ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote:How exactly are foreign automakers more American again? I'm dying to hear this logic.

Depends on the make and model, to which you are referring. My Honda Accord is made with 75% American parts.

Con_Alma wrote: Employ more and manufacture more was not the original point, was it?

It thought defining the amount of U.S. manufactured components in an auto was what was being clarified.

No, re-read his post.

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote:I already posted on the Huyndai thread about domestic part content.

Honda is the highest with 59% for foreigners. Toyota is only 48%

Ford and GM are both 75% and CHrysler is 74%.

There's no comparison.

Again... depends on make and model.

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote:

mcburg93 wrote:

If you count people working in the plants you might be right. But as far as parts made in the us I would have to say toyota is most american made.


You have your opinions but dont be blinded by them

I already posted on the Huyndai thread about domestic part content.

Honda is the highest with 59% for foreigners. Toyota is only 48%

Ford and GM are both 75% and CHrysler is 74%.

There's no comparison.

Although literally by him saying "parts made in the US" means volume after considering your response regarding percentage I interpreted the point being the amount of parts per car or percentage of parts per car made in the U.S.

ernest_t_bass wrote:

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote:I already posted on the Huyndai thread about domestic part content.

Honda is the highest with 59% for foreigners. Toyota is only 48%

Ford and GM are both 75% and CHrysler is 74%.

There's no comparison.

Again... depends on make and model.

It doesn't just depend on make an model b/c then you're picking and choosing which numbers you want to display. You gotta look at the whole picture.

It doesn't just depend on make an model b/c then you're picking and choosing which numbers you want to display. You gotta look at the whole picture.
Zwick

Very few want to look at the whole picture.

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote:It doesn't just depend on make an model b/c then you're picking and choosing which numbers you want to display. You gotta look at the whole picture.

Again, and I seem to always have to end my side of this argument with this...

From where I grew up, Honda is a huge provider of income. They support that county and surrounding counties. If any of the BIG 3 go out of business, there is a pick-up in my home town. Doesn't make me feel bad, one bit.

As far as "picking models and numbers," you can look at it both ways. Statistics can always tell the story you want to tell. ALWAYS.

So, in conclusion... I respect your opinion, as it is valid. Just not the way that I choose to live my own (car buying side of) life.

Wake up Zwick...your living in the 80's. the problem is not Japan anymore it's China. Even if the company is Japanese owned, they come here invest in our country, build plants here...employ American workers. Not the case with China.

HitsRus wrote: Wake up Zwick...your living in the 80's. the problem is not Japan anymore it's China. Even if the company is Japanese owned, they come here invest in our country, build plants here...employ American workers. Not the case with China.

China would if they ever could break the American Auto market (they're still a ways off).

Japan is just as much of the problem as anyone else. Our governments more to blame than anyone else though.

The car market is so globalized that only half of the top domestic parts and manufactured cars are actually Detroit owned. Toyota and Honda have 5 in the top 10. One of the best selling cars in the country...the Toyota Camry is the #1 auto in terms of domestic parts and manufacture.Moreover these companies make their vehicles here...pay taxes and employ workers. If you are worried that the profit go exclusively to Japan, that is simply not the case. Both are publicly traded companies on the NYSE...meaning investors from all over the world own the company. Americans can and do buy shares of Toyota and Honda.
China is the real danger as their workers are paid ridiculously substandard wages such that workers/companies in other countries...including Japan cannot compete.

Why do you have quotations by approval?

NAFTA

LJ wrote: Why do you have quotations by approval?

Because I wanted to get some responses a lot quicker, and technically, "approval" from you (the moderator of the politics forum) is what I would need, before I could get actual responses to this thread.

Also, and I didn't mention this in my original post, there is more traffic on this forum. So, it was an argument/inquiry that I wanted more people to see.

There is more traffic here, but not necessarily better traffic for a question like this.

ernest_t_bass wrote:

LJ wrote: Why do you have quotations by approval?

Because I wanted to get some responses a lot quicker, and technically, "approval" from you (the moderator of the politics forum) is what I would need, before I could get actual responses to this thread.

Also, and I didn't mention this in my original post, there is more traffic on this forum. So, it was an argument/inquiry that I wanted more people to see.

There's a reason for the approval process. A post like this would have no problem getting approval, but doing something like this is just going to get the poltics forum shut down by the administrator, who only agreed to a poltics forum if someone were to take full responsibility for it.

And saying "'approval'" is condescending

BigAppleBuckeye wrote: Because for 8 years , the face of the American brand looked like this:



Doesn't exactly instill consumer confidence ...

You are a jackass.

I didn't want to wait for approval to get responses. I had a thread yesterday that went half the day, which is fine, but for this one, I wanted to get responses. It isn't really "political" but it could belong in the political forum. If it is moved there, it doesn't bother me one bit. But, since I wanted to see people's opinions quicker, I started it in the Serious Business forum.

Yes, I said "approval." Is that not what I have to have, in order for a thread to go through on the politics forum? I wasn't waiting for approval of the thread topic, but of the thread itself.

ernest_t_bass wrote: I didn't want to wait for approval to get responses. I had a thread yesterday that went half the day, which is fine, but for this one, I wanted to get responses. It isn't really "political" but it could belong in the political forum. If it is moved there, it doesn't bother me one bit. But, since I wanted to see people's opinions quicker, I started it in the Serious Business forum.

Yes, I said "approval." Is that not what I have to have, in order for a thread to go through on the politics forum? I wasn't waiting for approval of the thread topic, but of the thread itself.

