|
JIMMYK
|
pro union wrote: <quoted text>
More neotard BS.
American Axle CEO D. Dauch took in $58 MILLION from 2003-2006. The numbers have been pasted all over the news. He took in $31 MILLION in 2003 alone. American Axle is profitable and has been profitable in years past.
These neotards want people to believe that the workers are being greedy cuz they won't accept $12 an hour while the company is profitable and the CEO gets mega millions.
$12 an hour isnt worth going back to. They can make that anywhere. If American Axle doesn't want to be reasonable then the workers should strike until GM dumps American Axle from its contract. American Axle doesn't need to reduce wages to keep making profits, they are doing it out of corporate greed. If they want to drive the workers into poverty, then the workers should take American Axle down with them. It's about fairness.
KEEP STRIKING UNTIL AMERICAN AXLE MAKES A DECENT OFFER. SOLIDARITY. I will make this short and simple, do the math. 1 Billion at the standard rate of inflation of 4.5% from 1994 to 2007 would of made about 852 million. The 2008 return on the compounded money would be around 83 million and that is a low rate of return. I can see you are unable to do math on this high of a scale. Now to bring up a point you made in your statement. you said $12/hour is not worth going back for they can get that anywhere. I belive you have hit it on the head you said it is all about fairness. You have confirmed that $12/ hour is the going wage for unskilled production work. So why should union employees get paid double that?? How is that fair to the company? would you hire a plummer and pay them double the going wage for there work? I doubt it.
|
|
deadwood
|
well put jimmy k.a person on food stamps and welfair are better off.heat assistance,food pantry,ect.....
|
|
JIMMYK
|
Seenitbefore wrote: <quoted text>
Profits and losses are reported after all the expenses including the stock holders have been paid. So I don't hold a lot of trust in when there are reported losses. So a reported lose may not actually be a loss. Rather the lack of a projected profit.
Until an independent and completely objective accounting has been performed can the actual figures be believed. Most large corporations are not going to allow an independent objective going over of their books.
If you sell and article or articles expecting they should bring a certain price/profit and you are unable to realize your expected profit, can you call it a loss even if the price sold for is greater than what you have into it? Perhaps your expectation(s) of a level of profit is considered a loss even though you can't lose what you never had.
In the 19th century most states had laws similar to obligating corporations by law to open their books to the particular state legislature or attorney general. I remember the arguments in the eighties during the Reagan administration when the last of those types of laws were finally eliminated. I remember it because the arguments given sounded reasonable to me...without the knowledge of the harm of releasing corporations of all accountability for their actions. I am going to let CHIP answer this one. He can correct your errors in how you preceive the function of accounting.
|
|
Chip
|
Seenitbefore wrote: <quoted text>
Profits and losses are reported after all the expenses including the stock holders have been paid. So I don't hold a lot of trust in when there are reported losses. So a reported lose may not actually be a loss. Rather the lack of a projected profit.
Until an independent and completely objective accounting has been performed can the actual figures be believed. Most large corporations are not going to allow an independent objective going over of their books.
If you sell and article or articles expecting they should bring a certain price/profit and you are unable to realize your expected profit, can you call it a loss even if the price sold for is greater than what you have into it? Perhaps your expectation(s) of a level of profit is considered a loss even though you can't lose what you never had.
In the 19th century most states had laws similar to obligating corporations by law to open their books to the particular state legislature or attorney general. I remember the arguments in the eighties during the Reagan administration when the last of those types of laws were finally eliminated. I remember it because the arguments given sounded reasonable to me...without the knowledge of the harm of releasing corporations of all accountability for their actions. Yet another post littered with inaccuracies. Dividends to shareholders are an equity transaction that never hits the income statement, the opposite of what you posted. Dividends to shareholders have no affect on a corporation’s income or loss. Independent and completely objective accounting is done on every single publicly traded company; it is mandated by the SEC. Quarterly financial statements are reviewed by an independent CPA and annual financial statements are audited by independent CPA’s. The third paragraph makes no sense, however I assume that you are trying to say that GM is estimating their profit or loss, this is also a violation of generally accepted accounting principals, which are mandated by the SEC. Corporations can estimate expenses that are probable, however the calculation for the estimated expenses are disclosed in the financial statements, and they are reversed in the preceding year if not realized. Corporations do have an obligation to make their financial statements public. I don’t know why you are saying that they don’t, other than the fact that you always post about things that are beyond your comprehension. All public corporations publish financial statements to the public, it’s the law. You have obviously made some sort of poor attempt at sounding as if you know something about accounting, it would have been better of you to keep your ideas to yourself and have people assume you are an idiot rather than post them on the internet and remove all doubt.
|
|
dumbdumb
|
go kiss buffy good night<you 2 bore me
|
|
Mike
|
Chip wrote: <quoted text>
Yet another post littered with inaccuracies. Dividends to shareholders are an equity transaction that never hits the income statement, the opposite of what you posted. Dividends to shareholders have no affect on a corporation’s income or loss.
