By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Now, you are correct to point out the $2500 gap in legacy costs. That's fine. But if GM offers you a Buick Lacrosse for $22,500 and you feel that's a reasonable price for a resonable car of it's quality, comfort and options, you'll buy one, provided there isn't a car of equal value you like better. I doubt you'd get that Lacrosse for $20,000 if there were no legacy costs, GM would just make $2500 more.
As far as market share, I think it has MORE to do with the fact that there are more choices today than even 10 years ago. This is much like the situation the big 3 TV networks find themselves in with competition from cable networks.
Do you think if the Japanese big 3 were unionized in this country it would level the playing field? Financially, maybe. But more importantly, they , like the American big 3 are going to have to be more innovative and risky with the products they put out to get your attention, much like the Big 3 networks do to get your attention from cable networks. Maybe 20% market share will be considered the new 50%.
50 years ago manufacturing was a great job. But now we've kind advanced beyond that to the point where those manufacturing jobs arn't so great. Now, people aspire to be doctors, lawyers, IT specialists, engineers, programmers, computer tecnitions, open their own bussines, and so on. Not work 2nd shift on an assembly line. and because a college education is available to most anyone, they can become those things.
-Rocky
Truth be told, average folks money probably goes farther than it used too. and thats due to wal-mart. Back in 2004-2005 the feds were actually worried about deflation.
Sure compared to pre-1950 that might be true but other wise we've taken a few steps backwards. When I judge an economy I look at more than just the stock market. Take for instance where Fintail, lives in Washington. It is super expensive there. Hell even lemko, has said a small home will run you north of $250K. Factor in the cost of food, utilities, gasoline, housing, price of a car, and a individuals income to debt ratio continues to break historic records each passing day. I can't see how some you believe this is a great economy ? Especially for some one in their 20's and 30's and have to forge their first borns signature to the mortgage just to afford a house. :confuse:
The bottom line is for regular folks like the UAW autoworkers it's getting to the point when they retire they need a second income coming in to keep what they got.
-Rocky
I think we would be remiss to not acknowledge what rockford is saying-costs are high. I moved out of Washington state having been smacked in the back from the Boeing door after 20 years at the Everett 747-767-777-787 factory. Boeing saved a tiny fraction on labor by laying off thousands of years of experienced workers. What a bunch of idiots. After a few CEO's had torrid affairs at their "stressful" Boeing's jobs and were fired, the company suddenly lifts back off. Oh, please come back, we need y'all back to help us build the "Dreamliner!" Yeah, right, you dear hearts got rid of us all and saved your job but dumped lots of loyal workers. That's the way it goes now...only I would rather listen to 150 hours straight of Britney Spears CD's than go back to Boeing and slave for those that feel they always know it all come what may. If they could only harness some of that know-it-all energy from the Puget Sound and use it to solve their traffic problems and save the Supersonics from going to OKC.(ICKKYPOO-POO...Oklahoma City...please!)
rock is right on lots of these issues...costs are going up and wages are staying stagnant and those that have are lording it over those that need more than ever before.
There may still be a middle-class but their worth after deductions is diminishing yearly. Oh, yes, many are getting rich. Agreed. More than those rich just need better jobs and they are not out there. They pay $7.66/hr. and they smell of strong Seattle coffee. Just the truth, that's all.
But rock, GM, Ford and Chrysler should have reacted quicker to the import onslaught, man. Too schlowman. Too bad. Now it's time to get re-trained in healthcare and reap some of those overly-high medical care costs, right. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
But it was a welcome, nonetheless.
During a question-and-answer session with the Detroit Economic Club, UAW chief Ron Gettelfinger was asked his thoughts on Chrysler nabbing Press from the Japanese automaker.
Gettelfinger, who has worked hard to organize the growing number of U.S. plants owned by foreign carmakers, smiled broadly.
"I think it's a great move on Chrysler's part. I certainly want to welcome Mr. Press to the Chrysler family and to the UAW," he said, eliciting laughs from the crowd.
It might not have been the type of warm welcome that Jim Press, the top Toyota exec who defected to Chrysler this week, hoped for.
But it was a welcome, nonetheless.
During a question-and-answer session with the Detroit Economic Club, UAW chief Ron Gettelfinger was asked his thoughts on Chrysler nabbing Press from the Japanese automaker.
Gettelfinger, who has worked hard to organize the growing number of U.S. plants owned by foreign carmakers, smiled broadly.
"I think it's a great move on Chrysler's part. I certainly want to welcome Mr. Press to the Chrysler family and to the UAW," he said, eliciting laughs from the crowd.
depends what you do for a living. many, many, many occupations are are seeing very significan wage gains, far more than are staying stagnant. For those with manufacturing/industrial jobs, yea, times have been tough.
