1 SCPrepTalk • View topic - Trump v Toyota
1

Trump v Toyota

Discussion topics that may not fit in other categories - minimal moderation

Trump v Toyota

Postby Wild Snorlax » Thu Jan 05, 2017 5:11 pm

This is getting old. Toyota should just close up shop in the US and teach the ignoramus a lesson along with the idiots who work in those US based Toyota plants that voted for Trump.

Trump targets Toyota: Build plant in U.S. or pay 'big border tax'

    President-elect Donald Trump waded once again into the world of automotive manufacturing, criticizing a carmaker for the second time this week for not building its vehicles in the United States and threatening to levy a heavy tariff on their imports.

    “Toyota Motor said will build a new plant in Baja, Mexico, to build Corolla cars for U.S. NO WAY! Build plant in U.S. or pay big border tax,” Trump wrote on Twitter Thursday afternoon. That post followed one on Tuesday, when he wrote, “General Motors is sending Mexican made model of Chevy Cruze to U.S. car dealers-tax free across border. Make in U.S.A. or pay big border tax!”
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-toyota-threat-big-tax-233232
User avatar
Wild Snorlax
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:43 pm

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby cavaliereagle » Sat Jan 07, 2017 10:44 pm

I agree with Trump on this one!
CENTRAL EAGLES...MAKE PLAYS NOT EXCUSES.
User avatar
cavaliereagle
Central Eagles. Richland Northeast
 
Posts: 1325
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 7:34 am

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby LessThanTolerant » Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:53 am

[quote="Wild Snorlax"]This is getting old. Toyota should just close up shop in the US and teach the ignoramus a lesson along with the idiots who work in those US based Toyota plants that voted for Trump.

Trump targets Toyota: Build plant in U.S. or pay 'big border tax'

As I have said, "Oft times the stupidity of liberalism is dangerous"

While I will be the first to say my 401K and investments have done well regardless the president, it has to be recognized letting big business chase lower wages around the world for the sake of improving the share holders bottom line is not a wise business model.

70% of the America population do not hold college degrees, many of those people work in factories and will never have the advantages of those of us who attained higher education and built an investment portfolios which allow us to not worry about that next paycheck.

Trump firing a warning across Toyota's bow is in fact a wise action. We saw Ford, Boeing, LHM, Carrier and Black & Decker respond. For those of us who have sat in Board Rooms and watched how many such executives react to market reaction, you can bet Toyota is looking at how to respond to President Elect Trump to avoid further stock fluctuation impacts.

So, its best know nothing liberals who have never had to generate revenue stay out of the way and let the grown ups handle economic issues.
LessThanTolerant
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 4:41 pm
Location: Spartanburg

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby Wild Snorlax » Sun Jan 08, 2017 11:02 am

LessThanTolerant wrote:Trump firing a warning across Toyota's bow is in fact a wise action. We saw Ford, Boeing, LHM, Carrier and Black & Decker respond.

I thought conservatives were all about free markets and not picking winners and losers? Will the Bronze Blowhard lobby Congress to put tariffs on his foreign made ties and shirts? Doubt it.

What of the US manufacturers that are already shipping product across the border, under the legally binding NAFTA agreement? Will the cost of a Ford Fusion now go up 35%? The question remains if the Republicans in Congress, including free trade champion Paul Ryan, will grow a pair and stand up to Trump. LTT, our 401Ks hang in the balance.
User avatar
Wild Snorlax
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:43 pm

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby LessThanTolerant » Mon Jan 09, 2017 9:24 am

Wild Snorlax wrote:
LessThanTolerant wrote:Trump firing a warning across Toyota's bow is in fact a wise action. We saw Ford, Boeing, LHM, Carrier and Black & Decker respond.

I thought conservatives were all about free markets and not picking winners and losers? Will the Bronze Blowhard lobby Congress to put tariffs on his foreign made ties and shirts? Doubt it.

What of the US manufacturers that are already shipping product across the border, under the legally binding NAFTA agreement? Will the cost of a Ford Fusion now go up 35%? The question remains if the Republicans in Congress, including free trade champion Paul Ryan, will grow a pair and stand up to Trump. LTT, our 401Ks hang in the balance.


Like I said, best to keep the adults involved in economic issues and let liberals tell us what movies to watch.

Free Markets, picking winners and losers are all buzz words to those unaware of sound economic models. NAFTA has been a failure, for America and Mexico.

I built several plants in Mexico, I can tell you from experience why they failed.

But like any decision, once it's made, one should analyze the results of it and modify the decisions moving forward. We now know NAFTA was in fact a failure, so we should not reproduce it, as is the case of TPP. Here are a few simple analysis for you to try to understand.

http://www.coha.org/the-failures-of-nafta/

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131 ... ents.shtml

Now let's see, pick winners and losers, I use that illustrious example of Green Energy, the silly liberals thought spending over a half billion dollars on a solar power production facility was a great idea. Was it? Let's see:

Solyndra's business model was the following:

Build a state of the art plant which paid on average $18 an hour for production of solar products. Their competition? China, which built similar products in a facility which averaged less than $18 a day. So, China could manufacture and ship their product to America cheaper than America could in the states. Know how? Lower labor costs, no regulations and state provided funding for cost loss control.

