Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Nissan / Nissan Cars / October 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

The big three ask for higher tariiffs on imported SUV and mini vans.

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
willshak - 17 Oct 2007 22:20 GMT
The big three can't compete.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE1DD1239F936A15752C0A96F948260

Signature

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
To email, remove the double zeroes after @

JimV - 18 Oct 2007 03:25 GMT
> The big three can't compete.
> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE1DD1239F936A15752C0A96F948260 

That's as it should be. Vehicles not assembled with American labor
should have a higher tariff. Where do you think we're going to get the
money to buy these vehicles when all the non-service jobs have been
outsourced?
Jim Yanik - 18 Oct 2007 04:06 GMT
>> The big three can't compete.
>> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE1DD1239F936A15752C
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> money to buy these vehicles when all the non-service jobs have been
> outsourced?

of course,that should include "American" vehicles assembled in Mexico and
Canada.
Also,any major assemblies such as engines,transmissions,frames/subframes.

Signature

Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

JimV - 18 Oct 2007 04:20 GMT
>>> The big three can't compete.
>>> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE1DD1239F936A15752C
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Canada.
> Also,any major assemblies such as engines,transmissions,frames/subframes.

It's a percentage of domestic content. Clearly if it's 0% it's a
no-brainer. We could argue about numbers between 0 and 100.
Jim Yanik - 18 Oct 2007 05:18 GMT
>>>> The big three can't compete.
>>>> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE1DD1239F936A1575
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> It's a percentage of domestic content. Clearly if it's 0% it's a
> no-brainer. We could argue about numbers between 0 and 100.

First,define "domestic content".
Currently,there's some funny games played with that definition,favoring
"US" brands.

some "foreign" autos have greater "domestic content" than some "American"
autos. Hondas have the greatest domestic content.

Whatever,the rules should apply equally to US as well as "foreign" auto
makers.

Signature

Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

frederick - 19 Oct 2007 09:04 GMT
>>>>> 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.
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.

Would you like it if your policy was extended to getting all
non US sprinters to carry 50lb lead weights at the Olympics?
still me - 19 Oct 2007 20:23 GMT
>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?
Bajori - 19 Oct 2007 00:22 GMT
> The big three can't compete.
> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE1DD1239F936A15752C0A96F948260

The Japanese tariffs on American vehicles are nearly 5 times the amount we
tax on Japanese-imported vehicles. Are you trying to say the Japanese can't
compete?
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.