Kodak Comeback, Quick Read

adam hirsch · Mar 27, 2012

CGW said:
I'll take a Nobel laureate and the facts over right-wing fear-mongering and fabulism any day, thanks.

The left and progressives rearing their ugly heads, once again. Aren't there any constitutionalists, here?

keithwms · Mar 27, 2012

adam hirsch said:
The left and progressives rearing their ugly heads, once again. Aren't there any constitutionalists, here?

Trust me it's not worth it! Those kinds of discussions are best had when you know the person on the other side of the table. Otherwise you may find out the other guy is clueless and you wish you could take back the time you put into attempting to have a rational discussion...

Photo Engineer · Mar 27, 2012

Keith;

I'm saying a pension could have been built from savings by a person born in the 20s, the 30s, and the 40s. That is the original postulate several pages ago that was disputed when someone said that about 90% of the retirees had no pension, and the implication was there that they had no chance to get one. From the 50s on, it has become possible but increasingly difficult to save money but a lot is coming via outright debt and the desire to spend lavishly as I said earlier. It is difficult to sacrifice today for future stability.

With each decade, people become less inclined to save for their future. That is my point. So, even if the economy and every other factor was in favor of building a retirement fund from scratch, few would do so.

PE

keithwms · Mar 27, 2012

Oh I agree completely, Ron.

Too many people rely on debt, routinely, to live. And the debt cycle is sustainable only as long as there is steady growth. But when that growth sputters, the whole thing comes crashing down like a massive Ponzi scheme.

Anyway, I can report that most people in my generation do not assume social security will be there for them. Sad. But again... it was never designed to be a retirement plan.

Tim Gray · Mar 27, 2012

keithwms said:
I worry a lot about the amount of money people spend on self-obsoleting electronica... all the iPads and iPods and dSLRs etc. These are all objects that cost us at the sales counter and also cost jobs at home. Rather than spending several $k per year on the latest imported gadgets, how about putting a few $k away into a 401k or such... where it'll make a huge difference over 20 years.

Agreed. Unfortunately, that's exactly what I did while in grad school. Saved a lot. All that money I put away from 2001 to 2008... Last I checked, it was worth no more than what it was when I put it away. Not saying that savings isn't important, but after 11 years (for the earliest investments), it's not making a huge difference. Actually it's not making any difference. I guess I should expect incredible performance in the next 9 to hit your 'huge difference over 20 years target'.

And while I agree with you that our society would be better if people saved more, the problems run deeper than that. Your college loan point makes that fact. I have plenty of friends with 10's of thousands in college loans still - and those are from 10 years ago. I can only imagine what kids today are forced to take out. And the solution is NOT to not go to college. That's a quick ticket for a rough road ahead of you right there. It's pretty tough out there for younger people.

Ron - I'm sure it was tough back then on minimum wage as well. One of the things that's changed in my mind is that there aren't a lot of decent jobs with decent benefits for the working class. A person working a minimum wage job coupled with a spouse who has a job working at an auto factory or similar (with the good pay and benefits that they provided in the past) was a workable solution. I'm sure your grandmother was not the sole breadwinner in the house. Nowadays it's often the case of one person trying to support themselves and their kid(s) on a smattering of minimum wage jobs.

Helinophoto · Mar 27, 2012

Off topic but as long as we're off topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe1a1wHxTyo

Tim Gray · Mar 27, 2012

keithwms said:
Anyway, I can report that most people in my generation do not assume social security will be there for them. Sad. But again... it was never designed to be a retirement plan.

While I'm not hopeful that Social Security there be there for me when I need it, it's not because it's not a fundamentally flawed system. If it goes away, it will be because politicians, a subset of them at least, want it to go away. There are many ways that it could be funded so it could stay around.

adam hirsch · Mar 27, 2012

keithwms said:
Trust me it's not worth it! Those kinds of discussions are best had when you know the person on the other side of the table. Otherwise you may find out the other guy is clueless and you wish you could take back the time you put into attempting to have a rational discussion...

Maybe, but it seems so fashionable, today, to espouse marxist tenents, wear che t shirts, be like sean penn and empathize with hugo chavez, believe in collective salvation, throw israel to the wolves, side with the current government which wants to dismantle our constitution in every way...........and all of this is done, solely bc of the complicity ojouf the mainstream media. They must teach the virtues of communism in journalism school, must be required reading. Notwithstanding all this, i hope kodak film survives and i wish only the best to all of their retirees

keithwms · Mar 27, 2012

Kodak? Quit changing the subject

georg16nik · Mar 27, 2012

The last news I know of is:

NEW YORK, March 20 (Reuters) - Retirees of Eastman Kodak Co asked a bankruptcy judge to appoint a committee to represent their interests in light of the company's plan to shed $1 billion in benefits for Medicare-eligible retirees.
Two retiree groups argued in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan on Tuesday that a committee was necessary under bankruptcy statutes governing retiree benefits.
"Most of these folks are without college education," R. Scott Williams, an attorney for one retiree group, told Judge Allan Gropper. "They are sitting there, needing the healthcare benefits that their employers promised them."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/20/kodak-hearing-idUSL1E8EKCME20120320

Anybody heard anything this week?

Photo Engineer · Mar 27, 2012

Tim;

How modern you are. Neither of my grandmothers worked, although one was a nurse and did some work on-call from time to time. That was the norm back then. Most women did not work until Rosie the Riveter became popular in WWII.

PE

Tim Gray · Mar 27, 2012

Photo Engineer said:
Tim;

How modern you are. Neither of my grandmothers worked, although one was a nurse and did some work on-call from time to time. That was the norm back then. Most women did not work until Rosie the Riveter became popular in WWII.

PE

Haha, sorry, misread a post of yours. That should have been your mother, not grandmother I was thinking to myself that it was odd that your grandmother worked.

CGW · Mar 27, 2012

keithwms said:
Trust me it's not worth it! Those kinds of discussions are best had when you know the person on the other side of the table. Otherwise you may find out the other guy is clueless and you wish you could take back the time you put into attempting to have a rational discussion...

And then there's putting people on your "ignore" list who don't agree or who get too close to your bubble with something sharp, right? Tyler Cowen is a Koch flunky. He's Director of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University which is lavishly funded by Charles Koch. Nothing like an arch-conservative billionaire buying his own economics dept. to spew self-serving misinformation, right? Clueless, indeed.

adam hirsch · Mar 27, 2012

CGW said:
And then there's putting people on your "ignore" list who don't agree or who get too close to your bubble with something sharp, right? Tyler Cowen is a Koch flunky. He's Director of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University which is lavishly funded by Charles Koch. Nothing like an arch-conservative billionaire buying his own economics dept. to spew self-serving misinformation, right? Clueless, indeed.

If we had more "arch-conservatives" (as you refer to them) in government, we'd be much better off, as a nation. If we weren't so afraid of "offending" every nationality, every race, every religion, sex, gender, etc... and having the behemouth Federal government intrude in evbery aspect of our lives and if the left didn't try to regulate business to the extent it does we'd be a much stronger nation, and companies like Kodak, may not have failed. Maybe, if Kodak hadn't had so many Federal regulations stifling it, it would be in a healthier position, today. Frankly, the left in this country is TOO worried about the environment. Most people are too politically correct to admit it. LAY THE PIPELINES, DRILL FOR OIL! How caers about some rare species of bird!!!! The problem with our country is that we've become weak, worrying about "how we look" to the rest of the world. We need to do what's right, and not look to the communist, U.N. for direction, and approval. Somewhere along the line...I don't know, was it Roosevelt, no...I know...it was WOODROW WILSON, the fungus of progressivism began to grow in U.S., and it's been a struggle to maintain the Constitution, ever since. Let's blame Kodak's troubles on Woodrow Wilson.

Steve Smith · Mar 27, 2012

adam hirsch said:
Let's blame Kodak's troubles on Woodrow Wilson.

Was he a digital user then?!!

adam hirsch said:
If we had more "arch-conservatives" (as you refer to them) in government, we'd be much better off, as a nation.

Looking at the US from outside, it seems to be far too conservative. Your Democrats appear to be extra conservative and your Republicans are super-mega conservative!

Steve.

keithwms · Mar 27, 2012

CGW your BS just isn't worth dignifying. I decided to do other APUG members the courtesy of not quoting you. You just need to go do some homework.

~~~

Steve, the traditional liberal-conservative balance in the US is completely askew right now. You can't even interpret our politics in terms of traditional liberal or conservative debates any more. Some of the so-called conservatives want very radical fiscal changes, and quite a few of the so-called liberals are as conservative as the republicans when it comes to social issues. There are (believe it or not!) a few good people with pragmatic ideas, but the overall picture is more discouraging than I can ever recall. This situation reminds me a lot of when Perot jumped into the mix and took 19%. That could easily happen again in this race; neither side is presenting a compelling case for how they can better lead the country. And so a lot of people just want something different... anything different!

My guess, Obama wins the popular vote, but Romney wins the electoral. It'll be a mess.

adam hirsch · Mar 27, 2012

Steve Smith said:
Was he a digital user then?!!

Looking at the US from outside, it seems to be far too conservative. Your Democrats appear to be extra conservative and your Republicans are super-mega conservative!

Steve.

With all respect, the DEM party in this country (compared to.KEnnedy or even Clinton).has swung HARD to the left. The party is no longer moderate. Obama, pelosi, and reid have a progressive, socialist agenda, growing the size of the Fed government out of control. The three of them.see the us constitution as a hinderence to their leftist agenga. Thats what obamacare is-simply a fed gov power grab. Further the MAINSTREAM.republican party isnt much better. They like the status quo so they can hang onto power once theyre in office (think bush, bush, romney, gingrich) as opposed to a real.conservative like reagan who called the soviet union what it was.

Tim Gray · Mar 27, 2012

keithwms said:
...and quite a few of the so-called liberals are as conservative as the republicans when it comes to social issues.

Really? Like what? I'm not arguing, I'm just curious what you are referring to.

Ken Nadvornick · Mar 27, 2012

Hey! How 'bout that new, downsized Kodak idea? Can they pull it off?

Can't wait for my new 8x10 Kodachrome. And the revamped Dwayne's Photo to process it for me!

Ken

adam hirsch · Mar 27, 2012

Helinophoto said:
Off topic but as long as we're off topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe1a1wHxTyo

That is very funny

adam hirsch · Mar 27, 2012

Ken Nadvornick said:
Hey! How 'bout that new, downsized Kodak idea? Can they pull it off?

Can't wait for my new 8x10 Kodachrome. And the revamped Dwayne's Photo to process it for me!

Ken

Sorry, my fault

jglass · Mar 27, 2012

adam hirsch said:
With all respect, the DEM party in this country (compared to.KEnnedy or even Clinton).has swung HARD to the left. The party is no longer moderate. Obama, pelosi, and reid have a progressive, socialist agenda, growing the size of the Fed government out of control. The three of them.see the us constitution as a hinderence to their leftist agenga. Thats what obamacare is-simply a fed gov power grab. Further the MAINSTREAM.republican party isnt much better. They like the status quo so they can hang onto power once theyre in office (think bush, bush, romney, gingrich) as opposed to a real.conservative like reagan who called the soviet union what it was.

Sir, you are entirely off topic . . . and incorrect. Mr. Obama, Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid are quite moderate. I should know, I'm a REAL liberal!!!!!

Aiieee!! Run away, he'll eat your baby, he'll take your gun, he'll try to stop you from pointlessly invading other nations, he'll bomb Israel, he'll give your money to Muslims! He'll make you stop bein a racist! He'll take away your tax cuts! He'll let Hispanics and African Americans vote without harrassment! He'll repeal Stand Your Ground Laws! He'll keep politicians from ordering medically unnecessary ultrasounds on pregnant women!

Worst of all, he'll shoot Ilford films when Kodak is still available! Help! Liberal!

Steve Smith · Mar 27, 2012

keithwms said:
And so a lot of people just want something different... anything different!

I think that's normally the case regardless of country or political leanings. The problem is people don't know how different they want it to be.

Steve.

kb3lms · Mar 27, 2012

Oops! The link to that article was messed up ...

http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/film-fading-to-black

kb3lms said:
Here is a link to an interesting article about the movie industry switch to digbibal. Maybe it's not all about convenience or inconvenience and cost of the medium, there's also an element of union contracts and labor issues to deal with that a digbibal workflow might avoid.

http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/film-fading-to-black

The part I found especially interesting was in the section "DIGITAL: AN "OVERNIGHT SUCCESS" and "THREE STRIKES AND YOU'RE OUT." Moving to digbible eliminated issues with the SAG and AMPTP because if it wasn't film the SAG contracts didn't apply according to this article.

Ain't much Kodak can do about that.

Ian Grant · Mar 27, 2012

It's great fun here on APUG when US members discuss the S word which they won't use - Socialism. It's time they realised the rest of the world treats it's citizens far better with free health care, welfare benefits etc. Just what are they afraid of ?

Ian

Kodak Comeback, Quick Read

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency