 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / September 2006Can An Airline Guy Steer An Auto Company?
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060905/NEWS99/60905027/1014/BU SINESS01 He sounds like a very capable guy. Let's hope he can steer Ford Motor down a long and bumpy road back to prosperity. Patrick >http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060905/NEWS99/60905027/1014/BU SINESS01 > >He sounds like a very capable guy. Let's hope he can steer Ford Motor >down a long and bumpy road back to prosperity. > >Patrick Doubtful. When Ford & GM were run by sales and design they did well. When the bean counters took over, the companies dived. Look what Roger Smith did to GM. Now the "all businesses are the same" MBA's take over, and Mustang's will have tail lights from a Pinto to save money in the short run. If any of these companies get their act together, they will put car people back in charge of the car business. Looks like the Ford family decided not to buy the company back. >http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060905/NEWS99/60905027/1014/BU SINESS01 > >He sounds like a very capable guy. Let's hope he can steer Ford Motor > >down a long and bumpy road back to prosperity. > Doubtful. > When Ford & GM were run by sales and design they did well. > When the bean counters took over, the companies dived. Look what Roger > Smith did to GM. > Now the "all businesses are the same" MBA's take over, and Mustang's > will have tail lights from a Pinto to save money in the short run. > If any of these companies get their act together, they will put car > people back in charge of the car business. While I agree car people should run the car business, I think it's too early to tell if Alan Mulally will be another Roger Smith-type guy. Let's hope not!!! And let's hope he has the business sense to know good products, desirable products, keep auto manufacturers from running into the ground. Patrick His first order of business should be to fire the entire marketing department and all their advertising consultants. Then systematically bring back Ford's bread and butter name plates like the Taurus, Thunderbird, Escort etc. Finally, get the designers and engineers together and tell them to start thinking outside the box and develop some innovative and forward thinking vehicles. > http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060905/NEWS99/60905027/1014/BU SINESS01 > > He sounds like a very capable guy. Let's hope he can steer Ford Motor > down a long and bumpy road back to prosperity. > > Patrick Just read an article about this in today's business section of the paper. The whole gist was that Ford desparately needs an "outside" guy to run things. "The Family" is just too close to things to make the right decisions. > His first order of business should be to fire the entire marketing > department and all their advertising consultants. Then systematically [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> >> Patrick Bill Ford seems to be a likable guy but he has been a disaster for FMC. I still think Ford's cars aren't that bad from a quality perspective. They have done an absolute horrible job of marketing their products though. The current "Bold Moves" marketing theme has got them nowhere. I don't think the new guy could do much worse. > Just read an article about this in today's business section of the > paper. The whole gist was that Ford desparately needs an "outside" guy [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >>> >>> Patrick > Bill Ford seems to be a likable guy but he has been a disaster for FMC. >From what I've read, very likable but not hard-assed enough when he needed to be. "Disaster" for FMC, I think is way too harsh. After all, Team Mustang under is tenure has been a huge success and he also greenlighted the Ford GT[40] project. If he was a ball player, IMO, his average would work out to be a low 200 hitter, with one home run, a few long balls and a decent number of RBIs. Not a guy you want at the plate in the 9th inning and you're down a couple runs, but certainly not a guy you're going to cringe when he walks up to the plate with two down. > I still think Ford's cars aren't that bad from a quality perspective. They have done an absolute horrible job of marketing their products though. The current "Bold Moves" marketing theme has got them nowhere. The problem is they have very few products. And the Lincoln and Mercury divisions have completely forgotten what they're about. Here's what I would do right off the bat if I was the new CEO. Top 5: 1) Leave Team Mustang alone to do what they've been doing. 2) Update the Focus. It was great when introduced but the most recent redesign didn't put it back in the front of the pack. They need this car to continue to be a hit. 3) Lincoln needs to be a rear-drive division. And they need a flagship... something with some retro. AND ditch the alpha/numeric name idea!! 4) Mercury needs some stylish cars. A Mustang-based Cougar would be an easy start. 5) The Hurricane V8 is proceeding, they have a new really nice V6 in the pipline, now they need a world-class 4 cylinder engine. Something really stout to bring import buyers into the showroom -- pair it up with a new rally-inspired Focus option. > I don't think the new guy could do much worse. Two words: Jack Nasser. Patrick ---- > > Just read an article about this in today's business section of the > > paper. The whole gist was that Ford desparately needs an "outside" guy [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >>> > >>> Patrick Before I retired I worked for Boeing and it correct that Mullaly is a motivational and team building leader. But he also is a nut cutter! I would like to comment on items 2,3 and 4. 2. They should have imported the European Focus which has a lot of commonality with the Mazda 3 and Volvo S40. 3. Couldn't agree more! The new names are stupid!!! The name Zepher was a good idea but... And no V-8, you've got to be kidding me. 4. The Cougar was an image builder in the late '60's. I can still remember the TV commercial with a cougar sitting atop a Mercury sign and growing. So, good luck Ford! > > Bill Ford seems to be a likable guy but he has been a disaster for FMC. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > > I still think Ford's cars aren't that bad from a quality perspective. They have done an absolute horrible job of marketing their products though. The current "Bold Moves" marketing theme has got them nowhere. > The problem is they have very few products. And the Lincoln and > Mercury divisions have completely forgotten what they're about. [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > >>> > > >>> Patrick > Before I retired I worked for Boeing and it correct that Mullaly is a > motivational and team building leader. But he also is a nut cutter! I > would like to comment on items 2,3 and 4. > > 2. They should have imported the European Focus which has a lot of > commonality with the Mazda 3 and Volvo S40. We do have a more or less european focus... just the previous generation one. It would be nice if ford made successful foreign market cars for the US market without messing them up. > 3. Couldn't agree more! The new names are stupid!!! The name Zepher was a > good idea but... And no V-8, you've got to be kidding me. Most of them are... > 4. The Cougar was an image builder in the late '60's. I can still remember > the TV commercial with a cougar sitting atop a Mercury sign and growing. What I would do product wise at ford: Bring in successful foreign market cars. If they do well against japanese and european makes overseas they should do well here. Namely focus and falcon. They can be built in the US, but there is no reason not use successful models elsewhere after they have proven successful. (some exception for cars that obviously wouldn't sell in a particular place) Create new models that people would care about. Not warmed over cars like the 500. Cougar is a good example. Challenge manufacturing to give detailed and widely varied option lists, color combinations, and multiple body styles. One thing that bores me about cars is that all models come in maybe 5 different appearances. blah. Is every other 99-04 mustang silver? Seems like it. Let someone order an orange car with a blue interior if they want to. It's about the product. But someone from commerical products might not get it. Then again, it was aircraft and a lot of those aircraft are entirely custom... so maybe he can apply it. > > Before I retired I worked for Boeing and it correct that Mullaly is a > > motivational and team building leader. But he also is a nut cutter! I [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > A lot of aircraft are customer from the cockpit layout to the interiors. The difference in flight controls and instrumentation goes back a long way but if I'm not correct, the new 787 "Dreamliner" is standardized up front and idea which was pushed by financiers and aircraft leasing companies. Helps maintain the value. That's somewhat analogis to chassis platforms, engines, etc. But when it comes to interiors, Katie bar the door! I think a forest green interior would look better. > What I would do product wise at ford: > Bring in successful foreign market cars. If they do well against japanese > and european makes overseas they should do well here. Namely focus and > falcon. They can be built in the US, but there is no reason not use > successful models elsewhere after they have proven successful. (some > exception for cars that obviously wouldn't sell in a particular place) "Euro models" haven't done particularly well for the domestics -- i.e. -- XR4Ti & GTO Patrick >> What I would do product wise at ford: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > "Euro models" haven't done particularly well for the domestics -- i.e. > -- XR4Ti & GTO Yeah... because the US automakers screw it up time and time again. WTF is a merkur? That was the first screw up there. GM with the GTO? well calling it a GTO was their first blunder. People didn't expect a GTO in theme of 1964, they expected a GTO in the theme of the judge. It's huge marketing blunders like that, plus not knowing how to sell the vehicles. BTW, the current focus here is a warmed over, cheaped version of europe's previous generation focus. The contour was allowed to die as they tried to sell it like a tempo replacement. Bring over the falcon. Move the driver's side over and don't screw anything up. Don't rename it, keep it named falcon. There, now there's something to compete with chrysler's V8 RWD sedans. Chrysler is bringing over several MB designs without trouble. But then again they don't seem to be screwing things up with goofy new make names and poor market research. > In article <1157596718.688391.290110@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, > NoOption5L@aol.com wrote: [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > again they don't seem to be screwing things up with goofy new make > names and poor market research. The Aussie cars in general seem to be a lot more desirable than what's offered here in the states. It's interesting that both Ford and GM have vehicles down under that some of us would kill to have here. The big difference with DC's adopting MB stuff is that MB is already very familiar (in a good way) to Americans. Not so with the Aussie vehicles. Don't get me wrong - I'd love to see some of those hipo Aussie things ripping up the streets here in the states. But IMO it all gets down to marketing, which the American makers are horrible at. Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC > The big difference with DC's adopting MB stuff is that MB is already > very familiar (in a good way) to Americans. Not so with the Aussie > vehicles. Except those cars are good old american cars in concept. The only US market things they might have trouble with is crap like cupholders. You forgot the CTS predecessor, the Catera which is a rebadged Opel. > > What I would do product wise at ford: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Patrick >> Bill Ford seems to be a likable guy but he has been a disaster for FMC. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > 9th inning and you're down a couple runs, but certainly not a guy > you're going to cringe when he walks up to the plate with two down. Maybe I'm being a little harsh but old Bill Jr. hasn't set the world on fire or even generated a flame, IMO, while at the helm of FMC. I will give him some credit for letting the Mustang team design a car that the fans would love. I don't think he understands, or knows, the auto business very well. Under his tenure Ford has dumped several of their bread and butter models that had huge name recognition. IMO, this has been a substantial contributor to their declining market share. I also give him credit for bringing vehicles like the hybrid Escape, Fusion, new Explorer to market but if he can't market them it really doesn't matter how good the product may be. >> I still think Ford's cars aren't that bad from a quality perspective. They have done an absolute horrible job of marketing their products though. The current "Bold Moves" marketing theme has got them nowhere. > > The problem is they have very few products. And the Lincoln and > Mercury divisions have completely forgotten what they're about. I don't think Ford has too few. Lincoln and Mercury are definitely hurting for unique models. Why they don't let Lincoln compete head on with Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Cadillac etc. is beyond me. This is a niche that they have all but abandoned. > Here's what I would do right off the bat if I was the new CEO. > > Top 5: > > 1) Leave Team Mustang alone to do what they've been doing. Agree. Maybe even give them the green light to develop a Cougar model for Mercury. > 2) Update the Focus. It was great when introduced but the most recent > redesign didn't put it back in the front of the pack. They need this > car to continue to be a hit. They need a car that has name recognition and will generate repeat buyers. IMO, they need to pick the Focus, Fusion or something and commit to it for the long run. How many Camrys are sold ever year just because of the name? My guess is a lot. If Ford brings another small car to market I think they should dust off the Escort name and use it. > 3) Lincoln needs to be a rear-drive division. And they need a > flagship... something with some retro. AND ditch the alpha/numeric > name idea!! IMO, the Continental, Town Car, Capri are a few they could revive. > 4) Mercury needs some stylish cars. A Mustang-based Cougar would be an > easy start. I don't know if Mercury is worth saving at this point. I think they can get all the models they need from Ford and Lincoln. The only model that I see Mercury running with is the Cougar. They might be better off offering a luxury/sport Lincoln to boost the image of that brand. > 5) The Hurricane V8 is proceeding, they have a new really nice V6 in > the pipline, now they need a world-class 4 cylinder engine. Something > really stout to bring import buyers into the showroom -- pair it up > with a new rally-inspired Focus option. I think Ford needs bread and butter models more that rally car variants and big displacement V-8s. They need something to go up against the Camry, Accord and Maxima. The majority of car buyers are not concerned with their car's name being on the race track. Ford needs a modern day "Taurus" in the worst way. >> I don't think the new guy could do much worse. > > Two words: Jack Nasser. If the new guy does no better than Bill Jr. then Ford might be a subsidiary of Toyota by 2015. > Patrick > ---- > >><snip> > >> Bill Ford seems to be a likable guy but he has been a disaster for FMC. > >>From what I've read, very likable but not hard-assed enough when he > > needed to be. > > "Disaster" for FMC, I think is way too harsh. After all, Team Mustang > > under is tenure has been a huge success and he also greenlighted the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > 9th inning and you're down a couple runs, but certainly not a guy > > you're going to cringe when he walks up to the plate with two down. > Maybe I'm being a little harsh but old Bill Jr. hasn't set the world on > fire or even generated a flame, IMO, while at the helm of FMC. I will > give him some credit for letting the Mustang team design a car that the > fans would love. And the Ford GT[40]. > I don't think he understands, or knows, the auto > business very well. Under his tenure Ford has dumped several of their > bread and butter models that had huge name recognition. Ford has let some models "rot on the vine" so long that any positive name recognition they had is destroyed by the time a new one would come out. That's why, IMO, they rename the next model. > IMO, this has > been a substantial contributor to their declining market share. I also > give him credit for bringing vehicles like the hybrid Escape, Fusion, > new Explorer to market but if he can't market them it really doesn't > matter how good the product may be. Both GM and Ford has been bad marketing their hybrids. > >> I still think Ford's cars aren't that bad from a quality perspective. They have done an absolute horrible job of marketing their products though. The current "Bold Moves" marketing theme has got them nowhere. > > The problem is they have very few products. And the Lincoln and > > Mercury divisions have completely forgotten what they're about. > I don't think Ford has too few. Not few products, I meant few *new* products. > Lincoln and Mercury are definitely > hurting for unique models. Why they don't let Lincoln compete head on > with Mercedes, BMW, Lexus, Cadillac etc. is beyond me. This is a niche > that they have all but abandoned. It's crazy! They've all but destroyed Lincoln. And that's sad for me, after growing up with the Hot Rod Lincoln being one of my favorite songs. > > Here's what I would do right off the bat if I was the new CEO. > > Top 5: > > 1) Leave Team Mustang alone to do what they've been doing. > Agree. Maybe even give them the green light to develop a Cougar model > for Mercury. > > 2) Update the Focus. It was great when introduced but the most recent > > redesign didn't put it back in the front of the pack. They need this > > car to continue to be a hit. > They need a car that has name recognition and will generate repeat > buyers. IMO, they need to pick the Focus, Fusion or something and > commit to it for the long run. How many Camrys are sold ever year just > because of the name? My guess is a lot. If Ford brings another small > car to market I think they should dust off the Escort name and use it. At this point I'd keep Focus. By the time the Escort died, it was known as a bomb. > > 3) Lincoln needs to be a rear-drive division. And they need a > > flagship... something with some retro. AND ditch the alpha/numeric > > name idea!! > IMO, the Continental, Town Car, Capri are a few they could revive. Personally, I never liked Town Car. The other two, yes! > > 4) Mercury needs some stylish cars. A Mustang-based Cougar would be an > > easy start. > I don't know if Mercury is worth saving at this point. I think they can > get all the models they need from Ford and Lincoln. The only model that > I see Mercury running with is the Cougar. They might be better off > offering a luxury/sport Lincoln to boost the image of that brand. Lincoln could/should be upscale. Mercury could/should be the stylish bridge to Lincoln and Ford the plainer entry level position. > > 5) The Hurricane V8 is proceeding, they have a new really nice V6 in > > the pipline, now they need a world-class 4 cylinder engine. Something > > really stout to bring import buyers into the showroom -- pair it up > > with a new rally-inspired Focus option. > I think Ford needs bread and butter models more that rally car variants > and big displacement V-8s. But the 500 has just been introduced. All they need to do is refine/upgrade it. Ford needs a new bib V8 for thier trucks. The 5.4 isn't cutting it anymore aganst the competition. PLUS, a 6.2 liter [Hurricane] would be really cool in a Mustang! :-) > They need something to go up against the > Camry, Accord and Maxima. The majority of car buyers are not concerned > with their car's name being on the race track. Ford needs a modern day > "Taurus" in the worst way. Rally cars -- WRX's & EVO's image is HUGE amongst young buyers. And the Focus is the entry level model that could -- with a Rally model -- get some creed in that market. They need it to gain some respect. And before you think/say Mustang, the Mustang appeals to a different buyer... it just isn't going to do it for someone who loves an Evo. > >> I don't think the new guy could do much worse. > > Two words: Jack Nasser. > If the new guy does no better than Bill Jr. then Ford might be a > subsidiary of Toyota by 2015. Toyota doesn't need/want anyone. You won't see them buy-up any auto company. Patrick > >><snip> >> Bill Ford seems to be a likable guy but he has been a disaster for FMC. > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > >Two words: Jack Nasser. Bill approached Nasser, supposedly numerous times, he passed, supposedly numerous times. I agree with most of your points and would like to throw one in of my own. I really think all American car companies need to quit trying to compete heads to heads with the Japanese on styling and be freaking American again. If people want Japanese they'll buy Japanese, but if they want an American car, and what an American car used to be and stand for, other then bad quality that is, then lets give them that classic American styling. It seems to be working with the Mustang. People are drooling over the new Camaro & Challenger. The 300C was a big hit and so are the Caddy's. Bring back big & performance using technology to get fuel economy and screw tiny. Hell were Americans and were big & loud & flashy! -- You can run, but you'll only die tired. ZombyWoof >I agree with most of your points and would like to throw one in of my >own. I really think all American car companies need to quit trying to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >technology to get fuel economy and screw tiny. Hell were Americans >and were big & loud & flashy! The new Mustang proves a lot of that. Ford needs to continue quality, and add models people want. Too many lumps put there. And Toyota & Nissan are falling into that trap. Maxima and Camry are starting to look like Oldsmobiles. Time for some nice American cars. Cougar and Thunderbird are a bit tarnished after the last tries, but could hold some respect if done right. Styling and fun to drive were once the words at Ford, bring those back! I drove next to a GRAND 1967 Galaxie 500 Convertible the other day. Black, white top & interior - near perfect. What a car! >His first order of business should be to fire the entire marketing >department and all their advertising consultants. Then systematically [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> >> Patrick No doubt that the marketing and ad people should be fired. For quite a while recently they were running ads for some ford cars, including the new 500. They wanted the ad to be "edgy" I guess, and the damn picture changed so quickly you couldn't even tell what the friggin cars looked like or even be sure what car it was you were theoretically looking at. An GM can't seem to get their stylists out of their love of swoopiness. Every damn car they make, with rare exception, looks like crap, and the same crap rehashed year after year after year. If I see one more Pontiac with that god-awful fish front I'll puck. >> His first order of business should be to fire the entire marketing >> department and all their advertising consultants. Then systematically [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > crap, and the same crap rehashed year after year after year. If I see > one more Pontiac with that god-awful fish front I'll puck. One of the worst commercials I saw from Ford was about some cutting edge super performance braking system. They went on to talk about it for 15-20 seconds and then at the end of the commercial they informed me that it's not available on any of their cars yet! After watching it I couldn't decide if they wanted me to wait and buy once the new brakes are in production or just go ahead and buy a Ford now with the old crappy brake system. IMO, Toyota is the current marketing master. They try and convince the consumer that they have made the vehicle to fit their needs/wants. Ford and GM builds a vehicle the then tries to make us think it is one step away from and Indy racer even if it is a boring, cookie cutter sedan. Sorry but a Ford 500 isn't sexy and sleek. It is plain Jane mode of transportation. Toyota markets the Camry as a reliable, economical, no surprises form of transportation which is exactly what the car is. There are millions upon millions of car buyers that want exactly what the Camry delivers. The trouble for Ford is that they can't bring themselves to tell people the 500 is exactly the car for them too. Ford can take a lesson from the Mustang. They built a sporty, quick, fun to drive car that they market as such and it is selling very well. They should do this same thing with all their lineup. > http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060905/NEWS99/60905027/1014/BU SINESS01 > > He sounds like a very capable guy. Let's hope he can steer Ford Motor > down a long and bumpy road back to prosperity. > > Patrick The Boeing way has been to eliminate US jobs and outsource to other countries. They are building (overseas) special 747s to transport major Dreamliner sections from Asia to the US for final assy. Korea has exclusive rights to manufacture F15 major assemblies, and they are doing so right now. Will you still buy a Mustang if 2/3s of it came out of Asia? All these so called company leaders care about is the price of stock. When they anounce big layoffs, the stock price jumps and they get huge bonuses. Say good bye to good paying US jobs at Ford. > Say good bye to good paying US jobs at Ford. Practically everywhere in the US. Welcome to globalism and the north american union. >> http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060905/NEWS99/60905027/1014/BU SINESS01 >> [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Say good bye to good paying US jobs at Ford. The fact is that we here in the USA either don't want to pay, or can't afford, to manufacture much of our consumables. We also don't have enough workers to do these jobs here in our borders. Don't believe me? Then why do we have 10-15 MILLION illegal immigrants here? It is because we won't, can't and/or don't have enough workers to do the jobs they are willing to perform. The world is becoming an economic melting pot at a ferocious pace. All this globalization is a tribute to our economic system from the rest of the world. Why would we want to punish these people for emulating us? The ordinary people in China, Indonesia, Korea, India, Mexico etc. just want the American dream for themselves. I really would not care if a Mustang is made in China as long as it meets my needs and wants. If you took the position of buying only American with everything you consume then then you will have a very empty house. There are plenty of jobs in this country. The unemployment rate is 4.6%. Anyone can have a job that wants one and it doesn't have to be a fast food position either. I know of numerous job opportunities for people in the civil engineering firms alone. They don't require a college education either, just a willingness to work hard, smart and learn. I know way too many people that just don't want to work hard or educate themselves and they are willing to accept mediocre jobs to retain their easy going life style. They don't mind complaining about the poor hand they were "dealt" though. There are plenty of good paying jobs to be had in this country. Trouble is too many people don't want to work hard enough to hold them and/or be qualified for them. As for the domestic automakers, don't blame Ford and GM because, IMO, the UAW is more to blame. At a time when Toyota is increasing their manufacturing in the USA with job satisfied, nonunion labor, Ford is having to pay UAW employees that haven't shown up to work for almost eight years. The unions are killing the domestically owned auto industry just as much as any competition from the Asians or Ford's mismanagement. It is hard for me to have much sympathy for UAW members when they have let their union gouge them financially and negotiate their jobs away. Too many felt they were owed a great paying job for life no matter how poorly they performed. That mentality only works in communist societies and I don't think there are many shining examples of these around (BTW China is far from communist, economically speaking). > The fact is that we here in the USA either don't want to pay, or can't > afford, to manufacture much of our consumables. We also don't have > enough workers to do these jobs here in our borders. Don't believe me? It's called automation. But near slave wages in china and even slave labor in some cases is much cheaper/ > Then why do we have 10-15 MILLION illegal immigrants here? To drive down wages. > It is > because we won't, can't and/or don't have enough workers to do the jobs > they are willing to perform. Yet, there's lots of crappy jobs US citizens do every day. > All this globalization is a tribute to our economic system from the rest > of the world. No, it's about breaking the back of the developed countries and riding the world of that pesky middle class. > Why would we want to punish these people for emulating > us? They aren't emulating us. > The ordinary people in China, Indonesia, Korea, India, Mexico etc. > just want the American dream for themselves. They can want, but they'll never get it under most of those governments. (S. Korea and india maybe being the exceptions) We won't have it here in the US for much longer either the way things are going. > I really would not care if > a Mustang is made in China as long as it meets my needs and wants. I try to buy as little as possible of what is made in china. I have worked in product development for stuff made in china. It tought me to avoid anything made in china if possible or unless it was really really cheap. A mustang made in china would have to sell for the price the mustang was introduced in 1964 for (but in current dollars) to get me to consider it. > If you took the position of buying only American with everything you > consume then then you will have a very empty house. I really don't have a problem sourcing most everything I need from nations with proper labor and environmental protections. > There are plenty of jobs in this country. The unemployment rate is > 4.6%. I suggest you learn how that value is calculated. It might surprise you. > Anyone can have a job that wants one and it doesn't have to be a > fast food position either. If you're willing to wage compete with illegal aliens in many cases. > I know of numerous job opportunities for > people in the civil engineering firms alone. They don't require a > college education either, just a willingness to work hard, smart and > learn. Civil engineers require education and PE license. > I know way too many people that just don't want to work hard or > educate themselves and they are willing to accept mediocre jobs to > retain their easy going life style. They don't mind complaining about > the poor hand they were "dealt" though. There are plenty of good paying > jobs to be had in this country. Trouble is too many people don't want > to work hard enough to hold them and/or be qualified for them. While true for some people, it's only a matter of time before product development jobs are all gone to china. Currently most engineers in product development face spending a lot of time in China. Soon companies are going to burn out engineers on travel, they are already needing to pay more to get people to put up with it. That is those who's jobs they haven't moved to china for greatly reduced pay. And sooner or later, many a company in the USA will be outright owned by chinese companies looking to do something with their dollars. That is if they just don't decide to sell on their own once having learned everything from the US company they did contract manufacturing for and drive it out of buisness. > As for the domestic automakers, don't blame Ford and GM because, IMO, > the UAW is more to blame. At a time when Toyota is increasing their [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > communist societies and I don't think there are many shining examples of > these around (BTW China is far from communist, economically speaking). Unions became more like thugs and beating up on the automakers. They are very responsible for the mess as are others. >> The fact is that we here in the USA either don't want to pay, or can't >> afford, to manufacture much of our consumables. We also don't have >> enough workers to do these jobs here in our borders. Don't believe me? > > It's called automation. But near slave wages in china and even slave > labor in some cases is much cheaper/ So is the cost of living for these people. They aren't making slave wages by their standards. Besides, look at this country's history. Remember the children working in the textile mills for almost nothing? Lower wage jobs turning into higher wage jobs is a right of passage when moving into an industrialized society. >> Then why do we have 10-15 MILLION illegal immigrants here? > > To drive down wages. Not in the construction industry here in the Washington, DC area. If it weren't for illegal immigrants hardly anything would get built and forget about getting that Whopper at the drive through. They are here because the jobs are here and they pay better than anything they could find in Mexico. The only thing driving down wages in this country is workers that refuse to educate themselves or seek retraining for the good paying jobs that are available. >> It is >> because we won't, can't and/or don't have enough workers to do the jobs >> they are willing to perform. > > Yet, there's lots of crappy jobs US citizens do every day. I watch "Dirty Jobs" too. The only reason for US citizens to keep doing these crappy jobs is they won't educate themselves to qualify for the better jobs. IMO, I would rather work to educate myself than feed slop to pigs for a living (unless I owned the pig farm). >> All this globalization is a tribute to our economic system from the rest >> of the world. > > No, it's about breaking the back of the developed countries and riding > the world of that pesky middle class. Just how are they breaking our backs? I don't feel it at all. The workers in developing countries want what we have, nothing more and nothing less. Why do people see wealth as something that can't be created? Do you really think if they improve their standard of living ours has to decline as a result? Countries like India, China, Korea etc. are creating their middle class right now. Anyone in this country that wants to be in the middle class can do it easily. Educate themselves and go get one of the middle class jobs that need to be filled. There are plenty of them. Don't believe me? Look at the want ads in any major newspaper. BTW, when I say educate I don't necessarily mean a college degree. It can mean OTJ training, a few courses at a community college or just some research at the local library. >> Why would we want to punish these people for emulating >> us? > > They aren't emulating us. Look at our history from an economic perspective and look at their's and you will see quite a few similarities. >> The ordinary people in China, Indonesia, Korea, India, Mexico etc. >> just want the American dream for themselves. > > They can want, but they'll never get it under most of those governments. > (S. Korea and india maybe being the exceptions) We won't have it here in > the US for much longer either the way things are going. They are getting it in China as I type this response. The same goes for India, South America and Indonesia. Look at the recent history of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong etc. If they can bring themselves from utter ruin to what they are today then why can't these other undeveloped countries? Besides, China can't move to free political society very quickly because of their huge population. Look at what Russia went through. It was ugly and they have maybe 1/5 the population of China. Can you imagine 1.5 BILLION starving people running wild with nuclear weapons at their disposal. Actually, I think the Chinese have done a pretty decent job under the circumstances. Political change will follow the economic change but it will take a long time to evolve and I think that is a good thing. >> I really would not care if >> a Mustang is made in China as long as it meets my needs and wants. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > mustang was introduced in 1964 for (but in current dollars) to get me to > consider it. Ninety nine percent of the time I don't give a second thought about where something I buy is made. I look at the quality and the price to decide whether I purchase an item. I suspect most people are the same way. >> If you took the position of buying only American with everything you >> consume then then you will have a very empty house. > > I really don't have a problem sourcing most everything I need from > nations with proper labor and environmental protections. That is a hard thing to track. I don't see how we can expect these developing countries to do any different than we did in the past. If anything they are probably doing a better job overall than we did at the same stage of economic development. >> There are plenty of jobs in this country. The unemployment rate is >> 4.6%. > > I suggest you learn how that value is calculated. It might surprise you. It is an indicator. I know there are PLENTY of very good paying jobs in the Washington, DC area. This is an indisputable fact. Many of these people that have exhausted unemployment benefits refuse to remold themselves to be viable in the current job market. They are the proverbial buggy whip makers that refuse to develop another trade. >> Anyone can have a job that wants one and it doesn't have to be a >> fast food position either. > > If you're willing to wage compete with illegal aliens in many cases. Anyone looking to compete against illegal immigrants for jobs needs to elevate their aspirations. They don't have to compete with them. >> I know of numerous job opportunities for >> people in the civil engineering firms alone. They don't require a >> college education either, just a willingness to work hard, smart and >> learn. > > Civil engineers require education and PE license. I would estimate that more than 50%-60% of people working in civil engineering firms have no college degree. They can be surveyors, CAD operators, administrative or even designers working under the supervision of a professional engineer. Some of the best site designers I have worked with had nothing but a high school diploma. What they did was work hard and educate themselves through OTJ training. Many of these "self-made engineers" have salaries now approaching $100k and some far beyond. >> I know way too many people that just don't want to work hard or >> educate themselves and they are willing to accept mediocre jobs to [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > everything from the US company they did contract manufacturing for and > drive it out of buisness. There is one area of great concern I have for this country. The school system is failing miserably in getting kids to go into science and engineering. If anything brings this country to its knees this will be what does it. I see these man-on-the-street interviews that ask the simplest of questions and the young people don't have a clue about the correct answer. It is downright scary to watch. IMO, in today's world, developing innovative technologies is the real engine that drives this country and not manufacturing. If this ever leaves us then we are doomed. >> As for the domestic automakers, don't blame Ford and GM because, IMO, >> the UAW is more to blame. At a time when Toyota is increasing their [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Unions became more like thugs and beating up on the automakers. They are > very responsible for the mess as are others. I agree. >>> The fact is that we here in the USA either don't want to pay, or can't >>> afford, to manufacture much of our consumables. We also don't have [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > So is the cost of living for these people. They aren't making slave > wages by their standards. so it's ok that they live in company run dorms and hovels in cities so polluted you cut the air with a knife? > Besides, look at this country's history. > Remember the children working in the textile mills for almost nothing? > Lower wage jobs turning into higher