Foreign Car Dealers’ Association Angry with Obama's 'Buy American' Message

[Z-06]

[source: MotorAuthority]

Foreign Car Dealers' Association Angry with Obama's 'Buy American' Message

Toyota, Nissan and Honda all build cars in the U.S. General Motors, Chrysler and Ford all build cars in Mexico and Canada in addition to within the U.S. It's hard to know which car is built where as a consumer, and the American International Automobile Dealer's Association (AIADA) is upset over President Barack Obama's 'buy American' message in during the Chrysler bankruptcy announcement yesterday.

The organization, which represents the 11,000 foreign nameplate car dealerships in the U.S., thinks the 'American' distinction is irrelevant. "In today's globalized economy 'buying American' can mean anything from buying a Chevy Avalanche built by Mexican workers in Silao, Mexico to buying a Toyota Camry built by Americans in Georgetown, Kentucky," said AIADA President Cody Lusk.

"The real issue is that every car purchased in America today is a shot in the arm for our economy, a boost for car dealers, who are the cornerstones of communities all across this country, and a win for American consumers who have the opportunity to choose the vehicles that best meet their driving needs. President Obama must recognize that protectionist policies and statements like 'buy American' have no place in America's economic recovery," said Lusk.

The AIADA and Lusk have a valid point - many Americans work for foreign car manufacturers, their dealerships and suppliers that rely on their business. Regardless of where the corporate profit - or loss - is ultimately going, every car sold in the U.S. does some good for the economy and America.

On the other hand, whether a car is assembled in Mexico or Kentucky, if the sale is chalked up for an American carmaker, it could help to boost the bottom lines of the most troubled - and thus most likely to fail catastrohpically - carmakers in America. And that could avert a situation where tens of thousands of Americans would lose their jobs.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

"The real issue is that every car purchased in America today is a shot in the arm for our economy, a boost for car dealers, who are the cornerstones of communities all across this country, and a win for American consumers who have the opportunity to choose the vehicles that best meet their driving needs. President Obama must recognize that protectionist policies and statements like 'buy American' have no place in America's economic recovery," said Lusk.

LMAO... americans will never learn the error of their ways...

As for the import auto dealers (most of which BUILT their import empires with money made by Detroit and most of which still keep a Detroit brand as "a fall back"

I say they go f*ck themselves.... (Thanks Camino, for that )

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Well Mexico and Canada's trade balance is a bit better lookin that US-Japan is. So it is still more beneficial to buy a car made in Mexico and Canada. PLUS there is the added bonus that buying cars made in Mexico pumps more money into the coffers of Mexicans, and more affulent Mexicans might make Mexico a nicer country that is not so corrupt & create a larger market for US goods & create a productive neighbor.

So, yes, there are benefits to buying 'American' still.

[Satty]

Support Mexican workers, buy American?

[Z-06]

The only reasonable argument against the foreign manufacturers claiming to be producing cars here is that - the foreign cars may be assembled here but the content is still mostly foreign. American cars might be manufactured in Mexico or Canada, but the content is mostly American. By destroying domestic industry you are not only making car manufacturer workers unemployed but also its suppliers' employees.

[balthazar]

I continue to be amazed at those still micro-analyzing the WHERE a car is screwed together in a few hours... as defining what country the Corporation that allowed it to be created, is.

The foreign car dealers had better suck it up and open their eyes: with a healthier... FAR larger employment base serving the domestic automobile industry, there is more potential for the few transplant foreign nameplates to increase their sales. Kill off all those connected withg thre domestic auto industry and you only shoot yourselves in the foot.

Or, to nutshell it nicely ala Camino, once again: "Go F**k yourselves!"

>>"every car sold in the U.S. does some good for the economy and America."<<

Only initially. Obviously, in the long run, the potential for undermining to the point of collapse is quite real, and that's clearly "some bad".

[Nick]

Last time I checked, all these corporations are publicly owned and traded. Can someone explain how the origin of the corporation really matters in determining where the money goes?

I get the "support the big 3" stance. Not questioning it over supporting other brands...I just never understood the argument that the money spent buying a Japanese car goes back to Japan.

Edited May 3, 2009 by Nick

[PurdueGuy]

Last time I checked, all these corporations are publicly owned and traded. Can someone explain how the origin of the corporation really matters in determining where the money goes?

I get the "support the big 3" stance. Not questioning it over supporting other brands...I just never understood the argument that the money spent buying a Japanese car goes back to Japan.

There are SO many aspects to consider in something like this.

-Where is it assembled?

-Where do the parts come from?

-Where was it engineered? (that one gets overlooked a lot)

-Where are the big management bucks going?

-Where is the company owned?

[balthazar]

Last time I checked, all these corporations are publicly owned and traded. Can someone explain how the origin of the corporation really matters in determining where the money goes?

I get the "support the big 3" stance. Not questioning it over supporting other brands...I just never understood the argument that the money spent buying a Japanese car goes back to Japan.

You live in CA. You make your income in CA, pay your taxes in CA, and deposit your savings in CA, no? Not Maine, right? Sure, there are federal taxes, and national/international investment possibilities, but including your consumerism, is not the majority of dollars attached to your name shuttling around in CA ??

Toyoda is incorporated & headquartered in Japan, pays their taxes in Japan, and assumedly does a great portion of their banking in Japan. Sure, assumedly they pay some portion of their utilities & property taxes from their plants here (unless they're still skating on all the state freebies initially given...), but why would you think the bulk of their corp money would be anywhere else beside Japan, even if 75% is generated in the U.S. ??

BTW, it has been detailed here before that one cannot buy actual shares of TMC on the SE, only 'representative' shares- so 'where' is that money (if it's really anywhere') ?

[fightingbee]

President Obama must recognize that protectionist policies and statements like 'buy American' have no place in America's economic recovery," said Lusk.

Yes, how dare we show some national pride and/or try to keep a US mfr. relevant in one of the last industries we still even have any chance of competing in.

[Drew Dowdell]

[source: MotorAuthority]

Foreign Car Dealers' Association Angry with Obama's 'Buy American' Message

Toyota, Nissan and Honda all build cars in the U.S. General Motors, Chrysler and Ford all build cars in Mexico and Canada in addition to within the U.S. It's hard to know which car is built where as a consumer, and the American International Automobile Dealer's Association (AIADA) is upset over President Barack Obama's 'buy American' message in during the Chrysler bankruptcy announcement yesterday.

The organization, which represents the 11,000 foreign nameplate car dealerships in the U.S., thinks the 'American' distinction is irrelevant. "In today's globalized economy 'buying American' can mean anything from buying a Chevy Avalanche built by Mexican workers in Silao, Mexico to buying a Toyota Camry built by Americans in Georgetown, Kentucky," said AIADA President Cody Lusk.

"The real issue is that every car purchased in America today is a shot in the arm for our economy, a boost for car dealers, who are the cornerstones of communities all across this country, and a win for American consumers who have the opportunity to choose the vehicles that best meet their driving needs. President Obama must recognize that protectionist policies and statements like 'buy American' have no place in America's economic recovery," said Lusk.

The AIADA and Lusk have a valid point - many Americans work for foreign car manufacturers, their dealerships and suppliers that rely on their business. Regardless of where the corporate profit - or loss - is ultimately going, every car sold in the U.S. does some good for the economy and America.

On the other hand, whether a car is assembled in Mexico or Kentucky, if the sale is chalked up for an American carmaker, it could help to boost the bottom lines of the most troubled - and thus most likely to fail catastrohpically - carmakers in America. And that could avert a situation where tens of thousands of Americans would lose their jobs.

[Dsuupr]

This is a comment that even non-Obama supports should like.

It's about time we had a President that believed in us.

[Nick]

You live in CA. You make your income in CA, pay your taxes in CA, and deposit your savings in CA, no? Not Maine, right? Sure, there are federal taxes, and national/international investment possibilities, but including your consumerism, is not the majority of dollars attached to your name shuttling around in CA ??

Toyoda is incorporated & headquartered in Japan, pays their taxes in Japan, and assumedly does a great portion of their banking in Japan. Sure, assumedly they pay some portion of their utilities & property taxes from their plants here (unless they're still skating on all the state freebies initially given...), but why would you think the bulk of their corp money would be anywhere else beside Japan, even if 75% is generated in the U.S. ??

BTW, it has been detailed here before that one cannot buy actual shares of TMC on the SE, only 'representative' shares- so 'where' is that money (if it's really anywhere') ?

I wasn't trying to be a smart ass even though my comment may have come across that way. It was an honest question that I would like to know the answer to in greater detail. I may have some interest in performing some research on where cash flows are diversified...Interesting point about the stock though. I wasn't aware.

[cletus8269]

This is a comment that even non-Obama supports should like.

It's about time we had a President that believed in us.

well... i guess this makes it even about the whole "country that invented the car" statement. although he could have salvaged it by saying the country that invented batter cars

[regfootball]

screw them. bite me. all of that.

simply put. if you spend your money, sure you want a great product. but if you care even just a &#036;h&#33; about anyone besides yourself, i don't care if its your neighbor, countrymen, family, etc. and you like the American way of life and prosperity for all, then you would care just a little f@#king bit about keeping companies here strong because other countries do not play fair in trade and use our weak pussy mentality against us.

typically people who seem to not care are ones who work in idustries that they don't feel their own jobs are threatened by ownership moving overseas. trust me, how would you enjoy it if your company went tits up because 2/3 of the work went overseas? Generally all that gets left here is 'sales and marketing'. HA. marketing and sales is needed to make up for &#036;h&#33; product. People today think marketing is more neccessary than product.

World economy, would you rather our citizens be doing the work, or somewhere else, driving our collective brain power down the &#036;h&#33;ter?

Edited May 4, 2009 by regfootball

[balthazar]

I wasn't trying to be a smart ass even though my comment may have come across that way. It was an honest question that I would like to know the answer to in greater detail. I may have some interest in performing some research on where cash flows are diversified... Interesting point about the stock though. I wasn't aware.

I did not take it as a 'smart ass' question- hope my answer wasn't taken that way, either.

I, too, would be interested to know the specifics here, but I'm afraid toyoda (for EX) would not be divulging this information, probably at least partly because it would be strongly counter to the 'gentle benevolent guest' image they try to portray.

[Camino LS6]

Well.

I guess I've already made my contribution to this thread...

But in case anyone missed it, hey foreign dealers...

GFY!

[balthazar]

Take it & run with it, Camino !

[Intrepidation]

[Camino LS6]

Take it & run with it, Camino !

I might just do that...

[Daryl Z71]

Awww poor F*ckin babies! Im tired of this whole damn "Where its made" argument! If its a jap brand made by Americans in friggin Kentucky the money still goes to a JAPANESE company! If its an American brand made by friggin Mexicans in Mexico the money still goes to an AMERICAN company! I know you guys on here know this, and it's common sense, but why the hell can't anyone else get this into their thick skulls!!! By the way I do my part every time I drive past the Toyota dealer and yell F*ck Toyota don't buy their garbage! May be immature, but it makes me feel better.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Daryl Z71

[Daryl Z71]

Oh and call me racist but if they don't like the way we handle our business, then pull out the F-15's and blow their asses back to hell!

[CSpec]

Globalization is good. Trade is good. Obama is wrong.

[regfootball]

Globalization is good. Trade is good. Obama is wrong.

equal and fair trade is good. why is japan bitching, their exports went to pot when car sales tanked. they have a trade defecit now, and they cannot function well that way. which is why they are turning the screws up to us so they can get their gravy train going again.

its not just japan anymore either. VW just extorted all sorts of money to build stuff in where, KY or VA? Move in for the kill, we outsourced all our other jobs so yeah people will be dying to work for 12 bucks an hour in a factory.

Edited May 4, 2009 by regfootball

[CSpec]

equal and fair trade is good. why is japan bitching, their exports went to pot when car sales tanked. they have a trade defecit now, and they cannot function well that way. which is why they are turning the screws up to us so they can get their gravy train going again.

its not just japan anymore either. VW just extorted all sorts of money to build stuff in where, KY or VA? Move in for the kill, we outsourced all our other jobs so yeah people will be dying to work for 12 bucks an hour in a factory.

Japan is hurting itself with its extremely strict immigration laws, imports, and protectionist policies. Japan does not enjoy our prosperity because they refuse to participate fully in the global marketplace. Just because they impoverish themselves on purpose does not mean we should do the same. It is ONE planet, ONE marketplace, and hopeless poverty is the only outcome of not participating in it.

[Drew Dowdell]

Globalization is good. Trade is good. Obama is wrong.

Globalization is bad. Trade is good. Obama is right.

[Drew Dowdell]

Japan is hurting itself with its extremely strict immigration laws, imports, and protectionist policies. Japan does not enjoy our prosperity because they refuse to participate fully in the global marketplace. Just because they impoverish themselves on purpose does not mean we should do the same. It is ONE planet, ONE marketplace, and hopeless poverty is the only outcome of not participating in it.

Globalization has the effect of averaging wealth across the globe. As the wealthiest country in the world, the effect is reducing our wealth while increasing the wealth of others. I see no problem in protecting or encouraging the protection of our wealth.

Every time someone buys a Camry, it damages our economy just a little bit because even though the Camry is assembled in Kentucky, the profits go back to Japan. Yet when someone buys an Impala made in Canada, the profits come back to the U.S.

Additionally, Canada, the U.S. and Mexico are far more economically tied together than the U.S. is with Japan. Our trade levels with Canada are equitable. Our trade levels with Japan are not.

[A Horse With No Name]

...which is why I wouldn't mind a Canadian built Camaro....

Chris

[pow]

Japan is hurting itself with its extremely strict immigration laws, imports, and protectionist policies. Japan does not enjoy our prosperity because they refuse to participate fully in the global marketplace. Just because they impoverish themselves on purpose does not mean we should do the same. It is ONE planet, ONE marketplace, and hopeless poverty is the only outcome of not participating in it.

+1 It would suck to live in Japan with such limited consumer choice and freedom. Their recession has gone on forever; what good is sitting on a pile of cash when you don't use it? The US found that out in the nineteenth century under mercantilism.

Also, if the US government were more like Japan's government, GM and Chrysler would have been dead long ago. Success of many Asian industries comes from governments picking winners among domestic players, withdrawing support from those that are revealed failures, so that resources don't get bottled up in unproductive companies. I don't think American business owners, or consumers for that matter, would find that level of interference acceptable.

[Camino LS6]

+1 It would suck to live in Japan with such limited consumer choice and freedom. Their recession has gone on forever; what good is sitting on a pile of cash when you don't use it? The US found that out in the nineteenth century under mercantilism.

Also, if the US government were more like Japan's government, GM and Chrysler would have been dead long ago. Success of many Asian industries comes from governments picking winners among domestic players, withdrawing support from those that are revealed failures, so that resources don't get bottled up in unproductive companies. I don't think American business owners, or consumers for that matter, would find that level of interference acceptable.

Way off on that one, if our government acted like Japan's we would all be driving big 3 cars!

The asian makes would have been kept out at the border.

[Drew Dowdell]

Way off on that one, if our government acted like Japan's we would all be driving big 3 cars!

The asian makes would have been kept out at the border.

!!! +1

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Way off on that one, if our government acted like Japan's we would all be driving big 3 cars!

The asian makes would have been kept out at the border.

Yep, and car quality would be god awful, mechanics would be doing good business, and cars would be very heavy with somewhat less efficient engines. IN ADDITION, car costs would be more because there would be less competition.

Overall net effect on Americans: lower income people are less able to have a car due to the increased maintenance costs. Older cars would likely be less reliable so that is not a viable alternative for them. Time and frustration on broken down cars for all Americans. More employment in auto manufacturing and service, but less employment elsewhere in the economy as time, effort, and money put into servicing cars drains investments elsewhere.

So your plan would hurt the lower income people and overall not really help anyone else.

...Although i suppose if one of the American automakers did actually pick up on the old American JIT and continuous quality improvement then things may have turned out somewhat the same.

Your guy's proposition equates to this:

Your a baseball team full of good, but not great players. You go up against a team who is somewhat better than you and you cannot win against them (you come close through). So, your solution is to ban that team from playing so that you can come out on top.

Now the reasonable thing to do in that instance is to practice more, watch how they play, and try to one up them and win. Its harder but it can be done.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Drew Dowdell]

Yep, and car quality would be god awful, mechanics would be doing good business, and cars would be very heavy with somewhat less efficient engines. IN ADDITION, car costs would be more because there would be less competition.

Overall net effect on Americans: lower income people are less able to have a car due to the increased maintenance costs. Older cars would likely be less reliable so that is not a viable alternative for them. Time and frustration on broken down cars for all Americans. More employment in auto manufacturing and service, but less employment elsewhere in the economy as time, effort, and money put into servicing cars drains investments elsewhere.

So your plan would hurt the lower income people and overall not really help anyone else.

...Although i suppose if one of the American automakers did actually pick up on the old American JIT and continuous quality improvement then things may have turned out somewhat the same.

Actually, we'd probably have a big 3.5 as AMC probably wouldn't have succumb in the 80s. Why do you assume that there would be no development or improvement if the domestics didn't have to compete with each other. Back when Toyota was still Toyopet, the domestics competed plenty with each other in races to build the most fantastic cars. When the imports came, it became a race to build the blandest cars.

And I don't buy your argument that domestics wouldn't be as reliable as they are today. Even if GM stuck around with the 3800 a few more years, it's still an engine you can take a shotgun to and it'll keep running. Oh no! I'll be "stuck" with an LT-1 that lasts only 350,000 miles between rebuilds and powers my 4,000 lbs land yacht down the highway, assertively, at 65mph whilst getting 26mpg. The tradgedy. Drat, I won't get to spin my partner's CRV up to 6,000rpm just to pull out into traffic or feel it's 4-speed auto shift into 2nd just to make it up a minor hill at highway speed.

You're correct that the automotive landscape would be very different than it is today, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Olds, Plymouth, AMC/Eagle, and Pontiac would all still be around today.

[pow]

Way off on that one, if our government acted like Japan's we would all be driving big 3 cars!

The asian makes would have been kept out at the border.

That would make this country far less attractive to investment, nobody would want to come to the US, and domestic consumers, or pretty much the entire population, would be screwed over. The Japanese are getting reamed.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Actually, we'd probably have a big 3.5 as AMC probably wouldn't have succumb in the 80s. Why do you assume that there would be no development or improvement if the domestics didn't have to compete with each other. Back when Toyota was still Toyopet, the domestics competed plenty with each other in races to build the most fantastic cars. When the imports came, it became a race to build the blandest cars.

And I don't buy your argument that domestics wouldn't be as reliable as they are today. Even if GM stuck around with the 3800 a few more years, it's still an engine you can take a shotgun to and it'll keep running. Oh no! I'll be "stuck" with an LT-1 that lasts only 350,000 miles between rebuilds and powers my 4,000 lbs land yacht down the highway, assertively, at 65mph whilst getting 26mpg. The tradgedy. Drat, I won't get to spin my partner's CRV up to 6,000rpm just to pull out into traffic or feel it's 4-speed auto shift into 2nd just to make it up a minor hill at highway speed.

You're correct that the automotive landscape would be very different than it is today, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Olds, Plymouth, AMC/Eagle, and Pontiac would all still be around today.

I am not saying things would not have progressed. I am just saying that they may not have progressed as quickly.

After all, Russian communist cars progressed, but not quickly. The more competitors you have the more things progress. Since this is all hypothetical anyways, who is to say that your LT-1 would ever have been invented if there was no foreign competition? I mean it COULD have been, but we don't know for sure.

In other words, when you compete with THE BEST, you learn quicker and everyone progresses faster. When you compete with okay people of your own skill level, you still improve, but you will not improve as fast and likely THE BEST will continue to compete against the other THE BESTS out there and they will be lightyears ahead of the others who only competed with other okay firms.

AMC and other companies fell by the way side because they could not compete very well against the other brands. Having AMC around now would only imply one of 2 things 1) AMC would have been more efficient with the lack of foreign cars (doubtful) or 2) AMC would still be around and not as efficient as most automakers are today.

Edited May 4, 2009 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Drew Dowdell]

In it's final decade AMC was decidedly the vehicle for people who couldn't afford something from the big three. Cheap imported cars are what really put the nail in the coffin for AMC. No the Gremlin and Pacer weren't great cars, but consider this. The Civic sold 100,000 copies in 1975, the Pacer sold 145,000 and the Vega sold 204,000. I couldn't find numbers for the Pinto and Dart but let's just guess them at another 300,000 combined.

In 1975, Honda had 1/6th of the compact market the domestics had...... in 1975!! Throw in the Datsun B210, the Toyota Corolla, the VW Rabbit.... You don't think that year after year, that made a difference in the fortunes of the domestics?

[Camino LS6]

In the time period we are talking about, the "Home Team" was the best.

The Japanese cars were absolute junk back then.

Please.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

In the time period we are talking about, the "Home Team" was the best.

The Japanese cars were absolute junk back then.

Please.

Alright, so we should be protectionist because the Japanese were able to learn from their mistakes, improve and eventually overcome Detroit????

[Camino LS6]

Alright, so we should be protectionist because the Japanese were able to learn from their mistakes, improve and eventually overcome Detroit????

No, but we should be self-sufficient instead of self-sabotaging.

And we should have demanded equal access to their markets.

And we should not have given them tax breaks to set up shop here.

And we should not have tolerated their monetary policy.

And we should not have tolerated their product dumping.

And so on, and so on.

[Drew Dowdell]

Alright, so we should be protectionist because the Japanese were able to learn from their mistakes, improve and eventually overcome Detroit????

We should be protectionist because the Japanese are.

[ZL-1]

Alright, so we should be protectionist because the Japanese were able to learn from their mistakes, improve and eventually overcome Detroit????

Nope, the real thought behind protectionism is to turn protectionist because domestic players were unable to learn from their mistakes and improve. One can think of it as sweeping dirt under the carpet. :AH-HA_wink:

[Camino LS6]

Nope, the real thought behind protectionism is to turn protectionist because domestic players were unable to learn from their mistakes and improve. One can think of it as sweeping dirt under the carpet. :AH-HA_wink:

Not really.

The time to have dealt with these issues was decades ago.

The unfair trade practices should never have been overlooked in the first place.

The level playing field should have been the guiding policy from the start.

What to do now is another topic entirely.

[Daryl Z71]

Not really.

The time to have dealt with these issues was decades ago.

The unfair trade practices should never have been overlooked in the first place.

The level playing field should have been the guiding policy from the start.

What to do now is another topic entirely.

Nuke em :AH-HA_wink:

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

But to what degree are Japanese protectionists rather than extremely nationalistic? There is a difference, same outcome, but still a difference.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Nuke em :AH-HA_wink:

again?

[Daryl Z71]

again?

Hell Yea! lol

[Camino LS6]

But to what degree are Japanese protectionists rather than extremely nationalistic? There is a difference, same outcome, but still a difference.

Not sure exactly what you are asking here given the wording.

But if I interpret it correctly, I would respond that only the realities on the ground are pertinent.

That is, both the letter, and the spirit, of the agreement would have to be enforced to consider the playing field level.

No bogus "inspections" at the ports, no refusal to rent/sell property to US companies, and so on.

In short, no cheating!

[deftonesfan867]

Without the US Japan wouldn't have a car industry. Japan will end up f@#king themselves in the end and who do you think they will turn to for help? f@#k em I say.

[Daryl Z71]

Thats what ticks me off so much! They killed how many of our soldiers in the war, but yet we go ahead and let them sell their garbage over here and make a killing on it. If I was a Veteran I would be disgusted that my own country basically betrayed me!

[Camino LS6]

That line of thinking crosses into bad territory.

It also ignores what Japan is today quite completely.

WWII is not a valid aspect of this issue, except to say that shortly after its conclusion we should have had trade ironed out a bit better.