Where are the 2009 Dodge Ram R/T's at?
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,647
From: Jupiter, FL
Apparently they should be coming out for 2010.
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2009/06...m-1500-rt.html
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2009/06...m-1500-rt.html
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
I sat in several of them and liked them very much. I thought to myself, if I needed a new truck, and gas was cheaper, this is the truck I would get.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
No....
What's he's saying is why was Chrysler allowed to be bailed out while sending EXISTING production to EXISTING facilities in Mexico and Canada, rather than continue to use EXISTING facilities in the US.
I'd have had ZERO issue with Chrysler taking St. Louis North, where HuJass worked building reg cab Rams, and adding production there and closing down Satillo in Mexico, where my reg cab Ram 2500 was built
Cost more to build them in St. Louis? Too effing bad IMO...call that the cost Chrysler should bear for government assistance.
I'm with him 110% on this one...
What's he's saying is why was Chrysler allowed to be bailed out while sending EXISTING production to EXISTING facilities in Mexico and Canada, rather than continue to use EXISTING facilities in the US.
I'd have had ZERO issue with Chrysler taking St. Louis North, where HuJass worked building reg cab Rams, and adding production there and closing down Satillo in Mexico, where my reg cab Ram 2500 was built
Cost more to build them in St. Louis? Too effing bad IMO...call that the cost Chrysler should bear for government assistance.I'm with him 110% on this one...
Thank you for saying that. I forgeot to put that in my post.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
Guy,
When you look at it objectively, you are 100% right. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (sorry to quote Star Trek, but it's apprapo).
I just want to address a few things, however.
-I give kudos to GM. They reversed decisions and brought work back to the States. That was the right thing to do.
-We can talk about overcapacity. Maybe Chyrsler didn't need 3 truck plants in North America. In that case, Saltillo should have been closed and that work should have been brought to St. Louis North.
Maybe Chrysler didn't need 2 minivan plants in North America. In that case, Windsor should have been closed and all minivan production moved to St. Louis South. This may have been a function of politics on this one. Tom Lasorda and Frank Ewashyshyn rose to the top via Windsor. That was their plant and they took care of it.
And why did Chrysler choose to close Kenosha only to make the same engines in a plant in Mexico?
We could have solved some of the overcapacity issue by shutting down the redundant plants OUTSIDE of the U.S.
These three things happened after we the taxpayers helped Chrysler out. Why couldn't the government have said, "we'll give you the money but there will be no job losses in the U.S.".
I could even understand Canada a bit. They've got skin in the game as well. But Mexico? What did they do to help Chrysler out?
-And one of the worse things is that we were lied to. The company lied to the workers. They told us about 3 days before the bankruptcy was announced that no plants would be closing, other than maybe Twinsburg Stamping. We all signed off on their concessions believing our jobs were still going to be there.
Then 3 days later, after we did our part, mind you, they announce 8 plant closings. 3 of which were taking product out of U.S. plants and sending it to foreign countries. And it wasn't like they cut production. They literally moved it.
Did you guys know that as the last truck passed each station, the workers at that station were to pack up the tools and the equipment for shipment to other plants?
And all this apparently happened with the blessing of the U.S. government.
"Here Chrysler, take U.S. taxpayers money and move your work to foreign countries".
It's not right and I'm surprised that more Americans are not up in arms about this. Americans had a fit when they learned that bank execs were getting bonuses (probably paid for by the bailout money) but don't seem to care that the loan money for the Big 2 is being used to outsource American jobs.
It blows my mind.
When you look at it objectively, you are 100% right. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few (sorry to quote Star Trek, but it's apprapo).
I just want to address a few things, however.
-I give kudos to GM. They reversed decisions and brought work back to the States. That was the right thing to do.
-We can talk about overcapacity. Maybe Chyrsler didn't need 3 truck plants in North America. In that case, Saltillo should have been closed and that work should have been brought to St. Louis North.
Maybe Chrysler didn't need 2 minivan plants in North America. In that case, Windsor should have been closed and all minivan production moved to St. Louis South. This may have been a function of politics on this one. Tom Lasorda and Frank Ewashyshyn rose to the top via Windsor. That was their plant and they took care of it.
And why did Chrysler choose to close Kenosha only to make the same engines in a plant in Mexico?
We could have solved some of the overcapacity issue by shutting down the redundant plants OUTSIDE of the U.S.
These three things happened after we the taxpayers helped Chrysler out. Why couldn't the government have said, "we'll give you the money but there will be no job losses in the U.S.".
I could even understand Canada a bit. They've got skin in the game as well. But Mexico? What did they do to help Chrysler out?
-And one of the worse things is that we were lied to. The company lied to the workers. They told us about 3 days before the bankruptcy was announced that no plants would be closing, other than maybe Twinsburg Stamping. We all signed off on their concessions believing our jobs were still going to be there.
Then 3 days later, after we did our part, mind you, they announce 8 plant closings. 3 of which were taking product out of U.S. plants and sending it to foreign countries. And it wasn't like they cut production. They literally moved it.
Did you guys know that as the last truck passed each station, the workers at that station were to pack up the tools and the equipment for shipment to other plants?
And all this apparently happened with the blessing of the U.S. government.
"Here Chrysler, take U.S. taxpayers money and move your work to foreign countries".
It's not right and I'm surprised that more Americans are not up in arms about this. Americans had a fit when they learned that bank execs were getting bonuses (probably paid for by the bailout money) but don't seem to care that the loan money for the Big 2 is being used to outsource American jobs.
It blows my mind.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
No problem my friend. I fully understand the position you're in, and while I understand what Guy is saying, I disagree with how this "capacity reduction" is taking place.
This is America. We need to protect OUR jobs. I don't think the Auto Task Force has done much wrong here, at all really, besides possibly being the catalyst behind Pontiac (although that is probably more conspiracy theory...GM had been killing it itself for a good 5 years now). What they HAVE done wrong is not insist EVERY US job that can be saved WILL be saved if we're to hand over taxpayer financing (I loathe to use bailout, because its NOT).
I don't want my Rams, Journeys and PT Cruisers (yes, those bastards are still being produced for '10!) being built in Mexico. Hell, I don't even care if my LXs are built in Canada. I want those jobs here. If this new UAW agreement is so great, then we now SHOULD be on par with the foreigners who build here.
Anything less is unacceptable IMO.
This is America. We need to protect OUR jobs. I don't think the Auto Task Force has done much wrong here, at all really, besides possibly being the catalyst behind Pontiac (although that is probably more conspiracy theory...GM had been killing it itself for a good 5 years now). What they HAVE done wrong is not insist EVERY US job that can be saved WILL be saved if we're to hand over taxpayer financing (I loathe to use bailout, because its NOT).
I don't want my Rams, Journeys and PT Cruisers (yes, those bastards are still being produced for '10!) being built in Mexico. Hell, I don't even care if my LXs are built in Canada. I want those jobs here. If this new UAW agreement is so great, then we now SHOULD be on par with the foreigners who build here.
Anything less is unacceptable IMO.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CARiD
Supporting Vendor Group Purchases and Sales
0
Sep 30, 2015 05:44 AM
PFYC
Supporting Vendor Group Purchases and Sales
0
Jul 17, 2015 02:47 PM