Independent and completely objective accounting is done on every single publicly traded company; it is mandated by the SEC. Quarterly financial statements are reviewed by an independent CPA and annual financial statements are audited by independent CPA’s.
The third paragraph makes no sense, however I assume that you are trying to say that GM is estimating their profit or loss, this is also a violation of generally accepted accounting principals, which are mandated by the SEC. Corporations can estimate expenses that are probable, however the calculation for the estimated expenses are disclosed in the financial statements, and they are reversed in the preceding year if not realized.
Corporations do have an obligation to make their financial statements public. I don’t know why you are saying that they don’t, other than the fact that you always post about things that are beyond your comprehension. All public corporations publish financial statements to the public, it’s the law.
You have obviously made some sort of poor attempt at sounding as if you know something about accounting, it would have been better of you to keep your ideas to yourself and have people assume you are an idiot rather than post them on the internet and remove all doubt. Nice job Chip. A major factor in this strike is that American Axle is NOT giving the Union full disclosure of its financial transactions. It is bargining in bad faith.
|
|
Chip
|
Mike wrote: <quoted text>
Nice job Chip.
A major factor in this strike is that American Axle is NOT giving the Union full disclosure of its financial transactions.
It is bargining in bad faith. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AXL/30... It took me about 1 minute to find their financials online with all disclosures. I guess either you don't have a clue what you are talking about or the union leaders are the dumbest people alive, I would accept either as an explanation.
|
|
Bright Eyes
|
OK, now where is Hillary when she says she will help to keep jobs here in Western NY?
|
|
UAWGirl
AOL
|
Chip wrote: <quoted text> http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AXL/30... It took me about 1 minute to find their financials online with all disclosures. I guess either you don't have a clue what you are talking about or the union leaders are the dumbest people alive, I would accept either as an explanation. I guess you'll believe anything you read. Of course you found the disclosures, but it doesn't mean they're correct. And based on these corporations less than flawless and honest track records, I can say I doubt their 'disclosure' is on the up and up. Gullible reader.
|
|
bye-bye
|
Bill Clinton wrote: Don't worry American Axle union scum, My wife will get you new jobs, she promises Union scum. That's really nice. Shall I nominate you for a Nobel Prize.
|
|
dave
|
I would be saddened to see more people lose their jobs in this area but I'm glad that it would be the UAW members, they want it all, high wages, all types of benefis etc. we live in a depressed area but I guess the UAW members don't care as long as they get what they want. I feel that $14.00/hr is better than $0/hr. I hope they all lose their jobs, it would serve them right.
|
|
Seenitbefore
|
dave wrote: I would be saddened to see more people lose their jobs in this area but I'm glad that it would be the UAW members, they want it all, high wages, all types of benefis etc. we live in a depressed area but I guess the UAW members don't care as long as they get what they want. I feel that $14.00/hr is better than $0/hr. I hope they all lose their jobs, it would serve them right. May I suggest some reading for you. Unequal Protection by Thom Hartmann and Free Lunch by David Cay Johnston. These two books get into what has really been going on behind this economy. I can understand that you may not want to read these because you'd believe them to be "left wing extremist" as they point out the facts of the other side. Your belief that it's just not worth fighting for what people need to survive, rather tuck one's tail between the legs and accept only the left overs is really quite sad and not at all what this country was supposed to be about. Can you not understand that when these people take less for what they do that means the ones who are not making that much are going to have to accept even less than what they are now getting "to stay competitive". It's the same ripple affect as the people who get put out of work because production has been halted by strikes. When the ones who make more accept less, the ones who already make less will have to accept even less. All the while the profit share will not reduce nor will the prices that those very people will still have to pay. The end result is small businesses will fail and people put out of work because no one can afford to purchase the products being sold. Is making $14.00 per hour better than making zero? Yes. Only in the short term though. It can not sustain our economy in the long term. I frankly would rather take $14.00 per hour from a different company that that's all they can afford to pay while shutting down the company that can afford to pay more and just doesn't want to, to gain more profit share. It's a shame that people just don't understand that this is a LOT bigger than it appears on the surface. This is a contrived condition and the sooner the majority realizes that the sooner it can be resolved.
|
|
Joined: Apr 12, 2008
Lakeview, MI.
|
Chip wrote: <quoted text> http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AXL/30... It took me about 1 minute to find their financials online with all disclosures. I guess either you don't have a clue what you are talking about or the union leaders are the dumbest people alive, I would accept either as an explanation. And how many times in the news papers have you seen accounting error....figures don't lie, liars figure.
|
|
Joined: Apr 12, 2008
Lakeview, MI.
|
Chip wrote: <quoted text>
Yet another post littered with inaccuracies. Dividends to shareholders are an equity transaction that never hits the income statement, the opposite of what you posted. Dividends to shareholders have no affect on a corporation’s income or loss.
Independent and completely objective accounting is done on every single publicly traded company; it is mandated by the SEC. Quarterly financial statements are reviewed by an independent CPA and annual financial statements are audited by independent CPA’s.