Result? Solyndra fails, American taxpayers loses over 800 million dollars in investment. By the way, my company made over $5 million in profits off of Solyndra. :lol:

How did such a business model get approved by idiots in government? Liberals of course, see, that's why they should only be allowed to tell us what movies to see.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... 049c8c65e2

In answer to your question, should Ford have a tariff on their Mexican manufactured vehicles? Yes. But, better yet, let business look at an economic model which allows them to manufacture here.

Know how to do that?

Cut stupid government required wages, labor, and environmental regulations.

Will our 401K's suffer, probably, if you are stupid enough to not do your due diligence to modify them to meet the new business models coming.

Your silly snarky comment about his shirts and ties just shows your minimal knowledge of finance and economic.

Just tell what movies you recommend, if I like them, I might go watch them.
LessThanTolerant
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 4:41 pm
Location: Spartanburg

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby Wild Snorlax » Mon Jan 09, 2017 11:35 am

LessThanTolerant wrote:
Wild Snorlax wrote:
LessThanTolerant wrote:Trump firing a warning across Toyota's bow is in fact a wise action. We saw Ford, Boeing, LHM, Carrier and Black & Decker respond.

I thought conservatives were all about free markets and not picking winners and losers? Will the Bronze Blowhard lobby Congress to put tariffs on his foreign made ties and shirts? Doubt it.

What of the US manufacturers that are already shipping product across the border, under the legally binding NAFTA agreement? Will the cost of a Ford Fusion now go up 35%? The question remains if the Republicans in Congress, including free trade champion Paul Ryan, will grow a pair and stand up to Trump. LTT, our 401Ks hang in the balance.

I built several plants in Mexico, I can tell you from experience why they failed.

We can pretty much guess why they failed. ;)

LessThanTolerant wrote:We now know NAFTA was in fact a failure

No we don't. Trade with the US increased 500% predominately with Mexico and Canada. There are BOTH successes and failures depending upon where you stand. The uneducated in the US were losers; no surprise there.

LessThanTolerant wrote:Build a state of the art plant which paid on average $18 an hour for production of solar products. Their competition? China, which built similar products in a facility which averaged less than $18 a day. So, China could manufacture and ship their product to America cheaper than America could in the states. Know how? Lower labor costs, no regulations and state provided funding for cost loss control.

Result? Solyndra fails, American taxpayers loses over 800 million dollars in investment. By the way, my company made over $5 million in profits off of Solyndra. :lol:

Tough call on Solyndra. Hindsight is always 20-20 after a failure. You, of all people should have learned that after all your mistakes in Mexico. Without government help, Solyndra would never had a chance to compete against government backed Chinese companies. You may not like it, and may make a good argument to apply tariffs to protect a fledgling industry, but some government support will be needed in some high tech industries like solar. Heck, without government financial backing we would never have had railroads built out west in the late 19th century.

LessThanTolerant wrote:In answer to your question, should Ford have a tariff on their Mexican manufactured vehicles? Yes. But, better yet, let business look at an economic model which allows them to manufacture here.

Know how to do that?

Cut stupid government required wages, labor, and environmental regulations.

The government doesn't set wages for Ford, or any other car company in the US or Mexico. :roll: All new manufacturing plants are green, including those built in Mexico. Independent of the social benefits, it makes financial sense too. You clearly need to learn a little next time on the subject before showing your ignorance.

LessThanTolerant wrote:Your silly snarky comment about his shirts and ties just shows your minimal knowledge of finance and economic.

Your lack of a serious rebuttal to this simple business model, manufacturing ties, is very telling.
User avatar
Wild Snorlax
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:43 pm

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby LessThanTolerant » Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:57 pm

After reading Wild Snortax response, all I can say is no wonders liberals create people like Streep. It is obvious trying to debate someone so total devoid of logic and economic acumen is simply a waste of time.
LessThanTolerant
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 420
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 4:41 pm
Location: Spartanburg

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby Wild Snorlax » Mon Jan 09, 2017 11:09 pm

LessThanTolerant wrote:After reading Wild Snortax response, all I can say is no wonders liberals create people like Streep.

The flip-flopping Bronze Blowhard praised Streep before she blasted him yesterday.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/t ... treep-2015

Now the thin-skinned president-elect acts out like a child through Twitter to defend his fragile ego. Trump looks like a fool to all but his Deplorable base.

LessThanTolerant wrote:It is obvious trying to debate someone so total devoid of logic and economic acumen is simply a waste of time.

My take is you just can't make a decent argument to support your position. But go ahead and quit; I'm OK leaving it like that.
User avatar
Wild Snorlax
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2016 3:43 pm

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby 3-3 Stack » Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:05 pm

Wild Snorlax wrote:
LessThanTolerant wrote:After reading Wild Snortax response, all I can say is no wonders liberals create people like Streep.

The flip-flopping Bronze Blowhard praised Streep before she blasted him yesterday.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/t ... treep-2015

Now the thin-skinned president-elect acts out like a child through Twitter to defend his fragile ego. Trump looks like a fool to all but his Deplorable base.

LessThanTolerant wrote:It is obvious trying to debate someone so total devoid of logic and economic acumen is simply a waste of time.

My take is you just can't make a decent argument to support your position. But go ahead and quit; I'm OK leaving it like that.

Toyota to invest 10 billion MORE in U.S. Go figure...
3-3 Stack
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 11:09 pm

Re: Trump v Toyota

Postby 3-3 Stack » Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:13 pm

Wild Snorlax wrote:
LessThanTolerant wrote:
Wild Snorlax wrote:
LessThanTolerant wrote:Trump firing a warning across Toyota's bow is in fact a wise action. We saw Ford, Boeing, LHM, Carrier and Black & Decker respond.

I thought conservatives were all about free markets and not picking winners and losers? Will the Bronze Blowhard lobby Congress to put tariffs on his foreign made ties and shirts? Doubt it.

What of the US manufacturers that are already shipping product across the border, under the legally binding NAFTA agreement? Will the cost of a Ford Fusion now go up 35%? The question remains if the Republicans in Congress, including free trade champion Paul Ryan, will grow a pair and stand up to Trump. LTT, our 401Ks hang in the balance.

I built several plants in Mexico, I can tell you from experience why they failed.

We can pretty much guess why they failed. ;)

LessThanTolerant wrote:We now know NAFTA was in fact a failure

No we don't. Trade with the US increased 500% predominately with Mexico and Canada. There are BOTH successes and failures depending upon where you stand. The uneducated in the US were losers; no surprise there.

LessThanTolerant wrote:Build a state of the art plant which paid on average $18 an hour for production of solar products. Their competition? China, which built similar products in a facility which averaged less than $18 a day. So, China could manufacture and ship their product to America cheaper than America could in the states. Know how? Lower labor costs, no regulations and state provided funding for cost loss control.

Result? Solyndra fails, American taxpayers loses over 800 million dollars in investment. By the way, my company made over $5 million in profits off of Solyndra. :lol:

Tough call on Solyndra. Hindsight is always 20-20 after a failure. You, of all people should have learned that after all your mistakes in Mexico. Without government help, Solyndra would never had a chance to compete against government backed Chinese companies. You may not like it, and may make a good argument to apply tariffs to protect a fledgling industry, but some government support will be needed in some high tech industries like solar. Heck, without government financial backing we would never have had railroads built out west in the late 19th century.

LessThanTolerant wrote:In answer to your question, should Ford have a tariff on their Mexican manufactured vehicles? Yes. But, better yet, let business look at an economic model which allows them to manufacture here.

Know how to do that?

Cut stupid government required wages, labor, and environmental regulations.

The government doesn't set wages for Ford, or any other car company in the US or Mexico. :roll: All new manufacturing plants are green, including those built in Mexico. Independent of the social benefits, it makes financial sense too. You clearly need to learn a little next time on the subject before showing your ignorance.

LessThanTolerant wrote:Your silly snarky comment about his shirts and ties just shows your minimal knowledge of finance and economic.

Your lack of a serious rebuttal to this simple business model, manufacturing ties, is very telling.


Failures for the United States

In 1992, Gary Hufbauer, a NAFTA enthusiast from the Institute of International Economics, predicted that “NAFTA will generate a $7 to $9 billion [USD] surplus that would ensure the net creation of 170,000 jobs in the U.S. economy the first year.”(5) However, quite the opposite occurred; the U.S. trade deficit with both Mexico and Canada increased, costing the United States an estimated 150,000 jobs in 1994 alone.(6) According to the United States Census Bureau, while the United States actually had a trade surplus with Mexico of approximately $1 billion USD in both 1993 and 1994, by 2007 the growing trade deficit with Mexico had reached an all-time high, at $74 billion USD.(7) Although U.S. exports to Mexico did increase slightly under NAFTA, the U.S. encountered the new problem of “revolving door exports.” Most U.S. exports to Mexico have consisted of mechanical parts, which are used to assemble goods in Mexican factories that are then imported back into the United States for cheap, a process known as the maquiladora system. Such exports have doubled since the implementation of NAFTA, leading only to more imports from Mexico and a deepening trade deficit.(8)


Source: CommodifiedLife.com

The combination of increased imports from Mexico and a growing trade deficit have led to job losses, mostly in high-wage, non-college-educated manufacturing positions, in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Colombia.(9) When these displaced American workers later re-enter the job market, they find difficulty securing new jobs and often have to settle for markedly lower wages. As of March 2011, the United States has lost approximately 700,000 jobs due to disruptions in supply chains brought about by NAFTA.(10)
http://www.coha.org/the-failures-of-nafta/
3-3 Stack
No Team Affiliation
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 11:09 pm

Next

Return to The Rubber Room - Society, Politics, Humor, Miscellaneous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

1