Lovely brilliant Rant:) I got what I wanted and more to boot!! Couple things..first was under the impression that there were a few plants in US and Mexico, but the biggest flow of imports still arrive through ports in Cali. My comment about reverse-engineering was just smack talk deriding their design capabilities. I was friends with an engineer in CA that worked for GMC for 25 years designing combustion babies and he had much good to say of the workforce there and lots bad about management. Do you think with deflated wages and a stripped down, bankrupt big three can continue to function or will they be assimilated by Toyo and Honda?
Nice point about Nadar. I thought the consumer had more power but we can only buy what they offer - you are right about that...I have never liked SUV monsters anyway and I hope they dissappear. Maybe the metal will be recyclable! The reason this has been big in my family is that my Dad is a master machinist and incredibly mechanically inclined individual and I grew up under his feet in his garage:) Not a new think for me either:) I hope more people write in on this subject and I will have more later as well ...as it occurs... On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 11:27 AM, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > "Question is: should we upset the current inport/export fracas and > force American Producers to sell the technology they possess?" – CB > > I'll start out with an analysis of the assumptions included within > your initial question. > ASSUMPTIONS; > 1. 'We' CAN upset [whatever this means] the current inport/export > situation > 2. The 'situation' is based on inport/export. > 3. The situation is a 'fracas'. > 4. 'We' CAN force 'American Producers' to sell anything. > 5. Automobile producers are 'American'. > 6. 'We' SHOULD, IF we could force 'em. > 7. There exists technology not currently in use. > 8. Such technology might be purchased if available in the US. > > First, I don't think that 'we' can do much when it comes to > corporations other than purchase or sell stock. At least, not as the > laws are currently structured. > IF by 'we' you mean the US legislature, clearly 'they' are bought and > paid for. Otherwise, for both the auto industry and banking industry > there would be a clear demand for a reasonable return on the > investment of at minimum $1,000,000,000,000.00. There has been none. I > sat next to a banker at a conference the other day who was in hospital > when the bailout was presented. This gave him the time and opportunity > to read the 107 page document. He said that it contained exactly what > the bankers did…the opportunity to buy/sell other banks and it did not > contain what the news agencies were saying it did. I haven't read it > so, will suggest others do so if interested. Also, for both banking > and the auto industry, I never heard the 'N' word come up. Did you? In > lieu of a contractual guarantee of a reasonable return on the > investment in both industries, clearly to nationalize them was a real > option at the time. No one even discussed this. It has happened all > over the world, even here in the US over time. And, this was a good > opportunity for it with a possible preferable result….nada! > Secondly, it hasn't been an inport/export situation for decades. Most > foreign automakers have been invited into the US and have plants all > over the place. The notion of tariffs started to die after the civil > war. Until that time, the entire revenue of the US government was from > tariffs. Until WWI the revenue was about 2/3s tariffs. From WWI until > WWII it was about 1/3rd. Today it has been reduced to almost nothing. > As globalization and multinationals have replaced countries, tariffs > have been seen, by the corporations, as nothing but impediments to > profit and something to abhor. So much for 'We the people…'! > Regardless, most "foreign" cars on the road here today were built > mostly in the US or Canada. And, due to clean air standards, we keep > affordable cars out, like India's Tata, a $2,000 car with 50mph or > better. > I see no 'fracas' at all. I see an outmoded industry (GM etc.) that > has for decades ignored the long term views of business that other > countries and corporations have been taking. They focused on the 'now'… > profit today and merely ignored the future. Of course, some of this is > caused by US code when it comes to the legal and fiduciary > responsibility of corporations. Their allegiance is only to the stock > holders (and CEOs) and care not a whit for anyone else. > So, UNLESS we nationalize the corporations, 'we' will not be able to > force them to do anything. The day for consumer influence died long > ago. This is one reason Ralph Nader decided to switch to politics > rather than consumer advocacy. This is in his own words. There was a > point in time when lobbyists were deregulated to the point where they > held (hold) more power than 'We the people.', do. > A lot would have to change to reverse this and after giving so much > money away without any guarantee at all of anything in return it is > too late to use what leverage was available to congress a while back. > The US had successful cars that ran on steam more than a century ago. > There used to be an 'interurban' network of electric trains going into > and out of all major cities that was clean and successful. That is > until GM and the oil companies started to influence local governments > into purchasing busses and the result today is obvious. 'We' had the > electric car that was loved and the 'owners' of it shredded them ALL! > Oh, yes, and as to 'ownership' of technology, that is another bugbear. > Public money (tax money) is used for the majority of research and > advancements in the US, mostly within higher institutions of learning. > Today, there is no return on that investment either. Corporations take > the advances and claim their rights to ownership of them. Those who > originally funded the research, you and me, are not given any sort of > rebate nor 'deal' of any kind when we then have to purchase that which > we already paid to develop. Clearly capitalism has never worked for > the people. We learned this about communism a while back now we have > to learn it about that which owns our entire media. A difficult > proposition at best. > So, for your first sentence, I find little hope. > And, I don't understand the notion of reverse engineering in this > context at all. US companies have known how to do it all along. They > have opted for the profit margin rather than anything else over the > last few decades, at least since consumers lost their voices. Yes, we > can buy/not buy cars. Yes, some people buy Hummers. Yes, most cars > purchased today in the US are NOT GM cars. Yes, there is a reason for > this and the reason will NEVER be solved by giving GM public money. > If you haven't figured it out yet, I'm rather radical and adamant > about this. > As to the rest of your rhetorical questions, trade ins, donations, > recycles etc., I think that our land fills will merely continue to > overflow. When it comes to throwing things away, there IS NO "AWAY"! > > "if they cut the pork"???? Even Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio is for the > auto industry bail out! And, he is one of the most progressive and > radical congressmen we have! > > As to any 'myth' about imports, in my eyes at least, I don't care > where a car is made as long as it is practical. This would have to > include being economical to use and green in result. > > Sorry for the rant, but if you think that you have been 'bitching > about this for …years'….I've been ranting about it for decades! > > Oh, and as for the media created 'enemy to US corporations', the US > workers, when carefully examined, this bit of corporate media > propaganda is easily dissolved as being the lie it is. The 'American > auto worker' does not decide which design to produce. They do not set > the prices. They do not determine how 'green' the car is. They do not > set emission standards. They no longer are protected by labor laws nor > have much influence at all when it comes to US laws and congress. Did > anyone at all see the movie "Roger And Me"? > Some of Michael's current thought can be found at: > http://www.michaelmoore.com/ > > Oh, one small thing when it comes to 'unrealistically high average > wage'….perhaps, IF one factors in the wage of the CEOs it is > unrealistic and bloated. Otherwise, even auto workers have a hard time > being able to afford US cars and the associated maintenance. Please > don't drink the Kool-Aid when it comes to the US labor/management > (ownership) battles. The situation was much much worse prior to labor > unions. The history is readily available to study. > > OK, again, sorry for the rant! This is an enormously big button for > me, clearly!!! > > > > > On Nov 23, 7:46 am, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > <<You can rent a ford in Europe that gets 40 mpgs. >> > > > > American auto companies can't produce small cars profitably in the > > US. The unrealistically high average wage rate for the American auto > > worker probably has a lot do with that, but I'm sure there is a lot of > > fat throughout the companies. Although I would love to blame the > > general incompetence of the auto companies, they're probably hamstrung > > by the labor laws. > > > -- gnothe se auton --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
