IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 Forum Rules 
Hotpart.comBlaine Fabrication.comUMI PerformanceUnbalanced EngineeringSolo Performance
7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Senate and UAW just gave up a few minutes ago ..., tomorrow is gonna hurt ...
cccbock
post Dec 16 2008, 12:33 PM
Post #41


Advanced Member
**

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 934
Joined: 7-March 06
Member No.: 1,113



QUOTE (mitchntx @ Dec 15 2008, 09:30 PM) *
QUOTE (BigEnos @ Dec 15 2008, 08:28 PM) *
What I meant was, all those things are more factors that apply wage increase pressure. That's the only point I was trying to make. Certainly was not a judgement.

To me, more people than ever feel like a life of luxury is attainable. The best cars, the best "stuff", and the best of everything for your kids. I am guilty of it.

The pressure to spend in our society is strong and can be difficult to resist. Much of one's status is viewed by the stuff you have. The car you drive, the phone you carry, and even the vehicle you tow to events with. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/ph34r.gif)


Well said!


Since this seems to be veering slightly off topic....I had to just chuckle at this one.

I wonder what status judgements I engender from the Viper & Vette crowd when I pull up to an event with a 13 year old Fcar on an open trailer being towed by a Honda (of all things) talking on my 4 year old cell phone?

Wonder what they think when I beat most of them?

bock
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mitchntx
post Dec 16 2008, 12:53 PM
Post #42


Nothing says 'I love you.' like a box of Hydroshoks
******

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,284
Joined: 23-December 03
From: Granbury, TX
Member No.: 4



QUOTE (cccbock @ Dec 16 2008, 06:33 AM) *
Wonder what they think when I beat most of them?

bock


"Damn redneck" ... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

Phil ... you and I think a lot alike.

Don't get me wrong ... I like my "stuff", but there is a lot of it I could actually survive without.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
00 Trans Ram
post Dec 16 2008, 06:43 PM
Post #43


Experienced Member
***

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 1,766
Joined: 10-April 04
From: New Orleans, LA
Member No.: 303



Hahaha - I get the same reaction. Pull up in the 1984 Chevy C20, with a Trans Am on an all-purpose utility trailer. Then go beat the Vipers and Vettes with 18-wheeler transports. Kinda fun.

As for the issue, I'm not an expert on any of this. In fact, I'm not even learned. If we talk about healthcare specifically, then I can speak with knowledge. But, I have no experience with unions, large manufacturing companies or government assistance of this scale. Therefore, I will reply only in general and to a select few points made above.

First, I don't understand the idea of pensions. I mean, I get what they are - I just don't get why anyone would want one! You are trusting your future finances to someone other than yourself? And, what's more, you're trusting it to a company which you probably gripe about dozens of times per day? Why would the average employee want a pension, which they can't control, versus a 401(k) or other retirement which they can control?

Second of all, no one is going to benefit by this. The workers making $30/hour will not benefit, the execs won't, and the labor bosses won't. everyone will hurt. A point was brought up about if the $30/hr worker were cut to $24/hour, how he would lose his house. That is probably true. But, is that the worse case scenario? If so, it's not that bad. After all, he's still making almost $50k per year. Yes, he may lose the house he is in now. But, he can buy a smaller one. He may have to keep that 2005 Tahoe a few years longer than he originally thought. But, he'll have a house and a car. Again, it's not what we all want, but it's certainly better than standing in a breadline.

As for the unions... I just don't see their place today. When they were formed, they served a very much needed purpose. Companies ran roughshod over their employees. People like the Rockefellers, Vanderbilts, etc. owned huge industries and if you wanted to work, you worked for them at whatever wages and under whatever conditions they told you to. But, the world has changed. America has labor laws now. Companies have to spend an average of 2-3x an employee's salary just to train a new person. That means there is natural incentive to make your employees happy. Heck, the company that I work for was just voted the 2nd Best Place to Work in this region - how many times did Rockefeller win that award back when he ruled the industrial world?

The unions have not defeated Big Business - they have replaced them. If a company refuses to give into a union demand, then the union will go on strike and shut down all production. How is that any different than way-back-when, when a company would fire its workforce because they refused to work 25 hours a day?

