I was thinking about this the other day.

In other countries, their respective governments are extremely protective of their own automotive manufacturing industries. Japan is essentially a closed market, and European countries do what they can to help out "the home team", so to speak.

In this country, out of fear of stepping on the toes of other countries, we've basically thrown open the floodgates and given all kinds of incentives to foreign manufacturers to build factories here, with no reciprocation from their home countries. Out of this same fear, it's extremely unlikely that our government will impose any sort of restrictions on foreign manufacturers to help our own auto industry.

I've come up with an alternative solution. How about a tax rebate for people who purchase a car made by an American auto manufacturer? Say in the neighborhood of a couple thousand dollars. It would provide an incentive to the public to buy American, and yet still allow the American car companies to make money (as they don't have to offer incentives themselves). I think this would definitely help ease some of the pressure on our "home team".

What do you think?

 

You start running into the thorny issue of what cars should be given this rebate. You say "American auto manufacturer" ... so does that mean the Australian-built Pontiac G8 gets a rebate? If not, how about the Oshawa-built Camaro, which has significantly higher US content but still doesn't employ US assemblers? Or would a Kentucky-built Toyota Camry be more deserving?

You say there's no reciprocation from other home countries, but that's not true. Many European countries have helped out the foreign arms of GM (i.e. Saab and Opel), as have Australia with Holden and even Korea with Daewoo. If you're talking about Japan, remember that their auto manufacturers didn't start building plants in the US (and therefore start receiving incentives from various levels of government) until they had established themselves through years of importing. GM never managed to reach that critical mass in Japan to even get to the point where they could consider building plants in Japan. I would agree that Japan's auto market has significant non-trade barriers to foreign manufactures, but still, GM's half-assed attempts to import cars there (e.g. left-hand drive vehicles) didn't help the situation.

 

Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Ohio. The Ohio congresswoman is proposing giving consumers vouchers worth $5,000 cash in exchange for turning in vehicles at least eight years old. Under the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save bill, or CARS Act, consumers would have to buy a more efficient vehicle than their current model to qualify. The vehicles would also have to have a price tag of $35,000 or less. The bill would also give higher-value vouchers for vehicles assembled in North America - up to $5,000 - versus up to $4,000 vouchers for vehicles assembled outside North America. Consumers could also turn in their vehicles in exchange for a mass transit voucher. This is better than our AE proposal of a week ago, and it needs to be enactd right now. Bravo, Betty.

http://www.autoextremist.com/on-the-...?currentPage=5

 

Political BS, IMO. Since it has "recycle" in the name of the program, does that mean the cars taken in will be taken off the road and dismantled? If so, that would seem to be of dubious environmental benefit. Since when does discarding something in perfectly good working order and building a brand new one to replace it, become earth-friendly? Sure there might be some emissions benefits, but even cars built in 2001 were hardly gross polluters.

 

FWIW, I got a letter last month from the local "Clean Air" agency that offered me $500 if I junked my 1967 Chevrolet instead of reregistering it in June.

 

i would send a letter back to them showing you disgust for that type of behavior. they want to ruin america's automotive heritage. that is downright wrong. i would be that car wasnt even going to be you daily driven. even if it was thats still wrong to do that. the percentage of people that daily drive a 67 chevelle is extremely low. america has a rich and proud automotive history, one that needs to be saved and kept for future generations. i think the people in power dont want any reminder of how great america was. if we were to loose our automotive heritage, we would loose allot of who we are and how far we have fallen.

 

Why should I, as a taxpayer, subsidize someone else's putchase of a new automobile?

Remember what George Bernard Shaw said, "Any government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul."

 

Where a car is assembled and the manufacturers country of origin are very easy to define. "American auto manufacturer" is exactly that. We aren't talking about the amount of money they spend to assemble the car but rather the thousands of dollars of profit that go to the manufacturer.

 

I'm not really into protectionist policies like what the OP suggested. I would rather see GM/Ford/Chrysler start giving people UNDENIABLE reasons why their cars are better choices than equivalent foreign makes. Not just more cash on the hood.

 

You should have sent a letter back saying the wheels on the car are worth more than that and that they can eat you instead.

 

Shares of GM and F are sold on the NYSE as well as many foreign exchanges. As such, there are many owners of each who are not in the U.S. None of the automobile companies are strickly American, Japanese, or Korean anymore. That hasn't existed in years. There is no such thing as an "American" car by your definition.

 

Amen to that.

This is why we should NOT give rebates or tax incentives. If anything, do Trade restrictions or Tariffs.

 

Trade restriction and tarriffs only raise costs for the consumer. Moreover, it leads to lower quality. Not the way I would vote for.

 

Because you can get the rebate too. Everybody wins, except the foreign manufacturers.

 

Nobody on the internet reads posts anymore. I said "country of origin" ****ing read the post or shut up.