We are aware of the login problems affecting the forums, and appreciate your patience as we work on a fix.
Did you recently purchase a new Tesla, Rivian or Lucid vehicle directly from the manufacturer and willing to share how your experience compared to previous vehicle purchases made through a traditional dealer? A reporter would like to speak with you; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 2/19 for details.
Tariffs to Help Domestic Manufacturers?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I could more then double my square footage to 3,200 if I finished my attict and basement.
And to lemko, you're sure right there. The differences between my mother's 1920's house, my grandma's 1960's house, and my friend's 1980's house are staggering. I swear that 1980's house is made of plywood. I shudder to think of the cardboard 'n plywood making up brand new houses. Better standard of living? Hardly.
Affordability of non-speculative consumer products is a much better indicator of standard of living than affordability of house purchase. The speculative nature of house purchase makes it almost like stocks. In 1999, a $60k income can buy NASDAQ Index 10 times over; today the same $60k can buy NASDAQ Index 24 times over. Are you more than twice as well off as you were in 1999? Obviously not. That's why speculative asset pricing is no indication of cost of living.
The cost of renting a house has not gone up nearly as much. $10/sq.ft is still very much possible in most metro areas for 2000sq.ft single-family homes (i.e. $2000/mo). That's the real housing cost. The purchase price is more of a reflection of the interest rate and speculation.
You actually hit the nail on the head when you said given the current market conditions, the only affordable purchases are condos of dubious appreciation potential. Well, if it is still affordable, it has obviously proven rather dubious in terms of appreciation for the previous buyer :-) You can not have it both ways and complain about the overall picture. Sure, you may be holding the short end of a stick for now, but that's just how any speculative games are played. I woulnd't worry too much about it.
Around my neck of woods, typical large houses are asking $1.2mil, but rental cost for these same houses are only $3k or so for 3-4000 sq.ft plus 1/4-1/3 acre of yard. Goes to show you the asking price is purely speculative. Some of the recent sale records seem to indicate that one of the nationally well known home builder just turned their 4000 sq.ft McMansions with $1.6mil asking price into $1mil actual sales. Go figure.
we had some specific requirements.
All of the other houses on my street, except one, are the same style of raised range from the middle 60s to late 70s I would say.
sorry, no LR's on the street, yet.
merry xmas to all.
merry xmas to all.
Well we have to work on that.
merry christmass as well.
revenue generation does not exclude the higher education system. :surprise:
after driving a good rwd based vehicle, i wonder if they will feel about driving fwd. :confuse:
I have noticed that about rentals too. I could rent a decent house for $2000 a month, far less than the mortgage on an identical house. That tells me something isn't right in the market, and it's not going to last forever.
Maybe I just need to con my employer to relocate to a less hyped and less speculative market...like the area where I spent a bit of my childhood, in eastern WA. Heck, with the prices there, on my income I could almost afford the fairly elaborate 1980s house I lived in as a kid. Less cultural/infrastructure amenities there, so maybe it would be a standard of living tradeoff...
There is more to compete on than price. There is performance, size, safety, mpg, and reliability. They need to focus here and if so be it they can't do so cheaply, let the price go up. Toyota and Honda are by far not the cheapest, yet they seem to be rolling in the sales.
Honestly what GM needs is to get rid of or seriously reduce their labels. Their might have been value back in the day of having many labels to choose from. If Ford and Chrysler didn’t have what you wanted then surly GM did. In a world of little competition having a wide selection was an edge. In a world with a lot of competition having a lot of selection is no longer an advantage.
Imagine what would happen if GM could take the money saved on R/D and engineering a lot of models and put it on a few. If GM made a few products, but did so well they would win back the market share. They could then afford to put more quality in as well as improve productivity at the same time. The results would be massive lay offs, but better a profitable company than an bankrupt one.
Also GM and Ford need to realize that it took years for them to get into the shape they are in and it is going to take years to win back customers. They need to stop playing for short term gain at the expense of long term gain. To be blunt if GM and Ford started making quality products that are desirable tonight it would take them at least ten years to get back to the same market share they had before the imports came.
