The Multinational Corporations, armed with free-trade agreements, look at the world as one big market…“Countries” are fast becoming obsolete…Little more than political fiefdoms that must be bribed or otherwise paid off…
I agree Caddyman. Especially when you consider that one of the largest increases in sales in China is enjoyed by GM. They have auto plants there employing and benefiting their workers as Toyota does here. We have and will continue to import auto parts and whole cars under the GM marquis routinely. I don’t see this as anything more then a balancing act.
The huge benefit is, financial ties help mitigate political differences. When capitalism infiltrates any totalitarian govt., I believe it’s a step in the right direction for world peace. All democracies, dictatorships and communist regimes begin to share and deal with one common problem and unifier ; corporate greed.
More world differences may be solved across the board room then in the UN.
Caddyman and Dagosa, I agree with you both. Global corporations have made political centrism obsolete in industry, and the more this happens, the more tied togather the economics become, is the more unified the world becomes. Economics transcends politics.
One detail left is money. It’ll be interesting to see how the Euro fares in the long run. Standardization of currency may be far more complicated than it’s given credit for.
I should have said that gasoline was a hazardous waste back in the early days of oil. Oil was primarily used as a lubricant for machines to replace the increasingly expensive whale oil. The problem with petroleum oil was the “volatiles”. The oil companies learned how to separate the “volatiles” out of the oil, but gasoline was the most difficult to find a market for.
Early automobiles used alcohol for fuel. Prohibition put an end to that and gave the oil companies the market they needed to get rid of this hazardous waste. That did change its classification from hazardous waste to consumer product.
Although Ken Burns did not mention this in his PBS documentary, the Rockefeller’s gave $4 million to the cause. That practically funded the whole prohibition movement. But surely that donation was motivated by their philanthropy rather than profit.
Thanks foe the chuckle Keith.
keith; the first major application for petroleum (rock oil) was to find a replacement for LAMP OIL which until then was whale oil which was more and more difficult to find. The only alternative was candles, expensive, inefficient and dangerous.
I lived in Europe during WW II with no electrcity or gas service and we used crude oil in our old fashioned lamps, causing the globes to have to be cleaned every day because of the soot. We cooked with wood since coal and gas were unavailable as well.
In the early petroleum days, the non-volatile part of petroleum, in addition to lubrication, was then also used for heating and cooking as volumes increased and the price dropped. The volatile part, gasoline, was a nusance and was just burned off.
Two landmark books on the history of the industry are “The Quest” and "The Prize"by Daniel Yergin. Any library shouldhave them.
When petroleum was first exploited, the main product produced was kerosene to replace the (whale) oil lamps. Gasoline was NEVER hazardous waste and was used as engine fuel right from the beginning…Markets for lubricating oil and asphalt were quickly developed…If some excess product had to be disposed of, the refiners would simply flare it off, as they continue to do today…
Keith
Caddyman is correct.
While some very early cars did use alcohol as fuel, by 1908 or so, gasoline was the standard fuel for IC engines. Prohibition did not come about until 1920, at least 10 years after gasoline was in wide-spread use as a motor fuel.
As to the Rockefeller family giving money to the cause of Prohibition, I can’t say whether this is factual or not, but it is certainly possible due to old man John D. Rockefeller’s very puritanical views. However, the majority of the super-wealthy gave money to fight against prohibition, because of the reality that the Federal Income Tax had gone into effect in 1913.
What is the connection with the income tax?
Simple!
The super-wealthy feared that Prohibition would reduce federal revenues from alcohol taxes so drastically that income tax rates would be raised in order to make up the shortfall in revenues. So–if the Rockefellers did help to finance the push for Prohibition, they were surely in the minority among their peers.
If you want to learn much more about Prohibition than was portrayed in Ken Burns’ entertaining documentary, I suggest that you read Last Call by Daniel Okrent. This is the book that Burns used as the basis for his film, but the book has so much more content than the documentary that it would be fair to say that Burns only “scratched the surface” with his film. Even though my undergraduate major was history, I have to say that I learned an incredible amount of new and fascinating information from Okrent’s book.
MikeInNH December 8 Report
It’s amazing…people COMPLAIN about Toyota creating jobs here in the US…yet they have no problems with GM MOVING jobs to China.
I think you misread a lot of people, Mike. Many of us don’t complain that Toyota hires people in the US - we complain that they get praised endlessly for it while they still employ Americans per car sold in the US than the domestic brands, and the gap isn’t closing… and many of the same people who praise Toyota bash the domestics for building factories in China so that they can sell vehicles in China (remember, we can’t compete with them on labor cost, the shipping alone would kill us, and their government won’t let us import large numbers of vehicles from the US into China)
A typical Toyota car built in the USA has about 85-90% US content. A typical Ford Crown Victoria when built in the USA had 50% or so US content. My friend had one where even the gas tank came from Spain!
The number of Americans employed per 100 cars manufactured is a function of both the local content and the EFFICIENCY of the manufacturing process. Ford had their best figures with the Taurus assembled in Atlanta before that plant closed. It had 22 assembly hours per car. And that was achieved with a lot of sub-assemblies bought from Mexico. That’s a lot more hours than Toyota uses. And their imports of non-US parts is about the same as US manufacturers.
The best assembly hours per car I’ve come across is the Nissan plant in Sunderland, England, of all places. They put a Micra model together with 12 manhours or less!
The overall US content is the key figure, and the Camry traditionally has generated the most US jobs per 100 cars.
“…the Camry traditionally has generated the most US jobs per 100 cars.”
Not surprising, give the US content. But I’m sure they have fewer hours per car in the assembly factory that the Detroit 3 equivalents. And that’s a good thing. IMO, the UAW sees to it that the the Detroit 3 spend more to assemble a car in the USA than any non-union manufacturer. They’re killing themselves. You’d think they were investment bankers; their foresight is so short.
When GM and Chrysler went bankrupt, the labor abuses that had built up over the years came to a screeching halt…Those days are over…The UAW is just an empty shell compared to what it once was…You can’t blame the currant economic problems on trade unions…Now if you want to talk about Public Service Trade Unions, that’s a different story…
Those darn unions. They are the reason we are in this mess. It’s a crime people want every thing from just cause to health insurance to a reasonable middle class wage with a retirement that isn’t tied directly to the stock market. Let’s just fire people as they age and hire only those that are healthy without familys who don’t need any extras. The middle class hasn’t seen wages increase with the cost of living over the last twenty years…gee I wonder if that 's tied to the demise of the unions…I sure hope so. Good wages are over rated.
“Those days are over…”
I disagree. UAW workers still have excellent pay and a benefit package that is unbelievable. The current administration was all for taxing health programs with significantly better benefits that the average, until they found out that the UAW had just such a plan. I’m sure that they still have excess employees in the factory. All these things lead to higher costs. As we see more cars from Asia arrive, the difference in prices will be greater, since China and India have significantly lower employment costs than South Korea.
So, the solution is obvious. Let’s gradually lower the wages and benefits of auto workers down to the level in competing countries. Let’s do that with all workers, everywhere. The last thing we need is anyone with excellent pay and benefit packages. Let’s have no benefits. Sounds to me like you may be campaigning for a national healthcare plan. That’s how Canada has been taking our manufacturing jobs.
The solution is not obvious. And the UAW is shortening its life by insisting on high wages and way above average benefits. If you can figure it out, give them a hand. The likely solution is to go where Tata and Chery don’t in the auto industry, and be where they aren’t in business in general. That’s how small business owners stay in business in the face of competition from Walmart and Target.
Blaming the union inspired auto workers for the predicament the auto companies mismanaged themselves into is the same as blaming homeowners for stealing home loans from banks in the mortgage crisis. The solution is obvious…and not on the backs of the workers. As long as we have employer based healthcare, the biggest benefit package outside of retirement, we can’t compete with countries that offer a national plan or no healthcare alone. As long as SS offers only marginal subsistence, the retirement packages are a must. As long as the prime so low, the only way keep up with the cost of living is to put it into the stock market where once secured bonds, savings accounts and cd s supplied security, the middle class will continue to be vulnerable to the Madeoffs of the world.
So “jt”, the bottom line is simple…keep lowering our standard of living so we can compete or not support incompetent management whose salaries, benefits payouts to shareholders has increased many times that of the average UAW worker. Your argument still, is to continue to squeeze the middle class out of existence. Everyone’s prior financial security has been directly attributed to union activity.
It is no coincidence, that union demise and lower economic growth and stability of the middle class are in direct correlation .
TO: the same mountainbike
60 minutes had a story on last year about the japanese auto companies. The found that the big four has never paid 1 cent in coporate taxes. They pencil whip their car titles thru Malaysia and pay the taxes there at a nearly 0 % rate. And it is done all legally. That is bad enough but their factories are non union. That is bad enough but with the increased competion the domestics have been signing new contracts with new hires making half what the old timers are. They are evil corporations that were smart enough to buy our politicians. Drive thru any Michigan city and see the devestation.
@eraser1998 - Talk about misreading…WOW
First off CCA clearly was complaining about Toyota building cars here in the US and sending the profits back to Japan…Which is EXACTLY what GM is doing in China.
Second…Toyota/Nissan Hyundai and others SHOULD be praised for added jobs to the US economy…and GM is REMOVING jobs from the US economy and shipping them overseas. Yes GM is building cars for the China market…but they are also planning on shipping those cars built in China to the US starting possibly as early as 2012. But keep praising GM for doing such a GREAT job.
“So “jt”, the bottom line is simple…”
No, it’s not. The UAW management must try to appease their members in order to continue to manage the organization. Unfortunately for them, the membership wants to maximize todays benefits at the expense of their future. The people working now will be dead in a few decades, and they can’t or or won’t concern themselves with whether the UAW will exist in 30 years. They got it when they agreed to a two tiered pay plan where younger workers make less for doing the same job. But that didn’t sit well with the younger members. The younger workers should not be pleased with this predicament, but if they plan on building cars and trucks in 30 years, they need to understand that they don’t have any choice. So, how simple is it that the union has to adjust to today’s market when they are trying to please the membership? A lot of industries have gone out of business because they could not adjust to market realities. The UAW as a business is in serious trouble, and they very well may not make it.