Buying American Cars What Does It Mean?

patriotsrule · January 2006

Exactly....also, the $19K price is if you get the Cobalt at invoice price. Perhaps you can. The other thing I didn't mention is that the repair and maintenance prices included in the 5 year TCO model I took from Edmunds has the Cobalt and Corolla at almost the exact same price. Does anyone really believe the 5 year costs of maintaining the Cobalt will be equal to or less than the Corolla? C'mon! To pay almost $20K for what is supposed to be an inexpensive entry level Chevy is insane. People will not pay as much for a used Chevy Cobalt as they will for a used Corolla. Especially after the recalls start coming out for the Cobalt.

andre1969 · January 2006

have got to be taken with a grain of salt. For instance, I remember looking up the TCO on the Dodge Intrepid, and for a car like my '00 base model, I think they came up with something like $44,000 over the course of 5 years! :surprise:

Well, I kept fairly accurate records of all expenses associated with my Intrepid, and it came out to around $35,214 for 5 years. And this was with depreciating the car just about completely (I factored in $19,000 in depreciation), AND taking the car out to 99,200 miles! IIRC, Edmund's TCO figures 15,000 miles per year, or 75,000 miles total.

So I seriously couldn't see a Corolla or Cobalt coming out to something like $30-34,000 over the course of 5 years! Although, with the way fuel prices are, I probably couldn't quite duplicate the TCO of my Intrepid again!

agalas · January 2006

I realize that anecdotes are nothing more than a survey of 1, and so statistically insignificant, but I would like to mention my story anyway.

My family, wife and I, owns 2 cars.

A 1996 Pontiac Transport, purchased because we got a fantastic deal, ($16,000 for a 1 year old model the dealer was desperate to dump), and a 1994 Toyota Corolla.

The Transport has 95,000 miles on it, is 10 years old and has broken down and had to be taken into the shop 9 times.
Just this month it broke down three times within 1 week. I was nearly brought to tears.

The Corolla is 12 years old and has 140,000 miles on it. It has broken down and had to be taken in 3 times.

What's more, the Corolla feels rock solid, with not a rattle, shake or squeak to be heard. The transport is constanly making terrifying noises that remind us that it is on its death bed.

Our local machanic says the Pontiac will last 1-2 years, tops, and will literally fall apart.

The Corolla he predicts will last another 5 years minimum and up to 7, a total of over 250,000 miles.

Also to be noted is my Father's car, he ditched his 1991 Ford Taurus 3 years ago after 147,000 miles and an amazing 17 repair trips. He has bought a Hyndai Santa Fe and is so far trouble free after 38,000 miles.

My mother drives a 1997 Civic which has been in to the shop only once despite having 126,000 miles on it.

When I was in college, my first car was a Plymoth Horizon, and it lasted 87,000 miles and literally died when its engine caught on fire on day. It broke down about every 6 months and felt like a rolling death trap.

Overall, I can honestly say, from personall experience that American Cars suck and suck bad. The quality is nowhere near that of Asian makes and GM has only its management to blame.

For decades they dominated the Automotive scene in America and made billions in profit. What did they do with it? Invest in the most efficent technology, the best technology, to give consumers quality cars that they could own for well over a decade, trouble free? No, they squandered their wealth designing crap and giving the management massive salaries, and even laying off workers in 1993 when they were making record profits.

I feel sorry for American car employees, getting laid off because of the idiocy and short sightedness of management. Maybe they can get a job at one of the foreign car plants that are constantly being opened, at least then they could get some job security. After all, Toyota is only a few years away from swamping GM in terms of market share, domestically as well as abroad. If you are going to build cars for a living, you may as well work for the winning team.

veliger · January 2006

In the meantime, GM losing money on every Malibu it sells (as a fleet wide average) can't be that "good for America" either.

But it is much better for America for GM to be losing money on every American made Malibu than for Honda to be making money on every American Assembled Accord. Since something like 80% of the content of the Malibu is from the US, and something like 30% of the Accords content is from here, the Malibu, even with GM losing money on every one makes a much larger contribution to the US economy than the Accord. In addition, all of the profit from the Accord, and from most of it's parts, goes straight back to Japan.

veliger · January 2006

Our local mechanic says the Pontiac will last 1-2 years, tops, and will literally fall apart.

The Corolla he predicts will last another 5 years minimum and up to 7, a total of over 250,000 miles.

Maybe your mechanic can tell me if Denver will cover the spread against New England this weekend??

After all, Toyota is only a few years away from swamping GM in terms of market share, domestically as well as abroad. If you are going to build cars for a living, you may as well work for the winning team.

In North America, Toyota is far, far behind GM in market share. Globally they will pass GM in 2006 or 2007. I have no idea how people have gotten the impression that Toyota was close to overtaking GM in NA market share. They better catch Ford first before they think about overtaking GM.

qbrozen · January 2006

Since something like 80% of the content of the Malibu is from the US, and something like 30% of the Accords content is from here

please post your source(s) for this.

veliger · January 2006

Since something like 80% of the content of the Malibu is from the US, and something like 30% of the Accords content is from here

please post your source(s) for this.

I've read this several places. Most recently, Bill Ford gave a speech about a month ago, with the actual domestic content listed. Hyundai was by far the worst, with a single digit domestic content (I didn't even know that was possible). I'm not going to spend a lot of time looking, but I'll post links if I find them.

I found the Bill Ford speech Link.

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=22062

carlisimo · January 2006

Hyundai does it because they get a lot of material and supplies from the other parts of the Hyundai conglomerate. They good an especially good deal on Hyundai steel, and things like that. It's how they've been able to sell more for less and still make a profit.

jimex · January 2006

This is taken directly off my window sticker of my 2005 Accord 4 DR EX.

US/Canadian Parts Content: 70%
Major Sources of Foreign Parts Content: Japan 15%
Assembly Point: Marysville, OH
Engine: USA
Transmission: Japan

Hope this helps.

qbrozen · January 2006

well, sources would be great, if you can manage, because one person's word on a message board is hardly compelling evidence.

I'm also curious as to how far back we want to trace parts. I mean, for instance, the Honda V6 is manufactured here in the states, but are you maybe referring to the parts of the engine and where those come from? Or are we taking that even further and discussing where the ore comes from to forge the internal parts?

And, while we're at it, we should probably drill down to the real core of it and discuss the percentage of total cost that goes to actual workers in a country. For instance, out of that Honda engine mentioned above, of its final assembled cost, what percentage was added by being assembled here in the US and what percentage was added by any potentially foreign-sourced parts, and, consequently, what percentage of those parts was added by foreign workers.

I mean, honestly, if we're going to discuss something so ambiguous as "what is best for the american economy," then we will need some REAL specific details. If we're going to discuss this properly, then I need to know, if I buy an Accord or Malibu, exactly how much of my money goes back into the american economy.

veliger · January 2006

Here's one source.

I found the Bill Ford speech Link.

http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=22062

qbrozen · January 2006

Ah, see, that helps. I can inform you now that you are misreading his quote.

The average American content of the vehicles sold in America by U.S.-based companies is 80%, compared to 31% for Japanese manufacturers, 5% for European, and 2% for Korean.

That does NOT mean, for instance, an Accord is only 31% US. What it means is that, of all cars manufactured by Honda, the AVERAGE US content is 31%. So something like the Accord is brought down greatly by Japanese-manufactured models sold by Honda. The Accord sample above is 70%, for instance, but average that with a 0% S2000, and you get an average of 35%.

And this just goes to further support the comment I've made in the past here that you need to look at individual vehicles. A 70% US-based honda is much better for our economy than a 0% US-based chevy.

And not that I totally believe anything one man says to support his own company, but I'm just explaining the quote.

anythngbutgm · January 2006

"The average American content of the vehicles sold in America by U.S.-based companies is 80%, compared to 31% for Japanese manufacturers, 5% for European, and 2% for Korean."