And you think its expensive here, the list of the 10 most expensive cities in the world to live in, doesn't even inclued 1 from this country. :surprise:
REAL WAGES 1947-2000 (Working Life)
Real Wages Fail to Match a Rise in Productivity (NY Times)
Real wages are having trouble keeping up with prices (CNN Money)
US real wages fall at fastest rate in 14 years (Financial Times)
The Real Story on "Stagnant" Wages (Heritage Foundation)
Wages up for the well-off, but not for others (Christian Science Monitor)
here is an interesting article on the current state of poverty in the US
link title
link title
deffinitly some interresting numbers
In other words, the US still has enormous poverty compared to the rest of the first world , but American poor are better off than those in Sudan or Myanmar, so all is well!
what difference does it make where an appliance is made :confuse: any decent washer is still going to run you at least 400-500 bucks. but it goes far beyond appliances. The number that own more than 1 vehicle is kind of surprising, the fact over 30% own their own home , (homes that average 3 bedrooms), and of course that the poor are "supernourished". As the saying goes, america is the only country in the world where the poor people are fat. :P
The fat thing is even more amusing...throughout modern history, I suspect you will see more fat poor people than fat wealthy people. It isn't about the quantity of food, but the quality and menality surrounding it.
America is the only country where most people are fat, as well :P
For the Second time, there was only one affair by a Boeing exec and he brought her to Boeing from MD which is where the relationship began. That same jerk also behaved the same way when he was at GE. Get over it. :sick:
They are a short-sighted company that can rot forever in hell.
Me? I'm fine. I'm working a good job in the Allied Health field. Good pay and benefits and I get to help people feel better. Not such a bad deal. And we get to get out of that hell-hole they call the Puget Sound, too.
In sharp contrast to Boeing, where dorky people who think they know it all about jet-aircraft production get to call the shots they've buffaloed others in to believing they know something about. I'm absolutely thrilled to be out of that circus and happily employed in the desert SW.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Try North Dakota. Beautiful sunsets.
Everyone is talking health care, but Seniority is a hot issue for workers. (Detroit Free Press)
And these are only the ones listed with the Realtor Union group. There are 3200 homes listed in the general area.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
We have a friend that worked 11 years for VON's when that big strike/lockout took place. The first week she went to an independent grocer and took a job. They needed people as many shoppers switched because of the strike. She is now an assistant manager. She would probably still be a union checker making less money if she had stayed on the picket line for the whole strike.
The UAW workers are given ample warning of plant closings. Pack up the kids and head south where the work and lower cost of living exists. We have gotten soft. We should look at the mess in the EU. I would not want to live in any of those countries as a worker. I just read an article on Germany. There are more people leaving than immigrating into Germany. Many consider Germany very progressive. The major reasons for the exits are best left for a different forum.
The main definition of poverty is "lack of income," and it takes income (i.e., money) to buy appliances (and automobiles). Therefore, the number of appliances poor people have IS a good indicator of how poor they really are, especially compared to the rest of the world.
Appliances are labor-saving devices - if you doubt that, compare the work required to do laundry with a washboard, as opposed to with a washing machine. Ownership of appliances can improve a person's life by reducing the amount of time spent on back-breaking but mundane tasks. Ownership of appliances DOES improve the quality of a person's life, even if they are poor, and the appliance came from China.
Noting this does provide a more accurate vision of just how "the poor" are really living.
It's one thing when people are defined as "poor" because they lack access to potable water, cannot bathe regularly or don't have enough to eat.
It's quite different when being "poor" means driving a 15-year-old Ranger as opposed to a brand-new Camry, relying on room units for air conditioning as opposed to a centralized system, or being overweight because of poor nutritional and exercise habits.
If you put most of America's poor in even a middle-class household in Sudan and Myanmar, they would be begging to come back to America.
I paid $196,000 for my house and could have gotten a nearly identical one for $170,000, perhaps less with some good negotiation, but that house was a little too close to a main road and had only a one car garage.
I low balled the family I bought my house from a little bit but I put an enormous deposit down and promised to close within 30 days. The accepted my first offer the next day and after the inspection accepted all my amendments one week later.
I bought in the right place at the right time though. If I had bought one town to the west I would have paid 300,000 for the same house. If I had bought in the town I worked in I would have paid 450,000 and if I had bought in the next town over it would have been over 500,000.
So I live 20 miles and 30 minutes from work instead of 5 minutes but I will do that to save 300,000 dollars.
Throughout most of human history, it was about the quantity of food, because even the rich were concerned with famines. People were at the mercy of the weather, and diseases could wipe out a staple crop and cause mass starvation.
Up until the early 20th century, voluptuous women were the ideal (Kirstie Alley was born a century too late), and pot-bellies made men more attractive and distinguished. Why? Because, in the age before modern farming, efficient distribution of food and mass refrigeration, being able to overeat was a sign of wealth. Look at photos of working class men and women. They are all relatively thin (especially the men).
The fact that obesity is more common among the poor, because now THEY can afford to overeat, is, from a historical perspective, simply astonishing.
Also, the fact that you and other people who aren't rich can afford to be worried about the quality of food, as opposed to its mere availability, is another amazing aspect of modern life.
Poverty is relative to the global position of the nation in question. Shouldn't Americans be expected have a higher standard than godforsaken places like Myanmar or Sudan to begin with? Although as globalization progresses, it will not.
It's also why malnutrition or even poor nutrition in the United States is not necessarily the result of low income. It is, most of the time, about poor choices.
