Waxman Dethrones Dingell as Chairman

[EvilMonkey]

Please, name one who was threatened with expulsion.

You miss the point. Why do they get a secret vote, when they want to take it away from employees? What are they afraid of? Being ostracized like Joe? Having committee assignments taken away from them if they didn't vote for Waxman?

[Balta1701]

You miss the point. Why do they get a secret vote, when they want to take it away from employees? What are they afraid of? Being ostracized like Joe? Having committee assignments taken away from them if they didn't vote for Waxman?

Because it has already been established that this secret vote you're so desperate to protect simply isn't working, and it's allowed for enormous abuse of labor laws by businesses.

 

research by the University of Illinois at Chicago's Center for Urban Development found that:

 

» 46 percent of workers report being pressured by management during union elections;

 

» 49 percent of employers illegally threaten to close a worksite during union organizing drives if workers choose to form a union;

 

» 91 percent of employers force employees to attend one-on-one anti-union meetings with their supervisors during union organizing drives; and

 

» 30 percent of employers illegally fire pro-union workers during union organizing drives.

 

According to the National Labor Relations Board, stalling negotiations has been a common tactic used by employers for decades. In fact, 32 percent of America's newly unionized workers still lack a collective bargaining agreement one year after voting for union representation. Both the federal and state legislation would make it easier for employees to express a desire to organize a union, and speed the process of getting them to the table with their employer for collective bargaining negotiations.

 

If nothing else, big business has had its 50 years of abuses. Now it's time for the labor unions to have a chance to overstep things.

[southsider2k5]

Because it has already been established that this secret vote you're so desperate to protect simply isn't working, and it's allowed for enormous abuse of labor laws by businesses.

 

 

 

If nothing else, big business has had its 50 years of abuses. Now it's time for the labor unions to have a chance to overstep things.

 

Their chance? You have to be kidding. Unions have been crooked for decades. I can't be the only one to remember people like Jimmy Hoffa, right?

[Balta1701]

Their chance? You have to be kidding. Unions have been crooked for decades. I can't be the only one to remember people like Jimmy Hoffa, right?

And yet, somehow you've forgotten or at least decided to ignore Walmart.

[southsider2k5]

And yet, somehow you've forgotten or at least decided to ignore Walmart.

 

I'll take your Wal-Mart and raise you the UAW.

[Cknolls]

There were a lot of people in the business world in the early 80s that said the same thing about their typewriters.

 

 

Never used one. Until something comes along as efficient and cost effective as gasoline, I'm doing fine with what I have.

[Cknolls]

Because it has already been established that this secret vote you're so desperate to protect simply isn't working, and it's allowed for enormous abuse of labor laws by businesses.

 

 

 

If nothing else, big business has had its 50 years of abuses. Now it's time for the labor unions to have a chance to overstep things.

 

 

I think they already have, HELLO GM, FORD CHRYSLER. MORE UNIONS! MORE UNIONS! MORE UNIONS!

[EvilMonkey]

I'll take your Wal-Mart and raise you the UAW.

AND just about every teachers union out there. And SEIU. The guy running that acts like he is Tony Soprano.

[NorthSideSox72]

Never used one. Until something comes along as efficient and cost effective as gasoline, I'm doing fine with what I have.

This mode of thinking would, if taken forward, end up destroying the US economy in the long run. If we don't incubate and encourage innovation and technology for energy, by the time we start changing, we'll be over the barrell to a point that our economy is no longer in our hands.

 

No thanks.

 

[lostfan]

Never used one. Until something comes along as efficient and cost effective as gasoline, I'm doing fine with what I have.

 

 

This mode of thinking would, if taken forward, end up destroying the US economy in the long run. If we don't incubate and encourage innovation and technology for energy, by the time we start changing, we'll be over the barrell to a point that our economy is no longer in our hands.

 

No thanks.

You guys are talking as if we had a say in the matter.

[NorthSideSox72]

You guys are talking as if we had a say in the matter.

Well, in a way, we do. As SS has pointed out, our behavior is what is most responsible for the energy mess we are in (which will only get worse over time). If more of us did more to change our behavior and our energy choices, it could make the transition to alternatives smoother and cheaper.

