Posted on 02/10/2016 5:42:19 PM PST by BlackFemaleArmyColonel
One of the cornerstones of Donald Trump's campaign has been the fact that millions of jobs have been lost to overseas industries because it is often too expensive to do business in America anymore.
Many liberals have criticized Trump for these statements, but the Wall Street Journal recently reported that Ford's latest production move showed that Trump was exactly right.
Ford planned to build a new assembly plant in Mexico in order to produce 500,000 more vehicles in Mexico than it currently does. Last year Ford's Mexican output was 433,000 vehicles, which translates to about 14 percent of its total production in North America. This deal had not been publicly confirmed and a Ford spokesperson simply stated, "We do not comment on speculation," when asked about the company's plans for Mexico. Mexico has become a serious competitor in the car-making market with "low wages, improved logistics and an arsenal of free-trade deals," the Wall Street Journal explained.
If the report proves true, Ford will join a long line of auto dealers making the pivot to Mexico, including BMW, General Motors, Volkswagen, Toyota, Honda and Kia. This shift is only expected to grow because the United Auto Workers labor union recently struck a deal to increase wages for U.S. factory workers, making domestic production just that much more cost-prohibitive. As wages in the U.S. go up, Mexican wages stay the same, and it therefore becomes even cheaper to do business with Mexican factory workers as opposed to American laborers.
The UAW insisted that auto companies don't need to run to Mexico because they can afford to pay their workers high wages. "They're making huge amounts of profits," UAW President Dennis Williams stated. "There is no reason mathematically to go ahead and run to countries like Mexico, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam."
(Excerpt) Read more at conservativetribune.com ...
Funny how you say it as a slam even without realizing how much truth is in your words.
Trump mentioned this in one of speeches months ago as has been all along, not just last week. I’m not saying he is wrong, I’m just saying it is not news. If I knew about it then Cruz knew it. I guess I don’t understand your defensiveness here...And I really don’t think Cruz wants American companies to send jobs outside our country. He wants this country to be competitive by retaining the jobs here just like any other Conservative would. Not just your messiah.
Perot was at the top of the polls at the the end of July when he oddly decided to drop out. The Establishment is always looking back, which is why they keep thinking that Trump was not a serious candidate, that he will decide to drop out. Perot was only a candidate to defeat Bush, of course, so in August he jumped right back in. But eccentric or not, Perot saw how things were going in Bush’s New World Order
But Trump is still part of the very class you are complaining about, He has prospered from globalism. And suppose the world economy does go south? The US was not big enough to go its alone in 1930, and is not today.
Fistbump
#coldanger
Every promise made by politicians, even Trump, is premised on the idea that a year from now the world will be the same. Trump is product of his experience. Herbert Hoover was also, and when the economy tanked in 1930 Hoover turned to the past for his remedies. So we got Smoot-Hawley. The following year he was deeply involved in the international crisis and failed to come up with a remedy. You are putting a lot of trust in a man close to seventy hoping he would be as great as opportunist as, Lenin or Hitler, or indeed, Churchill and can seize the moment. I think back to 1940 when Wendell Wilkie was able to seize the Republican nomination. Wilkie had many of he qualities as Trump and had been a Democrat. In truth, though, he looked at the world pretty much as FDR did. Is Trump that much different from Romney et al, except he is as a brilliant campaigner as Romney was a dull one?
World trade "collapsed" but define collapse?
U.S. goods imports declined from $5.3 billion in 1929 to just $1.7 billion in 1933, while U.S. goods exports fell from $4.4 billion in 1929 to a mere $1.5 billion in 1933.
If these drops were so great and so influential, why doesn't Milton Friedman mention them? First, in comparison to the total economy ($50B GNP), foreign trade was a small part of the United States economy. Second, the total balance of trade deficit went from (0.9 billion to 0.2 billion). In other words, the United States was losing less money because of Smoot-Hawley. It was in aggregate better off.
Stop lying.
That has been hashed out on other threads. You’re not doing yourself, or your preferred candidate, any favors.
wE DON’T STAND A CHANCE OF WINNING A WAR, WE BARELY EVEN MAKE NUTS & BOLTS INT HE usa ANYMORE.
You seriously don’t understand the game. Big Cap manufacturers LOVE EPA regs and OSHA regs because the cost of those is negligible per unit and it keeps the riff-raff upstarts out of the market.
You will probably get a higher percentage American-made vehicle with the Toyota, Honda or BMW than the Ford, GM or Fiat/Dodge.
We’d have a hard time keeping tires on our military vehicles because we off shored over 90% of our tire making facilities. Let alone making tires for new mil vehicles.
My Fiance’s mom worked for the last milspec brass mill in the USA. They weren’t too concerned passing the American plant over for a Chinese plant that made those specific F-18 parts cheaper in China.
That’s totally effed up IMO.
Let’s hope the solution proposed is to rescind the anti-business atmosphere here in the US, rather than to punish companies who recognize the government’s intent to destroy them and act accordingly.
In the interest of fair reporting Ford, Chysler and GM workers in Mexico get paid just under $4 per hour or about $26 per day. Approx 10% of what American auto workers make. No benefits package either.
Now on the other end I blame the unions for a lot of the auto problems in the US. They have demanded and demanded until they are killing the golden goose but that does not stop Ford from re-locating to GA or any other right to work state where the unions don’t call the shots.
But lets face it the average skilled worker in the US is not going to work for $26 per day. That’s not even minimum wage. That is third world stuff and that’s why these big companies are moving out of the country so Donald Trump has a valid argument when he says he’s going to charge Ford for bringing those cars back into the states from Mexico.
Really? I'm so tired of this mantra.... I agree that govt regs and taxes are nuisance but it is hardly driving them off shore. They go for the cheap labor. Wise up.
BTW if a large manufacturer gets in trouble the govt bails them out ( Chrysler = twice )
You have a binary view of an analog problem, FRiend.
Have you done any research on the cost of following EPA and OSHA regs for manufacturing? How much per unit cost? When you have some facts get back to me.
Cruz, Rubio, Trump...what they said about Trade & Guns in their announcement speech.
Stunning comparison. Trump is the only one right on trade.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3395582/posts?page=136#136
It’s funny, you point to a labor cost enticement (your sole cited reason) and tell me to wise up, and when I reply that I find your analysis too simplistic you strongly imply I am naive because I didn’t factor EPA and OSHA in - which are NOT traditionally considered labor costs, but rather compliance costs.
How amusing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.