Eraser…Re-read what I said…First off I NEVER EVER said anything in this thread about who has more workers or more engineers…While GM/Ford and Chryco do have engineers here in the US…they are ONLY hiring new hires in India…Let’s see how many they have in the US in 10 years.
I was responding to kriley who is saying they he/she only buys American cars…All I pointed out was that GM/Ford and Chryco are NOT ALL American cars…I don’t know where you thought I said anything else.
Citizens of our state do not think Canadian labor is domestic where nearly all of our paper making has been lost to Canada in the last twenty years. Read my lips…Canadian manufacturing does take jobs from the U.S.A.
According to one CEO from a Canadian paper making, they do it with superior reinvestment decisions in keeping their equipment more up to date and efficient and, get this, they underbid their American competition by the same % (as high as 30% in some plants ) they are able to save by having a national healthcare program and not emplorer based healthcare system which drains the competitive edge once held by the American industrial complex.
Yes, it is that simple. While we sit here and discuss all he jobs lost to foreign competition and wether it’s caused by the decisions to move abroad by GM and Ford (Chrysler doesn’t count, it is as foreign as Mercedes and whomever major shareholder owns them now) to improve quality, we find it is not. They are economic decisions based as much upon healthcare as any thing else. If we could waive a magic wand and insure everyone through no direct contribution made by employers, jobs from both small and large businesses would become available.
The magic wand is Medicare. Personal income tax increase on those top income earners to accomplish this who have more than half our countries wealth but pay less then 34% of the taxes is beyond the understanding of those of us who hide this arguement under a different veil. Veils like discussions on NAFTA, union dues and the like. They all pale when considering the contributions employer based healthcare affect the cost of manufacturing.
Whitey.
I am in full agreement that we should buy the best widget with the best value. Trading with other countries and all of us going with our strengths makes the whole world better off. But the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans all have trade barriers with us along with buying our politicians to cement their unfair trade practices. This is not being xenophobic. This is a battle for our survival as a strong country. If consciously buying an american product is the biggest sacrifice I make it is worth it. Having been to Korea those people buy local production because their elders knew really hard times after the wars and don’t want to go back. I don’t blame them or call them names. Maybe if we stood up to them and our leaders we would get better trade policies and pull out of our economic doldrums.
Paraphrasing an old quote: Civilizations can survive war, famine, and great need. They cannot survive times of plenty.
The world is a big competitive market. When a costumer walks in Walmart, they are going to buy the cheapest product that they feel will provide the quality that is acceptable to them. It is a financial decision. As much as we can expect every US citizen to have an altruistic approach and buy domestic/etc, the final decision is made based on simple math by the buyer. There is a similar, albeit more though out decision making process that goes for car buying. It is everybody’s game, if they want to have the costumer, they have to get them.
But the Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans all have trade barriers with us along with buying our politicians to cement their unfair trade practices. This is not being xenophobic.
You’re right…but you and I as buying public have very little to do with the trade barriers and very little we can do to affect them. GM on the other hand has HUGE influence in trade barriers. That’s why GM is investing very very heavily in China. In their own stock holders report they expect to sell more vehicles and make higher profits in China then the US by 2020.
So you want to decrease those trade barriers…buy a Honda.
irlandes - you’re a perfect example of what I explained earlier - you had bad cars in a time when they were bad, switched to Toyota and had a good experience and therefore believe that there still is a difference. CR has changed its scoring so many times that there is no statistical significance between average and the best anymore.
As for your story about US automakers deliberately weakening parts, well, you just shot your credibility.
I did not lose any credibility at all, Eraser. GM was happily assigning engineers to cheapen up the cars, while Toyota was happily increasing longevity. You don’t mind that, that is your option. I do mind that, and do not plan to own another GM car, ever. It’s called “badwill”, the opposite of Goodwill which is part of the value of a company.
Also, you put words into my mouth while apparently deliberately ignoring what I have said, which is I understand the American car companies are now making some good cars. Somehow for you that came out, that I believe there is still a difference. I don’t care if there is a difference or not. I am not buying from the companies which deliberately sold me junk. The only reason they are making good cars now is because their past sins almost destroyed them. If their businesses had not almost collapsed, they would still deliberately be selling junk.
Let me guess, Eraser, you work for an American car company? You sound like a PR person with a script. One standard PR trick is to mock or ridicule anyone who does not agree with your line. Doesn’t work well on this forum. And, it sure doesn’t work with me. Please mind your manners.
I understand some want to buy cars with US jobs in mind. I respect that view, I just don’t share it. The American way is those who do a good job are supposed to win, and those who do a bad job are supposed to lose. For decades, people have kept buying junky cars on that basis, which essentially rewarded the manufacturers for selling junk. You ‘enabled’ them in almost destroying a major part of our manufacturing economy.
