MAGA: ford saves $1billion on workers due to trumps tarrifs

[pimpmaster9000]

Ford Motor Company is reportedly preparing to initiate major layoffs after suffering a blow to profits of at least $1 billion due to tariffs enacted by President Donald Trump.

The nation’s largest automaker hasn’t yet revealed how many workers will be affected. But a report by Morgan Stanley estimated that as many as 12 percent of the company’s 202,000 workers worldwide could be cut, NBC reported.

“From Ford’s perspective the metals tariffs took about $1 billion in profit from us,” Hackett said. “The irony of which is we source most of that in the U.S. If it goes on any longer, it will do more damage.”

[directfiesta]

Maga !!!!!!!
Winning !!!!!!!!
So easy !!!!!!

[OneHungLo]

You gotta crack a few eggs to make an omelette.

[Tasty1]

Trump is able to make his own 'Paris Climate Agreement' and is saving the planet.

[dyna mo]

Obviously trump doesn't like things named Ford.

[Brad Mitchell]

Ford was expected to trim its workforceby around 12% when the new CEO came in. This is at least partly media spin. Ford is grossly underproductive vs GM on employee count to cars sold by a factor of almost 50%.

Brad

[crockett]

Fake News! Fake News!

[slapass]

Originally Posted by Brad Mitchell

Ford was expected to trim its workforceby around 12% when the new CEO came in. This is at least partly media spin. Ford is grossly underproductive vs GM on employee count to cars sold by a factor of almost 50%.

Brad

Ford has never had a bailout.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Brad Mitchell

Ford was expected to trim its workforceby around 12% when the new CEO came in. This is at least partly media spin. Ford is grossly underproductive vs GM on employee count to cars sold by a factor of almost 50%.

Brad

this is just foresight:

https://www.experian.com/content/dam...18-q1-safm.pdf

as you see there the american boom is based on loans like never before.
the same you can see in real estate as people have been forced to buy a house now before intrest

we all have seen in the 2008 crisis to where that leads to.

when loans are given to people who are already in debt, this leads to payment defaults. payment defaults in turn ensure that those purchased goods go to market cheaply.

that will happen first with the cars and then with the real estate.

every company with foresight will prepare itself for this now.

at the moment there is still a desperate search for workers in the construction sector because there are not enough workers to fulfil the previous construction orders. on the other hand, sales of new houses have already collapsed to such an extent that massive job losses are already foreseeable in the near future.

if you would know that most of your quality competitors would not be able to pay their loans back and you would know that you can buy high quality and quite new second hand servers for a fraction of the new price, you would not order many other new ones.
and that means that there is no need to produce them.

an economy is not healthy when the consumption is financed primarily with loans to private households. A loan is nothing else as to spend the money from the future today.
but what happens when this future comes ?

[Tasty1]

Originally Posted by thommy

this is just foresight:

https://www.experian.com/content/dam...18-q1-safm.pdf

as you see there the american boom is based on loans like never before.
the same you can see in real estate as people have been forced to buy a house now before intrest

we all have seen in the 2008 crisis to where that leads to.

when loans are given to people who are already in debt, this leads to payment defaults. payment defaults in turn ensure that those purchased goods go to market cheaply.

that will happen first with the cars and then with the real estate.

every company with foresight will prepare itself for this now.

at the moment there is still a desperate search for workers in the construction sector because there are not enough workers to fulfil the previous construction orders. on the other hand, sales of new houses have already collapsed to such an extent that massive job losses are already foreseeable in the near future.

if you would know that most of your quality competitors would not be able to pay their loans back and you would know that you can buy high quality and quite new second hand servers for a fraction of the new price, you would not order many other new ones.
and that means that there is no need to produce them.

an economy is not healthy when the consumption is financed primarily with loans to private households. A loan is nothing else as to spend the money from the future today.
but what happens when this future comes ?

