Buy American!
- Thread starter Philip Marlowe
- Start date
- Status
bigfatdave
Member
In response to many parallels being drawn to American cars ... buying used cars, guns or anything else, buying American (or US made) doesn't keep Americans working or otherwise benefit the economy the same way buying new does. In fact, just about anything you buy used is effectively "American" from an economic standpoint.
American car parts are a higher-profit item than American cars are.
When our family overpays for Japanese-made Subaru parts, we're not helping American workers.
So, as soon as I can get a solid, 300,000 mile American car with a good AWD system, for the same price as another Subaru, I'll consider an American car.
I think that means "when Hell freezes over" in the real world, but I have an open mind.
My Jeep has been a good vehicle, except for an axle housing issue and a dealer issue with fixing it (what's the point of buying American when it takes months to get a basic part, that then costs more than 10% of the price of the whole vehicle?).
I like Jeeps. I'd look at a Ranger (since our anti-consumer protectionist laws have made it impossible to buy a real Toyota compact truck like my old one). Otherwise, I can't think of an American car on my consideration list.
....and I wouldn't buy a new car anyway, any more. Prices have gotten stupid, and I would rather do other things with my money than be a guinea pig for a new model. You can have your depreciation and the newest car on the block; we'll buy it from you for what it's still worth when you're done paying off your car loan.
rhtwist! What I mean about taking American jobs is this. When foreign companies build factories in the U.S. they have no pensions to pay out, they have no insurance for employees to pay, and the worker wages are lower. Having such a small overhead allows the foreign companies for example, to spend more money on technology and quality control, which leads to more foreign sales and less American sales. More and more American owned companies are closing the doors because their overhead costs to operate cannot compete with the foreign costs. GM has more employees collecting pensions, than Toyota has working employees. Toyota pays no employee insurance, the Chinese government covers that. It's not too hard to figure out that our government is destroying the American work force and making other countries thrive.
Wrong.
American car companies spent a bunch on technology, much of which was annoying and little of which was useful.
"Your door is ajar. Your door is ajar. Your door is ajar."
Quality control isn't what made Japanese cars better. Building quality into the production process was. QC just means throwing out the junk when it comes off the line.
So I'm supposed to feel sorry for all the people who built the cars that were a PITA to so many of us for so long?
JohnBT
Member
"Toyota pays no employee insurance, the Chinese government covers that."
China bought Toyota? The employees don't have insurance? Somebody here is confused.
John
China bought Toyota? The employees don't have insurance? Somebody here is confused.
John
Hello sweet45,
Thank you for responding with the in depth explanation. I find it hard to believe that Toyota doesn't pay or have pensions and heath benefits. I believe the lower salaries. Would like alternate confirmation on those points. Thanks again for taking the time to illuminate your statement.
rhtwist
Thank you for responding with the in depth explanation. I find it hard to believe that Toyota doesn't pay or have pensions and heath benefits. I believe the lower salaries. Would like alternate confirmation on those points. Thanks again for taking the time to illuminate your statement.
rhtwist
Armed Bear,
I'm with you on all those points except about feeling sorry for the people on pension. I noted not necessarily in this case, blanket statements, I don't believe there is one reason why the American Car industry tanked. People who spent their lives working for a company with a mutual understanding of compensation should and deserve what they worked for. Of course there are probably some (unknown quantity) who don't deserve it but not your blanket statement. If any one problem is to be blamed is that stock holder's who are making for example a dollar will not accept .99 cents even if it means better quality, worker relations more and constant training. Also the absolute failure to identify the important issues Americans wanted in a vehicle and produce it. But again there is still no level playing field. Wish I knew the answer.
rhtwist
I'm with you on all those points except about feeling sorry for the people on pension. I noted not necessarily in this case, blanket statements, I don't believe there is one reason why the American Car industry tanked. People who spent their lives working for a company with a mutual understanding of compensation should and deserve what they worked for. Of course there are probably some (unknown quantity) who don't deserve it but not your blanket statement. If any one problem is to be blamed is that stock holder's who are making for example a dollar will not accept .99 cents even if it means better quality, worker relations more and constant training. Also the absolute failure to identify the important issues Americans wanted in a vehicle and produce it. But again there is still no level playing field. Wish I knew the answer.
rhtwist
It sure as hell is a lot easier to build quality into a project when your overhead is much less expensive than the competition. Also the overpaid union employees don't make it any easier. Pretty soon we will get are potato's from Japan, not IDAHO!!!
True, to a degree. However, when they, through their unions, negotiate future compensation that simply doesn't add up, then where will it come from?
Believe me, I have a dog in this fight. The State of California "owes" me some pension payments...
Honda is listed as HMC on the NYSE. Toyota is TM. GM used to be GM.
Are you suggesting that, for some odd reason, the stockholders of GM behave completely differently from the stockholders of Toyota and Honda (even when they're often the same people and institutions)?
I'm not buying it for a second. That's not even a reason, to say nothing of the top reason -- not because stockholders don't do this, but because the same pressure would be applied to all NYSE-listed car companies. If the Japanese manage to operate differently, perhaps it's because they can communicate better with stockholders. Also, Chrysler was taken private. That should have allowed Cerberus to look at the long term -- but Chrysler's quality ratings dropped even more under Cerberus.
Perhaps we can import some Engrish teachers from Japan, as well -- not to mention Economics teachers, since the notion of the Japanese beating the US in commodity agriculture is about the silliest thing I've heard in a week.
The US economy may rise or fall, but Japanese agricultural exports have no bearing on that.
oneounceload
member
Seems that this thread has morphed from one about US made guns to one talking about anything...OK.....it also seems most folks have no clue as to how business operates in the US......Toyota and similar seem to mae more cars here than most US makers who utilize Canada and Mexico.......those same companies also listened to Deming and built quality in as part of doing it right...US companies laughed it off and went on as if it didn't matter......decades later, it seems they were wrong........US companies look forward 3 months at a time......Japanese companies look forward 50 years at a time........
ozarkhillbilly
Member
American workers are the most productive in the world that why Toyota and Honda both make cars here along with a lot of other companies. One of the big problems with our auto industry is a combination of the highest corporate income tax in the western world and unions that have had the backing of the federal government for far too long, and still do.
Staggering wages and benefits along with crazy taxes do not make for a friendly or healthy car industry. Then add on top of that management that is either stupid or just dishonest.
Buying America would not have saved the auto industry just prolonged its death. Never buy a substandard product just to keep a industry alive because that is the surest way to kill it in the long run and that’s what we did to the auto industry.
Staggering wages and benefits along with crazy taxes do not make for a friendly or healthy car industry. Then add on top of that management that is either stupid or just dishonest.
Buying America would not have saved the auto industry just prolonged its death. Never buy a substandard product just to keep a industry alive because that is the surest way to kill it in the long run and that’s what we did to the auto industry.
Redneck with a 40
Member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2006
- Messages
- 2,273
ArmedBear, I agree 100% with you're assertion on Subaru and import cars, superior quality, much higher efficiency on the assembly line, they are NON-UNIONIZED, hence they are not bankrupt, instead they are turning profits. GM needs to go to school at Toyota and learn how to run a car company.
Based on what I see every day at our Saturn shop, GM is crap! I wouldn't take one if it was free!
I drive a 2004 Subaru Legacy and its an awesome car, love it!
Based on what I see every day at our Saturn shop, GM is crap! I wouldn't take one if it was free!
I drive a 2004 Subaru Legacy and its an awesome car, love it!
Hey Armed Bear,
I'm not disputing the fact that all stockholders expect the same from there investment. I'm saying what Deming said before he taught the Japanese his economic and production techniques.
ozarkhillbilly, can I get another amen. Level playing field > NOT
I must be slow but can someone explain slowly why the Union's are the main reason for the problem. If you mean that they would not lower their pay so that the management and stockholders could make more money and upgrade their factories, I might get the idea. But I don't believe that is what the anti-union people are saying. So please really attempt to enlighten me.
rhtwist
I'm not disputing the fact that all stockholders expect the same from there investment. I'm saying what Deming said before he taught the Japanese his economic and production techniques.
ozarkhillbilly, can I get another amen. Level playing field > NOT
I must be slow but can someone explain slowly why the Union's are the main reason for the problem. If you mean that they would not lower their pay so that the management and stockholders could make more money and upgrade their factories, I might get the idea. But I don't believe that is what the anti-union people are saying. So please really attempt to enlighten me.
rhtwist
Redneck with a 40
Member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2006
- Messages
- 2,273
GM's total labor cost, salarie's, retirement, healthcare, ect, is at ~$72/hour. The import companies, being non-unionized, are at about $45/hour. $27/hour savings x 100,000 employee's x 10 or 20 years = a whole lotta money!
ozarkhillbilly
Member
rhtwist
It is not just the union wages although that is a part of it. It is also union work place rules. Not being able to fire someone for poor job performance without going through lots of hoops. The it's not my job rules or the seniority over merit system that unions have fostered on many companies.
Some years ago GM sent a VP to study at the Toyota plant in CA and to bring back new ideas. After 3 years of fighting the unions while trying to impalement some very basic and common sense changes the VP quit GM and went to work for Toyota. A very good book on the auto industry although a few years old now is The Rise and fall of the American Auto Industry.
I am just thankful that our firearm industry has not followed the same steps as the car companies.
It is not just the union wages although that is a part of it. It is also union work place rules. Not being able to fire someone for poor job performance without going through lots of hoops. The it's not my job rules or the seniority over merit system that unions have fostered on many companies.
Some years ago GM sent a VP to study at the Toyota plant in CA and to bring back new ideas. After 3 years of fighting the unions while trying to impalement some very basic and common sense changes the VP quit GM and went to work for Toyota. A very good book on the auto industry although a few years old now is The Rise and fall of the American Auto Industry.
I am just thankful that our firearm industry has not followed the same steps as the car companies.
Thanks Redneck with a 40,
Thanks for that more exact fiscal breakdown. Maybe you can answer the questions your statement has brought up if you please. Is the big difference in cost because the non-unionized labor doesn't get retirement benefits, and or healthcare benefits? Or is it that they have contracted for a larger salary which the companies agreed to? If it is a combination could you list in your opinion the highest to lowest factors. I get the feeling that many people who are anti-union feel that the union workers do less. Has there been any real documentation of that.
I worked at a non-union factory and was often highly suggested to work overtime whether I liked it or not. Several years I worked 7am to 6:30pm and on Saturdays 7am to 2:30pm. I was paid overtime but the request was extremely strongley requested. I've stayed until midnight and came back the next day at 6:30am. I was strongly suggested to fly to several places in the US and Canada to do repair work which was not my specified job description. I don't believe this would have been allowed in a union shop.
My feeling of a company's position was stated by GM's Pubic Relations Head in the movie "Roger and me". It was that a company has NO obligations to it's workers except of course what is covered by law, ONLY to the stockholders. This was when they moved the plants from Flint, Michigan to Mexico.
So in essence no manufacturing job anywhere, is safe while there are poorer countries who will accept the lower standards of benefits than what a company is paying or workers who are willing to lower their arguably earned level of lifestyle and ability to be as prolific consumers as they once were.
Do feel this is a true statement, and if not why?
I mean no disrespect to your extremely true answer!
Hello ozarkhillbilly,
Thanks for your response as well. Deming went to GM long before he went to Toyota. I would like to know the common sense changes that didn't require employee's losing their benefits and portions of their salaries, while management gets bonuses for good performance. As to the American firearms industry, I can think of one which is surely flushing itself IMHO. That is matters of other of my posts. Thank you for your time, again I haven't worked for a union was was always under the whim of my management.
rhtwist
rhtwist
Thanks for that more exact fiscal breakdown. Maybe you can answer the questions your statement has brought up if you please. Is the big difference in cost because the non-unionized labor doesn't get retirement benefits, and or healthcare benefits? Or is it that they have contracted for a larger salary which the companies agreed to? If it is a combination could you list in your opinion the highest to lowest factors. I get the feeling that many people who are anti-union feel that the union workers do less. Has there been any real documentation of that.
I worked at a non-union factory and was often highly suggested to work overtime whether I liked it or not. Several years I worked 7am to 6:30pm and on Saturdays 7am to 2:30pm. I was paid overtime but the request was extremely strongley requested. I've stayed until midnight and came back the next day at 6:30am. I was strongly suggested to fly to several places in the US and Canada to do repair work which was not my specified job description. I don't believe this would have been allowed in a union shop.
My feeling of a company's position was stated by GM's Pubic Relations Head in the movie "Roger and me". It was that a company has NO obligations to it's workers except of course what is covered by law, ONLY to the stockholders. This was when they moved the plants from Flint, Michigan to Mexico.
So in essence no manufacturing job anywhere, is safe while there are poorer countries who will accept the lower standards of benefits than what a company is paying or workers who are willing to lower their arguably earned level of lifestyle and ability to be as prolific consumers as they once were.
Do feel this is a true statement, and if not why?
I mean no disrespect to your extremely true answer!
Hello ozarkhillbilly,
Thanks for your response as well. Deming went to GM long before he went to Toyota. I would like to know the common sense changes that didn't require employee's losing their benefits and portions of their salaries, while management gets bonuses for good performance. As to the American firearms industry, I can think of one which is surely flushing itself IMHO. That is matters of other of my posts. Thank you for your time, again I haven't worked for a union was was always under the whim of my management.
rhtwist
rhtwist
Harve Curry
Member
It is important to buy USA made products as much as possible.
Somethings it is almost impossible to find.
If you think about it ; what were the years that America was the healthiest?
It was during times when we made almost everything from raw materials.
It was during times when success and victories were measured in inches, yards, gallons, and miles. So
the metric system to.
What messed up America's ability to produce products from raw materials?
The Endangered Species Act, enviromentalists/lobbyists that put animals before people, socialists and welfare, the list goes on.
Somethings it is almost impossible to find.
If you think about it ; what were the years that America was the healthiest?
It was during times when we made almost everything from raw materials.
It was during times when success and victories were measured in inches, yards, gallons, and miles. So
the metric system to.What messed up America's ability to produce products from raw materials?
The Endangered Species Act, enviromentalists/lobbyists that put animals before people, socialists and welfare, the list goes on.
Texshooter
Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2004
- Messages
- 481
The only thing that saved the Jap car business in America was the oil embargo of 74. Up until then you could not give away a 6 cylinder car.
Then, and with a lot of thanks to American politicians, the Jap car companies started to "dump" cars on the American market. Illegal and nobody did a thing about it. Add that to the boneheaded executive decisions and labor union greed and it brought us to this point.
In 1958 my father tried to export to Japan a Buick that cost about $1795. The tariffs and addt'l taxes, in 1958 mind you, were almost $4000!!!!!!
The Japs had no such worries when they started dumping cars in America in the 70s.
Then, and with a lot of thanks to American politicians, the Jap car companies started to "dump" cars on the American market. Illegal and nobody did a thing about it. Add that to the boneheaded executive decisions and labor union greed and it brought us to this point.
In 1958 my father tried to export to Japan a Buick that cost about $1795. The tariffs and addt'l taxes, in 1958 mind you, were almost $4000!!!!!!
The Japs had no such worries when they started dumping cars in America in the 70s.
rbernie
Contributing Member
Too much thread drift.
- Status
