PDA

View Full Version : Like Andy Rooney said last night...


CanadaKC
12-12-2005, 09:08 PM
What the hell is wrong with American automakers? A consumer report magazine gave 31 vehicles a favorable to good/very good rating. Of those...29 were Japanese...only 2 were American. 30-thousand layoffs
at GM...followed by the same amount a week later at Ford. What is it aboput the market your automakers don't get?

Mr. Kotter
12-12-2005, 09:11 PM
What the hell is wrong with American automakers? A consumer report magazine gave 31 vehicles a favorable to good/very good rating. Of those...29 were Japanese...only 2 were American. 30-thousand layoffs
at GM...followed by the same amount a week later at Ford. What is it aboput the market your automakers don't get?

Japanese cars, you get more bang for the buck.

It's really that simple. And that's due to higher-than-is-prudent pay and benefits for union members who don't even need a HS dipoloma.

Pitt Gorilla
12-12-2005, 09:13 PM
IMO, they've been stupid and proud, which is a bad combination. They didn't invest in the hybrid market because Americans were buying their big SUVs and would continue to do so. They knew what Americans wanted and they knew they were right. Only, they weren't.

recxjake
12-12-2005, 09:17 PM
What the hell is wrong with American automakers? A consumer report magazine gave 31 vehicles a favorable to good/very good rating. Of those...29 were Japanese...only 2 were American. 30-thousand layoffs
at GM...followed by the same amount a week later at Ford. What is it aboput the market your automakers don't get?

You have no clue what your talking about....... first off Consumer Reports is very biased to the foreign automakers... always has been this way

Secondly.... Foreign automakers don't have to deal with retirees yet or any of Unions......... GM and Ford are a hundred years old... they have hundreds of thousands of retirees to take care of

The currency exchange between the US and the Japense Yen is rediculous.... Not only is Toyota making $$ each time they sell a car but when they exchange the $$ to the Yen they make even more

Union workers have just now changed how much they pay for healthcare... its costing GM 5 billion dollars this year.... Toyota and other companies... barely anything

GM has been awarded numerous awards for quality lately from companies that matter like JD Power.....

The Unions have a "Job Bank" when they get layed off they still get payed 95% ofstheir pay! It's rediculous....

Delphi is putting the Union in its place by offering them 10 bucks an hour... this is what they deserve... soon GM and Ford will too when the current contrats expire next year

GM will make it because they are taking care of healthcare costs... are coming out with some awesome new products and are getting rid of people who arent needed

Mr. Kotter
12-12-2005, 09:20 PM
You have no clue what your talking about....... first off Consumer Reports is very biased to the foreign automakers... always has been this way

Secondly.... Foreign automakers don't have to deal with retirees yet or any of Unions......... GM and Ford are a hundred years old... they have hundreds of thousands of retirees to take care of

The currency exchange between the US and the Japense Yen is rediculous.... Not only is Toyota making $$ each time they sell a car but when they exchange the $$ to the Yen they make even more

Union workers have just now changed how much they pay for healthcare... its costing GM 5 billion dollars this year.... Toyota and other companies... barely anything

GM has been awarded numerous awards for quality lately from companies that matter like JD Power.....

The Unions have a "Job Bank" when they get layed off they still get payed 95% ofstheir pay! It's rediculous....

Delphi is putting the Union in its place by offering them 10 bucks an hour... this is what they deserve... soon GM and Ford will too when the current contrats expire next year

GM will make it because they are taking care of healthcare costs... are coming out with some awesome new products and are getting rid of people who arent needed

Union man, I see. ;)

recxjake
12-12-2005, 09:20 PM
IMO, they've been stupid and proud, which is a bad combination. They didn't invest in the hybrid market because Americans were buying their big SUVs and would continue to do so. They knew what Americans wanted and they knew they were right. Only, they weren't.

Compeltely wrong.... people who buy Hybrids are STUPID..... they cost 4 or 5 thousand more then the non hybrid same type of car.....

It takes 5 to 6 years to make up that... Hybrids are somthing that will last for a few years just to make a good image.....

Hydrogen is the answer and GM everything ready... they have hydrogen buses, cars, trucks and even a HH... Hydrogen Hummer..... all they need now is the infrastructure to roll over... by 2012 we won't be using gasoline anymore

recxjake
12-12-2005, 09:21 PM
Union man, I see. ;)

hah completely non union.... they are ruining every industry.... Airlines... Steel and heck why not the auto industry too

Saulbadguy
12-12-2005, 09:21 PM
ROFL

This should be good.

|Zach|
12-12-2005, 09:22 PM
This thread is going to explode.

dtebbe
12-12-2005, 09:24 PM
american automakers are stupid. They rarely build a car that anybody wants (outside the rental car companies), and when they do they let thier dealers charge $8,000 over sticker (ala 2005 Mustang GT).

For example, right now Pontiac has a great looking 2 seater running around..... with a goddamn 4 cyl in it. Take that slick body and put a off-the-shelf LS2 V8 in it and you won't be able to build them fast enough, especailly if you can do it under $30k. But it will never happen because it's GM.

DT

beer bacon
12-12-2005, 09:24 PM
Japanese cars, you get more bang for the buck.

It's really that simple. And that's due to higher-than-is-prudent pay and benefits for union members who don't even need a HS dipoloma.

Clearly this is why Japanese cars are far more reliable. Those damn unions!

Mr. Kotter
12-12-2005, 09:25 PM
hah completely non union.... they are ruining every industry.... Airlines... Steel and heck why not the auto industry too

You're too naive to see the contradictions between your own professed ideology, and your knee-jerk reactions to questions about the automobile industry that you've been socialized to parrot.

Your dad will be proud; but your ideological role models would be perplexed. Heh.

recxjake
12-12-2005, 09:27 PM
american automakers are stupid. They rarely build a car that anybody wants, and when they do they let thier dealers charge $8,000 over sticker (ala 2005 Mustang GT).

For example, right now Pontiac has a great looking 2 seater running around..... with a goddamn 4 cyl in it. Take that slick body and put a LS V8 in it and you won't be able to build them fast enough, especailly if you can do it under $30k. But it will never happen because it's GM.

DT


Pontiac Solstice...... starting at 19,000...... it has turbo charged engine available next year and is selling at 10,000 over sticker they are so hot

Your right... the F-150 and Chevy Silverado the # 1 and 2 selling trucks in the world

Mr. Kotter
12-12-2005, 09:27 PM
Clearly this is why Japanese cars are far more reliable. Those damn unions!

Unions have a place, and remain important. They played a vital role in the late 1800s and early 1900s: then they became power hungry, sacrificing long term relevance for short term gains. When people who put together cars make more than nurses, teachers, social workers, and many others in professions that require a college education....something is amiss.

Japanese cars are more reliable in part because of workmanship, but also in part due to the more appropriate pay structure of their work force....which allows more investment in R & D, materials, and quality assurance.

KCChiefsMan
12-12-2005, 09:28 PM
ahhh, the Union....first it saved the country...in a way, now all they do is take advantage of their company

recxjake
12-12-2005, 09:28 PM
You're too naive to see the contradictions between your own professed ideology, and the knee-jerk reactions questions within the automobile industry that you've been socialized to parrot.

Your dad will be proud; but your ideological role models would be perplexed. Heh.

tell me why an uneduated factory worker deserves 130k including healthcare????

They deserve 10 bucks an hour.........GM should fire Union worker

dtebbe
12-12-2005, 09:29 PM
Pontiac Solstice...... starting at 19,000...... it has turbo charged engine available next year and is selling at 10,000 over sticker they are so hot

Your right... the F-150 and Chevy Silverado the # 1 and 2 selling trucks in the world

Oh boy... another 4 cyl buzz-bomb. Next year... that is IF GM has a plant left to build them in...

DT

Ultra Peanut
12-12-2005, 09:30 PM
Is it cuz I's black?

|Zach|
12-12-2005, 09:31 PM
I don't know enough about any facet of this issue to have an informed take but I am going to go with the odds and disagree with whatever stance rec is taking. Any side he is not on is generally the right one.

Saulbadguy
12-12-2005, 09:32 PM
I'm diggin the new Chevy HHR.

recxjake
12-12-2005, 09:32 PM
Unions are hurting GM now, and may kill GM in the future!

BY JEFFREY McCRACKEN
FREE PRESS BUSINESS WRITER

Amid falling U.S. market share, shuttered plants and production cutbacks, Detroit's three automakers and largest auto supplier are paying about 10,000 hourly workers in the United States and Canada full wages and benefits not to work, a Free Press survey shows.

The number appears to be up from the last few years and will likely grow again this year, though it still won't be as high as a decade ago.

Most of the companies refused to say how much they are spending to pay all these workers, but it's likely well over $1 billion this year, given the number of workers and typical union wage-and-benefit packages.

Auto supplier Delphi Corp. told Wall Street it will spend $300 million in 2005 to pay the salaries and benefits for about 2,300 union workers who currently don't have jobs. Delphi Chief Financial Officer Alan Dawes called that cost "as high as it has ever been for us."

If Delphi's cost per worker is near the average -- about $130,000 for full wages and benefits -- then Detroit's three automakers and Delphi are paying those 10,000 workers about $1.3 billion in a year. Auto analysts note that's a cost foreign automakers like Toyota, Honda or Nissan don't have.

General Motors Corp., with about 3,500 such workers, has the highest number in this group, known in UAW parlance as the jobs bank. This program is essentially a holding tank for hourly workers who are off work a long time, typically 11 months or more. It does not include the workers who are off a few weeks during temporary shutdowns.

GM's jobs bank number almost certainly will grow this year, by 2,000 or more, as GM looks to close a plant in Baltimore and idle another in Linden, N.J., say GM officials who asked not to be named. The majority of jobs bank workers are clustered near closed or partially shuttered assembly plants, such as GM's Lansing car-assembly plant. GM set aside $2.1 billion to fund its jobs bank from 2003-07, according to highlights of the UAW-GM national contract agreement.

GM spokesman Dan Flores declined to say how much GM spends annually on its jobs bank workers.

UAW guidelines say workers in the jobs bank are supposed to be used for a "meaningful, nontraditional job assignment," which is anything from training classes to community service with local churches to sitting in a break room in the auto plant and watching television.

The jobs bank has been around since the 1984 UAW national agreement. The automakers' rationale was that by telling union workers they would be protected in a jobs bank, they wouldn't fight efficiency measures. The union hoped it would force the automakers to find work for all their employees.

The number of workers in the jobs bank ebbs and flows through the years, typically growing when sales at Detroit's three automakers slide. Exact numbers are hard to come by because the automakers don't like to broadcast that they are paying people not to work and the unions and workers also don't like the negative attention.

While some UAW workers say they like being paid for not working, others say they find it frustrating and embarrassing.

UAW spokesman Paul Krell declined to comment.

The 10,000 figure, compiled from discussions with auto insiders, union officials and others in the industry, appears to be a few thousand higher than it has been the last several years. It's nowhere near as big as it was in the recession of the early 1990s -- GM alone had 20,200 workers in the jobs bank in 1993.

That 10,000 number is not trivial -- it's a pretty good percentage of their union workforce," said Dan Luria, research director for the Michigan Manufacturing Technology Center and longtime auto-labor researcher.
"It's one of those differences between the Big Three and the foreign automakers. The UAW put it into place so the companies would think of labor as a fixed cost and keep workers busy."

The Chrysler Group has the second-highest number in the jobs bank, with an estimated 3,000 workers -- 2,000 in the United States and about 1,000 in Canada. Chrysler's jobs bank workers are centered in Detroit, the Jeep plant in Toledo and the Neon plant in Belvidere, Ill.

Ford Motor Co. has about 1,200 people in its jobs bank, with about half of them in Ohio and about 250 in southeastern Michigan. UAW officials say Ford's number is smaller than GM's and Chrysler's because the Dearborn automaker has been more successful at getting union workers to take buyout packages.

Though most of Detroit's automakers and suppliers have seen their jobs bank numbers rise in the last year or so as they shuttered plants or cut shifts, Chrysler's jobs bank is down from about 4,000 people a year ago.

Chrysler spokesman David Elshoff said Chrysler expects its figure to drop in 2005 because people will be added as Chrysler adds back jobs in Belvidere or adds 900 jobs at its Brampton, Ontario, assembly plant to build the new Dodge Charger.

beavis
12-12-2005, 09:35 PM
Unions are hurting GM now, and may kill GM in the future!
You say this as if it was someone besides GM's fault.

Mr. Kotter
12-12-2005, 09:36 PM
tell me why an uneduated factory worker deserves 130k including healthcare????

They deserve 10 bucks an hour.........GM should fire Union worker

You are arguing with yourself. American cars SUCK because companies ARE forced to allocate a disproportionate share of their revenues toward employees--you are right about that.

What you are wrong about, is your assessment that foreign cars are not superior; no objective or rational observer would argue you don't get more bang for the buck buying Japanese cars over American cars--you do. Japanese cars are superior, in almost every category, to similarly priced American cars. And that's all that really matters.

The majority of consumers are driven solely or predominantly by value: cost and quality. And American manufacturerers fall woefully short....due to the outrageous costs associated with promises and contracts made with unions, which you acknowledge. They don't have enough money left over, to invest producing quality products....so they cut corners the Japanese do not.

recxjake
12-12-2005, 09:36 PM
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0508/23/A01-289735.htm

It is GM's fault.... they gave into every demand the Union made.... now its killing them

sd4chiefs
12-12-2005, 09:36 PM
It looks like I clicked the Washington D.C. forum by mistake. :rolleyes:

recxjake
12-12-2005, 09:37 PM
You are arguing with yourself. American cars SUCK because companies ARE forced to allocate a disproportionate share of their revenues toward employees--you are right about that.

What you are wrong about, is your assessment that foreign cars are not superior; no objective or rational observer would argue you don't get more bang for the buck buying Japanese cars over American cars--you do. Japanese cars are superior, in almost every category, to similarly priced American cars. And that's all that really matters.

The majority of consumers are driven solely or predominantly by value: cost and quality. And American manufacturerers fall woefully short....due to the outrageous costs associated with promises and contracts made with unions, which you acknowledge. They don't have enough money left over, to invest producing quality products....so they cut corners the Japanese do not.


your exactly right

Fishpicker
12-12-2005, 09:38 PM
rexcjake: do you think the japanese have an advantage due to Izusu motors? I mean toyota, honda, izusu, subaru, kawasaki are all using the same motors.

could American car manufacturers develop a standard (gasoline, bio-diesel, hydrogen) that would help us in the long term? I realize that Ford, GM etc. have a legacy but it seems as though those factional differnces kind of limit US.

dtebbe
12-12-2005, 09:38 PM
I'm diggin the new Chevy HHR.

Now that was a design challange. Some GM designer must have gotten a PT cruiser at the rental car counter on his last autoshow trip.

That new pontiac is basicaly a copy of the Miata, though it does look better, it still has the same anemic power.

DT

Mr. Kotter
12-12-2005, 09:39 PM
I'm diggin the new Chevy HHR.

If you are happy, for now....good for you.

I'd be willing to bet, you could've bought something else from Honda or Toyota....in the ball park, that would have been more reliable and had better workmanship. Japanese companies use to not be able to compete in particular markets, within the industry, minivans for instance; that's really changed in recent years though.

recxjake
12-12-2005, 09:40 PM
rexcjake: do you think the japanese have an advantage due to Izusu motors? I mean toyota, honda, izusu, subaru, kawasaki are all using the same motors.

could American car manufacturers develop a standard (gasoline, bio-diesel, hydrogen) that would help us in the long term? I realize that Ford, GM etc. have a legacy but it seems as though those factional differnces kind of limit US.

GM owns Izuzu, sold Subaru a few months ago and Kawaskaki doesnt make cars... but yes toyota and honda are evil

Frazod
12-12-2005, 09:41 PM
ahhh, the Union....first it saved the country...in a way, now all they do is take advantage of their company

Unions are certainly out of control, but so is the greed of upper management. It's not like they'll put money saved by beating back union bullshit into their companies - they'll simply line their pockets.

I work for a law firm. One of our clients, a manufacturer, recently closed two plants in the U.S. and Canada and relocated operations to China and Mexico. The company CEO decided he was entitled to a $30 MILLION bonus for all his "hard work." :rolleyes: The other shareholders and directors, however, decided he should only get $18 million. Poor baby.

If you think the average union employee gets away with murder, you'd shit yourself over what high ranking company pricks get. Massive salaries, million dollar bonuses, stock options, cars, gas allowances, free health care, you name it. I love the idea of giving multi-millionaires free health care - apparently someone thinks they can't afford the $500 a month they charge their $20 an hour employees for family health care coverage. I work on shit like this every day. It's really sickening sometimes.

And these assclowns aren't even in the same ballpark as GM or Ford. I wouldn't even want to think how much their upper level c#cksuckers rape the world.

recxjake
12-12-2005, 09:42 PM
If you are happy, for now....good for you.

I'd be willing to bet, you could've bought something else from Honda or Toyota....in the ball park, that would have been more reliable and had better workmanship. Japanese companies use to not be able to compete in particular markets, within the industry, minivans for instance; that's really changed in recent years though.

The Chevy HHR starts at 15,000 and looks way better then the PT Cruiser... I'm getting one in June..... Honda and Toyota make all their $$ w/ midsize cars... GM has the Impala and the new Buck Lucrene.... they are nice but the Japs are better

Saulbadguy
12-12-2005, 09:43 PM
If you are happy, for now....good for you.

I'd be willing to bet, you could've bought something else from Honda or Toyota....in the ball park, that would have been more reliable and had better workmanship. Japanese companies use to not be able to compete in particular markets, within the industry, minivans for instance; that's really changed in recent years though.
I haven't bought anything. Not really in the market, but I just like the look of it. It really has no equivalent in the Japanese market. It reminds me of the old Bel Air.

I don't really care what company makes a car, as long as i'm getting what I want: value, reliability, and the style that I like. If Chevy can offer that too me, great. If Honda can offer that to me, great. I don't put on the "Buy American" blinders when i'm shopping for anything. It clouds judgement.

Mr. Kotter
12-12-2005, 09:44 PM
Unions are certainly out of control, but so is the greed of upper management. It's not like they'll put money saved by beating back union bullshit into their companies - they'll simply line their pockets.

I work for a law firm. One of our clients, a manufacturer, recently closed two plants in the U.S. and Canada and relocated operations to China and Mexico. The company CEO decided he was entitled to a $30 MILLION bonus for all his "hard work." :rolleyes: The other shareholders and directors, however, decided he should only get $18 million. Poor baby.

If you think the average union employee gets away with murder, you'd shit yourself over what high ranking company pricks get. Massive salaries, million dollar bonuses, stock options, cars, gas allowances, free health care, you name it. I love the idea of giving multi-millionaires free health care - apparently someone thinks they can't afford the $500 a month they charge their $20 an hour employees for family health care coverage. I work on shit like this every day. It's really sickening sometimes.

And these assclowns aren't even in the same ballpark as GM or Ford. I wouldn't even want to think how much their upper level c#cksuckers rape the world.

You are right on.

That is an issue that some savvy, charismatic, and eloquent politician would do well to address in the not-so-distant future. Unfortunately, under current campaign finance laws their donations tend to insulate them from meaningful action.

Mr. Kotter
12-12-2005, 09:47 PM
I haven't bought anything. Not really in the market, but I just like the look of it. It really has no equivalent in the Japanese market. It reminds me of the old Bel Air.

I don't really care what company makes a car, as long as i'm getting what I want: value, reliability, and the style that I like. If Chevy can offer that too me, great. If Honda can offer that to me, great. I don't put on the "Buy American" blinders when i'm shopping for anything. It clouds judgement.

Yup, that's most of us, I'd say. I'd be paying close attention to reliability and workmanship issues, though; and maybe safety too. Sounds like you got decent value and a style you liked, so no one can argue with that. I took the "Buy American" blinders off in the 80s.....after repeated bad experiences with American cars, and many, many trips to the repair shop.

Saulbadguy
12-12-2005, 09:51 PM
Yup, that's most of us, I'd say. I'd be paying close attention to reliability and workmanship issues, though; and maybe safety too. Sounds like you got decent value and a style you liked, so no one can argue with that. I took the "Buy American" blinders off in the 80s.....after repeated bad experiences with American cars, and many, many trips to the repair shop.
Like I said..I haven't bought the HHR yet, but i'll be giving it a good look in a year or two.

I don't put on the "Buy American" blinders, but I also don't put the "Buy foreign" blinders on either...:D

Hell, anymore, it is a global operation. Whatever you buy will help the American economy...

Frazod
12-12-2005, 09:58 PM
Like I said..I haven't bought the HHR yet, but i'll be giving it a good look in a year or two.

I don't put on the "Buy American" blinders, but I also don't put the "Buy foreign" blinders on either...:D

Hell, anymore, it is a global operation. Whatever you buy will help the American economy...

I've never owned a foreign car, and have no plans to ever buy one. Sure I've had a dog or two, but the recent vehicles I've owned have been fine. And I certainly love my Mustang.

At least I did until it started to F#CKING SNOW. :banghead:

(Came back to me in a hurry why you keep a full tank of gas and a trunk-load of extra weight in a RWD car in the winter.)

recxjake
12-12-2005, 10:00 PM
The future of GM SUV's.... NICE

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22539

Mr. Kotter
12-12-2005, 10:02 PM
I've never owned a foreign car, and have no plans to ever buy one. Sure I've had a dog or two, but the recent vehicles I've owned have been fine. And I certainly love my Mustang.

At least I did until it started to F#CKING SNOW. :banghead:

(Came back to me in a hurry why you keep a full tank of gas and a trunk-load of extra weight in a RWD car in the winter.)

Japs don't have anything to really compete with the Mustang, that's for sure. Happy winter driving--it'll come back to you.

recxjake
12-12-2005, 10:03 PM
Japs don't have anything to really compete with the Mustang, that's for sure. Happy winter driving--it'll come back to you.

Here's the Tahoe coming out in January.
http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20089

Chevy debuts the Camro during the Jan. auto show and will come out the next year....

Frazod
12-12-2005, 10:05 PM
Japs don't have anything to really compete with the Mustang, that's for sure. Happy winter driving--it'll come back to you.

They certainly don't have anything that compared looks-wise. But I tell you, in retrospect I sure wouldn't have minded if the 2005 had been the first FWD Mustang. That first morning (snow packed street, 1/4 tank of gas and empty trunk) was just a little bit scary.

alanm
12-12-2005, 10:07 PM
tell me why an uneduated factory worker deserves 130k including healthcare????

They deserve 10 bucks an hour.........GM should fire Union workerUh.... you can't provide for a family on $10 a hr. I've no clue what some of these guys make but I know some of the higher muckity mucks make waaaaaaaaaaaay more than their worth. Millions of dollars a year in bonuses are insane. Factory worker gets a frozen turkey.

Mr. Kotter
12-12-2005, 10:08 PM
They certainly don't have anything that compared looks-wise. But I tell you, in retrospect I sure wouldn't have minded if the 2005 had been the first FWD Mustang. That first morning (snow packed street, 1/4 tank of gas and empty trunk) was just a little bit scary.

I'll bet. I'll admit, it's one of the cars, that has given me thoughts of crossing back over. They are sweet. FWD would be nice though. Unfortunately, four young kids makes it impractical for me. :banghead:

recxjake
12-12-2005, 10:09 PM
Uh.... you can't provide for a family on $10 a hr. I've no clue what some of these guys make but I know some of the higher muckity mucks make waaaaaaaaaaaay more than their worth. Millions of dollars a year in bonuses are insane. Factory worker gets a frozen turkey.

i agree with you that upper managment makes way to much.... and yes 10 bucks is not enough... they will probably have to settle around 15-20 an hour plus pay what salary workers pay for healtcare

Deberg_1990
12-12-2005, 10:12 PM
Its simple. Sit in a Honda, Toyota or Nissan. Then go sit in a Ford/Chevy/Dodge. If you honestly believe in your heart that a Ford/Chevy/Dodge is a better quality made car than the Japanese, you need to be medicated.

ClevelandChief
12-12-2005, 10:12 PM
american automakers are stupid. They rarely build a car that anybody wants (outside the rental car companies), and when they do they let thier dealers charge $8,000 over sticker (ala 2005 Mustang GT).

For example, right now Pontiac has a great looking 2 seater running around..... with a goddamn 4 cyl in it. Take that slick body and put a off-the-shelf LS2 V8 in it and you won't be able to build them fast enough, especailly if you can do it under $30k. But it will never happen because it's GM.

DT


Actually GM plans to offer both the Soltice and the Saturn Sky in a V6 6 speed manual and a hardtop convertable. No point to put a top shelf V8 Engine in a car with a sticker price of 20k. No company would do that it would be completely stupid. Even BMW didn't go larger than a v6 in their Z3 and it was what? 50k?

I work for the UAW and so far from what I'm reading in this post most of you people have no idea about what is going to happen to the economy of the USA if the American automakers go under because people are ignorant and keep sending profits overseas. Cracks me up even more than people think that the japanese automakers in America are not overcharging for their products as well.

I agree that American automakers are pretty stubborn. They fail to listen to consumers or even care sometimes about what they are needing. As far as hybrids....hybrids are complete crap. Read about them, it says in many different articles that in order to make up for the price of a hybrid gas prices would have to hit the 5$ a gallon mark.

GM has actually a joint venture with toyota in the hybrid market but they are smart enough to not start massing producing hybrids because toyota isn't making any profit on them at all. Also GM is doing their own research and development of hydrogen cells.

As for the bashing of Unions in this thread, you people are just ignorant. Unions put up with a lot more shit than they put out and as far as Delphi workers going to 10 bucks an hour, it's not going to happen, that's already a settled issue because GM realizes they can't afford to let Delphi strike or they may as well close up shop at all plants and sell out to toyota. And for people that think it's right for someone to take an 18 dollar a hour paycut is an ignorant, insensitive person with no class.

Unions are there to protect the workers rights they aren't there to exploit the company and take take take, in our shelf agreement we signed in 2002 we gave up A LOT in order to keep our jobs and get a new product in our plant. In 2007 I'm sure we will give up a lot more and that's fine I don't mind putting out extra for my healthcare in order to save the company I work for and that is the mindset of most of the people in our Union which is why the new agreement between management and Union about our benefits passed by 96 percent.

Toyota, Honda and all the other Japanese automakers have no overhead because they do not take care of their workers other than to pay their wages. They have no healthcare costs, no retiree costs and that's why they are able to offer their cars for the prices they do and as of late most US cars/trucks have ranked higher than almost all Japanese vehicles.

It's not all upper management either it's a lot of the management on the floor and in the plant that think they know everything because they went to school for 4 years.....for criminal justice. Most foremen on the plant floors and management in the office do not have a 4 year degree in business or anything at all that has to do with the auto industry, therefore making their degree as useful as a high school diploma because they do not know how to run a business.

It's these same upper management people blaming healthcare costs and blaming our wages for the downfall of the company but turning around at the end of the year and taking a 4 million dollar performance bonus and giving us 89 dollar profit sharing checks.

All I say is if you prefer Japanese cars that's all you but don't stand around whining about the state of the country in 20 years because you and other people like you keep sending about 90 percent of what you pay for each car over to Japan.

ClevelandChief
12-12-2005, 10:20 PM
"General Motors Corp., with about 3,500 such workers, has the highest number in this group, known in UAW parlance as the jobs bank. This program is essentially a holding tank for hourly workers who are off work a long time, typically 11 months or more. It does not include the workers who are off a few weeks during temporary shutdowns.

GM's jobs bank number almost certainly will grow this year, by 2,000 or more, as GM looks to close a plant in Baltimore and idle another in Linden, N.J., say GM officials who asked not to be named. The majority of jobs bank workers are clustered near closed or partially shuttered assembly plants, such as GM's Lansing car-assembly plant. GM set aside $2.1 billion to fund its jobs bank from 2003-07, according to highlights of the UAW-GM national contract agreement.

GM spokesman Dan Flores declined to say how much GM spends annually on its jobs bank workers.

UAW guidelines say workers in the jobs bank are supposed to be used for a "meaningful, nontraditional job assignment," which is anything from training classes to community service with local churches to sitting in a break room in the auto plant and watching television.

The jobs bank has been around since the 1984 UAW national agreement. The automakers' rationale was that by telling union workers they would be protected in a jobs bank, they wouldn't fight efficiency measures. The union hoped it would force the automakers to find work for all their employees."







While I'd have to disagree with the jobs bank....the reason people particularly at GM sit in the jobs bank for so long is managements problem. Management rarely ever goes up to the room they sit in and offer them jobs on the floor, instead they schedule people to work 4 hours overtime to do the jobs on the shift instead of going up and bringing someone out of the bank. Also that jobs bank is so high because 2 GM plants were just closed in Baltimore and New Jersey and MANAGEMENT has failed to place those people in active plants....so again it's not the UAW's fault that MANAGEMENT is constantly dragging their feet.

recxjake
12-12-2005, 10:28 PM
Actually GM plans to offer both the Soltice and the Saturn Sky in a V6 6 speed manual and a hardtop convertable. No point to put a top shelf V8 Engine in a car with a sticker price of 20k. No company would do that it would be completely stupid. Even BMW didn't go larger than a v6 in their Z3 and it was what? 50k?

I work for the UAW and so far from what I'm reading in this post most of you people have no idea about what is going to happen to the economy of the USA if the American automakers go under because people are ignorant and keep sending profits overseas. Cracks me up even more than people think that the japanese automakers in America are not overcharging for their products as well.

I agree that American automakers are pretty stubborn. They fail to listen to consumers or even care sometimes about what they are needing. As far as hybrids....hybrids are complete crap. Read about them, it says in many different articles that in order to make up for the price of a hybrid gas prices would have to hit the 5$ a gallon mark.

GM has actually a joint venture with toyota in the hybrid market but they are smart enough to not start massing producing hybrids because toyota isn't making any profit on them at all. Also GM is doing their own research and development of hydrogen cells.

As for the bashing of Unions in this thread, you people are just ignorant. Unions put up with a lot more shit than they put out and as far as Delphi workers going to 10 bucks an hour, it's not going to happen, that's already a settled issue because GM realizes they can't afford to let Delphi strike or they may as well close up shop at all plants and sell out to toyota. And for people that think it's right for someone to take an 18 dollar a hour paycut is an ignorant, insensitive person with no class.

Unions are there to protect the workers rights they aren't there to exploit the company and take take take, in our shelf agreement we signed in 2002 we gave up A LOT in order to keep our jobs and get a new product in our plant. In 2007 I'm sure we will give up a lot more and that's fine I don't mind putting out extra for my healthcare in order to save the company I work for and that is the mindset of most of the people in our Union which is why the new agreement between management and Union about our benefits passed by 96 percent.

Toyota, Honda and all the other Japanese automakers have no overhead because they do not take care of their workers other than to pay their wages. They have no healthcare costs, no retiree costs and that's why they are able to offer their cars for the prices they do and as of late most US cars/trucks have ranked higher than almost all Japanese vehicles.

It's not all upper management either it's a lot of the management on the floor and in the plant that think they know everything because they went to school for 4 years.....for criminal justice. Most foremen on the plant floors and management in the office do not have a 4 year degree in business or anything at all that has to do with the auto industry, therefore making their degree as useful as a high school diploma because they do not know how to run a business.

It's these same upper management people blaming healthcare costs and blaming our wages for the downfall of the company but turning around at the end of the year and taking a 4 million dollar performance bonus and giving us 89 dollar profit sharing checks.

All I say is if you prefer Japanese cars that's all you but don't stand around whining about the state of the country in 20 years because you and other people like you keep sending about 90 percent of what you pay for each car over to Japan.


well said

recxjake
12-12-2005, 10:31 PM
so what do you think the future of GM is gonna be??? my dad works for GMAC and they are very close to selling them off..... not good for my family at all

Cochise
12-12-2005, 10:35 PM
For a lot of people it comes down to reliability. Deserved or undeserved, the Japanese automakers have the better reputation there.

stevieray
12-12-2005, 10:40 PM
Women becoming viable buyers. Overpriced cars becoming available through leasing, and pimping the new car every three years mantra.

Coupled with a four decade mistrust of America.

And most importantly, unadulterated greed.

cosmo20002
12-12-2005, 10:41 PM
...... first off Consumer Reports is very biased to the foreign automakers... always has been this way


What exactly does that mean? What's in it for them to "favor" foreign cars? I suppose they are "biased" because Hondas and Toyotas continually have better repair records, reliability, resale values, etc.

ClevelandChief
12-12-2005, 10:42 PM
I'd like to be able to comment on the GMAC but I can't I really dont know much about. Which tells me that the whole deal there was probably dropped and GM will retain GMAC.


As far as japanese workmanship....trust me workers in japanese plants can be just as big as screw ups as those in american plants. Most of the reputation gained by the japanese automakers came at a time when a lot of american automakers were in transitions. I firmly believe that GM for one is definenetly on the right track as far as the quality of their new products and their designs are right up there with Honda/Toyota. In the same breath though I can also say that GM has a problem with being very bland with color choices and I believe they could definently spruce up the look of their cars interiors. But as far as quality of product goes they are on the right track and it shows in most reviews on all of their products especially in one of the most important ones being JD power.

ClevelandChief
12-12-2005, 10:48 PM
What exactly does that mean? What's in it for them to "favor" foreign cars? I suppose they are "biased" because Hondas and Toyotas continually have better repair records, reliability, resale values, etc.


Actually consumer reports is biased to everything foreign.

And to those of you thinking GM based it's company on gas guzzling vehicles and think that toyota and honda are so wonderfully implementing hybrids also have a significant amount of SUV's of their own, remember just because it doesn't have a honda or toyota sticker on it doesn't mean it's not produced by them.

"Toyota is doubling the size of its V-8 engine plant in Alabama to make 300,000 big V-8s for the huge new pickups to be assembled in Texas. And Toyota already has a lineup of heavy, gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs Land Cruiser, LX 470, Sequoia, GX 470, 4Runner, made chiefly in Japan."

cosmo20002
12-12-2005, 10:51 PM
...people are ignorant and keep sending profits overseas.

Toyota, Honda and all the other Japanese automakers have no overhead...They have no healthcare costs, no retiree costs and that's why they are able to offer their cars for the prices they do...


#1
I don't pretend to be an expert on this but aren't a lot of the "foreign" cars actually manufactured right here in the US? So those profits aren't all going overseas.

#2
You're implying that the Japanese cars cost less because apparenly they have no overhead. I don't know what health plans they offer, but their cars generally aren't cheaper. An Accord or Camry costs more than a comparable US car, for example.

recxjake
12-12-2005, 10:54 PM
#1
I don't pretend to be an expert on this but aren't a lot of the "foreign" cars actually manufactured right here in the US? So those profits aren't all going overseas.

#2
You're implying that the Japanese cars cost less because apparenly they have no overhead. I don't know what health plans they offer, but their cars generally aren't cheaper. An Accord or Camry costs more than a comparable US car, for example.

90% of it goes overseas to Japan and they get even more due to the exchange rate...

They make more per car because they have no legacy costs ro worry about and their workers are not unionized and actually have to pay for healtcare unlike the pennies US autoworkers pay

cosmo20002
12-12-2005, 10:55 PM
Actually consumer reports is biased to everything foreign.


Again, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? When you say "biased" you're implying their opinions aren't genuine--that they for some reason they favor the foreign cars. But when year after year those cars prove more reliable, need less repairs, etc., how do you dismiss it as "bias"?

recxjake
12-12-2005, 10:59 PM
Again, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? When you say "biased" you're implying their opinions aren't genuine--that they for some reason they favor the foreign cars. But when year after year those cars prove more reliable, need less repairs, etc., how do you dismiss it as "bias"?

somehow GM wins a lot of JD Power associates awards for good quality but never gets anything good by Consumer Reports..... for some odd reason they have never ever given any american auto company a good rating.... i don't know why

ClevelandChief
12-12-2005, 11:00 PM
Again, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? When you say "biased" you're implying their opinions aren't genuine--that they for some reason they favor the foreign cars. But when year after year those cars prove more reliable, need less repairs, etc., how do you dismiss it as "bias"?


No, when people say bias it means even if they were to find an American product better or more enjoyable they would look for a way to downplay it and ultimately rate a foriegn product aboved it. Their reports are not based on reliability reports or repair reports, they are based on their "experts" going to a dealership buying a product, driving the shit out of it then writing their own report.

Based completely on opinion, not on any reliability studies like JD power.

ClevelandChief
12-12-2005, 11:03 PM
#1
I don't pretend to be an expert on this but aren't a lot of the "foreign" cars actually manufactured right here in the US? So those profits aren't all going overseas.

#2
You're implying that the Japanese cars cost less because apparenly they have no overhead. I don't know what health plans they offer, but their cars generally aren't cheaper. An Accord or Camry costs more than a comparable US car, for example.


#1
If a company is based in Japan and they produce the vehicle in America, the only parts of that profit that are staying in America is wages for workers and for upkeep of their plants. The rest of that money is going back to the Hiroshima HQ's of that said company. It's the same with the GM plants in Canada and in Europe, the money made from the cars manufactured there ends up back in Detroit, minus of course worker wages and plant upkeep.

#2
By cheaper I mean they can offer more standard features than most comparable American automaker cars that are comparable such as, power windows, automatic transmission stuff like that at the same price as a base barebone model of a GM/Ford/Chrysler. So in other words you will get more for your money.

cosmo20002
12-12-2005, 11:13 PM
Based completely on opinion, not on any reliability studies like JD power.

You are completely wrong on that. Obviously, when you are reviewing a NEW car, there are no reliability studies. As for reliability and repair records, CU does base it directly on repair data. CU doesn't have bad reports for all US cars. Some of them are rated high. But overall, the Japanese cars simply are more reliable.

Also, CU takes no ads, and doesn't allow companies to use it in ads. Not so for JD Power.

ClevelandChief
12-12-2005, 11:18 PM
You are completely wrong on that. Obviously, when you are reviewing a NEW car, there are no reliability studies. As for reliability and repair records, CU does base it directly on repair data. CU doesn't have bad reports for all US cars. Some of them are rated high. But overall, the Japanese cars simply are more reliable.

Also, CU takes no ads, and doesn't allow companies to use it in ads. Not so for JD Power.


That's news to me, JD power reviews new cars then releases their findings to the public on reliability, initial quality etc.. Allowing a company to use the study in an ad, not quite sure what effect that has on anything or why you'd even put it in here. But it doesn't prove non bias or vice versa.

I'm not sour on CR at all, actually you're right they have rated many american made cars above imports, I just personally feel that they are very opinionated when it comes to American made products.

CR does not draw their data from the general public, only from subscribers, they have to prove that their data represents the general public, and they haven't. They seem to have a need to write "but not up to the best of the European/Japanese imports" at the end of every American review. Well, some of the imports aren't up to the best of the Americans.

Detoxing
12-13-2005, 12:10 AM
here we go again....Show me the evidence that shows where foriegn is more reliable then american. Consuer reports is Biased. Extremely. Go look at the reviews for the matrix, then look at the reviews for the vibe. I havnet looked, but i would be shocke dif they didnt rate the matirx higher, even though they are the same exact car. Please explain to me why Consumer reports claim the firebird is a bad quality car in the written artice, then post almost perfect maintnance stats right underneath? ive had my 01 bird for 60k and not a single problem with it. If you guys cant see the biased and understand then u shouldnt be arguing about this. Car and Driver is also very foreign Biased, while road and track is domestic biased. Pls dont cite these publishers in arguments, its annoying and pointless. Pls, show me how foreign cars are better quality. Make me a believer.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 05:40 AM
hah completely non union.... they are ruining every industry.... Airlines... Steel and heck why not the auto industry too

One thing you need to learn, if you're going to engage in arguments, is how to build and maintain credibility.

This was the point at which you should have disclosed your father is a GM manager of some sort. Instead, you go on and on ranting like you're completely unbiased, which is not the case.

That might not change the truth (or lack thereof) in anything you say, but at least people will know where you're coming from.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 05:42 AM
tell me why an uneduated factory worker deserves 130k including healthcare????

They deserve 10 bucks an hour.........GM should fire Union worker

'cept that it would violate their union contracts, lead to strikes everywhere, including their union-employing suppliers most likely, and get them dragged in front of the NLRB.

Other than that, it's a great idea. :D

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 05:47 AM
I've never owned a foreign car, and have no plans to ever buy one. Sure I've had a dog or two, but the recent vehicles I've owned have been fine. And I certainly love my Mustang.

At least I did until it started to F#CKING SNOW. :banghead:

(Came back to me in a hurry why you keep a full tank of gas and a trunk-load of extra weight in a RWD car in the winter.)


ROFL.

We got pounded by snow here last Friday, and I saw some people out skidding around in their rear-wheel drive vehicles, and all I can think is "WTF, you live in NEW ENGLAND! Why in the name of God do you own a rear-wheel drive sports car, if you can't also afford a bad weather vehicle to use on days when we all know it's going to snow?"

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 05:50 AM
90% of it goes overseas to Japan and they get even more due to the exchange rate...

They make more per car because they have no legacy costs ro worry about and their workers are not unionized and actually have to pay for healtcare unlike the pennies US autoworkers pay


First off, I can't believe 90% of what you pay for the car goes to Japan. That just makes no sense if the car is actually manufactured here in the US.

Just for example -- if you bought a $30,000 Honda that was manufactured here, there's just no way that $27,000 of that is going back to Japan. NO WAY. The dealership had to make its profit, the manufacturing facility had to make some money, etc. The math just isn't there. Not even close.

Second, are the Japanese auto manufacturing facilities here in the US not unionized? Does anyone know?

Baby Lee
12-13-2005, 06:13 AM
For example, right now Pontiac has a great looking 2 seater running around..... with a goddamn 4 cyl in it. Take that slick body and put a off-the-shelf LS2 V8 in it and you won't be able to build them fast enough, especailly if you can do it under $30k. But it will never happen because it's GM.
I'm all for big engines, but that is effing an effing ridiculous opinion.
The Solstice is already selling well, and rating well.
But you're right, the entire allure of the Miata was it's big block Mazda V-12. :rolleyes:

ping2000
12-13-2005, 06:18 AM
The only japanese part on my Camry is the transmission. There are more American made parts on my Toyota than on the Jeep I replaced. It was also built by Americans. The reason it is high quality is the design, which is Japanese. I chalk it up to the lack of Americans taking advanced math and engineering classes. Have you ever loooked at the makeup of a mechanical engineering class on a college campus?

Pants
12-13-2005, 06:50 AM
Is it cuz I's black?

Who's black? You're black?

morphius
12-13-2005, 07:37 AM
rec - So why is consumer reports biased exactly? Their subsribers send them the issues that they have with cars and they compile it and keep a running tab on which cars have more troubles where, how exactly is that biased? I have always thought of JD Power as biased, plus they just look at that year vehicle, they don't look at how that vehicle has performed over the past few years. That tells me which car might have the most power and look pretty, but that is only a small part of what goes into buying a car.

Fraz - Wasn't your last car basically a Toyota with a slightly different skin? I have an odd feeling no foreign company made a profit off of that.

I think we all know that the American workers can build a quality product, if that wasn't tru then Toyota and the Japanese automakers wouldn't be building plants here and turning out their normal quality product.

cosmo20002
12-13-2005, 07:39 AM
here we go again....Show me the evidence that shows where foriegn is more reliable then american. Consuer reports is Biased. Extremely.

Funny how when someone/something doesn't agree with your preconceived position, then it means IT is biased. I did show you evidence--the data in the consumer magazines. What am I going to do--run my own studies? Where's your "evidence" that US cars are more reliable?

Car & Driver and those others are much more new car oriented, and performance oriented. CU is more heavy on past reliability and past repairs. And talk about potential bias--which is the only publication that takes no advertising? They have nothing to gain by recommending one car over another.

Frankly, I don't see how this is even debatable--Hondas and Toyotas last longer, have less problems, higher resales, etc. than US cars. If not, then why would they be so popular? Its not because they are cheaper--because they aren't--its because they are better in the areas that matter.

ChiefsFanatic
12-13-2005, 07:39 AM
You have no clue what your talking about....... first off Consumer Reports is very biased to the foreign automakers... always has been this way

Secondly.... Foreign automakers don't have to deal with retirees yet or any of Unions......... GM and Ford are a hundred years old... they have hundreds of thousands of retirees to take care of

The currency exchange between the US and the Japense Yen is rediculous.... Not only is Toyota making $$ each time they sell a car but when they exchange the $$ to the Yen they make even more

Union workers have just now changed how much they pay for healthcare... its costing GM 5 billion dollars this year.... Toyota and other companies... barely anything

GM has been awarded numerous awards for quality lately from companies that matter like JD Power.....

The Unions have a "Job Bank" when they get layed off they still get payed 95% ofstheir pay! It's rediculous....

Delphi is putting the Union in its place by offering them 10 bucks an hour... this is what they deserve... soon GM and Ford will too when the current contrats expire next year

GM will make it because they are taking care of healthcare costs... are coming out with some awesome new products and are getting rid of people who arent needed


You think Consumer Reports is crooked? They are when it comes to cars. They took millions from Ford, and therefore didn't make a big stink about the rollover rate of the Bronco II, instead they threw Suzuki under the bus for the Samauri, even thought the Bronco II had a higher rollover rate.

But to say that J.D. Power is legit is ridiculous. J.D. Power manipulates the data exactly how they are paid to. All companies that issue any sort of edict about quality only do so because they are paid to.

Just like if you hire a polling service, they ask you what you want the outcome to be.

morphius
12-13-2005, 07:52 AM
You think Consumer Reports is crooked? They are when it comes to cars. They took millions from Ford, and therefore didn't make a big stink about the rollover rate of the Bronco II, instead they threw Suzuki under the bus for the Samauri, even thought the Bronco II had a higher rollover rate.

But to say that J.D. Power is legit is ridiculous. J.D. Power manipulates the data exactly how they are paid to. All companies that issue any sort of edict about quality only do so because they are paid to.

Just like if you hire a polling service, they ask you what you want the outcome to be.
Which is also odd, since CR has compained about roll over in SUV's for as long as I can remember, and I know they mentioned the bronco 2 as well.

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 07:58 AM
All anyone really needs to know, is Honda and Toyota are kicking the "Big Three"s collective ass. As someone pointed out, it isn't because they have the lowest priced vehicles either. It's because of the value you get with their products, compared to American products, generally.

Of course there are exceptions: within some classes or groups, the American companies have the best product. The problem is, it's few and far between.

It's capitalism at it's best: consumers, through their choices, are rewarding those doing the best work. Until American companies figure it out, it appears unlikely to change. Personally, I look forward to the day I can buy an American car, knowing it is the best value for the money. In the class I currently shop, it isn't even close.

Clint in Wichita
12-13-2005, 08:05 AM
I haven't read through this entire thread, but the biggest problem with American cars, IMO, is labor unions.

Then again, labor unions cause problems in just about every industry they are involved in.

Frazod
12-13-2005, 08:09 AM
ROFL.

We got pounded by snow here last Friday, and I saw some people out skidding around in their rear-wheel drive vehicles, and all I can think is "WTF, you live in NEW ENGLAND! Why in the name of God do you own a rear-wheel drive sports car, if you can't also afford a bad weather vehicle to use on days when we all know it's going to snow?"

Well, I wasn't thinking about snow when I was drooling all over the Mustang on the showroom floor last March.

It's not that bad if you take steps to minimize the effects of slick roads - keep the gas tank full and the trunk weighted down.

We've got socked in the Chicago area - 8" to 10" already on the ground, and another 3" to 6" forecast for tomorrow and Thursday.

Cochise
12-13-2005, 08:11 AM
It's capitalism at it's best: consumers, through their choices, are rewarding those doing the best work.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

Cochise
12-13-2005, 08:12 AM
IMO, GM needs to spend more money on making what they have better, instead of constantly bombarding us with new models. Look at Honda & Toyota's lineups, they've been the same for the past 20 years. Simplify.

Yeah, exactly. Like the world needs another trendy looking midsize SUV or yet another it's-not-a-wagon-its-an-SUV

Pants
12-13-2005, 08:14 AM
I haven't read through this entire thread, but the biggest problem with American cars, IMO, is labor unions.

Then again, labor unions cause problems in just about every industry they are involved in.

No, you don't undestand, it's because those damn chanks work for free for chank companies and than the chank cmpanies can buy off Consumer Report to make their shitty cars sound good, but the American companies can't afford to bribe Consumer Report because they already spent all their money on their workers, CEO's don't get paid though, but that money goes to pay for the health insurance, which the chank companies don't even pay. It's simple really.

Saulbadguy
12-13-2005, 08:15 AM
Is "chank" a term of endearment?

Pants
12-13-2005, 08:17 AM
Is "chank" a term of endearment?

If "chink" is...

Saulbadguy
12-13-2005, 08:19 AM
Do "koguts" make good vehicles?

penchief
12-13-2005, 08:32 AM
I haven't read through this entire thread, but the biggest problem with American cars, IMO, is labor unions.

Then again, labor unions cause problems in just about every industry they are involved in.

Let's not blame those decision-makers who, for whatever reason, choose to design and build inferior quality products. The bottom line is that Detroit has chosen not to build quality AND gas mileage into their product. When a consumer can go out a spend the same money on a Honda Civic as he/she can a Chevy Cavalier or Ford Escort then it's very simple to understand what the problem is.

In the past 20 years I have owned three new vehicles. A Toyota, a Mazda, and a Honda. The first two I had driven for nearly 250,000 miles each. I currently have 130,000 on my Honda. I have NEVER had a single malfunction with any of those vehicles. Not one. Routine maintenance only.

I also had a short stint as a used car salesman. It was the most distasteful job I've ever had. One thing I found out when selling used cars. The American-made vehicles were junk. And that is NOT the fault of the worker. It is the fault of those who make decisions on quality.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 08:34 AM
Well, I wasn't thinking about snow when I was drooling all over the Mustang on the showroom floor last March.

It's not that bad if you take steps to minimize the effects of slick roads - keep the gas tank full and the trunk weighted down.

We've got socked in the Chicago area - 8" to 10" already on the ground, and another 3" to 6" forecast for tomorrow and Thursday.

Oh goody. I'm sure the 3-6" will hit us after it's done with you. That's usually how it goes.

I hear ya. I'm not sure how much snow Chicago gets, but I'd think it could be enough to dissuade you from a Mustang. In any event, best of luck! :)

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 08:36 AM
No, you don't undestand, it's because those damn chanks work for free for chank companies and than the chank cmpanies can buy off Consumer Report to make their shitty cars sound good, but the American companies can't afford to bribe Consumer Report because they already spent all their money on their workers, CEO's don't get paid though, but that money goes to pay for the health insurance, which the chank companies don't even pay. It's simple really.


:shake: :shake:

Pants
12-13-2005, 08:37 AM
:shake: :shake:
Wow, I thought being over the top would be obvious I was sarcastic.

Did you really think I believed that Toyota employees worked without compensation or that the CEO's of american companies didn't get paid, lol?

Inspector
12-13-2005, 08:38 AM
How about those Renault's?

The LeCar has front wheel drive. And they're built by the quality minded French!

Woowee....what a car.

Clint in Wichita
12-13-2005, 08:44 AM
Let's not blame those decision-makers who, for whatever reason, choose to design and build inferior quality products. The bottom line is that Detroit has chosen not to build quality AND gas mileage into their product. When a consumer can go out a spend the same money on a Honda Civic as he/she can a Chevy Cavalier or Ford Escort then it's very simple to understand what the problem is.

In the past 20 years I have owned three new vehicles. A Toyota, a Mazda, and a Honda. The first two I had driven for nearly 250,000 miles each. I currently have 130,000 on my Honda. I have NEVER had a single malfunction with any of those vehicles. Not one. Routine maintenance only.

I also had a short stint as a used car salesman. It was the most distasteful job I've ever had. One thing I found out when selling used cars. The American-made vehicles were junk. And that is NOT the fault of the worker. It is the fault of those who make decisions on quality.


IMO they HAVE to cut corners to keep their cars competitively priced, while still paying the overblown wages of union employees. This results in an inferior product that costs as much or more than a superior foreign car.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 08:54 AM
Wow, I thought being over the top would be obvious I was sarcastic.

Did you really think I believed that Toyota employees worked without compensation or that the CEO's of american companies didn't get paid, lol?


:banghead:

I was focused on the "chank" thing and stopped reading before I even got to the CEO part.

Please excuse me while I turn on my sarcasm/white trash impersonation meter...

Pants
12-13-2005, 09:01 AM
:banghead:

I was focused on the "chank" thing and stopped reading before I even got to the CEO part.

Please excuse me while I turn on my sarcasm/white trash impersonation meter...

LOL, it's all good. I was just a bit shocked you thought I meant what I said. :(

StcChief
12-13-2005, 09:08 AM
Why my last American car was a 1978 Pontiac Sun-turd.
almost 30 years ago.
they have been rolling on sh1t to public since 1970.

When forced by Japs to compete they make half a$$ attempts at quality.

patteeu
12-13-2005, 09:09 AM
#1
If a company is based in Japan and they produce the vehicle in America, the only parts of that profit that are staying in America is wages for workers and for upkeep of their plants. The rest of that money is going back to the Hiroshima HQ's of that said company. It's the same with the GM plants in Canada and in Europe, the money made from the cars manufactured there ends up back in Detroit, minus of course worker wages and plant upkeep.

I don't know the breakdown, but I'd be very surpised to find out that labor costs and all the other costs that remain in the US when a foreign car is manufactured here aren't vastly greater than the share of the profit that goes to HQ. I'm certain that the money that goes back to Japan isn't 90% of the retail price of the car (or even 90% of the wholesale price for that matter).

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 09:10 AM
LOL, it's all good. I was just a bit shocked you thought I meant what I said. :(

Drain bamage, what can I say? :shrug: :banghead:

Seriously, I can't figure WTF I was thinking...

Rain Man
12-13-2005, 09:10 AM
IMO they HAVE to cut corners to keep their cars competitively priced, while still paying the overblown wages of union employees. This results in an inferior product that costs as much or more than a superior foreign car.

Yep, yep, yep. Regardless of one's opinion about quality, there's a cost impact, which means that you're paying more for the same product.

I also read something interesting the other day that said that the retirement benefits that they pay to current retirees amounts to several hundred dollars per car now. The Japanese companies don't have that liability because they don't have nearly as large a pool of retirees.

I should note as well that most car experiences are individual. For example, one of our cars is a 7 year-old Taurus, and it's been a great vehicle for us. In part, I figure that's because we don't drive like bats out of hell and we maintain it. I've always had the suspicion that a lot of people (certainly not all, and probably less than half, but still a lot) who have trouble with their cars are the ones I see on the roadway making jackrabbit starts and other maneuvers that aren't good for the car.

vailpass
12-13-2005, 09:14 AM
My Ford product is reliable, safe, luxurious, and runs like a raped ape.

(Volvo XC70, wouldn't drive an American-made car except a GMC Suburban if you paid me)

Rain Man
12-13-2005, 09:30 AM
There's certainly some truth to that...

Yeah, it's obviously not true for everyone, but whenever I see someone driving like a jerk, I always wonder if they have more car trouble than average and blame it on the car.

penchief
12-13-2005, 09:36 AM
IMO they HAVE to cut corners to keep their cars competitively priced, while still paying the overblown wages of union employees. This results in an inferior product that costs as much or more than a superior foreign car.

While there is some merit to your argument it is also true that our economy relies too heavily on repeat sales. I believe that inducing new car sales is also a motive. If Detroit pumped out cars that lasted longer people wouldn't be buying new cars every four to five years. I've bought three new vehicles since 1985 and plan on driving my current car for four or five more years.

High quality cars = less volume sales.

Not to mention that Banks and finance companies get rich financing new vehicles every four years as opposed to every 10 years.

Then that piece of crap used American-made vehicle gets dumped on a used car lot and sold to some poor schmuck who can only afford to buy what a sleezy dealership is willing to sell him. Then the dealership turns around and finances that piece of crap car at an exhorbitant interest rate for a term longer than the car will last. Knowing that the poor schmuck is getting taken to the cleaners and will ultimately have nothing to show for his investment except bad credit when he tows that piece of crap intentionally-made-not-to-last domestic built vehicle back to dealership who sold it to him. The dealership is happy because their finance company has already made about a grand in interest and they still own the car which they will recycle onto another poor schmuck.

It's the American way. Cheaply made automobiles help fuel the disposable aspect of our economy and the money-for-nothing attitude of the finance industry at the expense of the consumer and the environment.

NewChief
12-13-2005, 09:41 AM
My Ford product is reliable, safe, luxurious, and runs like a raped ape.

(Volvo XC70, wouldn't drive an American-made car except a GMC Suburban if you paid me)

ROFL

Volvo driving, latte-drinking, bronco fan.;)

My wife's got a XC70 as well. Hard to beat for icy blacktop.

jspchief
12-13-2005, 09:43 AM
IMO the biggest problem is the American worker believes he deserves a bigger slice of the pie than he is actually entitled to. Factory workers is one example, and they've found a way to use unions to blackmail their employers into giving them that slice of pie.

Everyone wants to be middle class/middle income, but no one likes that the wages they demand just drives up the price of the product they produce, which in turn makes the money they earn worth less.

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 09:50 AM
While there is some merit to your argument it is also true that our economy relies too heavily on repeat sales. I believe that inducing new car sales is also a motive. If Detroit pumped out cars that lasted longer people wouldn't be buying new cars every four to five years. I've bought three new vehicles since 1985 and plan on driving my current car for four or five more years.

High quality cars = less volume sales.

Not to mention that Banks and finance companies get rich financing new vehicles every four years as opposed to every 10 years.

Then that piece of crap used American-made vehicle gets dumped on a used car lot and sold to some poor schmuck who can only afford to buy what a sleezy dealership is willing to sell him. Then the dealership turns around and finances that piece of crap car at an exhorbitant interest rate for a term longer than the car will last. Knowing that the poor schmuck is getting taken to the cleaners and will ultimately have nothing to show for his investment except bad credit when he tows that piece of crap intentionally-made-not-to-last domestic built vehicle back to dealership who sold it to him. The dealership is happy because their finance company has already made about a grand in interest and they still own the car which they will recycle onto another poor schmuck.

It's the American way. Cheaply made automobiles help fuel the disposable aspect of our economy and the money-for-nothing attitude of the finance industry at the expense of the consumer and the environment.

You've actually stated quite nicely why a significant segment of automobile buyers choose Foriegn cars.

We don't CARE what kind of cars Detroit WANTS to produce; many of us want quality cars that will last 7-10 years. To get an American car in that category, you are required to over-pay--significantly. Some change their mind, and upgrade cars every 2-4 yrs, but many of us drive 'em until the wheels fall off. That creates a problem for Detroit, because: American cars begin to fall apart, generally, after 3-5 years.

If you want a Mustang, a Corvette, a Suburban, or a PT Cruiser.....a vehicle, for which foreign manufacturers offer no viable alternative, then you would be best served buying American. Anything else, and foriegn competition has a viable, and often, more reliable option.

Pitt Gorilla
12-13-2005, 09:56 AM
IMO the biggest problem is the American worker believes he deserves a bigger slice of the pie than he is actually entitled to. Factory workers is one example, and they've found a way to use unions to blackmail their employers into giving them that slice of pie.

Everyone wants to be middle class/middle income, but no one likes that the wages they demand just drives up the price of the product they produce, which in turn makes the money they earn worth less.
Very true.

Pitt Gorilla
12-13-2005, 09:59 AM
You've actually stated quite nicely why a significant segment of automobile buyers choose Foriegn cars.

We don't CARE what kind of cars Detroit WANTS to produce; many of us want quality cars that will last 7-10 years. To get an American car in that category, you are required to over-pay--significantly. Some change their mind, and upgrade cars every 2-4 yrs, but many of us drive 'em until the wheels fall off. That creates a problem for Detroit, because: American cars begin to fall apart, generally, after 3-5 years.

If you want a Mustang, a Corvette, a Suburban, or a PT Cruiser.....a vehicle, for which foreign manufacturers offer no viable alternative, then you would be best served buying American. Anything else, and foriegn competition has a viable, and often, more reliable option.
Good point. I am, however, still driving my 94 Pontiac. That being said, my next care will likely be "foreign."

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:02 AM
IMO the biggest problem is the American worker believes he deserves a bigger slice of the pie than he is actually entitled to. Factory workers is one example, and they've found a way to use unions to blackmail their employers into giving them that slice of pie.

Everyone wants to be middle class/middle income, but no one likes that the wages they demand just drives up the price of the product they produce, which in turn makes the money they earn worth less.

I agree that union workers in a number of industries are overpaid.

I also happen to think that the pay disparity between senior executive and the average worker is a total joke.

The average chief executive officer's pay has increased from 42 times in 1982 to 411 times that of the average production worker in 2001 (Business Week Online 05/06/02).

vailpass
12-13-2005, 10:02 AM
ROFL

Volvo driving, latte-drinking, bronco fan.;)

My wife's got a XC70 as well. Hard to beat for icy blacktop.

Takes one to know one! ROFL

We got a real nice deal on it and I don't have to tell you that it makes me feel better to put the wife and babies in a vehicle that's engineered for safety.

vailpass
12-13-2005, 10:04 AM
I agree that union workers in a number of industries are overpaid.

I also happen to think that the pay disparity between senior executive and the average worker is a total joke.
The average chief executive officer's pay has increased from 42 times in 1982 to 411 times that of the average production worker in 2001 (Business Week Online 05/06/02).

:thumb: No doubt, but what can be done to make the rule-makers (execs) change the rules?

FringeNC
12-13-2005, 10:06 AM
I agree that union workers in a number of industries are overpaid.

I also happen to think that the pay disparity between senior executive and the average worker is a total joke.

The average chief executive officer's pay has increased from 42 times in 1982 to 411 times that of the average production worker in 2001 (Business Week Online 05/06/02).

Why would firms overpay? Firms are competing for managerial talent, just like what happens for top execs in the NFL. The market sets the wage. Unfortunately, you'll get a lemon sometimes, like Carl Peterson, or the head of GM.

penchief
12-13-2005, 10:07 AM
:thumb: No doubt, but what can be done to make the rule-makers (execs) change the rules?

Those rule-makers are also the decision-makers when it comes to product quality.

jspchief
12-13-2005, 10:09 AM
I agree that union workers in a number of industries are overpaid.

I also happen to think that the pay disparity between senior executive and the average worker is a total joke.

The average chief executive officer's pay has increased from 42 times in 1982 to 411 times that of the average production worker in 2001 (Business Week Online 05/06/02).LIke I said, the American worker thinks he deserves more than he's entitled to. That attitude is not just found in low level jobs. Big time CEOs fall in the same group.

The only thing I would say is that a CEO has done a lot more to earn his wage than the average entry level union worker. I can swallow the argument that a CEO of a major corporation has more right to be a gazillionaire than that a high school dropout factory worker deserves to make 50K per year pushing a button on a piece of machinery for 40 hours a week.

Somebody will always have to do the shitty low paying jobs in this country. My problem is that has become teachers and policemen instead of factory workers.

ChiefsFanatic
12-13-2005, 10:10 AM
Which is also odd, since CR has compained about roll over in SUV's for as long as I can remember, and I know they mentioned the bronco 2 as well.

They did mention it, however, they were on 60 Minutes about the Samauri. They also provided their data for some national magazines, and in that data they ommitted the data about the Bronco II.

I did a paper in college about the subject. I looked for my bibliography, but can't find it.

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 10:10 AM
....The average chief executive officer's pay has increased from 42 times in 1982 to 411 times that of the average production worker in 2001 (Business Week Online 05/06/02).

I'm absolutely convinced this is one issue that a talented and charismatic politician could exploit to huge advantage, to bridge the growing gulf between conservatives and liberals.

Americans staunchly support the free market; but they also staunchly support fundamental fairness.

Quick, someone needs to clone Teddy Roosevelt. And fast!

recxjake
12-13-2005, 10:16 AM
GM coming out with hybrid SUV's in 2007.... 25% savings in fuel.....

GM stock is at his lowest levels ever.... If I had extra money I would be buying GM stock left and right...... it is a bargain........the goverment will never let GM go down the pooper

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=24060

vailpass
12-13-2005, 10:18 AM
Those rule-makers are also the decision-makers when it comes to product quality.

In part, along with market demand, competition, regulation, manufacturing standards, workforce competence, etc.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:20 AM
Why would firms overpay? Firms are competing for managerial talent, just like what happens for top execs in the NFL. The market sets the wage. Unfortunately, you'll get a lemon sometimes, like Carl Peterson, or the head of GM.


Generally, senior management is paying themselves.

As you may, or may not know, shareholders usually mindlessly reelect the members of the board of directors. The directors appoint the officers. Usually at least 1, if not more, of the senior officers are also on the board.

It's hardly rare for a public corporation to have a CEO who is also chairman of the board. Of course, it's his company, and he's the main guy for selecting candidates to join the board of directors, which, P.S., establishes his pay.

Accountability to stockholders is generally nominal at best. Sure, if the situation gets bad enough, the board can fire the CEO, but that's not exactly frequent. Or the stockholders can replace most/all of the board, but that's pretty much unheard of.

The resolution is just as often that someone else buys out the company, which of course will trigger the CEO and other senior officer's golden parachute.

It's a nice, cozy game played by seniro management and the board, with both stockholders and employees getting the short end of the stick.

The SEC has recently implement rules relating to independence of directors requirements and dividends are starting to make a big comeback after being heavily disfavored in the late 90s, but overall, the situation is still waaaay out of whack.

Look, I'm not saying pay the CEO 3x average worker. But 400x? AVERAGE (not lowest paid) worker? That's just nutzoid.

Cochise
12-13-2005, 10:20 AM
The lynchpin for the whole issue is that for American cars to be competitive they have to cut corners. Their labor costs are so high that they can't afford to produce the same quality car for the same price. Some of it is due to poor management and poor product line planning, but still.

Right now I've got an American vehicle that has been reliable so far, but I doubt if I would buy another one. Why? Because I know so many other people with this type of vehicle and every single one of them has had very costly problems. What am I to think if my american pickup truck is reliable, but I know 7 other people and they have all been fleeced at the repair shop? That I somehow just got lucky, of course. In that way, it's not even a consumer's personal experience but what they see around them.

vailpass
12-13-2005, 10:23 AM
Ex-TCI chief takes aim at CEO pay

By Al Lewis
Denver Post Staff Columnist
DenverPost.com

Now that Leo Hindery is no longer a chief executive officer, he's taking shots in a new book: "It Takes a CEO; It's Time to Lead With Integrity."

Hindery, who was chief executive of Tele-Communications Inc. until selling the Denver cable giant to AT&T in 1999, now runs a private equity firm in New York City. These days, he's got plenty to say about corporate villains:

"He was a screamer and a yeller," Hindery writes of convicted former Tyco chief executive Dennis Kozlowski. "The things that put him in line to become a CEO - his raw, naked aggression; his self-promotion - were the very things that should have disqualified him."

"Ken Lay simply doesn't care that he destroyed his workers," Hindery writes of Enron's former chairman.

John Rigas and son Timothy, both convicted on felonies for their role at cable company Adelphia, subsidized side businesses and paid for family vacations and country-club memberships as they fudged their books. "It all amounts to absolutely incontrovertible evidence that John Rigas was never cut out to be a CEO," Hindery writes.

In a phone interview, I asked Hindery if he'd met Rigas, WorldCom's Bernie Ebbers, or other corporate felons.

"Yeah," Hindery said. "And I hope they rot in jail. My only regret is that some of them are so old they won't rot."

Hindery's book criticizes deregulation, offshore labor, health care and even Wal-

Mart. But a common denominator, he says, is excessive executive compensation. He notes that the average CEO makes 304 times what his average employees get. "If you're a CEO in the United States today," he writes, "you're probably overpaid."
Hindery said he made about $900,000 a year at TCI, while his average employee made $55,000. Hindery's big payday came from his TCI stock, which he had held since selling his own cable assets to TCI before he became TCI's chief executive. That stock was reportedly worth about $250 million at the time of the AT&T deal.

And what kind of CEO was Hindery?

"I would hope most people would say 'He talks the talk and walks the walk,"' Hindery told me.

Nell Minow of The Corporate Library, which tracks governance issues, said she likes the message but is wary of the messenger. "I have a little bit of indigestion after consuming these 'Now-I-get-it' memoirs," she said.

Hindery has amassed a personal fortune reportedly worth more than $500 million. In Larkspur, he's selling his Lazy H Ranch for $12.6 million.

He became TCI's chief executive when the company was hemorrhaging. He struck several swaps, mergers and acquisitions that swiftly turned TCI's fortunes. He then sold TCI to AT&T - which was great for TCI shareholders but helped spell the end for AT&T.

"Leo dressed the bride for a sale to AT&T for top-of-the-market prices," said longtime Denver cable analyst Ted Henderson of Stifel, Nicolaus & Co. "I give Leo accolades for getting that sale done."

And what about AT&T? "AT&T didn't do their homework," Henderson said.

After AT&T, Hindery went to work for Gary Winnick, who made his fortune working with junk-bond king Michael Milken. In 2000, Hindery became interim chief executive of Winnick's debt-ridden telecom startup, Global Crossing, which went through five highly paid CEOs before filing bankruptcy in 2002.

Hindery held the job for six months. He was to get about $1 million in salary, $2 million in stock options plus $20,000 a month on his New York City apartment. He sued Global Crossing when it didn't pay. Also, before Hindery quit, he warned Winnick and other executives in a memo - later made public - that Global Crossing was headed for disaster.

"I have a vision," Hindery writes. "The CEOs of this country's thousand largest companies band together, storm Capitol Hill and declare their collective determination to launch the equivalent of a Marshall Plan to help rescue the U.S. economy and its middle class."

Yet, these days, who could trust an army of CEOs to save the middle class?

"When you're writing books, that's what you recommend to CEOs," said Henderson. "When you're a CEO, that's not what you recommend to yourself."

Al Lewis' column appears Sundays, Tuesdays and Fridays. Respond to Al at denverpostbloghouse.com/lewis, 303-820-1967, or alewis@denverpost.com.

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 10:28 AM
Ok, so now that the conversation has turned, as inevitably does around "Dynastic Family Wealth" Amnorix, that it's the CEO's, what percentage of the cost of each vehicle is attributed to paying the CEO his wages?

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:30 AM
GM coming out with hybrid SUV's in 2007.... 25% savings in fuel.....

GM stock is at his lowest levels ever.... If I had extra money I would be buying GM stock left and right...... it is a bargain........the goverment will never let GM go down the pooper

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=24060


GM also had its corporate bonds cut two grades by S&P yesterday. GM stock is down 40% in 2005, by far the worst in the DJ index. It's front page WSJ stuff how bad things are.

To top it off: "A bankruptcy by General Motors Corp. is not a "far-fetched possibility" if current trends at the world's largest auto manufacturer persist, Standard & Poor's analyst Scott Sprinzen said Monday."

http://money.cnn.com/2005/12/12/news/fortune500/gm_bankruptcy.reut/index.htm

Don't kid yourself about a fed bailout. Maybe it wouldn't allow GM to be liquidated, but it sure as hell would be allowed to run through bankruptcy and the shareholders would get murdered in the process.

jspchief
12-13-2005, 10:31 AM
Anyone ever read or hear anything about Costco and it's founder/owner?

They pay their employees well above the industry standard, and he pays himself about 300K per year ( although he has enough stock to be be considered plenty wealthy). They promote within company, almost never looking elsewhere for high end jobs.

I just saw a story about him on TV last week. It was refreshing to hear what they are doing to buck the American corporate trend. I've cancelled my Sam Club membership, and switched to Costco, even though it's 15-20 minutes further from my house.

BCD
12-13-2005, 10:32 AM
I'm diggin the new Chevy HHR.OMG, that thing is hideous...Seriously...

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 10:34 AM
They pay their employees well above the industry standard, and he pays himself about 300K per year...

Im suprised it's 300k...the taxes on that $$ is insane, he could shield it better by taking it all in stock/cap gains.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:35 AM
Ok, so now that the conversation has turned, as inevitably does around "Dynastic Family Wealth" Amnorix, that it's the CEO's, what percentage of the cost of each vehicle is attributed to paying the CEO his wages?


Actually, it has nothing to do with Dynastic Family Wealth at all. That involves taxes and inheritance laws, and not executive compensation at all. But you knew that and just wanted to play the fool anyway, so go ahead.

KC Kings
12-13-2005, 10:36 AM
I work for the UAW and so far from what I'm reading in this post most of you people have no idea about what is going to happen to the economy of the USA if the American automakers go under because people are ignorant and keep sending profits overseas. Cracks me up even more than people think that the japanese automakers in America are not overcharging for their products as well.


As for the bashing of Unions in this thread, you people are just ignorant. Unions put up with a lot more shit than they put out and as far as Delphi workers going to 10 bucks an hour, it's not going to happen, that's already a settled issue because GM realizes they can't afford to let Delphi strike or they may as well close up shop at all plants and sell out to toyota. And for people that think it's right for someone to take an 18 dollar a hour paycut is an ignorant, insensitive person with no class.



You union guys crack me up. I live next to a high school drop out that paints bridges haze gray for a living, and he makes $25 an hour. A monkey could do his job, and he makes as much as I do. The union is great.

I have friend that is in a union, he busts his butt every day, never is late to work, never calls in sick, and as soon as he worked his way up to a good route some imcompetant idiot got relieved of his management position and was made to be a driver again. My hard working friend was bumped off of his route because this worthless guy had more years under his belt. The union is great.

If you are a union guy, are dumb as a rock and aren't worth the money you are making, you better make a change because your job is either going to go overseas or go to an immigrant.

If you are a white collar guy and are as dumb as a rock and not worth the money you make, you better make a change because your job is going to end up being outsourced or reduced.

The problem with Americans is that we think we "deserve" a certain amount of salary. Union guys don't get what they think they deserve, they quit working a strike and force guys like me to thrown doe urine filled water ballons to get them off of store property.

White collar guys get laid off, aren't worth what they think they are, and sit on un-employment for years whining about how corporate America screwed them when in actuallity they have screwed themselves by becoming complacent with their skills, took their high salary for granted, and became worthless. Why do companies like Sprint lay off 10,000 people? Because they can with 0 impact to the business. It says a lot when you can layoff 10% of your work force and have 0 impact to your product.

FringeNC
12-13-2005, 10:37 AM
Generally, senior management is paying themselves.



I agree there is a principal - agent oversight issue, there. I don't think it's nearly as large as you indicate, though. Senior management is terrified of fund managers, who essentially represent the shareholders now. (Of course, the B. O. D., does too, but these fund managers are less likely to be "captured" by senior managers.)

Instead of limiting executive pay, which would be a essentially the government micro-managing the compensation contracts of firms, what is needed is loosening of the restrictions on corporate takeovers, so that bad, entrenched management teams, like the one at GM can be completely sacked and replaced by competent ones. GM's management has squandered tens of billions of dollars worth of shareholders' wealth.

I'm not discounting the impact of the unions. If you look back at the share price of GM, the shareholders would have been much better off if years ago the company was just liquidated. Management at GM should have made clear to the unions that the contracts were going to have to be renegotiated or that they'd just shut it down. Instead, management and the UAW leeched off of shareholder wealth.

GM should have been taken over long ago. Without so many regulatory hurdles, they would have been.

KC Kings
12-13-2005, 10:37 AM
You think Consumer Reports is crooked? They are when it comes to cars. They took millions from Ford, and therefore didn't make a big stink about the rollover rate of the Bronco II, instead they threw Suzuki under the bus for the Samauri, even thought the Bronco II had a higher rollover rate.



:BS:
Link?

Simplex3
12-13-2005, 10:37 AM
You are right on.

That is an issue that some savvy, charismatic, and eloquent politician would do well to address in the not-so-distant future. Unfortunately, under current campaign finance laws their donations tend to insulate them from meaningful action.
What makes you think the govt. would do anything but f**k things up worse than they already are? Second, what gives the govt. the right to give a f**k what a private business is doing? Is it stupid? Hell yes. Voice your opinion by selling your shares and not buying their products.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:38 AM
Anyone ever read or hear anything about Costco and it's founder/owner?

They pay their employees well above the industry standard, and he pays himself about 300K per year ( although he has enough stock to be be considered plenty wealthy). They promote within company, almost never looking elsewhere for high end jobs.

I just saw a story about him on TV last week. It was refreshing to hear what they are doing to buck the American corporate trend. I've cancelled my Sam Club membership, and switched to Costco, even though it's 15-20 minutes further from my house.

Impressive. Although, let's be honest, I have no problem with a CEO taking home a mill. or two a year. I'm not expecting him to just be "well paid", but rather VERY well paid. Just not obscenely, ridiculously, insanely well paid.

BCD
12-13-2005, 10:39 AM
I haven't bought anything. Not really in the market, but I just like the look of it. It really has no equivalent in the Japanese market. It reminds me of the old Bel Air.

Huh? The Bel air was a sedan...

Simplex3
12-13-2005, 10:40 AM
Uh.... you can't provide for a family on $10 a hr. I've no clue what some of these guys make but I know some of the higher muckity mucks make waaaaaaaaaaaay more than their worth. Millions of dollars a year in bonuses are insane. Factory worker gets a frozen turkey.
Neither one of them deserves s**t. A machine can do the factory worker's job and a drunken money with a dart board can do the CEO's.

Brock
12-13-2005, 10:40 AM
Huh? The Bel air was a sedan...

I'm guessing he means the Nomad.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:40 AM
Im suprised it's 300k...the taxes on that $$ is insane, he could shield it better by taking it all in stock/cap gains.


errr...what? Only quite small public companies pay less than that in salary to their CEOs.

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 10:40 AM
Actually, it has nothing to do with Dynastic Family Wealth at all. That involves taxes and inheritance laws, and not executive compensation at all. But you knew that and just wanted to play the fool anyway, so go ahead.

You might want to go see a doctor about that board you got lodged in your ass. I was just making a joke in reference to your persona a couple of years ago when every subject went back to the same thing with you.

Maybe while you're getting that out of your rectum, he can also transplant you a sense of humor.

:rolleyes:

siberian khatru
12-13-2005, 10:41 AM
You might want to go see a doctor about that board you got lodged in your ass. I was just making a joke in reference to your persona a couple of years ago when every subject went back to the same thing with you.

Maybe while you're getting that out of your rectum, he can also transplant you a sense of humor.

:rolleyes:

The board seems a bit "slow" today, if you catch my drift. :)

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 10:42 AM
errr...what? Only quite small public companies pay less than that in salary to their CEOs.


errr..ummm...if I were a CEO making eleventy billion annually, I'd rather pay the cap gains rate rather than the income tax rate.

That's what I meant...errr..umm...

Cochise
12-13-2005, 10:42 AM
OMG, that thing is hideous...Seriously...

Definitely... it's like they managed to make the PT Cruiser even more ghey somehow.

BCD
12-13-2005, 10:42 AM
Anyone ever read or hear anything about Costco and it's founder/owner?

They pay their employees well above the industry standard, and he pays himself about 300K per year ( although he has enough stock to be be considered plenty wealthy). They promote within company, almost never looking elsewhere for high end jobs.

I just saw a story about him on TV last week. It was refreshing to hear what they are doing to buck the American corporate trend. I've cancelled my Sam Club membership, and switched to Costco, even though it's 15-20 minutes further from my house.I hear alot of good from Costco, too bad none are anywhere near my area...

KC Kings
12-13-2005, 10:44 AM
I'm absolutely convinced this is one issue that a talented and charismatic politician could exploit to huge advantage, to bridge the growing gulf between conservatives and liberals.

Americans staunchly support the free market; but they also staunchly support fundamental fairness.

Quick, someone needs to clone Teddy Roosevelt. And fast!

Never before in the history of the world has the gap between the rich and the poor been greater than it is right now in America. In the past this has always led to revolution, but I have a hard time fathoming a revolution in America. I don't have links for these fact but spent a lot of time discussing this topic in a business ethics class.

Something that is scarying that he gap is the fact that 52% of our national debt is no held by foreign countries. It had never been more than 15% before Clinton. China holds the note for aprox 30% of our debt and could bankrupt the US if they called on us for repayment.

dirk digler
12-13-2005, 10:44 AM
I love my Toyota Corrolla. Best damn car I have ever owned and I have owned GMAC, GMC, and a Ford.

When my Toyota dies at 250,000 miles I will definitely buy another one.

BCD
12-13-2005, 10:44 AM
I'm guessing he means the Nomad.Most likely...

cosmo20002
12-13-2005, 10:44 AM
No, you don't undestand, it's because those damn chanks work for free for chank companies and than the chank cmpanies can buy off Consumer Report to make their shitty cars sound good, but the American companies can't afford to bribe Consumer Report because they already spent all their money on their workers, CEO's don't get paid though, but that money goes to pay for the health insurance, which the chank companies don't even pay. It's simple really.

I don't know what they pay their workers (although many are made by American workers right here in the US) and the "buy off CR" comment is ridiculous, but its all irrelevant. We're talking about the quality of the car. If they were crap, people would stop buying them.

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 10:44 AM
I hear alot of good from Costco, too bad none are anywhere near my area...


There is one really bad thing about Costco...you never seem to get out of there for under a couple hundred. Kid you not...I can go in there looking for some steaks, beer and wine and it allways seems like things just jump into the cart.

Then when you get to the checkout and the bill is $215, you're going WTF?!

jspchief
12-13-2005, 10:47 AM
Impressive. Although, let's be honest, I have no problem with a CEO taking home a mill. or two a year. I'm not expecting him to just be "well paid", but rather VERY well paid. Just not obscenely, ridiculously, insanely well paid.No, I agree. I believe most CEOs deserve to make a lot of money.

The conversation just reminded me of it, so I thought I'd bring it up. It's refreshing to see a company operated in that manner, and I'm doing my part by rewarding that company with my business.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:51 AM
I agree there is a principal - agent oversight issue, there. I don't think it's nearly as large as you indicate, though. Senior management is terrified of fund managers, who essentially represent the shareholders now. (Of course, the B. O. D., does too, but these fund managers are less likely to be "captured" by senior managers.)

Agreed that the increased power of fund managers, both mutual funds and funds like Calpers, are doing good things to return some power to the shareholders. That only applies to some public corporations, however. The other problem is whether the fund managers will cooperate to effect change. That, too, is rare.

Instead of limiting executive pay, which would be a essentially the government micro-managing the compensation contracts of firms, what is needed is loosening of the restrictions on corporate takeovers, so that bad, entrenched management teams, like the one at GM can be completely sacked and replaced by competent ones. GM's management has squandered tens of billions of dollars worth of shareholders' wealth.

I'm not a big fan of heavy micro-specific governmental regulation. I could see a guy like Bill Gates, maybe, getting 400x his average worker's salary, if he were still the CEO, because he was THE guy, if you know what I mean, and he's probably worth 400x the salary.

I'm fine with any and all efforts to eliminate corporate protectionism. Poison pills should be declared void as against public policy by the courts, but no one is willing to take a flyer, so Congress or the states (DE) should just outlaw it point blank.

I'm not discounting the impact of the unions. If you look back at the share price of GM, the shareholders would have been much better off if years ago the company was just liquidated. Management at GM should have made clear to the unions that the contracts were going to have to be renegotiated or that they'd just shut it down. Instead, management and the UAW leeched off of shareholder wealth.

No disagreement. All that has happened at GM has been at the expense of shareheolders. The lenders are still okay unless bankruptcy is declared. Executive paychecks aren't bouncing, last I heard either.

GM should have been taken over long ago. Without so many regulatory hurdles, they would have been.

I'm nto sure it would have happened even without the regulatory hurdles. They'd be a big nut to swallow, and between the cost to do the deal and the effort it would take to turn it around, I'm not sure it would have happened.

Spinning off Delphi made sense. They probably should have stripped down to their core profitable businesses and gotten rid of most of the bulk that makes them look bigger and badder, but just drags them into the red.

I can't begin to tell you how many stories I have about companies that won't sell unproductive, unprofitable businesses for reasons that make no business sense. It's like the GM that drafted a player in the 1st or 2nd round that won't cut the guy, even though it's clear he sucks now and will always suck, because the public perception will be bad. Meanwhile, you're hurting your team in about 10 different ways.

Simplex3
12-13-2005, 10:51 AM
Never before in the history of the world has the gap between the rich and the poor been greater than it is right now in America. In the past this has always led to revolution, but I have a hard time fathoming a revolution in America. I don't have links for these fact but spent a lot of time discussing this topic in a business ethics class.

Something that is scarying that he gap is the fact that 52% of our national debt is no held by foreign countries. It had never been more than 15% before Clinton. China holds the note for aprox 30% of our debt and could bankrupt the US if they called on us for repayment.
1. I have a check here for the national debt. Who do I make it out to?

Exactly.

2. What is China or any other country going to do, send in their goons to collect? If we go bankrupt they never get a nickle back.

3. Until we cut the federal govt. by about 80% and force people to support themselves all of this talk is BS. If we don't we might as well give up the nonsense about us being capitalist and admit we're socialist.

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 10:51 AM
What makes you think the govt. would do anything but f**k things up worse than they already are? Second, what gives the govt. the right to give a f**k what a private business is doing? Is it stupid? Hell yes. Voice your opinion by selling your shares and not buying their products.

Government regulation is not Socialism, as much as critics want to suggest otherwise. The government has the constitutional right, and authority, to regulate businesses that operate against the public interest. Munn vs. Illiniois started the ball rolling, Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt helped it along....and, while there have been excesses, most of the time excesses are corrected (though not as quickly as some of us would like to see.)

Collusion, monopolies, and unethical business practices fall under the purview of the federal government's authority. The "free" market is one thing; unrestrained and exploitative business practices are certainly fair game for government intervention, when it's appropriate. Surely, it should be minimized....but greed and corruption are all too human to ignore.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:53 AM
errr..ummm...if I were a CEO making eleventy billion annually, I'd rather pay the cap gains rate rather than the income tax rate.

That's what I meant...errr..umm...


Yeah, that's obvious enough, but if they're options than you need to both wait for them to vest, and hope that the price goes up so they're not underwater.

You can fiddle with SARs and stuff, but new regulations are affecting all of these things and making them a bit less exciting for the corporation to give out like pez.

Simplex3
12-13-2005, 10:53 AM
No, I agree. I believe most CEOs deserve to make a lot of money.

The conversation just reminded me of it, so I thought I'd bring it up. It's refreshing to see a company operated in that manner, and I'm doing my part by rewarding that company with my business.
CEOs who are leading companies that are growing deserve a percentage of that growth. CEOs like that a**hat from Coke years back who basically tanked the company for years, all the while getting his bonuses, only to be fired and get his golden parachute are quite a different story.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:55 AM
Never before in the history of the world has the gap between the rich and the poor been greater than it is right now in America. In the past this has always led to revolution, but I have a hard time fathoming a revolution in America. I don't have links for these fact but spent a lot of time discussing this topic in a business ethics class.

Something that is scarying that he gap is the fact that 52% of our national debt is no held by foreign countries. It had never been more than 15% before Clinton. China holds the note for aprox 30% of our debt and could bankrupt the US if they called on us for repayment.


1. China "can't call on us for repayment" unless we default somehow, which ain't likely to happen.

2. China has little interest in bankrupting one of their major buyers. They also don't have much interest in screwing up the entire world economy.

3. Finally, even if we defaulted, how would they collect? They going to invade us? Not hardly. Of course, this would cause a worldwide depression and have unimaginable consequences on the economies of the entire world, but that's another story.

Cochise
12-13-2005, 10:55 AM
[52% of our national debt] is now held by foreign countries. It had never been more than 15% before Clinton. China holds the note for aprox 30% of our debt and could bankrupt the US if they called on us for repayment.

I call BS on all of this. Prove it.

Brock
12-13-2005, 10:57 AM
CEOs who are leading companies that are growing deserve a percentage of that growth. CEOs like that a**hat from Coke years back who basically tanked the company for years, all the while getting his bonuses, only to be fired and get his golden parachute are quite a different story.

yeah - I think there should be a rider in the contract that termination means TERMINATION.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:57 AM
CEOs who are leading companies that are growing deserve a percentage of that growth. CEOs like that a**hat from Coke years back who basically tanked the company for years, all the while getting his bonuses, only to be fired and get his golden parachute are quite a different story.


What I'm saying is that they ALL get it, whether they're good or bad. The good ones might stay a little while longer, but I've also seen bad ones that created a situation that forced a sale that triggered the parachute. Disgusting.

morphius
12-13-2005, 10:57 AM
There is one really bad thing about Costco...you never seem to get out of there for under a couple hundred. Kid you not...I can go in there looking for some steaks, beer and wine and it allways seems like things just jump into the cart.

Then when you get to the checkout and the bill is $215, you're going WTF?!
My wallet would appreciate it if you would stop taking my wife shopping with you.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 10:58 AM
I call BS on all of this. Prove it.


Yeah, actually, I agree. Makes no sense that it would be 15% before Clinton but 50% now. 30% by China seems waaay high also.

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 10:59 AM
Yeah, that's obvious enough, but if they're options than you need to both wait for them to vest, and hope that the price goes up so they're not underwater.

Hope? I would hope the CEO finds that an incentive to keep the company growing and profitable--seeing that's his job.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 11:02 AM
yeah - I think there should be a rider in the contract that termination means TERMINATION.


Oh, it does.

But termination in an executive contract means you continue to get everything you got before you were terminated unless you were fired "For Cause", which is usually defined as:

1. commit a felony or any crime involving fraud

2. do something obviously unethical, embarrassing, etc.

Sometimes you can get "Grossly Negligent" in there, which is tough to prove because you'd basically have to not report to work at all to trigger this. It's essentially an "aggressively did not care about your job" kind of standard.

So, usually the board will negotiate a buy-out and both sides part ways, with the company a serious chunk of change lighter. Keep in mind that doing this means that a company that was already spiraling in a bad direction (presumably) now gets to fork out money that it might not have if it's in a cash crunch, and can enjoy the side benefits of bad press and having its stock potentially walloped as a result.

Good times.

CanadaKC
12-13-2005, 11:03 AM
Wow...did I set off a firestorm or what? I wanted to but an American SUV...I was looking at the Dodge Durango or a Chevy Blazer...but the Blazer got horrible ratings and the Durango...although better...couldn't hold a match to the 4Runner...which I bought.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 11:03 AM
Hope? I would hope the CEO finds that an incentive to keep the company growing and profitable--seeing that's his job.


And yet, there's far more factors on stock price than just what the company can control.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 11:04 AM
Wow...did I set off a firestorm or what? I wanted to but an American SUV...I was looking at the Dodge Durango or a Chevy Blazer...but the Blazer got horrible ratings and the Durango...although better...couldn't hold a match to the 4Runner...which I bought.


I love the 4Runner. If I wasnt' stuck buying a MommyMobile, it would've been either a PathFinder or a 4Runner. They're both pretty sweet, IMHO.

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 11:05 AM
And yet, there's far more factors on stock price than just what the company can control.

Those poor CEO's...

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 11:08 AM
:eek: :eek: :eek:

I'm havin' Pre-Washington DC flashbacks here.....it's a wonder this thread has lasted on the front page in the Lounge, but makes me long for days of old....when reasonable and heartfelt discussion, related but not dominated by politics, COULD be held over here.

It was one of the things that had drawn me to this place....and it's one of the things I miss about having to, usually, send stuff like this over to D.C. (to that cesspool of a ghetto)--that forum that is dying a slow and painful death.

What's the difference this time? Anyone? Anyone?

1. Absence of vitriolic and highly charged partisan rhetoric.
2. Absence of personal attacks.
3. Absence of a couple of notorious key posters.... :hmmm:

Sad we can't return to more of this.... :shake:

Donger
12-13-2005, 11:08 AM
Something that is scarying that he gap is the fact that 52% of our national debt is no held by foreign countries.

No, it isn't.

Present national debt = $8.1 trillion.
Debt owed to foreign countries = $1.8 trillion.

You can do the math.

It had never been more than 15% before Clinton. China holds the note for aprox 30% of our debt and could bankrupt the US if they called on us for repayment.

See above.

Cochise
12-13-2005, 11:09 AM
Yeah, actually, I agree. Makes no sense that it would be 15% before Clinton but 50% now. 30% by China seems waaay high also.

Not to mention that China could somehow 'bankrupt' us by 'demanding payment'.

What are they going to do? Send the cops over here to kick us out of the country? Foreclose on the whole United States? Send a flatbed over and have the repo man tow the country away?

Is China eager to write tens of billions or trillions off as a bad debt? Will that negatively affect China's stock price? Should we call a credit counselor and see if China will reduce our rates and balance in return for a promise of repayment?

If they press the red button to 'bankrupt' us will the lights just go out? NYSE closes up forever? Chinese flags go up in front of every federal building? Will I get a discount at the Happy Dragon China buffet for lunch tomorrow?

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 11:11 AM
Wow...did I set off a firestorm or what? I wanted to but an American SUV...I was looking at the Dodge Durango or a Chevy Blazer...but the Blazer got horrible ratings and the Durango...although better...couldn't hold a match to the 4Runner...which I bought.

Who the fugg are you, again? :p

;)

KCTitus
12-13-2005, 11:11 AM
But enough about those damned CEO's...anyone know how much GM's annual legacy costs are? I dont remember the numbers, but the healthcare alone was ridiculous and only getting worse.

How the union thought that they could keep that going without bleeding the company totally dry is beyond me. Simply unsustainable.

I also read about UAW 'job banks' that basically pays 12,000 UAW workers to do nothing. I read about this around the Delphi bankruptcy.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 11:19 AM
But enough about those damned CEO's...anyone know how much GM's annual legacy costs are? I dont remember the numbers, but the healthcare alone was ridiculous and only getting worse.

How the union thought that they could keep that going without bleeding the company totally dry is beyond me. Simply unsustainable.

I also read about UAW 'job banks' that basically pays 12,000 UAW workers to do nothing. I read about this around the Delphi bankruptcy.


Agreed that GM's union-related costs are absolutely killing them. I also have no idea what the unions are thinking when they do this kind of stuff to their employers. It's one thing to negotiate a good deal for your people, and another to negotiate SUCH a good deal for yourselves that you're cutting off the hand that feeds you.

I'm not a union guy or a union lawyer, so I'm not very close to these kinds of negotiations, but it does seem odd to me to say the least.

Pitt Gorilla
12-13-2005, 11:20 AM
1. Absence of vitriolic and highly charged partisan rhetoric.
2. Absence of personal attacks.
3. Absence of a couple of notorious key posters.... :hmmm:

Sad we can't return to more of this.... :shake:I find this just a tad bit ironic.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 11:20 AM
:eek: :eek: :eek:

I'm havin' Pre-Washington DC flashbacks here.....it's a wonder this thread has lasted on the front page in the Lounge, but makes me long for days of old....when reasonable and heartfelt discussion, related but not dominated by politics, COULD be held over here.

It was one of the things that had drawn me to this place....and it's one of the things I miss about having to, usually, send stuff like this over to D.C. (to that cesspool of a ghetto)--that forum that is dying a slow and painful death.

What's the difference this time? Anyone? Anyone?

1. Absence of vitriolic and highly charged partisan rhetoric.
2. Absence of personal attacks.
3. Absence of a couple of notorious key posters.... :hmmm:

Sad we can't return to more of this.... :shake:

Agreed on all counts. I have no clue why we haven't already been drop kicked over to DC, but hooray! :)

Pitt Gorilla
12-13-2005, 11:21 AM
Agreed that GM's union-related costs are absolutely killing them. I also have no idea what the unions are thinking when they do this kind of stuff to their employers. It's one thing to negotiate a good deal for your people, and another to negotiate SUCH a good deal for yourselves that you're cutting off the hand that feeds you.

I'm not a union guy or a union lawyer, so I'm not very close to these kinds of negotiations, but it does seem odd to me to say the least.Why would GM agree to such demands? It' not like these workers are improving the quality.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 11:22 AM
Not to mention that China could somehow 'bankrupt' us by 'demanding payment'.

What are they going to do? Send the cops over here to kick us out of the country? Foreclose on the whole United States? Send a flatbed over and have the repo man tow the country away?

Is China eager to write tens of billions or trillions off as a bad debt? Will that negatively affect China's stock price? Should we call a credit counselor and see if China will reduce our rates and balance in return for a promise of repayment?

If they press the red button to 'bankrupt' us will the lights just go out? NYSE closes up forever? Chinese flags go up in front of every federal building? Will I get a discount at the Happy Dragon China buffet for lunch tomorrow?


Yeah, I responded to these items (as did Patteau before me), prior to the post you responded to.

I also noted that China would be cutting off its own nose to spite its face. When one of your biggest customers is paying its bills on time, why would you yank its chain?

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 11:25 AM
Why would GM agree to such demands? It' not like these workers are improving the quality.

The threat of a strike is pretty potent. There are all kinds of federal rules about just firing them all and hiring replacements, but even if you could, you'd lose a huge (irreplaceable?) amount of worker know how to keep everything working smoothly and continuing to produce product in volume and quality (cough).

Keep in mind also that the UAW is a big boy in the union business, and might be able toc onvince other unions to follow it's lead if it struck GM as a whole. That could affect GM's customers and suppliers as well, which would be horrendous for them.

But, OTOH, it's not a completely one-sided relationship. But still, GM is in a position similar to sports owners, where sometimes they do things that are stupid long term because they think it's good in the short term. (see "salary cap, need to implement")

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 12:26 PM
I find this just a tad bit ironic.

I've made a real effort over the past 4-5 months to be better than I had become in DC in the past....but you just can't seem to let it go. Whatever floats your boat, dude.

Saulbadguy
12-13-2005, 12:28 PM
I think GM, Ford, and Chrysler pump too much $$$ in to advertising as well.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 12:47 PM
I think GM, Ford, and Chrysler pump too much $$$ in to advertising as well.


Although I hear you, I doubt that advertising outlays of GM are either all THAT significant compared to its other significant costs of doing business, or disproportionate to the auto industry as a whole, which certainly does alot of advertising.

Cochise
12-13-2005, 01:05 PM
Yeah, I responded to these items (as did Patteau before me), prior to the post you responded to.

I also noted that China would be cutting off its own nose to spite its face. When one of your biggest customers is paying its bills on time, why would you yank its chain?

I'm far from an expert on international finance, but my picture of the national debt is kind of like a person having a big credit card debt. Say I'm in debt $10,000 (or whatever) on my Visa. I can keep paying the minimum payment, and maybe it will get paid off in like 20 years (if my interest rate is good).

Do you think if my creditor had the power, they would want to demand full repayment immediately and throw me into bankruptcy? Hello, if I go bankrupt, they're never getting their money. Furthermore, they've got me paying them a hundred dollars or more every month in nice, steady income. Why would they mess with a good thing?

At any rate, I think whoever posted that garbage has been sufficiently owned so I won't belabor it.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 01:14 PM
I'm far from an expert on international finance, but my picture of the national debt is kind of like a person having a big credit card debt. Say I'm in debt $10,000 (or whatever) on my Visa. I can keep paying the minimum payment, and maybe it will get paid off in like 20 years (if my interest rate is good).

Do you think if my creditor had the power, they would want to demand full repayment immediately and throw me into bankruptcy? Hello, if I go bankrupt, they're never getting their money. Furthermore, they've got me paying them a hundred dollars or more every month in nice, steady income. Why would they mess with a good thing?

At any rate, I think whoever posted that garbage has been sufficiently owned so I won't belabor it.


Precisely correct in all respects. The US's debt is simply via its treasury bonds being bought by foreigners, and/or foreign banks, including their central banks. Their terms aren't any different from the bonds you and I can buy.

Cochise
12-13-2005, 01:17 PM
Precisely correct in all respects. The US's debt is simply via its treasury bonds being bought by foreigners, and/or foreign banks, including their central banks. Their terms aren't any different from the bonds you and I can buy.

Well, the point being, that I don't think paying these creditors off is a dire immediate emergency. There's no risk to our national sovreignty here. China doesn't own half the United States.

Sure, we need to figure out a way to get solvent as soon as possible but we're not going to be mandated to hang pictures of Chairman Mao in our living rooms because of the debt.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 01:35 PM
Well, the point being, that I don't think paying these creditors off is a dire immediate emergency. There's no risk to our national sovreignty here. China doesn't own half the United States.

Sure, we need to figure out a way to get solvent as soon as possible but we're not going to be mandated to hang pictures of Chairman Mao in our living rooms because of the debt.


I agree, but let's recognize that if the US were to default on its debts, a worldwide depression would be the most likely outcome. It would be an unprecedented economic disaster.

That said, China can't "call the loan" if you will, unless we first default. There's no imminent risk of that.

Donger
12-13-2005, 01:41 PM
I agree, but let's recognize that if the US were to default on its debts, a worldwide depression would be the most likely outcome. It would be an unprecedented economic disaster.

That said, China can't "call the loan" if you will, unless we first default. There's no imminent risk of that.

Yep. Don't forget that even our huge national debt is only 65% of our GDP. As a comparison, Japan's debt is 164% of its GDP. And they are one of our largest creditors.

Calcountry
12-13-2005, 02:08 PM
tell me why an uneduated factory worker deserves 130k including healthcare????

They deserve 10 bucks an hour.........GM should fire Union workerThis is why they need it. They need to support the beer belly, bologna, and blue jeans industry. Then come into my store and bitch at me, that they can buy a can of Science diet a nickle/can cheaper at a non union mega chain store. :rolleyes:

Calcountry
12-13-2005, 02:14 PM
GM owns Izuzu, sold Subaru a few months ago and Kawaskaki doesnt make cars... but yes toyota and honda are evilBest car I have ever owned, Honda Accord LX V6 260 horsepower, tons of creature comforts. No wasted space inside. The window controls are ergonomic. Top shelf all the way. GM would have charged 30k for a similar car, and it would have been in the shop by now.

I Paid 23K.

No problems, it still drives like it is brand new at 40K miles.

Mark M
12-13-2005, 02:17 PM
I've read quite a bit (yet not quite all) of this thread and just wanna give a big :thumb: to everyone involved. This has been an amazingly cordial, educational and enjoyable discussion.

That being said, IMHO the reason for the for the low quality of American cars has to do with one thing:

Pride.

While it may be a deadly sin, the fact is the Japanese take a lot more pride in their work than the average American. They see what they do as a reflection of themselves, not just a way to pay the bills.

This is a philosophy that just isn't present in enough American workers anymore, and it shows up in the final product.

MM
~~:shrug:

morphius
12-13-2005, 02:28 PM
I've read quite a bit (yet not quite all) of this thread and just wanna give a big :thumb: to everyone involved. This has been an amazingly cordial, educational and enjoyable discussion.

That being said, IMHO the reason for the for the low quality of American cars has to do with one thing:

Pride.

While it may be a deadly sin, the fact is the Japanese take a lot more pride in their work than the average American. They see what they do as a reflection of themselves, not just a way to pay the bills.

This is a philosophy that just isn't present in enough American workers anymore, and it shows up in the final product.

MM
~~:shrug:
I would have to disagree, just in the fact that the Japanese are building some of their cars over here with American workers and are keeping their quality standards intact.

Brock
12-13-2005, 02:52 PM
While it may be a deadly sin, the fact is the Japanese take a lot more pride in their work than the average American. They see what they do as a reflection of themselves, not just a way to pay the bills.

Americans have been building Japanese cars for years, and they're still just as good. The difference is the processes and nothing else.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 02:55 PM
Yep. Don't forget that even our huge national debt is only 65% of our GDP. As a comparison, Japan's debt is 164% of its GDP. And they are one of our largest creditors.


Holy crapoli. Didn't know about that Japanese debt percentage. That's insane.

Cochise
12-13-2005, 03:04 PM
Americans have been building Japanese cars for years, and they're still just as good. The difference is the processes and nothing else.

Are, say, the people who build Toyotas in Indiana also UAW?

Brock
12-13-2005, 03:06 PM
Are, say, the people who build Toyotas in Indiana also UAW?

I don't think so. Which probably says a lot about Toyota's management style.

tk13
12-13-2005, 03:16 PM
I don't think so. Which probably says a lot about Toyota's management style.
It's supposed to be a pretty rigorous process to get hired there... I don't know what all it entails but it's not an easy job to get, and it's usually in pretty high demand.

Iowanian
12-13-2005, 03:16 PM
UAW and every other union on Earth suck balls.

Unions are great, for underachieving simpletons who want to ascend on senority instead of earning it through hard work, ability and productivity. Overpaid, spoiled union workers are going to be the death of our economy.

UAW supporters can go take a flying f@ck after a rolling dounut IMO.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 03:18 PM
By next year, analysts believe, GM will be knocked off its pedestal as America's biggest automotive company and Toyota will take its place. Toyota has expanded its operations worldwide with nine plants in the United States -- including a Camry assembly plant in Kentucky and an engine plant in Alabama -- and a largely non-unionized work force that is paid close to the same wages as the unionized workers at the Detroit-based carmakers.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/commentary/cst-edt-edits25.html

Inspector
12-13-2005, 03:19 PM
Well, the point being, that I don't think paying these creditors off is a dire immediate emergency. There's no risk to our national sovreignty here. China doesn't own half the United States.

Sure, we need to figure out a way to get solvent as soon as possible but we're not going to be mandated to hang pictures of Chairman Mao in our living rooms because of the debt.

Well great!!!

Just WTF am I going to do with this huge painting of Mao?

eh...guess I'll try ebay....

tk13
12-13-2005, 03:19 PM
I'm pretty sure this is still how the Toyota plant hires.... it's something similiar to this, tough to pass, but once you get in I guess they take pretty good care of you.

The applicants will first be screened by state officials, then by Toyota, which will likely use a 15- to 20-hour interview and testing process, said Eric Kramp, manager of Toyota Motor Corporate Services.

The end result should be a plant filled with workers who are flexible, resourceful and good "team players," Kramp said.

Kramp and Tom Suter, the assistant general manager of Toyota's Georgetown, Ky., plant, spoke to a group of more than 100 people at a meeting sponsored by the Minority Economic Development Task Force on Wednesday.

The meeting was designed to let people in the near-Downtown area learn about Toyota and about employment opportunities that will be available through the company or through other automotive suppliers that are expected to be opening in Southern Indiana in coming months, said Royce Sutton, Vanderburgh County councilman and member of the task force.

Toyota announced in November it would build a $700 million plant along U.S. 41 about two miles south of Princeton.

The plant will begin operating in the fall of 1998. It will make 100,000 pickup trucks a year.

Kramp said Toyota will be filling positions in stamping, plastics, painting, welding, assembly and maintenance departments. A small number of employees will be hired for purchasing, public affairs, human resources, quality control, engineering and other management jobs.

Most of the people hired by Toyota will be from Southwestern Indiana. They will first be screened by Indiana officials, who gave the company economic incentives to locate in the state, then by company officials.

Toyota will ask applicants to undergo a "day-of-work" assessment, one to two hours of interviews, a drug test, a reference check and a four-to-five hour physical exam.

The "day-of-work" assessment will give employees eight hours in a work-like environment in which they will focus on problem-solving, teamwork and flexibility.

"What the process is going to do is allow you . . . to demonstrate you are a good employee," Suter said.

stevieray
12-13-2005, 03:23 PM
hopefully we can become Mexico and have every vehichle with a foriegn name attached.

then they can go after the trucking industry.

I love watching Americans argue for the Japanese.


Last longer my ass, Japanese cars rarely make it past twenty years.

Americans are too afraid to appear poor, therefore leasing a new car every three years. Reliabilty? what people really meaan is they want to beat the crap out of a car, without ever having to learn how to do even the slightest maintnenence. Spoiled.

I could give a sit if the Japanese build the best car. BFD.

Amnorix
12-13-2005, 03:37 PM
UAW and every other union on Earth suck balls.

Unions are great, for underachieving simpletons who want to ascend on senority instead of earning it through hard work, ability and productivity. Overpaid, spoiled union workers are going to be the death of our economy.

UAW supporters can go take a flying f@ck after a rolling dounut IMO.


I'll disagree.

First, let's note that the advent of unions in the late 1800s and into the 1900s was absolutely a necessary and positive step in balancing the power of the heavy industries that did nothing more than mistreat its workers.

Second, even today unions CAN be useful for both employees and employers, under the right circumstances. BUT they need to recognize that sucking every right and every dollar they can isn't always in their best interests.

headsnap
12-13-2005, 05:07 PM
Last longer my ass, Japanese cars rarely make it past twenty years.


None of todays cars are built to last 10 years, let alone 20...




My 300M is about dead after just 5, back to Honda for me...

Baby Lee
12-13-2005, 05:20 PM
My 1999 Grand Prix [from Bonner Springs, KS :thumb:]has 101K mi. I've replaced;

The tranny - OK that's a big one, but it is holding down a 240HP FWD
Wiper blades [2x]
3rd brake bulb [1]
Fog light bulb [1]
Brake Pads [3x]
Tires [3x]
Oil [every 3k mi]
Tranny fluid [every 40K mi]
Left rear proportioning valve [$20, 10 min]

That it.

Saulbadguy
12-13-2005, 05:24 PM
2009 "camero" concept car.
http://tinypic.com/icjup5.jpg

headsnap
12-13-2005, 05:24 PM
My 1999 Grand Prix [from Bonner Springs, KS :thumb:]has 101K mi. I've replaced;

The tranny - OK that's a big one, but it is holding down a 240HP FWD
Wiper blades [2x]
3rd brake bulb [1]
Fog light bulb [1]
Brake Pads [3x]
Tires [3x]
Oil [every 3k mi]
Tranny fluid [every 40K mi]
Left rear proportioning valve [$20, 10 min]

That it.

my 95 Honda had 150K with only the general maint & 1 CV joint ($150)

Rain Man
12-13-2005, 05:26 PM
I'll disagree.

First, let's note that the advent of unions in the late 1800s and into the 1900s was absolutely a necessary and positive step in balancing the power of the heavy industries that did nothing more than mistreat its workers.

Second, even today unions CAN be useful for both employees and employers, under the right circumstances. BUT they need to recognize that sucking every right and every dollar they can isn't always in their best interests.

I think the key is that the unions need to be realistic about the value of their employees, and they flat-out aren't. One reason that the airline industry is dying is because the unions blackmailed companies into providing ludicrous wages and pensions. I would argue that they were not looking out for the best long-term interest of their employees by focusing solely on short-term gains.

There was an article in the local newspaper here a while back that focused on the trials and tribulations of people who had been laid off from large companies. One of the people profiled was a woman who had lost her job washing airplanes. Her job was to spray the airplane with a hose, and her salary was over $50,000 a year with benefits. She was lamenting that she can't find a comparable job. Well, duh. The job was paying roughly triple the wage that was warranted by her skills. Other than Congress, there ARE no other jobs out there like that.

A later article focused on a former pilot who demanded pity because United Airlines was defaulting on his pension. His retirement pension was over $100,000 per year. While I certainly have sympathy that they aren't honoring their commitment to this individual, I step back and think that it's absolutely insane to offer $100k lifetime pensions to a large body of employees.

I blame the unions for creating a lot of the industrial problems in the U.S. today. A hundred years ago, they were vital for protecting workers' rights, but for the past forty years their efforts have been misguided and have promoted the export of jobs to other countries.

Baby Lee
12-13-2005, 05:26 PM
my 95 Honda had 150K with only the general maint & 1 CV joint ($150)
Sorry, I drained and replaced my coolant at 95K in preventive maintanence, too.

Rain Man
12-13-2005, 05:28 PM
Sorry, I drained and replaced my coolant at 95K in preventive maintanence, too.

Baby Lee lied, engines died.

Saulbadguy
12-13-2005, 05:28 PM
My 1999 Grand Prix [from Bonner Springs, KS :thumb:]has 101K mi. I've replaced;

The tranny - OK that's a big one, but it is holding down a 240HP FWD
Wiper blades [2x]
3rd brake bulb [1]
Fog light bulb [1]
Brake Pads [3x]
Tires [3x]
Oil [every 3k mi]
Tranny fluid [every 40K mi]
Left rear proportioning valve [$20, 10 min]

That it.
We all have our personal anecdotes. They really mean nothing.

I've got a 99 Nissan Sentra, and the only thing i've had a problem with was a carrier bearing. Had a problem with non-OEM brake pads (had to replace the pads and rotors), but I don't see that as Nissans problem. It was a cheap fix. All I do is change the oil every 5k miles and rotate the tires. I'm almost to 90k miles..got the car with 38k miles on it.

Saulbadguy
12-13-2005, 05:30 PM
hopefully we can become Mexico and have every vehichle with a foriegn name attached.

then they can go after the trucking industry.

I love watching Americans argue for the Japanese.


Last longer my ass, Japanese cars rarely make it past twenty years.

Americans are too afraid to appear poor, therefore leasing a new car every three years. Reliabilty? what people really meaan is they want to beat the crap out of a car, without ever having to learn how to do even the slightest maintnenence. Spoiled.

I could give a sit if the Japanese build the best car. BFD.
My parents have gone through quite a few Fords, and it was always the "little" things that would give them problems. Broken sensors, busted hoses, and faulty electronics. Nothing maintanence could have prevented.

I agree with you on the routine maintenance thing, it makes all the difference in the world. I've known people who don't get their oil changed ever...until its too late.

stevieray
12-13-2005, 06:11 PM
None of todays cars are built to last 10 years, let alone 20...




My 300M is about dead after just 5, back to Honda for me...

I see more American cars still on the road from twenty years ago than imports.

I'm not trying to change anybodys mind, more power to you if you want to buy Japanese. I'm sure they build great cars, I'm just not convinced we need them to get around.

Rain Man
12-13-2005, 06:40 PM
Someone told me something once that I thought was interesting. Let me toss it out there, and see what everyone thinks.

This person said that Japanese cars are designed to last longer than American cars ... as long as they're regularly maintained. (Japanese mindset) He then said that American cars are designed to last longer if owned by a toad who never maintains the car. (American mindset) They're designed to take more abuse and survive, which in turn helps them live longer lives, though they don't do as well in the short term.

I don't know if it's true or even logical, but it's an interesting concept.

Saulbadguy
12-13-2005, 06:42 PM
I see more American cars still on the road from twenty years ago than imports.


Which speaks volumes for how far the American auto industry has fallen. The older cars outlast the newer cars.

morphius
12-13-2005, 06:47 PM
I see more American cars still on the road from twenty years ago than imports.

I'm not trying to change anybodys mind, more power to you if you want to buy Japanese. I'm sure they build great cars, I'm just not convinced we need them to get around.
Thats probably because 30 years ago Americans made cars that last longer, sadly that idea died out in the 70's somewhere.

morphius
12-13-2005, 06:50 PM
Someone told me something once that I thought was interesting. Let me toss it out there, and see what everyone thinks.

This person said that Japanese cars are designed to last longer than American cars ... as long as they're regularly maintained. (Japanese mindset) He then said that American cars are designed to last longer if owned by a toad who never maintains the car. (American mindset) They're designed to take more abuse and survive, which in turn helps them live longer lives, though they don't do as well in the short term.

I don't know if it's true or even logical, but it's an interesting concept.
I could see that, honestly.

Cochise
12-13-2005, 06:52 PM
Thats probably because 30 years ago Americans made cars that last longer, sadly that idea died out in the 70's somewhere.

I don't have data, but I would also wager that there were exponentially more American cars being sold in those days. Perhaps in 1975, 90% of cars sold were by American automakers, whereas now it's close to even. So you see a lot more 20 year old American vehicles but because there were so many more of them, not necessarily because their rate of surviving for 20 years was any higher.

stevieray
12-13-2005, 07:00 PM
I don't have data, but I would also wager that there were exponentially more American cars being sold in those days. Perhaps in 1975, 90% of cars sold were by American automakers, whereas now it's close to even. So you see a lot more 20 year old American vehicles but because there were so many more of them, not necessarily because their rate of surviving for 20 years was any higher.

regardless, they are still on the road.

how many twenty year old imports do you see?

Cochise
12-13-2005, 07:03 PM
regardless, they are still on the road.

how many twenty year old imports do you see?

Not many.

But, I don't see very many 30 year olds from Mozambique on the street. It doesn't mean that people from there don't live until age 30, it just means there aren't a whole lot of them around here.

stevieray
12-13-2005, 07:06 PM
Not many.

But, I don't see very many 30 year olds from Mozambique on the street. It doesn't mean that people from there don't live until age 30, it just means there aren't a whole lot of them around here.


They aren't anywhere.

Saulbadguy
12-13-2005, 07:18 PM
Cause they sucked. They have gotten better.

Iowanian
12-13-2005, 07:20 PM
amn.

I think bRainman did an excellent job of explaining most of my position in a more diplomatic way.

Unions had their place, and like the washboard, have been bypassed in effectiveness.

There are good reasons so many companies are choosing to close Union plants and reopen them overseas.

I'll submit a sample from the small city in which I live.

Company A is a union shop with 200 employees. Company A is losing its arse, and has a non-union shop in Alabama that is doing fine. Company A says "Bust the union, come down to a reasonable wage and we'll keep the plant open and you all keep your jobs OR don't bust the union and we'll shut it down and move it all south"

Union at Company A says "you're bluffing, all in".
Company A closes most of doors, with exception of 25 employees...calls bluff.

Company A says "Ok, we'd really like to keep your shop open, but you last 25 guys have to bust the union and we'll keep your jobs and possibly work back up in numbers"

Last 25 employees at Company A say "no, we're not busting the union....we'd rather you shut down and we not have jobs in an area that has lost 3 factories in 2 years.

So now.....none of them have jobs, while company A has ramped up production and hired more employees from new region of country.

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 07:26 PM
They aren't anywhere.

That's because 20-30 years ago, foreign cars did suck, generally. Yes. That was then, this is now. In the late 80s Honda and Toyota figured out durability, reliability, and workmanship matters to many consumers; it's something Detroit left behind in the 70s. We don't "need" foreign cars; but savvy consumers who are searching for "bang for the buck"....go where they find value. In the 60s and 70s, it was American cars; since the late 80s, it's been foreign cars. In 2025, I suspect the majority of 20 year old cars still around....will not be American; I'd bet on it.

When Detroit and UAW wake the hell up, I'll be happy to give them my business once again. Thrilled, actually. Why settle for a a $3 Bud Light, when you can spend $3.50 for a REAL beer?

Iowanian
12-13-2005, 07:37 PM
Wasn't it UAW workers who refused to allow US Marines to park in their parking lot in Detroit while they were at the Reserve center because some of them were in non-UAW cars?

pffffffffffffft.

Sybil
12-13-2005, 07:51 PM
Wasn't it UAW workers who refused to allow US Marines to park in their parking lot in Detroit while they were at the Reserve center because some of them were in non-UAW cars?

pffffffffffffft.

Yes, it was.

stevieray
12-13-2005, 07:54 PM
In 2025, I suspect the majority of 20 year old cars still around....will not be American; I'd bet on it.



:(

That's downright depressing, and says more about us than it ever will about them.

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 07:59 PM
:(

That's downright depressing, and says more about us than it ever will about them.

I agree; but we have only the management and unions of the Big Three to blame. They've done this to themselves. To ask Americans to continue to "buy American" out of some perverted sense of Patriotism is absurd though.

stevieray
12-13-2005, 08:01 PM
I agree; but we have only the management and unions of the Big Three to blame. They've done this to themselves. To ask Americans to continue to "buy American" out of some perverted sense of Patriotism is absurd though.

We've done it to ourselves.

Saulbadguy
12-13-2005, 08:02 PM
To ask Americans to continue to "buy American" out of some perverted sense of Patriotism is absurd though.
I agree 100%.

TinyEvel
12-13-2005, 08:06 PM
Hey, Aren't Al and Gun running GM?

morphius
12-13-2005, 08:14 PM
We've done it to ourselves.
There is also a reason you buy old cars instead of buying the new metal that are being put out as well. You are not exactly helping the US companies out by driving old used cars.

stevieray
12-13-2005, 08:20 PM
To ask Americans to continue to "buy American" out of some perverted sense of Patriotism is absurd though.

Asking?

There is no such thing.

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 08:51 PM
Asking?

There is no such thing.

FTR, I wasn't saying you are asking; but that is what Detroit and unions seem to expect.

stevieray
12-13-2005, 08:53 PM
FTR, I wasn't saying you are asking; but that is what Detroit and unions seem to expect.

expect?

There is no such thing.

Mr. Kotter
12-13-2005, 08:57 PM
expect?

There is no such thing.

Nevermind, Stevie. No first down for me, heh. I'm punting. ;)

Saulbadguy
12-13-2005, 08:57 PM
I'm cornfused.

headsnap
12-13-2005, 08:58 PM
expect?

There is no such thing.
hope, want, pray... :shrug:

morphius
12-13-2005, 09:00 PM
I'm cornfused.
Then you are using your corn the wrong way...

headsnap
12-13-2005, 09:02 PM
Then you are using your corn the wrong way...

mixing ethanol with his methane? :eek:

kcfanXIII
12-13-2005, 09:06 PM
Union man, I see. ;)
hes a neo con, no way is he union. at the claycomo plant here in kc, when you break it down, those guys get paid about 65 cents a job (truck). i have about 7 family members that are uaw, and with any luck, i will be before too long. although looks like they're not gonna be hiring for a while.
meanwhile to address the hybrid issue, its all just pr. they have the technology to run a car off of water. yet this offers no chance to make a profit for anyone after the car is sold. long story short, i doubt we ever see this tech available to the public.
anyways, back off the uaw, they work hard and get paid good for the job they do.

kcfanXIII
12-13-2005, 09:18 PM
UAW and every other union on Earth suck balls.

Unions are great, for underachieving simpletons who want to ascend on senority instead of earning it through hard work, ability and productivity. Overpaid, spoiled union workers are going to be the death of our economy.

UAW supporters can go take a flying f@ck after a rolling dounut IMO.
do you think anyone is gonna put up with the bs of being a auto worker if they can't even support a family? talk about product quality going down.

morphius
12-13-2005, 09:19 PM
do you think anyone is gonna put up with the bs of being a auto worker if they can't even support a family? talk about product quality going down.
Ummm, see Toyota in the US...

Morphius
Feeling like a gawd damn certified parrot.

go bowe
12-13-2005, 10:00 PM
polly wanna cracker?

|Zach|
12-14-2005, 05:33 PM
I don't know enough about any facet of this issue to have an informed take but I am going to go with the odds and disagree with whatever stance rec is taking. Any side he is not on is generally the right one.
I did good.

Calcountry
12-14-2005, 06:00 PM
hes a neo con, no way is he union. at the claycomo plant here in kc, when you break it down, those guys get paid about 65 cents a job (truck). i have about 7 family members that are uaw, and with any luck, i will be before too long. although looks like they're not gonna be hiring for a while.
meanwhile to address the hybrid issue, its all just pr. they have the technology to run a car off of water. yet this offers no chance to make a profit for anyone after the car is sold. long story short, i doubt we ever see this tech available to the public.
anyways, back off the uaw, they work hard and get paid good for the job they do.First letter of a sentence is suppose to be a Capital.

Hurry up and join the union.

NaptownChief
12-14-2005, 06:13 PM
I see more American cars still on the road from twenty years ago than imports.




That is primarily because 20+ years ago American cars still dominated the market share. Probably wasn't until the late 80's, early 90's that imports really dug in their heels with the masses in this country. That probably is in direct correlation to Americans being really sour with domestic made cars after the complete garbage that was pushed out in the late 70's and early 80's.

During the 70's and 80's typical midwestern folks like my parents wouldn't even consider an import auto....by the early 90's they had enough of that junk.

penchief
12-14-2005, 07:24 PM
That is primarily because 20+ years ago American cars still dominated the market share. Probably wasn't until the late 80's, early 90's that imports really dug in their heels with the masses in this country. That probably is in direct correlation to Americans being really sour with domestic made cars after the complete garbage that was pushed out in the late 70's and early 80's.

During the 70's and 80's typical midwestern folks like my parents wouldn't even consider an import auto....by the early 90's they had enough of that junk.

Stevieray is wrong.

The turnaround happened by the early eightees. My first car was an '86 Toyota Camry. I did my homework and shopped for nearly four months. Test drove everything and read all the information I could find. I owned it for a little less than 250,000 miles and sold it to an acquaintance. Last time I knew that car was still on the road in 2001.

My ex-father in law bought a Ford Taurus about the same time. He had problem after problem. He finally got so fed up he traded the car in after only a year.

In my time as a used car salesman I dealt mainly with mid to late eighties vehicles. Without fail, the Toyotas, Mazdas, and Hondas were the most reliable cars and never stayed on the lot for any length of time for that reason. Nissan was another story. They were not quite as reliable. That's a little ironic considering the shelf life of some of those very early Datsuns.

But the Fords, Chevys, and Dodges were blatantly inferior products, IMO.

morphius
12-14-2005, 07:31 PM
Stevieray is wrong.

The turnaround happened by the early eightees. My first car was an '86 Toyota Camry. I did my homework and shopped for nearly four months. Test drove everything and read all the information I could find. I owned it for a little less than 250,000 miles and sold it to an acquaintance. Last time I knew that car was still on the road in 2001.

My ex-father in law bought a Ford Taurus about the same time. He had problem after problem. He finally got so fed up he traded the car in after only a year.

In my time as a used car salesman I dealt mainly with mid to late eighties vehicles. Without fail, the Toyotas, Mazdas, and Hondas were the most reliable cars and never stayed on the lot for any length of time for that reason. Nissan was another story. They were not quite as reliable. That's a little ironic considering the shelf life of some of those very early Datsuns.

But the Fords, Chevys, and Dodges were blatantly inferior products, IMO.
My thought is that he has been saying the same thing since the early 90's and forgot that a decade had went by since he started saying it...

I just didn't want to make him feel old, hehe.

stevieray
12-14-2005, 08:09 PM
Stevieray is wrong.

The turnaround happened by the early eightees. My first car was an '86 Toyota Camry. I did my homework and shopped for nearly four months. Test drove everything and read all the information I could find. I owned it for a little less than 250,000 miles and sold it to an acquaintance. Last time I knew that car was still on the road in 2001.

My ex-father in law bought a Ford Taurus about the same time. He had problem after problem. He finally got so fed up he traded the car in after only a year.

In my time as a used car salesman I dealt mainly with mid to late eighties vehicles. Without fail, the Toyotas, Mazdas, and Hondas were the most reliable cars and never stayed on the lot for any length of time for that reason. Nissan was another story. They were not quite as reliable. That's a little ironic considering the shelf life of some of those very early Datsuns.

But the Fords, Chevys, and Dodges were blatantly inferior products, IMO.

There is nothing to be wrong about. The oldest model honda accord you'll see on the road are 87's...and that is the most common. most others are gone. You can still see plenty of mid eighties American cars on the road.

I'm not debating quality, I know they build good vehichles...is it suprising? Americans have paid for it...Kia and hyundai used to be a "joke'. That will be five carmakers we've put on the map... but let's not pretend that America would come to a grinding halt without the imports.

I do find it interesting how some are so admanent about appearing to "defend" the Japanese. It's not right or wrong. It's about choice. I guess we should just thankful for japanese auto makers for providing jobs to a nation that once led the way in mass production of cars.

morphius
12-14-2005, 08:44 PM
There is nothing to be wrong about. The oldest model honda accord you'll see on the road are 87's...and that is the most common. most others are gone. You can still see plenty of mid eighties American cars on the road.

I'm not debating quality, I know they build good vehichles...is it suprising? Americans have paid for it...Kia and hyundai used to be a "joke'. That will be five carmakers we've put on the map... but let's not pretend that America would come to a grinding halt without the imports.

I do find it interesting how some are so admanent about appearing to "defend" the Japanese. It's not right or wrong. It's about choice. I guess we should just thankful for japanese auto makers for providing jobs to a nation that once led the way in mass production of cars.
Actually I think I see more early Camry's then I do anything but maybe the old 80's trucks. I don't see any old escorts, chevetts, exp's and the only rarely to I see and old Tauraus, but it alwalys looks like it is owned by a mechanic (PoS beater with few matching parts).

I think you are misunderstanding the "defending", its more of a frustration with the quality of our own products. We put ourselves in this way by trying to cut corners at every turn to make investors happy, instead of doing what was right.

CanadaKC
12-14-2005, 09:07 PM
I started this whole meyhem...and ironically...I was just reinterating what Rooney said on "60 Minutes" because I could relate after purchasing a 4Runner over an Amercian SUV. Ironically...this is by far the most popular thread I have ever started. That being said...I just tore the cartilage in my knee by simply taking out the garbage 2 days prior to my 39th birthday. Talk about perspective... :hmmm:

stevieray
12-14-2005, 09:46 PM
I think you are misunderstanding the "defending", its more of a frustration with the quality of our own products. We put ourselves in this way by trying to cut corners at every turn to make investors happy, instead of doing what was right.


I've already stated we put ourselves here, but pouring American dollars into Japan doesn't solve the problem.

Again, this isn't a right or wrong stance for me, I just think we could survive without imports.

penchief
12-15-2005, 07:06 AM
I think you are misunderstanding the "defending", its more of a frustration with the quality of our own products. We put ourselves in this way by trying to cut corners at every turn to make investors happy, instead of doing what was right.

Exactly.

Until this country realizes that the current "investor nation" mentality that is being advocated by many, primarily Cheneyburton, is counter-productive to the work ethic and fairness that helped build this country's economy, we will continue to see our jobs shipped overseas, our wages go down, our benefits disappear, and inferior products designed for quick sale and a short lifespan to ensure future resales.

And we will continue to serve the interests of the corporate world instead of the American people and our country.

stevieray
12-15-2005, 07:11 AM
:rolleyes:

morphius
12-15-2005, 01:31 PM
I've already stated we put ourselves here, but pouring American dollars into Japan doesn't solve the problem.

Again, this isn't a right or wrong stance for me, I just think we could survive without imports.
I'll also repeat that buying really old used cars doesn't exactly help the US economy much either. Not that I have any problems with that.

At least the cars have gotten better then they were then the 80's, so some good has come out of it.

BigRedChief
12-15-2005, 02:35 PM
Last 3 cars were a Ford Explorer, Mustang and a Saturn.

All made in the U.S. (I think the Explorer was made in the U.S. and assembled in Canada or vice versa)

Very happy with my American cars.