 

[Balta1701]

Well, in a way, we do. As SS has pointed out, our behavior is what is most responsible for the energy mess we are in (which will only get worse over time). If more of us did more to change our behavior and our energy choices, it could make the transition to alternatives smoother and cheaper.

I'll give you a concrete example. In per capita terms, over the last 34 years or so, in 49 states of the union, the average electricity consumption has gone up by a factor of about 2. The average household burns 12000 kilowatt hours of electricity per year. California has held its per capita electricity consumption constant over the last 34 years and if anything has nudged it down a bit. Your average Californian burns 7000 kilowatt hours of electricity per year.

 

This has been accomplished mainly through intelligent regulation of the electric companies. Most electric companies make money based on how much electricity they sell. You leave your lights on longer, they make more money. California's companies make a finite return on investment. So when they put money in to building a new plant, they make a return on it. Or, if they spend money to increase efficiency somewhere else down the line, they make money on that. So they offer people credits for taking up efficiency projects or for simply doing things like controlling demand.

 

It's possible to cut the average American's electricity consumption by 40% and still live life like a California. And the people out here tend to like air conditioning.

[lostfan]

Well, in a way, we do. As SS has pointed out, our behavior is what is most responsible for the energy mess we are in (which will only get worse over time). If more of us did more to change our behavior and our energy choices, it could make the transition to alternatives smoother and cheaper.

I can't buy a car powered by alternative energy right now because they don't exist. The only options we have are:

A. Own a gas-powered car

B. Use public transportation

C. Walk/ride bike

 

I live too far for option C, and the direction of my job from where I live eliminates option B, so I have no choice but to have a gas-powered car. With that option, I have the choice of buying a gas-guzzler, reasonable-mileage car, or high-mileage car - the 3rd option is the best obviously, but I'm not about to dump my Impala yet. So all I can really do is grin and bear it when gas prices go up.

 

That being said, anyone who's bought a gas guzzler within the past few years and complains about the price of gas is a tool, and I've said as much to many a face.

[NorthSideSox72]

I can't buy a car powered by alternative energy right now because they don't exist. The only options we have are:

A. Own a gas-powered car

B. Use public transportation

C. Walk/ride bike

 

I live too far for option C, and the direction of my job from where I live eliminates option B, so I have no choice but to have a gas-powered car. With that option, I have the choice of buying a gas-guzzler, reasonable-mileage car, or high-mileage car - the 3rd option is the best obviously, but I'm not about to dump my Impala yet. So all I can really do is grin and bear it when gas prices go up.

 

That being said, anyone who's bought a gas guzzler within the past few years and complains about the price of gas is a tool, and I've said as much to many a face.

Four things. One, its not just about cars. You consume energy in many other ways.

 

Two, I think you shouldn't lump all gas-powered cars into one pile. There is a big difference between an F350 that gets 10 mpg and a Prius that gets 50.

 

Three, the opportunities for cars that use far less gas continue to increase dramatically. For example, 2 years ago, if you wanted a hybrid SUV, you had 2 or 3 choices. Now, you have about 20. Tesla is now available as an all electric car, and 2 or 3 plug-in hybrids will (probably) hit the market next year.

 

Fourth and finally, as I demonstrated in here a while back, the payback period on hybrids decreased dramatically for the last few years (until the past three months), between gas price increases, fed/state tax incentive increases, and decreases in differential technology costs. Something to keep an eye on when gas is back over $3 and then $4 again, which will happen sooner rather than later.

 

[StrangeSox]

NSS, I remember your hybrid analysis. One of the big federal tax breaks (the one worth a few thousand) has since been phased out.

[lostfan]

Four things. One, its not just about cars. You consume energy in many other ways.

 

Two, I think you shouldn't lump all gas-powered cars into one pile. There is a big difference between an F350 that gets 10 mpg and a Prius that gets 50.

 

Three, the opportunities for cars that use far less gas continue to increase dramatically. For example, 2 years ago, if you wanted a hybrid SUV, you had 2 or 3 choices. Now, you have about 20. Tesla is now available as an all electric car, and 2 or 3 plug-in hybrids will (probably) hit the market next year.

 

Fourth and finally, as I demonstrated in here a while back, the payback period on hybrids decreased dramatically for the last few years (until the past three months), between gas price increases, fed/state tax incentive increases, and decreases in differential technology costs. Something to keep an eye on when gas is back over $3 and then $4 again, which will happen sooner rather than later.