Are you describing the Dutch economy? This is what is happening to the dutch economy also. Prices of houses are on an all time high, even higher than before the crisis. Cause of low interest, foreign investors that buy the houses, building cost are 10% higher, government stimulated buying a house etcetra. Now new commers in the housing market can't get a mortgage cause houses are too expensive. Expect the rental price to go skyhigh. And all the people that didn't get a higher salary for some years can get 0,5% extra this year! Wow, where did the money from the booming economy go? In Holland we must have as dumb presidents as in the USA.

Mexico has a crazy president and in 1 month Brazil will have another corrupt president. Doesn't matter who they choose in Brazil, all are corrupt. And the next president of the EU is also a crazy fool. The drinking buddy of Juncker, Timmermans (Dutch). The fool that speeched in Ukrain.

I think there is enough reason to go down.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Bjorn_Tasty1

Are you describing the Dutch economy? This is what is happening to the dutch economy also. Prices of houses are on an all time high, even higher than before the crisis. Cause of low interest, foreign investors that buy the houses, building cost are 10% higher, government stimulated buying a house etcetra. Now new commers in the housing market can't get a mortgage cause houses are too expensive. Expect the rental price to go skyhigh. And all the people that didn't get a higher salary for some years can get 0,5% extra this year! Wow, where did the money from the booming economy go? In Holland we must have as dumb presidents as in the USA.

Mexico has a crazy president and in 1 month Brazil will have another corrupt president. Doesn't matter who they choose in Brazil, all are corrupt. And the next president of the EU is also a crazy fool. The drinking buddy of Juncker, Timmermans (Dutch). The fool that speeched in Ukrain.

I think there is enough reason to go down.

you can´t compare holland to the united states.
the dept to GDP in holland in 64 % in USA it is 107 %. the dutch economy is healthy and the real etsate market in such a small country can´t be compared because of the very limited land area and emplyment rate is at 76,2 % compared to 60 % in the USA.

so don´t worry about this. the problem we have right now is the same we had in 2007/2008 and this problem is GLOBAL.
I am not sure how familiar you are with the problems of 2008 and why the world was ending up in a disaster. but if you go really deeper in that you would probably see that the same thing happens again - just worse than in 2008 because the amount of money in circulation has doubled up since than. there is more money in the flow as credits need and this leads to the fact that it will be lend to people that can´t pay it back.

at the end of the day the normal taxpayer have to pay this bill.

do you really think that you know the amount of money all western countries paid to the banks? I doubt it, because that was a fraction of that what they paid to the AIG (biggest US credit insurance company). their undercoverage alone amounted to more than 1 trillion of which the american state only paid 60 billion. where do you think the other money came from? if you hadn't saved this company, more european and worldwide banks would have gone under.

interest rates are only possible if someone lends money and pays it back with interest rates. also here supply and demand count. but if the supply is bigger than the demand, risk markets are the only way. this may all look nice at the moment but can not go well in the long run.

this is exactly what is happening with the US economy where no bank turns off the credit tap, just like the dutch banks wisely do. there more and more credit is being pumped into the market.

what they do is a variant of friedman´s helicopter money theory. the only difference is that the money is not given away but given to people who can never pay it back. banks made an insurance for it and the capital of these insurers comes from smaller savers, pension fonts and municipalities. so if this insurance can not pay who´s money is lost?

to understand economy and effects you need to know much more as just the headlines of some scandal magazines and internet blogs from dilettantes.

because this is such a complicated issue it is so easy to fool people with bullshit theories.

[Bladewire]

Originally Posted by Brad Mitchell

Ford was expected to trim its workforceby around 12% when the new CEO came in. This is at least partly media spin. Ford is grossly underproductive vs GM on employee count to cars sold by a factor of almost 50%.

Brad

Hackett came in a year ago. It wasn't until a month ago that Morgan Stanley projected a 12% cut because of Trump's steel tarriffs. Hackett never threw out a 12% number as part of his "fitness" plan to become more efficient in the last year.

[PornDiscounts-V]

Originally Posted by Brad Mitchell

Ford was expected to trim its workforceby around 12% when the new CEO came in. This is at least partly media spin. Ford is grossly underproductive vs GM on employee count to cars sold by a factor of almost 50%.