What in the heck does union labor code have to do with building houses today ?????......Good Grief brightness, I like ya alot but even you continue to amaze me with your blame the union mentality that now has crossed over into the housing market :surprise:.....Like Lemko, said it's done mainly by illegal aliens otherwise known as day laborers. I guess I can't make the connection..... but I'm confident you will pull something from history to justify your answer.
I'm also very amazed that so many in this forum could give a rat if the big 3 is able to survive and compete with such unfair conditions. I would think many of you would have a family member that has worked for the big 3 or a parts supplier to them and it would be important topic for them to survive so your relative doesn't lose his/hers job or pension. We all agree Big 3 cars need to be better across the board than they are now. That is happening and will take at least 2-3 years for the total turn-around to be complete at GM and Ford at least. I brought up the tariff issue as a potential way to help them out and level the playing field.
Rocky
Nope I actually liked what you had to say in your post and agree with some of what you had to say. I like it when people come up with idea.
Rocky
(1) the operators of heavy machineries are often still union workers;
(2) the electricians and plubmers are often still unionized;
(3) the building material often still come from union shops
(4) there are parts of the country, especially the most expensive metropolitan areas, where only union labor can be used in construction. That's why houses there are especially expensive. That's why it's mentioned. No history lesson necessary on this one :-)
My wife's grand parents used to work for GM. They left the company long time ago, and hitched their wagons to the computer industry back in the early 80's. That's what the rank and file have to do one way or another, if the companies fail. What the government can do is reducing taxes for everyone and reducing red tape. Targetted assistance is always robbing peter to pay paul.
Well that is why I'm such a strong believer in the Flat-Tax
Rocky
You're right...I was thinking of Packard in the 1950s. But in the 1920s and 1930s, Packard was the American equivalent of Mercedes-Benz. A very high quality, but not flashy, car.
fintail: I wonder what Studebaker would be now...Saturn without the GM connection?
Studebakers were definitely somewhat quirky, especially after the 1950 bullet-nose restyle. But Saturn drivers strike me as people who don't care about driving, buying cars or maintaining them (although the Aura and Outlook are attempting to change this).
Given the styling of the L-Series, Vue and Ion, it can be safely said that they don't care about styling, either.
Studebaker drivers, from what I've read, don't quite fit that mold, as the styling really was different, ranging from either bizarre (1950-51 models) to startingly beautiful (1953-54 models). And Studebaker was fairly early in getting a modern ohv V-8 to the market, which gave the cars some added quick.
And I'm thinking...on the tariff issue...even if tariffs were somehow slapped on the big competition for the big 2.5, people would probably still buy them and just pay more. I mean, they pay more for Camcords than for domestics already, I bet most would just eat the extra cost. In the end, nobody would win. Make a product better than the Camcords, that's the only solution.
Yeah, Saturns have been for people who don't like cars. I wonder what modern brand Studebaker could equal...maybe Suzuki or Mitsubishi?
Sorry, but having been to Michigan, and having read the posts of various employees of the Big 2.5 - I get the impression that Michigan is stuck in a time warp.
On one auto-related website, several union workers were actually advocating a massive strike against GM and Ford if they ask for any concessions in the 2007 contract negotiations...and then saying that such a strike would rally the general public to their cause!
This is the same general public that cares so much about the UAW that it is buying ever-increasing numbers of Hondas, Toyotas, Nissans and Hyundais.
Please tell me again who is insular and completely out of touch with the rest of the country???
Which Packard did, and found itself without direction after World War II.
It's hard to match Studebaker with a modern brand...somehow, Studebaker seems so quirky, yet so thoroughly Midwestern.
They were distinctly American cars - but still distinct from OTHER American cars - built for a small segment of the market that knew what it wanted.
here a link to a quick profile of the 2006 freeshman class.
2006 freshman
Of course that's the case. If you personalize any issue, you're going to be on the side of whatever remedy is most beneficial to you or your loved ones. That's just human nature. That doesn't mean it's the right remedy for the nation as a whole.
