Re: Detroit Vs Japan
 

The union construction guys are very good sometimes and sometimes they
aren't. Thye problem with the unions is they get bad leadership
sometimes and once that happens getting them out is impossible.

The UAW did the auto industry no favors in the 60s and 70's which is
why everyone bought Toyotas. I don't have a problem with them making
the money they do, but I want first class workmanship for that much
money.

Re: Detroit Vs Japan
 

calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:

> The union construction guys are very good sometimes and sometimes they
> aren't. Thye problem with the unions is they get bad leadership
> sometimes and once that happens getting them out is impossible.

I won't argue with that one bit.

> The UAW did the auto industry no favors in the 60s and 70's which is
> why everyone bought Toyotas. I don't have a problem with them making
> the money they do, but I want first class workmanship for that much
> money.

Well, I think people bought Toyotas in the 70's for several reasons: First
was gas mileage. Second was immediate availability of gas saving vehicles.
Third was the slow response to the market by GM, Ford, and Chrysler. Fourth
was how much nicer their small cars were compared to Mavericks, Pintos,
Chevettes, and Omnis. Fifth was price. Hondas and Toyotas were very
inexpensive cars back then.

There was a lot of bloat in Detroit. During the 1970's, according to
Autoline Detroit, GM hired tons of new workers, mostly unnecessarily. The
bloat was just overwhelming, and the hierarchy to support such size was
full of bureaucracy. It was just a tremendous mess. Since WWII, we went
from many competitors on the market such as Nash, Packard, Hudson,
Studebacker, and others to the Big 3 and AMC. They got fat and lazy.

I really don't think that the UAW had much to do with the problem. It was
poor management and an inability to respond in a timely manner to changing
market conditions. They blamed government regulation and they simply didn't
take the foreign threat seriously.


--

Registered Linux user #378193

Re: Detroit Vs Japan
 

calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:

> The union construction guys are very good sometimes and sometimes they
> aren't. Thye problem with the unions is they get bad leadership
> sometimes and once that happens getting them out is impossible.

I won't argue with that one bit.

> The UAW did the auto industry no favors in the 60s and 70's which is
> why everyone bought Toyotas. I don't have a problem with them making
> the money they do, but I want first class workmanship for that much
> money.

Well, I think people bought Toyotas in the 70's for several reasons: First
was gas mileage. Second was immediate availability of gas saving vehicles.
Third was the slow response to the market by GM, Ford, and Chrysler. Fourth
was how much nicer their small cars were compared to Mavericks, Pintos,
Chevettes, and Omnis. Fifth was price. Hondas and Toyotas were very
inexpensive cars back then.

There was a lot of bloat in Detroit. During the 1970's, according to
Autoline Detroit, GM hired tons of new workers, mostly unnecessarily. The
bloat was just overwhelming, and the hierarchy to support such size was
full of bureaucracy. It was just a tremendous mess. Since WWII, we went
from many competitors on the market such as Nash, Packard, Hudson,
Studebacker, and others to the Big 3 and AMC. They got fat and lazy.

I really don't think that the UAW had much to do with the problem. It was
poor management and an inability to respond in a timely manner to changing
market conditions. They blamed government regulation and they simply didn't
take the foreign threat seriously.


--

Registered Linux user #378193

Re: Detroit Vs Japan
 

calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:

> The union construction guys are very good sometimes and sometimes they
> aren't. Thye problem with the unions is they get bad leadership
> sometimes and once that happens getting them out is impossible.

I won't argue with that one bit.

> The UAW did the auto industry no favors in the 60s and 70's which is
> why everyone bought Toyotas. I don't have a problem with them making
> the money they do, but I want first class workmanship for that much
> money.

Well, I think people bought Toyotas in the 70's for several reasons: First
was gas mileage. Second was immediate availability of gas saving vehicles.
Third was the slow response to the market by GM, Ford, and Chrysler. Fourth
was how much nicer their small cars were compared to Mavericks, Pintos,
Chevettes, and Omnis. Fifth was price. Hondas and Toyotas were very
inexpensive cars back then.

There was a lot of bloat in Detroit. During the 1970's, according to
Autoline Detroit, GM hired tons of new workers, mostly unnecessarily. The
bloat was just overwhelming, and the hierarchy to support such size was
full of bureaucracy. It was just a tremendous mess. Since WWII, we went
from many competitors on the market such as Nash, Packard, Hudson,
Studebacker, and others to the Big 3 and AMC. They got fat and lazy.

I really don't think that the UAW had much to do with the problem. It was
poor management and an inability to respond in a timely manner to changing
market conditions. They blamed government regulation and they simply didn't
take the foreign threat seriously.


--

Registered Linux user #378193

Re: Detroit Vs Japan
 

calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:

> The union construction guys are very good sometimes and sometimes they
> aren't. Thye problem with the unions is they get bad leadership
> sometimes and once that happens getting them out is impossible.

I won't argue with that one bit.

> The UAW did the auto industry no favors in the 60s and 70's which is
> why everyone bought Toyotas. I don't have a problem with them making
> the money they do, but I want first class workmanship for that much
> money.

Well, I think people bought Toyotas in the 70's for several reasons: First
was gas mileage. Second was immediate availability of gas saving vehicles.
Third was the slow response to the market by GM, Ford, and Chrysler. Fourth
was how much nicer their small cars were compared to Mavericks, Pintos,
Chevettes, and Omnis. Fifth was price. Hondas and Toyotas were very
inexpensive cars back then.

There was a lot of bloat in Detroit. During the 1970's, according to
Autoline Detroit, GM hired tons of new workers, mostly unnecessarily. The
bloat was just overwhelming, and the hierarchy to support such size was
full of bureaucracy. It was just a tremendous mess. Since WWII, we went
from many competitors on the market such as Nash, Packard, Hudson,
Studebacker, and others to the Big 3 and AMC. They got fat and lazy.

I really don't think that the UAW had much to do with the problem. It was
poor management and an inability to respond in a timely manner to changing
market conditions. They blamed government regulation and they simply didn't
take the foreign threat seriously.


--

Registered Linux user #378193

Re: Detroit Vs Japan
 

I believe American cars were much better relative to the rest of the
world when we had both the majors and the independents. It's no
accident that the most reliable and toughest fifties and sixties
vehicles made in America with the highest percentage still on the road
and with loyal actitvist owner's clubs are Studebaker and International
Harvester. (Jeep was part of an independent then too.) In the late
sixties and early seventies American cars sucked. The Vega was a rust
ball with an engine that self-destructed in some cases in nine months,
the Pinto would explode if rear ended (but ironically had some good
drivelines!), on and on.

Re: Detroit Vs Japan
 

I believe American cars were much better relative to the rest of the
world when we had both the majors and the independents. It's no
accident that the most reliable and toughest fifties and sixties
vehicles made in America with the highest percentage still on the road
and with loyal actitvist owner's clubs are Studebaker and International
Harvester. (Jeep was part of an independent then too.) In the late
sixties and early seventies American cars sucked. The Vega was a rust
ball with an engine that self-destructed in some cases in nine months,
the Pinto would explode if rear ended (but ironically had some good
drivelines!), on and on.

Re: Detroit Vs Japan
 

I believe American cars were much better relative to the rest of the
world when we had both the majors and the independents. It's no
accident that the most reliable and toughest fifties and sixties
vehicles made in America with the highest percentage still on the road
and with loyal actitvist owner's clubs are Studebaker and International
Harvester. (Jeep was part of an independent then too.) In the late
sixties and early seventies American cars sucked. The Vega was a rust
ball with an engine that self-destructed in some cases in nine months,
the Pinto would explode if rear ended (but ironically had some good
drivelines!), on and on.

Re: Detroit Vs Japan
 

I believe American cars were much better relative to the rest of the
world when we had both the majors and the independents. It's no
accident that the most reliable and toughest fifties and sixties
vehicles made in America with the highest percentage still on the road
and with loyal actitvist owner's clubs are Studebaker and International
Harvester. (Jeep was part of an independent then too.) In the late
sixties and early seventies American cars sucked. The Vega was a rust
ball with an engine that self-destructed in some cases in nine months,
the Pinto would explode if rear ended (but ironically had some good
drivelines!), on and on.

Re: Detroit Vs Japan
 

That was a personal opinion, and not based on any fact. My opinion
of you is that you don't give a ---- about my home land, America! I
consider you a traitor.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Ruel Smith wrote:
><snip BS>