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.

 

Voltron & Thundercats FTW!

 

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.

 

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...

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.

 

Hell yeah!

 

Oh you've hurt my feelings, Robert.

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

 

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

 

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 could'nt agree more. God help US.

 

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)

 

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.

 

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 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.

 

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.