Nothing specifically stated about the Accord, or even Honda in this statement... :confuse:

qbrozen · January 2006

good point. i didn't even think of that. Is that 31% average for ALL japanese manufacturers?? So maybe honda is even higher, on average, and someone like Nissan or Toyota is lower.

that's why folks like this become presidents of companies and presidents of countries. They come up with these wonderful statements that actually aren't saying anything concrete.

anythngbutgm · January 2006

I'll ask this again:

Does buying a Dodge, or Chrysler under DCX support or hurt the U.S. economy???

anythngbutgm · January 2006

Heck plunking down $$$ at a Suzuki, a Mazda, a Mitsu, a Volvo, Saab, Land Rover, a Jag dealer must be evil as well huh? Not buying from a Ford dealer. Not buying it from a Chevy dealer...

Volvo's are built in Sweden, are they bad? They're under FMC aren't they? How about a Mazda 3 or RX8 (built in good ol Japan)? Supports workers over there doesn't it? But they are still under the Ford umbrella... Wonder what the land down under would think if we told them to keep their evil GTO. It is an import right?

Really, the whole "Buy American" is such an out dated way of marketing. It isn't going to convince import owners (I guess its only Honda and Toyo and Hyundai right?) to go anywhere near a domestic (which is?) either so why bother. Nothing more than a pointless ploy to convince browsers on this board that their "evil import" is killing the U.S. economy. Bull with a capital B.

nal · January 2006

For the first time, I am seriously considering buying an American car. Globalization has been tough for American car manufacturers but I think they are finally responding with the improved design and performance and fuel efficiency of recent American cars.

To me, an American car is still defined by whether or not that company is American regardless of how many components come from overseas. A Japanese company that sets up a manufacturing plant in America is primarily here to manufacture cars. However, with an American company, the development, design, planning, and marketing are based here. This is where the real value of a car company is created and by maintaining these activities in America, these companies are nurturing high level talent and skills that will protect the economy from overseas threats.
Having said that, the decision to buy a car is an individual one, not a political one. Freedom of choice - that is part of what being an American is all about. American consumers have a right to be demanding about what we want in a car and to be angry when American companies don't deliver. Complacency from consumers would be a terrible thing for our economy. It is our responsibility to demand quality performance and service and to push American companies to respond and deliver against global competitors.

carlisimo · January 2006

The only thing I'd argue is that many Japanese models are developed, designed, planned, marketed, and built exclusively in the US. Basically vehicles that fit our market but no one else's, like the Avalon, TL, and Titan. Most midsized sedans are developed here as well, and even the compacts too - our Sentra is US-exclusive, our Corolla is sold under a different name in other countries (they have a different Corolla), and our Civic has some differences with the one in Japan and is a totally different car from the European Civic.

On the other hand, our Focus was developed and designed in Europe, the Fusion's underpinnings in Japan, the Lincoln sedan concept's underpinnings in Sweden, the Aura in Europe, and the Aveo in Korea.

Just mucking things up a bit more =].

151ranch · January 2006

I love cars, so I am always looking at the new stuff at the shows. The new Camry is somewhat better looking than the old - no news there, since Toyota would have to make the Camry look as ugly as an Echo to lose any sales, and they really only have to look better than the Accord, which is still ugly.

The GM/Ford/Chysler bunch showed some nice stuff, but if they want to get back in the game they need to show they are serious about a Camcord fighter, and a Civic fighter, too. Honda, Toyota and Nissan are coming out with new econoboxes (Fit, Yaris and Versa). Ford actually HAS decent econoboxes on sale in Europe - did you think about bringing them here????? We don't even get the latest Focus!

Yes, I like the Camaro, too. But how many people over 35 can afford to drive a practical car and keep the 2-door in the garage? And these nostalgia cars may work for a few young men but won't do a thing for the 25 year-old girls who are all driving Civics.

rorr · January 2006

"The average American content of the vehicles sold in America by U.S.-based companies is 80%, compared to 31% for Japanese manufacturers, 5% for European, and 2% for Korean."

And everybody is taking Bill Ford's word on this????

Wouldn't it be in his best interest to beat the 'Buy America' drum by stressing a disparity in American content? How can he POSSIBLY say 80% for AMERICAN content given the huge number of domestic vehicles built in Canada/Mexico?