wage jobs is a right of passage when > moving into an industrialized society. Problem is, there are no human rights in china, there is no bill of rights, there is no such thing as conflict of interest. The military general, the high government offical, the ranking party member, and the company CEO can and many times are the same person. >>> Then why do we have 10-15 MILLION illegal immigrants here? >> To drive down wages. > Not in the construction industry here in the Washington, DC area. If it > weren't for illegal immigrants hardly anything would get built and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > workers that refuse to educate themselves or seek retraining for the > good paying jobs that are available. I suggest you actually research about how wages in many jobs have been flat for years and some are paying less in numerical dollars now than they used to. That's what flooding the labor market does. >>> It is >>> because we won't, can't and/or don't have enough workers to do the jobs >>> they are willing to perform. >> Yet, there's lots of crappy jobs US citizens do every day. > I watch "Dirty Jobs" too. The only reason for US citizens to keep doing > these crappy jobs is they won't educate themselves to qualify for the > better jobs. IMO, I would rather work to educate myself than feed slop > to pigs for a living (unless I owned the pig farm). Here's some news for you, some people just don't have the abilities. And the school system in the USA isn't exactly doing a bang up job either. >>> All this globalization is a tribute to our economic system from the rest >>> of the world. >> No, it's about breaking the back of the developed countries and riding >> the world of that pesky middle class. > Just how are they breaking our backs? High taxes, flooding the job market with labor to drive down wages. Outsourcing to other countries. > I don't feel it at all. Engineering wages in my field have been more or less flat since shrub took office. > The workers in developing countries want what we have, nothing more and > nothing less. And under their governments they aren't about to get it. Which is why I don't want their systems brought here. > Why do people see wealth as something that can't be created? Strawman. > Do you really think if they improve their standard of living > ours has to decline as a result? Strawman. > Countries like India, China, Korea > etc. are creating their middle class right now. China, the koreas, and india have population and resources to develop it without outsourced jobs from the USA. > Anyone in this country that wants to be in the middle class can do it > easily. Until the population is increased by a 100 million legal immigrants plus millions more illegal as per the bills in congress. Flood the labor market, increase taxes to pay for the huge cost increases of social services. Not only that but the diseases, etc. Not to mention that people are told they don't have to assimulate any more, which acts to divide the people and allow those ruling to pit groups against each other. Not to mention the labor practices of a century plus ago that did that. > Educate > themselves and go get one of the middle class jobs that need to be > filled. There are plenty of them. Don't believe me? Look at the want > ads in any major newspaper. Newspapers are pretty slim on jobs. Newspapers are practically obsolete for job searches for anyone with education or experience. Now I know for a fact that you haven't been out there looking in the last 6 years. > BTW, when I say educate I don't necessarily > mean a college degree. It can mean OTJ training, a few courses at a > community college or just some research at the local library. The entire population can't be doing HVAC repair and the like. >>> Why would we want to punish these people for emulating >>> us? >> They aren't emulating us. > Look at our history from an economic perspective and look at their's and > you will see quite a few similarities. I see a tyranny that surpresses people so that wealthy, connected, corrupt elite can rule and become wealthier. >>> The ordinary people in China, Indonesia, Korea, India, Mexico etc. >>> just want the American dream for themselves. >> They can want, but they'll never get it under most of those governments. >> (S. Korea and india maybe being the exceptions) We won't have it here in >> the US for much longer either the way things are going. > They are getting it in China as I type this response. The same goes for > India, South America and Indonesia. Look at the recent history of > Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong etc. Japan was an industrialized nation in the 1930s. Fully modern. It was bombed flat, that's it. It recovered. It is not in any way comparable to china. US corporations never in mass closed up shop to move jobs to japan. South Korea is also a more or less free nation, US companies are not in any large way outsourcing jobs to South Korea. South Korea built itself up. Taiwan, also a more or less free nation, a fair amount of outsourcing, not comparable to China. Hong Kong, now part of China but it's development was under UK rule. Much like Taiwan. It's comparing apples and oranges. > If they can bring themselves > from utter ruin to what they are today then why can't these other > undeveloped countries? See above. > Besides, China can't move to free political > society very quickly because of their huge population. Free political societies are bad for business. People might not like living in a polluted cesspool and start complaining, etc and so forth. They will not be able to free themselves as the state will grow more powerful faster than the people. The people will not catch up. In fact, if anything they'll become more scared because they'll have a little to lose. > Look at what > Russia went through. It was ugly and they have maybe 1/5 the population [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > follow the economic change but it will take a long time to evolve and I > think that is a good thing. There is no reason to suspect political change will follow. None. I find that in reality the opposite of no change or change for the worse is more likely. The kind of technologies being employed by the US and UK governments right now could be employed in China if they aren't already and there will be little the people could to do to bring about political change. >>> I really would not care if >>> a Mustang is made in China as long as it meets my needs and wants. >> I try to buy as little as possible of what is made in china. I have >> worked in product development for stuff made in china. It tought me to >> avoid anything made in china if possible or unless it was really really >> cheap. A mustang made in china would have to sell for the price the >> mustang was introduced in 1964 for (but in current dollars) to get me to >> consider it. > Ninety nine percent of the time I don't give a second thought about > where something I buy is made. I look at the quality and the price to > decide whether I purchase an item. I suspect most people are the same way. Should I start telling you stories of 'made in china' quality? Here's a clue, you can't tell by visual inspection that the plastic has been overheated in the molding process to up the cycle time resulting in a part that will be inferior and will easily crack in service. Yet, that's just one practice of vendors in China I've run into. Manufacturing processes are crap, material substitutions occur a lot. >>> If you took the position of buying only American with everything you >>> consume then then you will have a very empty house. >> I really don't have a problem sourcing most everything I need from >> nations with proper labor and environmental protections. > That is a hard thing to track. I don't see how we can expect these > developing countries to do any different than we did in the past. If > anything they are probably doing a better job overall than we did at the > same stage of economic development. They can easily achieve their goals without shipping massive quantities of goods to the USA and having US companies manufacture there in mass. >>> There are plenty of jobs in this country. The unemployment rate is >>> 4.6%. >> I suggest you learn how that value is calculated. It might surprise you. > It is an indicator. I know there are PLENTY of very good paying jobs in > the Washington, DC area. This is an indisputable fact. Many of these > people that have exhausted unemployment benefits refuse to remold > themselves to be viable in the current job market. They are the > proverbial buggy whip makers that refuse to develop another trade. Not everyone has universal talents. All the other job markets may not have enough growth to absorb people from others. Maybe companies are set in what they want. Companies can be extremely picky on trivial details. Last time I had to look for a job I had gotten through the HR phone interview with one company, but the hiring manager didn't want to interview me because I hadn't worked with the latest version of ProE. It might take me at most a couple hours to get used to the changes. Nope, automatically disqualified. It's sort of like online dating and being a month too old or a inch too short or tall.... Few years back I know I was the best person on the market for a job. I was interviewed by the place and they didn't like that I was a bit rusty with one aspect of part modeling in ProE. I had a half dozen recruiters call me for that job in the next 6 months. I don't know if they ever found anyone, but I know that if they had offered me the job, I would have been up to speed long before they found whomever they ended up hiring. >>> Anyone can have a job that wants one and it doesn't have to be a >>> fast food position either. >> If you're willing to wage compete with illegal aliens in many cases. > Anyone looking to compete against illegal immigrants for jobs needs to > elevate their aspirations. They don't have to compete with them. The illegal immigrants up their level as time goes on bringing more and more once viable jobs down the wage scale. But what you also neglect is that people have talents and things they like to do. Are you suggesting that once the product design and development jobs are all overseas I go to law school and be a lawyer? I don't have any natural talent for it like I do engineering, I would hate it. Sure, it pays well... but I'd rather remain in engineering. >>> I know of numerous job opportunities for >>> people in the civil engineering firms alone. They don't require a >>> college education either, just a willingness to work hard, smart and >>> learn. >> Civil engineers require education and PE license. > I would estimate that more than 50%-60% of people working in civil > engineering firms have no college degree. They can be surveyors, CAD [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > these "self-made engineers" have salaries now approaching $100k and some > far beyond. That's quite a different thing than what your previous wording indicated. But so what? Not everyone can be absorbed into those fields. You don't seem to understand that while some specific fields have demand, they cannot absorb the large numbers of people displaced elsewhere. And as the displacement wave moves through up the ranks of job quality, there's more people competing for the remaining jobs. Let's say the product design jobs are all gone and go to china... Guess what? Where are all the engineers in product design going to go? They are going to try to disperse into other engineering areas. There are only so many jobs managing chinese outsourcing available. The rest will spill out... they'll start taking those jobs in civil engineering. What's your no degree cad guy going to do when your firm can hire a guy who might have a PE license already or could get one quickly, has cad skills far and above the firm's needs is used to doing all his own cad work, and has the ability to do much of the civil engineer's work right out of the box? After all, a mechanical engineer is at least half way to a civil degree and vice-versa. Are your no degree guys (especially those without a decade plus experience) going to be able to compete in a job market like that? >>> I know way too many people that just don't want to work hard or >>> educate themselves and they are willing to accept mediocre jobs to >>> retain their easy going life style. They don't mind complaining about >>> the poor hand they were "dealt" though. There are plenty of good paying >>> jobs to be had in this country. Trouble is too many people don't want >>> to work hard enough to hold them and/or be qualified for them. >> While true for some people, it's only a matter of time before product >> development jobs are all gone to china. Currently most engineers in [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> everything from the US company they did contract manufacturing for and >> drive it out of buisness. > There is one area of great concern I have for this country. The school > system is failing miserably in getting kids to go into science and > engineering. Don't you know, science and engineering is something poor developing nations have their kids go into. The US is beyond that.... Yes I am being sarcastic, but that is the attitude out there. Engineering is for those kids in china and india, not americans. It's for those looking to build a middle class. > If anything brings this country to its knees this will be > what does it. I see these man-on-the-street interviews that ask the > simplest of questions and the young people don't have a clue about the > correct answer. It is downright scary to watch. It's been a systematic dumbing down. An educated, free society is too difficult to control. Dumbing down the US population appears to have been a consistant goal. (http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/ and there's another out there... the secret history of american education or something like that) > IMO, in today's world, > developing innovative technologies is the real engine that drives this > country and not manufacturing. If this ever leaves us then we are doomed. The problem is, they aren't free and won't be as the technology to keep the tyrannies in place grows. >>>> The fact is that we here in the USA either don't want to pay, or can't >>>> afford, to manufacture much of our consumables. We also don't have [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > so it's ok that they live in company run dorms and hovels in cities so > polluted you cut the air with a knife? Of course it isn't. I doubt that is anywhere close to the norm in these countries. As the demand for labor increases in the third world treatment of the labor force will improve. Look at our history. It isn't pretty either. >> Besides, look at this country's history. >> Remember the children working in the textile mills for almost nothing? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > general, the high government offical, the ranking party member, and the > company CEO can and many times are the same person. I'm not going to presume I can tell China's government how to handle 1.5 BILLION people. I can't imagine the logistical and societal issues in supporting that size of a population. I have talked with many business people that like the way the Chinese do business. They say there is far less bold faced lying than there is in many developed countries. Plus they get things done on time and on budget. Look at our politicians and tell me they don't have their hands in the honey pot up to their arm pits. Not much difference IMO. >>>> Then why do we have 10-15 MILLION illegal immigrants here? > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > flat for years and some are paying less in numerical dollars now than > they used to. That's what flooding the labor market does. They haven't been flat in this area of the country. Engineer's salaries have doubled in the last 5-10 years. Fast food jobs here pay $7-$8 per hour to start. The immigrants are taking jobs no one else wants. They work harder than most people I know. People that are content to run a cash register at Wal-Mart can't expect their salary to raise beyond the CIP index every year. Like i said, there are plenty of good paying jobs that go unfilled year after year. >>>> It is >>>> because we won't, can't and/or don't have enough workers to do the jobs [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Here's some news for you, some people just don't have the abilities. And > the school system in the USA isn't exactly doing a bang up job either. They don't have the ability? Or is it the desire? I went to a high school consisting of 400 students in grades 9-12 in a high school that was built in 1904. We had no swimming pool, indoor track etc. I graduated and went to one of the top undergraduate engineering schools in the country. The teacher unions are destroying the school system in this country. Add to this parents that don't care and students with no discipline or respect for the faculty and the outlook is bleak. This all goes back to my mantra.... educate yourself if you want a well paying job. >>>> All this globalization is a tribute to our economic system from the rest >>>> of the world. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > High taxes, flooding the job market with labor to drive down wages. > Outsourcing to other countries. I agree with taxes being too high. I attribute it in this coutry to politicians that can't stop spending money that is not their's to spend. I can't blame China for this mess. >> I don't feel it at all. > > Engineering wages in my field have been more or less flat since shrub > took office. Civil engineers have been underpaid for a long time. Maybe we are just catching up. I attribute the flat wages in the electronics fields to the dot com bust. there are planty of jobs in this area. Maybe some of these people should relocate. >> The workers in developing countries want what we have, nothing more and >> nothing less. > > And under their governments they aren't about to get it. Which is why I > don't want their systems brought here. I don't see why their systems would be brought here. Economics is the great equalizer. As these countries develop the population will demand better treatment. Economic well being promotes political empowerment. >> Why do people see wealth as something that can't be created? > > Strawman. Is wealth created or not? >> Do you really think if they improve their standard of living >> ours has to decline as a result? > > Strawman. Does it? >> Countries like India, China, Korea >> etc. are creating their middle class right now. > > China, the koreas, and india have population and resources to develop it > without outsourced jobs from the USA. Outsourced jobs in India are a minute portion of their job growth. They could loose every outsourced job and it would barely register on their economic indicators. Outsourcing of jobs isn't a problem for this country. It is very small compared to the rest of our economy and overall job growth. Besides, all the jobs companies like Toyota creates offsets these losses. >> Anyone in this country that wants to be in the middle class can do it >> easily. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > other. Not to mention the labor practices of a century plus ago that did > that. Now you're being silly. You do know that immigration built this country? Is it OK for all the Europeans to flood across the Atlantic but the Hispanics aren't good enough? The Hispanics I see here illegally work extremely hard. My only gripe is they will pack 10 families into a single house. Anyone that runs the gauntlet they do to get here just to work seven days a week in a back breaking job I wouldn't think of doing has my respect. They have a work ethic that many people here can't touch. >> Educate >> themselves and go get one of the middle class jobs that need to be [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > job searches for anyone with education or experience. Now I know for a > fact that you haven't been out there looking in the last 6 years. I've been looking for people to hire. They don't exist here. There are approximately 25,000 hi-tech jobs unfilled in the Washington, DC area alone. The national unemployment rate is low too. Most anybody that needs a job can find one. >> BTW, when I say educate I don't necessarily >> mean a college degree. It can mean OTJ training, a few courses at a >> community college or just some research at the local library. > > The entire population can't be doing HVAC repair and the like. You're thinking one dimensionally. There are a multitude of good paying jobs available. They just require some education and ambition from the employee. >>>> Why would we want to punish these people for emulating >>>> us? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I see a tyranny that surpresses people so that wealthy, connected, > corrupt elite can rule and become wealthier. I'm sure it happened somewhere. Almost all the wealthy people I know personally, worked their a.ses off for what they have. They suppressed no one, had no connections and are far from corrupt. In fact, they gave many decent jobs to many decent hard working people in the process of becoming rich. >>>> The ordinary people in China, Indonesia, Korea, India, Mexico etc. >>>> just want the American dream for themselves. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > outsourcing, not comparable to China. Hong Kong, now part of China but > it's development was under UK rule. Much like Taiwan. My point was if these countries could build themselves up then why can't the rest of them? > It's comparing apples and oranges. After the devastation of WWII I would say Japan was for from industrialized. They worked hard to get to where they are today. As did Taiwan, South Korea and Hong Kong. Just as China, Indonesia and India are doing now. >> If they can bring themselves >> from utter ruin to what they are today then why can't these other >> undeveloped countries? > > See above. >> Besides, China can't move to free political >> society very quickly because of their huge population. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > if anything they'll become more scared because they'll have a little to > lose. You really are a "the glass is half empty" kind of guy, aren't you? ;) >> Look at what >> Russia went through. It was ugly and they have maybe 1/5 the population [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > and there will be little the people could to do to bring about political > change. There is also no reason to believe political change won't happen. It happened economically so I see no reason it won't eventually happen politically. >>>> I really would not care if >>>> a Mustang is made in China as long as it meets my needs and wants. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > just one practice of vendors in China I've run into. Manufacturing > processes are crap, material substitutions occur a lot. If the quality/price ratio isn't there then I just don't buy it. Depending on the item I might not care that much about quality. If I am buying a product your company produces it is your job to insure the quality of foreign parts, not mine. If you can't get the quality from China then go to India or have it made here. Maybe I, as the consumer, am willing to live with slightly lower quality for a price break. The bottom line is it is your job to figure all this out and not mine. If your company can't do it and another one can then you may see your job evaporate or you company go belly up. >>>> If you took the position of buying only American with everything you >>>> consume then then you will have a very empty house. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > They can easily achieve their goals without shipping massive quantities > of goods to the USA and having US companies manufacture there in mass. I was referring to labor issues not exporting goods. >>>> There are plenty of jobs in this country. The unemployment rate is >>>> 4.6%. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > have enough growth to absorb people from others. Maybe companies are set > in what they want. Companies can be extremely picky on trivial details. The unemployment rate here is around 2%. We can absorb a lot of people. Anyone in your area that needs a job should come here. I guarantee they will find one. > Last time I had to look for a job I had gotten through the HR phone > interview with one company, but the hiring manager didn't want to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > anyone, but I know that if they had offered me the job, I would have > been up to speed long before they found whomever they ended up hiring. If you wanted the job bad enough could you have polished up our skills in that area and then went back to them and marketed yourself as a new and improved hiring prospect? >>>> Anyone can have a job that wants one and it doesn't have to be a >>>> fast food position either. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The illegal immigrants up their level as time goes on bringing more and > more once viable jobs down the wage scale. So the immigrants can adapt and get the good jobs but the people born and raised here can't? What's up with that? > But what you also neglect is that people have talents and things they > like to do. Are you suggesting that once the product design and > development jobs are all overseas I go to law school and be a lawyer? I > don't have any natural talent for it like I do engineering, I would hate > it. Sure, it pays well... but I'd rather remain in engineering. As I have told the youngsters in our family, not everyone has a job they love. If a person loves a job that doesn't pay squat then they shouldn't complain about the pay. My guess is you will always have a job in engineering. I don't find much fun in engineering these days. it is boring and tedious to me. That is why I am in the process of changing to doing land development. I have had to educate myself on many different things to make the switch and take a lot of risks. >>>> I know of numerous job opportunities for >>>> people in the civil engineering firms alone. They don't require a [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > elsewhere. And as the displacement wave moves through up the ranks of > job quality, there's more people competing for the remaining jobs. The civil engineering firms can't solve employment problems of the country but it is one example of the opportunities that exist. My wife works for a company that supplies electronics equipement to the Federal government and there are numerous jobs to had in her area. People just need to educate themselves a little to get their foot in the door. Once in the pay is good and the jobs are secure with great benefits. Believe me, the jobs are out there if people look hard enough and are willing to be flexible. > Let's say the product design jobs are all gone and go to china... Guess > what? Where are all the engineers in product design going to go? They [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > without a decade plus experience) going to be able to compete in a job > market like that? I don't agree with your doom and gloom scenario. I know there aren't enough engineers across the board in this country. There are plenty of places for them to land. If anything we will run out of engineers. >>>> I know way too many people that just don't want to work hard or >>>> educate themselves and they are willing to accept mediocre jobs to [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > those kids in china and india, not americans. It's for those looking to > build a middle class. It is a problem here and now in this country. What I hear from kids today is that getting an engineering degree is too hard. They don't want to work that hard. >> If anything brings this country to its knees this will be >> what does it. I see these man-on-the-street interviews that ask the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > there's another out there... the secret history of american education or > something like that) Most of the young people today are like water. They always take the path of least resistance. I fully believe that the kids that are getting technical degrees today will be the upper economic class of tomorrow. >> IMO, in today's world, >> developing innovative technologies is the real engine that drives this >> country and not manufacturing. If this ever leaves us then we are doomed. > > The problem is, they aren't free and won't be as the technology to keep > the tyrannies in place grows. > Of course it isn't. I doubt that is anywhere close to the norm in these > countries. Companies in china often have the workers living in company owned dorm like housing. > As the demand for labor increases in the third world > treatment of the labor force will improve. Look at our history. It > isn't pretty either. Exactly how is that going to happen with billions of people and no human rights? Remember, the people in the USA could be armed and had protections of their rights. They could also always work elsewhere. These very important things do not exist in China. > I'm not going to presume I can tell China's government how to handle 1.5 > BILLION people. I can't imagine the logistical and societal issues in > supporting that size of a population. So tyranny is just fine for you then.... > I have talked with many business people that like the way the Chinese do > business. I've done business with chinese companies. > They say there is far less bold faced lying than there is in > many developed countries. BULLSHIT. They lie about their capabilities and the part quality consistantly. > Plus they get things done on time and on budget. BULLSHIT. The resulting parts are crap and it takes many rounds of tooling changes process changes before they are just barely acceptable. It's clear you simply don't have the first hand experience required for this discussion. >> I suggest you actually research about how wages in many jobs have been >> flat for years and some are paying less in numerical dollars now than >> they used to. That's what flooding the labor market does. > They haven't been flat in this area of the country. Engineer's salaries > have doubled in the last 5-10 years. Is it 5 or 10? Or are you talking about someone who was fresh out 10 years ago, who now with 10 years experience makes double? > Fast food jobs here pay $7-$8 per > hour to start. The immigrants are taking jobs no one else wants. They > work harder than most people I know. Same old cheerleading... the jobs americans won't do.... yadda yadda... it's that people can do other jobs that are better for the money if they can't get filled. Which means they need to pay more or realize it's the 21st century and make some captital investment. Flooding the US with cheap labor isn't cheap for the society as a whole. Social services, prisons, cops, roads, bridges, etc all cost money. They don't pay enough in taxes to offset that. And then there's the costs of competing with more people for housing. The strains on the water supply, etc etc. Do you really think the USA can absorb another 100,000,000 people and it not have a negative effect on everyone's life? >> Here's some news for you, some people just don't have the abilities. And >> the school system in the USA isn't exactly doing a bang up job either. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > graduated and went to one of the top undergraduate engineering schools > in the country. I've known a number of engineers who didn't have the ability to be such. They were good at school. My former employer would make them managers where they could do more damage with their inability to design their way out of a wet paper bag. On a more serious note, yes ability. Not everyone is capable of the same things. > The teacher unions are destroying the school system in > this country. Add to this parents that don't care and students with no > discipline or respect for the faculty and the outlook is bleak. See my references in the previous post. > This all goes back to my mantra.... educate yourself if you want a well > paying job. And while I agree with that, you don't seem to understand that even skilled professions are being flooded labor wise. Also that the jobs that require education are being shipped overseas. >>>> No, it's about breaking the back of the developed countries and riding >>>> the world of that pesky middle class. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > politicians that can't stop spending money that is not their's to spend. > I can't blame China for this mess. Yes, the politicians owned by corporations allowing illegals to flood the labor market and have access to all the services tax payers pay for. >>> The workers in developing countries want what we have, nothing more and >>> nothing less. >> And under their governments they aren't about to get it. Which is why I >> don't want their systems brought here. > > I don't see why their systems would be brought here. Have you not paid attention ? CA,NM,AZ,TX, etc are being claimed as part of mexico. > Economics is the > great equalizer. As these countries develop the population will demand > better treatment. Economic well being promotes political empowerment. There is no basis for them to get it. In China they will simply throw the leaders in prison or shoot them dead. Corporations never had that sort of power in the USA. (although they'll probably have it shortly) Mexico uses the USA as a relief valve so it's ruling elite is never brought to task. >> China, the koreas, and india have population and resources to develop it >> without outsourced jobs from the USA. > Outsourced jobs in India are a minute portion of their job growth. They > could loose every outsourced job and it would barely register on their > economic indicators. Outsourcing of jobs isn't a problem for this > country. It is very small compared to the rest of our economy and > overall job growth. Besides, all the jobs companies like Toyota creates > offsets these losses. No, they don't. They offset some. And you think it's a little problem because you don't pay attention to where things are made. Pay attention, the loss of manufacturing hasn't been 'little'. >> Until the population is increased by a 100 million legal immigrants plus >> millions more illegal as per the bills in congress. Flood the labor [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> other. Not to mention the labor practices of a century plus ago that did >> that. > Now you're being silly. You do know that immigration built this > country? Old whine. > Is it OK for all the Europeans to flood across the Atlantic > but the Hispanics aren't good enough? Race card. That's the last straw. I could put up with the lack of experience on the manufacturing side and the third hand stories, but that's just one strawman too many. I think we will have to agree to disagree. Maybe I'm wrong but you seem to see this country as circling the drain and I don't think we are even close. There is always a group of people who want things to remain the same. I'm not one of them. I see the influx of Hispanics as just another page in our history books. People thought the Chinese, Irish, Italian immigrants at the turn of the century were less than worthless. These people were proved wrong. My gut tells me that anyone that works as hard as the Hispanics do are no a drag on our economy. I don't see China, India, Indonesia etc. as an economic threat either and the best way to keep them from being military threat is to embrace them economically. We need their developing markets to send our exports to as much as they need ours. The world is changing very quickly. Either the USA can be a leader of this change or sit back and try and keep the status quo. If we don't lead then we will be left behind. The history of this country shows our greatest strength is our ability to promote and react to change. If you look at a snap shot of the work force in this country at 50 year intervals for the last 250 years you will see wholesale changes in the jobs people hold. As new industries develop old ones die. It is the way of things and it is what has made, and will continue to make, the USA a world leader and not a follower. <snip> > I think we will have to agree to disagree. Maybe I'm wrong but you seem > to see this country as circling the drain and I don't think we are even > close. There is always a group of people who want things to remain the > same. I'm not one of them. I see the influx of Hispanics as just > another page in our history books. People thought the Chinese, Irish, > Italian immigrants at the turn of the century were less than worthless. Arguments I didn't make. I didn't say mexicans were worthless, I didn't make any reference to where or what the people where. They could be purple for all I care. If there weren't any social services, social security, the need for roads, emergency medical treatment, and whole host of other costs, if they were entirely on their own like it was in 1900 then it wouldn't bother me as much. However it's not 1900. An influx of 100,000,000 people means a great deal of cost, a flooding of the labor market, a straining of water supplies, a crowding of the roads, cities, etc. This is a scale that is simply huge. It's not an empty country anymore either. Add to this the desire of many of those to take over several states and make those part of their nation of origin. I can't spend any more time dealing with this habbit of yours of making up arguments for me. You clearly want to cast me as someone who is a racist and affraid of change. Of course that's par for the course with discourse in this nation now. You have failed to present how flooding the labor supply is a good thing, how we are going to pay for all the costs of these people. Congress doesn't consider that either. They just moan like you that we need cheap labor and then take cheap shots at any critic by saying they are jobs americans won't do and imply or outright claim racism. > These people were proved wrong. My gut tells me that anyone that > works as hard as the Hispanics do are no a drag on our economy. Take a look at the numbers, you'd be surprised. A large number know how to work the social services, how to use emergency rooms, etc and so forth. Remember, all these taxpayer supplied services didn't exist in 1900. > I don't > see China, India, Indonesia etc. as an economic threat either and the > best way to keep them from being military threat is to embrace them > economically. Anyone who owe a lot of money to is an economic threat. Anyone who holds large amounts of your currency is an enconomic threat. See what China has of each. > We need their developing markets to send our exports to > as much as they need ours. US isn't making very much these days. I know you want to cast me as someone affraid of change, sorry. There is change for the better and change for the worse. Short term thinking that is guiding this present change is a change for the worse long term. think of me as you will. Im tired of going in circles. >> I think we will have to agree to disagree. Maybe I'm wrong but you seem >> to see this country as circling the drain and I don't think we are even [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > make any reference to where or what the people where. They could be > purple for all I care. Sorry, I didn't mean to imply you thought the current crop of illegal immigrants were worthless. > If there weren't any social services, social security, the need for > roads, emergency medical treatment, and whole host of other costs, > if they were entirely on their own like it was in 1900 then it wouldn't > bother me as much. However it's not 1900. Most of the illegal immigrants pay taxes on the wages they earn. They are as financially (don't confuse this with legally) entitled to services as any other tax payer, IMO. > An influx of 100,000,000 people means a great deal of cost, a flooding > of the labor market, a straining of water supplies, a crowding of the > roads, cities, etc. This is a scale that is simply huge. It's not an > empty country anymore either. There aren't 100 million people living in Mexico. The number you are throwing around is absurd. If too many of them come here then there won't be enough jobs for them and they will leave. It is a supply and demand thing. Don't suggest they will start taking the higher profile jobs because the people qualified for them are staying in Mexico. > Add to this the desire of many of those to take over several states and > make those part of their nation of origin. Now you're paranoia is getting the better of you. ;) > I can't spend any more time dealing with this habbit of yours of making > up arguments for me. You clearly want to cast me as someone who is a > racist and affraid of change. Of course that's par for the cour |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message