Gm Problems

Ashish

You have a one sided thought burned into memory to just say GM and Ford produce garbage.

I don't like the fact that the big three are always making changes, tring different things, and just making cars that never amount to anything to remember. They spend too much time replacing outdated cars with new names instead of keeping a name alive. The focus replaced the escort. The ford 500 is replacing the taurus. A car that once outsold the camery and accord. GM had to drop oldsmobil and buick is next. You can only make so many cars with the same platform. The public noticed that it was all the same old stuff with a different look. That look was nothing speacial either.

Now, to say something good about American cars. When they get it right.

The Corvette is older then 50 years old and still running strong.

The Mustang blew away everyone when it came out and it is still very popular and selling like hot cakes now days.

Carol Shelby helped Ford build a race car to beat Ferarri and they finally did it three years in a row. He has also created one of the hottest roadsters of all time and helped to create really fast Mustangs. He isn't as involved as much now days, but in 07 the US will get a GT500 Shelby Cobra Mustang. If you wanna call that crap, you better not let anyone else hear you. You might acually get a beating for that.

Classic Mopar cars can fetch 100K+ at auctions.

Even modern day fast domestic cars can bring in some nice cash. Cars like a Grand National, Corvette ZR1, Dodge Viper.

For the most part, American's seem to only care about making good sports cars. However, trucks hold up well, Jeeps take a beating and they keep running.

For the most part, I don't think the big three really care about making a great economy car that runs forever.

The american automobile industry seems to be living the present on their past laurels. Not a very practical approach. The competition wasnt as severe back in the days of mustangs and corvettes. They were and are still good vehciles but reliability and engineering is and was questionable. Those 2 vehicles have the classic car appeals because they were popular in their days.

I recommend you use emotions when expressing your thoughts. A practical approach would be better bet.

Fords and corvettes may have won races in the past but what now. where do they stand now?

Remember when making a compariosin please compare mass produced vehciles which the common man can afford.

Sports car segment is very small and if ford makes one good mustang that does represent its whole product line or brand. You need the consistency of Toyota and honda excelling in almost all the segments they cater to.

VW owns Porsche. Porsche may be a great product but VW's are not too exciting in terms of reliability.

Mercedes benz has produced some great vehciles in the past but their quality has slid and Lexus, Infinity are hurting them. They were hot sellers in their times partly due to the fact they did not face too much competition. please factor this into the equation too.

Bottom line, changes in inevitable and if you keep up you'll do fine but living on your past laurels is foolish in my opinion.

ashish

On a "macro" level, wouldn't you be better of driving crappy Chevys if that is what is necessary to keep the auto industry going.

What is good for General Motors is good for America. While a hackneyed slogan, there is some truth to it. A country which builds nothing is a poor country indeed.

Economics is a tricky thing. People forget that on a large scale there is a equlibrium effect. It's perhaps better described at Economic Darwinism. Weaker companies must be allowed ot collpse and fail so that the more productive and effecient companies can grow stronger in a continuing cycle of growth and improvement. Artifically supporting a troubled company does not follow the rules of capitilism and a free market economy. Fair competition o na workwide scale benefits everyone.

EXAMPLE:

GM discontinues 2 or 3 of it's car models. Toyota meanwhile has added 2 new models which offer better quality, reliability and econmy at a larger profit margin. NET EFFECT - GM closes 2 assembly plants, Toyota opens 1 large new plant. GM lays off 5000, Toyota hires 4000, but pays better salaries and bonuses. For hte eamerican public, they get a vehicle with a lower total cost of ownership and spend the money they save elsewhere, Toyota employees make more mone yand can spend it elsewhere. Toyota reinvests their profits in technology and advertisement. A protion of the proifts goes to Toyota corporation and benefits it's stockholders. The GDP is actually increased and 2000 additonal jobs are created elsewhere.

Competition foreign and domestic is good for everyone. We must allow the strong to survive and force the weak to improve or get out of the business.

