OMG…that is complete, utter, and total bullshit. You are just following along with what the rest of society thinks. There is not one single shred of truth that foreign cars are any better than American. Look at the 300c, Caddy CTS-v, Mustangs…And there’s no way a foreign truck compares to an American truck. I’m not saying that American cars are better but they are definitely on the same level. [/quote]
But you can get a CHEAP foreign car with a 10yr/100,000 mile warranty.
Shame? Not really, since when did GM make good cars?
Aston Martin - Nope
Porsche - Nope
Audi - Nope
Merc or BMW? - Nope
Ferrari - Not a chance
And ruined Jaguar. GM has done nothing but to kill the auto industry. It can only be a good thing as it will make the market so much more competitive. All GM have done is bos around smaller companies taht make better cars such as Jaguar (which they ruined) Thank god Aston Martin are only in partnership with ford and GM.
NO AMERICAN CARS REALLY DO SUCK.
And you know they do, thats why you all drive hondas and toyotas.
OMG…that is complete, utter, and total bullshit. You are just following along with what the rest of society thinks. There is not one single shred of truth that foreign cars are any better than American. Look at the 300c, Caddy CTS-v, Mustangs…And there’s no way a foreign truck compares to an American truck. I’m not saying that American cars are better but they are definitely on the same level. [/quote]
-Why do you think the rest of society feels this way? Because it’s true? I will concede that American trucks are better, for now. Although, Japanese trucks are fairly new to market and if history is any indicator, they will adapt and innovate and eventually produce a superior truck as well.
-The cars you cited may be good cars, but how can you compare them to foreign vehicles in the same class? Take the CTS for example, who in their right mind would say that it compares favorably to the BMW 5 series, Lexus GS, Mercedes E-class, etc.?
Have you actually sat in one? The dashboard is a hideous piece of plastic shit. I know there are plenty of people who will say that it has more hp and point to engine specs, but who cares? I admit that America can make a big powerful engine, but if the rest of the car sucks, why buy it?
The Mustang is a classic, so sales will always be good. Hell, even the early 80s ones sold pretty well, an NOBODY is arguing that they were good cars. This most recent incarnation is the first full redesign since the 80s, and they chose to go retro(not very forward thinking). Time will tell if it’s a quality vehicle or not, but it proves my point about lack of innovation.
-Are people still buying the 300c? I don’t think so. Sure it has big when it first came out, because it looked different and cool, but you just don’t see as many on the road as you do the comparably priced imports(Accord, Camry, Maxima). Maybe because people don’t trust them.
-The big three have been too content to sit on their pile of money when they strike gold. It’s risky to innovate, but if you don’t you eventually get left behind. Chrysler has done a decent job of this in the past, some hits, some misses, but they are on the right track. They seem to need less of an overhaul than Ford and GM.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
What do we do with spent batteries from hybrids?
Who will service your hybrid out of warranty? The dealer…pay up.
Conservation is the only way and/or phasing in a $1 gasoline tax country wide over then next 3 years.
Everything else is BS.
How is a $1 tax on gasoline going to save the domestic auto industry?
Unions have done a very good job of systematicly choking the life out of the Big 3.
Get rid of the bloated, over-paid union worker, and the industry might have a fighting chance. You can’t swim very far with a millstone tied around you neck.[/quote]
Gas prices and America’s auto industry…
They are 2 seperate issues and occupy 2 seperate paragraphs in my post.
Are you playing dumb or what?
The auto industry analysts completely disagree with you. Even if GM and Ford moved their entire production over seas they would still suck elephant dongs.
Get your head our of your ass.
Nissan build most of their vehicles here and pays union wages and offers union benefits and they are propering.
This problem is a systemic company wide group think problem.
[quote]alstan90 wrote:
I can’t believe you all complain about gas prices either. A gallon of “gas” or petrol here would set you back ove ?2 at the moment or 3.5 dollars[/quote]
Dump your governments excessive taxation of “gas” and you should be just fine.
I see that the UAW really supports the service men and women. The UAW sucks.
The UAW no longer will allow Marine reservists who work out of a base in Detroit to park at the Solidarity House lot if they have foreign cars or display pro-Bush bumper stickers.
Marines driven out of UAW lot
The union says Marines in foreign cars, displaying Bush stickers unwelcome.