For the sake of the US, I hope the US manufacturers continue to improve quality. I doubt the Caravan will soon be as good as the Sienna, but it is somewhat cheaper, thus many people may be satisfied with the Dodge, and that is at is should be.
Eraser…Re-read what I said…First off I NEVER EVER said anything in this thread about who has more workers or more engineers…While GM/Ford and Chryco do have engineers here in the US…they are ONLY hiring new hires in India…Let’s see how many they have in the US in 10 years.
I was responding to kriley who is saying they he/she only buys American cars…All I pointed out was that GM/Ford and Chryco are NOT ALL American cars…I don’t know where you thought I said anything else.
Actually, Mexico is not considered domestic
Tell that to the displaced Detroit GM worker.
Displaced by someone in Mexico? They would have to be building new capacity in Mexico for that to happen.
As for where the new hires are, you are COMPLETELY wrong.
In just the last year, they’ve announced the hiring of over 5000 engineers in the US.
So for “ONLY hiring new hires in India”, that’s completely false… and even for those they are hiring, SO WHAT? They’re growing leaps and bounds there, but not here… and they’re still hiring them HERE, TOO!
irlandes - you’re a perfect example of what I explained earlier - you had bad cars in a time when they were bad, switched to Toyota and had a good experience and therefore believe that there still is a difference. CR has changed its scoring so many times that there is no statistical significance between average and the best anymore.
As for your story about US automakers deliberately weakening parts, well, you just shot your credibility.
I did not lose any credibility at all, Eraser. GM was happily assigning engineers to cheapen up the cars, while Toyota was happily increasing longevity. You don’t mind that, that is your option. I do mind that, and do not plan to own another GM car, ever. It’s called “badwill”, the opposite of Goodwill which is part of the value of a company.
Also, you put words into my mouth while apparently deliberately ignoring what I have said, which is I understand the American car companies are now making some good cars. Somehow for you that came out, that I believe there is still a difference. I don’t care if there is a difference or not. I am not buying from the companies which deliberately sold me junk. The only reason they are making good cars now is because their past sins almost destroyed them. If their businesses had not almost collapsed, they would still deliberately be selling junk.
Let me guess, Eraser, you work for an American car company?
You absolutely did lose all credibility - your claim about purposely weakening parts is simply not true - what is done is universal among all companies, and YES, TOYOTA DOES IT, TOO.
As for who I work for - it is NOT a car company. My products? They sell in grocery stores, box stores, pharmacies, etc… all for under a quarter a piece, and we move tens of billions of them each year. You think that’s a car? Even Matchbox cars are several times our price.
"Asian cars are better than domestics based on the evidence I’ve seen which is…"
hype.
Virtually all makes have improved in reliability significantly the last 5 or 10 years, and Toyota and Honda are no longer the kings. They live on as being perceived as way more reliable based on results from 10, 15, 20 years ago. In actuality, they are still quite reliable, but so are quite a few makes and models both foreign and domestic. This is based on the "defects per 1000" ratings on both new and used vehicles the last several years.
One thing that I think has affected this perception all along is the high maintenance requested of Toyotas and Hondas -- they will have the timing belt replaced at either 60,000 or 100,000 miles. When this is done, the water pump and timing belt tensioner are usually replaced; and probably the vacuum hoses, serpentine belt, wiring, and so on are examined for any problems. The domestic will often have a timing chain, I've seen cases were a water pump going at 210,000 miles or whatever is used as "proof" the domestic car was junk, when the Toyota would ahve been on it's second or third pump due to preventative maintenance.
“hertz”…This disagreement has little to do with the parts used. Many times it has to due with quality control during assembly. Toyota and Honda still have the edge there if you consider models 5 to ten years old because that is the only history of concern. You can’t say that a new GMC is equal in longevity and repair record as it has no history. In other words, I am not ready to say that a 2010 Cobalt is equal in 5 year repair history to a Corolla until 2015.
The repair history is still on the side of Honda and Toyota for most comparable models, with the exception of dual ventures using Toyota/GMC plants. “hwertz” you are absolutely incorrect in your equality assumption over the past 5 to 10 years as your last several year reference has only to do with new model polling. I would be on Ford and GMC products like white on rice if it were true for 5 to 10 years as many other Honda/Toyota owners would be as well.
The water pump reference is not meaningful as the real issue is often electrical, suspensions, drive trains and transmissions. Everyone’s water pump and alternator needs eventual service. Especially true of the Delco supplied accessories on my Prisms.
When even local dealerships around here advertised Prisms and Vibes as Toyota’s, they were interested in making sales based upon correct buying perceptions, yours not withstanding.