I don't expect GM FOrd or Chrysler to go out of busniess anything soon, but their ongoing struggles are a learning process that has been going on since the Japanesse entered the market 30 years ago. I'm confident that there will be a resurgence in the next 10-15 years as the market changes.

Here's one reason why GM is in the crapper.

Closed NJ GM plant employees paid to do nothing till contract expires 9/07

http://northjersey.com/page.php?qst...2Y3dnFlZUVFeXky

Paid to do nothing

Monday, June 27, 2005

By BOB IVRY

STAFF WRITER

CARMINE GALASSO / THE RECORD

Rich Cusumano peering through chain-link fence at the idle General Motors plant in Linden, where he spent 29 years on the assembly line and operating forklift equipment.

General Motors wants to pay Rich Cusumano for doing nothing.

All Cusumano has to do is show up every morning at his old job site, Linden's GM Truck Assembly, punch in, spend eight hours sitting around, then punch out.

But after 29 years working the assembly line and driving a fork-truck - call it pride, call it boredom - Cusumano said no.

"I'd be looking for a rope to hang myself," says Cusumano, 50.

Cusumano is one of 950 workers who lost their jobs April 20 when GM closed the Linden plant. Under its agreement with the United Auto Workers, GM will pay laid-off workers' full salaries until the current labor contract expires in September 2007.

The program is called the Jobs Bank, and it gives employees three options for getting their paycheck: They can work for a non-profit community organization, take classes or show up at the plant - and do nothing. It was designed to help laid-off auto workers transition into other occupations.

Fast facts

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General Motors will pay laid-off workers' salaries until September 2007. Employees have three options while they're in the Jobs Bank:

Work for a non-profit community organization.

Take classes at the plant or off-site.

Punch in, sit around - and do nothing.

GM's annual per-worker health-care cost

In the United States: $6,500

In Canada: $800

GM hourly employees in U.S.

1977: 580,000

2004: 150,000

GM retirees and surviving spouses (both hourly and salaried workers):

1977: 183,000

2004: 458,000

United Auto Workers membership

1977: 1.4 million

2004: 650,000

Sources: General Motors, United Auto Workers

But to what?

For Rich Cusumano and thousands of other laid-off auto workers, the future is looking dark.

Continuing pay is important, but it isn't the only thing workers will miss, says Clara Rose, who worked 29 years at Linden. Think of the relationships with co-workers, she says, the feeling of sharing a common goal. Rose says she worries about co-workers who will be "walking a thin line" now that they have nothing to fill their days.

"You might see people divorcing, taking their own lives," she says. "It's happened before when plants close. The bond with co-workers is gone."

The decline of the Linden plant happened slowly at first, and then all at once. In May 2002, 850 workers were laid off as the facility went from two shifts to one. In 2004, another 300 jobs were cut. The last to go, Cusumano and Rose among them, had the most seniority. They remember a time when 5,700 employees worked two shifts at Linden pumping out Cadillacs, Buicks and Oldsmobiles.

In those days, whatever GM built, the world bought.

Now, every month brings more bad news for the automaker and its hourly employees. Three weeks after Linden closed, GM shut its Baltimore facility, putting another 1,000 out of work. On June 8, the company announced it would close more plants in the next three years, cutting its workforce by 25,000.

"They've taken away the American dream," Rose says.

Rose will work for community organizations in her Newark neighborhood, while Cusumano, a Jackson Township resident, plans to take classes at Ocean County College. GM will pay him his $28 an hour and kick in an extra $4,600 a year for tuition.

"GM has been good to us," he says. "The UAW has been better."

But after September 2007, who knows?

When the current contract runs out, the union may not be able to help workers like Cusumano and Rose. And it certainly won't be able to help people their children's age.

"The good-paying jobs won't be out there for the kids who don't want to go to college," Cusumano says. "What are they going to do?"