The third paragraph makes no sense, however I assume that you are trying to say that GM is estimating their profit or loss, this is also a violation of generally accepted accounting principals, which are mandated by the SEC. Corporations can estimate expenses that are probable, however the calculation for the estimated expenses are disclosed in the financial statements, and they are reversed in the preceding year if not realized.
Corporations do have an obligation to make their financial statements public. I don’t know why you are saying that they don’t, other than the fact that you always post about things that are beyond your comprehension. All public corporations publish financial statements to the public, it’s the law.
You have obviously made some sort of poor attempt at sounding as if you know something about accounting, it would have been better of you to keep your ideas to yourself and have people assume you are an idiot rather than post them on the internet and remove all doubt. You sound like that evil man Rob...
|
|
Seenitbefore
|
Chip wrote: <quoted text> http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AXL/30... It took me about 1 minute to find their financials online with all disclosures. I guess either you don't have a clue what you are talking about or the union leaders are the dumbest people alive, I would accept either as an explanation. So it looks to me like they made some pretty good gains from 2006 to 2007 according to the financial summary. Their net sales aren't really going to go up as their product is pretty much restricted to one outlet. Gross profit increased significantly from a loss in 2006 to a significant gain in 2007. Same with net income, significant increase from loss in 2006 to profit in 2007. Back to, as I understand it, the workers have not been trying to get any increases. They are striking to not get reductions. As AAM went to the black across the board in 2007 from 2006 are they just trying to get the workers to offset the 2006 losses maybe. The company couldn't attempt it until the contract came up for re-negotiation. It looks a lot like the company is out to get the workers to pay for the losses from the earlier year.
|
|
Seenitbefore
|
Okay Chip.
Yes, okay, I give up (hands in the air). But thanks for making clear what I was thinking but didn't make it to the page properly. Profits that are distributed to the shareholders are not included in the profit and loss statement. So, because the profits have been distributed to the shareholders before the income statement does not accurately reflect a profit or loss. Equity for the shareholders comes out of the company profit first.
To say though that dividends to the shareholders has no affect on a corporation's income or loss is an accounting ploy. If the company made an actual profit and then distributed it to the shareholders, leaving it out of the books so to speak, does not mean they didn't make a profit. It means they made at least enough profit to distribute to the shareholders. It means they distributed that profit elsewhere than held it strictly on company books.
It's getting into semantics to say a profit wasn't made when the profit is supposed to be redistributed. A profit is a profit whether you re-distribute it or hold onto it. The first job a publicly owned corporation has is to make a profit for the shareholders above all else.
Again semantics to say "Independent and completely objective accounting is done on every single publicly traded company; it is mandated by the SEC. Quarterly financial statements are reviewed by an independent CPA and annual financial statements are audited by independent CPA’s."
I'm sure you'll have more demeaning comments to make when I say I just don't remember the name of the Accounting Firm that "inspected" the books of Enron and they "semantically" were an Independent and completely objective accounting firm. Like so many other publicly owned corporations and their independent and completely objective accounting firms.
And no I not saying it isn't done correctly by all companies. It's just that no for profit Accounting Firm is ever going to be completely objective when their income/profit hinges on the satisfaction of the corporations that hire them.
I know from the VP of one of the largest publicly owned corporations in town that a company makes projections for the coming year. If those projections are not met they deem them as losses in partial or in total affected by the amount those projections are met. No they can not count the lack of a met projection "on the books" but there is no law that says they can't say to the public, and especially their employees, who mostly would be union employees in this case, that the company lost money.
I'll just leave this alone from now on and let your majesty have all the say. I'm really tired of your uncontrollable need to be insulting. A typical Republican egomaniac that can't have disagreements without shouting others down. If your ego is that fragile there are many mental illness professionals out there more than willing to take your money even if they couldn't help you.
And yes that was meant to be an insult because I too am not above that when pushed to the limit.
God I hope your not a teacher. The world needs less neo-Nazis like you.
|
|
Joe
|
SO SICK OF CRIMINALS wrote: hopefully all the whiny cry babies take a long walk off a short bridge so that the company can hire some new workers who will APPRECIATE having a job!!! You are an ignorant uninformed moron. These men are fighting to keep these jobs not only in NYS but in the United States. Shame on you. It's not about appreication they appreicate these jobs that's why they want to keep them here for their children and their children's children. It pains me to think that someone can be this jealous and harbor this much anger on a subject that doesn't concern them. Worry about yourself and your crap job and leave these hard working men and women alone.
|
|
North Park
|
Folks, Excessive Distributions does eat away equity which in turn weakens the balance sheet. Any bottom line profit made goes into equity,right? Its identified as retained earnings..so in reality, excessive distributions doesnt help the overall strength of the Company which then (in microeconomic terms) effects the union.
I would be upset if i was a union member and I saw excessive distributions being made. May not effect the income statement but it does effect the balance sheet. And any contibutions from bottom line profits which should go into equity is distributed instead of retained. Am i missing something or are you two grand rapid guys going to duke it out some more?
|
|
Parent of none
|
sad
|
|
Kenmore
|
Expected. The union reps appear to be the only ones surprised by this.
|
Judge it!