All I am saying is that the other mods of this forum may get pissed off if you start posting things in the wrong forum just because you don't like the rules of the forum it belongs in.

And yes, your thread has to be approved as well as the topic. There is no need to try to portray irony with the approval process in the politics forum through the use of quotations.

Are you saying this belongs in the politics forum?

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote:
Any b/c u buy jap cars.

If the UAW would not have bankrupt two of the big three, I assume not as many people would be buying Japanese cars.

LJ wrote:There's a reason for the approval process. A post like this would have no problem getting approval, but doing something like this is just going to get the poltics forum shut down by the administrator, who only agreed to a poltics forum if someone were to take full responsibility for it.

And saying "'approval'" is condescending

It may be condescending but it's the truth.

Political topics need your "approval" before they go live. You act as a "gate keeper" and you can approve or reject topics at your discretion. That's censorship.

It seems odd FREE Huddle needs someone to approve political topics before they go live, but if I want to start a thread on boobs, booties, etc. on the "serious business" forum I can do that without hassle.

The way I see it, political topics should be given the same treatment. If the banter on the political thread gets out of control I can see putting the hammer down but getting a mod's "permission" before a political topic goes live is what's truly condescending.

believer wrote: ut it's the truth.

Political topics need your "approval" before they go live. You act as a "gate keeper" and you can approve or reject topics at your discretion. That's censorship.

wow! That really goes on in the politics forum?

kritzell wrote: Well, a lot of Japanese/German companies are building cars here now. Even Hyundai is now.

ernest_t_bass wrote:

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote: Well the obvious answer is competition from foreign markets. Companies can't afford to manufacture products here if they want to stay in business. If X company makes a product for $1 and sells its for 5 and Y company makes its for $4 and sells it for 6, Y isn't long for this world.

Any b/c u buy jap cars.

Glad you at least answered the question there. Our view points are different, and b/c of that, are both valid in our own minds.

I drive Honda (that to which Zwick is referring). I grew up near the Honda plants, so they support that community. In my eyes, I support Ohio labor by purchasing Honda. I will always buy Honda.

jordo212000 wrote:

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote: Well the obvious answer is competition from foreign markets. Companies can't afford to manufacture products here if they want to stay in business. If X company makes a product for $1 and sells its for 5 and Y company makes its for $4 and sells it for 6, Y isn't long for this world.

Any b/c u buy jap cars.

The "foreign" automakers are now more American than the American companies. I won't be buying an American car anytime soon for that very reason.

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote:

jordo212000 wrote: The "foreign" automakers are now more American than the American companies. I won't be buying an American car anytime soon for that very reason.

And how exactly is this? I love when people make blind statements without the slightest of clues of what they're talking about.

American Auto employs more Americans, has a hire domestic part contents on autos sold in America, has an astronomically larger number of retired Americans on pension...

How exactly are foreign automakers more American again? I'm dying to hear this logic.

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote:

mcburg93 wrote:

If you count people working in the plants you might be right. But as far as parts made in the us I would have to say toyota is most american made.


You have your opinions but dont be blinded by them

I already posted on the Huyndai thread about domestic part content.

Honda is the highest with 59% for foreigners. Toyota is only 48%

Ford and GM are both 75% and CHrysler is 74%.

There's no comparison.

ernest_t_bass wrote:

ZWICK 4 PREZ wrote:How exactly are foreign automakers more American again? I'm dying to hear this logic.

Depends on the make and model, to which you are referring. My Honda Accord is made with 75% American parts.

Whats funny is when you look at the car companies, nothing is american like it used to be. that goes for the cars built here by both american and foreign companies. hey thats great they were built here, maybe even with parts built here. but take a closer look at where the materials come from. take a look at the where the machines that build these cars and parts came from...not america. it used to be that cars were 100% american down the steel they were forged from, now we are arguing that some cars are such and such a percent more american that others. thats pathetic.

believer wrote:

LJ wrote:There's a reason for the approval process. A post like this would have no problem getting approval, but doing something like this is just going to get the poltics forum shut down by the administrator, who only agreed to a poltics forum if someone were to take full responsibility for it.

And saying "'approval'" is condescending

It may be condescending but it's the truth.

Political topics need your "approval" before they go live. You act as a "gate keeper" and you can approve or reject topics at your discretion. That's censorship.

It seems odd FREE Huddle needs someone to approve political topics before they go live, but if I want to start a thread on boobs, booties, etc. on the "serious business" forum I can do that without hassle.

The way I see it, political topics should be given the same treatment. If the banter on the political thread gets out of control I can see putting the hammer down but getting a mod's "permission" before a political topic goes live is what's truly condescending.

It has nothing to do with the topic on hand, unless it is something that doesn't belong in the politics forum at all. There is NO topic or subject matter censorship in the Politics forum. You may think there is, but tell me, what topic has not been allowed? Please, I am waiting for you to provide proof of this censorship that you claim.

You know, it's quite shitty of some of you to say what you say, when the ONLY reason there is a poitics forum on this website is because I said I would moderate it, The baseless accusations that I censor topics and that I moderate based on my political beliefs is absolute bullshit and quite insulting.

Your claim is baseless and bullshit. No topic is censored, topics are approved on the basis of followng the rules, no more, no less.

LJ wrote:Your claim is baseless and bullshit. No topic is censored, topics are approved on the basis of followng the rules, no more, no less.

Good then let the topics go "live" immediately and move them to the 'appropriate" forum if they don't belong on the political forum...problem solved and feelings don't get hurt.