Brad

Ford's CEO planned an administrative, salaried positions cut. Nowhere near 12% of its entire workforce. And that cut had nothing to do with tariffs. More to do with making the company agile and less layered in bureaucracy.

This is a cut to the entire workforce.

[Tasty1]

Originally Posted by thommy

you can´t compare holland to the united states.
the dept to GDP in holland in 64 % in USA it is 107 %. the dutch economy is healthy and the real etsate market in such a small country can´t be compared because of the very limited land area and emplyment rate is at 76,2 % compared to 60 % in the USA.

so don´t worry about this. the problem we have right now is the same we had in 2007/2008 and this problem is GLOBAL.
I am not sure how familiar you are with the problems of 2008 and why the world was ending up in a disaster. but if you go really deeper in that you would probably see that the same thing happens again - just worse than in 2008 because the amount of money in circulation has doubled up since than. there is more money in the flow as credits need and this leads to the fact that it will be lend to people that can´t pay it back.

at the end of the day the normal taxpayer have to pay this bill.

do you really think that you know the amount of money all western countries paid to the banks? I doubt it, because that was a fraction of that what they paid to the AIG (biggest US credit insurance company). their undercoverage alone amounted to more than 1 trillion of which the american state only paid 60 billion. where do you think the other money came from? if you hadn't saved this company, more european and worldwide banks would have gone under.

interest rates are only possible if someone lends money and pays it back with interest rates. also here supply and demand count. but if the supply is bigger than the demand, risk markets are the only way. this may all look nice at the moment but can not go well in the long run.

this is exactly what is happening with the US economy where no bank turns off the credit tap, just like the dutch banks wisely do. there more and more credit is being pumped into the market.

what they do is a variant of friedman´s helicopter money theory. the only difference is that the money is not given away but given to people who can never pay it back. banks made an insurance for it and the capital of these insurers comes from smaller savers, pension fonts and municipalities. so if this insurance can not pay who´s money is lost?

to understand economy and effects you need to know much more as just the headlines of some scandal magazines and internet blogs from dilettantes.

because this is such a complicated issue it is so easy to fool people with bullshit theories.

I know what is happening and will happen. What goes up will go down. And has many to do with the government. They also helped most of the banks and 1 went down. Also a trick cause the government didn't like that bank, they saved all, except one (and people with over 100.000 euro there lost it, while paying tax for the other banks...).

Europe is doing it again with putting billions in the market. That will come to an end.

With the housing market in Holland it is simple; we have not enough houses since WW2. Since WW2 people have problems finding houses and the governmunt fucks up solving it, and now it is getting to worse. Try as dutch man/woman to find a rental house in Amsterdam... they go all to the refugees. And there is already a waiting time for 10+ years...

Dutch banks are only bad for starters on the housing market. And that is mainly because the government and banks suck. In Holland you can't get a mortgage (or it is hard) when you don't have a work contract at a company. If you only have 1 or 2 year contract, no mortgage. And the economy changed, most people switch jobs more and don't have a life time contract with a company. If you have your own company it is even worse... A lot of things that have influence on the housing market and a government wasn't able to solve it (build much much more houses). But when governments sell ground for housing, they also want the jackpot (and than complain that houses are so expensive).

We agree, we will go down again.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Bjorn_Tasty1

Dutch banks are only bad for starters on the housing market. And that is mainly because the government and banks suck. In Holland you can't get a mortgage (or it is hard) when you don't have a work contract at a company. If you only have 1 or 2 year contract, no mortgage. And the economy changed, most people switch jobs more and don't have a life time contract with a company. If you have your own company it is even worse... A lot of things that have influence on the housing market and a government wasn't able to solve it (build much much more houses). But when governments sell ground for housing, they also want the jackpot (and than complain that houses are so expensive).

