PDA

View Full Version : Caterpillar CEO contradicts Obama, sees layoffs


Yar-El
02-13-2009, 07:54 AM
MSNBC Article - Caterpillar CEO contradicts Obama, sees layoffs (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29170141/)
Company will likely cut more jobs before it hires back, even with stimulus

EAST PEORIA, Ill. - President Barack Obama's stimulus plan may be good for Caterpillar Inc., but the company's chief executive says the equipment maker will probably have to lay off more staff before it starts thinking about rehiring any of the more than 22,000 employees it already plans to cut.

Even if a stimulus plan passes, it likely will not have an effect on the economy until late this year or early 2010, CEO Jim Owens said after a town hall meeting with the president and Caterpillar workers at a company tractor plant here on Thursday.

"The reality is we'll probably have to have more layoffs before we can start hiring again," Owens said without elaborating on timing or specific numbers.
This section doesn't bother me much; however, the following section does get me upset.
Owens seemed to back away from Obama's assertion that the Caterpillar CEO had promised him he would rehire some of the laid-off workers if Congress approves a sweeping stimulus bill. The company has struggled with lower demand amid the global economic downturn.

The severity and swiftness of the recession, Owens said, makes adding jobs back quickly unrealistic.

"We literally (went from) a three-year order backlog coming into November to now having order cancellations to the point where we cannot run at capacity," he said.

When asked to explain the difference between Obama's and Owens' statements, Caterpillar spokesman Jim Dugan said, "perhaps there's some nuance."

Obama told the roughly 280 Caterpillar employees and local officials who squeezed into a corner of the plant that the nearly $800 billion stimulus plan would set off a "wave of innovation, activity and construction," including electricity generating wind-turbine fields, upgraded schools and new and better roads and bridges.

"Think about all the work out there to be done, and Caterpillar will be selling the equipment that does the work," Obama said.

Many Caterpillar employees were optimistic the plan might eventually help, but said the company and the country need action fast.

"There's a lot of people in my building that have been laid off, about 200 out of 700," said 59-year-old Robert Teague, a production worker who has been with Caterpillar for 38 years.

Some of those waiting to see Obama before he arrived said they have already been told their jobs end in April.

"I was just thinking, what I am going to do? Am I going to have to move in with my parents?" said 27-year-old Jennifer Grebinoski, a West Point graduate and veteran of the war in Afghanistan who went to work for Caterpillar less than a year ago.

Her husband, who worked for a Caterpillar vendor, already lost his job.

"We were going to start having kids next year," she said, plans that have now been put on hold.

Owens told reporters that the president's plan is too light on infrastructure spending. Only about 20 percent of it would be devoted to the kind of infrastructure work that would benefit Caterpillar, he said.

The country will need more government spending on the economy, Owens said.

A roughly $600 billion economic package being worked on in China might be of more immediate help to Caterpillar.

"Theirs is even richer in terms of major infrastructure projects that will drive demand for our types of products," he said, noting that about 90 percent of the Chinese money would be used on such work.

Also important for Caterpillar — which generates more than half its revenue overseas — are stimulus plans being considered in Europe and elsewhere, Owens said.
That's why you don't send an inexperienced politician to the White House. He doesn't know how to move the pieces on the board. Most companies are tanking because Obama said, "We will tax those who make over $250,000." Corporations have learned to go elsewhere if the price is not right. Obama will have to break one of his campeign promises. The redistribution of wealth will not happen. Thank god.

jrrtoken
02-13-2009, 07:59 AM
Y'know, the Great Depression took two New Deals, 20 years and WWII to eventually fix the economy. The thought that this stimulus package is going to fix the whole thing overnight is foolish, and is not to be seen as a cure-all. Either way, I think people should just wait until the damn thing is passed and enacted before they moan about it.The redistribution of wealth will not happen. Thank god.Oh well. Time to apply for food stamps and welfare. Might as well set up a shantytown while I'm at it. :giveup:

Yar-El
02-13-2009, 08:11 AM
No one should get someone else's hardworking money. You want a home? Go to work, and leave me alone.

jrrtoken
02-13-2009, 08:13 AM
No one should get someone else's hardworking money.So they should be left homeless, without a job, starving to death? Sorry, but I'd rather steal from the rich and give to the poor than just twiddle my thumbs while people are living in utter poverty.You want a home? Go to work, and leave me alone.That's the problem, no one is hiring. The government needs to create more jobs, preferably through civil service projects.

