Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Buying American Cars What Does It Mean?

11112141617636

Comments

  • PF_FlyerPF_Flyer Pennsylvania Furnace, PAPosts: 7,670
    I know that this can be a controversial subject, but please try to avoid making this personal and/or derogatory in nature.

    I've cleaned up by removing a few posts that were taking us down the wrong path.

    And now, back to your regularly scheduled program.

    Edmunds Moderator

    Need some roadside assistance? pf_flyer@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

    Need help picking out a make/model, finding inventory, or advice on pricing? Talk to an Edmunds Car Shopping Advisor

    Share your vehicle reviews

    PF_Flyer's 2014 Versa Note Long Term Blog
    How To Start Your Own Long Term Blog

  • socala4socala4 Posts: 2,427
    Your first link demonstrates that tax breaks aren't the only consideration for a company's location selection.

    The second link doesn't broach whether the net benefit of lost corporate tax is offset by the employment creation, property tax payments, federal taxes, etc.

    Lexmark is an American company with over 13,000 employees, and I would think that the state of Kentucky would want that headquarters in their state, not elsewhere.
  • slinky1slinky1 Posts: 42
    Remember, JD power awarded gold,silver , bronze plant quality awards to GM, clean sweep, i think perception has to be changed.
  • slinky1slinky1 Posts: 42
    I build GM and Suzuki vehicles, so on the other hand, whats the difference from me buying GM or "Japanese" Suzuki???
  • xrunner2xrunner2 Posts: 3,062
    The 3800 has delivered decent performance and fuel economy in many cars I've driven over several generations of that engine. I don't care if the haters think it's crude,

    There are many needs to be filled for some drivers beyond "just transportation". Quality and reliability of overall vehicle aside, in last few decades, there have not been (except for Corvette, Mustang) American branded cars with exceptional performing engines. People have had to look to Honda, Nissan (VQ), BMW and other foreign brands to find engines that go beyond just being an appliance. American branded cars have become boring. But,this may be starting to change in last year with intro of Chrysler/Dodge with hemi and Australian GTO.
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America I70 & I75 Posts: 20,989
    Everyone has a different definition of the type of engine that is needed for their perception of an ideal car.

    I need an engine with good gas mileage, that will pull a fairly large car in the process, and that doesn't need to do 0-60 in 5 seconds. I am more concerned about the car's 60-0 time.

    Others want an engine that gives pizzazz in its operation an in their definition of pizzazz that's quick, high-revving, and so on.

    Most cars I see being driven during the day and the way they're driven only need to have 4-cylinder motors in them that can give 35-40 mpg in someone typical driving. Might also be useful next year or two as gas prices meet the $4 mark.

    2015 Cruze 2LT, 2014 Malibu 2LT, 2008 Cobalt 2LT

  • travlertravler Posts: 138
    Was this a particular plant or all plants across the country?
  • travlertravler Posts: 138
    You probably won't have to wait 5 years. Lets check it out in 12 months, then in 24.
  • socala4socala4 Posts: 2,427
    You probably won't have to wait 5 years. Lets check it out in 12 months, then in 24.

    According to JD Power, you can stop waiting. The initial quality surveys of the 2005 models already show the Cobalt falling behind. Perhaps the market will ignore the inferiority of the product when determining residuals, but I doubt it.
  • socala4socala4 Posts: 2,427
    Remember, JD power awarded gold,silver , bronze plant quality awards to GM, clean sweep, i think perception has to be changed.

    The perception of this will change when cars across the entire product line improve.

    Take a look at the JD Powers results that I provided above, and then tell me whether you'd be surprised if Cobalt doesn't compete effectively with the Civic or Corolla in retail sales. Even in the early stages, the car doesn't appear to be as well built as are its competitors.
  • Honestly, why does the car's origin (or place of assembly, or headquarter's location) matter in the least?

    Frankly, I think it is "un-American" to buy a car based on any of the above. We live in a Capitalist society where if you make it faster, better, and/or cheaper, you win. Everyone buys their cars for different reasons (more powerful, roomier, more reliable, more luxurious, whatever).

    But in my opinion, buying your car because they are "American" (whatever that means) just lets American manufacturers get away with building an inferior product. I'm going to buy the "best car" for my money, be it American, Japanese, German, Korean, or whatever.

