Why buy American
#101
06-08-2005, 12:44 AM
#102
06-08-2005, 09:07 AM
Why buy American
dense? tunnel vision? you owe nobody an apology 05PRED. It's not like you're the first to notice.
And executive pay? Remember, these are successful companies that don't (or aren't allowed to) use worker's pension funds to skew bottom line numbers, resulting in big personal bonuses on the backs of the workers:
International comparisons of the gap between average executive pay and average workers pay also indicate that the United States is far off the charts. Whereas U.S. CEOs of major companies enjoyed earnings 419 times the pay of the average blue collar worker last year, the ratio in Japan was about 20 to 1 and in Great Britain 35 to 1.
Of course, GM CEO is only about 250 times the average worker, so that makes them better!
Just wait until Kerkokian splits off the financing unit and auto workers lose everything under Chapter 11.
Best auto company in the world? For who?
And executive pay? Remember, these are successful companies that don't (or aren't allowed to) use worker's pension funds to skew bottom line numbers, resulting in big personal bonuses on the backs of the workers:
International comparisons of the gap between average executive pay and average workers pay also indicate that the United States is far off the charts. Whereas U.S. CEOs of major companies enjoyed earnings 419 times the pay of the average blue collar worker last year, the ratio in Japan was about 20 to 1 and in Great Britain 35 to 1.
Of course, GM CEO is only about 250 times the average worker, so that makes them better!
Just wait until Kerkokian splits off the financing unit and auto workers lose everything under Chapter 11.
Best auto company in the world? For who?
#103
06-08-2005, 01:10 PM
Why buy American
Originally posted by: 05PRED500I will just agree to disagree and leave it at that. Niether of us will convice the other of our point of view. Geez...I am glad we didn't intoduce politics.
BTW...on a more civil note, I really like your dock set up. Due to our lack of decent water in this part of the state, I have my boat in a marina on the Ohio. It is a very fun place to boat with several food choices and more partying than I care to do. But, your waterway looks very clean and not very congested.
BryceGTX
#104
06-08-2005, 02:44 PM
Why buy American
Not to restart another battle, but I just thought I would share with you guys a newsletter my Dad sent me. We both go to this site a lot, and this guy Roger has many good points and knows his stuff.
Enjoy
Enjoy
Quoted by Roger Simmermaker - "How To Buy American"Welcome to Roger Simmermaker's “Buy American Mention of the Week” electronic newsletter, created specifically for consumer patriots who want to Buy American and contribute to a more prosperous America. Please feel free to forward this to friends, family and associates. Thank you for your free subscription and for passing this important information along! For past issues, please visit our website at www.howtobuyamerican.com/bamw/index.shtml.
************************************************** **********
Buy American Mention of the Week 6-4-05
De-Junking the American Auto Industry
Since the writing of the May 2005 article “In Defense of General Motors,” I have received several responses regarding several of the points made in that article. These responses, along with the subsequent announcement that Standard & Poor’s Corp. downgraded both General Motors and Ford to junk status, have proven useful in determining the issues that should be addressed in my future articles related to the automotive industry.
General Motors was the primary focus of the May 2005 article since they were perceived to be in worse financial shape than Ford, although it is certainly vital that both of the two remaining American-based automakers survive and prosper.
The majority of the responses were positive and supportive. Of the negative responses, most of the points made were arguments already diffused and disproved as baseless in the article itself. This only reinforced my belief that most Buy American opponents only read what they agree with and conveniently skip over that with which they don’t agree – even as and especially when their positions are being invalidated.
Some foreign car lovers proclaimed they would only start to buy American when GM decided to build high-quality cars. Setting aside for a minute the fact that various quality surveys prove they already do, the point I had made already was this: Since GM is saddled with at least a $1,000 per automobile cost disadvantage to pay for honorable obligations like pensions and health care for thousands of Americans, that is why they have at least $1,000 less (per automobile) to spend on snazzier dashboards and other creature comforts.
These Buy American bashers are decidedly off base in claiming GM and Ford don’t make cars Americans want since both companies have higher market share than their closest foreign rival. General Motors, for instance, has over twice the market share in the U.S. compared to Toyota. GM’s problem is not necessarily low market share (although a return to the higher market shares of the past would surely be beneficial) but it is the lower profit margins they are able to generate in light of their honorable obligations to their current and former workers and their dependents.
The media hasn’t always been forthcoming with the facts, but certain news anchors do expose the truth. On “Your World with Neil Cavuto,” a program on which this author has appeared five times, Neil Cavuto promptly corrected one of his frequent guests who just couldn’t resist trashing American automakers in knee-jerk fashion. When Mr. Cavuto asked Tom Adkins of www.commonconservative.com why GM and Ford were being downgraded to junk status, Mr. Adkins spewed the typical and tired old venom proclaiming it was because American car makers only made American junk. Kudos to Neil Cavuto for pointing out some of the quality and efficiency gains American automakers have made over the years in response to such garbage.
Other tired refrains Buy American haters use include the accusation that GM and Ford have misguided objectives and have repeatedly missed the boat by concentrating on more-profitable larger vehicles rather than smaller, more-efficient ones. This argument is easily diffused by the fact that GM and Ford have merely been responding to broad consumer demand for these larger vehicles. Even as gas prices climbed into the $2 per gallon range in early 2005, polls taken around that time show that a majority of American consumers remained undeterred when it came to buying bigger and badder American trucks and SUVs. The Ford F-150, for instance, has been the number one selling truck for several years. Surely even Buy American opponents (usually laissez-faire advocates) recognize and subscribe to the law of supply and demand. Are these people really suggesting that Ford not concentrate on this obvious cash cow?
The anti-Buy American argument also conveniently ignores the fact that foreign-based automakers have been aggressively accelerating their entry into the large vehicle market to compete with American dominance in this area. The 2006 Lexus 470 Luxury SUV, for instance, boasts of 275 horsepower – a full 40 hp increase over the 2005 model – not to mention 12 ft. lbs. extra torque to boot. And of course no one can deny the various entries of foreign automakers in the big truck and SUV markets such as the Nissan Armada, Nissan Titan, Toyota Sequoia, Toyota Tundra and Honda Ridgeline, just to name a few. It smacks of hypocrisy to deride Ford and GM for making large American vehicles when all foreign-based automakers are scrambling to introduce even bigger models in an attempt to out-muscle them.
Ironically, within days of the “In Defense of General Motors” article, the Wall Street Journal ran a “Drive Buys” column featuring the Nissan Xterra comparing it to four other midsize SUVs. The Chevrolet Equinox was not only the only American vehicle in the comparison (no Ford product was profiled) but it was also the least expensive and had the best mileage rating. Go figure.
The point here is that when it comes to analyzing the automotive industry, hypocrisy often reigns. It would be different if Buy American nay-sayers had rhetoric to offer that lined up with the facts, but they normally do not. Most are stuck in the 70s and their questionable belief (also disproved in the “In Defense of General Motors” article) that American cars were inferior then and by default continue to be today.
One “Reader’s Report” submission to Business Week’s May 30, 2005 issue chided GM for not investing their profits wisely enough, claiming they could have bought Honda outright for 75% the money they spent creating Saturn. Such Monday morning quarterbacking overlooks the fact that Japan rarely allows foreign-based companies a majority ownership in their home-based companies. GM does own 49% of Isuzu, who recently announced an annual 9.7% net rise in profit ending March 31, 2005. The Business Week letter-writer also pointed out that one Saturn SUV is powered by a Honda engine as proof GM has gone astray in their strategies. I wonder if he knows that some BMWs use GM-built transmissions. Let’s call it a draw then, shall we?
Finally and perhaps more-importantly, many readers of the original article in defense of the U.S. auto industry cited that it was good to see a non-GM employee stick up for GM. It might be different of course if I had worked on the factory floor of one of the several dozen Ford or GM domestic plants, but I don’t. I defend American auto interests because it is in the best interest of America to do so. And even though the anti-Buy American crowd is aggressively undermining American prosperity with hypocritical and baseless views, those of us who stand for what is right for America deserve a prosperous country and should work hard to create that prosperity. That is what should keep us motivated to fight the good fight. We’re all in this together, so let’s make it work for all of us – together.
Roger Simmermaker, Author
How Americans Can Buy American
www.howtobuyamerican.com
************************************************** **********
Buy American Mention of the Week 6-4-05
De-Junking the American Auto Industry
Since the writing of the May 2005 article “In Defense of General Motors,” I have received several responses regarding several of the points made in that article. These responses, along with the subsequent announcement that Standard & Poor’s Corp. downgraded both General Motors and Ford to junk status, have proven useful in determining the issues that should be addressed in my future articles related to the automotive industry.
General Motors was the primary focus of the May 2005 article since they were perceived to be in worse financial shape than Ford, although it is certainly vital that both of the two remaining American-based automakers survive and prosper.
The majority of the responses were positive and supportive. Of the negative responses, most of the points made were arguments already diffused and disproved as baseless in the article itself. This only reinforced my belief that most Buy American opponents only read what they agree with and conveniently skip over that with which they don’t agree – even as and especially when their positions are being invalidated.
Some foreign car lovers proclaimed they would only start to buy American when GM decided to build high-quality cars. Setting aside for a minute the fact that various quality surveys prove they already do, the point I had made already was this: Since GM is saddled with at least a $1,000 per automobile cost disadvantage to pay for honorable obligations like pensions and health care for thousands of Americans, that is why they have at least $1,000 less (per automobile) to spend on snazzier dashboards and other creature comforts.
These Buy American bashers are decidedly off base in claiming GM and Ford don’t make cars Americans want since both companies have higher market share than their closest foreign rival. General Motors, for instance, has over twice the market share in the U.S. compared to Toyota. GM’s problem is not necessarily low market share (although a return to the higher market shares of the past would surely be beneficial) but it is the lower profit margins they are able to generate in light of their honorable obligations to their current and former workers and their dependents.
The media hasn’t always been forthcoming with the facts, but certain news anchors do expose the truth. On “Your World with Neil Cavuto,” a program on which this author has appeared five times, Neil Cavuto promptly corrected one of his frequent guests who just couldn’t resist trashing American automakers in knee-jerk fashion. When Mr. Cavuto asked Tom Adkins of www.commonconservative.com why GM and Ford were being downgraded to junk status, Mr. Adkins spewed the typical and tired old venom proclaiming it was because American car makers only made American junk. Kudos to Neil Cavuto for pointing out some of the quality and efficiency gains American automakers have made over the years in response to such garbage.
Other tired refrains Buy American haters use include the accusation that GM and Ford have misguided objectives and have repeatedly missed the boat by concentrating on more-profitable larger vehicles rather than smaller, more-efficient ones. This argument is easily diffused by the fact that GM and Ford have merely been responding to broad consumer demand for these larger vehicles. Even as gas prices climbed into the $2 per gallon range in early 2005, polls taken around that time show that a majority of American consumers remained undeterred when it came to buying bigger and badder American trucks and SUVs. The Ford F-150, for instance, has been the number one selling truck for several years. Surely even Buy American opponents (usually laissez-faire advocates) recognize and subscribe to the law of supply and demand. Are these people really suggesting that Ford not concentrate on this obvious cash cow?
The anti-Buy American argument also conveniently ignores the fact that foreign-based automakers have been aggressively accelerating their entry into the large vehicle market to compete with American dominance in this area. The 2006 Lexus 470 Luxury SUV, for instance, boasts of 275 horsepower – a full 40 hp increase over the 2005 model – not to mention 12 ft. lbs. extra torque to boot. And of course no one can deny the various entries of foreign automakers in the big truck and SUV markets such as the Nissan Armada, Nissan Titan, Toyota Sequoia, Toyota Tundra and Honda Ridgeline, just to name a few. It smacks of hypocrisy to deride Ford and GM for making large American vehicles when all foreign-based automakers are scrambling to introduce even bigger models in an attempt to out-muscle them.
Ironically, within days of the “In Defense of General Motors” article, the Wall Street Journal ran a “Drive Buys” column featuring the Nissan Xterra comparing it to four other midsize SUVs. The Chevrolet Equinox was not only the only American vehicle in the comparison (no Ford product was profiled) but it was also the least expensive and had the best mileage rating. Go figure.
The point here is that when it comes to analyzing the automotive industry, hypocrisy often reigns. It would be different if Buy American nay-sayers had rhetoric to offer that lined up with the facts, but they normally do not. Most are stuck in the 70s and their questionable belief (also disproved in the “In Defense of General Motors” article) that American cars were inferior then and by default continue to be today.
One “Reader’s Report” submission to Business Week’s May 30, 2005 issue chided GM for not investing their profits wisely enough, claiming they could have bought Honda outright for 75% the money they spent creating Saturn. Such Monday morning quarterbacking overlooks the fact that Japan rarely allows foreign-based companies a majority ownership in their home-based companies. GM does own 49% of Isuzu, who recently announced an annual 9.7% net rise in profit ending March 31, 2005. The Business Week letter-writer also pointed out that one Saturn SUV is powered by a Honda engine as proof GM has gone astray in their strategies. I wonder if he knows that some BMWs use GM-built transmissions. Let’s call it a draw then, shall we?
Finally and perhaps more-importantly, many readers of the original article in defense of the U.S. auto industry cited that it was good to see a non-GM employee stick up for GM. It might be different of course if I had worked on the factory floor of one of the several dozen Ford or GM domestic plants, but I don’t. I defend American auto interests because it is in the best interest of America to do so. And even though the anti-Buy American crowd is aggressively undermining American prosperity with hypocritical and baseless views, those of us who stand for what is right for America deserve a prosperous country and should work hard to create that prosperity. That is what should keep us motivated to fight the good fight. We’re all in this together, so let’s make it work for all of us – together.
Roger Simmermaker, Author
How Americans Can Buy American
www.howtobuyamerican.com
#106
06-13-2005, 08:25 PM
Why buy American
In 1997, the state of Alabama granted huge subsidies to Mercedes in exchange for a plant that would employ 1,500 people. $300 million in tax breaks, $253 million in direct incentives, $60 million in Alabama taxpayer money to send fellow Alabamans to Germany for training, and a promise to buy 2,500 of the new Mercedes SUV’s at $30,000 each. Based on just the initial $300 million grant alone, those 1,500 jobs will cost Alabama taxpayers $200,000 per job.
In 1987, Toyota constructed an auto plant on part of the 1,500 acres of free land given to them in Georgetown, Kentucky. The auto plant was built by a Japanese steel company using Japanese steel. The U.S. government granted a “special trade zone” so that Toyota could import auto parts from Japan duty-free. Financing was handled by Mitsui Bank of Japan. Total federal and state grants and incentives exceeded $100 million.
Tennessee gave Nissan $11,000 per job for their Smyrna plant built in 1980. South Carolina coughed up $79,000 per job to convince Germany’s BMW to build their plant in Spartanburg in 1992.
In 1987, Toyota constructed an auto plant on part of the 1,500 acres of free land given to them in Georgetown, Kentucky. The auto plant was built by a Japanese steel company using Japanese steel. The U.S. government granted a “special trade zone” so that Toyota could import auto parts from Japan duty-free. Financing was handled by Mitsui Bank of Japan. Total federal and state grants and incentives exceeded $100 million.
Tennessee gave Nissan $11,000 per job for their Smyrna plant built in 1980. South Carolina coughed up $79,000 per job to convince Germany’s BMW to build their plant in Spartanburg in 1992.
#107
06-13-2005, 10:55 PM
#108
06-13-2005, 11:16 PM
Why buy American
Originally posted by: sp600towtruck
DeeDawg,
I knew about those occurances, but I didn't know the specifics. Nice post. Our government can be REALLY stupid.
DeeDawg,
I knew about those occurances, but I didn't know the specifics. Nice post. Our government can be REALLY stupid.
The Nissan plant in Smyrna TN has had similar benefits to that state.
#109
06-13-2005, 11:48 PM
Why buy American
Originally posted by: sp600towtruck
DeeDawg,
I knew about those occurances, but I didn't know the specifics. Nice post. Our government can be REALLY stupid.
DeeDawg,
I knew about those occurances, but I didn't know the specifics. Nice post. Our government can be REALLY stupid.
#110
06-14-2005, 01:58 AM
Why buy American
Buying American supports the American dream. You'll never get rich, or even close, on the money you save buying foreign stuff. Unless of course you own the company that sells it. And the employees, well they should just be happy they even have a job.... just like the ones in China, or Japan, or maybe even right in your own.....