Yar-El
02-13-2009, 08:54 AM
So they should be left homeless, without a job, starving to death? Sorry, but I'd rather steal from the rich and give to the poor than just twiddle my thumbs while people are living in utter poverty.That's the problem, no one is hiring. The government needs to create more jobs, preferably through civil service projects.
So taxpayers can pay for you? :roleyess:

~snipped~ Now, that was just plain mean. Don't make comments like that. --Jae

I don't remember what I said; however, I apologize for making a possible mean comment. -- Yar

MSNBC Article - White House may move to buy bad mortgages (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29146768/)

The White House is considering a proposal to head off potentially millions more home foreclosures by using federal funds to buy up at-risk loans and then refinance them with more affordable terms.

Under the proposal, the government would draw on $50 billion in funds already approved for the financial bailout to buy up millions of mortgages at a discount. A $300,000 mortgage on a house now worth $200,000, for example, might be bought at a 30 percent discount.
The amount the government is looking at is around $5 trillion to buy these loans "toxic assets".

jrrtoken
02-13-2009, 12:22 PM
So taxpayers can pay for you? :roleyess:No, so that the infratructure can be refurbished. Boulder Dam, Mt. Rushmore, the Golden Gate Bridge, etc, were all projects set up during the depression so that thousands of men worked and were payed real cash, while at the same time, improving the nation's infrastructure. This needs to be done again, to dramatically decrease unimployment and poverty. while at the same time, keeping the infrastructure strong. It's common sense.

Adavardes
02-13-2009, 01:49 PM
And I'm sick of the "get a job and leave me alone" attitude, quite frankly. It's not applicable in the current economic climate, nor should it ever be applicable to society in general. The wealth gaps are ridiculously staggering in this country, one of the many reasons why complete capitalism just doesn't work. Besides, maybe if a lot of the rich upper-class didn't cheat their way out of taxes, we wouldn't have to raise them to get something done. Just a thought.

Yar-El
02-13-2009, 03:09 PM
Taxes come from all levels of income. Middle-class also pays for the lower-class. Its not a rich exclusive arena. I'm also bothered by people who evade taxes. I think we can argue for days on who is right and wrong.

I don't like the idea of working long and hard for my paycheck, so someone who is capable of working could just sit at home. Portions of my check are taken to pay for welfare, illegals, and foreign countries. I can understand taking some cash for roads, disability, police, fire, and social security.

I work long hours, went to school, and kept things legal for years. I also give to charities. Why do I need to pay for others who are capable of working; however, they choose to stay at home playing video games and collect welfare?

I have a second question - Do any of you pay taxes, have children, and live in the United States?

And I'm sick of the "get a job and leave me alone" attitude, quite frankly. It's not applicable in the current economic climate, nor should it ever be applicable to society in general. The wealth gaps are ridiculously staggering in this country, one of the many reasons why complete capitalism just doesn't work. Besides, maybe if a lot of the rich upper-class didn't cheat their way out of taxes, we wouldn't have to raise them to get something done. Just a thought.
Do you have an exact percentage number of how many rich people who have cheated on their taxes?

On a similar note - Some of you are guarding the Democrats as if they are the exception. Have you been paying attention to the news? Six of Obama's appointees have been involved with tax evasion. Caroline Kennedy, appointed to Obama's presidential committee, was also in trouble for tax evasion. How do you explain this trend on the Democrat side? Republicans are not alone in corruption.

Astor
02-13-2009, 03:17 PM
I don't like the idea of working long and hard for my paycheck, so someone who is capable of working could just sit at home.

It's not a universal case of everyone 'just sitting at home'.

In the current global economic climate, it's unavoidable - companies are cutting back, and losing non-essential staff.