Perhaps I'm older than you, but I can remember when poor people simply did not have access to any legitimate credit, other than the local loan shark or the check cashing store.
And they didn't have appliances at all - old or new. It was unheard of for poor people to possess air conditioners, deluxe televisions or dishwashers, which, when I was a kid, were still considered luxury items.
That's not just because of expanded availability to credit. The prices of most appliances have been falling in real terms for several years. That helps everyone - especially the poor.
fintail: Poverty is relative to the global position of the nation in question. Shouldn't Americans be expected have a higher standard than godforsaken places like Myanmar or Sudan to begin with? Although as globalization progresses, it will not.
Remember that immigrants - both illegal and legal - affect the picture of poverty in America.
And go to France or Great Britain - both countries have slums that will rival anything found in the U.S.A.
Credit is used for people of low income to buy more cars and larger items, much moreso than in the past. Savings and debt stats support this.
I have been to France and the UK, both nations facing serious problems in the near future. Similar problems will eventually find their way to this continent, just as the violent crime found here is spreading there.
You guys can be as pessimistic as you want. I'll pass though. There is unlimited opportunity out there. The catch though is, you have to take it. continue to wait arround for a union or government or whatever entity you choose to "give" you what you want, and you'll probably remain disgruntled and pessimistic. Set yourself goals and go after what you want and you'll probably surprise youself.
In the end, there is really nothing stoping you but you.
It's not just about trinkets. Dishwashers, washing machines, clothes dryers, air conditioners and even televisions really do improve the quality of life. Unless one prefers to wash dishes and clothes by hand, sweat through the summer months, and be completely out of the loop regarding news and popular culture. I haven't met any of those people.
Even those who criticize the purchase of appliances (not on this board - on the national stage) are curiously reluctant to give up said appliances and do all of those chores by hand.
Maybe they've spent time talking to my 94-year-old grandmother, who tells me that the "good old days" really weren't so good for those who actually lived through them.
She, for one, really appreciates her trinkets and appliances. And, incidentally, if one looks at her income, she would be considered poor.
fintail: Credit is used for people of low income to buy more cars and larger items, much moreso than in the past. Savings and debt stats support this.
And 35 years ago, they couldn't buy them, period, because they couldn't get credit, or if they got credit, it was from people who weren't content to rely on annoying phone calls when the payments were late. They had more "direct" methods of making debtors pay.
At least, I hope so....
Many are simply unable to take an opportunity, and this is determined from a very young age.
Direct comparisons to 1930s poverty are not really valid. It is all relative.
The good old days were not always so good, indeed. And the same can be said for today.
And why are they not able to take advantage of those opportunities? Because they have parents who do not care, and think that their responsibilities end after giving birth (or, in the case of males, after conception).
My wife was a social worker, and is now a special education teacher in an inner-city schools. Unlike the "armchair" critics, she has a very different view of poverty and its causes, because she deals with it every day.
The problems of the truly poor have nothing to with rich people, tax cuts or free trade. They have everything to do with a dysfunctional culture that, is in many ways, subsidized by the government.
fintail: Direct comparisons to 1930s poverty are not really valid. It is all relative.
No, it is valid. Poverty is deprivation, and improved standards of living alleviate deprivation over time. It is therefore entirely valid to compare people's standards of living today with those in the 1930s and 1950s.
I hardly consider major appliances to be trinkets, and neither does anyone else, and you don't either, unless you are willing to stop using them.
The fact that the poor have these in greater number shows that they have improved their standards of living over time, along with everyone else.
fintail: The poor have gained some trinkets, what has everyone else gained?
Longer life spans, more travel opportunities, greater comfort, improved opportunities to control their health, and that's just for starters.
fintail: In the past 20 years, how has the bottom 95% fared compared to the top 5%?
An irrelevant question. What matters is how I fare today, compared to 10 years ago, or my father 30 years ago. By those standards, I'm doing quite well, and so is everyone else I know.
The idea that because someone else gets richer means someone else automatically becomes poorer has long been discredited among serious students of the economy.
Thanks.
I will refrain from replying to the pseudo-capitalists who do not see their homeland leads the first world in poverty...
Of which there will be more as American manufacturing continues to fade.
If thats what it takes to kill the UAW, its worth it. Its destroying the domestic automobile industry and the sooner we can rid ourselves of that 60's throwback, the better.
We do have a Politics discussion where people expect to cover a wider range of issues than in a more narrowly focused discussion like this one.
It still amazes me how many regular folks in our country are so anti-union. If the workers don't group togeather for a common cause who is going to look out for them ? Sure the capitalist response is obtain the neccessary skills, educate, educate, retrain, retrain, etc, a bunch of hyperbole to make your self important to your employer. Not every one is cut out for the health care field or college. The fact of the matter is these same people don't see the writing on the wall as people from not only in this country have those skills but foreign workers willing to do the job for half the amount are trying to get in here and take those good jobs away.
So yeah jd10013, will some day get his wish if this trend continues. Like my family has said who is going to buy the stuff like automobiles if regular folks in this country and other 1st world country's like Canada, don't have good paying jobs ????? :surprise:
-Rocky