US auto bailout goes ahead!

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Ohio XB

Here we don't want free trade on a global basis, we want fair trade.

Your country's farming subsidies... fair trade? Ok......

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Ohio XB

1. I would have to agree. You've got such a small market compared to the US and have to have an "island" mentality.

Its nothing to do with 'island' mentality. We know we have finite resources, and use them accordingly. Considering how much the US spend on development, it beggars belief that US cars continually lag the rest of the world in terms of technology.

....from China cheaper than it costs to buy the tool steel to make them here. You can get a pair of these for less than $15 US and they are precision ground to within .0002". In the US you cannot buy and heat treat the steel for that price (even in non-union shops).

How do you compete with that?

For one thing, their steel quality is rubbish.

[Luke Plaizier]

Here in Australia we have what is called an 'award' wage. That is, an employer cannot legally employ you and pay you less than that per hour. You can almost consider it to be a government-led 'Union' regarding pay rate.

However, in developing countries either no such thing exists, or it is set incredibly low. I've long held the belief that [B]for foreign companies to sell products into Australia, they must demonstrate that their employees are being paid in accordance with the Australian 'award' wage.[\B] Instead, however, what happens is that major companies see substantial labour cost benefits by moving off-shore into countries where this award wage doesn't exist.

Does the US have a similar award-wage system?

The Australian government is on a mission to establish Free Trade Agreements with many Asia-Pacific countries. We have one such semi-agreement with the US. These agreements reduce tariffs to zero on a range of products. They are pushing to get a China FTA in place.

Where trade is not covered by an FTA, Australia has a general 10% car import tariff that will be reduced to 5% in a few years, with a goal of reducing that to zero in the long run. Australia has perhaps THE most competitive market place in the world when it comes to cars as we are already considered to have the lowest import tariff of any country in the local region. The fact that we can do that AND sustain a local manufacturing base is impressive - but it is getting precarious. There is too much competition at the moment.

I'd be curious to know what the tariff is in the US right now for importing cars. I'd suggest that with the AUS/US FTA in place that it would currently be negligible.

But funny things keep happening on the way to an FTA. The power of the sugar growers in the US, for example, has meant that Australia can't export sugar to the US without a tariff - and we have some major sugar cane growers in the hotter regions - northern NSW and QLD - who were pushing hard for access to the US market. Our FTA with Thailand was settled, and almost immediately Thailand put an extra tax on cars over some capacity - 3 Litres or something - meaning that every car made in Australia would be subjected to an even higher 'non tariff' tax that effectively blocked our entry to that market. Meanwhile Toyota have been building and importing pickups from Thailand and walking away with some major profits. So much so that their Pickups have even hit the top spot on monthly sales here a couple of times. Australia is not guilt-free either. We subject cars over $57kAUD to a 'Luxury Car Tax' unless they can demonstrate a fuel consumption of 7L/100km or less. The European Union are up in arms over this, since hardly any cars made in the EU are sold under this threshold, and have lodged official complaints to the WTO about Australias non-tariff trade barriers.

We've had a few stabs at selling cars to the US. But each time is fraught with controversy. Our first attempt was the little Mercury Capri that Jac Nasser pushed through, based off a Mazda at the time (and not all that good ruth be told). News reports here told of how when it was built, shipped and sold in the US, it would cost less to buy there than it to buy here. Now in an economies-of-scale world being able to sell loads of them would have made a difference, but once again the UAW were reported as limiting total sales to some 18,000 units a year, which is happening now with GM and the Pontiac GTO/G8.

When it's all said and done, I like how the very nature of capitalism is funnelling money into poorer natons to bring their quality of life up to the same standard as the rest of the developed world. When things are at equilibrium, we'll once again be competive against them. The goals of the WTO are to effect this very scenario. But I think some stabilisation is required, otherwise there won't be an equilibrium, there'll just be a incessant cycling of world power based on the cost of their labour force.

Interesting thought isn't it.


Lukeyson

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by b0son

Your country's farming subsidies... fair trade? Ok......

