Toyota may face backlash from Congress

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070302/ap_on_bi_ge/toyota_backlash_4

Well it seems to be mostly political rhetoric like usual. Its hard to correct for mistakes in trade policy that should've been done years back when Toyota didn't have the foothold it does now in the US. Adding some tariff would hurt American jobs too. If they would've evened up the game a long time ago and made the playing field more in line with domestic brands then Toyota wouldn't have gotten where they are here already and this wouldn't be an issue. So Toyota brags that they have brought 386,000 jobs to the US. I wonder how many they have pushed out from domestic brands?? If the numbers are equal or in favor of Toyota then this issue isn't a big deal. But if not and I don't think it is then this is a bigger deal and should've been addressed....

If GM, Ford and Chysler all close down or go bankrupt Toyota can talk all they want about new jobs because it won't matter unless they make more than whats lost and that won't happen. Congrats to Toyota to the winner go the spoils and I do mean spoils!

"… said Sen. Debbie Stabenow D-Mich., who represents thousands of Detroit-based auto workers. "Most of their vehicles are still coming from Japan."

Stabenow and other lawmakers…note that 46 percent of Toyota's U.S. sales in 2006 came from vehicles imported from Japan…

Only in “Washington-speak” could an article carry these two statements and not see just how contradictory they are…last time I checked, if 46% of the vehicles you sell in the U.S. were imported (meaning 54% were not imported) then “most of their vehicles” can NOT be “coming from Japan” unless you consider “46%” to be most! :confused:

These are the people making our laws...God help us all.

"386,000. Bird watchers in Nebraska. Kilometers to the Moon. Jobs created by Toyota in the U.S."

Um, are they really "created" if those jobs were once at GM, Ford or Chrysler? Perhaps a more accurate term would be "transferred" jobs.

Um, are they really "created" if those jobs were once at GM, Ford or Chrysler? Perhaps a more accurate term would be "transferred" jobs.

I like the cut of your jib.

I have a feeling that as GM continues to sort itself out (For example, I've noticed that no one seems to post those "GM Deathwatch" articles anymore...), and as Toyota faces more and more recalls, this "Toyota Threat" will sorta fade into the background.

Only in “Washington-speak” could an article carry these two statements and not see just how contradictory they are…last time I checked, if 46% of the vehicles you sell in the U.S. were imported (meaning 56% were not imported) then “most of their vehicles” can NOT be “coming from Japan” unless you consider “46%” to be most! :confused:

These are the people making our laws...God help us all.

But are the 54% US made or are some of them made elsewhere other than the US? (I don't know myself).
If 10% or 20% are being made elsewhere than they are still imported and the 46% from Japan would still be the highest percentage.

Toyota is as American as Apple Pie:

ohh its not over by a longshot Jim..Toyota is not done at all. But the reports coming out now. This is the 8-9 one I have read in the last 3 months from different places that states there is something wrong on this "level" playing field. There is.

Now I know the U.S. Car makers messed up in the 80's and so on they deserve the problem of reliability they got from that era. It has come and gone and actually some nameplates surpass the imports they once were beaten out by in quality. The unions are a dance partner that are dipping when they should be twirling messing everything up, why? they have no concept of taking two to tango the right way. Last is this practice that the import companies are using that shows leaps and bounds that there is something wrong.

Now first off is the importing. Sure importing is fine but to build here. And also import cus its supply and demand?? Not a chance. Its all numbers and if it was the case the factories here would be pumping them out not importing them. It IS cheaper to import the cars than to make them here as pointed out in the reports like this one given the advantage of the weaker yen. Kinda funny that its not recognized when Toyota makes record profits every month. Its not from sales but where they make the cars they sell.
Sure they are building these new factories in the South. Great they know they are getting cheap labor in a new area. Well, what about those 400K jobs lost in communities up north. Sure Toyota is spouting off about making jobs for people. IN THE SOUTH. WHY??? CHEAPER, new everything and they can build up a community.
What would impress me is and would not be so harsh is if Toyota took the closed factories from one of the big three and used that as the calling card of hey were helping America see were helping existing metropolis' stay alive and be part of this economy. Nope not doing it that way. See the problem is these closed factories some have been around since the golden days of the big 3. Whole cities, town and heck states thrived and built up around these factories. Millions of jobs, from mom and pop stores to corporations thrived. business that work directly or not so much with them thrived from these factories churning out cars. And suburbs that built up families and traditions of generations relied on these now vacant factories that litter the northern part of the U.S. These are the jobs Toyota took away. Yes, as said before the U.S. automaker has its faults but import companies coming in here is one big problem with it. They go into the South, where it is cheap. they find viable markets that can sustain a growth of a new factory. Places that have workforce's that can do the jobs. The problem is these town and cities in the South. They have survived for years on an economy that never needed a car factory. Yet creating almost 400K jobs here is all right where the generations of families the depended on these factories lay vacant? What good is that doing us? None! Don't you think Toyota knows this? They are using us like a sponge. They do not care as long as the cars are sold. Sure the same argument can be said about the U.S. makers but you know what. They are our own and the generations of families would still be thriving if we did not give into the false helpfulness of import companies. You want to impress me Toyota convert a few old Detroit factories to pump out your cars in the North and them I might think twice about what your tactics are. But they stand very obvious. Toyota is in it to win and control not just a global market but the U.S. market. Great a foreign power dictating what Americans drive. That makes me feel great. One of our last great liberties is having a U.S. car company make is a car. Take that away and what? We were the ones that created this whole genre of cars for the masses. Before then it was for the rich. Were giving what Henry Ford started away to cheap labor and an expanding invasion by a foreign nameplate that people think is as American as the flag we fly?? (sure the U.S. makers can do the same but agin its that two step with the Unions that is messing up the dance.)
Our government is supposed to protect our nations best interest. Not line the pockets of supporters of foreign companies eroding one of our biggest assets of our economy. Yes, they should look into this. There should be legislation into the practices of what is going on. Is it cry wolf?? or is it really happening? Toyota has thought this through very well and knows what it is doing. Building factories here while still importing huge amounts of product to this country. This helps out who more? Profits are sky high in the U.S. while the big 2.5 have a huge uphill battle that is in part the "level" playing field. The field is not level, the government that is sworn to protect and uphold the values of this country are not doing so. This country need to wake up and realize that yes Toyota is doing a great job. But at what? Helping us or milking us for all its worth. the trade laws have benefited the import companies for the longest time as you can see by the astronomical numbers posted by Toyota??? and its time to change and help the auto companies that were born here and not help competition from other shores.
What pride do we have left if we don't have some for our own people.:confused:

Well said CAPS. Ive complained about the un-even playing field in the auto industry for a long time. Its just funny that a company can import half of their products and turn a huge profit and then in turn build factories here to plant a permanent foothold and appear "part of the gang".