BTW - many, if not most, of the big volume sellers for the import nameplates are North American only editions. For example, the US/Canadian Honda Accord is completely different from the European/Asian Accord (which is actually the basis for the Acura TSX). And the design, development, R&D, etc. etc. etc. for the NA market vehicles is done......HERE IN THE U.S.

Also, those various points regarding "and all the profits go back to Japan yada yada yada" are total BS. Where does anyone think the import nameplates get the money to build additional plants and DO the design, developement, etc. etc. from? Those are PROFITS which STAY HERE. And I'm fairly sure one doesn't have to show Japanese citizenship in order to purchase stock in Honda or Toyota.

This is all beside the point of this thread though. The question is "Buying American Cars: What does it Mean?"

The simplistic view is to simply restrict all decisions to the 'traditional' domestic nameplates. And some folks like the simplistic view. But I'd challenge anyone who claimed that a European designed/developed and Candian-built Ford Focus is somehow 'more American' than an American designed/developed AND American-built Honda Accord simply because of the name on a 25-cent hunk of plastic stuck on the deck lid.

baller4ever85 · January 2006

i would never consider buying an american car and i am american. you should buy what is best for you.

socala4 · January 2006

To me, an American car is still defined by whether or not that company is American regardless of how many components come from overseas.

So where does that leave Chrysler, whose parent company is headquartered in Stuttgart?

And exactly how is an Aussie-made Pontiac GTO more "American" than an Ohio-built Honda Accord that was designed specifically for the US market?

Is a Canadian-built Big 3 product an "American" car? What about a Mexican one?

Incidentally, since the stockholders of these firms tend to be dominated by large multinationals, should we consider that many of the profits are not staying in the US, irrespective of the company? Or should we demand that the "US" companies divest themselves of "foreign" ownership, so that the profits remain stateside? And perhaps we should make sure that those profits are reinvested in US-based enterprises, so that the cash doesn't flow outside the US after the fact.

ford4life · January 2006

yea i agree with 100% percent... but u should give the big 3 a look once in a while.

nal · January 2006

Jeremy Clarkson, a British automotive journalist, is always making nationalistic comments about cars. In one of his articles, he wrote "This is what I love about the world of cars; that we can see national characteristics oozing out of every rivet and every weld. Indian cars have huge back seats because all the nephews and nieces will want to come too. Italian cars have a buzz. American cars wobble. German cars are resolute. Swedish cars have bigger wheels for the deep snow. And so it goes on. Its why there has never been a truly global car."

I would like to think that American cars have a better meaning attached to it than "wobbles". I think the fact that we are struggling to define the meaning of American cars is due to marketing efforts of both Japanese and American car companies. The Japanese want us to let go of nationalistic influences so that we purchase their cars without feeling like traitors to our country and the Americans want to disassociate from the negative steretypes that American cars had in the past. The Japanese appear to be succeeding in their efforts based on the number of facts/statistics thrown into this forum. But what about the Americans? I had this conversation with a friend recently:
Me: "I'm looking into buying a new car. I want something that is practical and fuel efficient."
Him: "If you are going to test drive the Honda Civic, let me know. I would be interested in tagging along on that test drive"
Me: "Actually, I'm kind of interested in the Pontiac Vibe"
Him: (long pause) "Well, you should look at the Toyota Matrix instead, it is essentially the same car but you'll have Toyota's reliability."
So my friend is completely lost to the Japanese (and he is originally from Michigan!), but the Americans still have an opportunity to convince me.

corvettefan427 · January 2006

and Mr. ''baller4ever'' what may I ask is your reasoning behind this decision.

corvettefan427 · January 2006

it's reasonable for a magazine to be more cautious in assessing likely reliability of domestics whose predecessors have a relatively poor or mixed track record than firms with consistently strong performance.

I'm not going to attempt to argue the validity of your statement as I already have for many other people on this forum. I would just like to point out that that kind of thinking makes for a biased report, not the unbiased report Consumers Reports claims to be.

corvettefan427 · January 2006

If Toyota/Honda products are so good, why don't they offer 10 year/100,000 mile warranties?

nal · January 2006

As a consumer, when I look at the Honda Accord I associate it with reliability because I believe that Japanese cars are reliable and that Honda's American made cars are following processes and quality standards set by Honda's Japanese management. For me, the Honda Accord is a Japanese car that just happens to be built by Americans.

I don't think about who it is that is the steering wheel onto my car. That doesn't matter. What matters to me is who is in charge. Who decides how much power I'm going to get? Who decides how safe I'm going to be if I'm in an accident? Who decides how much it is going to cost me to run the car? And do I trust them to make the decisions that satisfy my needs? I trust the Japanese to make the decisions that will prevent my car from repeatebly breaking down and will save me money at the fuel pump. I trust the Germans to make decisions that will give me superior handling and engineering.

Ownership has an impact. In Europe, Skoda was a Czechlosovakian (sorry, don't know how to spell that properly) car manufacture that had a reputation for making very bad cars in Europe. Volkswagen bought Skoda and is making huge strides in changing the image and quality of Skoda cars. In my mind Skoda has changed from a Czechlosovakian car to a German car that happens to be made in the Czech Republic because I believe that the Germans are now calling the shots at Skoda.

socala4 · January 2006

I would just like to point out that that kind of thinking makes for a biased report, not the unbiased report Consumers Reports claims to be.

So, let me understand -- it's biased for a magazine to consider a consistent, positive track record in rendering its decision? What rational reason should it have for ignoring a history of strong performance?

It seems to me that CR may be overly generous by claiming that some of these cars are "too new to rate." Sounds like a polite way of saying, "This car is probably pretty awful, but we're willing to cut them some slack yet again..."

big_prize · January 2006

How is a Cobalt 4000 more expensive to own than a Corolla over 5 years? Is this all in resale value? The two cars get very similar gas mileage (since we're talking the "sport" models, Corolla XRS:26/34 ; Cobalt SS sedan:25/34). And excuse me, but their is virtually no way that either car would need very much in repair costs for the first 5 years. I've probably spent 1500 in repairs over my eight years of owning a '98 Malibu, and I'd easily bet a new Cobalt has better quality than my Malibu. I'd say that the only way the Corolla is less expensive to own is if you're going to sell it early on.

Also, someone mentioned warranty in this discussion. According to Toyota's website, if you side-by-side compare a Corolla XRS vs. a Cobalt SS, they have identical warranties (3/36, 5/50 powertrain), except that the Cobalt has 1 year more on corrosion.

AG11 · January 2006

If Toyota/Honda products are so good, why don't they offer 10 year/100,000 mile warranties?

Because Toyota/Honda dont have to resort to gimmicks to sell their cars?

imidazol97 · January 2006

>Volvo's are built in Sweden, are they bad?

I thought they were built in Belgium? Who knows for sure where they are assembled?

>Nothing more than a pointless ploy to convince browsers on this board that their "evil import" is killing the U.S. economy

It's all just a plot to convince people to buy American brands.

imidazol97 · January 2006

>AMERICAN Canada/Mexico?

I believe they're all in North American continent.

> And I'm fairly sure one doesn't have to show Japanese citizenship in order to purchase stock in Honda or Toyota.

Aren't we required to buy ADRs since we're not in Japan? I personally don't own any Toyota/Honda stock, but I'm sure someone here can help me...
\
>Those are PROFITS which STAY HERE.

Can you show that all the profits stay here?

andre1969 · January 2006

but what's an ADR? BTW, I do own some Toyota stock. AFAIK there's nothing really exotic about the way it gets handled, although everytime it pays a dividend I have to pay a foreign tax of something like 7.5%.

carlisimo · January 2006

">Those are PROFITS which STAY HERE.

Can you show that all the profits stay here?"

They don't all stay here. Nor do all the domestic revenues, which go towards factories, design centers, and suppliers in various countries.

sabastian · January 2006

Jeremy Clarkson, a British automotive journalist...

