This is really sad....

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: bretfraz

You're saying that large, powerful corporations dominate markets and drive smaller companies out of business? I thought that's how a free market is supposed to work. You're right, I don't understand your point. Can you rethink your argument and repost it?

It depends on the situation. In this one, the big three have powerful lobbyists and government backing. That lobbying has helped rid them of competition and stay afloat (not Ford) during this recession.

Are you saying that the government involvement of the big three is also part of that free market?
 
Last edited:
Quote:

As for small cars, Detroit has NEVER been interested in the entry level market. Never. 20 years? That's 1989. I'm talking go back to 1959, back to when the Beetle first came to the US in the early 50's.


bretfraz, I agree 99% with what you said, but quoted the part where I disagree. What about the Chevrolet Corvair? Around 1959 production, small, good gas mileage, etc. It was killed off by that self-serving b-head, Ralph Nadar with the use of yellow journalism and "lawyer math". GM took about 20 years to get back on that horse with the poorly constructed A-bodies.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: ArrestMeRedZ
Quote:

As for small cars, Detroit has NEVER been interested in the entry level market. Never. 20 years? That's 1989. I'm talking go back to 1959, back to when the Beetle first came to the US in the early 50's.


bretfraz, I agree 99% with what you said, but quoted the part where I disagree. What about the Chevrolet Corvair? Around 1959 production, small, good gas mileage, etc. It was killed off by that self-serving b-head, Ralph Nadar with the use of yellow journalism and "lawyer math". GM took about 20 years to get back on that horse with the poorly constructed A-bodies.


Yeah, I owned a couple of those cars. The Corvair was a great car - if you didn't mind massive amounts of fumes coming into the passenger compartment, numerous oil leaks, and very poor handling.

Saying the Corvair was a great car is like saying the Ford Pinto was a well made luxury car!
 
Originally Posted By: ArrestMeRedZ
Quote:

As for small cars, Detroit has NEVER been interested in the entry level market. Never. 20 years? That's 1989. I'm talking go back to 1959, back to when the Beetle first came to the US in the early 50's.


bretfraz, I agree 99% with what you said, but quoted the part where I disagree. What about the Chevrolet Corvair? Around 1959 production, small, good gas mileage, etc. It was killed off by that self-serving b-head, Ralph Nadar with the use of yellow journalism and "lawyer math". GM took about 20 years to get back on that horse with the poorly constructed A-bodies.


The Corvair is a bit unique in this respect as its an unusually engineered car compared to everything else GM was offering at the time (late 1950's). However, like the Ford Falcon, Plymouth Valiant and others, it was a reaction to the expansion of small cars from Europe like the Beetle, Renaults, and small cars from the UK and elsewhere. As I said earlier, there always has been a market for affordable and efficient small cars in the US. However, that market has historically been driven by imports, with domestics getting involved only when market share is threatened.
 
Originally Posted By: 2002 Maxima SE
Originally Posted By: bretfraz

You're saying that large, powerful corporations dominate markets and drive smaller companies out of business? I thought that's how a free market is supposed to work. You're right, I don't understand your point. Can you rethink your argument and repost it?

It depends on the situation. In this one, the big three have powerful lobbyists and government backing. That lobbying has helped rid them of competition and stay afloat (not Ford) during this recession.

Are you saying that the government involvement of the big three is also part of that free market?


Lobbyists, yes. Gov't backing? No. Lobbying is influence peddling, it's not gov't support or partnership. Just because a corporation hires a lobbyist to gain favor with certain politicians does not mean that gov't supports an entire industry.

The gov't and industry are usually at odds with one another in the US. Look at all the regulations gov't has placed on the auto industry since the late 1960's. Doesn't look much like a business partnership to me, and certainly not like how things are done in Japan.

What is happening now is unprecedented in American industry and should not be considered as "how things are done". Everyone is swimming in uncharted waters.
 
So what if GM dies? Letting the GMs of the world die is one of the best things we can do for our economy and the wealth of our nation. Nostalgia aside, I am confident that the end result will be positive for America.
 
The average compensation for a laborer for one of the Big Three automakers is $73 per hour. At Toyota, that average is $48. Big companies fail and smaller, leaner companies that can do it better, faster and cheaper will step in to take their places. Maybe this will be a new Ford. Maybe a new company will come into play.

Of course the execs and management share the blame as well - the management did agree to and sign the union contracts. Even the USA itself can be blamed.





"Health-care costs alone add $1,200 to the cost of each car GM builds in the United States. By contrast, Toyota's health-care costs are about $200 per car."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/36484/page/2
 
Originally Posted By: heathenbrewing
The average compensation for a laborer for one of the Big Three automakers is $73 per hour. At Toyota, that average is $48. Big companies fail and smaller, leaner companies that can do it better, faster and cheaper will step in to take their places. Maybe this will be a new Ford. Maybe a new company will come into play.

Of course the execs and management share the blame as well - the management did agree to and sign the union contracts. Even the USA itself can be blamed.





"Health-care costs alone add $1,200 to the cost of each car GM builds in the United States. By contrast, Toyota's health-care costs are about $200 per car."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/36484/page/2




That Newsweek article is a good 2-3 years old and the facts are no longer valid. I think the cost differential between workers has been eliminated for the most part. At any rate, the myth has been debunked and is no longer a valid, current talking point.
 