By Eric Mayne / The Detroit News
Parking goes political
DETROIT – The United Auto Workers says Marine reservists should show a little more semper fi if they want to use the union’s parking lot.
The Marine Corps motto means “always faithful,” but the union says some reservists working out of a base on Jefferson Avenue in Detroit have been decidedly unfaithful to their fellow Americans by driving import cars and trucks.
So the UAW International will no longer allow members of the 1st Battalion 24th Marines to park at Solidarity House if they are driving foreign cars or displaying pro-President Bush bumper stickers
“While reservists certainly have the right to drive nonunion made vehicles and display bumper stickers touting the most anti-worker, anti-union president since the 1920s, that doesn’t mean they have the right to park in a lot owned by the members of the UAW,” the union said in a statement released Friday.
Shocked and disappointed, the Marines are pulling out.
“You either support the Marines or you don’t,” said Lt. Col. Joe Rutledge, commanding officer of the battalion’s active duty instructors. “I’m telling my Marines that they’re no longer parking there.”
At a time when U.S. armed forces are fighting and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan, quibbling over parking privileges is “silly,” Rutledge said.
The UAW has a long history of barring foreign-made cars from its parking lots. The subject is touchier than ever as Detroit’s Big Three loses market share, driving down union membership.
The pro-Bush bumper stickers are another sore spot after last year’s election.
UAW President Ron Gettelfinger opposed President Bush, accusing him of ignoring calls for labor law reform and failing to combat unfair business practices in China – a growing threat to U.S. manufacturers.
The dispute arises as the UAW, using laid-off workers for labor, is building a $300,000 home for the Veterans of Foreign Wars. The home in Eaton Rapids will operate a residential program for children of veterans who don’t have parents, or whose parents can’t care for them.
“We do not think it is unreasonable to expect our guests to practice the simple principle of not insulting their host,” the UAW statement said.
Rutledge is unmoved.
“I don’t see it as a snub against them,” he said, adding no conditions were set when the union first began allowing the Marines to park in the lot several years ago. “We’re appreciative of what they’ve done, but you don’t come into my office and say, ‘OK, we’re not going to support some of your Marines.’ I don’t know what a foreign car is today anyway. BMWs are made in South Carolina now.”
No but that is exactly the problem. One of the reasons the US doesn’t give a damn or do anything to prevent climate change is because their is not much tax on fuel. A significant amount of the British fuel tax goes towards environmental initiatives, as do other European coutnries. Something that doesn’t happen there. It’s a disgrace really, especially since the US is responsible for one half of the worlds energy expenditure.
I can understand where everyone is coming from about unions. However, it’s not the union’s fault if workers take advantage of situations like having a buddy clock in and out for them while they go to the bar. I work for AT&T(formerly named SBC) and we are a union company. While the union protects us from certain things the company tries to pull, it cannot protect you if you are not at work when you are supposed to be(attendance).
If you’re caught not where you are supposed to be then your ass is going to get fired and the union can’t do anything about it. The union can protect you from unfair practices by the company and keeps individuals from being singled out by say a manager that doesn’t like you and will try to get you fired.
Yes unions ask for a lot from companies, but what’s wrong with wanting a little job security? Do you forget why you get a job in the first place? It’s to able to take care of your family, and yes, I do make more than some of my friends who have college degrees, but their earning potential is more considering they do have a degree.
Would you rather union companies become non union? If companies are only out for profit, what do you think they would do if their were no unions? Lay people off at will, perhaps cut benefits down to nothing or very little.
Maybe GM sould do what my company does and promote people to management and then fire them, since management is non union. And by the way, I’m not “overpaid” as you all seem to think about unions. Trust me, the executives in a company are making way more than I am. I can potentially make more because I am paid by the hour where as they are on salary. Don’t forget, that unions set the wages for non union labor jobs also. If there were no unions, then non union companies would pay their employees shit.
[quote]lifter1 wrote:
I can understand where everyone is coming from about unions. However, it’s not the union’s fault if workers take advantage of situations like having a buddy clock in and out for them while they go to the bar. I work for AT&T(formerly named SBC) and we are a union company. While the union protects us from certain things the company tries to pull, it cannot protect you if you are not at work when you are supposed to be(attendance).
If you’re caught not where you are supposed to be then your ass is going to get fired and the union can’t do anything about it. The union can protect you from unfair practices by the company and keeps individuals from being singled out by say a manager that doesn’t like you and will try to get you fired.