For once, I can proudly say that the South has gotten it right. We are attracting large industrial and manufacturing plants at an unprecedented rate, and have very little union presence. When Thyssen-Krupp looked to build one of the largest steel plants in the nation, they looked at LA and AL. Heck, Louisiana (who very recently held the distinction of have zero Fortune 500 companies in-state) makes an announcement almost quarterly about some huge plant of Fortune 500 company relocating here.

Sorry, I seem to have gotten off on a tangent. I don't lay this blame only on unions, and almost none of it on union workers (though they may have the toughest time reacting to the changes coming). GM et al are probably mostly to blame. At some point, they should have told the unions to go screw themselves. You want to strike at our Detroit facility? Fine, we're moving to Arizona. Everyone who wants to come down there feel free.

But, I also think that a lot of this is being made into too big of a deal. The economy is hurting, but this is no recession. During the Great Depression, unemployment was 25%. The official unemployment rate for November 2008 was 6.7%. This is the exact same rate as the European Union, and only .6% above that of China (who, supposedly is doing great)!

People see the stock market sliding. But, does 90% of the country even know what that means? I have yet to find a single person who, in normal conversation, can tell me exactly what the numbers (ie: 8663.61) of the Dow Jones Industrial Average mean! (FYI, it's the activity measured on just 30 companies' stock.) But, when they hear that it's gone down by 500 points, they all run to withdraw their money from banks!!

This economic downturn is a product of a moderate recession, that has been multiplied by consumer ignorance, media hype and investor incompetence (after all, they should know better than to get spooked by some of these numbers).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
trackbird
post Dec 16 2008, 08:34 PM
Post #44


FRRAX Owner/Admin
********

Group: Admin
Posts: 15,393
Joined: 13-February 04
From: Ohio
Member No.: 196



QUOTE (00 Trans Ram @ Dec 16 2008, 01:43 PM) *
First, I don't understand the idea of pensions. I mean, I get what they are - I just don't get why anyone would want one! You are trusting your future finances to someone other than yourself? And, what's more, you're trusting it to a company which you probably gripe about dozens of times per day? Why would the average employee want a pension, which they can't control, versus a 401(k) or other retirement which they can control?



It's not "instead of" in most cases, it's "both". I get a pension at my current job (if I stay that long) and we have a 401k program with company match. When I retire, I can get paid "monthly" or in a "lump sum" to invest and live off of, as well as whatever I stick in my 401k.

And that's why someone would want one... (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/2thumbs.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
StanIROCZ
post Dec 16 2008, 09:37 PM
Post #45


Veteran Member
*****

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 3,323
Joined: 30-March 06
From: Detroit Suburbs
Member No.: 1,144



QUOTE (00 Trans Ram @ Dec 16 2008, 01:43 PM) *
People see the stock market sliding. But, does 90% of the country even know what that means?

If you have a 401k and you've checked your account balances at least once in the past year, you know what that means.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TSHACK
post Dec 16 2008, 11:23 PM
Post #46


Member
*

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 174
Joined: 25-January 08
From: Red Bluff Ca.
Member No.: 2,094



QUOTE (StanIROCZ @ Dec 16 2008, 01:37 PM) *
QUOTE (00 Trans Ram @ Dec 16 2008, 01:43 PM) *
People see the stock market sliding. But, does 90% of the country even know what that means?

If you have a 401k and you've checked your account balances at least once in the past year, you know what that means.

I have over a grand drop this year
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
T.O.Dillinder
post Dec 17 2008, 02:27 AM
Post #47


Member
*

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 119
Joined: 22-April 06
From: Beloit, Wisconsin
Member No.: 1,167



Why would the average employee want a pension, which they can't control, versus a 401(k) or other retirement which they can control?

Pensions are a benefit given to an employee for length of service.
Length of service and the amount of a Pension is determined by the Company, unless it is a Unionized shop. In which case, the Union and the Company bargin primarily the amount of the pension.

20 years in the Military, 30 years for a Manufacturing employee are a couple of examples for length of service amounts.

Do you really have control of a 401K?
Correct me if I am wrong, but it is my understanding that a 401(K) is a type of Mutual Fund with those monies being used in the investments in the Stock Market.