When automobiles began to replace the horse & buggy, should government have intervened to save the jobs of ferriers? Following the advent of electricity in the home and indoor plumbing, what should the government have done to preserve the livelihood of candlemaking shops and outhouse builders?
When it is evident that a product or skill is becoming less in demand regardless of the reason, it is (IMO) up to the companies & workers to adapt to changing consumer demands. When DVDs became more desirable than VHS tapes, I doubt that those workers & manufacturers simply threw up their hands and cried "foul," demanding that the government try to force the majority of the public gravitate toward their product using price controls.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
Rocky
The answer is simple -- they need to make better products that meet consumer needs. If they can build better cars that people want, they will eventually repair their damaged brands and recover.
While I wouldn't mind in theory to prop up Detroit until they can improve, I remember enough of my automotive history to know that they won't improve unless they first hit the wall and are forced to change. They could have rolled some of those SUV profits into building better cars, but they didn't, and they won't.
The number of transplants coming into the united states will not come close to replacing the jobs we've lost at the big 3.
While the transplants are hiring Americans, the Big 3 is busy outsourcing and firing them. If anyone is going to help American workers going forward, it surely won't be GM and Ford that are slashing and burning left and right, and that intend to build more and more product in Mexico and Asia.
They were not intended to interminably support industries that cannot succeed on their own merits. If domestic manufacturers cannot present a clear business model for improvement and a long-term to be self-sustaining, then we might as well call it what it is - corporate welfare.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
Very true...one needs only to review the actions of GM, Ford and Chrysler after the Reagan Administration negotiated "voluntary" import quotas on vehicles imported from Japan in the mid-1980s. Since supply - but not demand - for Japanese vehicles was restricted, their prices rose. Detroit used this umbrella to raise ITS prices, reward fat-cat executives with lavish bonuses and sign uncompetitive contracts with the UAW.
There was an interesting article on Ford in Friday's Wall Street Journal. The article chronicled the steps that Ford's new leader is taking to save the company. The reporters noted that Ford has long realized that these steps are necessary, but the narcotic of profits from various successful models - first the Panther-platform cars, then the Explorer, on through the F-150 and the Expedition - lulled the sense of urgency, and the changes were never made.
Ford has some attractive new cars - truth be known, I like the F-150, new Explorer, Mustang, Fusion and Edge, and our Focus has been a reliable car with decent chassis dynamics - and, unlike GM, it appears to have made good use of its foreign acquisitions (Volvo, Mazda) to improve Ford products.
But the company's back is still against the wall, and "change or die" is not just a slogan, but a fact.
Reading the various statements of William Clay Ford, Jr., Alan Mulally and Mark Fields, I get the impression that they do "get it." Knowing history, I have no doubt that government aid would only reduce their sense of urgency.
And right now, that sense of urgency is one thing standing between Ford and the abyss.
Rockylee: If you want to see how effective direct government aid is to an ailing automobile company, do some research on the history of British Leyland.
Government aid only prolonged the inevitable, while inflicting some really crappy cars on the British motoring public.
Is anyone familar with the compensation offered to employees of Honda and Toyota? I imagine it represents a liveable wage. So in the case of the domestic auto industry they aren't being beaten by corporations benefiting from third world labor costs. The complaint that the Japanese market is somewhat closed to domestics might be somewhat valid but its also irrelevant. If they can't compete here why would they do any better in Japan?
I personally think that GM and Daimler-Chrysler have a chance of survival. In Ford's case its just a matter of how long they want to drag out their inevitable demise. Should the government step in to prolong this process?
I think Ford and GM have the best shot (it's a toss-up as to which one is ahead...GM is farther along in its restructuring, but the vehicles still seem rather unimpressive, despite the widely hyped presence of Mr. Lutz, and it has basically sold everything it can, including the family china, also known as GMAC).
I see Daimler eventually cutting Chrysler loose or selling off everything but Jeep to another automaker (Hyundai?).
Time will tell which one of us is correct.
