Jump to content
  • Drew Dowdell
    Drew Dowdell

    Trump Threatens Mexico with Auto Tariffs

      ...in spite of negotiating no tariffs with them earlier..

    The President has threatened to slap tariffs on the import of all cars in a year if Mexico does not completely halt the flow of illegal immigration, a near impossible task.  This is after he backtracked on his previous threat to completely close the US-Mexico border, a move his own advisers recommended against.  Such actions would have massive economic repercussions on both sides of the border, raising prices for many consumer goods. 

    Trump said, "Mexico understands that we're going to close the border or I'm going to tariff the cars. I'll do one or the other. And probably start with the tariffs".  He further added, "I don't think we'll ever have to close the border because the penalty of tariffs on cars coming into the United States from Mexico, at 25%, will be massive".

    One problem with this threat is the fresh trade agreement with Mexico that Trump has already negotiated. Going back on a fresh trade agreement adds to the longtime concerns by other world leaders on whether Trump's word, and the U.S. Government, can be trusted.  Tariffs on imported goods aren't paid by the exporting country, they are paid by the consumers of the importing country, so it is unclear who Trump is targeting with these tariffs. 

    One of the biggest automotive importers from Mexico is General Motors.  GM recently had to remove a Chevrolet Blazer display from a stadium in Michigan after backlash over its Mexican origin. GM has recently closed two plants in Michigan costing the state thousands of jobs. 

    • Thanks 1


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    1 minute ago, ccap41 said:

    That is what I was getting at and also when the ignition switch was brought up I had never heard that was any form of cost cutting, it was just a miscalculation that nobody foresaw, nothing intentional but losing the lawsuits must have shown negligence somewhere along the lines.

    Yeah...

    Drew came to your rescue...and you take it so you wont be looked at like a troll...

    What you may or may not know...troll...

    That the aircraft industry does NOT work that way...

    NEGLIGENCE is NOT part of the equation...

    When a plane goes down, NEGLIGENCE SHOULD NOT BE PART OF THE EQUATION...

    Certification of aircraft PREVENTS negligence and cost cutting...THAT is the mission of certification.

    Safety for the plane NOT to fail on information that we already know that have failed in the past...

    Past aircraft failures are part of the engineering process to prevent for future failures.

    And a software glitz with sensors that fail should have been detected in the certification process...

    When an aircraft fails, an FAA investigation tries to see if a new problem arises, not to correct a past failure...again...

    THAT is how aircraft investigations and certifications are made....

    The article here...

    https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/failed-certification-faa-missed-safety-issues-in-the-737-max-system-implicated-in-the-lion-air-crash/

    Once again, suggests that Boeing rushed the 737 Max 8 to sell because of a threat of market share loss to Airbus...

    And all the other articles I posted after the 2nd crash reveal something sinister in Boeing's management of the 737 Max 8.

    And the FAA too.

    believe what you wanna believe, troll...

    BUT DONT YOU PHOQUING QUESTION MY OPINION WHEN YOU DONT HAVE NOTHING ON YOUR END AGAIN!!!
    ESPECIALLY WHEN DREW GAVE YOU AN OUT JUST NOW!!!

    PHOQUE YOU!!!

    • Downvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    of course you downvote @ccap41

    You got nothing else on your trolling! 

    Your actions and reactions speak louder than  your words...

     

     

    • Downvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Being an engineer, I see too often products that could be built to last for ever but cheapened up by companies that take the attitude of we want people to have to buy new to keep us going. I know we have seen law suites in the past and while I have no proof, I would not be surprised if GM had a very sturdy product of spec for the ignition switch but someone said if we change these parts, it still meets the spec of new and now, but will save us XXX,XXX,XXX amount of money and after all things need to wear out so they are forced to by new.

    We have seen how the auto industry has cut corners to deliver huge bonuses to the executive mgmt. of past from the OEMs. I believe this still goes on today for Planes, Trains and Automobiles plus much more.

    End result is that ethics is all good and great in a theoretical class, but putting it into the real business world where it costs real money and could cost jobs. Businesses still will shave here and there, we see it all the time from Bridges, to buildings, etc.

    Trumps threat on Mexico Auto's with a 25% Tariff will have the auto companies looking at ways to shave costs more to off set the tariff if it happens.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @ccap41

    You think your downvotes bother me?

    Because in the past it did?  

    Like I said...you are a troll to nth degree.   

    Keep those downvotes coming bud!  But do not counter in any way or show any proof like I did on why you believe what you believe in...

    YOU IGNORANT BLIND PHOQUING TROLL!!!

    Edited by oldshurst442
    • Haha 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    14 hours ago, balthazar said:

    Screen Shot 2019-04-08 at 10.54.54 PM.png

    Pretty much the state of everything right now.  This would be a fantastic country if we could elect actual adults to lead us.

    I am flying to Florida next week and will be flying on a Boeing 737. Yes, Boeing has some moral responsibility but they also have built some damned safe aircraft. No one has ever lost their lives on a 787, and I don't think any 777's were to blame for any of the fatalities on them. Most but not all of the 747 accidents that were fatal were human error rather than Boeing's engineering.

    I challenge anyone here to do anything with that kind of success record.

    Hell....Oldshurst has more failures with hot dogs in his restaurant than Boeing does with planes.

    And yes...no one has ever died from one of those hot dogs...but people are not exactly flying them across oceans either.

    And yet cost cutting did bring us two bad crashes. Boeing will pay out the nose for grounded flights and lost business. They are big kids on the block and they know this. That is part of what makes supervised Capitalism work.

    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    21 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

    @ccap41

    You think your downvotes bother me?

    Because in the past it did?  

    Like I said...you are a troll to nth degree.   

    Keep those downvotes coming bud!  But do not counter in any way or show any proof like I did on why you believe what you believe in...

    YOU IGNORANT BLIND PHOQUING TROLL!!!

    Ya know....I got yelled at by another driver who ran a red light...I had a green....near accident. Sometimes not escalating a situation has benefits.

    23 hours ago, ccap41 said:

    That is what I was getting at and also when the ignition switch was brought up I had never heard that was any form of cost cutting, it was just a miscalculation that nobody foresaw, nothing intentional but losing the lawsuits must have shown negligence somewhere along the lines.

    Nothing mechanical is ever perfect.

    Although the 65-70 Mustang fastbacks and 58-62 Corvettes are close to visually perfect, so I have to potentially modify what I said...

    On 4/8/2019 at 11:36 AM, ccap41 said:

    Do you know this as fact or are you assuming? If they knowingly did this, they are in some deep sh!t. 

    And I think you need to give the Mad Greek Oldsmobile fanatic some breathing room. Boeing did really do some morally questionable things here.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    55 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    I am flying to Florida next week and will be flying on a Boeing 737. Yes, Boeing has some moral responsibility but they also have built some damned safe aircraft. No one has ever lost their lives on a 787, and I don't think any 777's were to blame for any of the fatalities on them. Most but not all of the 747 accidents that were fatal were human error rather than Boeing's engineering.

    Boeing is a damned good aircraft manufacturing company. 

    The 737 is one of the best built and safest aircraft in the world EVER. 

    The 747 too. 

    But, Airbus, despite their snafu on miscalculating the business model on the A380 and Boeing hitting it on the nail with the Dremliner, Airbus is cleaning their clock! 

    So much so that Canadair, (Bombardier Aerospace) also is threatening a small portion of Boeing's market with the C Series.

    Therefore, Boeing's last two last business decisions, (one to try to discredit Bombardier and got US courts involved in lies, and rushing the Max 8 to market) scream desperation to me.  

    In the end, the C Series was bought in partnership by Airbus and sometime in the near future, Airbus will solely own this plane and it cost Airbus peanuts to acquire...

    An incredible aircraft that is sorely needed in a very fast growing market that neither Boeing or Airbus had an answer to, Boeing was afraid of a very small potato player and in haste, made their situation worse because their REAL competitor acquires this airplane for peanuts. Bombardier spent the BILLIONS to develop it, spent billions to make it super safe, spent billions certifying it, all on Canadian tax payer money that Bombardier did pay off, but made many many Canadians angry, and Airbus now owns it partially and will eventually own it outright when Bombardier could not build too many too quickly because Bombardier does not have that kind of manufacturing ability, but Airbus does...

    And this latest sad news of the Max 8 not being ready for commercial flight.  Sad news for the families that lost people, and sad news because this is going to cost billions to Boeing. 