This article is from yesterday. Not about healthcare per se, but just the difference between 2 companies costs:


"Industry analysts have said GM's costs per vehicle are about $2,500 higher than Toyota's because of $1,000 for pensions and $1,500 for benefits paid to autoworkers."

http://www.indystar.com/article/20090426/BUSINESS/904260321/1003/BUSINESS


My point being that GM is too fat and can no longer compete in this global economy.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: heathenbrewing
This article is from yesterday. Not about healthcare per se, but just the difference between 2 companies costs:


"Industry analysts have said GM's costs per vehicle are about $2,500 higher than Toyota's because of $1,000 for pensions and $1,500 for benefits paid to autoworkers."

http://www.indystar.com/article/20090426/BUSINESS/904260321/1003/BUSINESS


My point being that GM is too fat and can no longer compete in this global economy.


Clipped from the end of the Newsweek article:

With Christian Caryl in Toyota City, Japan, and Akiko Kashiwagi in Tokyo

© 2007

The data used is from 2005-2006. With everything that has gone on, the conclusions are no longer valid.

The Indy Star article is about Remy, which was spun off from GM in 1994.

We've discussed the GM pension fund issue ad nauseum here at BITOG. No point in rehashing it in this thread; there's got to be a dozen other threads on the topic.
 
Originally Posted By: bretfraz
Originally Posted By: heathenbrewing
This article is from yesterday. Not about healthcare per se, but just the difference between 2 companies costs:


"Industry analysts have said GM's costs per vehicle are about $2,500 higher than Toyota's because of $1,000 for pensions and $1,500 for benefits paid to autoworkers."

http://www.indystar.com/article/20090426/BUSINESS/904260321/1003/BUSINESS


My point being that GM is too fat and can no longer compete in this global economy.


Clipped from the end of the Newsweek article:

With Christian Caryl in Toyota City, Japan, and Akiko Kashiwagi in Tokyo

© 2007

The data used is from 2005-2006. With everything that has gone on, the conclusions are no longer valid.

The Indy Star article is about Remy, which was spun off from GM in 1994.

We've discussed the GM pension fund issue ad nauseum here at BITOG. No point in rehashing it in this thread; there's got to be a dozen other threads on the topic.



That is exactly why the Chevrolet I bought back in 1985 and the Mercury I bought in 2006 were used cars, you get sacked if you buy an American Car brand new.
 
Last edited:
Whoa, they gave Americans what they wanted, gass guzzling SUVS, they were not pushed down out throats, we sought them out. Unfortunately, they never recovered their imagevfrom the junk they produced in the 70s and did not produce fuel eficient vehicles along with the SUVs.

But really, Americans are getting what they deserve, they wanted big gass guzzlers and GM, Ford, Chrysler sold them Americans are still buying them, we just do not learn from the past it seems.
 
Originally Posted By: heathenbrewing
This article is from yesterday. Not about healthcare per se, but just the difference between 2 companies costs:


"Industry analysts have said GM's costs per vehicle are about $2,500 higher than Toyota's because of $1,000 for pensions and $1,500 for benefits paid to autoworkers."

http://www.indystar.com/article/20090426/BUSINESS/904260321/1003/BUSINESS


My point being that GM is too fat and can no longer compete in this global economy.


GM or the UAW?
 
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
At least the xB had a theme, the Ridgeline is just a hodgepodge of styling suckage without decent capability or a fuel economy advantage when compared to full-size V8 pickups.

Ridgeline = fail


Yeah...got to agree the Ridgeline is *****. My friend bought one and his wife refused to drive it. He got a RAV4 instead.
 
Originally Posted By: AcuraTech
Everyday I read the news and the outlook for GM and Chrysler gets worse and worse. Honestly, it's heartbreaking. Even though I'm employed indirectly by American Honda, I'm still a homer. I really really want to see GM and Chrysler succeed.


I didn't want to see PAN AM or TWA go either. It happened. We moved on. The void left by them was filled by the current crop of air carriers. And so it will be with Chrysler, GM, and F.
 
Originally Posted By: Aldaris
Originally Posted By: AcuraTech
Everyday I read the news and the outlook for GM and Chrysler gets worse and worse. Honestly, it's heartbreaking. Even though I'm employed indirectly by American Honda, I'm still a homer. I really really want to see GM and Chrysler succeed.


I didn't want to see PAN AM or TWA go either. It happened. We moved on. The void left by them was filled by the current crop of air carriers. And so it will be with Chrysler, GM, and F.


A little different to lose an airline as opposed to a manufacturer. It is a national security concern. If the govt. has any sense, they won't let them fail. My idea would be to tariff imports to allow our industries to fairly compete.
 
Originally Posted By: cousincletus
A little different to lose an airline as opposed to a manufacturer. It is a national security concern. If the govt. has any sense, they won't let them fail. My idea would be to tariff imports to allow our industries to fairly compete.


That would start a huge trade war, that frankly, I'm fine with. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

U
2014 Challenger long term review: Absolutely terrible.
3 4 5
Replies
84
Views
18K
FZ1
tbm5690
Rental Review - 2020 Chrysler 300S HEMI
2
Replies
20
Views
4K
umungus1122
P
  • Locked
Long term E85 usage - '09 Mercedes C300
Replies
15
Views
13K
Rat407
R
  • Locked
I really miss my Accord.
2
Replies
23
Views
8K
Nickdfresh
wwillson
  • Locked
Pennzoil Answers - Thinner Viscosity Grades
Replies
10
Views
20K
GaleHawkins
Back
Top Bottom