28th Feb 2013, 13:36

Nobody is arguing for a closed economy, and protectionism is a completely different concept. The word you would be looking for is "isolationism", the economic concept, not the foreign relations concept.

Globalism has done some good things, but it has also hurt the US middle class too. Remember, because corporations can now import workers from places like China and India who will work for less, there is less incentive to hire Americans. This doesn't just apply to cars, it applies to all multi-national corporations as well.

Plus, also remember that under globalism, corporations are now separate entities that have publicly admitted that they have no obligation to solve their home nation's problems in any way. They don't have to answer to a government, and they possess more power than at any other time in past history. So be careful of what you advocate for.

28th Feb 2013, 15:17

Everyone should read the link in comment 11:33. Of course those brainwashed by the "Global Economy" supporters (i.e. foreign-based companies) will try to refute it.

At the present rate the U.S. will become a nation of doctors, lawyers, bankers and fast-food workers in a few years. The current anti-American-industry mindset of so many Americans cannot possibly be in any way beneficial to our country.

And we ARE a "global economy". U.S. companies use many parts that are made in other countries. They also have assembly plants in other countries. To claim that supporting U.S. industry makes us evil "isolationists" is wrong. But the fact (and it is a fact) that buying from American manufacturers helps our economy can't be denied.

I own many items that include parts made by foreign manufacturers. I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is this rather odd idea that supporting U.S. companies is somehow bad.

28th Feb 2013, 17:20

Most of the manufacturing jobs in the US were not lost as a result of foreign competition. Most of those jobs that were lost came from:

A: Automation

B: Outsourcing

Those decisions were made by the automakers themselves. It used to be that you had to have a small army of people manually welding frames and parts together. The same was true with putting together engines, transmissions, and interior components. Now a large percentage of that work is done via robots and machines. Thus far less required workers. Every car maker uses automation, and thus as competitors, all car makers have to do the same.

Outsourcing jobs to other countries was also a decision by the automakers. Millions of jobs were sent to Mexico, Canada, Brazil, and so on. This has been going on for decades and still to this day. Entire cars are in some cases shipped to the US and basically assembled here. Outsourcing was also a decision those same automakers made.

Lastly, a lot of jobs were lost because frankly, the Big Three made some poor decisions in the 70's-90's. First of all, the quality went down the toilet starting in the mid 70's. This has been well-documented, with one of those years having the combined three automakers actually recalling more cars than they actually made. Secondly, they were caught off guard by the oil crisis. Most of the cars the Big Three made were large rear wheel drive cars with V8's. When the Japanese automakers entered the scene, they were suddenly in a position where they made fuel efficient and affordable cars that people later discovered were also very reliable, and hence those brands began building brand loyalty. This was partially due to the dramatic contrast in quality between US and Japanese made cars of the time.

Then in the 90's, the Big Three once more focused on only a certain segment of the vehicle market: Large SUVs and trucks, where they grew to rely very heavily on the sales of those vehicles, while mostly ignoring their car lineups. As a teenager of the 90's, I recall how bad most American mid sized and small cars were. They were afterthoughts with little regard to long term durability.

So we can talk all day long about buying American and so on. But as a US consumer, it isn't my duty nor is it a requirement that I do so. That the Big Three lost ground to various imports is no fault but their own, and why should any company that clearly fails to meet the demands of its consumers be rewarded with my business? I work hard for my money, and I don't buy shoddy products just because they might be American, Japanese, or Chinese.

But luckily for we as consumers, the Big Three have made dramatic improvements over the last few years. I am perfectly happy with the idea of buying some of their products. I say bravo for them making such a drastic and quick turnaround. It's nothing to do with patriotism. It's about the products themselves, which is what the conversation SHOULD be. Not whether it's foreign or domestic. If the Big Three continues to listen to their consumers and build the products people want to buy, then that alone is their best security for success and the better chance that more workers will be hired. This is true for any company, both foreign and domestic.

1st Mar 2013, 12:07

I drove Japanese and German models in the 80s during our thriving period. I could care less what anyone thought, felt I had cachet driving an import. I actually switched over having a low production true foreign car that I had less issues with. I have no issue with spending 40k plus on a car. But I don't want to be losing a trans and having engine woes with low mileage cars.

Now the economy is worse, I killed two birds with one stone. I have a higher quality domestic and I have a corporation based in America as per the earlier link. Better late than never. I admit I never cared before; it's my wallet and tough luck for everyone else. Maybe I have gotten a bit wiser since.

1st Mar 2013, 17:13

I just had lunch with one of my fellow mechanics and car enthusiasts. We were discussing recent races and performance tests we had watched. One was an acceleration and road course race between a domestic station wagon and a $250,000 Ferrari. The Cadillac station wagon totally blew the Ferrari away and at one-third the price.

Another test involved the new Boss 302 Mustang, and again, a $250,000 Ferrari. The Mustang chewed the Ferrari up and spit it out, besting it in both acceleration and a road course.

Then there was the "torture test" of Ford's new F-150. The truck was used to haul logs out of a logging site, then driven for hours around a race track at over 100 miles per hour pulling a trailer with two Fusions on it. After that, the engine was removed and placed in a Baja racing truck and run in a race. It WON. And this was a totally stock engine with over 100,000 miles on it. After all this, the engine was torn down and checked for wear. There wasn't any.

And those "horrible" cars of the 70's? We had one of those. It was a 1975 Ford Granada with the 200 six and an automatic. It really was awful. After only 18 years and a mere 325,000 miles, that unreliable piece of crap was already ready to be traded. And in those 18 years it had cost us a whopping $500 in repairs. Dang. We should have gotten at least 500,000 miles out of it.

We also got stuck with one of those "poorly built, crappy" cars of the 90's. It was a 1990 Dodge Omni. What a piece of crap. After only 240,000 miles, the crappy thing had been through two sets of brake pads, two timing belts and a heater hose. The darn thing was nickel and diming me to death!!

After all those horrible domestics, I did consider buying an nice, reliable import... for all of ten seconds!!