But yet our own homegrown companies have to ship production offshore just to turn a minimum profit on some products. Indeed Robert, God help us all and wtf has this country come to?

I have no issues against imports being here, hell more choices for everyone. But damn, level the playing field a bit so our OWN manufacturers dont have to scrap for anything possible to make a profit and get some headway.

"386,000. Bird watchers in Nebraska. Kilometers to the Moon. Jobs created by Toyota in the U.S."

Um, are they really "created" if those jobs were once at GM, Ford or Chrysler? Perhaps a more accurate term would be "transferred" jobs.

In which case it should not affect our economy what so ever...Well, actually our economy might grow a bit from those tearing down GM's plants and building Toyota's.

77

go read my post above and see how that would not effect our economy?? It sure does..

But are the 54% US made or are some of them made elsewhere other than the US? (I don't know myself).
If 10% or 20% are being made elsewhere than they are still imported and the 46% from Japan would still be the highest percentage.

It is not an ambiguous term…”imported” means it was not made in the U.S. The Senator quoted in the article is either stupid or simply sees no problem saying whatever advances her agenda; neither would surprise me but both possibilities should bother people.

On average, the “foreign” nameplates build much more than 50% of the vehicles sold in the U.S. in the U.S.; for some nameplates, the percentage built here is almost 80%. However, the demand for Toyota vehicles in the past year or so outstripped its ability to meet the demand with their U.S. capacity so a greater percentage of vehicles than normal were imported.

I read an article once that suggested that Toyota, Honda, etc. built plants in the US, starting in the 80's in large part because of flak from the big three and politicians.

It also suggested that all this new capacity was what allowed them to take so much market share so quickly. If they had never built the factories here in the 80's, they'd not have nearly the capacity here (or in Japan) that they do now.

Food for thought.

Imported means it was not made in the US... but Canada part of North America, and as far as the auto industry is concerned, US and Canada enjoy a defacto relationship. People like to use stats to suit their sometimes feeble arguments to mask known political agendas. Not mentioning any names but Nashville might as well be Tokyo.

I read an article once that suggested that Toyota, Honda, etc. built plants in the US, starting in the 80's in large part because of flak from the big three and politicians.

It also suggested that all this new capacity was what allowed them to take so much market share so quickly. If they had never built the factories here in the 80's, they'd not have nearly the capacity here (or in Japan) that they do now.

Food for thought.
It wasn't from "flack"; it was one very quantifiable reason; they built here to save money.

Aside from significant transportation expense they avoided, Detroit had asked for and received a lot of protection in the form of tarrifs/taxes/duties all of which didn't apply to a vehicle not imported.

Imported means it was not made in the US... but Canada part of North America, and as far as the auto industry is concerned, US and Canada enjoy a defacto relationship. People like to use stats to suit their sometimes feeble arguments to mask known political agendas. Not mentioning any names but Nashville might as well be Tokyo.
If you have a problem with my facts, then prove them wrong; in the meantime I don’t need an Australian to tell me I’m not “American” enough for him.

Any vehicle built by anybody in the U.S. (be it GM, Ford, Honda, Toyota or anyone else) is a hell of a lot more “American” and a hell of lot better FOR America than an imported vehicle (and that includes the Australian stuff GM is bringing here).

It wasn't from "flack"; it was one very quantifiable reason; they built here to save money.

Aside from significant transportation expense they avoided, Detroit had asked for and received a lot of protection in the form of tarrifs/taxes/duties all of which didn't apply to a vehicle not imported.

Protection in the form of tarrifs/taxes/duties all of which didn't apply to a vehicle not imported, driven by the big three and politicos sounds like flak to me. Either definition seems to apply. ;)

FLAK–noun
1. antiaircraft fire, esp. as experienced by the crews of combat airplanes at which the fire is directed.
2. criticism; hostile reaction; abuse: Such an unpopular decision is bound to draw a lot of flak from the press.

But I only read the article. I spent most of the 80's watching cartoons.

But I only read the article. I spent most of the 80's watching cartoons.

Voltron & Thundercats FTW!

It is not an ambiguous term…”imported” means it was not made in the U.S. The Senator quoted in the article is either stupid or simply sees no problem saying whatever advances her agenda; neither would surprise me but both possibilities should bother people.

On average, the “foreign” nameplates build much more than 50% of the vehicles sold in the U.S. in the U.S.; for some nameplates, the percentage built here is almost 80%. However, the demand for Toyota vehicles in the past year or so outstripped its ability to meet the demand with their U.S. capacity so a greater percentage of vehicles than normal were imported.

It says "They note that 46 percent of Toyota's U.S. sales in 2006 came from vehicles imported from Japan"

Like you said imported is from countries from the US the article says 46% from Japan, there are other countries they could have come from as well.

It says "They note that 46 percent of Toyota's U.S. sales in 2006 came from vehicles imported from Japan"

Like you said imported is from countries from the US the article says 46% from Japan, there are other countries they could have come from as well.

Exactly. Key words "imported from Japan". Thus the statements do not contradict.

It says "They note that 46 percent of Toyota's U.S. sales in 2006 came from vehicles imported from Japan"

Like you said imported is from countries from the US the article says 46% from Japan, there are other countries they could have come from as well.
To the best of my knowledge, Toyota has no plants outside of Japan from which they import into the U.S. If someone has actual knowledge otherwise then feel free to share the specifics.

That aside, 54% of the vehicles sold by Toyota in the U.S. were made in the U.S. and that's not going to change regardless of where the the other 46% were imported from.

The simple fact is, the the majorty of vehicles Toyota sold in the U.S. in 2006 were made here. If you don't believe me there are plenty of publications that have discussed Toyota's ratio for 2006 including several in the Wall Street Journal such as...