It's a very scary time for people who are entering the job market for the first time, due to the level of unemployment everywhere, creating levels of competition for jobs that wouldn't normally be encountered.

jrrtoken
02-13-2009, 03:49 PM
I work long hours, went to school, and kept things legal for years. I also give to charities. Why do I need to pay for others who are capable of working; however, they choose to stay at home playing video games and collect welfare?Thanks for generalizing the poor as lazy minorities. Ever considered the fact that sometimes people are literally born into a class, and are stuck there, despite a good work ethic? Discrimination plays a big factor, but so do other things. Either way, it's rather a social Darwinistic perspective, which is also highly imperialist and elitist, IMO.
I have a second question - Do any of you pay taxes, have children, and live in the United States?Yes, no, yes, though I don't know why the third is even factor, seeing as poverty and taxation are universal.
On a similar note - Some of you are guarding the Democrats as if they are the exception.Please show me the post where Democrats are seen as exceptions here, because I'm thinking it's a load of BS.
Six of Obama's appointees have been involved with tax evasion. Caroline Kennedy, appointed to Obama's presidential committee, was also in trouble for tax evasion. How do you explain this trend on the Democrat side? Republicans are not alone in corruption.That's my point. Almost every politician, businessman, etc., is most likely corrupted. Both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of this, and any suggestion to a particular side is simply hypocritical; they're all probably of some crime or another.

Det. Bart Lasiter
02-13-2009, 03:49 PM
No one should get someone else's hardworking money. You want a home? Go to work, and leave me alone.

if you intended this to be a blanket statement (no pun intended) towards all homeless people regardless of disability, you are an objectively horrible person

Yar-El
02-13-2009, 04:01 PM
if you intended this to be a blanket statement (no pun intended) towards all homeless people regardless of disability, you are an objectively horrible person
Praise from Cesar! You didn't read all of the posts did you?

Thanks for generalizing the poor as lazy minorities. Ever considered the fact that sometimes people are literally born into a class, and are stuck there, despite a good work ethic? Discrimination plays a big factor, but so do other things. Either way, it's rather a social Darwinistic perspective, which is also highly imperialist and elitist, IMO.
Darwin rules! :)

I challange your first sentence. Where did I generalize the poor as lazy minorities? Try to read all of the posts before replying.

jrrtoken
02-13-2009, 04:06 PM
Darwin rules! :)Uh, not this Darwinism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_darwinismI challange your first sentence. Where did I generalize the poor as lazy minorities?This (http://www.lucasforums.com/showpost.php?p=2588443&postcount=3), and this (http://www.lucasforums.com/showpost.php?p=2588574&postcount=8).

Yar-El
02-13-2009, 04:08 PM
This (http://www.lucasforums.com/showpost.php?p=2588443&postcount=3), and this (http://www.lucasforums.com/showpost.php?p=2588574&postcount=8).
I see nothing wrong in what I said, and I didn't call anyone who is poor a lazy minority. You are stretching things.

jrrtoken
02-13-2009, 04:11 PM
I see nothing wrong in what I said, and I didn't call anyone who is poor a lazy minority. You are stretching things.But you did say that the reason why people are poor is because they're lazy. That's pretty mean, IMO.
No one should get someone else's hardworking money. You want a home? Go to work, and leave me alone.
I work long hours, went to school, and kept things legal for years. I also give to charities. Why do I need to pay for others who are capable of working; however, they choose to stay at home playing video games and collect welfare?Poor=lazy

Web Rider
02-13-2009, 04:15 PM
I don't like the idea of working long and hard for my paycheck, so someone who is capable of working could just sit at home. Portions of my check are taken to pay for welfare, illegals, and foreign countries. I can understand taking some cash for roads, disability, police, fire, and social security.
I do agree that I would like it if our taxes were more....locally oriented.

Why do I need to pay for others who are capable of working; however, they choose to stay at home playing video games and collect welfare?
You pay for a handful of people who abuse the system, just like the rich guys who cheat on their taxes. The average person on welfare can't even afford a video game much less a console, and if they've got one, it's probably a used nintendo.(ie: old and cheap)

Do you have an exact percentage number of how many rich people who have cheated on their taxes?
Interesting question! So I looked it up.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27328293/
According to this article, wealthy people are more likely to cheat on their taxes.

On a similar note - Some of you are guarding the Democrats as if they are the exception. Have you been paying attention to the news? Six of Obama's appointees have been involved with tax evasion. Caroline Kennedy, appointed to Obama's presidential committee, was also in trouble for tax evasion. How do you explain this trend on the Democrat side? Republicans are not alone in corruption.
People who skip on their taxes get two solutions when caught.
1: pay up with interest.
2: go to jail.

If they pay up, I'm OK with that. Yeah, they broke the rules, but they literally paid their debt to society, putting them in jail only means they won't make money and won't pay taxes at all. Might as well let them go back to work and give the govt money.

Honestly, I don't really care if they've been skipping taxes or eating puppies. I know that 9/10 times, politicians are corrupt in SOME way, nobody's perfect. What I want is for people to get over all of this BS and focus on the matter at hand. Cutting wasteful spending, increasing domestic production, and so on. If these guys can do it, let 'em take a year off on their taxes! I'll happily reward anyone who helps solve this problem by turning a blind eye to their next missing tax return.

Yar-El
02-13-2009, 04:19 PM
Web Rider, I can agree with your statements. I can see your point of view.

Jae Onasi
02-13-2009, 07:18 PM
I work long hours, went to school, and kept things legal for years. I also give to charities. Why do I need to pay for others who are capable of working; however, they choose to stay at home playing video games and collect welfare?My mother-in-law worked her butt off and still couldn't get above the poverty level--she grew up during the depression and had to leave school early to work so the family could have enough food on the table just to survive. She wasn't able to complete her education, and my father-in-law died fairly young with the 2 youngest kids still at home. She needed welfare and social security to survive, and sometimes she was too proud to take it when she really needed it. Don't tell me my mother-in-law was sitting at home playing video games and eating bon-bons after she worked her behind off all her life just to survive. I don't want to hear crap about how poor people are just lazy and can get out of poverty if they just work hard. She worked hard. Life events didn't go her way.

I have a second question - Do any of you pay taxes, have children, and live in the United States?Yes to all three, though why the last 2 matter is beyond me. I have had to use unemployment twice when the offices I worked for closed with no warning to any of us employees. When I was growing up, my family had to be on welfare and food stamps for about 2 months one time when my dad had a heart attack and had to be off work after bypass surgery. I pay into the system as insurance in case something like that ever happens again to my husband or me. We never know when we might have a job loss, a catastrophic accident or illness, or some other bad turn in life that would cause us to need these services. I hope we never use it, but we need the safety net anyway.


On a similar note - Some of you are guarding the Democrats as if they are the exception. Have you been paying attention to the news? Six of Obama's appointees have been involved with tax evasion. Caroline Kennedy, appointed to Obama's presidential committee, was also in trouble for tax evasion. How do you explain this trend on the Democrat side? Republicans are not alone in corruption.
Tax evaders should go to jail. Political affiliation is irrelevant. Geitner should be brought up on perjury charges on top of it for lying to Congress about Turbotax, but that'll never happen.

Q
02-13-2009, 08:00 PM
At least wait for the guy to screw up before unleashing a deluge of piss and vinegar. Just give it time. ;)

mimartin
02-14-2009, 12:10 AM
I’ve owned CAT stock since 2001 when I did a thesis on Caterpillar which included a complete financial breakdown of the last ten years of Caterpillars financial statements, look at if officers, competition and market. The reason I bought the stock was not because of the US market, but the potential foreign sales. I could not even tell you what the stock is selling for today, because I purchased it for a long-term investment, however I am very happy to read this article. It at least tells me my fortune telling is somewhat accurate. :D

However, Caterpillar’s chairman and chief executive office Jim Owens clarified what he thinks of President Obama’s stimulus plan Friday. It was not as big of a contradiction as some would lead you to believe.

In a statement Friday, Owens said he and the president "fundamentally agree" that the U.S. stimulus package will benefit the U.S. economy and should spur demand for the types of products made by Caterpillar. Business Week (http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D96ATHTG0.htm)

The redistribution of wealth will not happen. Thank god.
What do you mean? What do you think has been happening to the middle class since the 1980’s. Oh you mean the current trend of redistribution of wealth should not be reversed. You are saying it is alright to take from the middle class and give to the rich, but it is socialist or communist to go the other way. Therefore, you are an admirer of trickle down economics.