We agree, we will go down again.

but look, this is the way it should be.
the banks do not give their own money - they give the money from the small saving accounts of normal people. do you think they do not have to take care this money ?
try to buy a house in germany or spain - you will not get a loan whan you are not able to pay 50% of it from your pocket. try to do that anywhere else in the world and you will see the same - except in USA - you don´t need much own capital to get a loan even when you can get fired from one day to the other.

banks are usually not taking this risk. they sell this shitty papers by selling them together with other papers to other banks or they buy an insurance for that. and the insurance is investing the money from the small people. and they are in this "too big to fail-position"
trump opened exactly this possibility again on his first day in office because he eliminated the dodd frank act what was at least a BIT of security.

he has once again given banks and financial service providers the opportunity to speculate completely freely with saved money of small people.

and in europe, the stricter control of the financial sector doesn't help us if they are ultimately secured by a US insurer. then we simply pay this bill in europe although we didn't cause it at all.

this bill has never been a trump card to anyone because even if some banks went bankrupt in the usa, the "too big to fail" institutions were ultimately rescued by the credit insurers. and these in turn received more than 90% of their rescue money from the european states because the european banks were also insured there.

so finally USA banks have been rescued from europen states. and now they are allowed to give this money again to people who are unable to pay it back. the only difference is that they give out MUCH MORE unsafe loans as before.

and there is another difference now:
as europeans have learned this lesson they are using much more credit insurances from insurance companies in europe under european law.
that means: in the next crash they have no reason to help the biggest US credit insurance any more.

and THIS is the reason why they do NOT give loans that easy.

[Tasty1]

Originally Posted by thommy

but look, this is the way it should be.
the banks do not give their own money - they give the money from the small saving accounts of normal people. do you think they do not have to take care this money ?
try to buy a house in germany or spain - you will not get a loan whan you are not able to pay 50% of it from your pocket. try to do that anywhere else in the world and you will see the same - except in USA - you don´t need much own capital to get a loan even when you can get fired from one day to the other.

banks are usually not taking this risk. they sell this shitty papers by selling them together with other papers to other banks or they buy an insurance for that. and the insurance is investing the money from the small people. and they are in this "too big to fail-position"
trump opened exactly this possibility again on his first day in office because he eliminated the dodd frank act what was at least a BIT of security.

he has once again given banks and financial service providers the opportunity to speculate completely freely with saved money of small people.

and in europe, the stricter control of the financial sector doesn't help us if they are ultimately secured by a US insurer. then we simply pay this bill in europe although we didn't cause it at all.

this bill has never been a trump card to anyone because even if some banks went bankrupt in the usa, the "too big to fail" institutions were ultimately rescued by the credit insurers. and these in turn received more than 90% of their rescue money from the european states because the european banks were also insured there.

so finally USA banks have been rescued from europen states. and now they are allowed to give this money again to people who are unable to pay it back. the only difference is that they give out MUCH MORE unsafe loans as before.

and there is another difference now:
as europeans have learned this lesson they are using much more credit insurances from insurance companies in europe under european law.
that means: in the next crash they have no reason to help the biggest US credit insurance any more.

and THIS is the reason why they do NOT give loans that easy.

You are seeing it wrong in some points. Nowadays nobody get a jobcontract for life. It is a false statement of security cause any boss can fire you, even if you have a permanent contract. That is not taking care of money, it is walking behind the facts. So they can not buy and must rent, but if you make a little more than welfare you must rent private, what means most of the people are pusehd in private rent they can't afford.

If banks don't want the risk, they shouldn't lent to USA banks and buy shitty papers but lent money to Dutch/European people so they can buy a house. Or better, they should have built more houses.

Insurance companies are a rip off. Government force you to take an Insurance when you buy a house, but you will never get the money. They have it in Holland, Insurance when the house price goes down. I think maybe 10 people used it. (kidding don't know). Cause first you have 80% unemployment rate the first 2 years (or longer). Than you get money from government when you have wellfare and it is cheaper you keep your house instead of renting. So in that time the house prices went up again in that period. Insurance for nothing.

[dyna mo]

it's not that simple thommy. the entire world borrowed money in 2008+ trying to claim europe money saved US is entirely wrong. you also completely leave out huge economies like china and the fact they've borrowed trillions and easily have trillions of bad debt still on the books.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by Bjorn_Tasty1

You are seeing it wrong in some points. Nowadays nobody get a jobcontract for life. It is a false statement of security cause any boss can fire you, even if you have a permanent contract. That is not taking care of money, it is walking behind the facts. So they can not buy and must rent, but if you make a little more than welfare you must rent private, what means most of the people are pusehd in private rent they can't afford.

