>>>>> The big three can't compete.
>>>>> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE1DD1239F936A1575
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> Whatever,the rules should apply equally to US as well as "foreign" auto
> makers.
>You do realise that while you theorise about what % tariff
>to apply to imported cars and components, your leaders
>travel the planet pleading with most other nations to
>abolish tariffs in the spirit of free trade and market
>self-regulation held to be a pinnacle of the American way.
They're not necessarily _our_ leaders. They just happened to get
elected. The current administration touts whatever helps out their
friends and self-interests the best. So, they carefully examine
tariffs, check with their friends, and make a decision. It has little
to do with what the people here want.
>If your auto makers can't compete, then it's your fault -
>not anyone else's, and as a casual outside observer, I'd
>just comment that penalizing others because they appear to
>be able to do something better than you can isn't very fair.
Definitely. US Automakers don't have a clue. Never have, never will,
never want to change. If someone gets on a Board of Directors who
advocates change, they push him back off.
>Would you like it if your policy was extended to getting all
>non US sprinters to carry 50lb lead weights at the Olympics
I'm not sure how that applies. However, in the instances where the US
does actually advocate a "no tariff" situation, the trading partner
quite often continues to maintain a tariff. That's not right. (Keeping
in mind that "no tariff" is usually reserved for situations when a
powerful administration ally wants to import foreign items at low cost
to increase profit and CEO salaries, at the expense of the workforce
and smaller vendors who use local materials).
Jim Yanik - 20 Oct 2007 01:01 GMT
>>You do realise that while you theorise about what % tariff
>>to apply to imported cars and components, your leaders
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
> to increase profit and CEO salaries, at the expense of the workforce
> and smaller vendors who use local materials).
I believe that Japan's tariff is for completed cars,not assemblies.
I suspect that Honda and Toyota could and would continue in the US if a
tariff was enacted for imported parts assemblies.I don't know about
Nissan,Mazda and BMW.
It would affect "domestic" auto companies much more,as they move a lot of
parts AND complete cars between Mexico,Canada,and the US.
If you want to aid US workers,get the domestic automakers to build their
products in the US,not in Mexico and Canada.
At least Honda and the other imports build most of their US(and some
export)cars here in the US,employing US workers.
While our own auto industry builds their US vehicles in other countries.

Signature
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
still me - 20 Oct 2007 14:30 GMT
>I believe that Japan's tariff is for completed cars,not assemblies.
>I suspect that Honda and Toyota could and would continue in the US if a
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>export)cars here in the US,employing US workers.
>While our own auto industry builds their US vehicles in other countries.
I thought the US, Mexico, and Canada were all one country now. Did I
misunderstand the politicians?