[quote=Rt.66]It’s about FAIR trade. We have been giving our jobs to counties that practice outright protectionism for decades. Why? Japan has ALWAYS carefully balanced its trade to “protect” its manufacturing base. Japan has been one of the richest countries in the world with good jobs, low unemployment and high wages all without even the tiniest natural resource.
How do they do it? They keep trade fair (or rather, tilted to be way more fair for Japan and its workers). Why can’t we do that?
Not practicing an aggressive trade balance policy is asking/begging the rest of the world to play fair. Not gonna happen, ever.
4) Don’t have the horrible disease GM suffers from called “legacy costs” consisting of providing tens (hundreds?) of thousands of Americans with good pensions and healthcare (oh God the horror!).
You will pay for the failed pensions and healthcare benefitsn thru higher taxes. Who did you think was going to pay, the Gov.? All jobs will suffer some form of wage deflation as hundreds of thousands get thrown onto the job market, so even though you may not see it, you will be paid less in the future because of what is happening right now. IF….if, you still have a job.
Sure we can’t go back in time and save the US home electronics industry or textile industry, but we might have another shot at saving the US auto industry WHICH IS WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT.
[/quote]
Rt.66: I excised a good chunk of what you wrote as I want to respond to your points about.
First off, let me say this: My dad worked for Ford Aerospace for a good amount of his 35+ years in the aerospace industry (he also worked for Jet Propulsion Labs in Pasadena and McDonnell-Douglas), so I have experience with Ford and can personally attest to the ups and downs of the American auto industry (through Ford vehicles) from the mid-1970s to the present.
Put bluntly, Ford cars from the mid-1970s to the mid-1980s were junk. Period. Poorly designed, poorly built and the workers could care less, as evidenced by the lack of workmanship and detail.
Before you go on and on about Japanese and Korean protectionism (and, yes, it certainly DOES exist and for the benefit of Japanese and Korean workers), GM was no different in terms of manipulating the US government for it’s own ends. GM’s maneuverings around the CAFE standards are a good example of this.
As to the “good” pensions and healthcare programs that GM underwrote: These were a huge mistake and a result of GM’s caving in to the AFL-CIO and UAW during the “go-go” days of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, when GM controlled 50% market share and could afford (or so they thought) such largesse. As it turns out, they couldn’t and that’s a large part of why GM finds itself in the mess it’s in, along with questionable purchases, such as Hughes and EDS.
I note that you’re quoting from union sources, like AFL-CIO, in order to buttress your claims. I have a historical sense of respect for unionization and what that’s meant for the American worker, but we’re long since removed from the days of strike breaking and Matewan. The unions are largely responsible for their part in undermining the competitiveness of the very organizations their members worked for and management was just as purblind in their inability to recognize the changing nature of the automotive world and react accordingly.
GM became a success due to economies of scale and ultimately failed for the same reason: It lacked the agility to compete because of it’s cumbersome size and unresponsive management structure. To lay blame for this fiasco solely at the feet of competing countries is to avoid not only responsibility but the truth of why it happened and to help prevent it from happening again.
If you’re going to be honest about this, be honest about this and present all of the facts, not just those that your support your end of the argument. Oh, and my family only drives American (Ford) and always has, so let me blunt your riposte before it even comes.