Ahh yes, Jeremy Clarkson. In Edmunds.com's recent review of the new Z06, I believe the author poked a bit of fun at Mr. Clarkson's unique way of reviewing automobiles. Unlike many of you (I assume), I quite enjoy Top Gear and actually have most of the episodes downloaded. That's beside the point, though. My point is that the presenters on Top Gear are always looking for something they call the "X-factor." This "X-factor," I think, is something that many people ignore when they purchase a car. For instance, most people who want a reliable car will go and buy a Honda. Why? Because they want something that will take them to work and to their kids' soccer games in a safe, secure, and worry-free manner. These are the people who struggle to figure out where the oil goes in, and the people who...well...don't visit this website. Hondas are fine, though...just like vanilla ice cream is fine.

I drive a 1994 Saab 900S. Why? Well, not because I wanted something reliable. But for me, this car just oozes character. It has an X-factor that no Civic or Focus (other cars in my price range) can match.

I could have bought a Civic, though, and I'm sure I wouldn't have had a shop visit yet. As it turns out, though, I've made a trip or two in the last couple years of owning this car. This brings me, however, to car nationalities. As much as the Big 3 have tried to shake their "cheap" image, American cars are still the bargin-basement transportation of the world. For instance, if you live America, and you want a safe car, sterotypical views will take you to a Volvo dealership because the general public sees the Volvo as a safe car. If you want a reliable car, you'll buy a Honda. If you want an engineered car, you'll get something German, and if you want something expensive, you'll buy Italian. This is a problem for American companies, however, because if the general public wants a cheap car, they'll buy American.

I'm not sure what the Big 3 can do to shake this image off. Maybe better interiors would be a start? I don't know. Mechanical quality has improved, but maybe the all-important fit and finish needs to step it up. Maybe some inovative technology? Who knows, but GM is running out of time.

carlisimo · January 2006

I have a lot of the episodes too. Love 'em.

Basically what they (and other Europeans) think about cars sold in America are that they are: big, wallowy, have the interior quality of tic tacs, poor ergonomics, old-tech suspensions, and either very boring or very over-the-top (they tend to like those even if they're "rubbish"). That doesn't apply to the Fords ands Opels sold in Europe, while it does apply to a lot of Japanese cars sold in our market (the ones that are tailored to our tastes).

It's great that cultures influence their cars. America has torque, size, and boldness. Japan has reliability, versatility, and sci-fi looks. France has funky styling, good suspensions, and innovation. Etc. etc.

driverdm · January 2006

"The average American content of the vehicles sold in America by U.S.-based companies is 80%, compared to 31% for Japanese manufacturers, 5% for European, and 2% for Korean."

And everybody is taking Bill Ford's word on this????

Wouldn't it be in his best interest to beat the 'Buy America' drum by stressing a disparity in American content? How can he POSSIBLY say 80% for AMERICAN content given the huge number of domestic vehicles built in Canada/Mexico?

Let me put you on to some info. When you are CEO of a company you cannot publicly say what you feel like. That would be called slander, in writting it would be libel and it is against the law. What you have confused is where something is built versus where it is assembled. The main parts for the Fusion (remember they had experienced delays getting it out because an American supplier in charge of most of the interior parts was filing for bankruptcy) are from the US. The assembly is in Mexico. Also consider that the Mazda 6 is built in the same US factory as the Mustang. With all the parts the Fusion/Milan/Zephyr and Mazda share, it isn't far off to conclude that many of the parts are from the US suppliers that supply the Mazda6 factory.

BTW - many, if not most, of the big volume sellers for the import nameplates are North American only editions.

That does not specify where the parts are from. Nissan ran into problems before its turn around plan because the Japanese have such a high tendency to use suppliers from their own country and Nissan's suppliers weren't the cheapest.

driverdm · January 2006

An American company, in a loosest definition, is one that has it parent company located within the United States. I also believe that the current migration of jobs from our American companys (NOT ONLY AUTOMOTIVE) is directly related to us ALL SITTING ON OUR BEHINDS. Our government does not protect our jobs and we keep electing the same old people. Our government believes in free trade and low trade barriers. Our government allows the wages and cost for American workers in some industries to hurdle out of control. A UAW worker that is unimployed can still collect a very high check. Go to Japan and try that business logic. That ain't gonna fly. Sorry for the bad grammar but that best expressed my opinion. So Ford and GM are relocating production until things in the US pan out. Do you really think we can keep relying on borrowed money to finance an economy? Do you really think that credit card debt can continue to soar and Americans can continue to have negative average savings? Do you really think that Americans can continue to sit on their behinds and let the government be more concerned about whether to tap people's phone lines than the jobs being shipped overseas. When you think of why the auto industry is where it is, don't point the finger at Ford and GM. Go right into your bathroom, the man or woman responsible lives right there in the mirror. Point your finger at her and the person the mirror points to, is the real one responsible.