Downsized dreams

The Jobs Bank is a reflection of the state of manufacturing in America. Skilled workers who want to work, but can't, collect paychecks for sipping coffee - from a company struggling to be competitive.

The number of manufacturing jobs in New Jersey has declined 40 percent in just the last 15 years. That's 218,000 families since 1990 that have downsized their dreams.

"America is at war with its workers," says William R. Adams, author of "Facts & Tactics for Resisting Unions." "We send the jobs away, subsidize foreign countries to do things for less and we expect our employees to love us."

When companies foul up, it's the wage-earners who end up paying with their jobs, Adams says. GM lost $1.3 billion in the first quarter of 2005.

Ask a dozen experts what's causing GM's decline and they're liable to offer a dozen answers: Promoting rebates and low financing rather than the cars and trucks, relying too much on gas-guzzling models, shortchanging research on alternative-energy vehicles and making a product that's inferior to foreign brands.

Always, however, the discussion returns to the cost of worker benefits.

"The U.S. system is based on companies paying for special benefits, so treating workers better puts companies at a competitive disadvantage," says John Budd, professor of industrial relations at the University of Minnesota. "In other countries, like Japan and Canada, those benefits aren't paid by the employer - the state takes care of those things."

Competition is fierce and Japanese automakers are winning, even when they build cars in the United States. They run non-union shops in the South and Midwest, where newer factories and a younger workforce mean pensions and health plans cost the companies a lot less.

Meanwhile, GM pays $1,525 in health-care costs for every vehicle that comes off its assembly lines - more than it pays for the steel. The annual total for health coverage |is $5 billion. GM retirees, who receive pensions and health insurance but produce nothing, outnumber current employees 2½ to 1.

'Still here'

At the UAW's Local 595 hall, a split-level brick building on Routes 1 and 9 in Linden, a sign out front announces: "Still proud, still strong, still here."

In his upstairs office, a wood-paneled room overlooking the highway, Guy Messina takes a call from a union member who was laid off from the Linden plant. The man is in trouble for driving drunk. "He's depressed," Messina explains.

Messina, the wiry, bearded president of the local, began his GM career in 1968, fresh off a stint as a staff sergeant in Vietnam. On April 20, Messina followed the last Chevy Blazer as it rolled down the Linden line, shaking hands along the way.

"It was a very emotional time for everyone," he says.

Down the hall, Jerry Harper, 54, sits on a folding chair in the union's auditorium. Behind him, weak sunlight seeps in through windows high on the walls. Harper says he started at Linden on Dec. 13, 1967, making $2.95 an hour on the assembly line.

"We thought we were doing pretty good back then," he |says. After 36 years, Harper was making $28 an hour as an electrical repairman.

Harper signed on to do community service through the Jobs Bank and found work - at the union hall. He helps with mailings and keeps the building tidy, inside and out.

"I'm still young," he says, with a shrug. "I can't just sit around. I have to do some kind of work."

Harper's friend paces the room. He won't give his name.

"You been working at a place like this all your life, how do you go out there and work, for what? Eight or nine dollars an hour?" he says. "You got professional people, educated people out there who can't find work."

Mostly idle days

Neither GM nor the UAW will say how many workers are in the Jobs Bank, but participants say about 300 punch in at Linden on any given day.

If GM managers want them to do odd jobs, such as filing documents or photocopying, they ask for volunteers. The former autoworkers spend most of the day chatting, reading or watching CNN on the cafeteria TV. A gym is available, and some walk laps around a track. Some have signed up for computer classes taught at the Linden plant.

In the union hall basement is a bar, and at midday eight men are gathered around, drinking Budweiser and an occasional shot of whiskey. Among them, they have 250 years' experience with GM. None wants his name in a newspaper.

"We love to work," says one man, who put in 29 years. "We had the pride of making something. Now it's gone."

"It was the saddest day of my life" when the plant closed, says another.