So, what is your personal Honda/Toyota ownership history? :=)
hwertz, it isn’t just hype. According to every automotive journalist I have read, automotive quality is a moving target that keeps increasing, for Honda, Toyota, GM, and Ford. All of these companies are continuing to improve quality, and 10 years ago, Honda and Toyota were ahead of Ford and GM. However, the rate of increase is where you see the difference. While the rate of increase in quality has been steady for Honda and Toyota, Ford and GM have increased the rate of their quality increase. That doesn’t make them better than Honda and Toyota, it just means they are doing a better job of catching up to Honda and Toyota, which frankly, is not such an impressive feat. When you have more room for improvement, achieving that improvement isn’t as impressive as when you have less room to improve, but manage to improve nonetheless.
With Ford and GM increasing the rate of their quality improvements, and Honda and Toyota continuing to improve at a steady rate, the difference has become virtually insignificant, and all four companies are virtually on par, but the Japanese still hold the lead. It isn’t marketing hype. It’s the consensus of automotive journalists across the board, and it’s reflected in real world data collected by Consumer Reports and other groups who collect and report repair data.
irlandes, I hope you don’t mind me butting in with your discussion with eraser1998.
I don’t think irlandes has lost any credibility.
There are a great many people who share his “burn me once, shame on you, burn me twice, shame on me” attitude about Ford, Chrysler, or GM. I am not one of them anymore, but I once was, and I also know of others who would love to buy a Ford or GM car, but have bad feelings about previously being burned.
About planned obsolescence, I don’t think that is hurting irlandes credibility either. Everyone I know who lived through the 1950s and 1960s as an adult remembers it. They remember buying a new car every year or two because of it. It’s the reason Detroit’s big three redesigned the cars every year until they had to compete with the Japanese, who redesigned their cars about every three years. Planned obsolescence wasn’t just about the expected life of parts. It was also about body design. Detroit’s big three knew their customers would want to keep up with their neighbors who had the current year’s design sitting in the driveway, so their marketing teams did what they could to shame their customers who had older cars into trading them in so they could drive the latest status symbol.
I am not going to speculate why eraser1998 seems to be burying his head in the sand and denying this part of automotive history, but it’s there for all to see, if they want to see it.
First off…where do you get the figure of 5000 new engineers…Second who said those hirings will be in the US…From the links you provided…it said nothing close to 5000 engineers being hired…and not one said where those engineers would be working…
You are confusing planned obsolescence with a completely different problem that irlandes is accusing them of.
YOU are correct about about what planned obsolescence means. This is NOT what Irlandes is saying.
Planned obsolescence is simply a scheme to make the new models seem more appealing than the old ones to keep people wanting the new ones. EVERYONE did that, and they still do. A perfect example is the Ford Fusion. Here are the changes, year to year, that they have done to make the new model year more appealing:
2006: First model year
2007: AWD debuts, Sirius becomes an option, side airbags and alarm become standard, audio input jack added, navigation becomes an option
2008: ABS becomes standard, rear sensing system, SYNC, and ambient lighting added as options. New navigation system, audio system, and trim kits become options
2009: ESC added as an option, new trim package
2010: redesign with new engines and transmissions. 2.3L goes to 2.5L, 3.0L gets power upgrade and flex fuel, and 3.5L added as option. Hybrid debuts
2013: All-new version due.
THAT is planned obsolescence. Each year becomes more appealing than the last in order to prop up sales and cater to the “keeping up with the Joneses” pack. And it works - Only 2008 saw a decline in sales, and it was a very minor one.
What Irlandes is accusing the companies of is purposely weakening parts to get them to fall apart to force you to buy a new vehicle. COMPLETELY different idea, and completely false.
First off…where do you get the figure of 5000 new engineers…Second who said those hirings will be in the US…From the links you provided…it said nothing close to 5000 engineers being hired…and not one said where those engineers would be working…
Mike -
I didn’t link to every announcement that they’ve made. Do I need to do all the work for you? Sorry, but that’s not going to happen, especially when the very first story says in the second paragraph: “Ford (F) said most of the 750 salaried workers it plans to add over the next two years will be added in Dearborn, Mich… Areas include: Design, product development, product engineering, manufacturing and electric vehicle engineering.” If you aren’t going to read the proof I provide, why should I dig up every single announcement for you?
750 salaried workers does NOT mean automotive engineers…There are many positions that are salaried and NOT engineers.
But YES Ford and GM is hiring…But 5000…we’ll see…So far all we have is your conjecture.
As for jobs in India…I just showed you what took me 30 seconds to find…GM and Ford and invested MILLIONS in Engineering campuses in India…I work with one guy from India here in the US…He use to work at one of the GM engineering campuses…and it’s HUGE…at least 5000 engineers…and GM has more then one over there…
As with ALL companies that have offices all over the world they share information/projects and people. Now that the economy here in the US is turning around maybe some of those jobs will come back to the US…We’ll see.