Yes unions ask for a lot from companies, but what’s wrong with wanting a little job security? Do you forget why you get a job in the first place? It’s to able to take care of your family, and yes, I do make more than some of my friends who have college degrees, but their earning potential is more considering they do have a degree.
Would you rather union companies become non union? If companies are only out for profit, what do you think they would do if their were no unions? Lay people off at will, perhaps cut benefits down to nothing or very little.
Maybe GM sould do what my company does and promote people to management and then fire them, since management is non union. And by the way, I’m not “overpaid” as you all seem to think about unions. Trust me, the executives in a company are making way more than I am. I can potentially make more because I am paid by the hour where as they are on salary. Don’t forget, that unions set the wages for non union labor jobs also. If there were no unions, then non union companies would pay their employees shit.
[/quote]Lifter1- If you read the comments made about unions it seems the people making them really dont know what they are talking about.I live in a town where they have been trying their best to break unions for the last 25 yrs.we used to have high skilled workers that made good wages.
Now the wages arent very good the skilled jobs are all about gone ,the towns going to shit,But for some reason the price of everything keeps going up.They cant blame it on the salaries,most of the companies that closed were bought by larger outfits and closed down for tax right offs etc.The only people that are getting anywhere are the ones who are inheriting their wealth.
Its the 1970’s all over again we just dont have the benefit of these years being history yet. Back in the 1970’s Japanese subcompacts were coming into style and they were able to compete with our compacts. Now, GM worries about the " big spender" consumer way too much, and all of its cars are too big. Sub compacts and hybrids will be pretty much the only thing we will drive in 20 years. Gas prices will be cost-prohibitive against anything else and GM needs to recognize this and divert resources to these long-term changes.
BUT , i dont think that it will be too bad. Ethanol is being used 2 or 3 X’s more than in the the previous year so its booming as far as U.S. usage. Since farmer’s can grow it out of the ground, it will increase the dominance of american agriculture , and gas prices won’t be horrible. I predict that in 20 years, we will still be below $4. And if we don’t ? I’ll be driving in my Prius laughing at the high gas prices w/ my 60 mpg vehicle while im scoring a hippy chick at starbucks.
Good article I think, that looks at both sides of the issue here.
Bad management+bad unions = bad company.
Once Upon a Time in America
Why GM and the UAW’s postwar economic vision failed.
BY MICHAEL BARONE
Sunday, November 27, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST
The end, or the beginning of the end, of a familiar and comfortable world: That’s how General Motors’ announcement last week of massive layoffs and plant closings, following the bankruptcy of Delphi last month, strikes one who grew up in the Detroit area in the two decades immediately after World War II. In that world, it was easy to imagine you were at the center of the economy. Detroit was then the fifth-largest metropolitan area, the home of the Big Three auto companies and the United Auto Workers–national institutions of the greatest importance. The news media followed the negotiations between the UAW and the Big Three company it picked as a target every few years, and it was assumed that the wages and benefits agreed to would set a pattern for the whole economy.
And a very good economy it seemed to be. Left behind were the Depression and the anxious years of World War II. The UAW was able to negotiate big hourly pay increases and generous medical and pension benefits as well. With no effective competition, the Big Three could pass along the cost of UAW contracts to consumers who seemed willing to pay more for dramatically restyled and heavily advertised cars. General Motors’ president, Harlow Curtice, was Time’s Man of the Year for 1955. This was a recognition not just of an individual (I wonder how able an executive Curtice was) but of a system; Time might have honored UAW’s longtime president, Walter Reuther.
The success of the Big Three and the UAW seemed a fit symbol of America’s postwar economic dynamism. In fact, this was an economy characterized not by dynamism but by stasis, to use Virginia Postrel’s term in “The Future and Its Enemies.” New Deal legislation had been designed not for economic growth but for protection from the downward spiral of deflation. Those laws, not least by encouraging unions, strove to prop up wages and prices and to provide security to workers and existing firms. Keynesian economics was employed to flatten out the business cycle as much as possible and to reduce unemployment.
