26th Feb 2013, 11:33
I remember in college Economics 1 and 2, hearing the following.
http://www.americanreformation.org/policy/BuyAmerican/BuyAmIntro.htm
Hope that answers your import domestic questions yet again.
26th Feb 2013, 15:44
I haven't seen anyone arguing for a "closed economy". What I see are very justifiable comments from people who are insulted by those who regard anything made by American companies as inferior. We constantly see remarks about "crappy" domestic cars and statements such as "domestics break down twice as often", which has never been close to the truth. Even the worst of domestic vehicles has never, at any time, been less than just a few percentage points lower in overall reliability than the best imports.
And so-called "reliability studies" take into account every aspect of a car. Not just the drive train. Items as insignificant as a loose trim piece or a hard to operate stereo system can earn a car a bad rating. Ford shot itself in the foot by making its overly complicated and very expensive SYNC system standard on virtually all its vehicles. Problems with this unnecessary gimmick has caused 99 percent of all Ford's "reliability" complaints.
For decades Buick and Lincoln have traded places with Lexus for the top spot in long-term reliability. And regardless of its showings in so-called "reliability studies", Toyota still remains the recall king, with more vehicles recalled than any car maker in history.
I don't want a "closed economy". My last domestic truck had 20 percent of its parts manufactured by foreign parts suppliers. What I am opposed to is those who openly advocate the destruction of American industries based on myths propagated by foreign companies.
27th Feb 2013, 08:49
Great link! I especially like the Toyota issues that were commented upon. There will always be free trade by the way. Doesn't mean that all have to buy imports either.
27th Feb 2013, 09:53
There is no way the US can exist as even a world power without heavy industry, which we are slowly trading away. Critics are called "economic isolationists" by the government and media, but this is really a planned effort by our leaders to reduce our country into mush. Look up inverted totalitarianism by Sheldon Wolin and democide by Rudolph Rummel, and you'll see what they're trying to build.
27th Feb 2013, 11:33
That link didn't actually address any of the realities of global economics. What it failed to address was that jobs are jobs. I can tell that no matter what I say, the same sort of worn-out argument will come back to claim that all that matters is where the company headquarters are located. That's not true. Again, because when you look at the big picture, what matters is to look at the overall economic funnel.
A: The American middle class is the backbone of the US economy.
B: Those American workers working in those factories making Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans, BMWs, VWs, Hyundais, and Kias are all a part of the middle class.
C: Those same American workers pay the bulk of the taxes, and therefore contribute most to the overall economy.
That's about as simple as it comes. When people make the argument that the money goes overseas to the corporate offices, they're really talking about the money that pays the upper level management and the shareholders. Yes, it's true that those at the top usually get very high wages, as in sometimes wages in the millions. But their total take is a tiny and inconsequential percentage of the overall money the company makes and spends. Any company that manufactures in the US will easily spend many magnitudes MORE money here than what they pay their upper level execs. Besides - all of the foreign companies that do business in the US also have US based executives anyway.
So again - use the "oh no the money goes overseas!" argument all you want. It doesn't mean diddly-squat, and besides and as mentioned many times, we can't possibly have a closed economy. If there are those who want to know what a closed economy is, it's the sort of economy where trade is totally cut off from foreign countries. It's a sort of protectionism. If you look at your history, you'll find that in almost all cases, any country that imposes protective measures to their economies usually suffer the consequence in the form of less innovation, less economic power, and less overall income. If there are those who claim we should ONLY ever buy American, then that's the sort of economy you'd get as a result.
And lastly, where exactly did this weird notion that "Import" car brands intentionally propagated a myth that their products were good? That's really a bizarre assertion, because their reputation didn't come from them suddenly coming to the US in the 60's and claiming to make super reliable cars. That quality was simply bestowed upon them by generations of consumers whom found cars from Toyota, Honda and Datsun/Nissan to be more reliable than the American counterparts of the time. What's more, stop conveniently ignoring the fact that just last week a new long-term reliability report once again showed Toyota as the most reliable brand in the US. If there was some sort of "Myth", then they wouldn't be at the top... would they? Or are the many reliability and quality reports also in on some strange conspiracy too?
25th Feb 2013, 15:53
Making a counterargument with totally vague and generic claims that "Imports are bad" doesn't really make a point, because that sort of statement is meaningless. If you want to get down to the nuts and bolts, you could check out the latest long term reliability surveys that clearly shows Toyota as well as its division brands of Lexus and Scion at the top 1, 2, and 3 spots. So even if the comments alluding to "ALL imports are bad" were taken into consideration, then even that statement is false, since the results of the latest surveys show that to be wrong in of itself.
But nevertheless, yes - a foreign company - just like ANY company, including domestic ones - is going to get a cut of the profits, as they should. And once again, what do you think they do with those profits? They build more factories, research and development centers, engineering departments, and also buy more parts and hire more workers.
A recent story I read discussed the fact that pretty much all foreign car manufacturers now have plants and facilities in the US: It's becoming more cost effective to simply make the product here, since shipping costs have risen so much. So if you take that trend at face value, what do you think that means when someone goes out and buys one of those cars? It means that those US factories staffed with US workers will have more cars to build to meet that demand, which means more workers to hire, more cars to build and more American made parts being bought.
The fact of the matter is at the end of the day, the real important factor is WHO gets paid? If there are American workers making foreign cars, then they are getting paid a wage. The ONLY counterargument seems to be that "The money goes to the corporate office", at which point I suggest re-reading what I mentioned above, which is yes - it does, but then that same money is used to hire people in other countries. If that's a problem, then nobody making that argument can buy any cars made by anyone, since all car manufacturers - especially domestic brands - send money overseas for their operations there. Domestic automakers make a HUGE percentage of their products overseas, and as such, where does the money that was used to make those cars go? Why - it goes into the pockets of the workers in that country who made the car.
But even if the issue was that oh no - the money goes to another country... so what? What's the problem here? If we decided that nope - zero money can ever go to other countries, then what would happen if they didn't have money to buy things from us? Do you see the problem here? That's why such simplistic suggestions that we should be a closed economy are such bad ideas.