There are fruits and vegetables in our grocery stores from all over the world. I would have to say that Mexican and Central/South American (Venezuela, etc.) vegetables out number American grown vegetables, so I don't think anyone is at a loss in this industry. American farmers are still having a hard time competing. Again, laborers in those countries are getting paid $1.50 per hour, and people in the US get paid more what the work is worth.

If you are proud to race to the bottom in wages, especially after making the sacrifice to obtain a doctorate degree, then by all means, good luck in your endeavors in achieving poverty. I am sure who ever you work for will be very pleased.


Steve

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by George1861

Ford reportedly lined up enough financing a year or so back to make it through '09. They had at least one plant in Japan, but it got bombed in WWII. It was reported during the Olympics that some Chinese businessmen were closing factories in China & moving them to Vietnam to get cheaper labor!

I read that report too. Vietnam is China's Mexico. Just as American businesses moved to Mexico after NAFTA was approved Chinese businesses are moving to Vietnam since wages in China are now $1 per hour and increasing.

2 - 3 years after American companies started moving to Mexico they then relocated to China for the even cheaper labor. Mexicans making $1.50 per hour at the time were just costing the company too much. When they moved to China the labor was 65 cents (USD) an hour. Also the emissions regulations were non-existant.



Steve

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by b0son

Its nothing to do with 'island' mentality. We know we have finite resources, and use them accordingly. Considering how much the US spend on development, it beggars belief that US cars continually lag the rest of the world in terms of technology.

I'm sorry. "Island mentality" is am American phrase that means exactly what you pointed out. Finite resources so everything is used to the utmost of efficiency.

as far as US cars lagging behind the rest of the world in technology, take a look at any of Ford's new cars and the cars coming out. Look into SYNC, Cross Traffic Alert system to warn you of oncoming vehicles as you back out of a parking space, Travel Link, Work Solutions office system for F-150, Collision Avoidance system, and a myriad of other innovations.

Originally Posted by b0son

For one thing, their steel quality is rubbish.

Yup, their metallurgy is not up to ASI standards, but you can still get 52 rockwell C 1-2-3 blocks at .0002" percision for $12.50 USD.

Personally, I machined my own out of O6, heat treated them myself to 58 RC.



Steve

[Ohio XB]

When it's all said and done, I like how the very nature of capitalism is funnelling money into poorer natons to bring their quality of life up to the same standard as the rest of the developed world. When things are at equilibrium, we'll once again be competive against them. The goals of the WTO are to effect this very scenario. But I think some stabilisation is required, otherwise there won't be an equilibrium, there'll just be a incessant cycling of world power based on the cost of their labour force.

Luke Plaizier, nice post. I want to address this quote first.


Speaking from experience with NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) with Canada and Mexico, a stipulation of the agreement was that wages in Mexico would increase as well as working standards (safety) and emissions standards. The agreement was touted by politicians and big business as a great thing for Mexico's work force and as a result the workers would be able to afford American goods because of their increased wages and American imports would increase.

That was the ploy.

American emissions standards for factories have never been implemented in Mexico. As a result American companies flocked there to build cheaper factories with little or no emissions equipment and cheap labor. More Mexicans were impoverished as they relocated to the cities for these new factory jobs only to find that they were not paying anymore than before. Cardboard and wooden communities began to spring up as the citizens could not afford real housing.

The free trade agreements between developed countries and third world countries has nothing to do with raising the wages and standard of living in the third world countries, it has everything to do with bring down the wages in the developed countries. This has been what happens with American free trade agreements with these companies.

What you hear is "Hey, if you don't take a wage cut we will move to Mexico or China. We pay you $11 per hour, they will do your job for $1 per hour."

So if you don't take a wage cut to take you down to the level of poverty your job will be gone all together.

This has happend countless times, even at very successful businesses. Zenith was the last American television maker in the US in the 1990's. Two years after NAFTA was signed Zenith had their most profitable year on record while building their television sets in the southern US. They made more money this specific year than at any other time in their company's history. Did they give their workers a bonus? Did they have a party for the workers? How about a pat on the back? No........they announced they were moving production to Mexico. Even though they made more money than at any other time in their history, that was not enough. They moved to Mexico where they could pay people $1.50 per hour to build a TV set.