By the mid-1960s, it was generally agreed that this system worked and would continue indefinitely. The Big Three could always make money by rolling out the big cars families needed to go up north each summer. As John Kenneth Galbraith then argued, auto makers could induce consumers to buy as many cars as they wanted to sell by clever advertising. UAW workers could always look forward to ever-increasing wages and benefits. The big demand in the 1970 contract negotiations was retirement for auto workers in their early 50s. The confrontational labor-management politics of the 1940s and 1950s was replaced by consensus, as Henry Ford II joined Reuther in endorsing LBJ in 1964.
Reuther, a man of great energy and ability, wanted to use the UAW as an entering wedge to transform America into a Scandinavian-style welfare state. His contracts would set the pattern for national wages; the union movement would expand into new industries and unionize most of the economy; growth would enable workers to enjoy not only high wages, but job security, medical benefits, generous pensions. They would be protected against competition by large corporations. Reuther employed a Scandinavian architect to build Solidarity House, the union’s headquarters on the Detroit River, and Black Lake, its educational center in northern Michigan. Reuther, like Marx, and like so many other social democrats, envisioned workers devoting their increasing leisure hours to pursuing the culture that seemed so inaccessible to workers earlier in the century.
The problem was that the default character of the economy, after the shocks of depression and war, turned out to be not stasis but dynamism. Private-sector unionization peaked in the mid-1950s; employment in unionized firms grew less than in nonunion firms. Union leaders believed that Section 14(b) of the Taft-Hartley Act, which allowed state right-to-work laws, was preventing unionization in the South, the Great Plains and much of the West. But the attempt to repeal 14(b) was one of the few defeats for LBJ’s Democrats in the 1965-66 Congress.
The Big Three auto firms–and the UAW–would soon face competition from foreign firms and an unforeseen demand for cars not large enough to take the family up north every summer. Attempts to wall themselves off from foreign competition either failed legislatively or produced perverse results. Faced with domestic-content laws, Japanese and European firms built large plants in the U.S. with nonunion work forces. That has left the Big Three and their spinoffs, like Delphi, with redundant work forces and huge legacy costs in the form of generous pensions and open-ended retiree health benefits.
Union-driven legacy costs have already forced many steel companies and airlines into bankruptcy, with pension obligations fobbed off on the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. The Big Three auto companies might as well do the same. At least there aren’t that many big unionized private industries left to fall. Besides, taxpayers and politicians angry at costs imposed by unions–particularly in the public sector–can always change the rules and reduce unions’ bargaining leverage. Just as the economic marketplace eventually reduced the power of the old industrial unions, the political marketplace could, in time, reduce the power of the “post-industrial” unions.
The attempt to protect workers from all risk has turned out to be very risky indeed, since in a dynamic economy large corporations are subject to competition from firms with lower costs. In the auto industry the result is significant pain for those who relied on the Big Three and the UAW; but the result is also a vastly faster growing economy and many more opportunities than provided by the European welfare states.
A broader result has also been the consolidation of a more demotic, market-based culture. On the Michigan freeways going up north, the big attractions are not the UAW’s cultural haven of Black Lake but Indian casinos and outlet malls, places where people throng to win sudden riches or to take advantage of low prices on brand-name goods. The attempt, made when the economy seemed static, to promise security and leisure and restrained good taste, has failed. We remain, as we have been in most of our history, a nation of hustlers (as historian Walter A. McDougall so strikingly put it)–a people who strive mightily to get ahead and advance their interests, enjoying the sometimes vulgar opportunities a dynamic economy provides.
[quote]lostinthought wrote:
AZMojo wrote:
-American cars suck!! That’s common knowledge. The only reason people buy American at all is out of a sense of patriotism, or slightly lower price points(and that gap is narrowing). One other reason is that American auto makers have marketed the luxury SUV better than anyone, but people are now waking up to the impracticality of owning one. The big three should have seen this coming and planned accordingly. They put all their eggs, for the most part, in one basket and rode the wave as long as they could. Again, this has more to do with management than the unions.
-What the big three need to do at this point(if it’s not too late) is start building vehicles that can compare to foreign cars, in the same class, in terms of quality and innovation. Then they need to convince a wary public that their cars are just as good. Just saying it won’t it. Anyone who sits inside an import and domestic car can immediately tell the difference.
OMG…that is complete, utter, and total bullshit. You are just following along with what the rest of society thinks. There is not one single shred of truth that foreign cars are any better than American. Look at the 300c, Caddy CTS-v, Mustangs…And there’s no way a foreign truck compares to an American truck. I’m not saying that American cars are better but they are definitely on the same level. [/quote]
When Ford and Cadillac and GM start topping the JD Power Survey the way Toyota, Lexus and Honda do, on a regular basis, year after year, then you might begin to convince me. As of now, it ain’t so. When people start being able to tell you stories from years back about an American car they had, they way people do now about how they had a 1990 Accord or Celica when they were in high school that had 210,000 miles on it and still took them cross-country 3 times without so much as a window switch breaking, when people can tell those stories about American cars, THEN you might begin to be right.
The big 3 never made the slightest attempt to best the Camry and Accord, and that continues to be their downfall. They’re not even close.
[quote]lifter1 wrote:
I can understand where everyone is coming from about unions. However, it’s not the union’s fault if workers take advantage of situations like having a buddy clock in and out for them while they go to the bar. I work for AT&T(formerly named SBC) and we are a union company. While the union protects us from certain things the company tries to pull, it cannot protect you if you are not at work when you are supposed to be(attendance).
If you’re caught not where you are supposed to be then your ass is going to get fired and the union can’t do anything about it. The union can protect you from unfair practices by the company and keeps individuals from being singled out by say a manager that doesn’t like you and will try to get you fired.
Yes unions ask for a lot from companies, but what’s wrong with wanting a little job security? Do you forget why you get a job in the first place? It’s to able to take care of your family, and yes, I do make more than some of my friends who have college degrees, but their earning potential is more considering they do have a degree.
Would you rather union companies become non union? If companies are only out for profit, what do you think they would do if their were no unions? Lay people off at will, perhaps cut benefits down to nothing or very little.
Maybe GM sould do what my company does and promote people to management and then fire them, since management is non union. And by the way, I’m not “overpaid” as you all seem to think about unions. Trust me, the executives in a company are making way more than I am. I can potentially make more because I am paid by the hour where as they are on salary. Don’t forget, that unions set the wages for non union labor jobs also. If there were no unions, then non union companies would pay their employees shit.
[/quote]
If you’re doing such a great job and aren’t overpaid why are you joining a group that uses its collective power to force companies to agree to its policies? Not to mention the lost production that accrues whenever you have a union.
If you’re doing such a great job and aren’t overpaid why are you joining a group that uses its collective power to force companies to agree to its policies? Not to mention the lost production that accrues whenever you have a union.[/quote]
-Without collective power, the workers have NO power.
-If it weren’t for unions, in many cases, the workers would get trampled by the company.
Ideally, unions should serve as a balancer between company and employee rights. I realize that in practice the scales tilt in one direction or the other, but we should resist giving absolute power to the corporations, as they will always do what’s best for the shareholders(which is great if you’re a shareholder, not so great if you’re an employee).
[quote]AZMojo wrote:
Garrett W. wrote:
lifter1 wrote:
If you’re doing such a great job and aren’t overpaid why are you joining a group that uses its collective power to force companies to agree to its policies? Not to mention the lost production that accrues whenever you have a union.
-Without collective power, the workers have NO power.
-If it weren’t for unions, in many cases, the workers would get trampled by the company.
Ideally, unions should serve as a balancer between company and employee rights. I realize that in practice the scales tilt in one direction or the other, but we should resist giving absolute power to the corporations, as they will always do what’s best for the shareholders(which is great if you’re a shareholder, not so great if you’re an employee).
[/quote]
Get a new job? But then again maybe you’re just a welder… And feel you’re entitled to full benefits and a pension, regardless of the fact that a machine could probably do your job with none of the bitching and it doesn’t take days off. So you left the union sabotage the bottom-line…
What about shareholders who’re counting on that company to make a profit and some growth? No one sticks up for them.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
What do we do with spent batteries from hybrids?
Who will service your hybrid out of warranty? The dealer…pay up.
Conservation is the only way and/or phasing in a $1 gasoline tax country wide over then next 3 years.
Everything else is BS.
How is a $1 tax on gasoline going to save the domestic auto industry?
Unions have done a very good job of systematicly choking the life out of the Big 3.
Get rid of the bloated, over-paid union worker, and the industry might have a fighting chance. You can’t swim very far with a millstone tied around you neck.
[/quote]
Amen, Unions are a big part of the problem… Junk cars are the other part.