Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (3831)	1/30/2001 3:39:16 PM
From: Mr. Whist	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 59480

Re: "We all know what the good US made cars are and they are more likely than not to be non-union than union made." The whole issue is more complicated than you make it out to be. For instance, which car has more U.S.-produced parts ... a Ford Taurus (put out by union autoworkers) or a Toyota Camry (put out by non-union automakers)? The answer is (b) the Toyota Camry. Now, let's peel back another layer of the onion? What percentage of parts supplied to Ford and Toyota come from non-union vs. union suppliers? I suspect if Toyota is gaining market share and Chrysler is losing market share, the reasons lie much deeper than union vs. non-union workforce. Your argument is too simplistic. Also, I would point out that what might be a non-union workforce today might well be a union workforce tomorrow. Example: Recent employee interest in organizing Toyota's Camry plant in Georgetown, Ky. Another reason your argument fails: Many would say the best cars made in the world today come out of Germany ... BMW, Mercedes, etc. Members of some of the strongest labor unions in the world turn out those cars on a daily basis. So the issue is not union vs. non-union labor. The issue lies with management ... engineering ... marketing. Some companies do it better than others irrespective of whether their workers are union or non-union.