Here's an article about a book that explains the devastating effect that NAFTA has had on just one border town in Mexico...

http://www.utwatch.org/archives/work...o3_juarez.html

The book’s pictures are indeed impressive, but it has much more to offer. In a very short 135 pages, the book explains why and how NAFTA has such devastating effects. The introduction, by Noam Chomsky, contributes significantly to developing this context. Bowden furnishes a lot of significant data: While the cost of living in Juarez is 85–90 percent of that in the United States, the typical salary for women factory workers is $US4.50 per day. In Juarez, where this salary is 160 pesos per week, bus fare is 48 pesos per week. But he makes these statistics come alive with glimpses of individual citizens in the city, often the stories of the people in the photographs.

Juarez shows all the effects of the NAFTA’s exploitation of Mexico. The standard of living for working people in Mexico has dropped by a third over the past 10 years. Mexico is exporting some of these problems to the United States with emigration, drugs and crime.


This has been a pretty rampant experience all across Mexico but particularly along the border where shipping to the US is cheaper since the goods do not have to be trucked across Mexico.

Even Ford workers in Mexico took a 50% pay cut in 2007. They were told that they needed to compete with the Chinese. They went from $2.50 USD per hour down to $1.25 USD per hour.

How many times do you hear the word "compete" now? In the US you hear it all the time. The companies use it to get the workers to accept wages and working conditions that in the past have been flatly rejected or were considered unfair labor practices. This couldn't be done before NAFTA and other trade agreements that make it easy for American companies to move production to third world countries where wages are peanuts.



So be very very careful when Australia talks about Free Trade Agreements with countries that pay their people 1/10 of what Australians get paid. Believe me, no one wants to raise the other country's wages ten times the current rate. That would cut into company profits.


Steve

[Ohio XB]

Here in Australia we have what is called an 'award' wage. That is, an employer cannot legally employ you and pay you less than that per hour. You can almost consider it to be a government-led 'Union' regarding pay rate.

However, in developing countries either no such thing exists, or it is set incredibly low. I've long held the belief that [B]for foreign companies to sell products into Australia, they must demonstrate that their employees are being paid in accordance with the Australian 'award' wage.[\B] Instead, however, what happens is that major companies see substantial labour cost benefits by moving off-shore into countries where this award wage doesn't exist.

Does the US have a similar award-wage system?

We have something called "minimum wage" which is a wage that anyone with a job must be paid at least this minum amount. States also set their own minimum wage that supercedes the Federal wage if the State wage is higher.


As far as other countries needing to have a comparable wage to import their goods here...........Hahahahahahaaa!!!! No. As a matter of fact, most imports to the US come from China where the wage is 70 cents USD to about $1.25 USD for the top wage earners.


But don't worry. The free trade agreements will increase their wages.....the government said so........just like in Mexico where wages now are exactly what they were in 1996 with no adjustment for inflation.



Steve

[Ohio XB]

The Australian government is on a mission to establish Free Trade Agreements with many Asia-Pacific countries. We have one such semi-agreement with the US. These agreements reduce tariffs to zero on a range of products. They are pushing to get a China FTA in place.

When that happens it will be a huge detriment to Australia. Just like with the US (and Australia has a much closer proximity to China) your market will be flooded with very cheap products and your production companies will move their facilities to China. Then you will be told that your country is moving to a "Service Based Economy" because you will not be manufacturing anywhere as much as before since the companies moved to China where wages are $1 USD per hour, or perhaps they will move to Vietnam. So now the labor force needs to adapt to service type occupations......nursing, landscaping, massage therapy, hair stylist, anything where nobody is actually making something.

This is of course unless you want to take a drastic wage cut in order to be "competitive" with the Chinese.


This is exactly how it has gone in the US. The high price of oil this past July made shipping from China expensive and the 75 - 100% increase in wages (to just $1.25) is also much higher than it used to be, so companies are looking at Vietnam, Bangledesh (already a lot of clothes made there sold here), and other third world countries were labor is cheaper than in China.


Steve

[Ohio XB]

I'd be curious to know what the tariff is in the US right now for importing cars. I'd suggest that with the AUS/US FTA in place that it would currently be negligible.

