Save the big Three?

  • rivereyes
    Osceola, Wisconsin
    Posts: 2782
    #1260737

    Ya know its funny when you think about it… all the big three car companies want is $35 billion… then they promise they will eliminate 20,000 jobs immediatly…. huh.. what gives? we give them billions.. they take OUR jobs? THIS is their grand idea?? wow… you can get better terms from someone holding a gun on you.. they (probably) will just take your money… your job will be safe…. heck.. for 35 billion we could buy ALL the stock of ALL three!…. we would OWN them!…
    though I WILL say why was congress so hard on THESE guys when they FLEW to washington… they didnt say anything to big banking.. what… did those guys walk there? did they just communicate via email or something? they got everything they asked for and when AIG threw a huge party at first there wasnt even a peep….. until the press caught on and blew the whistle…

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #725767

    Quote:


    then they promise they will eliminate 20,000 jobs immediatly…. huh.. what gives? we give them billions.. they take OUR jobs?


    Are they “Our Jobs” or the “Company’s Positions”? You want a job you own, start your own company. Working for someone aren’t you always at risk of that job being eliminated or you being replaced? That’s America!

    -J.

    rivereyes
    Osceola, Wisconsin
    Posts: 2782
    #725789

    sure Jon they are employees at large (I guess thats the term)… but the big 3 are asking for OUR money… and since currently there are 20,000 people employed who will “loose” their jobs… Id still call it “our” jobs (Im sure those 20,000 people pay taxes too)… I call this “my” hosue too… but guess what.. the bank thinks its theirs… and they have the paper to prove it.. and we have 3 vehicles that are “ours”.. but the bank figures one is theirs…. I dont want to be silly here… but for the sake of common language I will still use the terms “ours” and “mine”… even if its not always 100% true… these workers are not loosing “their” jobs because of “their” incompetence…. when 20,000 go then the failure is much farther up the line… the big 3 just followed their short sighted view that big was always better and allowed foreign companies to paint them into a corner… sure… companies can lay off THEIR employess… MY point is that we dont PAY them to do it!!! I dont think getting rid of another 20,000 jobs is the way to economic recovery! If were going to hand out money lets CREATE jobs.. not ELMINATE them.. the big 3 can lay off people without being paid…. if we are going to play word games the big 3 need to at LEAST say how many jobs that money will save/create… not how many it will loose… if their management is really that stupid then the first jobs to go should be theirs….
    thanks for the lively discussion…. I like being able to see both sides… though I do generally choose one I like best… lol

    Whiskerkev
    Madison
    Posts: 3835
    #725814

    torn. On one hand I say let them fail. When they emerge from bankruptcy, they might be better. On the other hand if we don’t, for the next 6 months every day we will hear about another supplier going under and more jobs being lost. Difficult issue. At some point we have to stop printing more money to give it away.

    rivereyes
    Osceola, Wisconsin
    Posts: 2782
    #725817

    yeah… in the end maybe all they have to do is give US 100,000… that would prop up pretty much everything.. people would pay off debts, buy property, invest, and of course some of them would just blow it on whatever… it would all help bring the economy charging back BIG time… of course they would have to print MOST of that money… but they say they are on the edge of massive deflation… so if that is REALLY true then shouldnt they be able to print their way out of that?..

    chamberschamps
    Mazomanie, WI
    Posts: 1089
    #725822

    I thought our country supported a free market? Why should they get a dime of support. The US is bleeding money right now and we have to draw the line and stop giving it away. Or else every large US corp. that doesn’t compete successfully in the market place will come to the govt. like its the local soup kitchen. These bills are going to come due someday.

    Paulski
    “Ever Wonder Why There Are No Democrats On Mount Rushmore ? "
    Posts: 1196
    #725823

    This has been a long time coming for the big three. I do not see how giving them 35 billion is the solution, as they have had plenty of time to be competitive in the market and have failed to do so many times.

    The big question is where does it end.

    Currently lining up for another BAILOUT are all the states who seem to take the federal governments lead and just spend money like water with no thought as to the ramifications.

    Here is a thought, if I am suppose to live within my means, how about the governemnt following suit

    The last time I checked the constitution, I did not see where it was governments role to guarantee a job, or a house for that matter. Personally, hard work did it for me on both fronts, no handouts were provided. This is part of living in a country where capitalism (only in times of plenty) is the model we follow.

    Pal

    eyejacker
    Hudson, Wisconsin
    Posts: 1890
    #725826

    I say, don’t give them any of OUR money, let OUR companies file bankruptcy. That does not mean they will go out of business, rather they will reorganize and stem the perpetuation of this government perceived bailout panacea. This will entail cutting their costs to become competitive again including trimming the labor force to only the workers needed to be produce the end product in whatever shape, form and function they determine the market demands. Also, imperative is renegotiating with the UAW the labor contracts that are strangling OUR companies. This is the way of capitalism, and we are not a socialistic nation quite yet. Although apprehensive, I hope I can still say that in 4 years! In conclusion, let us be reminded of all the programs the government is good at managing/administrating……It is quite a list, but there you have it and it did not take me all that long to compile it.

    das_bass
    Mound, MN
    Posts: 332
    #725832

    When you hire someone to do work for you, do you want to pay 4 people while only 3 actually do the work? In this economy, there just aren’t a lot of people buying cars. Which means there is less work that needs to be done making cars. And this doesn’t look like it is going to change any time soon. When a business owner has less money coming in, they need to reduce their expenses or they go broke. And one of the biggest expenses is employees. The math is pretty simple, with 3 options. You either raise the price of the vehicles to be able to pay for the idle workers, you reduce the pay for all of the workers, or you reduce the number of workers. Some or all of these are going to have to be on the table for the company to survive. And this is after the announcements that the CEO will be earning a $1 salary, and all salaried employees will be receiving $0 bonuses. So this isn’t JUST the blue-collar workers getting hurt.

    Congress was right to send those idiots packing until they show up with a realistic plan for dealing with the current situation. I don’t have a clue WHY they would show up to beg for money WITHOUT a plan to pay it back. I would get laughed out of a bank if I tried to get a car loan without any evidence I could pay the loan. So, they are coming up with a plan now, and unfortunately, some people are going to lose jobs. With near 40% drops in sales, how can there NOT be jobs lost? Hopefully, unemployment benefits will help these people keep their heads about water until they can find other jobs, or the industry rebounds enough to hire them back.

    Oh, as for the $100,000 dollar/person idea, this is another case of just doing the math. There are well over 300,000,000 people in the US currently. Do you seriously wanting to quadruple the current national debt? As well as trigger run-away inflation? I sure hope not.

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #725833

    Until the Big 3 (Union Plants) can compete with the foreign auto makers assembling cars in the US (Non-Union Plants) they will ultimately fail and go bankrupt. The US could give them loans now and hobble them along or make them come up with a new business plan. Funny, I would have expected that ultimatum from the Republicans, not Nancy Pelosi. Can’t wait to hear what Nancy has to say to the AFL-CIO and Teamsters when the Big 3 come back with a working plan!

    -J.

    Mike W
    MN/Anoka/Ham lake
    Posts: 13294
    #725842

    Does anyone else think the CEO’s offer of taking a one dollar a year is BS. Didnt Lee Iococca do this but made his money on stock options and other ways threw Chrysler? They turned us plumbers down for aid. I dont see why the car makers should get it.

    kooty
    Keymaster
    1 hour 15 mins to the Pond
    Posts: 18101
    #725847

    Got this in an email, not sure how much of it 100% factual, but it’s an interesting read. Kind of hard to build confidence in our government.

    Quote:


    Not quite two months ago, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson came to Congress with an unprecedented request: 700 billion taxpayer dollars to bail out America’s major financial institutions. In a three-page proposal, Paulson outlined his plan to purchase firms’ troubled assets and transfer that debt to the American taxpayers of today and tomorrow.
    After one failed vote, a lot of arm-twisting and $110 billion in sweeteners, Congress gave Paulson the keys to Uncle Sam’s vault. In less time than it takes to pass a Christmas resolution, Congress passed the largest bailout in history and granted extraordinary new powers to the federal government.
    These new powers would be exercised through the Troubled Asset Relief Program — or TARP — managed by a new federal bureaucracy, the Office of Financial Stability. Congressional leaders, in keeping with Washington tradition, even held a press conference to congratulate one another on the birth of this new federal office. But not everyone had the TARP pulled over their eyes.
    I voted against the bailout both times. Many on each side of the aisle did the same. As a member of the Financial Services Committee, I had the chance to hear Paulson’s testimony and ask some tough questions. But Paulson had no answers. The bailout was supposed to give confidence to investors and lenders, free up corporate books from toxic debt and stabilize the markets. Yet, week after week, the markets have continued to vacillate, and confidence in investment remains shaken.
    Sure enough, Paulson came back before Congress two weeks ago and admitted that he would not be using the Troubled Asset Relief Program to relieve troubled assets. You heard right: The sweeping, historic program that Paulson and his backers in Congress had said was so vital and so urgent was scrapped before it even began.
    Instead, the Treasury has used nearly all funds already expended from the TARP to make capital injections — pouring money directly into banks and financial institutions by purchasing shares — effectively turning a single federal bureaucracy into the largest and most powerful investment bank in America. But it doesn’t end there. Now Paulson has proposed a new plan to extend $200 billion to America’s credit markets, and he has joined Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke in backing another new plan to buy up the monstrous debts of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
    In other words, even though Paulson has changed course repeatedly and admitted his own failures in judgment, Congress and the Treasury are plowing forward with this watershed expansion of power. They have fallen for the tempting but disproven premise that one man or one bureaucracy can have the wisdom and foresight to micromanage the complex machinery of the free market.
    The reality, of course, is that a Treasury secretary has no such ability. Nor does any arm of government. History led us to free markets for a reason. And whenever a new crisis rears its head and the powers-that-be try to prove economic truths wrong, the problem they hoped to solve only worsens. Nixon instituted temporary wage and price controls to combat inflation, and inflation skyrocketed. Congress pushed subprime lending to increase low-income housing — and it ignited the housing crisis that has resulted in foreclosure for so many families.
    Now we are trying to stabilize the financial sector with Paulson’s TARP, and we have thrown the market into even greater turbulence. We have also compromised the market of tomorrow by reversing the incentives critical to long-term stability: bailing out the bad actors and, as a result, punishing the good.
    It’s not too late, though, to chart a better course. As of this writing, Paulson has spent nearly half of his bailout dollars — $250 billion for financial institutions, $40 billion for AIG, $20 billion for Citigroup, and Tuesday’s announced $20 billion for consumer credit companies. But Congress has the authority to deny Paulson his next installment of $350 billion. And that is exactly what we should do.
    Instead, Congress should pursue aggressive reforms. First, it should repair the lending standards that Congress itself broke. Next, we need to replace involuntary bailout dollars with voluntary investors’ dollars by suspending the capital gains tax, streamlining our regulatory framework for the 21st century and holding back so-called “mark-to-market” accounting that artificially devalues investments.
    And, we must perform oversight for the hundreds of billions of dollars we’ve spent. The Treasury Inspector General has called execution of the bailout an outright “mess.” Congress promised oversight provisions in the form of a special inspector general and a Congressional Oversight Panel when it passed the TARP. Yet, with more than $300 billion out the Treasury door, the oversight appears to be the only part of the bill not fast-tracked for action. Not one of those provisions has been implemented.
    This year we’ve already authorized nearly $1.5 trillion in financial bailouts. Our national debt has ballooned past $10 trillion. America got into this financial mess because of a culture of debt. Too many homeowners, banks and financial institutions were overleveraged. But no one is deeper in the red than the federal government. And if we don’t stop the deficit spending — if Washington doesn’t balance its books and start living within its means — how long until we too come crashing into reality?


    Whiskerkev
    Madison
    Posts: 3835
    #725858

    Since we are no longer being gouged for gasoline, I could see a go slow approach as I think their sales will get better. My jeep is a 1998 with over a hundred thousand on it. I am looking for a good deal that will pull my rig. I am sure there are others like me and I buy American.

    eyejacker
    Hudson, Wisconsin
    Posts: 1890
    #725860

    Quote:


    Can’t wait to hear what Nancy has to say to the AFL-CIO and Teamsters when the Big 3 come back with a working plan!

    -J.


    That will be interesting indeed! I predict that Nancy Belagosi will suck the blood right out of the Union, not, rather, she will call for inconsequential concessions, not being willing to risk offending such a large group of her supporters. After all, she is, above all else, a politician, which brings to mind this somewhat non sequitur gag involving a couple of friends. Said one to the other “Don’t tell my mother I’m in politics. She thinks I play piano in a whorehouse.”

    rivereyes
    Osceola, Wisconsin
    Posts: 2782
    #725867

    now we have a lively discussion!… as for my “proposal” of giving each tax payer 100,000… well.. who said I was serious? and who said I did the math wrong.. I didnt say anything about HOW much.. let see.. I was not saying every man woman and child… only taxpayers.. that brings it down to the neighborhood of around 140 million… so lets see.. Id calculate that would be 14 trillion.. added on to the 10 trillion of current devt.. lets see.. thats just a little over doubling it… no problem!… and yeah… inflation here we come.. but I thought the fear was deflation and weak economy.. if 100,000 is too much.. how bout just 50K?… lol. the point really is that economics isnt that easy… but Id rather have an expanding economy then a recession or worse yet a depression…
    as for failing businesses… yeah they have to lay people off… and what does this do? gives people less money to spend.. and the ones who still have jobs spend less cuz they might be next.. and spending less causes them to lay off more people.. and laying off more people causes….
    ok.. you see where this is going right? its the kind of negative momentum you have to stop right in its tracks… this recession we have in our sights is kind of like the perfect storm (and Ive heard that so many times I could puke!)…. something has to be done to stop it… but what? obviously the bailout wasnt the right answer… I DO think the problem has to be solved at a grass roots level.. the trickle down theory dont work.. they are pouring money on the banks like crazy and they are soaking it up like sponges and passing NONE of it on…

    john23
    St. Paul, MN
    Posts: 2578
    #725868

    In a free market business succeed or fail based on their abilities to meet consumer demand.

    In a socialized market businesses succeed or fail based on the decisions of the government.

    jon_jordan
    St. Paul, Mn
    Posts: 10908
    #725869

    As long as the government is bailing out everyone. How about a 401k bailout! Just restore my account values as of August 1st, 2008.

    I’ll vote for ya!!! I promise..

    -J.

    Brian Hoffies
    Land of 10,000 taxes, potholes & the politically correct.
    Posts: 6843
    #725885

    My understanding is that they want a bridge loan of $35 billion. That will only carry them until they can come up with a final number on what they will need to survive.

    $200 to $300 Billion will be closer in my estimation.

    But…………keep in mind it’s only my opinion.

    martin_vrieze
    Eagan
    Posts: 484
    #725890

    Didn’t we bail out Harley Davidson through a system or tarrifs on the Japanese motorcycle manufacturers?

    Didn’t we also bail out Chrysler once before?

    Just trying to jar loose those fragments of my memory and exactly what we did when we bailed them out.

    rivereyes
    Osceola, Wisconsin
    Posts: 2782
    #725897

    ok.. I dont think there are any pure capitilist nations.. or pure socialist ones… both systems as pure systems have their problems… Id say pure socialism has more.. the greatest problem with socialism vs capitalism is that greed triumphs over giving everytime…. so socialism dont work unless the people administrating and living in it are well.. saints… and personally I cant see that happening any time soon… but pure uncontrolled greed leads to anarchy.. and people being trampled to death in walmart.. and people being fleeced by huge corporations and dogs and cats living together and etc, etc….
    restore our 401ks?!… PLEASE!

    das_bass
    Mound, MN
    Posts: 332
    #725914

    Quote:


    something has to be done to stop it… but what? obviously the bailout wasnt the right answer… I DO think the problem has to be solved at a grass roots level


    You are right in that the Trickle Down theory doesn’t work. But the Bubble Up doesn’t work any better. Fixing an economy just isn’t that easy. The most important thing, is Consumer Confidence. You have probably heard about the Consumer Confidence report before, and noticed how many financial people take note of it. When Confidence is high, people are feeling good about their job, the government, the economy, etc., and are willing to spend money. When it is low (and it is REALLY low now) people hang onto what they have. Both cases result in a cycle. The first, more money keeps getting poured into the economy, making more jobs, resulting in people having more money, which they pour into the economy…

    In the second case, poeple only spend what they need to, resulting in loss of jobs, resulting in people having less money, resulting in people hanging onto their money tighter…

    Both cycles are difficult to break. What has to happen is that large numbers of consumers need to change their mind on the economy, and getting them to do that isn’t easy. To break this cycle, you need to convince large numbers of people that things are getting better. Of course, the majority of the people want to see evidence that it is getting better first. Since things get better AFTER people are more confident about the economy, and people want to see the economy improve BEFORE they feel better about it, this is quite a challenge.

    maddog
    Park Rapids Mn.
    Posts: 171
    #725916

    Isn’t a lot of this money going towards saving the retired Auto workers pension? From what I’ve read they don’t have the monies to pay them. As far as the top CEOS taking $1.00 for their pay I guess I could live off the 10 t0 14 mill they made the year before.

    riveratt
    Central Wisconsin US-of-A
    Posts: 1464
    #725950

    I say let them go bankrupt and not give them the money. That way I can sit here and read everyone P&M about the 17% unemployment rate! But what difference would that make? After all it would only be the largest segment of the highest average paid people out of a job ever. I’m sure showing them our noses would teach them terrible companies a lesson. Right? Just think of it. The largest combined group of the highest average salaried people in the US out of work. Heck that’s ok it doesn’t affect us anyhow. Or does it? Who spends the most money a guy making $25k a year or a guy making $30 an hour? What group would would affect whats left of the economy the most? Sense my sarcasm?

    Why isn’t anyone on here P&Ming about the money spent to bailout the banks? The government spent how much to buy risky assets? And who’s money was that? What’s worse a chain of banks with comparably little overhead closing down or the auto makers? Maybe my mind thinks in too simple of terms.

    Funny the UAW was brought up. We all know it has a strangle hold on the big 3 and it needs to go away. In a round about way that is why the politicians want them to file, to force the monkey off their back. While the unions are not the blame for this specific downfall (The UAW doesn’t, after all, underwrite auto loans.)they also have done nothing to strengthen the companies. Example: What benefit does any of the big 3 have in paying 90% of a layed off workers wages? I see none.

    I know my anti union stance will bring a lot of criticism from pro union folks and that’s understandable. But I get a kick out of so many people that whine about the troubles caused by the big 3 as they are driving down the road in their imports. Not all do mind you but take a look at another of the nations huge union population. School teachers. Great people and most are under paid. All that I know of belong to one of the strongest unions in the states. Want something interesting? Drive through the employee lot of a local school and take note of the brands of cars the teachers drive. Insane how a union member can even be so hypocritical as to ignore another union by buying an import. By the way the vast majority of my local school drives imports. Two blocks away is a Ford and Buick dealership. Closest import shop is 45 miles. I lived in that town too(Eau Claire by the way) and saw the same thing in the schools there.

    Sorry to go so far off on the rant but there are more sides to this topic than a gold ball has dimples. I’m not a fan of the 700 billion dollar buy out at all. I think the finance companies that swindled Joe Public ought to take their lumps and go away. (Research that and find out why Fanni and Freddie exist!) But this problem with the big three isn’t exactly their fault and largely it isn’t even the unions fault. When a person with a 700 credit rating can’t get a loan the blame lies somewhere else.

    rivereyes
    Osceola, Wisconsin
    Posts: 2782
    #725988

    Id say there are not easy answers.. and Id say the problem is more complex than being able to point to one thing or one group of people and say.. thats its.. THATS the problem! people love to have an easy target to blame… because that usually means there is an easy fix… I dont think there is an easy fix this time…. but Id love to be wrong….

    chris-tuckner
    Hastings/Isle MN
    Posts: 12318
    #725991

    There is a Congressman I heard on Fox News today (His name excapes me.) and he had the smartest idea to date in my opinion to recharge the economy. He proposes we take 2 months and not collect Fed or FICA tax, and let people who make it, keep it. No printing of checks…no waiting by the mail box…no expense created and getting it done. The money saved would in itself generate tax dollars. Car sales, electronics…etc.

    Remember, people have been sitting on cars for a while now. Miles are adding up. Remember the 0% financing days? A gazillion people bought cars and trucks. Soon they will be needing replacement. I have a Buick with 155k on it, and a Lincoln Navigator with 55k. That combined is over 200k miles! How many more of you are in the same position?
    Rather than seeing Pro Golfers and the like pushing vehicles, I would like to see a National push to buy American! There are some darned nice American cars out there! We can save ourselves. A bailout is corporate welfare. When money is free and handed out, responsibility goes right out the window.

    I am not going to Union bash here, but something has to be done about this US vs. THEM mentality! It is a fight until both sides lie bleeding and we brush ourselves off and say OK, lets get back to work and be friendly. I find that sickening! Corporate greed, worker/Union greed…plenty of blame to go around.

    Folks, this is a long, LONG way from over!

    Paulski
    “Ever Wonder Why There Are No Democrats On Mount Rushmore ? "
    Posts: 1196
    #726015

    I think it would be interesting to see how many people who think we should bail out the big three actually drive imports? The earlier comment about people how are pro union, but drive imports is pretty telling. It is amazing how many union bumper stickers are on imports here in MN.

    Seriously, the big three has been aware of the higher quality imports since the early 70’s, yet I cannot name one car they make in the standard 4 door category that is equal in quality to a camry or an accord. What have they been doing for the past 30+ years, sitting on profits from large trucks and SUV’s, and then when the bottom falls out beg for help, sorry guess I answered my own question…

    If the so called government really wants us to get out this mess they created, they need to let us keep and spend our own money. Why should I trust them to fix the current mess with my money in the first place, It is not like I see them at church each Sunday and know them personally. Not to mention the lot of them are attorneys, do they really have any business sense, they went to law school, not business school.

    b-curtis
    Farmington, MN
    Posts: 1438
    #726020

    Ratt, that is the amazing thing. Guys who put lug nuts on cars are some of the highest paid employees in the US. Why is that? Oh yeah, the unions. Paying salaries and benefits like that is one of the big reasons these companies in the position they are in. I don’t hear the Japanese or German car companies begging their governments for a handout (maybe they do but I guess I haven’t seen any news on it??). I read that even though Toyota’s sales have dropped as much as the big 3, they are still going to make a profit this year. Why? Better run companies and they don’t have this huge overhead cost of the Unions. If these companies are bailed out, they will continue “business as usual” and continue what they do and in another decade they can get bailed out again. If they go into bankruptcy and reorganize, maybe they can come out the other side as a competitive company. If not, they go away just like any other company that fails does.

    As for no P&Ming about the bank bailout, well history has shown (say the great depression) that if there isn’t confidence in your financial infrastructure, the country will collapse. If confidence drops and there is a run on banks, they would all collapse and we would go straight into the Great Depression #2. I’m not a big fan of the bank bailout because it sounds like they are just wasting the money (what, the government wasting money??), but the concept is correct. There is a banking concept called Too Big to Fail, which basically means it does more damage if the bank fails versus bailing it out. You don’t see the little mom and pop banks getting help. It is the big boys. The auto companies are trying to use the same concept. But what happens if confidence drops in the auto companies? Nothing. You go get a car from someone else. You sell your stock and put it in another company. Yes there is a question about lost jobs. They find another job and would get paid a salary that is comparable with what they do.

    Maybe school teachers buy foreign because the foreign companies put together a product that the school teacher wants? Maybe if the big 3 would put more effort into that instead of just building what they want, more American cars would be bought? I have two school teachers is my family and they both drive American, not to support some union but because it is a product they want (trucks and SUVs). A lot of teachers want economical well built car. Imports are the way to go. If another campaign to buy American is the answer, we are in big trouble. Again, sales have dropped for everybody. It isn’t like people stopped buying the big 3 this year and went to an import. But those other companies are not having as much financial trouble. Why? Better management and less overhead expenses. . I will never understand this supporting the union?? What a successful marketing campaign! Most Americans are at will employees and could be fired tomorrow, but let’s make sure we care about union guys. Instead of buying a car you want we should instead be sure to buy some American car so we can show our support for the union. I just don’t get it??

    Ratt, you are pretty close to Eau Claire, right? It wasn’t too long ago that Uniroyal closed its doors there. They were the biggest employer and highest paying jobs in the city. Everybody thought the city would completely collapse. Guess what, once the union-driven high salaried company was gone, other companies came in with lots of new jobs. Granted, they were not as high paying, but they were still jobs. The same thing would happen on a national level.