"What is this country going to do without manufacturing?" asks yet another. "We want to work, be the heads of households, be men."

One of the long-timers buys the house a round of drinks. While his former co-workers toast, a tool-and-die man speaks softly.

"I had 30 years at that plant," he says. "The best years of my life."

E-mail: ivry@northjersey.com

The ford 500 is replacing the taurus.  A car that once outsold the camery and accord.

I hate to tell you this, but all those years in the 1990's that you say the Taurus outsold the Camry and Accord don't exist. Ford never sold more Tauri than Toyota did Camry to consumers.

 

Ford wanted to give the people the illusion that a Taurus was a good car and so they thought the way to do so was to make it America's best selling car. Year after year, Ford would look at how many Camrys had sold in October or so, and they would then call up Hertz. They own Hertz, and so they would say to Hertz, you're going to take 50,000 Tauri this year because we want to sell more than the Camry. Hertz would take the cars, and Ford's numbers would look good.

That is a cheap trick, you notice that Ford never says that the Taurus is the car with the most personal use registrations per year. They say they sold more Tauri. If Toyota had a rental company, they could have done the same thing and easily outsold the Taurus.

The Taurus did very well. I'm having trouble finding acual sales records for each year to prove that the Taurus sales numbers, but back in the day, they sold record numbers. Now, ford might have more dealers and maybe pushed some cars on to Hertz, but the Taurus is not Fords main fleet car, the crown vic is. Call it cheap tricks or whatever, the Taurus did very well.

Now, I never said Taurus was better then a Camery

Auto manufacturing is alive in the U.S. We build plenty of cars here. In my state alone, there are Camrys, Siennas, Avalons, and Solaras rolling off the lines. Soon, a hybrid Camry will join those cars. Toyota has served my state well, and they use local suppliers. Toyota also makes cars in Indiana and California. Nissan is busy building in TN, Hyundai in Alabama, Honda in Ohio, BMW in South Carolina, etc. All car companies build all over the world. Ford has incredible success in Europe. (I wish they'd bring some of those cars stateside.)

112263 states, "Aren't you worried that if your auto industry fails, this will be a terrible blow to your country as a whole? Think of the spin offs: mining; steel; transportation; rubber. On a "macro" level, wouldn't you be better of driving crappy Chevys if that is what is necessary to keep the auto industry going.

What is good for General Motors is good for America. While a hackneyed slogan, there is some truth to it. A country which builds nothing is a poor country indeed."

- Answer:

America doesn't make VCRs or DVD players anymore, America no longer makes TVs, America no longer manufactures clothing or shoes, America no longer makes the majority of textiles and plastics used in our houshold items, America no longer produces the majority of air conditioners, appliances, etc, sold in the states.

These are all industries that were key to the US economy 30 years ago. People who did no understand America believed that as these industry were exported to Asia the US economy would suffer. However, US innovation replaced these aging industries with massive inroads into new industies like Technology and Bio Research.

If America allows it's automobile industry to be exported, it's simply because we no longer have the time to build cars. We'll leave that to our competitors while we work on bigger, more important projects.

Look at the 2004/2005 corolla. It gets 29 mpg in the city. Do you call that innovation? I'll remind you that the year is 2005! When the autombile industry undergoes a complete revolution (ie Hydrogen), I'll bet it's America that leads the way.

Fords and corvettes may have won races in the past but what now. where do they stand now?

Remember when making a compariosin please compare mass produced vehciles which the common man can afford.

Sports car segment is very small and if ford makes one good mustang that does represent its whole product line or brand. You need the consistency of Toyota and honda excelling in almost all the segments they cater to.

VW owns Porsche. Porsche may be a great product but VW's are not too exciting in terms of reliability.

Mercedes benz has produced some great vehciles in the past but their quality has slid and Lexus, Infinity are hurting them. They were hot sellers in their times partly due to the fact they did not face too much competition. please factor this into the equation too.