Sorry, I don't know what the tarrif is at the moment. I know American cars get about $6,000 USD or more tacked onto them when they go to Japan. All I can do is look around the internet to find what US excise tax is on imported cars.


Steve

[Ohio XB]

....but once again the UAW were reported as limiting total sales to some 18,000 units a year, which is happening now with GM and the Pontiac GTO/G8.

First, please let me dispell the myth about the GTO/G8. The GTO was poorly received by the public here for a couple reasons.

First, and nothing against Australia, but the GTO was an American Icon. For an American Icon to not be built in the US leaves a bad taste in people's mouths.

Second, it had bland styling and was written up as such in many reviews. This notion was so strongly held that a new hood was designed with scoops and used on the car the following year. This was still not enough to thrill buyers even with the corvette engine in the car. If Americans don't like the way a car looks they will not take it for a test drive to see how well it performs.


As for the G8.....there are tens of thousand of them sitting at shipping yards because they are not leaving dealer's lots. Sales of the G8 have been sluggish and the dive in the economy another hit on sales of the car. This doesn't have a thing to do with the UAW, it is purely a lack of sales. The vehicle is being discontinued as soon as current import comittments are met.


From an article dated December 2, 2008....

http://www.leftlanenews.com/slow-sal...8s-future.html

Since the Pontiac G8 was launched in the U.S. market for the 2008 model year, the re-badged Holden Commodore has only found a home with 13,000 buyers. More than 11,000 more unsold G8s remain in Pontiac’s inventory, totaling a 283 day’s supply — the third worst of any GM nameplate, according to Automotive News.

Although the G8’s performance in the U.S. is disappointing, it’s not exactly the biggest surprise. Pontiac sold the Holden-made GTO in the U.S. from 2004 to 2005, but the reborn Goat was forced back out of the market due to dismal sales.




Again, this has to do with how the cars were received by the public. It has nothing to do with the UAW having any power to restrict imports.


Likewise, the Capri was not well received either. I don't even remember ever seeing a commercial for it on television.


Steve

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by Ohio XB

First, please let me dispell the myth about the GTO/G8. The GTO was poorly received by the public here for a couple reasons.

First, and nothing against Australia, but the GTO was an American Icon. For an American Icon to not be built in the US leaves a bad taste in people's mouths.

Second, it had bland styling and was written up as such in many reviews. This notion was so strongly held that a new hood was designed with scoops and used on the car the following year. This was still not enough to thrill buyers even with the corvette engine in the car. If Americans don't like the way a car looks they will not take it for a test drive to see how well it performs.


As for the G8.....there are tens of thousand of them sitting at shipping yards because they are not leaving dealer's lots. Sales of the G8 have been sluggish and the dive in the economy another hit on sales of the car. This doesn't have a thing to do with the UAW, it is purely a lack of sales. The vehicle is being discontinued as soon as current import comittments are met.


From an article dated December 2, 2008....

http://www.leftlanenews.com/slow-sal...8s-future.html

Since the Pontiac G8 was launched in the U.S. market for the 2008 model year, the re-badged Holden Commodore has only found a home with 13,000 buyers. More than 11,000 more unsold G8s remain in Pontiac’s inventory, totaling a 283 day’s supply — the third worst of any GM nameplate, according to Automotive News.

Although the G8’s performance in the U.S. is disappointing, it’s not exactly the biggest surprise. Pontiac sold the Holden-made GTO in the U.S. from 2004 to 2005, but the reborn Goat was forced back out of the market due to dismal sales.




Again, this has to do with how the cars were received by the public. It has nothing to do with the UAW having any power to restrict imports.


Likewise, the Capri was not well received either. I don't even remember ever seeing a commercial for it on television.


Steve

Steve,

The G8 isn't just poorly received in your country, it was poorly received in Australia too. There was a lot of hype leading to the release of 2 a door Commodore / Monaro back in 2002, mainly due to the media's excitement of the revival of this 'iconic' nameplate.

Once the hype died down the sales numbers couldn't support the business case for the vehicle and it subsequently died in '06. Likewise, the W427 project has fallen short of it's sales predictions; again a hyped up vehicle by HSV which the majority of buyers didn't want.

Good reading your posts. I'd love for you to send me a new Super Duty F Truck!!!

[Luke Plaizier]

Yes, I'm aware that the GTO wasn't a huge seller, but then at a production cap of 18,000 a year, it didn't do too bad to sell around 41,000 over the 3 years it was on sale. News on the success or otherwise of G8 is sparse, but uniformly negative.

You know, most of what I hear about the UAW is from the australian media. It would be good to take them to task if they've just been pulling the UAW excuse over us all of this time....


Lukeyson

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by TVS Super Pursuit

Steve,

The G8 isn't just poorly received in your country, it was poorly received in Australia too. There was a lot of hype leading to the release of 2 a door Commodore / Monaro back in 2002, mainly due to the media's excitement of the revival of this 'iconic' nameplate.

Once the hype died down the sales numbers couldn't support the business case for the vehicle and it subsequently died in '06. Likewise, the W427 project has fallen short of it's sales predictions; again a hyped up vehicle by HSV which the majority of buyers didn't want.

Good reading your posts. I'd love for you to send me a new Super Duty F Truck!!!

I guess its just more fun to blame the UAW instead?



Hey, you can get a deal on Super Duty's right now! : The turbo diesels are some of the fastest vehicles I've driven.



Steve

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

Yes, I'm aware that the GTO wasn't a huge seller, but then at a production cap of 18,000 a year, it didn't do too bad to sell around 41,000 over the 3 years it was on sale. News on the success or otherwise of G8 is sparse, but uniformly negative.

You know, most of what I hear about the UAW is from the australian media. It would be good to take them to task if they've just been pulling the UAW excuse over us all of this time....


Lukeyson

So far it seems that way. I've been told a number of things I had never heard of before. I am in the UAW and I have not been advised by them that they were protecting my job by limiting imports from Australia. Like I said, they do not wield that kind of power. I am still going to see if I can find out anything about this though.


I've agreed with bad aspects of the Union (jobs bank) that have been pointed out here. I try to call them as they are. I am not one of those that believes the union can do no wrong.....I've even told them of actions I do not agree with.


Steve

[Luke Plaizier]

Just a little perspective....

Remember how I mentioned that Holden and Ford were able to justify building new cars based on small volumes?

As of December 2007, here are some statistics for the local manufacturers:

Ford Falcon: 33941
Ford Falcon Ute: 13758
Ford Fairlane: 1703 (discontinued)
Ford Territory: 17290


Holden Commodore: 57307
Holden Caprice: 2611
Holden Statesman: 2143


So the numbers of Pontiac GTO's sold were not an insigficant number to Australia... (I'm not sure if those numbers actually include GTO/G8 sales though to be honest. I think the VFacts numbers are just for Australian registrations.)

http://www./vfacts/2007dec/marque_model.pdf


Lukeyson

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by XRQTR

Election fund - Retirement fund

Kind of the same thing bud, if you actually think that all the money for an election fund actually goes into an election then, well, ok, but just for you

Was meaning that the polis have their money invested in areas that if they go broke the poli's will lose alot of money.

Originally Posted by George1861

It was reported during the Olympics that some Chinese businessmen were closing factories in China & moving them to Vietnam to get cheaper labor!

The living costs in China have jumped up quite a bit so its getting more pricey to make items. SO now Vietnam is considered the new China.

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by Ohio XB

So far it seems that way. I've been told a number of things I had never heard of before. I am in the UAW and I have not been advised by them that they were protecting my job by limiting imports from Australia. Like I said, they do not wield that kind of power. I am still going to see if I can find out anything about this though.


I've agreed with bad aspects of the Union (jobs bank) that have been pointed out here. I try to call them as they are. I am not one of those that believes the union can do no wrong.....I've even told them of actions I do not agree with.


Steve

Really appreciate your time and effort in providing such excellent posts Ohio XB.

What Lukeyson has been saying about the 18,000 car limit has been widely reported here in Australia over the years. This has been in both print and internet mediums.

It would be great to hear from your side.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

Just a little perspective....

Remember how I mentioned that Holden and Ford were able to justify building new cars based on small volumes?

As of December 2007, here are some statistics for the local manufacturers:

Ford Falcon: 33941
Ford Falcon Ute: 13758
Ford Fairlane: 1703 (discontinued)
Ford Territory: 17290


Holden Commodore: 57307
Holden Caprice: 2611
Holden Statesman: 2143


So the numbers of Pontiac GTO's sold were not an insigficant number to Australia... (I'm not sure if those numbers actually include GTO/G8 sales though to be honest. I think the VFacts numbers are just for Australian registrations.)

http://www./vfacts/2007dec/marque_model.pdf


Lukeyson

The G8 numbers were significant, the problem is holden lost money making them.....

[Luke Plaizier]

I see that link was bung.

And no matter what I do I can't fix it. At the front of each url put www_autonews_net_au with the appropriate _ to . substitutions.


Lukeyson

[Gobes32]

The GTO would have helped balance Holden's books in regards to the Monaro development bill. It's just that Holden got locked into a lousy contract and lost money.

[Luke Plaizier]

Has it been reported anywhere that Holden lost money exporting to the US?


Lukeyson

[Gobes32]

Soon enough 4Vman will be along, he is pretty clued up on what they made/lost on the deal. Something to do with the strong dollar kicking Holden in the ****.

[Perana]

Strong dollar and a cheap contract by GM US on price id say

[JerseyVics]

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

Has it been reported anywhere that Holden lost money exporting to the US?


Lukeyson

are people actually buying the G8 GT? I thought the buzz wore off quickly...

[ZC001]

Originally Posted by Ohio XB

...

I remember in Japan when Ford would export Taurus' to them there was an additional $6,000 slapped on them as an excise tax. This was back in the early 1990's. Their cars get an excise tax slapped on them when they bring them here but it isn't that much. I think we should charge whatever they charge.

Likewise, how many Japanese manufacturing plants (just autos) are there in the US? 5? 10? How many US auto manufacturing plants are there in Japan?

Zero.

Yeah, free trade.

Here we don't want free trade on a global basis, we want fair trade. What's good for one is good for the other. That way each country trades under the same rules.

On top of that how is a worker that earns $20 an hour supposed to compete with another that earns $1 per hour and/or lives in a depressed society as a nation?


Steve

Steve,

You compare Japanese plants located in the US v. zero US company plants in Japan as evidence of free trade not existing. This is misleading.

There is one, and only one reason the Japanese have ANY manufacturing plants in the US at all. US Government regulation &/or union pressure. If the US truly believed in free trade the Japanese would be more than happy to make all those vehicles elsewhere and be able to sell better quality cars to Americans at lower prices. Your government and unions have never allowed this to occur, yet you are expecting exactly the reverse of this to occur - free access for US manufactured vehicles to Japan with no quota and minimal tariff.

The principal of Free trade seems to be a one way street for some.
We constantly see quotas or tariffs being used to limit access to US markets for agricultural products (for feck sake arent we on the same side ?).
Free trade only seems to become an issue for the US when the rest of the world (justifiably) have regulations that set product safety standards that dont allow them to sell a product in some markets - eg: GM crops & products, tainted beef that is considered unsafe in some countries.

Free trade is a noble principal. The problem is it appears to only used as a tool to increase profits, either by driving costs down by importing or to increase turnover by expanding potential market size. Those making the money do not care about anything else.

Cheers,
Darren.

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Really appreciate your time and effort in providing such excellent posts Ohio XB.

What Lukeyson has been saying about the 18,000 car limit has been widely reported here in Australia over the years. This has been in both print and internet mediums.

It would be great to hear from your side.

It would be great to hear from your side.


Frankly, I don't believe that the UAW even knows this is being talked about this way in Australia.



Again, I am glad people here are open to the info I am bringing. Where I can I provide links to articles that the info is based on. Sometimes it is from inside stuff that the public does not have access to. Even then I can only disclose certain things that the company has made public but the press has not publicized.


Steve

[Luke Plaizier]

By the way, you need to update your website into 2008 on the progress on the XA Fairmont Coupe.....


Lukeyson

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by ZC001

Steve,

You compare Japanese plants located in the US v. zero US company plants in Japan as evidence of free trade not existing. This is misleading.

There is one, and only one reason the Japanese have ANY manufacturing plants in the US at all. US Government regulation &/or union pressure. If the US truly believed in free trade the Japanese would be more than happy to make all those vehicles elsewhere and be able to sell better quality cars to Americans at lower prices. Your government and unions have never allowed this to occur, yet you are expecting exactly the reverse of this to occur - free access for US manufactured vehicles to Japan with no quota and minimal tariff.

The principal of Free trade seems to be a one way street for some.
We constantly see quotas or tariffs being used to limit access to US markets for agricultural products (for feck sake arent we on the same side ?).
Free trade only seems to become an issue for the US when the rest of the world (justifiably) have regulations that set product safety standards that dont allow them to sell a product in some markets - eg: GM crops & products, tainted beef that is considered unsafe in some countries.

Free trade is a noble principal. The problem is it appears to only used as a tool to increase profits, either by driving costs down by importing or to increase turnover by expanding potential market size. Those making the money do not care about anything else.

Cheers,
Darren.

Darren, thanks for your insights. I realize I don't always get my thoughts across acurately. I'll try to clarify them.



Your government and unions have never allowed this to occur, yet you are expecting exactly the reverse of this to occur - free access for US manufactured vehicles to Japan with no quota and minimal tariff.


This was not my point at all. The Taurus reference was pointing out that the tariff of US cars into Japan far exceded and currently excedes the tariff on cars coming into the US from Japan. Advantage in trade, Japan.


Japanese manufacturers are allowed to build auto manufacturing plants in the US because of our regulations. Toyota has its solely own plants here, Honda has plants it solely owns here, and others.

There is no GM plant in Japan. There is no Ford plant in Japan. There was before WW II, but not since.

GM has or had 49% ownership in Isuzu Motors Ltd. I don't know if they still do.

There are no US auto maker plants in Japan. It is not because the US auto makers don't want them there. Ford's montra, going back to Henry Ford himself, and the reason Ford is in Australia, "Build it where you sell it."

......as long as it is not Japan. Japan will not allow it.

That is not fair; they build plants here where they don't have an import tariff or trans-Pacific shipping costs on the cars built here, but the US cannot build plants in Japan.

That was what I was trying to point out.



In the free trade agreement ratified this year with Korea the UAW was against it. Why? Because they don't want Korea shipping cars here?

That's not it.

The President of the UAW made this statement before the Congressional and Senate boards in Washington at the hearings for the auto loan assistance request....


In addition, Congress and the Obama administration should insist that the U.S.-Korea free trade agreement must be renegotiated to require that Korea dismantle the non-tariff barriers that have kept its market closed to U.S.-built automotive products, before it is granted any further access to the U.S. market.


He asked that it be renegotiated, not eliminated. He pointed specifically to non-tariff related barriers, not the tarriffs themselves.

While Korean automakers sold nearly 773,000 vehicles in the United States last year, U.S. automakers sold fewer than 9,000 of the 1.2 million cars and trucks bought in South Korea. - Ron Gettelfinger, February 4, 2008
http://benmuse.typepad.com/koreaus_f...ader-call.html

In April of this year he had this to say...

"Look, we are not against trade; we are for fair trade, not free trade," he said."There is nothing wrong with trade, but what are we getting in return?"

Gettelfinger said the trade agreements are not being enforced because worker's rights are not being protected, environmental laws are not being followed and safety rules are also being routinely violated .He said the race to the bottom for the lowest wage is really the goal of the free trade agreements. He also said labor has never been involved in any trade talks.

"They don't want workers to have a voice when they talk about these trade agreements," he sad. "Labor is not at the table trade when these trade agreements are being worked out."


http://liberalmedianot.blogspot.com/...ree-trade.html

It's a good read from the horse's mouth.



Steve

[Ohio XB]

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

By the way, you need to update your website into 2008 on the progress on the XA Fairmont Coupe.....


Lukeyson

Yeah, I know. There hasn't been much progress but worse is that the free website is out of server space. I was going to transfer the site to my server space that I have for my company, I've got plenty, but it won't work that way. I would have to completely redo the site. I don't have that kind of time.

I am going to start another site at that free server and just continue the original site into that.


Steve