    May the best manufacturer win, and may the others improve their product so next time, maybe I'll buy their's! That's the American way!
  • travlertravler Posts: 138
    These awards obviously don't guarantee a good quality product by comsumer report ratings, recalls, and warranty claims.
  • nwngnwng Posts: 664
    well, the first story is about how bad the education system in the south is.

    the second story is about how KY competes with other states to get yota to have a plant there. it also states tax breaks are not the deciding factor of where corps want to be hdqtr or build a plant cause the amount usually is minimal (remember to spread them out over the number of years of the plant's anticipated lifespan). I do want to know though, say if yota never had a plant in KY and where the plant is now still a piece of vacant land and no one ever worked for the yota plant, would the state of KY lose anything? (over the number of years of course). This would include $$$ to build the plant, income tax from the employees, the $$$ generated to the local economy....etc.
  • travlertravler Posts: 138
    You can try www.ohio.honda.com but I'm not sure that would be public information.
    Also, all manufacturers regardless of product are offered these incentives. Don't blame the foreign car companies alone. Blame the local government. Maybe they see a bigger picture. Future revenue for the city/county/state, higher employment, stronger economy.
  • nwngnwng Posts: 664
    I think you misunderstood my post
  • socala4socala4 Posts: 2,427
    When Ronald Reagan was President, the U.S. exported more then it ever did.

    I'm sorry, but that's completely wrong. If you look at total US exports since 1978, the largest dollar amount of exports was during the most recent year. If you adjust this for inflation, the best year in recent memory was during 2000, when a certain Bill Clinton was president:

    Year / Exports ($millions) / CPI (1982-84=100) / Adjusted for CPI
    1978 / 142,075 / 65.2 / 217,906
    1979 / 184,439 / 72.6 / 254,048
    1980 / 224,250 / 82.4 / 272,148
    1981 / 237,044 / 90.9 / 260,774
    1982 / 211,157 / 96.5 / 218,816
    1983 / 201,799 / 99.6 / 202,609
    1984 / 219,926 / 103.9 / 211,671
    1985 / 215,915 / 107.6 / 200,664
    1986 / 223,344 / 109.6 / 203,781
    1987 / 250,208 / 113.6 / 220,254
    1988 / 320,230 / 118.3 / 270,693
    1989 / 359,916 / 124 / 290,255
    1990 / 387,401 / 130.7 / 296,405
    1991 / 414,083 / 136.2 / 304,026
    1992 / 439,631 / 140.3 / 313,351
    1993 / 456,943 / 144.5 / 316,224
    1994 / 502,859 / 148.2 / 339,311
    1995 / 575,204 / 152.4 / 377,430
    1996 / 612,113 / 156.9 / 390,129
    1997 / 678,366 / 160.5 / 422,658
    1998 / 670,416 / 163 / 411,298
    1999 / 683,965 / 166.6 / 410,543
    2000 / 771,994 / 172.2 / 448,312
    2001 / 718,712 / 177.1 / 405,823
    2002 / 682,422 / 179.9 / 379,334
    2003 / 713,421 / 184 / 387,729
    2004 / 807,536 / 188.9 / 427,494

    If you had intended to say that there was a trade surplus under Reagan, that would also be wrong. The US hasn't had a trade surplus since 1978, and it grew rapidly under Reagan, even if adjusted for inflation:

    Year / Trade surplus ($millions) / CPI (1982-84=100) / Adjusted for CPI
    1978 / 33,927 / 65.2 / 52,035
    1979 / -27,568 / 72.6 / -37,972
    1980 / -25,500 / 82.4 / -30,947
    1981 / -28,023 / 90.9 / -30,828
    1982 / -36,485 / 96.5 / -37,808
    1983 / -67,102 / 99.6 / -67,371
    1984 / -112,492 / 103.9 / -108,269
    1985 / -122,173 / 107.6 / -113,544
    1986 / -145,081 / 109.6 / -132,373
    1987 / -159,557 / 113.6 / -140,455
    1988 / -126,959 / 118.3 / -107,320
    1989 / -117,749 / 124 / -94,959

