View Single Post
Old 11-11-18 | 10:13 AM
  #64  
tandempower
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,319
Likes: 15
Originally Posted by Mobile 155
To be honest I don’t have stock in GM so as far as I am concerned they can do as they wish. They answer to stock holders and if they don’t perform financially they can be replaced. It is not a moral issue to me.
Actually, you are right here, but if you took your view to its full implications, then we could simply work hard to cut down automotive demand as much as possible and all the lost jobs and lost revenues would just be chalked off to change. If people lose their jobs, they can just adapt their lifestyles and find some other way to prosper. Ideally that's what should happen with LCF, i.e. people buying less cars, thus stimulating the economy less with auto-related spending/revenues, and then the currency deflating or whatever other economic reforms have to occur to make everything work out well for everyone. But you are one of the people always saying that people have to make more money instead of less, so the automotive companies have to maintain their sales. That pressure to manipulate markets and prevent change is a huge obstruction to progress and reform of various kinds. If your attitude of acceptance regarding investors not making money and moving on was taken to its full implications, things would be fine; but it's not. They are always pushing for management (and government) to provide them with high returns so they don't just have to sit on their money and wait for deflation to increase its value.
tandempower is offline  
Reply