Bottom line, changes in inevitable and if you keep up you'll do fine but living on your past laurels is foolish in my opinion.

ashish

If you have to ask where the Corvette and Mustang stands now, you are not up to date. You think I'm living in the past

The Corvette while a little pricy for a Corolla forum is a great value for the price. The C5 was up to date, powerfull, and a good value. The C6 Vette is pretty much = to a C5 Z06 and they priced it even cheaper.

The Mustang starts in the 18K range and I've read post on this forums where people have spent that much on a Corolla. I think the common man can afford them. The GT starts at 25.5K and is a whole lotta car for the money. Sales on the stang are up 47% and Ford is behind on filling orders. Dealers can no longer take 05 orders.

Toyota and Honda excelling in all segments is more of a opinoin. I would buy a American truck or Sports car over a Toyota or Honda. If you want to talk about high prices that the comman man can't afford. The Toyota twin turbo supra was priced way out there, and they can still fetch well over 30K today for a 10 year old car. The next Toyota supra replacement looks like it's getting a lexus badge and is expected to be priced over 100K.

VW ownes Audi and Porsche is it's own company.

http://www.theautobahn.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-91.html

Ferdinand Porsche worked for VW and made the beatle for Hitler and was jailed for treason. His 356 was powered by a VW engine, but Porsche has been it's own company for some time now.

Ashish, I'm not living in the past. I look at the auto world as a whole. Past, present and future. If your not willing to look at the whole picture, even the parts you don't want to look at, you will not really see the big picture.

I will probably always own at least one Toyota. Today it is a 05 Corolla. Next decade, it will probably be a Camery. Toyota fills one of my family needs very well. I also own a CRX as a daily beater for myself that is for sale and it getting replaced by a used 01 V6 Mustang. Mustang makes the cheapest RWD car on the market, and after lots of research, the 01 is the right one for me. The 01 v6 Mustang has things that Toyota or Honda could never fill. I also have a 92 Galant VR4 US spec car. It's basicly a WRX type car that was a decade ahead of it's time. It's a car I love VERY much and I will keep forever. It is also a type of car that Toyota or Honda has not made and will probably never make. The closest thing would be a Celica All Trac.

Toyota and Honda beat the US market is economy cars. No doubt about it. The US market sells more trucks and SUVs ( I don't like SUVs either) and I think they make a more practacle large size sedan. There is a reason the Crown Vic is used as taxi's and Police cars. They take a beating and they keep running. Also that small segment sports car you talk about is a HUGE segment. You might think they are ghost in the past, but they are still strong and kicking butt today.

Another thing to say about American cars is HEMI. Need I say more? Oh ya, it's from the past, and it's selling cars today.

. There is a reason the Crown Vic is used as taxi's and Police cars. They take a beating and they keep running.

Another thing to say about American cars is HEMI. Need I say more? Oh ya, it's from the past, and it's selling cars today.

As far as the Hemi...

The Hemi is a gimmick.

With today's engine technology the Hemi is nothing special except for gimmick sales and more profit.

And Colt, why are the police restricted to large rear-wheel drive vehicles? The answer is, they are not. The reason that cops and taxis run crownvics is because they'll go 200k miles with proper maintenance and they are extremely comfortable.

. There is a reason the Crown Vic is used as taxi's and Police cars. They take a beating and they keep running.

Another thing to say about American cars is HEMI. Need I say more? Oh ya, it's from the past, and it's selling cars today.

The Crown Vic are used as taxi's and police cars because that's the only large car with rear wheel drive available not because of quality.

 

As far as the Hemi...

The Hemi is a gimmick.

With today's engine technology the Hemi is nothing special except for gimmick sales and more profit.

HEMI is NOT a gimmick. It's is a trademarked engine design. Trademarks are not gimmicks. You can't trademark a gimmick. Just because you don't like it or understand it, doesn't make it a gimmick.