If banks don't want the risk, they shouldn't lent to USA banks and buy shitty papers but lent money to Dutch/European people so they can buy a house. Or better, they should have built more houses.

Insurance companies are a rip off. Government force you to take an Insurance when you buy a house, but you will never get the money. They have it in Holland, Insurance when the house price goes down. I think maybe 10 people used it. (kidding don't know). Cause first you have 80% unemployment rate the first 2 years (or longer). Than you get money from government when you have wellfare and it is cheaper you keep your house instead of renting. So in that time the house prices went up again in that period. Insurance for nothing.

you missunderstand the fact WHO is in risk.
the banks loan money from other people and not their own.

they have the OBLIGATION to keep the risk small.
here the risk is handled to a 3rd party and exactly this 3rd party is insuring it again with other people´s money.

you can turn it however you want - as soon as loans are given easy the risk will be high and it always ends up even in higher interest rates or in higher fallouts.
these fallouts are again paid from the taxpayer.

[thommy]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

it's not that simple thommy. the entire world borrowed money in 2008+ trying to claim europe money saved US is entirely wrong. you also completely leave out huge economies like china and the fact they've borrowed trillions and easily have trillions of bad debt still on the books.

i do not say that it is simple.
it is fucking complicated and this is the reason why it took so long til even professionals understood what happend there.

the problem in 2008 was that nobody wanted to borrow money to anybody - not even banks to other banks because nobody knew how much of the other ones assets are just hot air.

that was leading to the problem that only the central banks could push money into the market - money what was not existing before and what was not equivalent to the sum of goods and services.

means:
there is more money in the market now as goods and services available.
and I am sure you know what that means.

the real tricky thing in economy is that in this situation it would be necessary to burn down this money somehow. but there is not really a way to burn money what is in the market. whatever you do - someone will make exactly this profit of the sum you want to burn.

the world is already at kind of that point were money is concentrated to a few single hands. economy on the other side can not work when money is not circulating and given back to those that have spend it before.

and this wheel spins faster every day. as we all know there is a physical limit in speed.
when this physical limit is reached the markets will break completely.
and if that happens everybody will lose ALL MONEY and ALL debts.
it is like starting from zero but without banks or any service who need a bank (what is in fact everybody). this is the reason why we all need the biggest mafia in this whole game and we do not even have the chance to tell them to fuck off, because we would have to start without them in the stone age again.

we both know how many small people have lost money in the last crisis. but the problem was that the same mafia won this money again and they got legally filled up with other people´s money for the next round.
and no - this was not only happening in USA - the Deutsche Bank was one in the very first mafia line.

and sure china have a lot of this shit papers still in their portfolio - they also lend money like fuck and pump it into the markets (but their dept to gdp is still far under US).

what is the difference if a country supports its industries with subsidies or if a country supports its industries with the purchase of shares which increase so much due to this demand that they amount to a multiple of the actual value?

do you know how much money in US and other countries governments are spending tax money in anti smoking campaigns ? this might sound ok for some but on the other hand another part of the tax money flows as a subsidy into the pockets of tobacco farmers that are suffering from these anti smoking campaigns.

crazy ?
yes but reality !

why are wars existing? because it is a business to destroy things, because they have to be build up again.

crazy?
yes - but reality

we have to stop that shit - if not that shit stops us in a near future.

the pure greed of some rich and powerful people in this world seduces us to believe in problems that are not problems at all but become problems because of our belief in them. weeds are destroyed by their roots - but first of all you have to be able to distinguish weeds from wheat shoots.

the key to the solution is in education. if people would really understand the rules of an economy they would automatically find better solutions. and at the end of the day EVERY individual standpoint depends on the money in the own wallet and the own prosperity.
it will NEVER be a social point of view. this is why people have to understand how much they are depending on this society the don´t give a shit.