All I can say is I've been driving GM cars since 1984, mostly Buicks, and found them to be VERY reliable. My parents bought a '77 Electra limited in '79, and put over 100,000 mi. on it and replaced the starter and power seat motor, that's it. Sold it in '89 to a guy who drove it for 10 more yrs. Don't know what happened to it then. I've put about 60,000 miles on my '99 Ultra (it now has 103,000) and have spent maybe $600 in repairs and routine maintenance, including a tune up, and brakes and rotors all around. No UAW crap here.
All I can say is I've been driving GM cars since 1984, mostly Buicks, and found them to be VERY reliable.
I think there is a consensus that Buick builds great cars. They get good marks from JD Powers and CR. Which tells me that when the UAW workers are given good designs, engineering, and parts they can compete with the best of the best.
I had a very good friend in the 1990s that sold Buicks. He thought he could make more selling Toyota and switched. Less than a year later he was back at the Buick store. Said he could not sleep at night with the tactics that dealership used. Plus he did not feel they were as well built as the Buick. Just one salesman's opinion. I would have bought a Buick on his recommendation. Except that was a real ugly year for them and I am really a truck man.
“I think there is a consensus that Buick builds great cars. They get good marks from JD Powers and CR. Which tells me that when the UAW workers are given good designs, engineering, and parts they can compete with the best of the best.”
As an import lover, I agree. I am not sure if the UAW drained funding from R/D with salaries. Or did the need to sasitfy investors drain funding. Or was it a corporate culture unable to grasp the changes in the marketplace?(i.e. Floatly old Buicks becoming uncool)
R\D is what is killing them. With good R\D you could make cars that people want. Cut costs in a way that is less likely to offend your customers. Create better systems for controlling production. And get the as many bugs out as possible before the product gets in the hands of the consumer. And rectify remaining problems quickly so as to limit damage.
A lot of the big threes problems come down to just not reacting fast enough to the marketplace and customer needs.
Fintail, you would be correct but at the same time pal, I do think we should build most of their cars here and then export them is all I'm saying. As far as your other comment on the 10-foot pole deal.....GM, had it's best year ever in Europe. The fact remains look at our products we have today. I sat in a new 08' Malibu LTZ, after my interview at another chevy dealer that was interested in me. I tell you one thing pal, we have came aloooooong way invehicle quality !!!! It was waaaay nicer than the Camry, I sat in a couple months ago. I can see exactly why those Malibu's are red hot !!!! I was watching a couple shopping the Malibu, and their facial and body language said it all. I didn't stick around to see if they bought it but they were sitting at the salesmen's desk.
The bottom line is the UAW, workers can build the finest vehicles in the world when given the proper "tools" to accomplish that mission. The proof is in the products we have in 2008' that they make !!!!! I'll put the CTS, MKS, Enclave, Malibu, Tahoe, Silverado, Escalade, Sierra Denali, to name a few up against the worlds best !!!
....changes in the marketplace?(i.e. Floatly old Buicks becoming uncool)
THAT, coupled with other companies trying to emulate what Buick is all about (Avalon, anybody) has put a tremendus drain on Buick. It's ironic that with all this talk about work going to places like China and India, that China may be Buick's saving grace not only propping up worldwide sales but inspiring what may be heading our way in terms of Buick design. (insert uaw link here) All that would obviously bode well for US auto manufacturing, because if Buick can reclaim some of it's lost market share, it surely would have to come from a company like Lexus, which I believe are all built in Japan (or most of them, anyway)
Well that sounds all good but the fact remains we should be building them here and sending them there but china's protectionist, trade barrier, laws forbid it. So why can't two play that game ??? The same goes for Japan. :mad: That's all I'm asking for is a level playing field. Who's to say an american made 08' Malibu, won't sell decent in Japan ????
Who's to say an american made 08' Malibu, won't sell decent in Japan ????
Declining market, punitive tax laws, poor fuel economy, subpar interior and exterior fit and finish, poor drivetrain refinement, exhorbitant ownership and operating costs, etc. A car the size of a Malibu has to be outfitted better than a CTS and carry a much more prestigious badge to have any real chance at selling there.
Declining market, punitive tax laws, poor fuel economy, subpar interior and exterior fit and finish, poor drivetrain refinement, exhorbitant ownership and operating costs, etc. A car the size of a Malibu has to be outfitted better than a CTS and carry a much more prestigious badge to have any real chance at selling there.
Well we both know that's not possible and stay competitive on price. The bottom line is if they are going to trade barrier our cars we should return the favor. The other bottom line is the 08' Malibu, is waaaay better product than their camcord and Japan, will do everything it can to keep it out of the country. :sick:
The bottom line is the UAW, workers can build the finest vehicles in the world when given the proper "tools" to accomplish that mission.
I agree - but so can Mexican workers, or Indian workers or Chinese workers - all of which are willing to work for a mere fraction of the UAW compensation package.
You think it would be viable to build Opels and Euro Fords here, and export them? I don't think that would work. Remember, Europe has autoworkers too.
GM and Ford are doing better in Europe than here - because what they sell there is not what they sell here.
I have no doubt UAW workers can build great cars - given the tools (engineering, design) and perhaps for some old attitudes to die off. The new Malibu looks impressive...I'd probably take one over a Camry too.
I certainly agree it is important to keep some jobs at home, and it foolish to send everything offshore...but Europe should not be worried about by the UAW. Worry about China.
I agree - but so can Mexican workers, or Indian workers or Chinese workers - all of which are willing to work for a mere fraction of the UAW compensation package.
Well if you studied the history of what you are saying you might come up with another conclusion. They have gotten better at buildingautomobiles but they are not even close to UAW or even non-union U.S. worker standards for that matter. The Mexicans, have had labor woes of their own with a high turn-over ratio and trust me from personal experience quality issues. Mom's brand new off the truck wrapped in plastic Tahoe, had a driver side tear in the leather which came from Mexico. Ask Delphi, about the fuel injectors they had the chinese make. They were scrapped. The same idea was done earlier in Mexico, but failed. Like I said they are getting better but the 3rd world foreigners do not have nearly as much pride and loyalty as the UAW, workers. Remember they are making only a little more than their wife sewing clothes down the road. If a new manufactor like Chery, is paying a penny more down the street they are gone !!! For god sakes they can't keep lead off our childrens toys, do you really think these people give a rats [non-permissible content removed] if they put on a shoddy part ??? Ship it !!!! :sick:
Well Fintail, I'm waaaay less concerned with Canada and Europes labor standards. If anything they help improve ours here at home as they have socialism and protectionist clauses. We are the only 1st world nation with next to nothing in protectionist clauses and the ones we do have are CRAP !!!
China, scares me to deathand what scaresme more is the fact that you might buy a Chin-E Class !!! :P j/k !!! :P
But on a serious note the Chinese, do scare me with their pennies on the dollar labor rates and 7/12 day work weeks. :mad: I guess some want that for our country where unions are essentially abolished and anyone caught trying to organize is jailed. I know marsha7 & silverfox5, would drink to that !!!! :sick:
GM and Ford are doing better in Europe than here - because what they sell there is not what they sell here.
Couldn't agree with you more.
I'll take the Ford Mondeo over any midsize sedans we have here.
I'll take the Euro Ford Focus over any compact sedans over here.
If Saturn is selling the "real" Vectra instead of the Vectra look-a-like called Aura I'll take that over any other midsize sedans as well (maybe except the Ford Mondeo). If Saturn managed to bring in the exact same Astra why can't they do it with the Aura?
As for why Japan and other countries aren't buying American cars...