    rivereyes
    Osceola, Wisconsin
    Posts: 2782
    #726040

    I tried to do a bit of research on US vs Foreign auto companies.. and found the usual stuff so far… but this “research” was interesting.. for myself.. Ive learned in a lot of cases to at least buy non-chinese products.. china has turned into a massive scam where cheating on product quality is rampant.. I simply refuse to buy chinese metal products.. they are in recycling shortly after being used…. when screws twist off just by being used there is a problem.. the idea of american bridegs and buildings made of chinese steel scares the P outa me…. buing this junk is being penny wise and pound foolish..
    Last year I was offered a buyout from Ford (thanks UAW) and jumped on the EDOPP educational program. Being a full time student requires doing research and writting alot of papers. Naturally, I choose to research and write about the auto-industry whenever I get the chance. My last research paper was titled, “Why are Autos Made by The Big Three Important to the Economy?” In researching this paper, I learned that a “domestic” vehicle and “domestic content” is defined by the North American Free Trade Agreement as an automobile or part made in the United States, Canada, or Mexico. This could be a Chrysler, Ford, Honda, GM, Mitsubishi, Nissan, ect. The Federal Gov. states a vehicle can be deemed “American” as long as it contains 75% domestic content. Even though some foreign makes are made domestically with domestic content higher than 75%, the majority are not and contain no domestic content. Thomas H Klier, Economists, Federal Reserve Bank Chicago writes, “Foreign carmakers imported 44.1% of vehicles sold in the U.S. from overseas; On the other hand, 96% of vehicles sold in the U.S. by the Detroit Three were assembled in North America”. If you think that buying a foreign make is as good, or better for the American economy, you might be mistaken, Louis Uchitelle, reporter, NY Times writes, “Alan Tonelson, a researcher at the United States Business and Industry Council argues that the Big Three lift the rest of the national economy more than the transplants do, nearly every study shows that vehicles made by the Big Three contain a “considerably higher” percentage of American made parts than cars rolling off the lines at the transplants.” Chris Woodyard, reporter, USA Today writes, “Detroit’s big three derive about 77% of their parts from U.S. and Canadian factories from domestic sources. That compares with 48% which is slightly less than half for Japanese brands overall”. one thing I found interesting was that, according to The Level Field Institute or (Level Field), Ford spends more money on R&D than any other auto-manufacturer in the U.S. Our nation spends billions of dollars each year on Research and Development (R&D). Level Field writes, “Ford GM, and Chrysler represent the largest source of corporate research and development in America, In Michigan alone, more than 65,000 R&D workers represent a $10 billion/year investment resulting in roads that are four times safer and tail pipe emissions that are 99% cleaner”. In fact, “The Big Three” invest more money into research and development than the United States Government. While the Japanese auto industry only employees about 4,000 R&D workers here. According to Level Field, “Buying a Ford, GM, or Chrysler supports about 6 times more U.S. jobs, on average, than buying a Hyundai or Kia and 2.5 times more U.S. jobs, on average, than buying a Toyota”. We are told that purchasing a new vehicle is often the second largest investment that we will make in life. Based on my research, when a consumer makes the decision to invest in a foreign car or truck, he/she also decides to invest in a foreign economy. According to Level Field “The auto-industry is responsible for one out of every ten jobs in the country”. What this means is, 10% of all American jobs are somehow related to the auto industry. Level Field reports that “only 2% of the 10% is related to foreign auto jobs in the USA.” Basically, every state in the U.S. houses an auto-related industry that contributes to jobs related to manufacturing domestic automobiles. Based on my research, I would rather buy a Fusion assembled in Mexico than a Camry assembled in Kentucky.

    b-curtis
    Farmington, MN
    Posts: 1438
    #726047

    So even if a person likes a Camry better than a Fusion, they should buy the Fusion because it supports more American auto jobs? If I have to buy something I am not interested in, will they be sure to return the favor and protect my job? I will go with no

    riveratt
    Central Wisconsin US-of-A
    Posts: 1464
    #726083

    You guys did a lot more typing than I can read at work. But I did catch the part about foreign auto quality and I have to call BS. What the foreign companies did was a great job of advertising. I’ve been in the auto repair business for nearly 15 years and can say with confidence that the big 3 have as reliable car as anyone. Something to factor in is the lack of gadgetry on imports as compared to the American made stuff and your likely to see more things wear out or need maintenance than a lesser equipped import.

    When you look at the American made vehicles some of the highest quality cars on the road are the Ford Fusion, Focus, Escape, and F150’s. For General Motors you have their trucks, Impala’s, and the entire Buick line up. I don’t see a lot of Chrysler stuff but it does seem you either get a good one or you don’t.

    Bottom line is the reliability of an import is no more than a perception of reality.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 67 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.