Buying American Cars What Does It Mean?

nippononly

is making fresh headlines at Automotive News today with announcements that they are ramping up production in China, and will be selling more and more GM cars in global markets that are made in China.

You can just bet that in the near future, I would bet on a decade or so, maybe less, future Aveos and Cobalts or their equivalents here in the U.S. will be built in China, along with the midsize pick-ups and maybe other cars in the line-up too. Who here that is so concerned about North American content and profits will continue to buy GM then?

And LOL! GM has just lowered all its prices "in an aggressive move to stabilize its resale values". Most models are a couple of thousand dollars cheaper, now without incentives (or with small ones), and this move includes fairly low-priced cars like the Cobalt. While it may stabilize resale in the long run, most recent buyers are screwed as their cars just lost even more value than a GM car normally would. Does buying American mean getting screwed on resale? :-P

Ford's credit rating, including that of Ford Motor Credit, was lowered further into junk bond status this week, as investors expressed grave doubts that they could turn it around even after the latest restructuring plan is complete. Does buying American mean buying from a company that soon may be bankrupt?

Kerkorian's mouthpiece, Jerry York, made some speeches earlier this week even as ol' Kirk attempted to get his hands on some more GM stock. Said GM should dump Saab double-quick, and had better dump Hummer too. Does buying American mean buying from a brand that may change hands multiple times, or even leave the U.S. entirely a year after you buy your brand new car? That would be a bummer.

Buying a Toyota is like buying Dreyers Grand Vanilla. You know the company has been around for ages, and will be around for ages to come, they won't be changing hands or disappearing any time soon, and the vanilla is a predictably rich creamy flavor. If you want more ice cream next week, next year, next decade, you know you will get that same rich creamy flavor, because they are CONSISTENT.

socala4

Made in America by Americans for Americans.......(with American Owners)= "DOMESTIC"

That still doesn't help me with the Pontiac GTO. Is an Aussie-made Pontiac an American car?

Incidentally, if your concern is about ownership, you might want to look at who the stockholders are of these companies.

-Between them, the British Barclays and German Deutschebank own over 7% and 5% of Ford's and GM's stock, respectively. Should they be required to sell their shares so that their profits don't leave the US? Do they make these companies less American?

-American financial institutions comprise the major institutional holders of Toyota and Honda's NYSE-listed stock. Are they being bad Americans by investing in these companies, or does it make those companies more American, given their American ownership?

Have a look at the major institutions that own these companies, and tell me if you know if the owners are "American" or not:

Ford
GM
Honda
Toyota

gtee

Made in America by Americans for Americans.......(with American Owners)= "DOMESTIC"

I think what you mean is:

Made in UAW approved factories by UAW for UAW..........(with UAW approved Owners) = "DOMESTIC"

Lets all of us be honest on this board. We should talk about cars made by "Unions" and "Non-Unions" The union boyz consider all cars made by union employees as Domestic, while all cars made by non-unions Foreign. To them it makes no difference if the car is made in USA or Mexico or Canada. All they care about is that its "UAW Made."

These union types could care less that many hard working Americans build great cars right here in America that Americans love to buy. Its not that American's cannot build good cars, its just that UAW cannot build good cars. Its not that American people don't want to buy American cars. Its just that American people don't want to buy UAW built cars, that is all.

What I don't understand is this: If these UAW boyz are so patriotic and care so much about Ford and GM and Chrysler, then why don't they just liquidate UAW and stop representing those workers. Its obvious to all that UAW is a major cause of problems for Domestic car makers. At least this way UAW can be part of the solution and just leave. I am sure every body will be much better off without UAW.

dglozman

Agree 100%!

socala4

It's not that American's cannot build good cars, its just that UAW cannot build good cars.

That's an unfair comment. There are UAW plants that are building good cars, such as the soon-to-be-shut Saturn plant, so to lay the blame at the feet of the union may be fun for the union busters but doesn't help us get to the root of the problem.

The thing that must be appreciated is that the manufacturing processes between the traditional automakers and Japanese firms such as Toyota are quite different.

The Toyota process involves an emphasis on zero defects that begins with design and engineering, and is incorporated to the assembly process, including strict quality standards on its suppliers and a team approach that is meant to spot defect and assembly problems during assembly and before the car is completed. Compare to that to most US and European makers that use the traditional assembly line method and rely heavily on post-assembly QC to identify problems.

If you look at the various recalls and TSB's of domestic makers, you'll notice that a lot of the issues are design-oriented, not due to the plant workers who built the cars. Likewise, when Detroit turns out dull, tired and uninspiring designs that don't match consumer demands or wants, that comes from the top of the chain, not from the worker who bolted it together.

You can't blame the UAW for making Malibus and Impalas into the dull appliances that they are. What distinguishes successful US models such as the 300 and the Mustang are that they are interesting designs that appeal to consumers, not who built the car.

anythngbutgm

To the average consumer who knows nothing about the politics of the Automotive world, whether or not a car is built by union workers means squat. It isn't the union who comes up with the undesirable exterior designs, it isn't the union that designs the interiors either.

As some may know, I think GM interior designs are (for the most part) some of the worst in the industry. They're cheap, chintzy and built with materials no better than a Fisher price toy. BIG Example: the Cadillac CTS.

On the other hand, look at something like Lincoln for example. Their interiors are (typically) beautiful, and (for the most part) well put together, great materials, good ergonomics, what not. Think if the guys who built Lincolns and the guys who built Caddy's switched jobs for a couple of weeks, anyone would notice?

Probably not.

My point is, before we start pointing fingers at the union for GM's problems, it isn't those guys who are coming up with the designs in the first place. They only put together what's in front of them.

Sorry for the sidetrack, I just don't think the unions should take all the blame for the current situation. I have alot of respect for the guys (who keep it honest) working the assembly lines, union or not. It's not their fault GM products stink before they even start assembling them.

imidazol97

I don't see your point on all interiors by GM being different from the competition because they use plastic.

I looked over at a 745Li yesterday trying to figure out why anyone would buy that BMW rather than a Lexus. It looks odd. The interior dash was covered by a foamy looking plastic. Is that what makes a desirable, soft touch interior? It didn't look attractive to me. But it must to people who part with $howmanydollars for the large 745. What cars should I compare to a LeSabre since I'm familiar with them.

I sat in 500 and Fusion and saw a little difference in the plastics used, but I found myself wondering if they'll endure in hot sun and cold of winter for 10 years like my Buicks have.

I fully agree with your description of the interiors not being the fault of UAW or union workers. That's a well-made point about switching workers and nobody discerning a difference in the resulting cars. Good job.

qbrozen

What does this even matter?

Its not like GM and Ford are NOT selling cars. They are selling PLENTY! GM sold nearly 2 million cars last year (just cars, not trucks). Toyota sold 1.3 million.

So why are we talking about them NOT selling cars due to design, interior, or the tilt of the planets?? The problem, as I understand it, is that they are not selling what they PRODUCE! Hence my comment earlier about overproduction (which i saw no replies to). Why can't the domestic manufacturers understand that lowering production increases demand?? This is the most basic of all business principles, and these folks heading this billion dollar corporations don't get it???

anythngbutgm

Soft touch is a big thing. Texture is another. Minimal exposed screwheads, hollow sounds when you tap on them. It just doesn't exude solidity. The tactile feelings of the controls..."snick snick" goes a long way to impressing people. While it may come across as a bias, I have owned multiple Honda Accords, noted in buff rags for top notch quality, design, ergonomics and it shows, big time.

And just to be fair, I think one of the other big offenders in the industry is japanese... Some of the Nissan products are pretty bad.

socala4

So why are we talking about them NOT selling cars due to design, interior, or the tilt of the planets??

Because (a) they are losing market share, which is a relative measure of their popularity and ability to compete and (b) many of their sales are fleet sales, which conceal the fact that many of these cars have limited appeal to the general public.

Add to that that both GM and Ford have made themselves highly dependent upon SUV sales, exposing them heavily to a change in market tastes that was dictated by macroeconomic events, i.e. increasing oil prices. Because of the long cycles inherent to the auto industry (the process of going from idea to built product usually takes at least a few years) and their generally undistinguished track record of building economical cars that appeal to US buyers, it becomes questionable whether they are in position to adapt and adjust to ongoing and future changes in the market.

What's interesting is that both Ford and GM do quite well in serving the needs of bread-and-butter car buyers in Europe with the Focus, Mondeo, Corsa, etc. Why they consistently lose ground here should be raising a few eyebrows in Dearborn and Detroit, don't you think?

qbrozen

That's an interesting perspective.