    And maybe airlines will think twice to buy Boeing aircraft... 

    They just handed Airbus many many markets...

    1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    I challenge anyone here to do anything with that kind of success record.

    Boeing had a spotless record. That is a rare occurrence in the aircraft industry. In any industry.   Too bad haste decisions took the better of them. 

    1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Hell....Oldshurst has more failures with hot dogs in his restaurant than Boeing does with planes.

    And yes...no one has ever died from one of those hot dogs...but people are not exactly flying them across oceans either

     

    Yup...I could attest to that. 

    And you are right, nobody has died eating my food.   My partner and I have high quality food standards.  We are not in business to poison anybody. We are here to make a buck or two, make a few friends along the way and help our community. 

    1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Ya know....I got yelled at by another driver who ran a red light...I had a green....near accident. Sometimes not escalating a situation has benefits.

    You are absolutely right. But my passion runs deep sometimes and my emotions get the better of me.

    1 hour ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    And I think you need to give the Mad Greek Oldsmobile fanatic some breathing room. Boeing did really do some morally questionable things here.

    And this is why I went haywire.

    Because I did not appreciate his tone. 

    I practically wrote a 1000 word essay ranting on  economic and social woes that we are facing with examples and links and he chose  cherry picked  a very subtle and mundane thing  try to discredit me. 

    That Boeing engineers knowingly... 

    THAT was his counter point, that no engineer KNOWINGLY does something bad...

    THAT was his beef...his trolling, his downvotes. 

    Ignoring what I posted as links. Not even throwing a rebuttal of any kind but going with a general statement of  there are no facts of this so I dont believe what you say.

    Basically his whole argument is:

    I waste my time visiting automotive websites and I choose to be a douche  to posters when I see a semantic quality I could attack on because anything that is written on an automotive website is mostly heresay anyway with no proof...

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    I waste my time visiting automotive websites

    I certainly hope that's not what you consider yourself doing here.... 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    20 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    I certainly hope that's not what you consider yourself doing here.... 

    No. Not me.

    But that quote was me paraphrasing what CCAP might be saying as his rebuttal to me regarding Boeing.

    I am genuine with me talks with you guys in here and for better or worse, my emotions too.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    ccap41

    Posted (edited)

    He really doesn't let anything go, does he? 24 hours later and he's still talking about me. 🤷🏻‍♂️

    Edited by ccap41

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    8 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    He really doesn't let anything go, does he? 24 hours later and he's still talking about me. 🤷🏻‍♂️

    because you are a troll...

    Because 24 hours later, you are still a troll, continuing on to troll...🤷🏻‍♂️

    24 hours later, and you responded with a laughy vote and 24 hours later you respond back with this shyte and yet, 24 hours later, there is still no clear opinion on this matter...other than  its your opinion...

    Image result for shrugs gif

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Then I encourage you to use the Ignore function.... both of you.  

    PM me if you need assistance.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Social supported business versus capitalism for profit business. The challenge is in the details and the need to cut corners to compete. This is pretty much the Boeing versus Airbus battle. Me, I like the boeing plans over airbus after all the international travel I have done.

    Back on subject of the trade tariffs, Mexico could really hurt the US but just finding other suppliers for their natural gas needs and so many other things. I really question the wisdom in how DC leadership is approaching trade with other countries. From labor needs from entry level to highly skilled and the need to create and sell products, right now, I do not see smart business friendly consistent leadership.

    This blows!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    Social supported business versus capitalism for profit business. The challenge is in the details and the need to cut corners to compete. This is pretty much the Boeing versus Airbus battle. Me, I like the boeing plans over airbus after all the international travel I have done.

    https://ca.yahoo.com/finance/news/europe-slams-latest-us-tariff-094542749.html

     

    Double standards

    Both sides have now been found guilty of paying billions of dollars of subsidies to gain advantage in the global aircraft manufacturing business.

    The EU is still waiting to hear from the WTO about what "retaliation rights" it has after the organization found in 2012 that Boeing too had received billions of dollars in illegal subsidies that had been to the detriment of Airbus. The WTO also ruled in March that the U.S. had failed to comply fully with its earlier ruling to remove all illegal subsidies that Boeing had received.

    The European Commission source also signaled Tuesday that Brussels is ready to retaliate in kind, noting that in the parallel Boeing dispute, "the determination of EU retaliation rights is also coming closer and the EU will request the WTO-appointed arbitrator to determine the EU's retaliation rights."

    Some analysts have accused the U.S. of double standards. GAM's Investment Director for Global Equities, Ali Miremadi, said the U.S.' tariff proposal was "quite bold."

    "I have to say the country which is the home to Boeing accusing Europe of state subsidies for Airbus — this is quite bold," he told CNBC's "Squawk Box Europe" Tuesday.

    "It's very well established that both Boeing and Airbus exist only at the discretion of their respective hosts or host governments."

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    51 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    24 hours later, there is still no clear opinion on this matter...other than  its your opinion...

    What more do you need for an opinion? An opinion is just that, an opinion. I'm not stating fact or claiming to do so.

    opinion.PNG

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    What more do you need for an opinion? An opinion is just that, an opinion. I'm not stating fact or claiming to do so.

    opinion.PNG

    I gave you MY opinion...

    opinion.PNG

    WITH HOW I GOT THERE

    You did not...meaning...your opinion just becomes trolling...

     

    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Internet Troll

    A person whose sole purpose in life is to seek out people to argue with on the internet over extremely trivial issues. Such arguments can happen on blogs, Facebook, Myspace and a host of others. 
    The best thing you can do to fight an internet troll is to not answer..or report them.
    "God, Jeromy won't stop posting about Larry's bad spelling in that conversation."

    "Yeah, I know, what a Internet Troll."
    by Person#98765 June 21, 2009
     
    2
     
    An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disruptnormal on-topic discussion.
    To be a good Internet Troll you must copy and paste this definition all over the internet.
    • Haha 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hahaha, okay,.. I'll be certain to ask for your permission from here on out to post my opinion on a subject.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    8 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    Hahaha, okay,.. I'll be certain to ask for your permission from here on out to post my opinion on a subject.

    No need. Despite you thinking otherwise, I really dont give a shyte you or your "opinion".

    But...when you answer me with a righteous dumb assed tone, make sure you back up your "opinions" with some sort of reason of why you feel that way, a link, an anecdote, something, or else I WILL call you up on your trolling...

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You're just assuming my tone the same way you assumed the engineers did this "knowingly". 

    I legitimately do not think you know what an opinion is.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 minute ago, ccap41 said:

    You're just assuming my tone the same way you assumed the engineers did this "knowingly". 

    I legitimately do not think you know what an opinion is.

    So...nothing on the news that is reported, anybody could formulate an opinion...

    Like I said...

    I wrote a 1000 word essay ranting...

    I gave links as to why I feel this way...

    And YOU, righteously, just harp on 1 word...

    But you ignore the other 999 words....including the links I gave...

    I think that its YOU that does not know what an opinion is...

    An EDUCATED opinion...

     But its OK...what you are doing now is called trolling....even with your latest response to me...

    @Drew Dowdell is allowing you to do it...go right ahead. Troll away. 

    If that brings you happiness in life. 

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Guest
    This is now closed for further comments



  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      China has announced today that it would be reducing tariffs on U.S.-built cars and car parts from 40 to 15 percent beginning on January 1st. This reduction will last for three months as the U.S. and China begin hashing out a new trade deal. We first reported the reduction of the tariffs earlier this week.
      China's Ministry of Finance posted on their website said it hopes the talks between the two can go quickly and remove "all additional tariffs on each other’s goods" that were brought forth before the current trade-war.
      “China just announced that their economy is growing much slower than anticipated because of our Trade War with them. They have just suspended U.S. Tariff Hikes. U.S. is doing very well. China wants to make a big and very comprehensive deal. It could happen, and rather soon!” President Donald Trump wrote on Twitter in response to the announcement.
      China raised the tariffs on U.S.-built vehicles and parts back in July in response to the U.S. raised tariffs on Chinese-built vehicles and parts to 27.5 percent. The move caused a number of headaches for automakers which had to increase prices on models sold in China or change up various plans. Various automakers and groups welcomed the news.
      At the moment, the U.S. hasn't announced any plans to reduce the 27.5 percent tariff on Chinese-built vehicles and parts.
      Source: Associated Press, Reuters

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      China has announced today that it would be reducing tariffs on U.S.-built cars and car parts from 40 to 15 percent beginning on January 1st. This reduction will last for three months as the U.S. and China begin hashing out a new trade deal. We first reported the reduction of the tariffs earlier this week.
      China's Ministry of Finance posted on their website said it hopes the talks between the two can go quickly and remove "all additional tariffs on each other’s goods" that were brought forth before the current trade-war.
      “China just announced that their economy is growing much slower than anticipated because of our Trade War with them. They have just suspended U.S. Tariff Hikes. U.S. is doing very well. China wants to make a big and very comprehensive deal. It could happen, and rather soon!” President Donald Trump wrote on Twitter in response to the announcement.
      China raised the tariffs on U.S.-built vehicles and parts back in July in response to the U.S. raised tariffs on Chinese-built vehicles and parts to 27.5 percent. The move caused a number of headaches for automakers which had to increase prices on models sold in China or change up various plans. Various automakers and groups welcomed the news.
      At the moment, the U.S. hasn't announced any plans to reduce the 27.5 percent tariff on Chinese-built vehicles and parts.
      Source: Associated Press, Reuters
    • By William Maley
      Earlier this year, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles announced that it would be moving production of the next-generation Ram HD trucks from Saltillo, Mexico to the Warren Truck Plant in Michigan. This was due to the U.S. Government threatening steep tariffs on Mexican-made vehicles. Saltillo would continue producing global commercial vehicles. But with a new Free Trade Agreement between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico; FCA is having second thoughts about moving production.
      CEO Mike Manley told Reuters that he wants Ram Trucks to move out of third place with truck sales.
      “We need to get ourselves into second” place. Frankly, I don’t care which of the two I take share from,” he said.
      Thus, he is reconsidering the decision made by his predecessor and keep some Ram HD production in Mexico.
      “With a combination of Warren and Mexico building what we call the classic truck, we have enough production to increase output next year if it’s required. In my opinion it will be required. We are gaining share. Obviously I am looking for that to continue, but it’s an incredibly competitive segment,” said Manley.
      The new agreement between the two countries calls for no import cap, so long as the vehicle meets a certain amount of content from various countries.
      Source: Reuters

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Earlier this year, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles announced that it would be moving production of the next-generation Ram HD trucks from Saltillo, Mexico to the Warren Truck Plant in Michigan. This was due to the U.S. Government threatening steep tariffs on Mexican-made vehicles. Saltillo would continue producing global commercial vehicles. But with a new Free Trade Agreement between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico; FCA is having second thoughts about moving production.
      CEO Mike Manley told Reuters that he wants Ram Trucks to move out of third place with truck sales.
      “We need to get ourselves into second” place. Frankly, I don’t care which of the two I take share from,” he said.
      Thus, he is reconsidering the decision made by his predecessor and keep some Ram HD production in Mexico.
      “With a combination of Warren and Mexico building what we call the classic truck, we have enough production to increase output next year if it’s required. In my opinion it will be required. We are gaining share. Obviously I am looking for that to continue, but it’s an incredibly competitive segment,” said Manley.
      The new agreement between the two countries calls for no import cap, so long as the vehicle meets a certain amount of content from various countries.
      Source: Reuters
    • By William Maley
      While the Trump administration is still deciding whether or not to put tariffs on imported vehicles, certain automakers are bracing for the worst.
      During a briefing in Tokyo, Subaru is predicting a "big impact" if the U.S. does put tariffs into place.
      “It’s a fact that there would be a big impact from a U.S. tariff increase. We’re studying what the impact might be but there are too many unknowns at this point, so we want to refrain from giving a specific figure,” said Toshiaki Okada, Subaru's Chief Financial Officer.
      Of the 670,900 vehicles it sold in the U.S. through the year that ended in March, about half were imported, including the Forester. The rest of the vehicles - Legacy,  Outback, and Ascent - are built in Indiana.
      According to data gathered by Bloomberg, Subaru would be the hardest hit by tariffs as over 67 percent of their revenues from North America. This is more than Honda (52.5 percent), Nissan (48.9 percent), and Toyota (35.2 percent).
      Source: Bloomberg

      View full article
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. yair fuentes
      yair fuentes
      (26 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...