A Salaried employee may have a Pension, and the value of the pension stated in his/her contract.

I am just going to say it is the fault of the Federal Reserve, Corporate Magistrates, and Politicians. In other words "THE MAN". (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/nutkick.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigEnos
post Dec 17 2008, 03:22 AM
Post #48


Collo Rosso
***

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 1,220
Joined: 3-August 05
From: San Antonio, TX
Member No.: 839



QUOTE (TSHACK @ Dec 16 2008, 06:23 PM) *
QUOTE (StanIROCZ @ Dec 16 2008, 01:37 PM) *
QUOTE (00 Trans Ram @ Dec 16 2008, 01:43 PM) *
People see the stock market sliding. But, does 90% of the country even know what that means?

If you have a 401k and you've checked your account balances at least once in the past year, you know what that means.

I have over a grand drop this year


Like a grand meaning $1,000.00?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TSHACK
post Dec 17 2008, 07:08 AM
Post #49


Member
*

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 174
Joined: 25-January 08
From: Red Bluff Ca.
Member No.: 2,094



QUOTE (BigEnos @ Dec 16 2008, 07:22 PM) *
QUOTE (TSHACK @ Dec 16 2008, 06:23 PM) *
QUOTE (StanIROCZ @ Dec 16 2008, 01:37 PM) *
QUOTE (00 Trans Ram @ Dec 16 2008, 01:43 PM) *
People see the stock market sliding. But, does 90% of the country even know what that means?

If you have a 401k and you've checked your account balances at least once in the past year, you know what that means.

I have over a grand drop this year


Like a grand meaning $1,000.00?


yup (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/nutkick.gif) but it's come back up some (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/drink.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BigEnos
post Dec 17 2008, 12:55 PM
Post #50


Collo Rosso
***

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 1,220
Joined: 3-August 05
From: San Antonio, TX
Member No.: 839



QUOTE (TSHACK @ Dec 17 2008, 02:08 AM) *
QUOTE (BigEnos @ Dec 16 2008, 07:22 PM) *
QUOTE (TSHACK @ Dec 16 2008, 06:23 PM) *
QUOTE (StanIROCZ @ Dec 16 2008, 01:37 PM) *
QUOTE (00 Trans Ram @ Dec 16 2008, 01:43 PM) *
People see the stock market sliding. But, does 90% of the country even know what that means?

If you have a 401k and you've checked your account balances at least once in the past year, you know what that means.

I have over a grand drop this year


Like a grand meaning $1,000.00?


yup (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/nutkick.gif) but it's come back up some (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/drink.gif)


I guess it's all relative to the starting balance. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/drink.gif)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mitchntx
post Dec 17 2008, 01:23 PM
Post #51


Nothing says 'I love you.' like a box of Hydroshoks
******

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,284
Joined: 23-December 03
From: Granbury, TX
Member No.: 4



The drop in my 401K has several zeros and a comma. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)

But my pension is based upon my years of service, age at the time of retirement and ending salary and not the market ... thank God!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pknowles
post Dec 17 2008, 02:11 PM
Post #52


Experienced Member
***

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 1,427
Joined: 12-February 04
From: Huntingtown, MD
Member No.: 193



QUOTE (T.O.Dillinder @ Dec 16 2008, 09:27 PM) *
Why would the average employee want a pension, which they can't control, versus a 401(k) or other retirement which they can control?

Do you really have control of a 401K?
Correct me if I am wrong, but it is my understanding that a 401(K) is a type of Mutual Fund with those monies being used in the investments in the Stock Market.

The amount of control you have over your 401K depends on who you have it with. Most 401K's give you packages or general areas to invest in, but the individual stocks are determined by the handler. Some if not most 401K's give you the option to buy bonds instead of investing in the market. On average over years of time, the market out performs bonds by almost 2X, but bonds don't go down in amount (this is different than value because value is based on the strength of the dollar). There have been people speaking out wanting their 401K to be more like an e-trade account, where they can choose exactly what they invest in. I'm not sure if this exists yet, but I can see this being an option in the future for people that really follow the market. This allows the 401K handler to rake in the trading fees because you are locked into using them. Since 401K handlers are investment firms anyway this seems like a natural progression.

You get a pension and a 401K. I interviewed with ExxonMobil last year and they had the best pension and 401K matching program I've ever seen. They told me straight up that their focus was to retain experienced workers because their industry is so specialized, they can't buy experience in the oil industry where one small mistake costs millions of dollars.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mitchntx
post Dec 17 2008, 02:55 PM
Post #53


Nothing says 'I love you.' like a box of Hydroshoks
******

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,284
Joined: 23-December 03
From: Granbury, TX
Member No.: 4



Let me add ...

I've seen several on other boards that want total control of their 401Ks, as Phil said. And along with that, they say that if you aren't market savy, too bad, so sad.

I find that kind of mentality very short-sighted and arrogant. If a percentage of folks gamble away their savings playing the market (and it is, in reality, legalized gambling) then that percentage of folks will become wards of the government in some form or fashion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
00 Trans Ram
post Dec 17 2008, 04:00 PM
Post #54


Experienced Member
***

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 1,766
Joined: 10-April 04
From: New Orleans, LA
Member No.: 303



FYI, my 401k has gone up over the past few months. But, that's only because I moved things around a year ago. Put a lot into money markets.It's in no one's best interest to have people lose their savings, even if it's their own fault.That said, now I see why GM et al are going under. They pay pensions, 401k, healthcare, andhigher wages? Sounds like I should have fed at that trough before the food ran out! But, that's unsustainable.The only time a company should do all those things is if their competition is doing it - if it's the only way to entice employees. But, the competition is NOT doing it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
trackbird
post Dec 17 2008, 04:36 PM
Post #55


FRRAX Owner/Admin
********

Group: Admin
Posts: 15,393
Joined: 13-February 04
From: Ohio
Member No.: 196



QUOTE (00 Trans Ram @ Dec 17 2008, 11:00 AM) *
The only time a company should do all those things is if their competition is doing it - if it's the only way to entice employees. But, the competition is NOT doing it.



The competition was doing it, it was called Ford and Chrysler. At least the competition was doing it at the time it started being done. And, good luck getting anyone to accept "going backwards". Meaning, you generally expect to get a raise every year (or at least stay even with the cost of living). Nobody is going to accept "we're not doing that anymore". Once something becomes "the way it's always been done", it's the way everyone will expect it to be done. Nobody expects to take a job that pays you less every year to where in 30 years you can't maintain the standard of living you had when you started (as a new employee with no experience). So, once you go down that road, you are going to keep driving. There isn't a good place to turn around, so nobody did.

The foreign automakers moved here and went to some of the less affluent states (without pulling the numbers) where people were just happy to have work. So, they took jobs for less money than the Detroit guys. But there was no existing precident. You are hiring and you pay how much? Well, ok, I need work so I'll take it. That's how the foreign automakers got away with cheaper labor. If they had opened a plant in Detroit, they'd probably have had a hard time getting enough people to fill their labor needs (You want me to work for what???), but I could be wrong.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
C3SS
post Dec 17 2008, 04:51 PM
Post #56


Member
*

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 99
Joined: 29-December 03
From: DFW, TX
Member No.: 64



QUOTE (trackbird @ Dec 17 2008, 10:36 AM) *
And, good luck getting anyone to accept "going backwards". Meaning, you generally expect to get a raise every year (or at least stay even with the cost of living). Nobody is going to accept "we're not doing that anymore". Once something becomes "the way it's always been done", it's the way everyone will expect it to be done. Nobody expects to take a job that pays you less every year to where in 30 years you can't maintain the standard of living you had when you started (as a new employee with no experience). So, once you go down that road, you are going to keep driving. There isn't a good place to turn around, so nobody did.


Kevin - I know you're not advocating the quoted attitudes, just expressing the hurdles the Big 3 face. None of the below is aimed at you (or anyone) personally!

That said...