    Trade data: http://www.bea.gov/bea/international/bp_web/simple.cfm?anon=202&table_id=2&area_- id=3

    CPI factor: ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiai.txt
  • fred222fred222 Posts: 200
    Everyone has a different definition of the type of engine that is needed for their perception of an ideal car.
    I want it all.
    But seriously, I think that all engines should be aluminium block for weight savings. I don't know about the GM 3800, but the Chrysler 3.3 and 3.8 are still iron.
    Automatics should be at least 5 speed and where are the manual transmissions which are more fuel effecient and "peppy"? It seems to me that Chrysler is, at least in some areas, leading the Imports, while GM and Ford are playing a poor game of catch-up. This may be because Chrysler is not really competing against the Accord and Camry but has its own niche with the 300's and Magnums.
    At some point, if the Domestic Automakers really want to compete with Honda and Toyota, they must do something about the resale value. I don't know what or how, but cars which depreciate 50% or more the first year really stink!
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    You keep dodging around my main point. You sure you went to a business school and not a law school for political science? Whether people have the right or not DOES NOT MATTER WHEN YOU ARE TALKING SUPPLY AND DEMAND. Supply and deman have nothing to do with people's rights in trade negotiation. Where in your economics books did you find that?

    This statement is silly. Supply and demand are the heart of a negotiation. Negotiation is the means whereby supply and demand come into balance.

    There's supply (labor) and there's demand (factory mgt) and some price 'p' which will bring the two into balance or agreement or contract or vehicle price - whatever you want to call it.

    Negotiation is the means to find 'p'.

    I think your problem is 'what are the components of 'p' in the labor negotiation?' It consists of..
    A price per hour,
    fringe benefits,
    guaranteed hours,
    minimum staffing levels,
    vacations,
    etc.

    Who said Management had to agree to all of these. Back in the 90's when GM averted a big strike all the analysts stated that they negotiated a bad deal and were only delaying the inevitable.

    When you go to buy a truck the dealer might ask for $33K plus $2000 over sticker. You dont have to pay it. The team at GM at that time was weak and afraid. Ford and Chrysler were PO'd because GM was the target company at that time and the other two had to follow along.

    OK now times have changed and the UAW has gotten a great deal. Now it's time to buy a new vehicle and it may be that GM that gets the better deal this time. It's the normal course in business. Supply and Demand meet based on a price.
  • grbeckgrbeck Posts: 2,361
    Those who complain about the incentives and concessions awarded to transplants by (over)eager state and local governments forget the circus that surrounded GM's announcement of what ultimately became Saturn.

    GM announced it was building a plant from scratch, and states promptly engaged in a "bidding" war to be chosen as the home for the new facility.

    GM, Ford and Chrysler have been just as adept at wringing concessions and handouts from state and local governments when they revamp old plants. Since they haven't been building as many new plants - they've largely been closing old ones and consolidating production - the focus has been on extracting tax concessions and infrastructure improvements from state and local governments eager to prevent the closure of a facility.

    Ford has announced that it will close several plants as part of its "Way Forward" plan (the details of which will be announced on January 23). There has been considerable speculation as to whether Ford will close its Atlanta, Georgia, plant or the one in Wixom, Michigan. Until recently, the governors of those respective states were offering Ford incentives to keep those plants open. It now looks as though Atlanta will be closed but Wixom will remain open, so Georgia dropped out of the "bidding" over the last few days.

    I have no problem with anyone arguing that government shouldn't be offering these incentives to corporations. It is inaccurate, however, to suggest that only the foreign manufacturers are good at extracting these concessions from state and local governments.
  • Lots of verbiage here. What buy American means is the money used for the purchase goes into an American based bank. What that means to you is that the bank can lend that money back to you or your company. What that means to you personally is that you can be employed that day or your company may be able to get a loan so they can stay open this week. Its very simple as it was explained in a popular recent movie--follow the money. When money leaves the country in large amounts your job will not be far behind. Have you started with your Chinese language lessons ?
  • socala4socala4 Posts: 2,427
    What buy American means is the money used for the purchase goes into an American based bank.

    As noted by Yahoo Finance, two of the largest Ford and GM stockholders are Barclays Bank (English) and Deutsche Bank (German).

    So perhaps there are no American carmakers left?
  • grbeckgrbeck Posts: 2,361
    So I guess Europeans should never buy a European Ford, or Opel, or Vauxhall, as the "money" ends up in Detroit. And Australians had better swear off Australian Fords and Holdens.

    Good thing the Europeans didn't take that view in the early 1980s, when Ford's European operations were keeping the company afloat.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    This is so far out of touch with reality in the year 2006 it's scary. Did you do a Rip van Winkle and fall asleep in the late 40's.

    It's amazing that people still think the world ends at the last light in their town.
  • socala4socala4 Posts: 2,427
    I have no problem with anyone arguing that government shouldn't be offering these incentives to corporations. It is inaccurate, however, to suggest that only the foreign manufacturers are good at extracting these concessions from state and local governments.

    Excellent post and insights. Very fair point -- while it is completely reasonable to debate this use of incentives, the urge on this thread to demonize the "foreign" companies while ignoring the same tactics when used by "American" ones is flawed and unfair.

    If anything, this illustrates that governments don't really care who provides the employment and wage base, or who pays the property and income taxes. A "foreign"-operated plant is often considered to be better than no plant at all. Given that these companies are multinationals, does it really matter where they are from, just so long as they are delivering the goods?
  • nwngnwng Posts: 664
    Wow, boeing, ibm, microsoft, intel, dell.... would be all out of business tm if everybody wants their "money" to stay in their own backyard.
  • reddogsreddogs Posts: 353
    If you dont have "money" in your "backyard", you loose.

    Bank loans to small business, mortgages to first time home buyers, seed money for startups, loans for retooling at GM, Ford....... Were do you think that money comes from..

    Japan along with other countries, with all of Honda's, Toyota's sales in America is now getting the money flow, and money follows money. U.S. investors have been putting much more money abroad — and into Japan especially. Investors poured an estimated $135 billion into world stock funds last year, vs. $52 billion in funds that invest only in U.S. stocks. It was the first year that more new money had gone into world funds than into U.S. funds, and those funds have been steadily putting more money into Japan.

    U.S. funds that invest abroad have been lured by the Japanese market's performance as its companies report improve worldwide sales, I would imagine car sales in the US leading the way. All this money has to come out of somewhere and you can see it as it pours out of US Stocks, business investments, and ultimately jobs that were not created or lost....... :confuse:
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    If you dont have "money" in your "backyard", you loose.

    This concept went out in the 30's after the Depression. If you are a small business and you qualify for a loan your 'local' bank purchases its funds from the world market. If you need $10Million your local branch on Main St. doesnt go see if it's in the vault. They put in a requisition to the main office which goes to the currency markets in NY, London and Zurich to 'buy' the funds at a lower price than you are paying on your loan.

    C'mon. Get current.

    Investors poured an estimated $135 billion into world stock funds last year, vs. $52 billion in funds that invest only in U.S. stocks. It was the first year that more new money had gone into world funds than into U.S. funds, and those funds have been steadily putting more money into Japan.

    Why put money offshore, as you say into Japan? To make a profit off them and send that profit back here. This is precisely the point other posters have been making that transplant-company profits do not end up only in the foreign country. They are often, very often as you point out, repatriated back here to your 401k, my 401k, my individual holdings, etc.

    It is a very small world now. Railing against 'foreign' ownership is like railing against Dell having a plant in NC. Them damn Texans should stay in Texas. ;)
  • nwngnwng Posts: 664
    how much do you think japan, china and s korea hand over their hard earn cash to purchase us securities?
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Posts: 7,160
    Their financial institutions and funds probably own gazillions of dollars worth of Dell, Intel, Microsoft and GE. And some of the profits these 'US' companies end up back in Beijing, Seoul and Tokyo.

    Probably the laptop you bought online from Dell and the new washer from GE that you bought are now paying for braces in Kyoto. And a savvy investor in Seoul sold some of his GM stock at a loss to shelter income and gains he made on a German startup that took off.

    And.....
  • jlawrence01jlawrence01 Posts: 1,828
    They hold a substantial amount of the US public debt which is well documented in sources such as the Wall Street Journal.
Sign In or Register to comment.