1. Agreed, but I was talking specifically about cars since that's what Cknolls brought up.

2. I know, that's what I was trying to allude to.

3. Agreed, and while this is progress, we're still using gas, albeit less.

4. Not sure what exactly you're getting at here, I think I agree...?

[NorthSideSox72]

NSS, I remember your hybrid analysis. One of the big federal tax breaks (the one worth a few thousand) has since been phased out.

I just looked at the IRS site like a month ago, and its still there as active for 2008. I'll end up with $2800 from the feds. I will now go see if its still there.

 

[Balta1701]

I just looked at the IRS site like a month ago, and its still there as active for 2008. I'll end up with $2800 from the feds. I will now go see if its still there.

Pretty sure that was included in the $200 billion we added to the bailout package.

[NorthSideSox72]

NSS, I remember your hybrid analysis. One of the big federal tax breaks (the one worth a few thousand) has since been phased out.

According to the federal gov't's website on this matter, the rebates are still good. The "phase outs" are about how many are sold - and I got mine in January, early in the year, and get full credit. My car model and year are still there, at $2200.

 

[StrangeSox]

I just looked at the IRS site like a month ago, and its still there as active for 2008. I'll end up with $2800 from the feds. I will now go see if its still there.

 

I guess it depends on the specific model, but the most popular ones are no longer eligible because they have met production incentives.

 

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=157632,00.html

[NorthSideSox72]

1. Agreed, but I was talking specifically about cars since that's what Cknolls brought up.

2. I know, that's what I was trying to allude to.

3. Agreed, and while this is progress, we're still using gas, albeit less.

4. Not sure what exactly you're getting at here, I think I agree...?

On 4, I was just pointing out that the purely financial incentive for certain hybrid and alternate drivetrain cars continues to get better, although we've obviously seen a few steps back in recent months.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I guess it depends on the specific model, but the most popular ones are no longer eligible because they have met production incentives.

 

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=157632,00.html

As I mentioned in a later posts, the production values are by-year. And mine is still on that list at that link.

 

As they make more of them though, this bizarre policy of decayed rebate over model year time creates an artificial front-loading of demand by year. Something to keep in mind. If you want a hybrid and the credit, buy the models early in the model year.

 

[lostfan]

On 4, I was just pointing out that the purely financial incentive for certain hybrid and alternate drivetrain cars continues to get better, although we've obviously seen a few steps back in recent months.

Oh, then yes, agreed.

[StrangeSox]

As I mentioned in a later posts, the production values are by-year. And mine is still on that list at that link.

 

As they make more of them though, this bizarre policy of decayed rebate over model year time creates an artificial front-loading of demand by year. Something to keep in mind. If you want a hybrid and the credit, buy the models early in the model year.

 

It's based on total hybrids manufactured by the company, not just model or year.

 

For example, F Company is a manufacturer of hybrid motor vehicles, but not advanced lean burn technology motor vehicles. F Company sells its 60,000th hybrid car on March 31, 2007.

 

* Ms. Smith buys an F Company hybrid car on June 30, 2007, and claims the full credit.

* Ms. Maple buys an F Company hybrid car on Dec. 31, 2007, and claims 50 percent of the credit.

* Mr. Grey buys an F Company hybrid car on June 30, 2008, and claims 25 percent of the credit.

* Mr. Green buys an F Company hybrid car on July 1, 2008, and is unable to claim the credit, because the credit has phased out for F Company vehicles.

 

 

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=162562,00.html

 

Toyota hybrid owners stopped getting credit on October 1st, 2007. Hondas stop receiving credit on January 1st, 2009. Ford, GM, and Nissan are all still ok for now.

Edited November 21, 2008 by StrangeSox

[NorthSideSox72]

It's based on total hybrids manufactured by the company, not just model or year.

 

 

 

 

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=162562,00.html

 

Toyota hybrid owners stopped getting credit on October 1st, 2007. Hondas stop receiving credit on January 1st, 2009.

That's weird, I see what you are saying now. I could have sworn when I did this research originally that wasn't the case. Either it changed or I misunderstood.

 

Either way, fortunately, my car is still in the clear by your previous chart and the other site. But that sucks for Prius people.

 

The moral of the story then, I guess, is that if you want a hybrid incentive, check the IRS site for production levels on the model first!