If this forums is going to be a hater of anything that is different, then why is this post even open?

I was a Saturn fan until GM's lack of quality bit hard.

Bought a 2000 Saturn LS (my 5th Saturn). What a POS - all bad design. Glove compartment full of work orders trying to fix uncorrectible design errors such as:

1. Steering wheel vibration (3 TSB's)

2. Seat kept falling apart (1 NHTSA injury report)

3. Bad taillight design caused repeat failures (now a recall)

4. Steering wheel emblem broke (bad design - arbitrated)

5. Complete trash interior materials & fit

6. The worst tires (replaced free but still crap)

7. Shift cable fell apart (a recall later)

8. Door handle broke off in my hand (a recall)

9. Steering rack acted up (very common with the L series)

After the L series failure, GM tried to make a CVT tranny like the Prius. They sourced it to an Opel plant in Hungary.

1. First, GM extended all warrantees on the tranny to 7 years, 75,000 miles

2. Then, they pulled the crap tranny off the option list

This comes after a GM ad campaign admitting the trash they made in the 80's (read diesels) and promising to do better.

Then, GM tried to add automatic climate control to the Saturn L series.

1. The system was so bad it was pulled off the option menu

2. GM brought it back and it still didn't work

3. GM admitted the system was junk but blew off customer complaints

GM speaks out their corporate rectum and needs to go away if they can't build a good product. Would you buy a hybrid or hydrogen vehicle from a useless company that can't build a seat, a tranny, or an HVAC system?

I bought 2 US built 2003 Corollas and have much better luck with them. The first had a few cosmetic issues, the second had no warranty work at all.

Our Saturn dealer is great and I worship weekly with the owner. Unfortunately, their product is just basic crap (Saturn ION is known for water leaks & electrical gremlins).

GM must throw out the beancounters, learn how to test the cars pre-release, or go away.

True, Fish, but the customer perception of GM may be so bad that it's too late.

Discounts alone can't save them. You'd cry at the effect of GM incentives if you wanted to trade a Saturn.

The dealers were the best part of Saturn. It could have worked if GM left it alone.

fishexpo101, this thread it a little hot under the coller, but not out of control.

As far as patents and tradmarks go, the ideal must be well thought out, a original ideal that isn't abovious and most important, usefull. That's why I said trademarks aren't gimmicks. You can't trademark a X symbol to iron on your own person t-shirts.

As far as GM failures go, lots of car makers are having problems. All car makers out did themselves. The auto market is like the internet. It just got too big. Now days it is normal normal for high school kids and collage kids to have new cars. Now that everyone has a car and their isn't a new age group to sell cars too, all auto makers are having problems with sales. Now, the weakest links are falling first. Right now, GM and Mitsubishi are in big trouble. GM back in the day had to go buying out car companies, like Buick, Olds, to create a endless product line. I think in the end, they just out did themselves. Quality and the UAW is only part of the problem. Only so many cars can be on the road, and a LOT of different types of cars are for sale right now. The rise of Hyundia and Kia plays a big roll in GMs sales right now.

On a "macro" level, wouldn't you be better of driving crappy Chevys if that is what is necessary to keep the auto industry going.

What is good for General Motors is good for America. While a hackneyed slogan, there is some truth to it. A country which builds nothing is a poor country indeed.

Please re-read your statement. That is a terribly ignorrant statement. I respect you sense of patriotism, but it's misplaced. THat attitude is why the US continues on a long downhill slide in it's worldwide competitiveness. Innovation, technology and hardwork is why this country is strong. GM does not represent those values.

 

Economics is a tricky thing. People forget that on a large scale there is a equlibrium effect. It's perhaps better described at Economic Darwinism. Weaker companies must be allowed ot collpse and fail so that the more productive and effecient companies can grow stronger in a continuing cycle of growth and improvement. Artifically supporting a troubled company does not follow the rules of capitilism and a free market economy. Fair competition o na workwide scale benefits everyone.