Rocky
I like I've said in the past put most of the blame on the government. Our trade policy's are unfair and un free. Certain people that obviously have low IQ's and can't think for themselves need a biased media to tell them whats best for them thus they pick up the Koran otherwise known as Consumer Report to gain that knowledge. :mad: The other problem with americans is we hold grudges. We all know the big 3 made some bad cars in the past but what car company hasn't. The difference is people remember the bad cars made by domestic manufactors and give a free pass to car company's like Hyundai/Kia. I strongly believe you can trace that back to the anti-domestic media problem this country has. This biasness doesn't just happen with car company's and other examples can be shown in tools, machinery, clothing, athletes, art, furniture, etc etc etc.
Rocky
I could be wrong but if I were to venture a guess it would be that people who subscribe to CR, as a demographic group, probably have a higher than average IQ, level of education and income. The reliability ratings that CR provides is a compilation of a very extensive annual survey. There is little if any bias injected. CR also readily states that the quality gap between imports and domestics has shrunk considerably in the past 20 years. And finally, they recommend quite a few domestic vehicles, especially Ford/Lincoln/Mercuries. Your statement was uninformed and based on a misconception that a particular source did not hold your point of view, therefore they must be wrong. BTW, do you think for yourself or do you let Lou Dobbs handle that chore?
But that won't be the end of the world, and it won't even be the end of auto making in North America. Oldsmobile and Plymouth went away, and the sun still rises in the east and sets in the west.
There will still be a big demand for cars and trucks - 17 or so million per year - and lots of people will still be employed here to make those vehicles.
They won't all be UAW members, but no where does it say that the UAW must have a monopoly on the labor used to build new vehicles.
The factories and company headquarters won't all be concentrated in the industrial Midwest, which is a GOOD thing, as I believe that the limited perspective of GM, Ford and Chrysler stems in part from their proximity to Detroit and to each other.
Our trade policies have given American consumers more choices and higher quality vehicles than ever before.
rockylee: Certain people that obviously have low IQ's and can't think for themselves need a biased media to tell them whats best for them thus they pick up the Koran otherwise known as Consumer Report to gain that knowledge.
It isn't just Consumer Reports that recommends Hondas and Toyotas over domestic offerings.
rockylee: The other problem with americans is we hold grudges. We all know the big 3 made some bad cars in the past but what car company hasn't. The difference is people remember the bad cars made by domestic manufactors and give a free pass to car company's like Hyundai/Kia.
Hyundai and Kia have dramatically improved their vehicles, but even then they have still had to offer an extremely long warranty, coupled with much lower prices than the competition, to get consumers to consider their products. So they haven't gotten a "free pass" from American consumers.
I could be wrong but if I were to venture a guess it would be that people who subscribe to CR, as a demographic group, probably have a higher than average IQ, level of education and income.
That is merely a guess as you said. The people I know that do subscribe to CR are people that are easily influenced. They have to wear certain brands, and only drive certain brands to protray a certain image because they lack self confidence. These are your usual CR subscribers. I know its a stereotype but based on the people I know they almost all have a similar character make-up and yes some of them are my friends, family, and co-workers.
The reliability ratings that CR provides is a compilation of a very extensive annual survey. There is little if any bias injected. CR also readily states that the quality gap between imports and domestics has shrunk considerably in the past 20 years.
As many have posted before CR gets its so-called extensive research from subscribers. It's going to be slanted if your demographic has like minded personality's. I wouldn't call that extensive but rather very limited.
And finally, they recommend quite a few domestic vehicles, especially Fords/Lincoln/Mercuries. Your statement was uninformed and based on a misconception that a particular source did not hold your point of view, therefore they must be wrong.
That isn't it at all....Whatever.... :confuse:
BTW, do you think for yourself or do you let Lou Dobbs handle that chore?
LOL, that was a good one !!!!! I must let him (Dobbs) think for me because I'm not a loyal CR subscriber and don't have that "extensive" education background or income level even though I'm in the Top 20% in the latter.
Rocky