America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 11 years ago by Papachristou. 22 replies replies.
Another Jobs Creation Success Story
Abrignac Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,441

Plant that got $150M in taxpayer money to make Volt batteries furloughs workers

By Perry Chiaramonte
Published October 08, 2012

President Obama touted it in 2010 as evidence "manufacturing jobs are coming back to the United States,” but two years later, a Michigan hybrid battery plant built with $150 million in taxpayer funds is putting workers on furlough before a single battery has been produced.

Workers at the Compact Power manufacturing facilities in Holland, Mich., run by LG Chem, have been placed on rotating furloughs, working only three weeks per month based on lack of demand for lithium-ion cells.
The facility, which was opened in July 2010 with a groundbreaking attended by Obama, has yet to produce a single battery for the Chevrolet Volt, the troubled electric car from General Motors. The plant's batteries also were intended to be used in Ford's electric Focus.

Production of the taxpayer-subsidized Volt has been plagued by work stoppages, and the effect has trickled down to companies and plants that build parts for it -- including the batteries.

“Considering the lack of demand for electric vehicles, despite billions of dollars from the Obama administration that were supposed to stimulate it, it’s not surprising what has happened with LG Chem. Just because a ton of money is poured into a product does not mean that people will buy it,” Paul Chesser, an associate fellow with the National Legal and Policy Center, told FoxNews.com.

The 650,000-square-foot, $300 million facility was slated to produce 15,000 batteries per year, while creating hundreds of new jobs. But to date, only 200 workers are employed at the plant by by the South Korean company. Batteries for the Chevy Volts that have been produced have been made by an LG plant in South Korea.

The factory was partly funded by a $150 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy. LG also received sizeable tax breaks from the local government, saving nearly $50 million in property taxes over 15 years and another $2.5 million annually in business taxes. Landing the factory was hailed as a coup when shovels first hit the ground. 

“You are leading the way in showing how manufacturing jobs are coming right back here to the United States of America,” Obama told workers at the ground-breaking ceremony. “Our goal has never been to create a government program, but rather to unleash private-sector growth. And we're seeing results.”

Randy Boileau, a spokesperson for LG Chem in Holland, told FoxNews.com that battery production is expected to pick up once Volt assembly lines in Detroit resume production on Oct. 15. He said the facility has spent the past two years building infrastructure and conducting pre-production “test runs.”

“The market conditions haven’t been as favorable, but this hasn’t slowed down plans one bit,” Boileau said. “LG Chem has repeatedly said that this facility is a critical component for them globally.”

Boileau pointed out the workers who are on furloughs one week a month are eligible to collect unemployment for that week, and he said the company covers the contributions to their individual benefits during the period.

The Volt has been plagued by low sales since it first rolled off the line three years ago. Orders have picked up for 2012 but are still well below projections.

Chesser said no amount of government subsidies can counter the practical problems posed by plug-in cars.
“Electric car batteries do not perform much better than they did 100 years ago," he said. "Research has not conquered the battery storage issue, and therefore the electric transportation ‘stimulus’ did not boost the ‘technology of the future,’ but instead a century-old technology as far as performance and capability goes.”

He added that the LG Chem plant's problems show that the unpopularity of electric cars despite heavy taxpayer subsidies has had more widespread negative effects than most realize.

“Billions of dollars were put into Volt research, and Ford received $5.9 billion in stimulus loans to retrofit plants to produce [electric vehicles]," Chesser said. "The battery companies like LG Chem that were supposed to service them have no customers to speak of. Their existence was solely based on access to taxpayer money.

“Had it been private investors rather than government bureaucrats making the decision, there either would have been a reality check about the industry, or only those who made individual decisions to invest would have lost their money, not taxpayers.”

http://www.foxnews.comhttp://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/10/08/lg-plant-that-got-150m-to-make-volt-batteries-in-michigan-puts-workers-on


Did I forget to mention this huge dole out went to a South Korean company? Seems as if one would want to build a US jobs base, we would at least dole out to US owned companies who if are succsessful are more likely to reinvest in the US instead of shipping profits overseas. And this fool wants to crucify Romney for Bain???? WTF???

DrMaddVibe Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,681
Another resounding reason why it was an utter failure to bail out GM!

DOOMED TO FAIL!

This time, it's ALL being done with the grandkids money! Forget the fact that the prices keep on rising on every model and salaries for executives and UAW workers skyrocketed...they NEED another bailout! Perhaps the next bailout the corporation now known as Government Motors will get it right...who trusts them?


Let them use the bankruptcy laws and court system instead of leeching the American taxpayer dry!
Abrignac Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,441
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Another resounding reason why it was an utter failure to bail out GM!

DOOMED TO FAIL!

This time, it's ALL being done with the grandkids money! Forget the fact that the prices keep on rising on every model and salaries for executives and UAW workers skyrocketed...they NEED another bailout! Perhaps the next bailout the corporation now known as Government Motors will get it right...who trusts them?


Let them use the bankruptcy laws and court system instead of leeching the American taxpayer dry!



After the election, but not before. Can't risk union workers no voting because they didn't get their dole. Bankruptcy would only serve to make their salaries and benefits competitive with what the average Joe gets.
rfenst Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,531
Abrignac wrote:

Did I forget to mention this huge dole out went to a South Korean company? Seems as if one would want to build a US jobs base, we would at least dole out to US owned companies who if are succsessful are more likely to reinvest in the US instead of shipping profits overseas. And this fool wants to crucify Romney for Bain???? WTF???



No offense, but if the goal of any investment is to increase jobs, who cares the nationality the owner(s) of the business. Sure it would be great to invest with American owners, but that is no longer anywhere near a given and has been increasingly less possible over the last few decades. Xenophobia is the fear of people unlike one's self. I'd gladly work for a Korean company if I needed a job.

Expatriation of foreign profits doesn't occur as often as people might think. Why pay taxes to a foreign government in order to bring after tax profit home (and possibly have to pay tax on the remainder again)? It just leaves less capital to work with anyway one looks at it. So, the norm is keeping the profits where they have been earned and reinvesting them over and over again, continuing to build as much equity as possible for additional investment before taxes.

And, the Bain allegations (don't know if true and don't care) are different from those here. Bain allegedly didn't use American labor because oversea labor was cheaper. Here, there was an intention to use American labor.

Until we get out of this mess we are in, we have to keep our eyes on the big picture: jobs! Jobs = greater disposable income = increased spending, which in turn requires more goods and services and a greater rate of employment so that supply will keep up with demand
ZRX1200 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,703
"Jobs" paid for with pretend money that never were realized?


RFenster. If Obama was your stockbroker would you defend this?
wheelrite Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 11-01-2006
Posts: 50,119
ZRX1200 wrote:
"Jobs" paid for with pretend money that never were realized?


RFenster. If Obama was your stockbroker would you defend this?



he would...
Abrignac Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,441
rfenst wrote:
No offense, but if the goal of any investment is to increase jobs, who cares the nationality the owner(s) of the business. Sure it would be great to invest with American owners, but that is no longer anywhere near a given and has been increasingly less possible over the last few decades. Xenophobia is the fear of people unlike one's self. I'd gladly work for a Korean company if I needed a job.

Expatriation of foreign profits doesn't occur as often as people might think. Why pay taxes to a foreign government in order to bring after tax profit home (and possibly have to pay tax on the remainder again)? It just leaves less capital to work with anyway one looks at it. So, the norm is keeping the profits where they have been earned and reinvesting them over and over again, continuing to build as much equity as possible for additional investment before taxes.

And, the Bain allegations (don't know if true and don't care) are different from those here. Bain allegedly didn't use American labor because oversea labor was cheaper. Here, there was an intention to use American labor.

Until we get out of this mess we are in, we have to keep our eyes on the big picture: jobs! Jobs = greater disposable income = increased spending, which in turn requires more goods and services and a greater rate of employment so that supply will keep up with demand



Whatever


I for one would think it is much better for OUR economy to dole to US companies rather than foreign companies. That being said, I'm not a big fan of corporate welfare to begin with.

Call it short-sighted if you will, but one of the reasons our economy is in a shambles is because lots of manufactoring jobs have moved overseas. Nothing like sending more money overseas.

Pat Buchanan was called a protectionist many years ago. Perhaps he should have been called a visionary.
rfenst Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,531
ZRX1200 wrote:
"Jobs" paid for with pretend money that never were realized?


RFenster. If Obama was your stockbroker would you defend this?


Before the fact: I don't know. Depends on the pitch and broker's track record.
After the fact: no. Of course not.
rfenst Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,531
Abrignac wrote:
Whatever


I for one would think it is much better for OUR economy to dole to US companies rather than foreign companies. That being said, I'm not a big fan of corporate welfare to begin with.

Call it short-sighted if you will, but one of the reasons our economy is in a shambles is because lots of manufactoring jobs have moved overseas. Nothing like sending more money overseas.

Pat Buchanan was called a protectionist many years ago. Perhaps he should have been called a visionary.


So, lets look at it another way: American dollars go overseas. Where do you think those dollars ultimately end up getting spent? Iceland or back in the U.S.
Abrignac Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,441
rfenst wrote:
So, lets look at it another way: American dollars go overseas. Where do you think those dollars ultimately end up getting spent? Iceland or back in the U.S.



Sri Lanka
HockeyDad Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,247
rfenst wrote:
So, lets look at it another way: American dollars go overseas. Where do you think those dollars ultimately end up getting spent? Iceland or back in the U.S.



Two words: Trade Deficit
Abrignac Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,441
HockeyDad wrote:
Two words: Trade Deficit



Amazing how some people forget that part. Why is it ok to send $$$ overseas to support jobs there when our unemployment is so high???
chemyst Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 05-29-2006
Posts: 1,674
What's $150M among friends?
ZRX1200 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,703
The sound of jobs leaving the US.......
DadZilla3 Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 01-17-2009
Posts: 4,633
Abrignac wrote:
Pat Buchanan was called a protectionist many years ago. Perhaps he should have been called a visionary.

Moreover, in 1992 Buchanan called for reining in the big banks as part of his bid for the Republican presidential nomination, 16 years before the 2008 global financial crisis.
rfenst Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,531
ZRX1200 wrote:
The sound of jobs leaving the US.......


Yep, but it has been sad reality for a long time now. With such cheap and technical labor available elsewhere, one would have to be out of their mind (profit-wise) not to use foreign labor whenever possible.
HockeyDad Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,247
rfenst wrote:
Yep, but it has been sad reality for a long time now. With such cheap and technical labor available elsewhere, one would have to be out of their mind (profit-wise) not to use foreign labor whenever possible.



We just need to drive down US salaries a little more and then all will be well.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,681
rfenst wrote:
Yep, but it has been sad reality for a long time now. With such cheap and technical labor available elsewhere, one would have to be out of their mind (profit-wise) not to use foreign labor whenever possible.



Confused


I know and deal with a few large companies that are pulling back from the offshoring experiment.

What good is it to have cheap and technical labor when you cannot communicate with them? Besides, it's not like they're rolling the cost back because "Bobby" or "Peggy" in Pune, India and Vladstock, Russia are cheaper. They're keeping any profit margin for the board of directors and those sweet CEO "golden parachutes"!

Whom among you here on CBid has made a call and when it's picked up you hear an Indian/Paki dialect and just grimace at what's going to happen for the next 45 minutes?

When we emptied the callcenters here in America and threw them overseas it was a rippling effect on the US economy. Like you mentioned before the disposable income factor and what I call the "Never Doin' Bidnezz Wif You Again" factor. When you have Americans that were making a living wage doing work well here then gave it away to a person making 2 dollars a day do you really think you're getting the same product?

I know firsthand of an incident that impacted my company with this...our entire call center was "offline"...we just thought it was because their infrastructure couldn't handle it and broke but the reason we found out 3 days later...all of the employees there went to work at the competitor across the street for a quarter more. A quarter!

No, this is more of the American Exceptionalism being dismantled right before our eyes. Don't sacrifice quality for a deal. If you did you'd be shopping at Wal-Mart for EVERYTHING!
Abrignac Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,441
rfenst wrote:
Yep, but it has been sad reality for a long time now. With such cheap and technical labor available elsewhere, one would have to be out of their mind (profit-wise) not to use foreign labor whenever possible.


Funny, weren't those jobs shipped overseas the so-called middle class jobs?

I remember a concept taught in my macroeconomics class many years ago. It was called "opportunity cost.". Moving those jobs off shore meant saving money. But, alas the opportunity cost to the economy as a whole is a net job loss for that specific transaction. Then when a new job is added, we're not a +1, we're back to even up.

Fast forward a few years. What is going to happen to what is left of the middle class if companies continue to move those jobs off shore. Using that model, there will be far fewer dollars in the household to afford those products that once were produced here.

I grew up in the '60's and 70's, a time when most middle class families were typically single earner and made do fine on a daily basis, nowadays most families are dual earner households and scrape by.

But, what do I know???
DrMaddVibe Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,681
Abrignac wrote:
Funny, weren't those jobs shipped overseas the so-called middle class jobs?

I remember a concept taught in my macroeconomics class many years ago. It was called "opportunity cost.". Moving those jobs off shore meant saving money. But, alas the opportunity cost to the economy as a whole is a net job loss for that specific transaction. Then when a new job is added, we're not a +1, we're back to even up.

Fast forward a few years. What is going to happen to what is left of the middle class if companies continue to move those jobs off shore. Using that model, there will be far fewer dollars in the household to afford those products that once were produced here.

I grew up in the '60's and 70's, a time when most middle class families were typically single earner and made do fine on a daily basis, nowadays most families are dual earner households and scrape by.

But, what do I know???



But...but...we can just get H1 B1 visa employees to come here and do the work! Glass half-full!Beer


No?
Stinkdyr Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 06-16-2009
Posts: 9,948
Tax and Spend Vote Buying!!!


Enjoy your socialism!!
And don't forget to re-elect all of those socialist politicians!!


Beer
Papachristou Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 10-20-2010
Posts: 845
until gas prices go to $5+, people will not seek out alternatice fuel vehicles such as hybrids, diesels etc. (or smaller vehicles like the fiat 500)
Users browsing this topic
Guest