22nd Sep 2011, 10:59

But... then again Chrysler is now over 50% owned by an Italian company. And I'm sorry, but Toyota, Nissan, and Honda still build a better product than any of the big three.

22nd Sep 2011, 17:22

It's hard to get past the dis-information tactics used by Japanese car companies. Yes, a few U.S. citizens work for them (1 in roughly 10 auto workers actually). The companies are foreign-owned, don't pay U.S. taxes and have their headquarters outside the U.S. This certainly does matter. For every U.S. citizen you help by buying a Honda or Toyota, you hurt 9 U.S. citizens. This fact always seems to fall on deaf ears. It is as if we are so mathematically challenged that we think 1 is equal to 9. No citing of facts seems to ever get through to people making the "buying Japanese cars doesn't hurt the U.S." argument.

Ford is adding 7000 U.S. jobs. GM is re-opening their Spring Hill, Tennessee plant and will employ another 2000 U.S. citizens. In addition, that will create approximately 10 jobs in related sectors for each one of the auto workers jobs, such as housing, food services, etc.

Another issue is getting a more reliable car. In looking through the latest edition of Consumer Reports (which I give little real credence to, but import owners seem to) Ford ranks just as high or higher in reliability than Japanese cars, so why send money to Japan for a car that is clearly no better?

23rd Sep 2011, 12:45

I have yet to see any "Tactics" being used by Japanese car companies. We've been through this whole tired argument that "Buying an American car helps 10 out of 10 Americans because somehow we ALL must in some way be tied to the auto industry?"

Either way, nobody buys that argument, a person working in the US for Toyota is just that - an employee, with a job, paying their taxes, buying a product that's made out of globally designed and manufactured components. Simple as that. There is no argument here because there isn't one to be made, since there's no difference between this worker and anyone else in the US workforce. We all have jobs. Some industries and companies are huge. Others are tiny with just a handful of people. They all add up as a whole. Simple as that. If someone works at a company with only 5 people making up less than .000000000000001% of the economy, does that person's job not count? Of course not.

I look forward to buying my next Toyota car or truck.

23rd Sep 2011, 17:52

Good point, but two can play the same game, because there are anti-domestic folks who go on Ford and GM posts, and try to put down domestics and the people who own them, even if the post is a good experience.

24th Sep 2011, 09:49

My car is domestic and built in Bowling Green Ky. I do not even need to have an argument. If I drove an import, I would not try to say it was a domestic. Just say what it is. It is your wallet, just buy what it really is and drive it.

24th Sep 2011, 17:33

As always, no one gets it. Helping 9 American workers is less important than helping 1 American worker. Please explain this math. Is this what is meant by the "new" math??

25th Sep 2011, 11:00

The only common element is people have been burned on here, and now buy domestics or imports. I had major issues with my recent imports. So I am off Honda and Toyotas. 2 decades ago I was pro import because of reliability, not political. If you have major drive train issues, you vent and do not buy again. My neighbors, friends and politicians do not buy my cars. I drive new Fords over reliability. It just happens that they are domestics as well. I buy what holds up foremost.

26th Sep 2011, 09:37

Because the "Helping 9 out of 10 American workers" is a useless piece of loose, barely cohesive politically heated statistic. It fails to address the fact that every single American with a job is counted, and if someone happens to buy a car that's made in the US, then by golly American workers were involved.

But in any regards, the last time I looked we don't happen to live in a state-run, planned economy. Those making the argument that we should ONLY ever buy things made in the USA in their entirety (being that most "American" made things are now comprised of foreign and domestic components anyway, makes this virtually impossible) seem to not realize that planned economies do not work, and a healthy economy relies on a steady stream of imports and exports.

Also - if we did have a planned economy where only domestic cars were available for purchase, I can almost guarantee the quality would be crap. Thus not only does an import-export free market economy bring choices and competition, but overall improvement to products as a whole. The improvements Ford and GM have had more recently was mostly due to the stiff competition from Japanese brands that have dominated the top of the quality and reliability reports for decades. So in the end we all win.

Either way, people can and will continue to buy what they want, and that means that an argument that we should only buy "X" product will never hold water.

27th Sep 2011, 10:51

The flaw on these reviews is it's rarely indicated that the reviewer ever says "I bought this vehicle brand new, was the only driver, and it failed with a specific issue".

I have owned multiple new imports, purchased every few years, and drive a lot. My newest ones were the most trouble prone. In all fairness, I once had a new Acura that my teenage son tore the clutch out in one day. If I had driven it, I feel my review would have had different results.

If you have a car you bought with high mileage used to start with, I question how you can accurately review its history. As I just mentioned, a lot of damage can occur in as little as 1 day. I feel if you read many reviews however, same make and model, you can at least pick out trouble prone areas such as sludging from cold spots in the block, braking, air bags, transmissions etc. to steer clear at least of specific years.