Those of you who are asking that question need to understand that roads in Japan, Europe and some Asian countries like Korea and Taiwan are much narrower and twistier than here in the US. Most American cars are designed to be driven in America so ultimately wouldn't be a good fit in other countries. The best selling Toyota and Honda models here like the Camry and Accord are far from the best selling models in JDM.
UAW products will never have an impact in Japan and Europe. This has to be accepted. Japanese and European products will always have demand in North America, simply due to their past performance. They are not the enemy.
China is really the threat to western labor and anything we see resembling a standard of living. There are people here who will sell their countrymen to make a few dollars from glorified slave labor.
Some people see an interest in accelerating the socio-economic gap. A harshly two-tiered society is a dream for some.
Those examples are in my mind too. The Euro Fords look pretty nice and the GM products aren't too shabby either - and they've been more competent than what we see here for eons.
Europe has long been ahead of NA in the realm of nearly every consumer good. From cars to cellphones...it's amazing.
rockylee: The bottom line is the yuppies on the left coast thought it would be cool to buy japananese automobiles not because they were better but it was a trend.
That is accurate for the 1960s, but by the 1980s, Japanese cars weren't selling because of left-coast yuppies. They were selling because, in their respective market segments, they were clearly superior to the domestic competition. By the late 1980s, they not only had the domestics on the defensive, but had driven out virtually all of the low-cost European marques (Fiat, Renault, etc).
rockylee: Toyota, finally by the early 90's invested heavily in propaganda and hid recalls from their owners.
Toyota invested heavily in making better vehicles, which is why they gained market share and sales. The 1992 Camry was a huge leap forward for the company...compare it to a 1992 Ford Taurus or 1992 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme, and it is no contest.
rockylee: When you have your recalls fixed during routine service of course you can paint a rosy picture of flawlessness.
So this old wives' tale rears its head yet again.
Question - if secretly replacing defective parts during routine service visits were all that was necessary to boost quality ratings and the resulting owner satisfaction numbers, then why didn't the Big Three take this route?
This is certainly cheaper than revamping the model development process and reconfiguring factories - which GM and, to a lesser extent, Ford, have done over the past 15 years at great expense. It would also make the dealers happy - after all, they get reimbursed for this warranty work. This approach would make the UAW happy, too (no need for layoffs or changing work classifications).
So why didn't the domestics adopt this tactic, too? Was management really that stupid? Or perhaps the better reliability of the top-ranked Japanese marques was real, and this, like other conspiracy theories, falls apart when confronted with the facts.
The simple fact is that, domestic quality began dropping dramatically in the 1970s. At first it was assembly quality (i.e., workmanship). Panel fits and paint quality declined, especially on the smaller cars. Plus, the Vega was a terrible car that deserved every bit of bad press it received. Reliability of the full-size, intermediates and compacts was still pretty good through the early 1970s.
Then, when the Arab Oil Embargo hit in 1973, the domestics began a massive effort to downsize drivetrains, suspension components, transmissions and bodies, all to reduce weight. The results hurt reliability. Couple that with tightening emissions standards that hurt drivability and gas mileage, and declining workmanship, and it's easy to see that American cars got dramatically worse as the 1970s progressed.
Take Oldsmobile as an example. In 1970, the Toronado, Cutlass, Delta 88 and Ninety-Eight used tried-and-true engines, transmissions, air conditioning compressors and suspensions that may not have been the height of sophistication, but were rock-solid and tough as nails. Every Oldsmobile was a strong, tough, reliable car. Same for Buick, Cadillac and Pontiac.
By 1979, Oldsmobile had debuted the terrible diesel V-8; was using four-cylinder engines and downsized V-6s that had been rushed into production; and was beginning the switch to a front-wheel-drive layout with the debut of the troublesome X-car Omega. The lemons were now sprinkled liberally throughout the lineup. Plus, an Oldsmobile could now be a luxurious Ninety-Eight...or cheap, economy Starfire based on the old Vega platform. The brand identity was becoming blurred. The same thing was happening to Buick and Cadillac, too.
During the 1980s, workmanship on the domestics improved, and the Ford Taurus led the way to better ergonomics and chassis dynamics, but the switch to front-wheel drive hurt reliability even more, especially with transmissions and engines. The old rear-wheel-drive battlecruisers at Ford and GM were still reliable, and cheap to fix when something did go wrong, but they represented a shrinking market segment even then.
Today, GM and Ford are producing MUCH better vehicles. But they didn't make those changes out of the goodness of their corporate hearts, and they can't undo over 25 years of clunkers with one generation of new models.
GM and Ford have made those improvements because their products were inferior, and they were getting beaten in the market place. The SUV boom of the 1990s was, in retrospect, a mixed blessing, because while it restored profits for the Big Three, it allowed both management and the UAW leadership to postpone the day of reckoning until now.
Companies don't make changes until they need to do so. If anything, they (like government), don't make changes until the last minute. Same with unions - actually, unions are worse, because leadership is accountable to members, and its members tend to be more isolated and focused on today, not the future.
Mr. Gettelfinger agreed to the latest contract because he knows that things have to change, even if his members don't like it, not because he really cares what The Wall Street Journal says about him on its editorial page.
He knows the truth, and the truth is that the Honda and Toyota are leading the way in revamping how vehicles are made; they set the standard in most major segments, and GM and Ford must meet them head-on to survive; the transplants are not going away; the federal government is not going to discourage people from buying vehicles made at transplant operations; if such action were taken, it would only encourage those companies to build more products here, thus placing the domestics in even more of a bind; and that the UAW cannot survive if GM or Ford go under.
Ummm....as far as the'08 Malibu is concerned, you can remove the subpar fit and finish as well as the poor drivetrain refinement, as this car is drawing rave reviews in those categories. While Rocky is right about unfair trade practices are in China and Japan, I don't think the Malibu would sell there because the car is too big for what they are accustomed to. But, we'll never know if that's true because unlike you or I the Japanese don't have a true choice in whether or not they would want the higher costs associated with owning a Malibu or Tahoe over there
BTW, I did read where GM was thinking about building Astra's here and shipping them to Europe when they start building the Saturn version here because of the discrepancy between the dollar and euro.
You think it would be viable to build Opels and Euro Fords here, and export them? I don't think that would work. Remember, Europe has autoworkers too.
Um, we already do that ... the plant that assembles the Saturn Sky and Pontiac Solstice (Wilmington, DE, IIRC), also builds the Vauxhall / Opel GT that is exported to Europe.
Granted, that's a low quantity example - does BMW and / or MB export any of the vehicles built here in the US?
as far as the'08 Malibu is concerned, you can remove the subpar fit and finish as well as the poor drivetrain refinement
Subpar for the expectations of the Japanese market where Rocky wants to sell them. The Malibu does meet the lower expectations of American buyers.
But, we'll never know if that's true because unlike you or I the Japanese don't have a true choice in whether or not they would want the higher costs associated with owning a Malibu or Tahoe over there
Actually, they do. Japanese buyers who can afford the importation, legalization, and ownership costs can bring in foreign-market vehicles on an individual basis, and selected US domestic models are available from dealers there.
I'm sure you wouldn't like the idea of a Chinese-manufactured Mercedes-Benz as much as I wouldn't like a Chinese-made Cadillac. Could you imagine the Mercedes-Benz ads touting "old world craftsmanship" while an E-Class is assembled in some Chinese sweatshop by underage girls slaving under abominable working conditions for pitiful wages?
Actually, they do. Japanese buyers who can afford the importation, legalization, and ownership costs can bring in foreign-market vehicles on an individual basis, and selected US domestic models are available from dealers there.
Well if only the few who can afford to jump through those hoops and pay for the jumping can get them, does the average Japanese consumer REALLY have that choice?? Think about it. Lets say all that hoop jumping cost a Japanese person $32,000 for a base Malibu and $40,000 for an LTZ, how many would they really sell? I'll bet if a base 4 cyl Camcord cost $32,000 they'd sell less than 1/4 of what they sell now. Even any Japanese Camcords shipped here to supplement what is built here sell for the same price as their "American" counterparts.
Chinese sweatshop by underage girls slaving under abominable working conditions for pitiful wages?
Can you provide proof for that?
Because it's not just once that I've seen the "Chinese sweatshop" comment popping up in your posts from time to time.
Have you ever been to a so-called Chinese sweatshop? Have you actually talk to the Chinese workers who works in the so-called Chinese sweatshop? As matter of fact, have you ever been to China, or anywhere in the Far East?
To be able to work for a large international company like BMW, Dell, Sony and others are considered good in China no matter how low the workers' salaries are compare to the US. To be honest, I don't mind to get paid half of what I am making here if I have to live in China because I can get filled up for lunch (and good food) for only $1 USD over there but here try something like $10.
I haven't, but a colleague of mine has and confirmed my suspicions. He tells me the working conditions there resemble that of the United States circa 1900. From what I've read about that time in labor history, it was an awful time for the working person.
Nobody said they should cost less than the homegrown product. Rocky's complaint was that trade barriers (whether real or imagined) kept them out altogether, much like the draconian US import laws keep foreign-market cars out of the reach of all but the most fabulously wealthy Americans. Japanese consumers with the wallet and motivation can bring in a 2008 Malibu intead of, say, buying a Lexus GS, but exceedingly few of them would want to.
He tells me the working conditions there resemble that of the United States circa 1900.
Which plant for factory did he go to?
Is it one of the big corporation or some small, private, family-run shops?
Also, what kind of factory did he go to? How long ago did he go to China and witness this? Did he talk to the workers? Are the workers complaining or are they just happy to be able to have a job so they can feed their family.
I grew up in a place which was a lot like China in the 90s and maybe today so I have a better understanding of what's going through those Chinese workers' mind. Not every country is in the same stage as the US and Europe development-wise so it's foolish trying to force our "value" upon the people in a very different world.
Just remember, when US was celebrating 100 years of independence and democracy, China was still being ruled by a person called the Qing Emperor. Also, last I checked, back then the US didn't launch the "Operation China Freedom" trying to free the poor Chinese people from dictatorship. As matter of fact US was one of the eight western countries (including Japan) who were trying to colonize China back then. So let's cut back some hypocrisy and give the Chinese a break.
GM and Ford have not exported cars in large numbers from the U.S. for decades.
Ford's preferred method of operation was to set up a subsidiary (Ford of Europe, Ford of Australia, etc.), while GM preferred to purchase an established company (Opel, Holden and Vauxhall) to produce cars tailored to that specific market. Nothing is likely to change their strategies. The "we can't export vehicles to Japan (or Korea, or anywhere else)" is a red herring argument, because neither company has pursued that strategy for decades.
Plus, most U.S. vehicles are not compatible with Japanese parking and traffic conditions. In Tokyo, for example, a family must prove that it has a place to park the vehicle before it can be registered. Can you imagine trying to buy a parking space for a Ford Expedition or Chevrolet Silverado in Tokyo, where LIVING space is at a premium?
Sure, GM could export the Malibu (and Ford could export the Fusion), but even those cars are considered very large by Japanese standards, and the hometeam's offerings are just as good, so why would large numbers of Japanese buyers switch to the Chevy?
And let's not forget about the higher gas prices paid by the Japanese.
Honda and Toyota are following Ford's strategy for the U.S. market - set up a subsidiary completely owned by the parent company that produces vehicles to suit local tastes.
Chinese, do scare me with their pennies on the dollar labor rates and 7/12 day work weeks.
I don't think everyone in China is working 7/12s. Looks like they are imitating the US lifestyle at least at the beach....There must be money in making Nike tennis shoes..
Sorry, carrying a Motor Trend when you were 7 does not give you any idea about the politics of Carter/Reagan or the quality onslaught by the Japanese carmakers...
and, as a child, considering that the UAW adults I knew had their heads in the sand, your potential knowledge of quality problems with American cars would be less than zero...your parents could not admit out loud that something was wrong, but you could see the handwriting on the wall at age 7???...
Sorry, rocky, you have been relegated back to the Diaper Squad, and there is nothing you can say or do to change it...you were simply too young to comprehend what was happening (as was the entire UAW adult membership, BTW), but you expect us to believe that you had insights back then???...back then you hardly knew that wheels were round...
We lived it, we experienced it...you read about it 15 years later, and only heard the union viewpoint, which, in 2008, has not changed from 1975...you really do not know what you are talking about, and blustering with emoticons does not change your sheer lack of knowledge...
Pampers for rocky!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I've been around since '52 and lived through Mr. Telfon RayGun and his slimebag contra operation in the White House basement and his huge budget deficits.
The '73 oil embargo started the decline of the UAW more than anything.
Put that point of view in your adult diapers and smoke 'em. :shades:
President Reagan (Ray-gun - star wars, etc.) had the reputation of being the teflon president because scandal didn't stick to him. The "great communicator" said he didn't know that North, Poindexter, Weinberger et. al. were selling weapons to Iran and illegally using the money to fund the Contras in Nicaragua.
Guess you had to be there.
I suppose you never heard of George Meany or Walter Reuther either? (hint - they are topical).
The Teflon Raygun threw me. Now I see where the Gun part came from.
Now I recall the "Teflon Ron." I read it in the history books.
I would believe him before I'd believe some of the current crop of president wannabes.
George Meany? Walter Reuther? Didn't they run Ford and GM at one time? :P Or were they buddied of Jimmy Hoffa (whatever happened to Jimmy Hoffa?) Did he get crushed by a skillet on the assembly line at Honda?
Actually you have to understand just how specialized the car market is in a country. Toyota maybe celebrating 50 years in the US, but their first car was a disaster. They thought all they had to do to be successful was take a Japanese product, make it meet American regulations, move the steering wheel, lower the price and sell it. Well they created the Toyota Toyopet and two years later they were driven out the NA market. (Think the 1950ies Yugo).
The car was built with Japanese market in mind not US conditions. It was small perhaps a bit too small, for the time but that might have been forgivable. What was unforgivable was it underpowered and it value steams broke when driven over 60 mph. In Japan it was a hit in the US it was a flop.
Japan lacks the big wide open freeways in which to take a car that fast very often so it was a product not suitable for the North American market. They returned later in 65 with the corona which was designed for the US market and have been growing since.
Subpar for the expectations of the Japanese market where Rocky wants to sell them. The Malibu does meet the lower expectations of American buyers.
As I and cooterbfd, said we will never know !!!! :sick:
Actually, they do. Japanese buyers who can afford the importation, legalization, and ownership costs can bring in foreign-market vehicles on an individual basis, and selected US domestic models are available from dealers there.
With all do respect bumpy, that is B.S. GM, only has like 2 or 3 dealerships that have survived because of trade barriers. The Japnese government says a 4 banger can be 1.9 liters and once Toyota, is working on a 2.2 they work with their own and change the regulation that 2.2 is good and 1.9 is out of spec. These type of trade barriers have been very well documented and supported in the past with evidence. It's mind boggling you as a senior poster are now denying this took place when I assume you have read the links. I and brightness04, had a falling out a couple years ago on this subject and after hours of digging and being called a liar well I found evidence to support my position. Hell the politicians in both party's have touched on this subject already this year if you've paid any attention to presidential politics. It baffles me as smart as you are about automotive news and the industry that you are trying to take a position of this never happened ??? :confuse:
These are just a few of the many articles and pictures below I found not spending much time at all !!!! :sick: It makes me sick to my stomach looking at these pictures and reading these story's but you have the gull to question lemko's credibility is crazy. Watch a little Lou Dobbs, and Anderson Cooper, who spent time over their in his series called "Planet in Peril"
Globalization and Child Labor Posted by Marcos Ancelovici on July 19, 2007
It is commonly believed that trade liberalization in developing countries fosters child labor. Families would send their children to work in new export-driven sectors, particularly textile and apparel, while greedy multinational corporations would take advantage of these families’ desperate condition to shamelessly exploit children.
Well, think again. In an article just posted on VoxEu.org, Dartmouth economists Eric Edmonds and Nina Pavcnik argue that trade liberalization could actually have a positive effect on child labor:
“Our recent research shows that children are less likely to work in countries with more international trade. The negative association between trade and child labour holds even when considering only poor countries’ trade with high-income countries. It also holds up for trade in unskilled-labour intensive products. Quite simply, child labour is less prevalent in countries that trade more because countries that trade more are richer, and children work less in richer countries”
According to Edmonds and Pavcnik, instead of assuming that international trade can cause children to work we should begin by asking why do children work. The main reason children work in some developing countries is poverty. Trade liberalization could thus foster child labor if it makes families poorer. Edmonds and Pavcnik claim that it doesn’t, but that’s a heated debate in the development policy community. Most studies show that globalization and trade feed inequality but not necessarily poverty. World Bank studies show that globalization has reduced poverty but some scholars, like Robert Wade, have questioned the validity of World Bank indicators.
But whatever the actual causal relation between globalization and poverty, Edmonds and Pavcnik have a point when they write that:
“Before one boycotts a product with child labour content or supports punitive trade sanctions, one should ask whether these measures will make the child better off. Will boycotts or sanctions eliminate the reasons why children work? Thus far, most of the existing evidence suggests that eliminating sources of income will not make poor families better off. It will not change the circumstances that cause children to work.”
This entry was posted on July 19, 2007 at 3:11 pm and is filed under Globalization. . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Well you are comparing a Camry compeitor to a Cadillac STS/CTS competitor. :confuse: The point we are trying to make is with the barriers, currency manipulation, tariffs, it's next to impossible to do business in Japan, except with the few wealthy. Our market is opened to all classes for japanese exports not just a select few who are willing to jump through hoops to get what they want.
Just remember, when US was celebrating 100 years of independence and democracy, China was still being ruled by a person called the Qing Emperor. Also, last I checked, back then the US didn't launch the "Operation China Freedom" trying to free the poor Chinese people from dictatorship. As matter of fact US was one of the eight western countries (including Japan) who were trying to colonize China back then. So let's cut back some hypocrisy and give the Chinese a break.
Let's not give them a break but let's give them freedom. All we are doing right now by shipping our good paying union jobs over their is providing them a income base to build up their military, and steal R&D because China, doesn't follow international copyright/trademark laws. :sick:
They were showing Michigans, economy and with every auto job that had a combined average salary of $72,000 a yr. the ones replacing those jobs were $32,000 and most required a college degree.
I would believe him before I'd believe some of the current crop of president wannabes.
George Meany? Walter Reuther? Didn't they run Ford and GM at one time? Or were they buddied of Jimmy Hoffa (whatever happened to Jimmy Hoffa?) Did he get crushed by a skillet on the assembly line at Honda?
Our market is opened to all classes for japanese exports not just a select few who are willing to jump through hoops to get what they want.
It most certainly is not. Go figure out how much it costs to import and register a Toyota Mark X in the United States, then compare that to how much it costs to import and register a Cadillac CTS in Japan. The Japanese cars that are here were specifically tailored to meet US trade barriers at very high cost.
The ones replacing those jobs were $32,000 and most required a college degree.
Wow, what are they? Jobs for managers of McDonald's? Justification for higher education? Maybe they should change the classic poster from a photo of six-car garage filled with exotic cars next to a seaside mansion to a snapshot of ratty four year-old Kia parked behind Mommy and Daddy's garage. Shoot, at $32K a year, junior would be lucky to pay the rent on a studio apartment in a marginal neighborhood and keep up with his student loan payments. Hey, son, you better keep that Kia clubbed and invest in a firearm!
I think he forgets there were also wealthy people during the so-called "Guilded Age" who went to the beach to relax. I doubt all those people enjoying the sun and surf are Chinese laborers.
rockylee: I guess the documentation of links to storys providing evidencethat I provided almost 2 years ago was all made-up.
Sorry, but your "documentation" usually consists of links to union-related websites or the Level Field Institute, which are hardly impartial, and thus not credible for those of us looking for accurate articles that tell the ENTIRE story. I doubt that this one was any different.
And I also doubt that it answered my original question - if secretly replacing defective parts during regular service visits is the key to improved reliability, and thus improved customer satisfaction ratings, why didn't the Big Three take this simple and relatively easy and inexpensive route? Until this question is answered, it will remain an "old wives' tale."
To compete successfully with the imports, Detroit is going to have to produce a reliable car that is built of quality materials. That car is also going to have to be priced the same as the imports. It needs to last as long and get the same fuel mileage.
Consider this: GM wishes to produce a car that will sell to the consumer for say $18,000 to compete with a Toyota model. GM needs to net $X from that car sale to the dealer.
To simplify as much as possible, all manufacturers have buildings to erect, advertising, energy cost and so forth. This is true for Import Mfg as well as the big 3. Lots of Japanese and other imports are being built here now. Thus they all have the same basic expenses in this regard.
There are 2 other expenses involved. Salaries and Parts.
If the payroll is disproportionately high, the quality of the parts must suffer in order to sell at the $18 and make the $X profit necessary to stay in business.
When the top executives are being paid ridiculously high salaries and the assembly line workers are making more than college graduates, ( nurses for example) the quality of parts and therefore the quality of the product will suffer.
Everybody from the guy on the back of a garbage truck to the guy flying the plane wants to make as much as they can. However, companies can not continue to pay high salaries and continue to be competitive. When that happens, plants close, businesses go under, and people can't find work.
While it may be nice to have the UNION bully the mfg into unreal high wages and bennefits, where are they when things go south.
The American worker can compete in skills with any worker in any country in the world, under identical circumstances. The quality of the Toyota or Honda that is made here is every bit as good as those made in Japan. Wages are lower at those plants than at the big 3, but parts are better. Consequently the quality of the Japanese car is better than those of the big 3.
I'm not speaking without some knowledge on the subject. At 66 years of age, I've owned in excess of 60 vehicles. Until '95 most all were from the Big 3. I generally traded at around 50K miles before major repairs were due. We bought a new Maxima in '95 because the wifes Oldsmobile needed a new transmission, the timing gears and chain had already been replaced because the "rubber" teeth fell off the gears, and the paint was literally "Pitting" off the car. It had 75K mikes on the clock. But in reality, I though all cars were pretty much worn out by 50K. That is what I was used to. My wife insisted on the Maxima, because she liked the looks. In 93 we traded it for a CR-V because she needed the hauling capacity. The Maxima had gone around 76K miles with "0" problems. Meanwhile I had bought a 96 Ram and in 98 they traded me out of it for a 98 because they were tired of me complaining about the "Lemon". The 98 wasn't much better, so I unloaded it for an 03 Pilot. We have had a problem with both the Hondas after the warranty period, but Honda fixed them "Free". Honda's comment: "Hondas are not supposed to do that. ,We want the broken part to find out why it broke". In contrast, my (now 87 yrs old) mother had to replace the transmission in her 95 Explorer at about 60K miles and again at around 90K. No help from Ford. Ford's comment: "You are out of warranty"!
Sorry, but your "documentation" usually consists of links to union-related websites or the Level Field Institute, which are hardly impartial, and thus not credible for those of us looking for accurate articles that tell the ENTIRE story. I doubt that this one was any different.
I guess the ones to Harbour, weren't credible ??? :surprise: :confuse:
And I also doubt that it answered my original question - if secretly replacing defective parts during regular service visits is the key to improved reliability, and thus improved customer satisfaction ratings, why didn't the Big Three take this simple and relatively easy and inexpensive route? Until this question is answered, it will remain an "old wives' tale."
Well if the Big 3, would of been caught doing this their would of been a out cry for law suits because it was after all against the law. The Big 3 went through enough law suits in the past to not even dare cover up defects and the biased media outlets were getting multi-million dollar advertising campaigns from toyota, and went along with the "sweetest perfection" image. :mad:
Oh well times are changing !!!! The Big 3, especially GM, are turning around !!!! We are making some of the best products on the market today. :shades: Some of the presidential candidates on both sides promise to fix Michigan, and the automobile industry. We will see if they can keep their word.
When the top executives are being paid ridiculously high salaries and the assembly line workers are making more than college graduates, ( nurses for example) the quality of parts and therefore the quality of the product will suffer.
Not here they don't !!! I have relatives that are nurses or will be nurses. My cousin Michael, last I knew makes $35 bucks an hour. :confuse:
Everybody from the guy on the back of a garbage truck to the guy flying the plane wants to make as much as they can. However, companies can not continue to pay high salaries and continue to be competitive. When that happens, plants close, businesses go under, and people can't find work.
Well explain to me how union labor in japan, does it ???? They (JAW) make a lot more than the UAW, workers plus get pension enefits, and gobs of paid time off.
The American worker can compete in skills with any worker in any country in the world, under identical circumstances. The quality of the Toyota or Honda that is made here is every bit as good as those made in Japan.
Ummm, I think others would disagree with you !!!! Is that why the top Lexuses, are made in Japan, by JAW workers !!!!
Wages are lower at those plants than at the big 3, but parts are better. Consequently the quality of the Japanese car is better than those of the big 3.
I guess you missed the contract talks ??? A new UAW worker at GM, makes $14 an hour. Last time I knew Toyota, was paying $19 to start and once they complete theirtraining they are making $22 an hour. After about 3 or 4 years they are up to $27 an hr. and get killer bonuses. Last year they got $10K or an equivalent of $3 an hour.
At 66 years of age, I've owned in excess of 60 vehicles.
Good god !!!! :surprise: and I thought I owned a lot of vehicles !!!
We have had a problem with both the Hondas after the warranty period, but Honda fixed them "Free". Honda's comment: "Hondas are not supposed to do that. ,We want the broken part to find out why it broke". In contrast, my (now 87 yrs old) mother had to replace the transmission in her 95 Explorer at about 60K miles and again at around 90K. No help from Ford. Ford's comment: "You are out of warranty"!
So you are saying that Ford, should fix it out of warranty ??? If Honda, fixes them out of warranty then why not advertise it that customers have a lifetime warranty. :confuse:
presidential candidates to revive Michigan and politicians to keep their promises...
What are you? Six?
If I am one of those people who has been hurt by the ever-shrinking Big 3 market sharing and auto industry in Michigan my priority would be to re-educate myself and find out how to make myself competitive in the job market again. Counting on those politician would be the last resort, much less hoping for the promises to come true.
Comments
I think there is a consensus that Buick builds great cars. They get good marks from JD Powers and CR. Which tells me that when the UAW workers are given good designs, engineering, and parts they can compete with the best of the best.
I had a very good friend in the 1990s that sold Buicks. He thought he could make more selling Toyota and switched. Less than a year later he was back at the Buick store. Said he could not sleep at night with the tactics that dealership used. Plus he did not feel they were as well built as the Buick. Just one salesman's opinion. I would have bought a Buick on his recommendation. Except that was a real ugly year for them and I am really a truck man.
As an import lover, I agree. I am not sure if the UAW drained funding from R/D with salaries. Or did the need to sasitfy investors drain funding. Or was it a corporate culture unable to grasp the changes in the marketplace?(i.e. Floatly old Buicks becoming uncool)
R\D is what is killing them. With good R\D you could make cars that people want. Cut costs in a way that is less likely to offend your customers. Create better systems for controlling production. And get the as many bugs out as possible before the product gets in the hands of the consumer. And rectify remaining problems quickly so as to limit damage.
A lot of the big threes problems come down to just not reacting fast enough to the marketplace and customer needs.
The bottom line is the UAW, workers can build the finest vehicles in the world when given the proper "tools" to accomplish that mission. The proof is in the products we have in 2008' that they make !!!!! I'll put the CTS, MKS, Enclave, Malibu, Tahoe, Silverado, Escalade, Sierra Denali, to name a few up against the worlds best !!!
-Rocky
THAT, coupled with other companies trying to emulate what Buick is all about (Avalon, anybody) has put a tremendus drain on Buick. It's ironic that with all this talk about work going to places like China and India, that China may be Buick's saving grace not only propping up worldwide sales but inspiring what may be heading our way in terms of Buick design. (insert uaw link here) All that would obviously bode well for US auto manufacturing, because if Buick can reclaim some of it's lost market share, it surely would have to come from a company like Lexus, which I believe are all built in Japan (or most of them, anyway)
-Rocky
Declining market, punitive tax laws, poor fuel economy, subpar interior and exterior fit and finish, poor drivetrain refinement, exhorbitant ownership and operating costs, etc. A car the size of a Malibu has to be outfitted better than a CTS and carry a much more prestigious badge to have any real chance at selling there.
Well we both know that's not possible and stay competitive on price.
-Rocky
I agree - but so can Mexican workers, or Indian workers or Chinese workers - all of which are willing to work for a mere fraction of the UAW compensation package.
GM and Ford are doing better in Europe than here - because what they sell there is not what they sell here.
I have no doubt UAW workers can build great cars - given the tools (engineering, design) and perhaps for some old attitudes to die off. The new Malibu looks impressive...I'd probably take one over a Camry too.
I certainly agree it is important to keep some jobs at home, and it foolish to send everything offshore...but Europe should not be worried about by the UAW. Worry about China.
Well if you studied the history of what you are saying you might come up with another conclusion. They have gotten better at buildingautomobiles but they are not even close to UAW or even non-union U.S. worker standards for that matter.
No Thanks !!!
-Rocky
China, scares me to deathand what scaresme more is the fact that you might buy a Chin-E Class !!! :P j/k !!! :P
But on a serious note the Chinese, do scare me with their pennies on the dollar labor rates and 7/12 day work weeks. :mad: I guess some want that for our country where unions are essentially abolished and anyone caught trying to organize is jailed.
-Rocky
Couldn't agree with you more.
I'll take the Ford Mondeo over any midsize sedans we have here.
I'll take the Euro Ford Focus over any compact sedans over here.
If Saturn is selling the "real" Vectra instead of the Vectra look-a-like called Aura I'll take that over any other midsize sedans as well (maybe except the Ford Mondeo). If Saturn managed to bring in the exact same Astra why can't they do it with the Aura?
As for why Japan and other countries aren't buying American cars...
Those of you who are asking that question need to understand that roads in Japan, Europe and some Asian countries like Korea and Taiwan are much narrower and twistier than here in the US. Most American cars are designed to be driven in America so ultimately wouldn't be a good fit in other countries. The best selling Toyota and Honda models here like the Camry and Accord are far from the best selling models in JDM.
China is really the threat to western labor and anything we see resembling a standard of living. There are people here who will sell their countrymen to make a few dollars from glorified slave labor.
Some people see an interest in accelerating the socio-economic gap. A harshly two-tiered society is a dream for some.
Europe has long been ahead of NA in the realm of nearly every consumer good. From cars to cellphones...it's amazing.
That is accurate for the 1960s, but by the 1980s, Japanese cars weren't selling because of left-coast yuppies. They were selling because, in their respective market segments, they were clearly superior to the domestic competition. By the late 1980s, they not only had the domestics on the defensive, but had driven out virtually all of the low-cost European marques (Fiat, Renault, etc).
rockylee: Toyota, finally by the early 90's invested heavily in propaganda and hid recalls from their owners.
Toyota invested heavily in making better vehicles, which is why they gained market share and sales. The 1992 Camry was a huge leap forward for the company...compare it to a 1992 Ford Taurus or 1992 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme, and it is no contest.
rockylee: When you have your recalls fixed during routine service of course you can paint a rosy picture of flawlessness.
So this old wives' tale rears its head yet again.
Question - if secretly replacing defective parts during routine service visits were all that was necessary to boost quality ratings and the resulting owner satisfaction numbers, then why didn't the Big Three take this route?
This is certainly cheaper than revamping the model development process and reconfiguring factories - which GM and, to a lesser extent, Ford, have done over the past 15 years at great expense. It would also make the dealers happy - after all, they get reimbursed for this warranty work. This approach would make the UAW happy, too (no need for layoffs or changing work classifications).
So why didn't the domestics adopt this tactic, too? Was management really that stupid? Or perhaps the better reliability of the top-ranked Japanese marques was real, and this, like other conspiracy theories, falls apart when confronted with the facts.
The simple fact is that, domestic quality began dropping dramatically in the 1970s. At first it was assembly quality (i.e., workmanship). Panel fits and paint quality declined, especially on the smaller cars. Plus, the Vega was a terrible car that deserved every bit of bad press it received. Reliability of the full-size, intermediates and compacts was still pretty good through the early 1970s.
Then, when the Arab Oil Embargo hit in 1973, the domestics began a massive effort to downsize drivetrains, suspension components, transmissions and bodies, all to reduce weight. The results hurt reliability. Couple that with tightening emissions standards that hurt drivability and gas mileage, and declining workmanship, and it's easy to see that American cars got dramatically worse as the 1970s progressed.
Take Oldsmobile as an example. In 1970, the Toronado, Cutlass, Delta 88 and Ninety-Eight used tried-and-true engines, transmissions, air conditioning compressors and suspensions that may not have been the height of sophistication, but were rock-solid and tough as nails. Every Oldsmobile was a strong, tough, reliable car. Same for Buick, Cadillac and Pontiac.
By 1979, Oldsmobile had debuted the terrible diesel V-8; was using four-cylinder engines and downsized V-6s that had been rushed into production; and was beginning the switch to a front-wheel-drive layout with the debut of the troublesome X-car Omega. The lemons were now sprinkled liberally throughout the lineup. Plus, an Oldsmobile could now be a luxurious Ninety-Eight...or cheap, economy Starfire based on the old Vega platform. The brand identity was becoming blurred. The same thing was happening to Buick and Cadillac, too.
During the 1980s, workmanship on the domestics improved, and the Ford Taurus led the way to better ergonomics and chassis dynamics, but the switch to front-wheel drive hurt reliability even more, especially with transmissions and engines. The old rear-wheel-drive battlecruisers at Ford and GM were still reliable, and cheap to fix when something did go wrong, but they represented a shrinking market segment even then.
Today, GM and Ford are producing MUCH better vehicles. But they didn't make those changes out of the goodness of their corporate hearts, and they can't undo over 25 years of clunkers with one generation of new models.
GM and Ford have made those improvements because their products were inferior, and they were getting beaten in the market place. The SUV boom of the 1990s was, in retrospect, a mixed blessing, because while it restored profits for the Big Three, it allowed both management and the UAW leadership to postpone the day of reckoning until now.
Companies don't make changes until they need to do so. If anything, they (like government), don't make changes until the last minute. Same with unions - actually, unions are worse, because leadership is accountable to members, and its members tend to be more isolated and focused on today, not the future.
Mr. Gettelfinger agreed to the latest contract because he knows that things have to change, even if his members don't like it, not because he really cares what The Wall Street Journal says about him on its editorial page.
He knows the truth, and the truth is that the Honda and Toyota are leading the way in revamping how vehicles are made; they set the standard in most major segments, and GM and Ford must meet them head-on to survive; the transplants are not going away; the federal government is not going to discourage people from buying vehicles made at transplant operations; if such action were taken, it would only encourage those companies to build more products here, thus placing the domestics in even more of a bind; and that the UAW cannot survive if GM or Ford go under.
BTW, I did read where GM was thinking about building Astra's here and shipping them to Europe when they start building the Saturn version here because of the discrepancy between the dollar and euro.
Um, we already do that ... the plant that assembles the Saturn Sky and Pontiac Solstice (Wilmington, DE, IIRC), also builds the Vauxhall / Opel GT that is exported to Europe.
Granted, that's a low quantity example - does BMW and / or MB export any of the vehicles built here in the US?
Subpar for the expectations of the Japanese market where Rocky wants to sell them. The Malibu does meet the lower expectations of American buyers.
But, we'll never know if that's true because unlike you or I the Japanese don't have a true choice in whether or not they would want the higher costs associated with owning a Malibu or Tahoe over there
Actually, they do. Japanese buyers who can afford the importation, legalization, and ownership costs can bring in foreign-market vehicles on an individual basis, and selected US domestic models are available from dealers there.
Well if only the few who can afford to jump through those hoops and pay for the jumping can get them, does the average Japanese consumer REALLY have that choice?? Think about it. Lets say all that hoop jumping cost a Japanese person $32,000 for a base Malibu and $40,000 for an LTZ, how many would they really sell? I'll bet if a base 4 cyl Camcord cost $32,000 they'd sell less than 1/4 of what they sell now. Even any Japanese Camcords shipped here to supplement what is built here sell for the same price as their "American" counterparts.
Can you provide proof for that?
Because it's not just once that I've seen the "Chinese sweatshop" comment popping up in your posts from time to time.
Have you ever been to a so-called Chinese sweatshop? Have you actually talk to the Chinese workers who works in the so-called Chinese sweatshop? As matter of fact, have you ever been to China, or anywhere in the Far East?
To be able to work for a large international company like BMW, Dell, Sony and others are considered good in China no matter how low the workers' salaries are compare to the US. To be honest, I don't mind to get paid half of what I am making here if I have to live in China because I can get filled up for lunch (and good food) for only $1 USD over there but here try something like $10.
It actually might make economic sense now that the Euro carries a 50% premium over the greenback...but it won't happen in volume.
The Chinese conditions might not be like 19th century sweatshops, but they would not be tolerated under first world ideals.
Which plant for factory did he go to?
Is it one of the big corporation or some small, private, family-run shops?
Also, what kind of factory did he go to? How long ago did he go to China and witness this? Did he talk to the workers? Are the workers complaining or are they just happy to be able to have a job so they can feed their family.
I grew up in a place which was a lot like China in the 90s and maybe today so I have a better understanding of what's going through those Chinese workers' mind. Not every country is in the same stage as the US and Europe development-wise so it's foolish trying to force our "value" upon the people in a very different world.
Just remember, when US was celebrating 100 years of independence and democracy, China was still being ruled by a person called the Qing Emperor. Also, last I checked, back then the US didn't launch the "Operation China Freedom" trying to free the poor Chinese people from dictatorship. As matter of fact US was one of the eight western countries (including Japan) who were trying to colonize China back then. So let's cut back some hypocrisy and give the Chinese a break.
Ford's preferred method of operation was to set up a subsidiary (Ford of Europe, Ford of Australia, etc.), while GM preferred to purchase an established company (Opel, Holden and Vauxhall) to produce cars tailored to that specific market. Nothing is likely to change their strategies. The "we can't export vehicles to Japan (or Korea, or anywhere else)" is a red herring argument, because neither company has pursued that strategy for decades.
Plus, most U.S. vehicles are not compatible with Japanese parking and traffic conditions. In Tokyo, for example, a family must prove that it has a place to park the vehicle before it can be registered. Can you imagine trying to buy a parking space for a Ford Expedition or Chevrolet Silverado in Tokyo, where LIVING space is at a premium?
Sure, GM could export the Malibu (and Ford could export the Fusion), but even those cars are considered very large by Japanese standards, and the hometeam's offerings are just as good, so why would large numbers of Japanese buyers switch to the Chevy?
And let's not forget about the higher gas prices paid by the Japanese.
Honda and Toyota are following Ford's strategy for the U.S. market - set up a subsidiary completely owned by the parent company that produces vehicles to suit local tastes.
I don't think everyone in China is working 7/12s. Looks like they are imitating the US lifestyle at least at the beach....There must be money in making Nike tennis shoes..
and, as a child, considering that the UAW adults I knew had their heads in the sand, your potential knowledge of quality problems with American cars would be less than zero...your parents could not admit out loud that something was wrong, but you could see the handwriting on the wall at age 7???...
Sorry, rocky, you have been relegated back to the Diaper Squad, and there is nothing you can say or do to change it...you were simply too young to comprehend what was happening (as was the entire UAW adult membership, BTW), but you expect us to believe that you had insights back then???...back then you hardly knew that wheels were round...
We lived it, we experienced it...you read about it 15 years later, and only heard the union viewpoint, which, in 2008, has not changed from 1975...you really do not know what you are talking about, and blustering with emoticons does not change your sheer lack of knowledge...
Pampers for rocky!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The '73 oil embargo started the decline of the UAW more than anything.
Put that point of view in your adult diapers and smoke 'em. :shades:
AT risk of being off topic..., Who is Teflon RayGun and his slimebay contra operation.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
President Reagan (Ray-gun - star wars, etc.) had the reputation of being the teflon president because scandal didn't stick to him. The "great communicator" said he didn't know that North, Poindexter, Weinberger et. al. were selling weapons to Iran and illegally using the money to fund the Contras in Nicaragua.
Guess you had to be there.
I suppose you never heard of George Meany or Walter Reuther either? (hint - they are topical).
Now I recall the "Teflon Ron." I read it in the history books.
I would believe him before I'd believe some of the current crop of president wannabes.
George Meany? Walter Reuther? Didn't they run Ford and GM at one time? :P
Or were they buddied of Jimmy Hoffa (whatever happened to Jimmy Hoffa?) Did he get crushed by a skillet on the assembly line at Honda?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
The car was built with Japanese market in mind not US conditions. It was small perhaps a bit too small, for the time but that might have been forgivable. What was unforgivable was it underpowered and it value steams broke when driven over 60 mph. In Japan it was a hit in the US it was a flop.
Japan lacks the big wide open freeways in which to take a car that fast very often so it was a product not suitable for the North American market. They returned later in 65 with the corona which was designed for the US market and have been growing since.
I guess the documentation of links to storys providing evidencethat I provided almost 2 years ago was all made-up. :confuse:
-Rocky
As I and cooterbfd, said we will never know !!!! :sick:
Actually, they do. Japanese buyers who can afford the importation, legalization, and ownership costs can bring in foreign-market vehicles on an individual basis, and selected US domestic models are available from dealers there.
With all do respect bumpy, that is B.S. GM, only has like 2 or 3 dealerships that have survived because of trade barriers. The Japnese government says a 4 banger can be 1.9 liters and once Toyota, is working on a 2.2 they work with their own and change the regulation that 2.2 is good and 1.9 is out of spec. These type of trade barriers have been very well documented and supported in the past with evidence. It's mind boggling you as a senior poster are now denying this took place when I assume you have read the links. I and brightness04, had a falling out a couple years ago on this subject and after hours of digging and being called a liar well I found evidence to support my position. Hell the politicians in both party's have touched on this subject already this year if you've paid any attention to presidential politics. It baffles me as smart as you are about automotive news and the industry that you are trying to take a position of this never happened ??? :confuse:
-Rocky
I sure in the hell will though !!!! :mad:
These are just a few of the many articles and pictures below I found not spending much time at all !!!! :sick: It makes me sick to my stomach looking at these pictures and reading these story's but you have the gull to question lemko's credibility is crazy. Watch a little Lou Dobbs, and Anderson Cooper, who spent time over their in his series called "Planet in Peril"
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.chinaherald.net/uploaded_image- s/chinaslaveminesfactory-797663.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.chinaherald.net/2007/06- /child-labor-on-rise.html&h=214&w=319&sz=21&hl=en&start=5&tbnid=FS-Aek4DQsOYlM:&- tbnh=79&tbnw=118&prev=/images%3Fq%3DChinese%2BChild%2BLabor%26gbv%3D2%26svnum%3D- 10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/07- 06/olympics_merch_0614.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,85- 99,1632985,00.html%3Fxid%3Dfeed-cnn-topics&h=235&w=360&sz=35&hl=en&start=6&tbnid- =OKLVMXAERlHaxM:&tbnh=79&tbnw=121&prev=/images%3Fq%3DChinese%2BChild%2BLabor%26g- bv%3D2%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG
http://mancelovici.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/nike_child_labor.jpg -pic to story below
Globalization and Child Labor
Posted by Marcos Ancelovici on July 19, 2007
It is commonly believed that trade liberalization in developing countries fosters child labor. Families would send their children to work in new export-driven sectors, particularly textile and apparel, while greedy multinational corporations would take advantage of these families’ desperate condition to shamelessly exploit children.
Well, think again. In an article just posted on VoxEu.org, Dartmouth economists Eric Edmonds and Nina Pavcnik argue that trade liberalization could actually have a positive effect on child labor:
“Our recent research shows that children are less likely to work in countries with more international trade. The negative association between trade and child labour holds even when considering only poor countries’ trade with high-income countries. It also holds up for trade in unskilled-labour intensive products. Quite simply, child labour is less prevalent in countries that trade more because countries that trade more are richer, and children work less in richer countries”
According to Edmonds and Pavcnik, instead of assuming that international trade can cause children to work we should begin by asking why do children work. The main reason children work in some developing countries is poverty. Trade liberalization could thus foster child labor if it makes families poorer. Edmonds and Pavcnik claim that it doesn’t, but that’s a heated debate in the development policy community. Most studies show that globalization and trade feed inequality but not necessarily poverty. World Bank studies show that globalization has reduced poverty but some scholars, like Robert Wade, have questioned the validity of World Bank indicators.
But whatever the actual causal relation between globalization and poverty, Edmonds and Pavcnik have a point when they write that:
“Before one boycotts a product with child labour content or supports punitive trade sanctions, one should ask whether these measures will make the child better off. Will boycotts or sanctions eliminate the reasons why children work? Thus far, most of the existing evidence suggests that eliminating sources of income will not make poor families better off. It will not change the circumstances that cause children to work.”
This entry was posted on July 19, 2007 at 3:11 pm and is filed under Globalization. . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
http://chinaview.wordpress.com/2007/08/20/shocking-photo-chinese-womans-breasts-- disfigured-and-infected-from-electric-shock-torture/
http://chinasick.blogspot.com/2007/06/over-1000-child-slaves-found-in-shangxi.ht- ml
http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=9769
-Rocky
-Rocky
Let's not give them a break but let's give them freedom. All we are doing right now by shipping our good paying union jobs over their is providing them a income base to build up their military, and steal R&D because China, doesn't follow international copyright/trademark laws. :sick:
They were showing Michigans, economy and with every auto job that had a combined average salary of $72,000 a yr. the ones replacing those jobs were $32,000 and most required a college degree.
-Rocky
George Meany? Walter Reuther? Didn't they run Ford and GM at one time?
Or were they buddied of Jimmy Hoffa (whatever happened to Jimmy Hoffa?) Did he get crushed by a skillet on the assembly line at Honda?
Oh brother !!! :surprise: :P
-Rocky
It most certainly is not. Go figure out how much it costs to import and register a Toyota Mark X in the United States, then compare that to how much it costs to import and register a Cadillac CTS in Japan. The Japanese cars that are here were specifically tailored to meet US trade barriers at very high cost.
Wow, what are they? Jobs for managers of McDonald's? Justification for higher education? Maybe they should change the classic poster from a photo of six-car garage filled with exotic cars next to a seaside mansion to a snapshot of ratty four year-old Kia parked behind Mommy and Daddy's garage. Shoot, at $32K a year, junior would be lucky to pay the rent on a studio apartment in a marginal neighborhood and keep up with his student loan payments. Hey, son, you better keep that Kia clubbed and invest in a firearm!
Sorry, but your "documentation" usually consists of links to union-related websites or the Level Field Institute, which are hardly impartial, and thus not credible for those of us looking for accurate articles that tell the ENTIRE story. I doubt that this one was any different.
And I also doubt that it answered my original question - if secretly replacing defective parts during regular service visits is the key to improved reliability, and thus improved customer satisfaction ratings, why didn't the Big Three take this simple and relatively easy and inexpensive route? Until this question is answered, it will remain an "old wives' tale."
Consider this: GM wishes to produce a car that will sell to the consumer for say $18,000 to compete with a Toyota model. GM needs to net $X from that car sale to the dealer.
To simplify as much as possible, all manufacturers have buildings to erect, advertising, energy cost and so forth. This is true for Import Mfg as well as the big 3. Lots of Japanese and other imports are being built here now. Thus they all have the same basic expenses in this regard.
There are 2 other expenses involved. Salaries and Parts.
If the payroll is disproportionately high, the quality of the parts must suffer in order to sell at the $18 and make the $X profit necessary to stay in business.
When the top executives are being paid ridiculously high salaries and the assembly line workers are making more than college graduates, ( nurses for example) the quality of parts and therefore the quality of the product will suffer.
Everybody from the guy on the back of a garbage truck to the guy flying the plane wants to make as much as they can. However, companies can not continue to pay high salaries and continue to be competitive. When that happens, plants close, businesses go under, and people can't find work.
While it may be nice to have the UNION bully the mfg into unreal high wages and bennefits, where are they when things go south.
The American worker can compete in skills with any worker in any country in the world, under identical circumstances. The quality of the Toyota or Honda that is made here is every bit as good as those made in Japan. Wages are lower at those plants than at the big 3, but parts are better. Consequently the quality of the Japanese car is better than those of the big 3.
I'm not speaking without some knowledge on the subject. At 66 years of age, I've owned in excess of 60 vehicles. Until '95 most all were from the Big 3. I generally traded at around 50K miles before major repairs were due. We bought a new Maxima in '95 because the wifes Oldsmobile needed a new transmission, the timing gears and chain had already been replaced because the "rubber" teeth fell off the gears, and the paint was literally "Pitting" off the car. It had 75K mikes on the clock. But in reality, I though all cars were pretty much worn out by 50K. That is what I was used to. My wife insisted on the Maxima, because she liked the looks. In 93 we traded it for a CR-V because she needed the hauling capacity. The Maxima had gone around 76K miles with "0" problems. Meanwhile I had bought a 96 Ram and in 98 they traded me out of it for a 98 because they were tired of me complaining about the "Lemon". The 98 wasn't much better, so I unloaded it for an 03 Pilot. We have had a problem with both the Hondas after the warranty period, but Honda fixed them "Free". Honda's comment: "Hondas are not supposed to do that. ,We want the broken part to find out why it broke". In contrast, my (now 87 yrs old) mother had to replace the transmission in her 95 Explorer at about 60K miles and again at around 90K. No help from Ford.
Ford's comment: "You are out of warranty"!
Kip
I guess the ones to Harbour, weren't credible ??? :surprise: :confuse:
And I also doubt that it answered my original question - if secretly replacing defective parts during regular service visits is the key to improved reliability, and thus improved customer satisfaction ratings, why didn't the Big Three take this simple and relatively easy and inexpensive route? Until this question is answered, it will remain an "old wives' tale."
Well if the Big 3, would of been caught doing this their would of been a out cry for law suits because it was after all against the law. The Big 3 went through enough law suits in the past to not even dare cover up defects and the biased media outlets were getting multi-million dollar advertising campaigns from toyota, and went along with the "sweetest perfection" image. :mad:
Oh well times are changing !!!! The Big 3, especially GM, are turning around !!!! We are making some of the best products on the market today. :shades: Some of the presidential candidates on both sides promise to fix Michigan, and the automobile industry. We will see if they can keep their word.
-Rocky
Not here they don't !!! I have relatives that are nurses or will be nurses. My cousin Michael, last I knew makes $35 bucks an hour.
Everybody from the guy on the back of a garbage truck to the guy flying the plane wants to make as much as they can. However, companies can not continue to pay high salaries and continue to be competitive. When that happens, plants close, businesses go under, and people can't find work.
Well explain to me how union labor in japan, does it ???? They (JAW) make
a lot more than the UAW, workers plus get pension enefits, and gobs of paid time off.
The American worker can compete in skills with any worker in any country in the world, under identical circumstances. The quality of the Toyota or Honda that is made here is every bit as good as those made in Japan.
Ummm, I think others would disagree with you !!!! Is that why the top Lexuses, are made in Japan, by JAW workers !!!!
Wages are lower at those plants than at the big 3, but parts are better. Consequently the quality of the Japanese car is better than those of the big 3.
I guess you missed the contract talks ??? A new UAW worker at GM, makes $14 an hour. Last time I knew Toyota, was paying $19 to start and once they complete theirtraining they are making $22 an hour. After about 3 or 4 years they
are up to $27 an hr. and get killer bonuses. Last year they got $10K or an equivalent of $3 an hour.
At 66 years of age, I've owned in excess of 60 vehicles.
Good god !!!! :surprise: and I thought I owned a lot of vehicles !!!
We have had a problem with both the Hondas after the warranty period, but Honda fixed them "Free". Honda's comment: "Hondas are not supposed to do that. ,We want the broken part to find out why it broke". In contrast, my (now 87 yrs old) mother had to replace the transmission in her 95 Explorer at about 60K miles and again at around 90K. No help from Ford.
Ford's comment: "You are out of warranty"!
So you are saying that Ford, should fix it out of warranty ??? If Honda, fixes them out of warranty then why not advertise it that customers have a lifetime warranty. :confuse:
-Rocky
What are you? Six?
If I am one of those people who has been hurt by the ever-shrinking Big 3 market sharing and auto industry in Michigan my priority would be to re-educate myself and find out how to make myself competitive in the job market again. Counting on those politician would be the last resort, much less hoping for the promises to come true.