EXAMPLE:

GM discontinues 2 or 3 of it's car models. Toyota meanwhile has added 2 new models which offer better quality, reliability and econmy at a larger profit margin. NET EFFECT - GM closes 2 assembly plants, Toyota opens 1 large new plant. GM lays off 5000, Toyota hires 4000, but pays better salaries and bonuses. For hte eamerican public, they get a vehicle with a lower total cost of ownership and spend the money they save elsewhere, Toyota employees make more mone yand can spend it elsewhere. Toyota reinvests their profits in technology and advertisement. A protion of the proifts goes to Toyota corporation and benefits it's stockholders. The GDP is actually increased and 2000 additonal jobs are created elsewhere.

Competition foreign and domestic is good for everyone. We must allow the strong to survive and force the weak to improve or get out of the business.

I don't expect GM FOrd or Chrysler to go out of busniess anything soon, but their ongoing struggles are a learning process that has been going on since the Japanesse entered the market 30 years ago. I'm confident that there will be a resurgence in the next 10-15 years as the market changes.

I understand what you mean about letting the strong survive, but at what cost to the US? I would rather have a domestic industry making slightly inferior cars than no industry at all.

112263 states, "Aren't you worried that if your auto industry fails, this will be a terrible blow to your country as a whole? Think of the spin offs: mining; steel; transportation; rubber. On a "macro" level, wouldn't you be better of driving crappy Chevys if that is what is necessary to keep the auto industry going.

What is good for General Motors is good for America. While a hackneyed slogan, there is some truth to it. A country which builds nothing is a poor country indeed."

- Answer:

America doesn't make VCRs or DVD players anymore, America no longer makes TVs, America no longer manufactures clothing or shoes, America no longer makes the majority of textiles and plastics used in our houshold items, America no longer produces the majority of air conditioners, appliances, etc, sold in the states.

These are all industries that were key to the US economy 30 years ago. People who did no understand America believed that as these industry were exported to Asia the US economy would suffer. However, US innovation replaced these aging industries with massive inroads into new industies like Technology and Bio Research.

If America allows it's automobile industry to be exported, it's simply because we no longer have the time to build cars. We'll leave that to our competitors while we work on bigger, more important projects.

Look at the 2004/2005 corolla. It gets 29 mpg in the city. Do you call that innovation? I'll remind you that the year is 2005! When the autombile industry undergoes a complete revolution (ie Hydrogen), I'll bet it's America that leads the way.

So how do we address the fact that American car companies are building outside the U.S.? When U.S. plants close, they open in other countries. And it isn't just Toyota building in the U.S. Other car companies do, too, and they use American workers and American products to get it done. As I mentioned earlier, I live in a state that has benefitted greatly from Toyota's presence. The American car companies left Kentucky in the dust to go build cheaply in Mexico.

I was a Saturn fan until GM's lack of quality bit hard. Bought a 2000 Saturn LS (my 5th Saturn). What a POS - all bad design.

even if they were built good I'd never buy one, theyre just ugly to me.

Let me kick in my two cents:

You can't trademark a gimmick

- Actually you can trademark nearly anything. The product doesn't even need to exist - they can be filed before any product is produced. That to me sounds like a gimmick.

 

But I agree - HEMI is not a gimmick at the time of its introduction. Compared to the flathead designs at the time - the hemi head was state of the art. Now - HEMIs are selling on past product legacy. Modern Pent head designs are much more efficient than any hemi head - but HEMI just has that name recognition that the marketing just loves.

The reason that cops and taxis run crownvics is because they'll go 200k miles with proper maintenance and they are extremely comfortable.