Toyota's North American production ratio -- a figure that measures how localized and "American" the company is by comparing the number of vehicles Toyota builds in North America with its imports from Japan -- has been dropping fast because of surging imports. Toyota has said it aims to produce in North America two-thirds of the overall number of vehicles it sells here. But rising imports sent Toyota's North American production ratio slipping to 54% in 2006.{Toyoyta Picks Mississippi Site For New Assembly Plant; The Wall Street Journal, February 27, 2007 1:35p.m.; Page A2}

It's all missing the point anyway; Detroit and dim-witted Senators alike can agrue about where the vehicles are made until they are blue in the face! Detroit's problems are not where the vehicles are or are not made; Detroit's problems are that more and more people are buying Toyotas.

Voltron & Thundercats FTW!


Hell yeah!

Any vehicle built by anybody in the U.S. (be it GM, Ford, Honda, Toyota or anyone else) is a hell of a lot more “American” and a hell of lot better FOR America than an imported vehicle (and that includes the Australian stuff GM is bringing here).

Oh you've hurt my feelings, Robert. :cry:

NEWSFLASH: GM products from Australia are no good for US economy! Lutz must be a fool... what was he thinking? :p

To the best of my knowledge, Toyota has no plants outside of Japan from which they import into the U.S. If someone has actual knowledge otherwise then feel free to share the specifics.

That aside, 54% of the vehicles sold by Toyota in the U.S. were made in the U.S. and that's not going to change regardless of where the the other 46% were imported from.



Actually, isn't assembled a better word than "made" since most of the parts used to make the cars are made in Japan.

It's all missing the point anyway; Detroit and dim-witted Senators alike can agrue about where the vehicles are made until they are blue in the face! Detroit's problems are not where the vehicles are or are not made; Detroit's problems are that more and more people are buying Toyotas.


Thats the point exactly. these goverment officials are begging the import companies to come here...why??? That is the big problem?? why not GM or Ford?? Why is it Toyota or Honda or Nissan or Kia?? There has to be a catch..
The catch I think is the Unions..if I am not wrong in this. They cannot close a shop up i nthe north and go down south. So only other option is go to Mexico or Canada to set up shop..in a nutshell right??

And the reason Toyota has this huge sales numbers is they have places to bring cars in from. Japan...
GM does this to a lesser extent..ALOT less with Holden. But if it was that expensive to bring the G8 here why is it still only in the 30's for the car. Its my wonder what the yen and aus. dollar are compratibly??
If GM was making money off the import of the GTO and now G8. Hows is it so far fetched to say Toyota brining thousands of cars at a time is not giving them millions???

Only in “Washington-speak” could an article carry these two statements and not see just how contradictory they are…last time I checked, if 46% of the vehicles you sell in the U.S. were imported (meaning 54% were not imported) then “most of their vehicles” can NOT be “coming from Japan” unless you consider “46%” to be most! :confused:

These are the people making our laws...God help us all.

I could'nt agree more. God help US.

Actually, isn't assembled a better word than "made" since most of the parts used to make the cars are made in Japan.
Yes, assembled. Toyota and the Japanese have brought all or most of their parts suppliers here to the US. Not many americans work @ those places, I know from the countless meetings we had with them.
Also, the gm Ypsilanti FisherBody plant was not sold to Toyota. Still empty.
The US manufacturing/ machining base is alll but destroyed in Detroit. It will never come back.
The UAW limited the GTO imports.
(97SS 383 - D1)

Yes, assembled. Toyota and the Japanese have brought all or most of their parts suppliers here to the US. Not many americans work @ those places, I know from the countless meetings we had with them.
Would you care to give some specific facility names and locatioins for those suppliers who have been brought here but don't employ many Americans?

If they've really brought "most or all" of their suppliers to the U.S. then you ought to be able to supply quite a long list since a typical vehical manufacturer has hundreds or even thousands of different suppliers.

Thats the point exactly. these goverment officials are begging the import companies to come here...why??? That is the big problem?? why not GM or Ford?? Why is it Toyota or Honda or Nissan or Kia?? There has to be a catch..
The catch I think is the Unions..if I am not wrong in this. They cannot close a shop up i nthe north and go down south. So only other option is go to Mexico or Canada to set up shop..in a nutshell right??

And the reason Toyota has this huge sales numbers is they have places to bring cars in from. Japan...
GM does this to a lesser extent..ALOT less with Holden. But if it was that expensive to bring the G8 here why is it still only in the 30's for the car. Its my wonder what the yen and aus. dollar are compratibly??
If GM was making money off the import of the GTO and now G8. Hows is it so far fetched to say Toyota brining thousands of cars at a time is not giving them millions???
I think you are missing one very big point...it isn't the phyiscal location; if GM or Ford builds a plant in Mississippi or Toyota builds a plant in Ohio or Michigan, GM and Ford still have the UAW to deal with...regardless of what one thinks of the UAW or unions in general; that presents a significant competative disadvantage to GM and Ford compared to any manufacturer that doesn't have to deal with a union.

As to why Toyota is making a lot of money, it's the simple fact that they are selling a lot of cars...any advantage given by exchange rates pales in comparison to simply selling the cars they make (wherever they are made).

Oh you've hurt my feelings, Robert. :cry:

NEWSFLASH: GM products from Australia are no good for US economy! Lutz must be a fool... what was he thinking? :p

I guess I should expand a bit more on my point and cut down a little on the sarcasm..

Robert, to explain just how narrow minded your comments can be, GM awarding work to Australia is done for 1. cost reasons as it can be done cheaper 2. RWD expertise there 3. Don't you think that long term GM will ramp up production of these Zeta based vehicles IN THE US?

Focus on point number 3 and then realise just how ill-conceived your comments are... and please, none of this where did I say this and I don't need an Aussie to tell me points 1-3. :D

Actually, isn't assembled a better word than "made" since most of the parts used to make the cars are made in Japan.
Most of the parts are not made in Japan; in fact, most of the parts Toyota and Nissan and Honda and the rest use come from the same suppliers that GM and Ford and Chrysler uses and generally, come from facilities within a few miles or at least in the same region as the assembly plant is located in.

What does often come from Japan are tooling and dies, etc (upon which a lot of duty/taxes are paid when they are brought into the U.S.)...much of that tooling is "loaned" to the suppliers making the parts.

That's why the Domestic Parts Content of a Honda/Nissan/Toyota made is the U.S. is comperable (note I said comperable not equal) to that of an vehicle made in the U.S. by GM/Ford/Chrysler.

NEWSFLASH: GM products from Australia are no good for US economy! Lutz must be a fool... what was he thinking? :p
It’s amazing how you can quote what I say and have no apparent comprehension of it.