The pay at airlines went "backwards" back in 2001-3 at every level - flight crew, maintenance, and management. Some voluntarily, some through bankruptcy. So did software consultants from 1999-2002. Sometimes the market changes and jobs don't pay what they used to, and we're fortunate enough that we live in a country with a free market that allows us to change our individual courses if we so desire. As someone who works to earn money it is MY responsibility to be worth more to an organization (maybe not even the same one) year after year, not theirs to pay me more just because I've managed to hang around on payroll for another 365 days. It seems the US automakers are paying well over market value for their labor (when compared to competitors) and that needs to be fixed.

QUOTE
If they had opened a plant in Detroit, they'd probably have had a hard time getting enough people to fill their labor needs (You want me to work for what???), but I could be wrong


The only difference is the lesser paid workers will still have jobs. Ironically, in the long run they'll be paid more.

This post has been edited by C3SS: Dec 17 2008, 04:53 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
StanIROCZ
post Dec 17 2008, 05:53 PM
Post #57


Veteran Member
*****

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 3,323
Joined: 30-March 06
From: Detroit Suburbs
Member No.: 1,144



QUOTE (C3SS @ Dec 17 2008, 11:51 AM) *
QUOTE (trackbird @ Dec 17 2008, 10:36 AM) *
And, good luck getting anyone to accept "going backwards". Meaning, you generally expect to get a raise every year (or at least stay even with the cost of living). Nobody is going to accept "we're not doing that anymore". Once something becomes "the way it's always been done", it's the way everyone will expect it to be done. Nobody expects to take a job that pays you less every year to where in 30 years you can't maintain the standard of living you had when you started (as a new employee with no experience). So, once you go down that road, you are going to keep driving. There isn't a good place to turn around, so nobody did.


Kevin - I know you're not advocating the quoted attitudes, just expressing the hurdles the Big 3 face. None of the below is aimed at you (or anyone) personally!

That said...

The pay at airlines went "backwards" back in 2001-3 at every level - flight crew, maintenance, and management. Some voluntarily, some through bankruptcy. So did software consultants from 1999-2002. Sometimes the market changes and jobs don't pay what they used to, and we're fortunate enough that we live in a country with a free market that allows us to change our individual courses if we so desire. As someone who works to earn money it is MY responsibility to be worth more to an organization (maybe not even the same one) year after year, not theirs to pay me more just because I've managed to hang around on payroll for another 365 days. It seems the US automakers are paying well over market value for their labor (when compared to competitors) and that needs to be fixed.

QUOTE
If they had opened a plant in Detroit, they'd probably have had a hard time getting enough people to fill their labor needs (You want me to work for what???), but I could be wrong


The only difference is the lesser paid workers will still have jobs. Ironically, in the long run they'll be paid more.

I 100% agree with what you said Cody.

To state this in another way, you are worth as much as someone is willing to pay for you. Just like your house, a used car, a share of a particular stock, baseball cards etc. I'm an engineer and if someone comes up with a machine that can do my job faster/better/cheaper than I can more than likely I will have to take a pay cut, get in the business of making that machine, or find a new profession.

What scares me is all the engineering and design that is being outsourced to India. I better pay off my debt fast.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
trackbird
post Dec 17 2008, 07:40 PM
Post #58


FRRAX Owner/Admin
********

Group: Admin
Posts: 15,393
Joined: 13-February 04
From: Ohio
Member No.: 196



From my local news:

http://www.10tv.com/live/content/business/...da.html?sid=102

QUOTE
Honda Cuts Top Salaries, Slashes Profit Forecast
Wednesday, December 17, 2008 3:04 AM



TOKYO — Japanese automaker Honda slashed its profit forecast for the fiscal year Wednesday and announced that managers will take a 10 percent pay cut amid a global downturn in the auto industry.
President Takeo Fukui blamed the revisions on declining demand set off by the U.S. financial crisis and the nose-diving dollar, which has recently fallen to 13-year lows against the yen.

Japan's second-biggest automaker now expects 185 billion yen ($2.06 billion) in group net profit for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2009. That's less than a third of the 600 billion yen it earned last fiscal year.

Tokyo-based Honda has already twice revised its forecast, the latest in October when it said it expected 485 billion yen in profit.

"Every day, the hardships we face are getting worse and worse. And there are no signs of recovery," Fukui said at a news conference that was hastily moved up two days from the initial schedule.