But, as far as SUVs ... the numbers I posted (as i indicated) were for cars only. So they are still out-selling the number 1 foreign manufacturer, Toyota, in JUST auto sales.

Ok, but you talk about fleet sales. First question, is that a bad thing? Do fleets pay less than, for instance, the $8k off invoice the guy off the street pays? My feeling is no. I mean, maybe I'm wrong, but fleet managers usually buy what they need when they need it, and don't necessarily have time to wait around for the best incentives to kick in.

2nd question, do we have any hard data on total GM auto fleet sales vs. Toyota?

I do agree about losing ground ... but that's not what is keeping them in the red now. They are outselling the competition, but are far less profitable ... that alone should make them rethink things. Worrying about the future is useless if you can't survive the present.

fred222

My point is, before we start pointing fingers at the union for GM's problems, it isn't those guys who are coming up with the designs in the first place. They only put together what's in front of them.

I agree partially, but believe that GM's hands are tied into scrimping on design and materials because of the very high cost of labor. They are at a competitive disadvantage and if they did make cars as good as Hondas or Toyotas, they would cost more because of the higher labor costs. Therefore GM must cut costs on design and materials to allow for the higher labor costs.

socala4

Ok, but you talk about fleet sales. First question, is that a bad thing?

In theory, no. Everybody's money is the same color, and it is healthy for these companies to build a dependable wholesale customer base, so the issue isn't with fleet sales, per se.

The problem arises when the companies become so dependent upon fleet sales that they lose touch with the needs of the rest of their customer base. When a good number of Cavaliers end up in rental car and government fleets, there is very little motivation for a product manager to up the ante, improve the product or to compete directly with the comparable Accord or Camry.

The fleet purchasers are not concerned with design, long-term reliability or interesting features as is the normal consumer, so these sales put the manufacturers further out of touch with what Joe Sixpack really wants. Meanwhile, the general buying public develops its loyalties for the firms that are more interested in serving them, only to leave the Big Three further behind.

Anyone in business understands that ultimately, a company must serve its customers if it is to prosper. By building unattractive cars with limited appeal but to quantity buyers, Detroit begins to forget that they ultimately can't progress without the indvidual buyer's needs being served. This ultimately helped to kill off the domestic UK automakers, and if they are not careful, the same thing could ultimately happen with these firms as well.

big_prize

And LOL! GM has just lowered all its prices "in an aggressive move to stabilize its resale values". Most models are a couple of thousand dollars cheaper, now without incentives (or with small ones), and this move includes fairly low-priced cars like the Cobalt. While it may stabilize resale in the long run, most recent buyers are screwed as their cars just lost even more value than a GM car normally would. Does buying American mean getting screwed on resale?

I think that most mainstream models (i.e. G6, Cobalt, etc) are about a thousand dollars or so cheaper. Some that are actually selling well didn't change much, if at all (HHR, etc). Basically, GM took away the rebate and just lowered the sticker price by a similar amount.

What this means is that the dealers/consumers are getting the short end of the stick, because the invoice price probably hasn't changed much, so the dealer just has less room to manuever when closing the deal.

Detroit News is also reporting that GM is offering up to $1000 in dealer incentives to help seal deals, a strategy that seems to work for Honda et al.

GM gives dealers coupons to help close deals



I'm not sure what there is to complain about here (unless you're buying, of course), since the concensus was that GM's stickers were too high and fire-sale rebates were killing them. This seems to be a move in the right direction for them to normal prices and start selling cars for reasonable profits.

imidazol97

Thanks. I will start moving controls when I test sit in those showroom cars. Are you saying soft touch and texture are not the same effect? What's an ideal interior for GM to emulate. I hope it's not the Avalon I sat in last spring.

big_prize

Imidazol, I tend to agree with you that for as bad as GM interiors are claimed to be, I don't find that at lot of the competition is all that great either. Most of the Nissans and Mazdas that I've driven/sat in seemed to have almost as equally bad plastics as GM (well, current GM, not 90's GM, those were terrible).

Toyota's and Honda's interiors in general do seem to be a better in the materials department, but I have to question some of the styling cues these companies have been using lately. In my opinion, the civic and the ridgeline have some of the ugliest interior designs i've seen (well, not counting anything with center mounted gauges), for brand new models. Even the steering wheels look goofy to me. For as much as the 2004 Malibu's steering wheel was panned for being uber-blah, the new Honda wheels look like children's toys to me.

One area in which GM still fails is the mechincal quality of switches. In my '04 Grand Prix, for all of the plastic panels in the interior, the switch gear actually feels top notch. The climate controls have soft rubberized knobs, and they "click" into positions very easily and firmly. This is not a common thing for GM. When I sit in the Pontiac Torrent at the dealership, the interior pieces look a lot nicer (better plastic panels, chrome ringed climate control knobs), but the climate control knobs move very slopily, almost as if the plastic is scraping the panel behind it, and they hardly "click" into position at all. They are so horrible that I almost cringe when tyring to move them.

nippononly

Yeah, well you could take two approaches to that. You could improve the product up to the price level of the sticker it already has. Or you could drop the sticker precipitously. GM chose option two.

The Silverado 2WD dropped by more than $2K, the Cobalt's new base price is about $1500 lower, there were lots of examples in the article I read but I forget what all of them were at this point.

rayng

This reminds me of the time I rode in my friend's '98 grandprix. When I pressed the plastic radio preset button to change the channel, my finger went straight through the plastic button. Now that's cheap plastic.

This past weekend, while sitting in the new Solstice, I couldn't help but be reminded of the cheap plastics that plagued "American" brands of the past 20 years. The Solstice door panels and buttons were pretty poorly put together.

The point is simply that customers who are asked to spend more and more on cars demand and expect quality interiors. With the Korean brands building better and higher quality cars (and Ford and Chrysler making strides in better fit and finish), GM better get the message and spend more time and money on their interiors or risk losing even more market share.

imidazol97

Interiors: I wonder if people feel the interior they're used to is the basis for judging others. If there are differences, not necessary lesser quality, they feel the car is not as good. The last time I test drove the 03 Accord, there were things I didn't like about the interior feel.

But I'm used to my LeSabres. I have had the heater/AC soft touch buttons on all of them. It sounds like the GM heater controls that rotate aren't as "good" in the feel. I may have had that type on a loaner car from my dealer.

My radio knobs and buttons are good. Newest car has controls built into the steering wheel... But it's not a cheapie end model either.

rayng

The UAW needs to disband, plain and simple. I don't think the tax unions impose on their members are helping them or the big three stem the red ink. What can UAW do to sell more Malibus to the Chinese or Europeans? If the unions want to be relevant, get rid of Sweeney and create sister labor organizations in Mexico and other countries. But for now, since unions are bound by domestic regulations, they are easily sidestepped or outflanked by offshore outsourcing.

socala4

The UAW needs to disband, plain and simple...What can UAW do to sell more Malibus to the Chinese or Europeans?

How is it plain and simple? You don't seem prepared to address the fact that Malibus simply aren't very desirable cars, regardless of who builds them. Nobody seems unwilling to buy Chrysler 300's or Corvettes, even though those are also made by union labor.

rayng

Domestic car manufacturers are hoping that by pasting a storied model name to their pos current cars, people will buy. Well considering the sales disappointments of the GTO and Impalas, the effort is not only not working but the domestic brands are also tarnishing the images of these respected and time-honored cars.

What will happen when GM's strategy of resurrecting storied and valued icons like the Camaro runs out of gas? With the Impala and GTo have already lost a great deal of panache, is the next Camaro next?

GM and Ford must let go of the past and invent the future. Where have all the innovations gone? Where's the next Harley Earl? Who would dare to pen a sexy, stylish, and affordable American car? Is the 300 our only choice?

rayng

The desirability you speak of is directly related to quality and cost, both areas where union labor hurts more than helps the domestic brands. Note that 2006 300 is assembled Bramalea, Cananda. While the 'Vette is produced domestically (Bowling Green, KY), it's history of poor reliability is legendary (alternator, dash, etc...).

socala4

The desirability you speak of is directly related to quality and cost, both areas where union labor hurts more than helps the domestic brands.

I can't see how you can blame the UAW for flimsy plastics, dingy cloth and outdated OHV motors. Trying to blame labor for poor design isn't going to make Impalas one whit better to drive.

buddhabman

Remember the Z06 is built by UNION LABOR. This constant berating of Union Labor as the cause of all ills for GM and the rest of the domestics is sickening. Yes there are some issues. But BMW"s and Benz' are built by worker Unions also. You have to pick and choose what models but all of the domestics have some nice cars in their lineups. People have to get a grip and give some of the models a chance instead of immediately thinking Toyoata and Honda.

That said Buick, Lincoln-Mercury have got to be buried. It was pathetic to watch people just avaid the Lincoln-Mercury and Buick sections at the LA Auto show. Saab is also a question mark for GM, but their prospects are brighter in Europe, and if the bring the Biodiesel/fuel cars here they will improve the fortunes. A biodiesel AWD 9-5 will be an awesome car.

Proud Cadillac, Saab & Subaru owner

rayng

I do not disagree with your underlying point: that design and engineering has lagged the "foreign" brands. But I just think UAW labor is expensive, and that the UAW is not in the position to ensure job security or good wages. It's just tragic and more than a bit ironic that the unions efforts to create better American jobs have resulted in plant closures and benefit cuts.

So let's disband the unions, let the workers keep their union dues, and build higher quality, lower cost, and better cars. Maybe some of these union guys can get together and start their own hot-rod company. Anyone one willing to put up some capital? I'm interested!

I still cheer for the domestic brands because cars do mean something to the average American. The pony car for example is a modern day symbol for freedom, mobility, and optimism. The American car is a big component of the American dream. So how or why should we outsource that? It will be a sad day if Toyota ends up buying out GM or Ford.

rayng

While BMW reliability has improved, Mercedes has not. Actually Mercedes suffered a huge hit on profitability from revenue spent on recalls and dealer reimbursements for warranty work. Though I'm not saying that union workers are 100% responsible for the problem, I am saying that Toyota and Honda have demonstrated manufacturing processes that are both lower cost while producing a better product.

Imagine a vette with the reliability of a civic. Wow, that would be an awesome deal even if I had to pay another $10k. The domestic brands can charge more, make more, and keep jobs here, if they made more reliable cars.

Btw, the z06 is a halo car like the viper and cannot be counted on to make money for GM. Let's hope that the camaro can resurrect sales as the Mustang has done for Ford. Besides, I think think the vettes are all underpriced for the performance.

socala4

BMW"s and Benz' are built by worker Unions also...

Absolutely right. Nothing prevents automakers from making desirable, interesting cars made with union labor.

...People have to get a grip and give some of the models a chance instead of immediately thinking Toyota and Honda.

But here you've lost me. GM and Ford are businesses, not charities for the automotively challenged. I can't see why consumers should be expected to pay thousands of dollars for some second-rate designs that are poorly supported by their manufacturers. (Incidentally, you can't blame the UAW for the awful dealer service departments, either.) If Detroit wants more business, let it earn it.

irnmdn

Disband GM management which one of most over paid and underpaid guys in the industry. Lutz says GM will loose 'talent' if salaries are cut at the top. That sounds like a good reason, cut the 'talent' which ran GM into ground in the last 25 years. I see absolutely no reason why GM management should be several times more than their peers at Toyota/Nissan

imidazol97

And how is their pay on top of all the excess numbers???

irnmdn

GM's Lutz in Business Week: "With gas around $2/gallon who would possibly need a car with 50mpg".
Would you pay this moron 2 million+ dollars year?
A UAW worker high on crack could probably think better.

driverdm

Why should "our government" be involved in capping the wages of American workers? Would you want a government official to unilaterally reduce your pay, when you and your employer had agreed to other terms?

Our government should be involved in producing results that are the best for America. If you didn't know the government does do this... when a company files for bankruptcy. The UAW workers DON'T EVEN WANT TO PAY FOR HEALTHCARE!! Name one other industry where the workers have a ZERO co-pay. There isn't one. Also, the American worker has become too expensive. If you didn't know that, look at the outsourcing of jobs in America. Either the government gets involved now or when there is a significant increase in unemployment and general dissatisfaction in the United States populace. Remember that the lower class is growing at an astronomical rate and the middle class is shrinking. It is like having a cavity, and knowing it far before the tooth is rotted. You either deal with it now, or deal with it later, but the reconning day is coming. The writting is on the wall my friend. Only blind people have an excuse not to read it.

driverdm

I can't see how you can blame the UAW for flimsy plastics, dingy cloth and outdated OHV motors. Trying to blame labor for poor design isn't going to make Impalas one whit better to drive.

I am a financial analyst and work looking at businesses everyday. Let me tell you this, there is not an infinite pot of money they can draw from. If they have to pay exorbatant wages, the money is going to come from somewhere. That money CAN'T be used for product development because it just isn't there anymore.

The UAW contract says that if they get laid off, they still have to pay them a handsome amount and cover their healthcare too. Where is this money coming from? It is coming from taking that lower plastic to cover the dash and not that VW type plastic. It's coming from making that cheap OHV motor. Everything in the business world is connected. America is becoming uncompetitive because of Americans. Doesn't this sound like hypocrisy? That would be because it is.

socala4

The UAW workers DON'T EVEN WANT TO PAY FOR HEALTHCARE!!

I don't blame them -- I don't either, it's a hidden tax that they never agreed to pay. Perhaps the US needs to realize that the private-insurance-based healthcare system does not help corporate competitiveness.

Also, the American worker has become too expensive.

Yes, but there is no way that a developed country such as the US can ever expect to have wages that match that of a developing economy such as the PRC or Mexico. Perhaps offshoring should be viewed as somewhat inevitable, given the fact that labor arbitrage become easier to exploit as trade barriers fall and technology and transport improve. Expecting Americans to compete directly with wage rates of $1-2 per hour is obviously unrealistic.

Remember that the lower class is growing at an astronomical rate and the middle class is shrinking.

Not sure if that is exactly right, but I'm not sure how a family getting stuck with higher insurance costs helps reverse the trend. Do you want their living standards to go down by getting them to pay for more of their healthcare or not?

reddogs

Ditto, Unions are the the root cause of the fall of GM, Ford and Chrysler, they poison the system with their Mafia style extortion and threats, and never give back a penny before cutting off their hand in true Wise Guy style........

They need to be true brokers for the workers and not kill the business that gives them jobs...... :surprise:

socala4

If they have to pay exorbatant wages, the money is going to come from somewhere. That money CAN'T be used for product development because it just isn't there anymore.

I'm a finance guy myself, so I'm always chagrined to see accountants blame the workforce for management's errors. (Perhaps the number crunchers wouldn't be so willing to do this if they weren't classified as being part of management themselves.) It's a copout for the coach of the team to blame the players for a bad season. If we don't do this in sports, why is this being done on this thread?

In any case, how is it that a low cost Scion or Corolla still ends up being a better car than does a higher priced Chevy? This sounds like more apologetics and excuse making to me, surely there was a time during the last twenty years when GM could have diverted some of those SUV profits toward developing a decent multi-valve OHC motor or a nicer level of plastic for the dash.

Again, there are deeper issues here than just the UAW. For example, although the build quality of Saturns was generally good, it also astonished me that GM felt so proud of itself for building Saturns that offered the road feel and level of packaging found on a five-year-old Corolla. With Saturn, GM elected to be imitative, which was certainly better than being arrogant and staid, but not as innovative as would have been required to make it a winning marque.

The poster above who highlighted some recent Detroit successes such as the 300 was right on the money -- Detroit needs to get past gimmickry such as nostalgia, and build cars that can capitalize on their "American" qualities and that appeal to the public.

Instead of building better cars, it seems that GM's most clever move as of late has been to turn healthcare into a bogeyman (nevermind raiding the pension funds, effectively stealing their workers' retirement). With this brilliant PR move, the company has been able to distract some people from the fact that no business cannot succeed without making products that people want, and that GM's long-term success or failure will come from its ability to serve the customer. If someone can tell me how its current product and marketing strategy helps to get it there, please let me know.

dglozman

Even Hyundai CEO recognizes this. He said that unions are the biggest problem for companies like GM.

http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200601/11/200601112250490209900090509051.html

jlawrence01

Even Hyundai CEO recognizes this. He said that unions are the biggest problem for companies like GM.


He OUGHT to recognize it. Hyundai has had a rocky relationship with its unions in South Korea.

reddogs

The Unions in South Korea are almost militant in their demands and usually have to be controlled with police.

driverdm

"The UAW workers DON'T EVEN WANT TO PAY FOR HEALTHCARE!!

I don't blame them -- I don't either, it's a hidden tax that they never agreed to pay. Perhaps the US needs to realize that the private-insurance-based healthcare system does not help corporate competitiveness."

And this is what is wrong with America. No one wants to pull their weight. Ford and GM aren't asking for them to pay a large portion. They are asking them to be competitive with the rest of the industry. NO ONE has 100% coverage except these guys. When they complain about this while also fighting for the ability to be paid even if they are not working, it seems a little greedy. And then when they lose their jobs, are we supposed to feel sorry.

"Remember that the lower class is growing at an astronomical rate and the middle class is shrinking.

Not sure if that is exactly right, but I'm not sure how a family getting stuck with higher insurance costs helps reverse the trend. Do you want their living standards to go down by getting them to pay for more of their healthcare or not?"

Some of the janitors were making well over $20 an hour. There are plenty of us that make less than that and still pay for health insurance. Paying for some health care isn't what is causing the growth in the lower class. I am sorry but you believe that this is heaven on earth. I'd gladly pay 40 bucks a month when I am making $20+ an hour, too help my company and in doing so ensure my job and job stability.

AG11

GM top management should be profit based: no profits = tiny pay.

Does anyone who work for GM provide us with how the morale is like inside? If I were a GM grunt, I'd have zero respect for the greedy incompentants that run the show.

I also find the GM top management's unwillingness to set measurable targets like Nissan did during their turnround to be pretty damn weak.

no2duke

we live in AMERICA so we should support AMERICA and the people who live here,I've driven alot of foreign cars and hate the way they drive so even if I did go against my beliefs I wouldn't drive one anyway

socala4

we live in AMERICA so we should support AMERICA and the people who live here,I've driven alot of foreign cars and hate the way they drive so even if I did go against my beliefs I wouldn't drive one anyway

Not many people on the thread have had much luck in defining what an "American" car really is, so it would be helpful to know which cars are "American" and which ones are not.

socala4

There are plenty of us that make less than that and still pay for health insurance. Paying for some health care isn't what is causing the growth in the lower class.

So, the UAW should cut benefits because others have also gotten the shaft? Just as I wouldn't stop eating in order to help someone abroad suffering from famine, I wouldn't expect a worker to pay more for health care in the belief that it would do me any good.

I seriously doubt that you would take a paycut in the hopes that it would help me. I would think that for you, you and your family would come first, and I would expect the UAW guy to believe similarly.

I am sorry but you believe that this is heaven on earth.

I never made that claim, I simply pointed out that the US cannot compete directly with the wages of developing nations. That's an economic fact, you can accept it or not.

I'd gladly pay 40 bucks a month when I am making $20+ an hour, too help my company and in doing so ensure my job and job stability.

Why aren't you doing that now? If you really think it's patriotic to earn less, then tell your employer that you insist on paying more for your healthcare. Nothing's stopping you from demanding a pay cut if you really would prefer it.

sabastian

You hate the way foreign cars drive? Well I can safely say that an F430 is a bit different from a Scion xB. So when you say that you hate the way foreign cars drive, you may want to be a bit more specific. Also, if you had been reading this thread, you would understand that it is hard to tell which cars support America. Many Japanese cars are built by Americans, whereas many American cars are built by Mexicans and Canadians. This brings up a problem for those people who want to, as you say, support America.

imidazol97

>Mexicans and Canadians. This brings up a problem for those people who want to, as you say, support America.

Mexico and Canada are part of North America. The cars are being built by American car brands.

socala4

Mexico and Canada are part of North America. The cars are being built by American car brands.

But that begs the question -- if the goal is to support labor in the United States, is it preferable to buy a Mexican-made GM product or an American-made Honda?

nippononly

unfortunately, some terms are being bandied about that have very indistinct meanings.

"American" is being used to mean "United States", I believe, most of the time. And a lot of the people that are vociferously pro-U.S. labor do not consider it a positive thing for so-called "American" cars to be built in Mexico, as Ford does with some of its volume models.

All these companies are spending their money all over the world, from research and development to production, so if we're talking about one of the big car corporations that among them make most of the world's cars, I don't see a difference in whose you buy, as far as where your purchase money goes. And I tend to agree with someone who posted above that the really pro-American posters are ACTUALLY pro-UAW/CAW. Union labor has its place, that is for sure, but its manifestation in the U.S. car industry has today become corrupt.

Through all the debate, I say buy what you like.

navigator89

Sorry, but if AMERICA cant make a good product in the eyes of the consumer, then I dont see why the consumer should have to support AMERICA. Let the buyer buy what they like. It's AMERICA after all, the land of choice and variety.

Which foreign cars have you driven to say that foreign cars suck?

mparks1

Amen brother- People knocking GM and other American auto companies have to realize that GM is paralyzed under the UAW. They have to pay so much money out that their quality suffers in the meantime.