My comment said nothing about what was “good” for GM. The comment was pointing out the very small benefit to the U.S. economy when an imported vehicle is sold here compared to the much more significant benefit to the U.S. when a vehicle is MADE here.

Is it a benefit to GM when it sells a car in the U.S. (regardless of where the car was built)? Of course it is. Is there a benefit to the U.S. economy when a vehicle is sold in the U.S. regardless of where it’s made? Of course there is. I didn’t say otherwise.

However, the benefit to the U.S. of goods many anywhere outside of the U.S. (Australian or otherwise) and sold here is nothing compared to the benefit to the U.S. economy of goods made in the U.S.

If you refuse to see the truth of my statement then I’ll just give your comments and opinions the attention they deserve; if you really can’t understand that concept then you have my pity.

I think you are missing one very big point...it isn't the phyiscal location; if GM or Ford builds a plant in Mississippi or Toyota builds a plant in Ohio or Michigan, GM and Ford still have the UAW to deal with...regardless of what one thinks of the UAW or unions in general; that presents a significant competative disadvantage to GM and Ford compared to any manufacturer that doesn't have to deal with a union.

As to why Toyota is making a lot of money, it's the simple fact that they are selling a lot of cars...any advantage given by exchange rates pales in comparison to simply selling the cars they make (wherever they are made).

I did say that that, in a nutshell. and not missing the point:
The catch I think is the Unions..if I am not wrong in this. They cannot close a shop up i nthe north and go down south. So only other option is go to Mexico or Canada to set up shop..in a nutshell right??
If they go to Canada or Mexico they dont deal with the unions (CAW yea but not the UAW). That is one reason why. They are sidestepping the unions cus they are that messed up in the logic. unions cut off the nose to spite the face mentality. I dont think you would see all this shipping jobs and closing plants if the unions figured it out. They got Ford and GM by the balls cus even if they dont work they still get paid..WTF?? Thats messed up. So only thing to do is send it outside the U.S. just to compete.

Toyota like I said I would not say as much as I am but if they stepped in and took over these factories that lay dormant then I would give them props. But to do what they are doing they are doing not to help us in the least bit. Just profiting from our stupidity.

And I will say it here mark my words: there will be a story or something that will come out in the next year or two. There will be a report on how these numbers are padded in some way or form to make them look huge (almost 90% gain in the Prius??) Either by what DCX was doing. Forcing the cars down the dealers throats and toyota able to absorb this amount just by sheer sales volume. or some finagaling of the numbers. Trust me. At this rate the jump in numbers. Its almost impossible to do without seeing the huge reflection in the market. Yet its about the same. And truthfully I just dont see it yet. So I am going with someone trying a tactic of marketing that will be just another weapon in the arsenal of thier takeover of this country.

and by the way. Why say assembled in the U.S. and not Made in the U.S.A.??

I did say that that, in a nutshell. and not missing the point:

If they go to Canada or Mexico they dont deal with the unions (CAW yea but not the UAW). That is one reason why. They are sidestepping the unions cus they are that messed up in the logic. unions cut off the nose to spite the face mentality. I dont think you would see all this shipping jobs and closing plants if the unions figured it out. They got Ford and GM by the balls cus even if they dont work they still get paid..WTF?? Thats messed up. So only thing to do is send it outside the U.S. just to compete.

Toyota like I said I would not say as much as I am but if they stepped in and took over these factories that lay dormant then I would give them props. But to do what they are doing they are doing not to help us in the least bit. Just profiting from our stupidity.

And I will say it here mark my words: there will be a story or something that will come out in the next year or two. There will be a report on how these numbers are padded in some way or form to make them look huge (almost 90% gain in the Prius??) Either by what DCX was doing. Forcing the cars down the dealers throats and toyota able to absorb this amount just by sheer sales volume. or some finagaling of the numbers. Trust me. At this rate the jump in numbers. Its almost impossible to do without seeing the huge reflection in the market. Yet its about the same. And truthfully I just dont see it yet. So I am going with someone trying a tactic of marketing that will be just another weapon in the arsenal of thier takeover of this country.

and by the way. Why say assembled in the U.S. and not Made in the U.S.A.??
Guess I missed that statement so no, you got that point. :)

As to Toyota or some other transplant taking over old plants; they may "look" good but it would be a very bad business decision otherwise...one the problems that GM and Ford and Chrysler face, among many, is the age of their plants and their inefficiencies and to bring them up to date would be a huge expense; much less expensive to simply build new plants somewhere especially when communities are willing to give incentives to get them to bring jobs to a new area...it's not all that dissimilar to an NFL team choosing to move to a new city.

yea till the players (the union) step in and dont want you to move or they dont play..
What I am wondering is who is hampering or why is it that these wonderful elected officials blubbering on about Toyota and such. Why them? why not GM or Ford??? Is it what Toyota will do for the communities?? Something that GM or Ford cant offer?? again the whole thing about the unions get in the way. new plant in southern U.S. means union labor prices.
Kinda funny how it goes all back to one problem that will not fix itself..Unions.
It just baffles me that, and i hope you can see it Robert. These detroit plants are shut down for many reasons, unions one, dated facility and the last thing sales. Now these places have cities and communities tied up into them and the thousands of jobs lost at the factories. There are countless hundreds of thousands of jobs lost that surround these factories in the town and cities around it. From corperations that worked with the automakers to shopping plazas and chain stores to the corner coffee house that went under since the factory closed. All of these indirect economical resources that were kept alive by the plant.Turning a thriving city of millions to a deserted boarded up slum with many not having a job. Where does this help our economy? When millions lose thier jobs.
You go down south. Toyota goes to a new town that they picked out with some help of the local goverment official throwing incetives after incentices to come build there. Towns that by all rights have a good economy. Have lived like this for many generations not needing an automaker to make a better community. They give these new cities almost 400K jobs. Jobs that are good for that community and will make a town a thriving city in a few years doing what that old city in Detroit had. Sure it sounds good for the southerners and it is good for them, but what good does it for the rest of the country up north?
Sure its not Toyotas fault. They are doing what they should but come on. They are doing this in such a fasion that it does look helpful to everyone but it is not. The unions are to blame for most and then it goes a long list of to blames from there, along with an un fair playing feild. There has to be something there for all these articles to have come forth in the last few months. thats why GM and Ford build out of the country. They cannot compete with the "new" so they build their "new" outside. Its almost like a castle thats been beseiged and the ruler driven out and the king ins now looking at his own castle from the outside walls while the invader is sitting in his throne room. That is what these import companies are doing throwing a wedge into an economy that cannot afford this kinda split. But you know what. There not the ones that will lose out. If this "kingdom" falls apart. You think they will be in dire straghts?? Nope. they pile back on thier boats and take the spoils of war home, back to Japan. Can our U.S. automakers do that? Nope. this is where people buying import cars thinking it does not hurt. Well go talk to those people in detroit that have no jobs. Its not just the auto industry either, hell look at the outsourcing the call centers did. Who is "Jim" and why does he sound like hes in India?? He is. This olive branch of peace is not what they bring. I can tell you that. you should know that. It is as you say the only thing they care about (not the only thing but thats another argument) they care about capitol over anything else. And doing a good job of milk everything about this country in doing so.
In many of Americas families Toyota is as American ans Apple Pie.
That is a frightning thing to realize. and a sad one to boot.