- For some people - most of the cops that I talked to didn't care too much for the Crown Vic. The reason it accounts for almost 85% of fleet use is the RWD drivetrain (can take curb hopping better than most FWD), have enough HP to pursue vehicles and pushing disabled vehicles off the road if needed, have four full sized doors, a manufacturer that will tailor a vehicle to fleet needs, and most importantly - no major competitors (GM killed off the Caprice, Dodge Intrepids and Chevy Impalas are FWD and are more costly to purchase due to additional strengthing of the FWD cradle to protect the drivetrain from off road excursions). Most modern cars do 200K+ miles with proper maintenance. Now, some departments cannot get Crown Vics due to a class action suit against Ford on the safety aspects of the Crown Vic. Since Ford knows that they are the only game in town for fullsized, RWD platform - they used that power to restrict sales to some customers. Sure doesn't sound like quality is the primary issue here.

.

We seem to share the same feelings on both issues and correct feelings at that.

. There is a reason the Crown Vic is used as taxi's and Police cars. They take a beating and they keep running.

Another thing to say about American cars is HEMI. Need I say more? Oh ya, it's from the past, and it's selling cars today.

The Crown Vic are used as taxi's and police cars because that's the only large car with rear wheel drive available not because of quality.

 

As far as the Hemi...

The Hemi is a gimmick.

With today's engine technology the Hemi is nothing special except for gimmick sales and more profit.

Too idealistic in my opinion. You obviously aren't an auto worker. Do you really think that the hole in the economy that would be created by loss of the auto industry could be filled by high tech? That sounds good on paper but in reality there would be untold suffering the the heartland. Auto workers aren't going to quickly become computer nerds and get jobs in the computer industry.

The simple matter is that people hate change. We fought a civil war 150 years ago because people were unwilling to accept cultural change at the dawn of the industrial revolution.

If we keep fighting globalization and the modern economy, we will find ourselves left behind and could even face the horro of no longer being that #1 superpower. GASP! We would fall down to the level of countries like Great Britian, France, Spain, Germany. Countries that previously were top dog.

Our Aussie friend is right. America has never gotten back the jobs it has lost overseas, and it will only lose more.

First of all, the industries that are now monopolized by the Far East (with China in the lead), are generally very labour-intensive businesses. When you lose these, you can only very minimally make up for it with the resurgence in the domestic high-tech sector.

Second, this high-tech sector, once the darling of the American industrial and technological renaissance, is also being offshored today, at an increasing rate.

The days of the offshoring of exclusively low-skilled labour, are gone. Today, high-skilled professional services jobs (accounting, law, consulting, engineering) are being shipped overseas to places like India, as well as R&D and manufacturing jobs.

Call-centres and IT technical support are going that way too.

The companies don't realize that by doing this, they are putting the only people who could otherwise afford their products, out of work. A Nike sweatshop kid will never put on a pair of Cross-trainers in his entire life.

One thing has to be done before anything else: China must be forced to unpeg their yuan. When that happens, their grossly under-valued currency will assume its real value, thereby making our exports to China more affordable for the Chinese consumer (and competitive to their domestic industries) and Chinese exports will not be so ridiculously underpriced overseas (including in the US market), allowing other countries to compete.

Greenspan thinks unpegging the yuan will only contribute to more expensive Chinese goods, and US importers, retailer and consumers looking to other Asian countries for cheaper equivalents. What I think will happen is that many of these cutthroat Asian companies will go out of business, and a more level playing field will develop among manufacturers. Sure, DVD players may go up from $50 to $80, but is there anybody here who wouldn't be willing to pay such a premium in the name of fair competition?

And BTW, the so-called protectionist measures that America took against the Japanese automakers years ago: they were in response to illegal dumping activities.

More of these types of measures need to be taken to protect US industry.

But for some of these things to happen, real political and business leaders with cojones are required, who are willing and capable of looking beyond next week's profits.

Tinto, well put. America is draining itself of a work force on many fronts from manufacturing to customer service. Example: When I was rear-ended a couple years back, I called in the accident info to a woman in India. But, the auto industry is not as bleak as some make it out to be. More here:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/06/21/business/toyota.php