Fukui said the automaker will focus on green technology, especially hybrids and small cars, to ride out the difficult times and prepare for recovery in the long run.

Until recent months, Honda had avoided the woes of its cash-strapped U.S. rivals, General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC, which are asking for a government bailout.

Like other Japanese manufacturers, Honda makes models such as the Civic and Accord, which have a reputation for fuel-efficiency. Such products had been relatively popular amid surging gas prices.

But the recent drop in auto sales is proving too much for even Honda. In November, when U.S. auto sales plunged 37 percent to their worst level in more than 26 years, and Honda's vehicle sales sank 32 percent from the same month a year ago.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
00 Trans Ram
post Dec 18 2008, 02:14 AM
Post #59


Experienced Member
***

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 1,766
Joined: 10-April 04
From: New Orleans, LA
Member No.: 303



Looks like everyone is getting hit. I hear that the Euro car makers are asking for many of the same thing that the American ones are (bailout, loans, etc.). Now Honda is being hit.

I think the car companies (not just American ones, either) are going to have to make some changes. Stop paying pensions. Cut the fat on administration. Make a flatter corporate structure to enhance efficiencies. Cross-train employees so that they can perform more than one job function. Automate. Pull salaries back in line.

Then comes the hard parts - make a car that people want to buy and price it cheaper than the next guy. This isn't the 50's. I don't think Americans (or any other nationality) is going to pay more for a "X" brand car just because of where it's made.

Besides, who knows where cars are made? My Trans Am was assembled in Canada, with a gazillion Mexican parts. But, it's an American car. My G8GT is made in Australia, with who-knows-where parts. But it's an American car. Whereas my neighbor's Toyota is made in America, with who-knows-where parts, but it's foreign?

Back in 2000, you were in for a world of hurt if you were in the tech industry. Today, you're going to be in a world of hurt if you're in the automotive industry. It's not nice, but I think that's where we're going.

Don't worry - I'm not immune, either. I'm in healthcare. Not that people are going to stop getting healthcare, but I think the landscape and the direction healthcare is going is going to make it a very NOT FUN place to work in a few years.

For my part, I'm doing what I can to help - I bought a new Saturn in 2006, and a new G8 and Honda Pilot in 2008. I think my new-car-buying days are over for a while, but I tried!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
94bird
post Dec 18 2008, 07:06 AM
Post #60


Insert catch phrase here
***

Group: Advanced Members
Posts: 2,098
Joined: 23-December 03
From: Michigan
Member No.: 20



Considering I work at GM doing engine calibration I suppose my opinion on this whole mess could be considered biased. Given I go to work every day and we all talk about the possible scenarios we could be facing in coming weeks, I'm a little burned out on discussing the issue.

However, the biggest point I see that just flabbergasts me is how GM is not initiating any kind of positive PR campaign. The misconceptions so many people have about the domestic car industry and how it's stuck in the past, and all we make are trucks/SUVs, etc. are just mind boggling to me. The information is out there, but most of the public has to be fed this info. They won't go out and find it themselves. None of the Detroit 3 are doing much positive PR to the public right now. I'm sure they're doing it in Washington, but that method obviously isn't working.

I also want to point one thing about this argument that a Toyota that is made here is just as American as a GM car that is made in the US. That is simply not true, not even close. Where the car is made, is only a very small part of the picture. Of course, I'm an engineer, so my opinion may be biased here too, but Japanese cars are almost exclusively designed in Japan. There are engineering centers here in the US, yes, but they are just minions to Japan. Toyota has an engineering center in Ann Arbor, a suburb of Detroit, but the powertrain engineers are basically a liason to US based suppliers. They do not engineer the parts. Most of the engineering done in Ann Arbor is for vehicle crash safety, dynamics, and some vehicle calibration, centered on having emissions testing support for EPA testing. So, when you talk about Toyota cars being just as American because they are made here, remember, the jobs that Toyota has here in the US are decidedly low in tech and on the totem pole vs. what the domestic auto companies have here. As foreign auto companies gain ground here, those higher tech jobs are being lost. Do we really want to replace engineering jobs with manufacturing jobs? Is that a net gain for our country?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 10:35 AM