reddogs · January 2006

Well I guess its all over, the American dream is fading fast along with our jobs to China for manufacturing, India for tech jobs, Japan for our vehicles, and Mexicans to do our landscaping........

Like the Roman Empire we are crumbling from within, its everyone for themselves and the devil take the hindmost. All the cities are filling up with the slaves to the Empire who do all the work as the Romans party to the excess before the fall. Its only a matter of time before we start fighting amoung ourselves for the last few tidbits of good jobs with our faces posted on Monster dot com like 'Cinderella Man' at the gates waiting to be one of the few picked as a day laborer.

Look at yourself in the mirror and admit it, you dont want to buy American cause your peer group grew up on cheap imports and now they are hooked. You can't stop shopping at Walmart with its chinese imports or running up your credit card debt on imported clothes and fabrics, or taking out loans that you can't afford to get more import cars. You cant stop yourself as you wait at your overpaid job for the pink slip to come your way so you can go work at the great new jobs openning up in America.......Import Auto Detailing and Dog (of CEO's) Walking!.......

AG11 · January 2006

I'm not sure what the Big 3 can do to shake this image off.

What Big 3 needs to do is make sure that their cars look American. They need to distinguish themselves somehow, instead of being another me-too players.

Impala is American car at its worst: it looks just like any another bland Japanese car. Why would anyone buy an Impala over an Camry? They both look pretty much the same, but Camry comes with the reliability and resale value. Only reason to choose an Impala would be incentives, which we all know is not really helping anyone's bottom line. To go back to your example, there is no X-factor at all. There's just too many domestic cars like that.

What Chrysler has started with 300 is a good thing. If GM can build a good (and American to the bone) looking Camaro, just ooozing with X-factor, why can't they do the same for their volume midsize cars?

socala4 · January 2006

Our government allows the wages and cost for American workers in some industries to hurdle out of control.

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

So Ford and GM are relocating production until things in the US pan out.

Not quite. As is much of the rest of American industry, they are locating plants outside of the US to take advantage of lower wage costs and less stringent environmental laws.

Sorry, but no one in a developed nation is going to live on wages of $10 per day, the disparity is a function of a century-long head start of economic development that gives us both a higher living standard and higher costs. Irrespective of what anyone wants, we are a victim of our own success, and the automakers are incentivized to strive for both higher profits and prices that its customers can afford.

Without massive changes that would create import tariffs and quotas, and disincentives in the tax code for "US" companies to import goods produced abroad, this path is inevitable. And since the consumer wants lower prices and the government understandably wants to maintain a low inflation rate, we would prefer to import goods at lower costs than to produce higher-cost goods that push up prices and reduce disposable income.

Would most of us be willing (or in some cases, able) to pay substantially more for everyday items to keep jobs in the US? I highly doubt it.

reddogs · January 2006

...was people lost confidence in American Companies.

They basically pulled out their monies from American manufacturer's and business's, whose worker's then lost their jobs so they could not afford even the most basic necessities to say nothing of imported goods even at lower costs.

So retail business's started to go under which forced those workers to loose their jobs so they couldnt afford the necessities which caused the next level of business's to go under until the whole country went under..

Loosing confidence in American companies is just the start, we know what the ending is.........

lemko · January 2006

Could've gotten worse. Some people were thinking of ditching democracy in favor of fascism or communism which seemed to work for Italy, Germany, and Russia. If we didn't have a strong leader like FDR during the Depression, knows where we would be today? If we had some buffoon like "W" in office at that time, today we'd either be all greeting each other with "Sieg Heil" or have gigantic posters of Josef Stalin all over Times Square.

qbrozen · January 2006

Point your finger at her and the person the mirror points to, is the real one responsible.

So, tell me, what are you going to do to change your evil ways?

qbrozen · January 2006

i've lost track of all the tangents, excuses, reasons, etc flying around here .... but has anyone mentioned OVERPRODUCTION as a problem?

Honda and Toyota are very much against incentives. They claim to not use them (although the research savvy know they do offer dealer incentives, just not consumer ones). And, when sales are down, they decrease production. They seem to manage to sell every car they make without HUGE money in the trunk of every car. SO, given their success, strong profit margins, and NOT running a company in the red, why do the so-called american companies choose to increase incentives, thereby decreasing profit margin (and even taking a loss), rather than decrease production.

Now, I believe I know the answer, I think it has been said somewhere that this goes back, once again, to the union. The manufacturers are forced to produce a certain number of cars? Is that correct?

reddogs · January 2006

Impose massive changes that would create import tariffs and quotas, and disincentives in the tax code for "US" companies to import goods produced abroad, and pay substantially more for a few everyday items to keep jobs in the US.

sabastian · January 2006

What Chrysler has started with 300 is a good thing. If GM can build a good (and American to the bone) looking Camaro, just ooozing with X-factor, why can't they do the same for their volume midsize cars?

Excellent point, AG11. The new 300C is great example of this emergance of "American Styling." It's cousin, the Magnum/Charger is another example of a car that is nothing but American. Unfortunately for some of these cars, however, is the fact that their stars and stripes are only skin deep. The 300C, for example, is based on the Mercedes E-Class. It's the same story with the Crossfire: It's just an SLK (an old SLK at that) in drag. In my humble opinion, I don't really see this as a bad thing. American technology needs help, and where better to get shot in the arm from than Germany?

rorr · January 2006

"When you are CEO of a company you cannot publicly say what you feel like. That would be called slander, in writting it would be libel and it is against the law."

Let me put YOU on to some info. Bill Ford stated "...sold in America by U.S.-based companies is...5% for European...".

Now, the question is, is Daimler Chrysler a U.S.-based company? Isn't the headquarters for Daimler Chrysler located in Stuttgart? If this is so, then a strict interpretation would show that the only U.S.-based company's would be Ford and GM. Wouldn't DC vehicles (because they come from a European-based company) tend to raise the % for American content of European companies somewhat ABOVE 5%? Also, the parent company for Jaguar, Volvo, Saab and a number of other European makes is....Ford and GM. So, I wonder what the 'American content' of these vehicles sold in America by a U.S.-based company is?

The point is, it is an incredibly complex task to determine just exactly what should constitute "American content" and just what should constitute what is a vehicle sold by a U.S.-based company. How, for example, would Bill Ford know precisely what the source of all the parts are that go into the construction of a Toyota Tundra? How would he know the VALUE of all these individual parts? Is % of content for ANY car based on the number of parts? The VALUE of the parts? The POUNDAGE of the parts? How would Bill Ford know where the parent companies are for the various sub-contractors supplying parts for a Honda Odyssey? Eight years ago this country couldn't even agree on just what the definition of 'sex' was, yet you seem to think that defining 'American content' is much more cut and dried and that hard, impeachable numbers are available?

Please.

I don't even know how to find out the AMERICAN content for a single vehicle sold in the U.S. We can certainly determine the "DOMESTIC" content as determined by the government, but since that can include parts and assembly beyond our border, just how would anyone go about 'proving' Bill Ford may have stretched things a bit? In order to 'prove' libel on his numbers, you would first have to prove just PRECISELY what he meant by 'American content'.

I stand by my earlier assertion.

reddogs · January 2006

Well I know you are all confused about 'CONTENT' so I'll simplify it for you.

I can't verify the AMERICAN content or determine the "DOMESTIC" content of any of the chickens you eat at your fancy resturants, but the chickens I have in my barn are ALL AMERICAN, 100% AMERICAN CONTENT, as "DOMESTIC" as it gets even if they do eat some French Fries and drink some Japanese Sake when it suites them.........

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

Buying American Cars What Does It Mean?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles