The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Chrysler to Mexico? (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
Slide
View Profile
Special user
533 Posts

Profile of Slide
"But by the same token why use union labor when non union labor is cheaper? Why not follow this logic all the way out?"

is anyone stopping them now?
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20032 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Makes me wonder why it is ever an issue.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20032 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 12:28, Al Angello wrote:
Cars they import to Mexico are stripped down versions of cars made elsewhere so I don't think there is a big Chrysler market in Mexico.


Do they import them or make them there?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
motown
View Profile
Inner circle
Atlanta by way of Detroit
5843 Posts

Profile of motown
It's like the second coming of Tommy.
"If you ever write anything about me after I'm gone, I will come back and haunt you."
– Karl Germain
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20032 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
I have no problem with them moving. A business made a business decision. I just wonder what others think.

Not a big issue.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
817 Posts

Profile of acesover
Wages depend on who you talk to. The low end seems to be around $25 to $30 per hour plus benefits. The high end seems to be around $40 to $55 an hour plus benefits. Whichever is correct it is good money for no formal education. Benefits run fromo what I understand run from around $10 an hour to $15 an hour.

I wonder if union wages has anything to do with this? Smile Nah of course not. Smile I am sure it cost the same to produce an automobile in Mexico as it does here in the U.S. Smile Lets see the average UAW wage is around $25 to $30/hour then add benefits and it ups it to around $$40 to $55 an hour...there are estimates that are higher. Remember this is average not what employees make that have been there for a while. Add to the fact that benefits have to be paid to those who have retired (benefit package) and it brings the cost of an hourly wage around $10 an hour more that it costs an auto company per employee an hour. As a CEO how fast can you say, "lets move to Mexico?" Not fast enough.

I like to see people get a "fair wage". However as I stated with no formal education and really non skilled labor this is a very high wage and benefits. We are not talking overtime either. When I say non skilled I mean what they learn is on the job training. Far from rocket science.

Just an after thought. Don't let those McDonalds' workers that want $15 an hour hear about this or they are going to want a heck of a lot more. Smile
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
If Mexico has an absolute economic advantage in building cars (or even a relative economic advantage), then it's in the best of both Mexico and the US for Chrysler to move their manufacturing to Mexico.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 13:25, Chance Wolf wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 11:27, mastermindreader wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 11:21, Chance Wolf wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 11:08, mastermindreader wrote:
Are they actually moving all of their production to Mexico, or is this like the Jeep situation that was a big non-issue a few years back and simply involved opening another plant in China in order to build vehicles for the Chinese market?


Yeah...I'm sure that a brand new Chrysler is exactly what the Mexican folks are saving up for.


I just asked a simple question. Balducci's post answered it for me. Thanks for the snide reply, though. This place wouldn't be the same without a regular does of those.


It was a joke.

Man...you gotta lighten up a bit.


My mistake. I thought jokes were supposed to be funny. Or followed by one of these: Smile
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4765 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 22:16, S2000magician wrote:
If Mexico has an absolute economic advantage in building cars (or even a relative economic advantage), then it's in the best [interest] of both Mexico and the US for Chrysler to move their manufacturing to Mexico.

I'll assume the brackets there, unless I totally misread you.

So, why is it in the interest of the American worker for Chrysler to move their manufacturing to Mexico? Or by "America" do you mean the CEO and shareholders of Chrysler? Not quite the same, let's define terms.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20032 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Chrysler has no obligation to America.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 22:39, landmark wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 22:16, S2000magician wrote:
If Mexico has an absolute economic advantage in building cars (or even a relative economic advantage), then it's in the best [interest]of both Mexico and the US for Chrysler to move their manufacturing to Mexico.

I'll assume the brackets there, unless I totally misread you.

Yes: my mistake.

Quote:
On 2013-10-12 22:39, landmark wrote:
So, why is it in the interest of the American worker for Chrysler to move their manufacturing to Mexico? Or by "America" do you mean the CEO and shareholders of Chrysler? Not quite the same, let's define terms.

