Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BrewSwillis

Level Field Institute

Recommended Posts

http://www.levelfieldinstitute.org/

Level Field is a grassroots organization founded by retirees of Chrysler, Ford, GM and the companies that supply them. We encourage all foreign-owned automakers to invest more in America – home to some of the best workers in the world. But if you are care about how each automaker contributes to our economy, you should have all the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....or they could be FACTS, based an actual data. :thumbsup:

Actually, no. Everyone makes arguments using only the facts pertinent to their side...and avoiding the facts that disprove your point. It happens on both sides...and this site is obviously doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, no. Everyone makes arguments using only the facts pertinent to their side...and avoiding the facts that disprove your point. It happens on both sides...and this site is obviously doing that.

O.K., I will allow you to refute the facts from that website, because you seem convinced that there is "another side" to the argument.

Here's one:

For 2004 cars, domestic automakers (DCX’s Chrysler division, Ford and GM) automobiles contained 80 percent domestic content, while Japanese, European and Korean carmakers used 31, 5 and 3 percent domestic content, respectively. (ATPC)

Data for 2005 remains incomplete. We will post new data once all companies have reported. However, a recent Detroit Free Press article found that the average content of GM, Ford and Chrysler were 81, 82 and 75 percent, respectively. Toyota, Honda and Nissan automobiles contained, on average, 49.9, 58.5 and 48 percent domestic content.

O.K., now you post about how that's not true:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hudson: Here is the most recent data from a previous post of mine.

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...topic=7460&st=0

For the year end results for the 2005 MY

Ford (traditional US) and Toyotas corporate (all brands) sales weighted average are as follow:

2005CY sales including 2006 MY vehicles.

Ford drops to 82% (Ford's number is your post conveniently leave out PAG)

Toyota Rises to 50%

GM is about 80% for reference.

Fords number will drop further (below 80) as the sales for the Fusion and the cousin increase and the Taurus is phase out.

That number also excludes Ford's foreign brands (Volvo, Land Rover, Jaguar) which would drop Fords number for the 2005 CY close to 73%.

You argument looses its merit because this discussion is about transplants and those vehicle produced by transplants in the US have a higher US/Canada content. Toyota's corporate number will increase with their new US operations.

So your argument is again pointless because the traditional US brands are reducing their US content while the Asia's are increasing theirs as their operation shift to NA production.

Toyota's transplant operation uses app. 70% NA sourced content as a sale weighted average.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hudson:  Here is the most recent data from a previous post of mine.

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...topic=7460&st=0

For the year end results for the 2005 MY

Ford (traditional US) and Toyotas corporate (all brands) sales weighted average are as follow:

2005CY sales including 2006 MY vehicles.

Ford drops to 82% (Ford's number is your post conveniently leave out PAG)

Toyota Rises to 50%

GM is about 80% for reference.

Fords number will drop further (below 80) as the sales for the Fusion and the cousin increase and the Taurus is phase out.

That number also excludes Ford's foreign brands (Volvo, Land Rover, Jaguar) which would drop Fords number for the 2005 CY close to 73%.

You argument looses its merit because this discussion is about transplants and those vehicle produced by transplants in the US have a higher US/Canada content. Toyota's corporate number will increase with their new US operations.

So your argument is again pointless because the traditional US brands are reducing their US content while the Asia's are increasing theirs as their operation shift to NA production.

Toyota's transplant operation uses app. 70% NA sourced content as a sale weighted average.

Do domestics have any choice in the matter though? At this point in time its either keep majority production in the US and bleed money to unions, healthcare, and retirement or move production to less costly countries where wages are much much lower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do domestics have any choice in the matter though?  At this point in time its either keep majority production in the US and bleed money to unions, healthcare, and retirement or move production to less costly countries where wages are much much lower.

Well the trend show from the data that US/Canada content is dropping and the transplants are increasing on average.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You argument looses its merit because this discussion is about transplants and those vehicle produced by transplants in the US have a higher US/Canada content. Toyota's corporate number will increase with their new US operations.

So your argument is again pointless because the traditional US brands are reducing their US content while the Asia's are increasing theirs as their operation shift to NA production.

Toyota's transplant operation uses app. 70% NA sourced content as a sale weighted average.

Why does this argument "lose merit" when it addresses transplants only? If you discount the Aveo and GTO and Saabs...and most of the Lexus and Scion brands (and a handful of Toyotas), that seems to be the appropriate comparison. Toyota produces well over a million vehicles a year in North America and, by your numbers, they have over 70% domestic content.

Domestics are making more "imported" vehicles and the foreign-based companies are expanding their US and Canadian production. Toyota and Honda and Nissan are hiring more workers in the US and Canada while GM and Ford are hiring more workers in Mexico, China, South America, and Europe to replace closed factories and suppliers in the US and Canada. Why is this a pointless fact?

Secondly, have you ever read the law that defines "domestic content?" It gives domestic manufacturers an edge in the calculation. I don't recall the specifics (you can read it for yourself), but the same part can be "imported" or "US/Canadian" depending on WHO is putting it into their vehicle. The example I recall explained how two vehicles built in the same North American plant would count the exact same part (from the same source) as "imported" or "domestic" depending on who's vehicle it was put in. The law favored the domestics.

Third, while new transplant jobs are not replacing lost Big3 jobs 1-for-1, this is not the fault of the transplants. For years, the Big3 have been forced to have a bloated workforce. They have far too many workers for the number of vehicles they produce, and it's not their fault. The transplants have established new factories and supplier bases who do not come with the legacy (read: UAW/CAW) costs and can staff up or down to their requirement. Nissan, for example, has had among the fewest workers on the line per vehicle built for many years while GM is required to keep a certain employment level, whether or not those people are actually adding to the productivity of the plant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does this argument "lose merit" when it addresses transplants only? If you discount the Aveo and GTO and Saabs...and most of the Lexus and Scion brands (and a handful of Toyotas), that seems to be the appropriate comparison. Toyota produces well over a million vehicles a year in North America and, by your numbers, they have over 70% domestic content.

Domestics are making more "imported" vehicles and the foreign-based companies are expanding their US and Canadian production. Toyota and Honda and Nissan are hiring more workers in the US and Canada while GM and Ford are hiring more workers in Mexico, China, South America, and Europe to replace closed factories and suppliers in the US and Canada. Why is this a pointless fact?

Secondly, have you ever read the law that defines "domestic content?" It gives domestic manufacturers an edge in the calculation. I don't recall the specifics (you can read it for yourself), but the same part can be "imported" or "US/Canadian" depending on WHO is putting it into their vehicle. The example I recall explained how two vehicles built in the same North American plant would count the exact same part (from the same source) as "imported" or "domestic" depending on who's vehicle it was put in. The law favored the domestics.

Third, while new transplant jobs are not replacing lost Big3 jobs 1-for-1, this is not the fault of the transplants. For years, the Big3 have been forced to have a bloated workforce. They have far too many workers for the number of vehicles they produce, and it's not their fault. The transplants have established new factories and supplier bases who do not come with the legacy (read: UAW/CAW) costs and can staff up or down to their requirement. Nissan, for example, has had among the fewest workers on the line per vehicle built for many years while GM is required to keep a certain employment level, whether or not those people are actually adding to the productivity of the plant.

Husdon: My post was just a cut and paste repost and the link was provided. Meaning this is an old discussion as recently as just about a month ago. My data refutes again, what the same poster brought up once before.

The term ""lose merit" was used in that earlier post refuting old data from that earlier discussion.

I got lazy and tired of repeating myself around here.

Edited by evok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hudson:  Here is the most recent data from a previous post of mine.

http://www.cheersandgears.com/forums/index...topic=7460&st=0

For the year end results for the 2005 MY

Ford (traditional US) and Toyotas corporate (all brands) sales weighted average are as follow:

2005CY sales including 2006 MY vehicles.

Ford drops to 82% (Ford's number is your post conveniently leave out PAG)

Toyota Rises to 50%

GM is about 80% for reference.

Fords number will drop further (below 80) as the sales for the Fusion and the cousin increase and the Taurus is phase out.

That number also excludes Ford's foreign brands (Volvo, Land Rover, Jaguar) which would drop Fords number for the 2005 CY close to 73%.

You argument looses its merit because this discussion is about transplants and those vehicle produced by transplants in the US have a higher US/Canada content. Toyota's corporate number will increase with their new US operations.

So your argument is again pointless because the traditional US brands are reducing their US content while the Asia's are increasing theirs as their operation shift to NA production.

Toyota's transplant operation uses app. 70% NA sourced content as a sale weighted average.

In your opinion, do you think the Japanese automakers numbers would be as high as they are, and increasing, if their plants were unionized, and do you think the domestics numbers would be dropping if the plants were not unionized?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In your opinion, do you think the Japanese automakers numbers would be as high as they are, and increasing, if their plants were unionized, and do you think the domestics numbers would be dropping if the plants were not unionized?

There is no best answer about the union's impact today on % US/Canada content at the transplants.

The problem is the undustry has become so global and cost driven, that even if the transplans were to unionize, that will have a limited impact on where the transplants purchase their components that the union workers would assemble into the final product.

When the UAW formed, the US auto manufacturers were fully integrated manufacturers. That was for the most part true until, Dephi and Visteon were split off and modular manufacturing became the norm.

Today GM, F and C manufacturer only powertrains and final vehicles. As a result everything else that goes into a car can be purchased from anywhere and anywho. As the transplants build more powertrain plants in the US, their content will go up. And GM, F and C will go down.

ie In the past a GM truck plant would build up a complete instrument panel off line at a GA plant. Today they purchase a complete module from a supplier that takes 10 seconds to install.

With or without a union I do not see the transplants or the US companies change philosophy unless there is another cost structure shift.

Over time all will equalize as far as content is concerned.

Edited by evok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2005CY sales including 2006 MY vehicles.

Ford drops to 82% (Ford's number is your post conveniently leave out PAG)

Toyota Rises to 50%

GM is about 80% for reference.

Fords number will drop further (below 80) as the sales for the Fusion and the cousin increase and the Taurus is phase out.

That number also excludes Ford's foreign brands (Volvo, Land Rover, Jaguar) which would drop Fords number for the 2005 CY close to 73%.

You argument looses its merit because this discussion is about transplants and those vehicle produced by transplants in the US have a higher US/Canada content. Toyota's corporate number will increase with their new US operations.

So your argument is again pointless because the traditional US brands are reducing their US content while the Asia's are increasing theirs as their operation shift to NA production.

Toyota's transplant operation uses app. 70% NA sourced content as a sale weighted average.

They did not "conveniently leave out" Ford's PAG brands.....just as they didn't conveniently add Lexus to the Toyota number of 49.9%. You can read the PDF here if you want the factual breakdown: http://levelfieldinstitute.org/docs/lfi-domestic-content.pdf . Then you won't have to include a bunch of comments that are meant to skew the facts to match your opinion. The numbers you posted are within a percentage point of the ones from the Level Field Institute, and that's because they didn't have 2006 info included. What you posted actually backs up the numbers from the LFI. :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did not "conveniently leave out" Ford's PAG brands.....just as they didn't conveniently add Lexus to the Toyota number of 49.9%.  You can read the PDF here if you want the factual breakdown: http://levelfieldinstitute.org/docs/lfi-domestic-content.pdf .  Then you won't have to include a bunch of comments that are meant to skew the facts to match your opinion.  The numbers you posted are within a percentage point of the ones from the Level Field Institute, and that's because they didn't have 2006 info included.  What you posted actually backs up the numbers from the LFI.  :huh:

Re-read my post in the order it was written.

Well I have the 05,06 and certain 07 numbers. Things are a changing and my numbers are still correct.

Edited by evok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i buy a Toyota, I am funding the Toyota Japan. That's all I need to know. I have no trouble buying something Japanese, except I dislike Toyota's expansion and the net effect of it in terms of our economy vs. theirs. Its feeding their machine to get bigger, which I do not want to do. Eventually if Toyota gets big enough it could really hurt our position globally as a country. So who cares about the percentages. Decide where you want your money to go. Toyota has a few jobs here, but the profits go back to the land of rice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i buy a Toyota, I am funding the Toyota Japan.  That's all I need to know.  I have no trouble buying something Japanese, except I dislike Toyota's expansion and the net effect of it in terms of our economy vs. theirs.  Its feeding their machine to get bigger, which I do not want to do.  Eventually if Toyota gets big enough it could really hurt our position globally as a country.  So who cares about the percentages.  Decide where you want your money to go.  Toyota has a few jobs here, but the profits go back to the land of rice.

And every time you go to Wal-Mar to buy some tighty whities, sox and wife beaters your money goes to the Chinese Communist Regime.

So yes, decide where you want your money to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And every time you go to Wal-Mar to buy some tighty whities, sox and wife beaters your money goes to the Chinese Communist Regime.

So yes, decide where you want your money to go.

i rarely, if ever, shop at walmart. walmarts are $h!ty stores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i rarely, if ever, shop at walmart.  walmarts are $h!ty stores.

Amen! Wal Mart sucks. Edited by Satty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not only do I not shop at wal-mart, I will pay more for the same item to avoid the words 'Made in China' whenever possible, and have aborted a purchase when there was no other possiblility.

Someone has to stand up for what's important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not only do I not shop at wal-mart, I will pay more for the same item to avoid the words 'Made in China' whenever possible, and have aborted a purchase when there was no other possiblility.

Someone has to stand up for what's important.

I've had this idea for a while kicking around in my head.

I think it could be the "next big thing" if executed

correctly:

A store... an Anti-Wal*Mart of sorts. Everything there

would be made in the USA. That's really the only rule.

It's a pie-in-the-sky idea but so was Apple computers

in the 1970s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had this idea for a while kicking around in my head.

I think it could be the "next big thing" if executed

correctly:

A store... an Anti-Wal*Mart of sorts. Everything there

would be made in the USA. That's really the only rule.

It's a pie-in-the-sky idea but so was Apple computers

in the 1970s.

I thought Wal-Mart (15 years ago) touted the fact that so many of their items came from the US. Am I mistaken? I know it's not that way now...but wasn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look who has thrown the thread off course by throwing in Wal-Mart, as if that is a valid argument.

Japan Inc started off with cheap shoes and toys, then moved on to electronics and now have their sights set on the auto industry.

Do you really think buying a $25 pair of tacky runners at Wal-Mart is in the same league as a $35,000 car???? REALLY?

The defense department freaked when the last American TV manufacturer closed down and had to award a contract to Zenith just to keep them going and keep SOME of the technology in the U.S.!

All this arguing about domestic/foreign content is bullcrap, plain and simple. Although it is a shame to lose the guys and gals on the line, or even the spin off parts jobs, it is the high end technical jobs that are the TRUE value-added jobs.

The one area where America has really shone in the past 20 years has been in the IT/computers and communications, of which the American car manufacturers have been major buyers/contributors. Take that away from America and there will be no industrial complex left.

The next Space Shuttle will be built in Japan and then we can argue about where the windshields and tires came from!

Plain and simple: who is going to build the tanks and guns when China decides to take all the oil fields in Saudi Arabia? Will the future President call up the future Prime Minister of Japan and politely ask him if he can commandeer some Toyota plants to build tanks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We  Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×