Originally posted by Robert_Nashville :
...regardless of what one thinks of the UAW or unions in general; that presents a significant competative disadvantage to GM and Ford compared to any manufacturer that doesn't have to deal with a union.Why do you believe that?
Toyota pays comparable wages...sometimes more!
Toyota's medical coverage, in most cases is better...less co-pays, better coverage.(I know Honda's is as well, they employ people I talk to everyday)
Maybe that's b/c of their fear of Unionization..:shrug:
Maybe 15-20 years ago, but now???....it reminds me of the "All Domestic cars are crap" stereotype...which may have been earned in the past, but continues to haunt them.:no:

Look for the Union Label;
August 1998; Scientific American Magazine; by Wallich; 2 Page(s)

After nearly a century of unionmanagement warfare in the U.S., a series of nationwide surveys showing that union shops dominate the ranks of the country's most productive workplaces may come as a surprise. In fact, according to Lisa M. Lynch of Tufts University and Sandra E. Black of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, economic Darwinism--the survival of the fittest championed by generations of hard-nosed tycoons--may be doing what legions of organizers could not: putting an end to autocratic bosses and regimented workplaces.

American industry has been trying to reinvent itself for more than 20 years. Management gurus have proclaimed Theories X, Y and Z, not to mention Quality Circles, Total Quality Management (TQM) and High-Output Management. Only in the past few years, however, have any solid data become available on which techniques work and which donÆt. Businesses do not always respond to surveys, and previous attempts to collect data ran into response rates of as low as 6 percent, making their results unrepresentative. Enter the U.S. Census's Educational Quality of the Workforce National Employer Survey, first conducted in 1994, which collected data on business practices from a nationally representative sample of more than 1,500 workplaces....The average unionized establishment recorded productivity levels 16 percent higher than the baseline firm, whereas average non-union ones scored 11 percent lower. One reason: most of the union shops had adopted so-called formal quality programs, in which up to half the workers meet regularly to discuss workplace issues. Moreover, production workers at these establishments shared in the firms profits, and more than a quarter did their lobs in self-managed teams. Productivity in such union shops was 20 percent above baseline. That small minority of unionized workplaces still following the adversarial line recorded productivity 15 percent lower than the baseline, even worse than the non-union average.

I live in central Ohio where there is a large presence by Honda. They do pay their employees a good wage (although from what I hear it is significantly less than the UAW), but their workforce is only about 20% direct employees (making the good wages) and 80% are long term temporaries working for $11-12/ hour. The vast majority of suppliers are also Japanese transplant companies like Yusa, Tigerpoly, Showa, etc. paying $8.50-10/hr.

I have no direct knowledge of how Toyota or Nissan plants or suppliers operate, but I would be suspicious of any numbers without looking deeper into what they count as "employees" and "domestic suppliers".

Why do you believe that?
Toyota pays comparable wages...sometimes more!
Toyota's medical coverage, in most cases is better...less co-pays, better coverage.(I know Honda's is as well, they employ people I talk to everyday)
Maybe that's b/c of their fear of Unionization..:shrug:
Maybe 15-20 years ago, but now???....it reminds me of the "All Domestic cars are crap" stereotype...which may have been earned in the past, but continues to haunt them.:no:
I don't really want to turn this into a discussion on the pros/cons of unions but at the risk of oversimplication, I'll give you a couple of reasons.

1. Unions impede the ability of management to make the best decisions for the company and to react quickly to a changing business environment.
While GM and Ford and Chrysler’s hands are tied up by a union contract and the three domestics are talking with the union negotiators about what to do about the way the auto market is today; Nissan and Toyota and Honda and the rest that are non-unionized have already responded and moved onto the next problem.

In other words, Unions, by their very nature, add inefficiency to the equation.


2 Unions often serve to protect lazy, incompetent employees from termination and likewise, will often delay or stop advancements that would reduce labor costs (cause people to loose jobs or get moved elsewhere).

The moment you remove the consequences of being a bad employee or doing a bad job, you tend to start getting bad results out of people…while it may seem a bit archaic in this “enlightened age”; there is something be said for the fear of being fired as a motivator to keep doing a good job.

Likewise, one of the things that has kept GM/Ford/Chrysler from modernizing their plants and being able to compete on the “level playing field” everyone says they want, are the unions who only look at modernization as meaning less union dues all while Toyota and Nissan and Honda build new, modern, efficient plants.

I live in central Ohio where there is a large presence by Honda. They do pay their employees a good wage (although from what I hear it is significantly less than the UAW), but their workforce is only about 20% direct employees (making the good wages) and 80% are long term temporaries working for $11-12/ hour. The vast majority of suppliers are also Japanese transplant companies like Yusa, Tigerpoly, Showa, etc. paying $8.50-10/hr.

I have no direct knowledge of how Toyota or Nissan plants or suppliers operate, but I would be suspicious of any numbers without looking deeper into what they count as "employees" and "domestic suppliers".
I’m a fellow buckeye; I did two of my degrees at Franklin University; moved to Tennessee from Westerville (Columbus for you non-Ohio people) and grew up near Washington Court House. I well remember when Honda came to Marysville and over the years have known several people who work/worked there. I’m also very familiar with Yusa as their Washington Court House plant is only about seven miles from my parents home and know (and have done taxes for) a number of employees there.

From my experience; while there are Japanese citizens working there, the vast majority of employees (temp and full-time) were Americans (as opposed to what mzgp5x suggested earlier).

I can’t speak to their ratio of employees/temps but I would not say their wages are not at all out of line based on the work they are doing and COL of where they live. Let’s also keep in mind that no one is forcing temp work on people…temps choose to be temps…I worked as an IC for several years here and turned down several full-time jobs before choosing to work for my current employer…I never felt taken advantage of and I made a good income as a temp.

The use of temps is hardly new nor is it confined to the auto industry – many businesses today are using more and more temps, where possible…we may regret that but I suspect it’s just another step away from the traditional “go to work for the local factory for 30 years and then retire” framework our fathers and grandfathers knew and lived by. The auto industry is probably the last business that has still held onto the model; for most businesses and most workers in this country; that model has been dead for many years now.

I can understand how someone might not think of a Yusa part as "domestic" but the term isn’t ambiguous…if a part is made in the U.S. it’s “domestic” content; if it’s imported then it isn’t; regardless of the company name over the door. But the transplants hardly get all their parts from suppliers they have “brought over”…I’ve worked for Dana corporation as well as Kiser Aluminum; I saw and tracked the parts they both those companies were manufacturing and selling to Ford and Nissan and Honda and GM and the rest…Yusa and the like are hardly the only suppliers transplants rely on.

Would you care to give some specific facility names and locatioins for those suppliers who have been brought here but don't employ many Americans?

OK... example... Japanese glass Co. "Central Glass". All of the floor machinery and people were Japanese. Toyota brought them over with them. The Japanese form strong ties with their suppliers from Japan. Not saying ther's anything wrong with that, but, they could go to PPG or Guardian Glass (why not???). These US companies were not considered by Japanese. The same for metal stamping suppliers "Ogiahra", wire harness assemblies, air bag manufacturers... etc.

If the US builds so much junk (the current prevailing US consumer thinking), why is our military equipment so good???

As for old plants, They can be fitted with new automation assembly line equipment to work under 1 roof. Comes down to how you arrage material and work flow around Body/ Paint/ and GA production areas, &, future expansion planning.

example... The new American plant model uses three (3) seperate buildings... Body/ Paint/ GA. ie... LGR plant.

I do believe the Union is far more costly for the domestic AutoMkt (I know as an abused salary employee). Of course, let's not forget, that many of todays domestic cost problems were ideas/ agreements by Mgt and Union.

As far as Detroit, the there are massive amounts of good people out of work. White and blue collar. The Lib Michigan state government solution is to raise tax on services now. It's time people in the US consider giving back to their US citizen-neighbors. I don't see the Japanese helping with Iraq.
(97SS 383 D1) American iron, and fast!!!

Only in “Washington-speak” could an article carry these two statements and not see just how contradictory they are…last time I checked, if 46% of the vehicles you sell in the U.S. were imported (meaning 54% were not imported) then “most of their vehicles” can NOT be “coming from Japan” unless you consider “46%” to be most! :confused:

These are the people making our laws...God help us all.

Well if 46% are from Japan
<45% were from the USA
and 9%+ were from other countries, by my math that would mean most are coming from Japan.

Well if 46% are from Japan
<45% were from the USA
and 9%+ were from other countries, by my math that would mean most are coming from Japan.
If you won't believe me or the Wall Street Journal or Autodata.com then I can't help you. Of the 100% of Toyota vehicles sold in the U.S. in 2006; 54% of them were built in the U.S. - this should not be a difficult concept to grasp.

54% is low compared to the ratio from prior years because a lot of the double-digit increases Toyota's sales last year were for models not made in the U.S.

The vast majority of suppliers are also Japanese transplant companies like Yusa, Tigerpoly, Showa, etc. paying $8.50-10/hr.

I have no direct knowledge of how Toyota or Nissan plants or suppliers operate, but I would be suspicious of any numbers without looking deeper into what they count as "employees" and "domestic suppliers".

In very broad terms and understanding it would seem possible that some so called and labeled "domestic suppliers" ie "domestic content" could source from suppliers that are Japanese owned and operated correct?

In very broad terms and understanding it would seem possible that some so called and labeled "domestic suppliers" ie "domestic content" could source from suppliers that are Japanese owned and operated correct?
I don't have specifics in front of me but as I understand how "part content" is established by a manufacturer for the window sticker statement; the key is where the part(s) were actually manufactured; if they are made in the U.S. then they are "domestic"; ownership of the company that physically makes and/or sells the part is not a consideration; where the part was physically made, by whoever made it is.

in other words, if Dana Corporation, for example, went to India to source a part and then sold it as a Dana part, it would not count toward the domestic part content calculation.

If you won't believe me or the Wall Street Journal or Autodata.com then I can't help you. Of the 100% of Toyota vehicles sold in the U.S. in 2006; 54% of them were built in the U.S. - this should not be a difficult concept to grasp.

54% is low compared to the ratio from prior years because a lot of the double-digit increases Toyota's sales last year were for models not made in the U.S.

I wonder what the $$$ break down is. I know a lot of the more expensive vehicles are built in Japan.

I wonder what the $$$ break down is. I know a lot of the more expensive vehicles are built in Japan.

The entire Lexus line.

What mzgp5x says and if the information is at least half right.

I have said all along and it bears mention again after you read this:
OK... example... Japanese glass Co. "Central Glass". All of the floor machinery and people were Japanese. Toyota brought them over with them. The Japanese form strong ties with their suppliers from Japan. Not saying ther's anything wrong with that, but, they could go to PPG or Guardian Glass (why not???). These US companies were not considered by Japanese. The same for metal stamping suppliers "Ogiahra", wire harness assemblies, air bag manufacturers... etc.

If the US builds so much junk (the current prevailing US consumer thinking), why is our military equipment so good???

As for old plants, They can be fitted with new automation assembly line equipment to work under 1 roof. Comes down to how you arrage material and work flow around Body/ Paint/ and GA production areas, &, future expansion planning.

example... The new American plant model uses three (3) seperate buildings... Body/ Paint/ GA. ie... LGR plant.

I do believe the Union is far more costly for the domestic AutoMkt (I know as an abused salary employee). Of course, let's not forget, that many of todays domestic cost problems were ideas/ agreements by Mgt and Union.

As far as Detroit, the there are massive amounts of good people out of work. White and blue collar. The Lib Michigan state government solution is to raise tax on services now. It's time people in the US consider giving back to their US citizen-neighbors. I don't see the Japanese helping with Iraq.
(97SS 383 D1) American iron, and fast!!!

the people and companies that are Japanese do what they do for one thing, the betterment of Japan. It is a pride they work on in every aspect of their culture in everything they do. As pointed out by mzgp5x in some small ways. Japan does this for no reason but to establish a dominant role in the Auto industry the likes have never seen before with Toyota taking the lead. Japan is creating an empire through commerce and it is strategically positioning itself in our boarders. This is a takeover of who we are. America is the crown jewel of that industry and we are blindly giving it away. We have lost our pride in what made our auto industry great. We don't care we say it does not matter.
When in fact it is all part of a plan to do exactly what they are doing. Making sure they are the global leaders in car production INCLUDING the U.S.. How sad is that, a market we created and we cannot control in the next generation? They struck while the iron was hot. They took our concepts and ideas of what "American" car should be and build them. Great a foreign country telling us what to buy for a family car. The advertising is also the great ploy to lure the mass' into thinking its as red white and blue as you and me. Is it?? I ask this cus as stated in Japan it is hard to get any outside product to get in and any that does get in does it sell? Is it as competitive as the homegrown stuff in Japan? No? Why? One explanation Japanese pride themselves on being from Japan. Is that shown here in the U.S.? Do we stand up and say YES WE HAVE A GREAT CAR..no we go to the local import company and proclaim their dominance? Way to support the home team. Ohh this goes far beyond the auto industry. Heck one example the furniture industry where is that made now?? Not in Indiana or Maine. But India and Malaysia. So were going to let another industry slip through our fingers. Cus its okay to set up foreign factories here on our shores. While building that rolled off the first cars for the mass' rot?? That's doing us justice?
I hate to use this analogy but maybe it will get people thinking.

Nazi Germany was the best of the best at everything produced, you name it they had the best of it, sure we could have just folded and went along with them and their superiority. Why not they were making the best of the best. They were creating an empire with the might they controled. But no we did not. We stood our ground and fought back and won. Our ideal and our steel won the day. Japan has the same mentality but not with bullets and soldiers but with paper and automobiles . build the best of the best and dominate the world. Yet for some reason we think its all right and we let the Trojan horse through the gates. See what I am getting at? And yes the analogy fits, economics and war are the same game played on a different field.

Caps94ZODG I Agree with everthing you said. :usa:

1. Unions impede the ability of management to make the best decisions for the company and to react quickly to a changing business environment.From my experience they force the company, as a whole(employees included), to make better decisions for the company's long term profitablity, not just short term market reactions, since their livelyhoods depend on it. What they lose in time, they make up in quality.
2 Unions often serve to protect lazy, incompetent employees from termination and likewise, will often delay or stop advancements that would reduce labor costs (cause people to loose jobs or get moved elsewhere).This was a past problem, but has all but been eliminated...there's nothing a hard working, due paying, union member hates more than having to carry a free-loader. I have seen many fired!..
Some "advancements" have not been thoroughly thought out, and the human worker is often underestimated. When you figure in the cost of initial investment, operating costs(energy) and maintenance, replacement parts and downtime, those "advancements" lose their perspective shine.

The entire Lexus line.

That is a lot of cash flowing out of America.

From my experience they force the company, as a whole(employees included), to make better decisions for the company's long term profitablity, not just short term market reactions, since their livelyhoods depend on it. What they lose in time, they make up in quality.
If the UAW fostered such good management decisions; why are GM, Ford and Chrysler in the shape they are in today?

If the UAW is so good for quality; why aren’t all (or at least a majority) of GMs vehicles at the top of JD Power IQS and long-term quality studies and why haven’t they all been there for many years in a row rather than just a few scattered here and there?

Seeking what’s good for the long-term is important but especially in today’s business world, not responding to a problem TODAY will cost you both long-term and short-term and put you right out of business. UAW contracts have forced the domestics to do all kinds of stupid things from a business standpoint simply because the CBAs they signed left them no other options – that’s why you see some manufacturers keeping plants open and producing cars it knows there is no market for simply because that’s less expensive overall than paying people to not work.


This was a past problem, but has all but been eliminated...there's nothing a hard working, due paying, union member hates more than having to carry a free-loader. I have seen many fired!..
Some "advancements" have not been thoroughly thought out, and the human worker is often underestimated. When you figure in the cost of initial investment, operating costs(energy) and maintenance, replacement parts and downtime, those "advancements" lose their perspective shine.
Sorry, but I don’t buy it that it was all in the past and isn’t true any longer; I’ve been literally hearing that argument for over 20 years and I find it doubtful that the argument is any more true today than it was then.

If what you’ve said is true then the transplants ought to be knocking on the door of the UAW and asking them to come in and organize their workforce since it ultimately would be better for Toyota, Nissan, Honda and the rest…I don’t think that’s happened yet, however. :)

I’m not saying that the UAW is the source of all of Detroit’s problems; there are plenty of players in the process that bear responsibility but the UAW has made a significant contribution to the problems and although I hear a lot of lip service form the UAW that they are now enlightened and want to “work with management” I’ve seen little hard evidence of that…I guess we’ll all get to see how enlightened the union has become when they negotiate their next contract (which happens later this year if memory serves).

OK... example... Japanese glass Co. "Central Glass". All of the floor machinery and people were Japanese. Toyota brought them over with them. The Japanese form strong ties with their suppliers from Japan. Not saying ther's anything wrong with that, but, they could go to PPG or Guardian Glass (why not???). These US companies were not considered by Japanese. The same for metal stamping suppliers "Ogiahra", wire harness assemblies, air bag manufacturers... etc.

Central Glass came to this country as a joint venture with Ford so I’m not at all sure that your statement that Toyota brought them over is accurate. I don’t know anything personally about “Ogiahra” but I do know that many manufacturers, including Toyota, was buying wiring harness/parts from companies like Kaiser Aluminum because I worked as an IC at Kaiser and saw the part orders.

That aside, you initially said that….
Toyota and the Japanese have brought all or most of their parts suppliers here to the US. Not many americans work @ those places…

A manufacturer (be it GM or Ford or Honda or Toyota) has literally thousands of suppliers so I can’t help but question the accuracy of your initial assertion that Toyota had brought over “all or most of their parts suppliers here to the U.S.”. I’m sure they’ve brought some but saying they brought all or most is probably a bit of an exaggeration.

As far as your statement that “not many Americans work there” I just find that a bit difficult to believe…I’m sure most of the senior management would be Japanese if the supplier really was “brought over” to the U.S. from Japan but I really doubt that most of the workforce are all Japanese…if a Toyota or Honda was really going to do that then there is really very little benefit to bringing the supplier here at all; far cheaper to simply import the parts.

Posted by Robert_Nashville:
If the UAW fostered such good management decisions; why are GM, Ford and Chrysler in the shape they are in today?
They refused Demings philosiphies for continuous improvement, Statistical Process Control, the Japanese applied it like a Religion! Add to that the "Disposable Car" mentality of the '70s, resting on laurels, and some bad decision makers in the wrong places..you have the kinda short term thinking I'm talking about. ."Deming's management philosophies are the driving force behind Japan's economic miracle." - USA Today


Posted by Robert_Nashville:
If what you’ve said is true then the transplants ought to be knocking on the door of the UAW and asking them to come in and organize their workforce since it ultimately would be better for Toyota, Nissan, Honda and the rest…I don’t think that’s happened yet, however. If Unions are the Evil that ends all, why do the Japanese home plants all have them?
Example:
Meanwhile, the Confederation of Japanese Auto Workers, while it hasn't taken a stand against the proposed alliance, is watching the situation carefully, according to members of a JAW delegation that toured North America last week. Isao Yoshida, the leader of JAW delegation, stressed that JAW indicated that the union's currently excellent relations with Nissan and Ghosn were one of the key reasons for holding off on any kind of criticism. Japanese unions don't criticize management unless key union interests, such as jobs and compensation, are directly threatened.

However, during the lunch with reporters at the Japanese consulate in Detroit, leaders indicated that JAW was keenly interested in insuring that Japanese automakers generally maintained a significant production base in Japan.

Yoshida said he expects Japanese automakers this year to build more cars outside Japan than they do in Japan. JAW, however, does not want Japanese auto production to drop below 10 million units annually and will pressure Japanese manufacturers to maintain the production level, which is critical to the job security of Japanese auto workers, he said. Wagoner Wins A Round by Joseph Szczesny (7/31/2006)





Trade Unions fostered such ideas as mentoring, apprenticeships, which although wasn't a "fast-track" to employment for the trainees; it ensured properly trained workers and quality work
When I began working in the UAW just 12 years ago, there was a lot of waste; both in the offices and on the "Floor", now I can say with all good conscience, it's NOT the same Union!, or management fo that matter.

Look how much GM has changed, improved, over the last 12 years...Do you think that an evolving UAW couldn't be a part of that improvement???
There is always some middle ground that both labor and management can get a satisfactory agreement, especially since negociators on both sides are much better at defining their needs.

I’ll give you this; you’ve learned the UAW talking points well.

Unions are an impediment to management; they seek one thing and that is their own continued existence. Any benefit to the rank and file is purely a by-product of their desire to maintain power.

They have certainly served a purpose but that purpose has long ago passed and as long as the domestics have to deal with the UAW, they will always be at a disadvantage to the transplant manufacturers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derek M
The entire Lexus line. .
That is a lot of cash flowing out of America.

Ya think??? sad isnt it. Were sell outs.. :mad: :o

Central Glass came to this country as a joint venture with Ford so I’m not at all sure that your statement that Toyota brought them over is accurate.

That aside, you initially said that….

A manufacturer (be it GM or Ford or Honda or Toyota) has literally thousands of suppliers so I can’t help but question the accuracy of your initial assertion that Toyota had brought over “all or most of their parts suppliers here to the U.S.”. I’m sure they’ve brought some but saying they brought all or most is probably a bit of an exaggeration.

As far as your statement that “not many Americans work there” I just find that a bit difficult to believe…if a Toyota or Honda was really going to do that then there is really very little benefit to bringing the supplier here at all; far cheaper to simply import the parts.

Central Glass was associated with Ford because they copied (and wanted) Ford's glass process for application of the poly-urethan internal layer front wind-screen manufacture. It is true, the Japanese only want their own suppliers. They don't trust American based companies. I've seen it alot with all of the jobs I have had.

Sorry you don't agree with me, and, I don't begin to approach your standards. I state the truth. Go ahead and read all you want. Believe everything you read. I'm done with this post and all of your others. You will not see me again. CamaroZ28 is a tech web-site.

I usually have alot of Engineering information to share in those posts, and, attempt to help people with modification of their cars. It's sad that all you can do is bash the domestics on a regular basis and cannot contribute to any of the Engineering science applications on this web site.

Central Glass was associated with Ford because they copied (and wanted) Ford's glass process for application of the poly-urethan internal layer front wind-screen manufacture. It is true, the Japanese only want their own suppliers. They don't trust American based companies. I've seen it alot with all of the jobs I have had.

Sorry you don't agree with me, and, I don't begin to approach your standards. I state the truth. Go ahead and read all you want. Believe everything you read. I'm done with this post and all of your others. You will not see me again. CamaroZ28 is a tech web-site.

I usually have alot of Engineering information to share in those posts, and, attempt to help people with modification of their cars. It's sad that all you can do is bash the domestics on a regular basis and cannot contribute to any of the Engineering science applications on this web site.
Well I guess if you want to take your marbles and go home you can but just because someone disagrees with you seems like a pretty flimsily reason to do so.

When you start making statements like “all” or “most”, as you did in your initial post, you are making a very all encompassing assertion and I don’t feel it unusual or unreasonable or out of line to ask for some evidence to back up the claim. Bringing over one or two or even a few or a few dozen suppliers is hardly “all”…and claiming that all or most of the employees of those suppliers, how ever many there are, are all or mostly Japanese is equally broad and deserving of some evidence to back it up.

I’m not discounting your personal experience but your personal experience is a pretty limited basis on which to base such broad statements. Frankly, what seems likely here is that you simply hate Japanese imports (or the Japanese in general) and engaged in a bit of exaggeration to reinforce your point of view.

As far as "bashing the domestics" go; pointing out real issues or bad decisions or disagreeing with you or other people is not “bashing the domestics”…if you can’t see or refuse to see the problems that have and/or do exist in Detroit then I would suggest that it is you that needs to reconsider his position.

By the way, there is more to life, and more to this website, than "engineering sicience applications"...I don't usually contribute in those areas because my backgorund is finance, accounting, and IT plus 30 plus years in the business world (less 8 for Navy service) and a fair amount of those years in the auto industry...I doubt that my "engineering" knowledge, such as it is, is either needed or desired.

While I have made posts in quit a few of the forum catagories over the years I've been a member here, I cetainly haven't and likely never will post in all of them and I suspect that's probably true of most people who come to this website; we all come here for different reasons and have different interests...I tend to think that's a good thing.