I don't recall using the word "worker". Nor "CEO", nor "shareholders".

I'd settle for "consumer".
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27065 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 23:01, Dannydoyle wrote:
Chrysler has no obligation to America.


You mean taxes?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
Bob1Dog
View Profile
Inner circle
Wife: It's me or this houseful of
1159 Posts

Profile of Bob1Dog
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 23:01, Dannydoyle wrote:
Chrysler has no obligation to America.

Correct. Chrysler is obligated only to the folks who purchase its shares and invest in the company, be they Russian, Chinese, Canadians, Americans, and, well y'alls get the picture. That's all. If some of y'alls don't like that notion, then get 'em out of your portfolios and go green, as it were. I personally like to invest in companies that make money. And I let my financial advisor worry about all that, so don't even ask me if I own Chrysler, because I frankly don't know and I don't shiv a git as long as I keep getting the good returns I've been getting since 2008. Smile
What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about? Smile

My neighbor rang my doorbell at 2:30 a.m. this morning, can you believe that, 2:30 a.m.!? Lucky for him I was still up playing my drums.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 23:08, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 22:39, landmark wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 22:16, S2000magician wrote:
If Mexico has an absolute economic advantage in building cars (or even a relative economic advantage), then it's in the best [interest]of both Mexico and the US for Chrysler to move their manufacturing to Mexico.

I'll assume the brackets there, unless I totally misread you.

Yes: my mistake.

Quote:
On 2013-10-12 22:39, landmark wrote:
So, why is it in the interest of the American worker for Chrysler to move their manufacturing to Mexico? Or by "America" do you mean the CEO and shareholders of Chrysler? Not quite the same, let's define terms.

I don't recall using the word "worker". Nor "CEO", nor "shareholders".

I'd settle for "consumer".


It would be in the interest of some consumers, no doubt. Unless, of course, they were out-of-work American auto workers.
Bob1Dog
View Profile
Inner circle
Wife: It's me or this houseful of
1159 Posts

Profile of Bob1Dog
So. Why are American auto workers out of work?
What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about? Smile

My neighbor rang my doorbell at 2:30 a.m. this morning, can you believe that, 2:30 a.m.!? Lucky for him I was still up playing my drums.
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1192 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
It's good that those Mexican automotive workers are stepping up to do jobs Americans won't do.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2013-10-13 00:54, mastermindreader wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 23:08, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 22:39, landmark wrote:
Quote:
On 2013-10-12 22:16, S2000magician wrote:
If Mexico has an absolute economic advantage in building cars (or even a relative economic advantage), then it's in the best [interest]of both Mexico and the US for Chrysler to move their manufacturing to Mexico.

I'll assume the brackets there, unless I totally misread you.

Yes: my mistake.

Quote:
On 2013-10-12 22:39, landmark wrote:
So, why is it in the interest of the American worker for Chrysler to move their manufacturing to Mexico? Or by "America" do you mean the CEO and shareholders of Chrysler? Not quite the same, let's define terms.

I don't recall using the word "worker". Nor "CEO", nor "shareholders".

I'd settle for "consumer".

It would be in the interest of some consumers, no doubt. Unless, of course, they were out-of-work American auto workers.

There are likely more Chrysler consumers in the US than incipient out-of-work US auto workers.

A couple of years ago I was listening to a story on NPR about textile production jobs leaving South Carolina for . . . I don't recall exactly where: Indonesia, Malaysia, Viet Nam . . . somewhere in Southeast Asia, and about all of the South Carolina textile workers who were crying foul about losing their jobs. The interesting point of the story, however, what the none of those same South Carolina textile workers had similarly cried foul ten years earlier when textile jobs left Maine . . . for South Carolina.

The common reply to the complaint about one set of workers losing their jobs to another set of workers is that the former should be retrained to work in industries in which their country has an absolute (or, at least, a relative) economic advantage. There are, I'm sure, industries in which the US has a relative economic advantage over Mexico.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4765 Posts

Profile of landmark
S2000:

What I object to is the vagueness of appealing to the "best interest of the US." There are US workers, CEOs, consumers, magicians, and many other, possibly overlapping, categories... Unless NAFTA is some miracle policy that makes life better for all members of the US, then it's better to be more specific.

Which you were in your last post, thanks.

We are not just consumers. We are mothers, fathers, children, teachers, soldiers, artists, doctors, burger flippers, neighbors, etc. When it comes to our economic life, for 99% of us, we are workers; the bulk of our subsistence will depend on wages and jobs. Not everybody can be in the 1% by definition. Public policy like NAFTA that makes it easier for companies to move jobs abroad does not help wages, it just fuels a race to the bottom for workers and wages. As a consumer, I cannot consume as much if my wages are low or non-existent.

In your post you write: "There are likely more Chrysler consumers in the US than incipient out-of-work US auto workers." May or may not be true. Let's assume for argument's sake it is true. Are they equivalent entities? Do they hold the same weight in the larger scheme of things? That is, does the burden of some Americans having to pay x amount of dollars more for a Chrysler carry the same implications about life as the burden of some Americans not being able to work? I think this is a very important question to consider.

RE the South Carolina/Maine/ Indonesia question: the jobs moved in both instances because the wages were lower. It's not hard to envision public policy that ameliorates those inequities, rather than aggravates them: encourage strong national unions so that there is no incentive to move from Maine to SC; discourage, through tax policy, the export of jobs to other countries.

What if we actually made decisions that favored us as workers, not just investors?
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
+1 landmark.

I find it fascinating that large corporations are frequently appealing for tax breaks, access to resources,infrastructure exemptions etc. etc. etc. Yet a number of people blandly repeat the assertion that corporations have no obligations except to their shareholders.

Back in the 60s and 70s we called this "corporate welfare". And the CEOs were disparagingly called "corporate welfare bums". How in the world did we get to the point where corporations are applauded for taking from the taxpayer, laying off the people who underwrote the cheque, moving the facilities elsewhere, while giving themselves and the shareholders huge (tax-funded) dividends?

Oh how our minds have changed.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Slide
View Profile
Special user
533 Posts

Profile of Slide
"I find it fascinating that large corporations are frequently appealing for tax breaks, access to resources,infrastructure exemptions etc. etc. etc. Yet a number of people blandly repeat the assertion that corporations have no obligations except to their shareholders.

Back in the 60s and 70s we called this "corporate welfare". And the CEOs were disparagingly called "corporate welfare bums". How in the world did we get to the point where corporations are applauded for taking from the taxpayer, laying off the people who underwrote the cheque, moving the facilities elsewhere, while giving themselves and the shareholders huge (tax-funded) dividends?

Oh how our minds have changed.
"

Magnus, while I certainly sympathize with your sentiments, it is the way business, big business I should say, has always run. It is a major aspect of any capitalist system. And I am 100% a capitalist If corporations are given incentives to come into your state, the idea is that corporation is also bringing jobs, it is a quid pro quo. And while a corporation may feel the need to be a good corporate steward in the areas they move into, this is more often than not to engender positive feelings about the company, in other words a product of marketing, not conscious.

The traditional role of government has been to mitigate the worst aspects of capitalism by providing oversight and by passing laws protecting its citizens against the extremes that a corporation may engage in to service their shareholders at the expense of the local population. And while I'm a capitalist, I'm also a big believer in strong government that protects its citizens against abuse. Ying and Yang balance each other. When one or the other get out of balance, there is trouble.

No regulations are not the answer and restrictive unnecessary regulations stifle economic growth. Knowing where the balance point is, is what good governance is all about, something sadly lacking in washington and the US congress.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Chrysler to Mexico? (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.24 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL