Posted on 10/24/2004 11:08:27 AM PDT by Willie Green
You're wrong. Michigan has lost more jobs to other states than it has to other countries because of higher taxes and union strangleholds. Additionally, many new jobs here are from foreign companies including HI-tech, automotive industries and their suppliers, it's called job 'in sourcing.'
The state has a robust economy that is brought down by the huge cities, and the collective pathetic city management (like Detroit) and employee unions. Thank the dems and their 'Great Society' that has really made a perpetual mess of urban areas.
To suggest that job issues here are a direct result of free trade policies is at best myopic. To be sure a few jobs could be affected but it is miniscule by comparison - but open trade brings in more factories (like the Japanese auto companies) than a protectionist mindset would produce.
And don't forget productivity. It is way up along with technology and simply fewer people are needed in many applications. I have considered (and still am) moving my own business to a friendlier state and taking the jobs with it, and it doesn't have a darned thing to do with free trade.
====
It is not as simplistic as you present. The enemy is within, not external in my view.
Your posting a quote a Marx indicates you agree with Marxist economic analysis and the "Labour Theory of Value". Both have been demonstrably proven to be false. You are going to have to do better than this to establish conservative credentials - or do you really think Marx's analysis of the class struggle and the economy was gospel truth? :)
Ivan
Mark me squarely in the Hyundai column, please. We've had ours since 95 and it's just as reliable as the day we got it. When it eventually needs to be replaced, I'd get another without hesitation.
Now the POS Ford my mom drives....no thanks, no way, I'd walk sooner. It starts when it feels like, fails to just as often, and has been in the shop more in the 3 years sicne she got it than my Accent ever has.
"Once again Willie Green proves himself to be a one hit wonder."
You're wrong about willie!
He's not just against free trade, he's for mass transit! Those are the two cornerstones of the willie green posting philosphy. Here's the short course:
1. Post economic news only if it's bad. For instance, a plant closing where 500 people lost their jobs is a good post. A new factory opening with 700 jobs isn't noteworthy. 200 Jobs going overseas is news. 1,000 jobs being added in the US by a european / asian manufacturer should just be ignored.
2. Post any study or article extolling the virtues of mass transit, especiall rail. Willie sure does love his trains. Post stories showing just how little it will cost and how many people will actually ride the thing.
Ignore any stories about the failures of mass transit. Any studies done comparing the actual costs and ridership of mass transit VS. the promised costs and promised ridership are bogus propaganda done by neocons who hate mass transit and have a conspiracy to keep it down.
Repeat steps one and two until the sheer brialliance of your positions are obvious to everyone.
Not at all, Ivan.
Marx may have been woefully wrong in attempting to fabricate a socialist utopia based on such a theory, but he was in complete agreement with classical economists such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo, whose "Iron Law of Wages" stated that wages "naturally" tended towards a minimum level corresponding to the subsistence needs of the workers.
He backslid and bought Mom a new T-Bird this year. The top doesn't line up right and so it takes two strong men to manhandle it on and off, and you gotta have a third fat boy get on top and put a little English on it so your first two brutes can start the two bolts. It's a forty-something-thousand-dollar car and the freaking top doesn't fit. This is mechanical engineering, not voodoo, and you know the Japs wouldn't let that car into customer hands like that. You know what the dealer says? "They're all like that."
The only reason American cars improved enough to be remotely competitive in quality is that foreign competition shamed, or scared, or dang-near-bankrupted them into it. The reason cars today are so much better than the "classic" cars of my youth, is because the Japanese grabbed Detroit by the stacking swivel and gave it a good shaking.
If you think the old classics were better, try maintaining one. And Purcell's Hyundai, a cheap sedan, will blow the doors off many of your performance "legends" of the fifties and sixties. Performance, too, would still be stagnant wiithout foreign stimulus.
You're a chump to buy an American car without looking at the alternatives. All you are doing is feeding the far-left leadership of the UAW and their no-neck goons who are going around trashing rival politicians' offices and beating up three-year-olds (although that goon might have been an IBEW goon... who cares, unions are unions). If they would back off the politics and take some pride in their work I might be willing to replace my pickup or sports car this year. But hostility to the brutes of the UAW -- the real Marxists -- is keeping that money in the bank.
The last four people I've advised on cars I all pointed to foreign machines: A Toyota pickup, two Camrys (which are not entirely foreign, although all the intellectual content is), and a Civic. Even though my own vehicles are all American (a Ranger pickup, a classic Mustang, and a Corvette). I've had good dealer service on the Ranger and extremely bad dealer service on the Vette... but both had initial quality problems. I only know of one instance of bad service on a Toyota and the dealer replaced the entire engine to make good on damage his mechanic caused. You would never get that from an American-brand dealer, never. And I likewise have never heard of a significant initial quality problem on a Toyota.
Patriotism is fine, but it's no excuse to pay more for lower quality, and finance those (UAW) who would destroy you into the bargain.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
My Kia sportage has 35000 trouble free miles on it so far and I believe that if I was fool enough to try, it would climb walls in 4WD. The price differential is a gift the Korean worker gives the US Buyer. I was too well raised to refuse a gift kindly offered.
Oh I certainly agree with THAT statement.
It is our own government that imposes excessive regulations, mandates and economic burden on our domestic industries, making them less competitive in the global market. And it is our own political leadership that then undermines our domestic industries by favoring imports for the transnational corporations.
Yes, the "enemy within" are the free traitors, there is no doubt about it.
Well I agree that the "Big Three" should have never been allowed to merge and consolidate to exert the oligopolistic control over the domestic market that they once did. Had anti-trust legislation been more effective, they would have been much more competitive and the UAW would never have become such a bloated parasite. But now that the automotive cartel has expanded to a "Big Five" (GM, Ford, DCX, Toyota, VW), the global industry is still way too concentrated to be called " competitive. Instead of truly competing based on quality and innovation. They're merely playing off one nation against the others, seeking concessions which best enhance their profitablity by minimizing employee wages and benefits while also receiving taxpayer subsidies. IMHO, we need stronger anti-trust legislation to bust up the incestuous tangle of automotive "partnerships" and joint-ventures. The automotive sector will never be truly competitive unless the global cartel is fractured.
That's an interesting theory, Willie. But the odds of busting the cartel are rather small. The last successful new entrant came out of the Second World War -- and other new entrants since then, even in the USA, had to merge to survive (Jeep), like many of the old firms, or died miserable deaths (Tucker, DeLorean) because they couldn't get over the economic barriers to entry -- things like staggering tooling costs, building a dealer network.
In Europe, where some new entrants were subsidized, they still didn't survive (DKW), or were forced to consolidate by socialist governments chasing false economies (everything in Britain). Even the nameplates of the mighty Soviet and satellite factories -- one of which, Tatra, made a world-class quality car -- couldn't survive.
Henry Kaiser couldn't manufacture a quality car for a fair price, even though he could build a Liberty Ship in four days. He gave up while he still had his shirt.
But -- consider a few foreign nameplates: FIAT, Renault, Citroen. They all thrive today -- with considerable subsidies from their EU homelands. And they do it without exporting to the USA (The French companies don't even have an office in America or Canada to sell parts -- they know their cars are all long since beaten in to Revere Ware. But I got an exhaust gasket for a '65 Mustang from a Ford dealer in Munich, no problem). What killed them was the same thing that led the US makers to a near-death experience: low quality in the face of international competition. They retreated to their homelands, where they don't have to face the big boys on the schoolyard.
Your argument is quite puzzling. You are against someone buying a Hyundai -- from a company that is a 10,000 lb gorilla in Korea but a weak sister here. Instead you favour "stronger anti-trust legislation to bust up the incestuous tangle of automotive 'partnerships'" -- well, why don't we start on GM and see how long its Divisions can survive on their own? GM and Ford certainly did more to suppress competition than any international combination ever did.
I have been fortunate to have friends all round the world, quite literally from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe. Most of these people want and admire certain American goods. We ship guns, guitars, computer software, airplanes (indeed, most of the small airplanes in the world are made here. The ones that aren't use American motors. When Russia opened her borders, her aero-engine companies mostly failed, and her factories build planes with American (and for jets, European also) engines. It was traumatic for the Russian engineers who had good jobs making overweight, fuel-inefficient motors, for sure. It's always a drag being a dinosaur when the small furry mammals start taking over. Now its ten years on and most of those guys are in better jobs than they ever dreamed having, facing the challenge of making stuff good enough to sell to the USA and Japan.
US leadership in any area of manufacturing or technology is not a given. It comes and it goes, and if we start acting cold-blooded and really large, somebody else will put that ice age juju on us, too. Look at all the industries in history that are gone with nary a ripple, from whale oil products to radio serial production. You can't even get a good job cutting wood for the corduroy road any more.
I think that you are clinging to a past that only existed for a moment, for a snapshot. The best way to get from New York to Chicago was the 20th Century Limited; there were about ten makes of car and you could tell by make and model exactly what the status was of the guy who met you in the station. Cadillac! Why, he's the boss, or the top salesman. Packard, he's probably the head engineer, unless it's a Clipper, then he's just an engineer. Ford, Chevy, Plymouth -- one of the worker bees. If he had a foreign car he was a weirdo, maybe an industrial designer... possibly queer.
As far as the consolidation of the global auto industry -- give it time. The bigger it gets, the more it resembles something ending in -saurus. If you look at the American companies that have innovated in the auto market, it has usually happened when their back was to the wall. What puts your back to the wall? Competition, that's what.
Same thing with airliners. Think Boeing's problems are because Airbus is subsidized? or because Boeing management is dumb as a box of rocks? (Hot tip: a subsidy makes a company move at the pace of government. Of course, in Boeing's case, that might be a step up).
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
I had a survey from some company call me about the purchase of my minivan. I ID'd it as a Kia Sedona. All kinds of questions about why the car I bought and not the american car. Was the American dealership unfriendly...nope, I said, it was the price and the warranty. Was the quality of American cars lower....nope, I said, it was the price and the warranty.
A lot of questions and all of them the same answer: Price and Warranty.
They had an end of year clearance here in Cincy a few weeks back. I forget which Korean dealer, but they offered a free subcompact if you bought one of their larger cars at regular price.
But not in the context I purport. The enemy is indeed within, and it is people like you. How many jobs did you create last year after risking your tips you earned working in a restaurant? How many trees did you plant last in the last year with your own money you bought from the local soil conservation district last year? How much did you donate to FR last year to cover the bandwidth you waste sporting socialism? Geez, I could spout a hundred questions at you exposing your glaring, ignorant hypocritical positions.
It is our own government that imposes excessive regulations, mandates and economic burden on our domestic industries, making them less competitive in the global market.
Which side of the fence are you on? Do you just walk both sides of the fence in a pretend existence? You say:
Yes, the "enemy within" are the free traitors, there is no doubt about it.
You are calling me a 'traitor' because I have an understanding of basic economics? Because I employ people? What have you done for the economy lately? The environment? How can you blame govt regulation for failures and in the next sentence rant about 'free traitors' and throw the blame their (my) way?
You're a deadbeat. Get off your lazy butt and go do something instead of whine. Create one job, maybe your own if only part-time. And then when you actually do something that warrants an economic reward I sincerely hope you realize that it came at the expense of your own hard work and not a handout (govt forced extortion) from those who do contribute to the well-being of the economy from 'traitors' like me.
"He who establishes his argument by noise and command shows that his reason is weak."~ Michel Eyquem De Montaigne
The economic basis for your position is flawed, so you resort to personal attacks.
Not very impressive.
Actually quite mundane and boring, as a matter of fact.
FIAT, Renault and Citroen (Peugeot) all exist primarily withing the Ford sphere of influence through a variety of other recognizable nameplates such as Volvo, Mazda and Nissan.
Ford owns Volvo.
Ford owns 33.4% of Mazda
Renault purchased 36.8% of Nissan Motor
Mazda has a mutual OEM supply agreement with Nissan for commercial vehicles.
Ford and Nissan jointly produce minivans.
Ford has formed a joint venture with PSA Peugeot Citroen to produce diesel engines.
Fiat now owns 52% of the joint venture, Iveco-Ford Truck U.K.
Peugeot and Renault own two subsidiaries: Francais Mecanique, which produces engines, and Societe de Transmission Automatiques, which makes mechanical components
Renault owns 20% of Swedish Motors in Thailand. Volvo owns 56% with the remainder held by Swedish Motors. Swedish Motors, in turn, owns 70% of Thai Chrysler Automotive Ltd., which builds Jeep Cherokees at a Thai Assembly Co. Ltd. assembly plant. DaimlerChrysler owns the remaining 30% of Thai DaimlerChrysler.
Of course, that last one gives a hint at how convolutedly incestuous the global automotive cartel has become. While Ford remains the dominant Big Five "partner" for FIAT, Renault and Peugeot, ties can also be traced to DCX, GM and Toyota.
It is the nature of a cartel, They are cooperating tather than actually competing.
My comment was directed at the political leadership who are free traitors.
If you are so thin-skinned with guilt that you take that as personally directed at you and launch into some kind of adolescent retaliatory tirade, then that's you're character flaw.
I support directly some of them in varying capacities including political so you have indeed included me in your definition of a "traitor." Be assured I harbor no guilt, I drive my own economy so your viewpoint(s) are meaningless to me. Be also assured that the mentality of a "global economy" means separate and different things to us. We'll just have to agree to disagree.
ROTFLMAO!
Okay, go ahead and live in an alternate reality where the whole economy revolves around "quantim".
That may be meaningful to you, but not to anybody else.
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.