socialist, you seem to have a grasp of how the free market actually works.

In print. A compliment. From you to me. Acknowledging that I actually possess a clue.

...are you back on the dope?

more precise explanations.

Sure.. GM thought the public were collectively stupid enough to think that they were still making cars of the 55 Chevy caliber and that they could continue to lower quality and efficiency standards while simultaneously raising prices and no one would notice.

That's a lot of words to say greed.

Maybe a good grasp of how free markets work is why socialists become such....

That right there is worth some heavy meditation time on your part, Patrick.

Satyavati devi dasi said...

Oh, and the reason that SUVs are or will be on the block are not political, they're practical. No one wants an 8mpg monster that costs $10 just to roll out your driveway.

Believe me, if they made a full-size 4x4 8cyl truck (or SUV) that got 30mpg people would be beating down the house to buy them... my husband included.

But when you're talking about paying $50K for something that costs you $250 a week in gas, it becomes a study in stupidity. People start looking at the 'NEED VS WANT' equation, and quite honestly, if you can justify that kind of NEED, then you probably don't need to look at the equation in the first place.

TAO said...

Now, now...you are getting way too logical to be a socialist...

If you had argued that you wanted an SUV and you wanted someone else to pay for your gas then you would have been a socialist! :)

Toad734 said...

I agree about Wagoner being ass hat of the week, what ever the fuck an asshat is.

And you really think he deserves 14 million per year? This is why I bitch about CEO pay, you never hear me bitch about Steve Jobs or Bill Gates income do you? Those are people who earn it and are worth it. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be paying more in taxes but I have no problem with them making that money. I could have run GM better than this schmuck. If anything, we should be outsourcing CEOs. They work for 1/20 the price in Japan.

Good article:

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/923/10-Cars-That-Sank-Detroit;_ylc=X3oDMTE4aGI2MDhuBF9TAzI3MTYxNDkEc2VjA2ZwLXRvZGF5BHNsawNzYW5rLWRldHJvaXQ

TAO said...

Toad,

Brother, you just don't understand...

We do not concern ourselves with what those a head of us on the economic bus have...

We just want to make sure that none one behind us gets anything more...

Toad734 said...

Those ahead of us on the economic bus are the ones who make my taxes so high. If we didn't have to give handouts to millionaires who don't know how to run a business we could be lowering my taxes. So yes, just as you guys worry about fat black women in the projects getting something for nothing and thus raising your taxes, I worry about rich white guys, who don't even need the money, raising my taxes.

Who, between the two of them, needs money the most:

A single mother with 3 kids
or a millionaire who can't do his job properly but gets paid 14-24 million dollars per year?

I have an idea, if GM needs cash, how about they get it from the guy who ran their company into the ground. He has been making 14 million dollars for the last several years; he can afford it.

Arthurstone said...

From Guinness' memoir 'A Positively Final Appearance' to a young fan who told Guiness he's seen Star Wars over 100 times:

"Promise me you'll never watch it again." The boy was stunned, but his mother thanked Guinness.

Also:

[Guinness discussing how much he disliked working on Star Wars (1977) and his attempts to encourage George Lucas to kill off Obi-Wan Kenobi]
"And he agreed with me. What I didn't tell him was that I just couldn't go on speaking those bloody awful, banal lines. I'd had enough of the mumbo jumbo."

Guinness' three volume autobiography, 'Blessings in Disguise', 'My Name Escapes Me', and 'A Positively Final Appearance' is a fantastic memoir of a wonderful actor and a very, very interesting and kind man.
Cheers!

Satyavati devi dasi said...

POV porn

Is this like when the DVD has additional camera angles that you can access through a submenu?


Just asking.

:P

TRUTH 101 said...

I like what you're saying here Patrick. Waggoner is an asshat. GM builds crappy cars except for the Buick. (I do have some knowlege of the car business.) And I agree with your leaning towards Ford for your next car. That I own Ford stock has nothing to do that. Cough cough.


Now onto the hot lesbians and a free society Brother. Hail freedom!

Patrick M said...

Tao: Too big to fail is also too big to change. Kind of wonder if that is not the paramount issue for our country also....

I don't wonder. I'm sure it is.

Saty: Oh, and the reason that SUVs are or will be on the block are not political, they're practical.

Maybe when gas was at $4/gal. But there has always been a number of people that don't mind that. Plus, they're coming up with hybrid SUVs.

That's a lot of words to say greed.

Actually, I'd consider that laziness, and an assumption that dumb Americans would "buy American".

As for POV porn, here's the wikipedia link (in other words, not a porn site in explanation).

Toad: I agree about Wagoner being ass hat of the week, what ever the fuck an asshat is.

Asshattery is a transient condition. At some point, your mirror will show you an asshat. And I may give you the "honor" if you annoy me enough on a slow week. :)

And you really think [Rick Wagoner] deserves 14 million per year?

In hindsight, no. But the company chose him and chose to pay him that. And there is a definite danger in allowing the government more power to control wages. A minimum wage does enough damage. A maximum will, of course, lead to outsourcing the top talent, and maybe the company if they can do it.

Arthur: I know Sir Alec had some issues with Obi-Wan. But it did interest me in checking out some of his other performances.

And he's absolutely right about what George Lucas attempts to pass off as dialogue.

101: Actually, I was thinking Honda. Made in Ohio.

And the hot lesbo action is supposed to be between a couple of opposing fellow bloggers (who I won't name lest one give me a tongue lashing (no comment there (again)) and the other one hate me more).

Arthurstone said...

Patrick typed:

'Arthur: I know Sir Alec had some issues with Obi-Wan. But it did interest me in checking out some of his other performances.'

Extraordinary Alec Guinness:

'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy'

& 'Smiley's People'

BBC mini-series based on John LaCarre's novels. Absolutely fantastic. Watch them in order.

Guinness is the perfect George Smiley.

Toad734 said...

Really? If we put a cap on CEO salaries (which I am not saying I am actually for) where else are they going to go? You really think they are giong to go to Mexico and work for someone for more? Certainly not France. Fuck em. Let them leave then maybe I can have their jobs for half the price.

Patrick M said...

Toad: They run the companies. They'll move the HQ where they don't get punished. There are plenty of places to move a corporate headquarters.

And they'll just find different ways to pay them (last time, it was stock options).

Satyavati devi dasi said...

A lot of the bonuses given in the financial sector were 'retention' bonuses; huge sums of extra money to ensure you don't quit your job and go somewhere else. EXTRA MONEY, above and beyond your salary, to make sure you don't quit?

I wish I got some of that. I got a smiley sticker and a $3 lunch coupon on Nurses' Day.

The whole premise of giving someone additional money to keep them in your company is ludicrous. What the industry needs to do, as a whole, is lower the bar all the way around. Where are these high-powered millionaire hedge fund people going to quit and go to, if these companies stop bidding up bonuses higher and higher to get them to work? It's not like there are endless numbers of these jobs going around; I imagine they could, possibly, go overseas, but I somehow doubt it'd be the same.

This is the same concept as the 'guaranteed money' for NFL rookies (another scam that needs to be stopped), except these money wizards aren't risking catastrophic injuries every time they step into their offices.

Performance bonuses, yes. Profit sharing, sure. Even additional incentive bonuses based on meeting goals. But money to do nothing but not quit? Annually? That's some ridiculous shit. And it needs to be stopped.

And yeah, I just realized we were talking about GM.

It still needed to be said.

Patrick M said...

Saty: What the industry needs to do, as a whole, is lower the bar all the way around.

I don't wholly disagree here, as there are some salaries and bonuses that appear a little disproportionate. But the only way that could happen (other than a massive collapse of the economy) would be a government mandate. And I suspect, based on the actions of the Obama administration and the words of Barney Frank, that salary caps are the ultimate goal of the Democrat left.

Then watch the companies that can flee start fleeing.

Toad734 said...

Patrick:

They already do that now and pay virtually no taxes. In fact, we have only lowered their taxes over the years as business taxes, as a percentage of taxes collected, shrink every year but every year more and more people move to these tax shelters.

And Obama does have plans to close those loopholes and there is only so much land in the Caymans, I doubt they are going to be building too many car factories there. And guess what it costs to ship freight from the Caribbean into the United States? Again, I don't see it happening and they aren't moving to Sweden or Colombia so where are they going to go?

All you have to do is close those loopholes. And if all these people do move to these tax havens, eventually, they will be taxed there too.

Patrick M said...

Toad: Closing loopholes is good. It means you can lower the taxes, not raise them. The taxes have come down as many of the old loopholes have been closed. But then new ones appear to suit the party in power.

I have a perfect way to close all the loopholes forever. I'll save that for my tax day post, though.