You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views
Would You Avoid a Manufacturer Because of Bad Public Policy?

56 messages, Last post on Mar 12, 2007 at 7:37 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: jrdwyer (Nov 07, 2006 7:02 am) If I am socially conscious enough, I can find a good reason to boycott any company. Anheuser-Busch (and Coors & Miller, plus many others, I suspect) gave money to candidates I don't like, so gone are my domestic beer drinking days. All of the homebuilders in my area publicly support a candidate who is very anti- AmendmentThatKirstieCaresAbout. So, if I want a new home, I'll have to build it myself or move out of the area. If you want to make a personal statement about a corporation based on an certain issue that is very near & dear to you, then fine - but note that keeping track of agendas of all of the companies from whom you may purchase is extremely hard work, and may result in a total inability to purchase anything from anyone, ever. So, regardless of their political agenda, if a Toyota is the best product for my driving needs, that's what'll sit in my driveway. VOTE.
|
|
|
Replying to: kirstie_h (Nov 07, 2006 7:19 am) For instance, I know people on the left who won't eat Domino's Pizza (founded by a far-right Christian) or on the right who won't eat Ben and Jerry's (don't really need to spell that one out...). But it doesn't really matter in terms of the operation of the marketplace. The beauty of the market is that producers have to produce goods that reflect consumer preferences, not theirs. Otherwise, they'll go out of business. So Domino's pizzas come with mounds of extra cheese, not bible verses, and Ben and Jerry's doesn't make you sign a "save the whales" petition when you buy a pint. And by buying the goods/services that fit your needs/desires for their instrinsic performance, you tend to have more resouces left over (money, time) that you can put to directly dealing with political issues important to you! |
|
|
Replying to: john_324 (Nov 07, 2006 7:41 am) Congrats... that's one of the most well-written lines I've seen in the Forums. It sure would take a lot more time at the grocery checkout if every pint of Chunky Monkey came with a Greenpeace petition, and every U2 album with a "Forgive 3rd World Debt" support card. |
|
|
Replying to: john_324 (Nov 07, 2006 7:41 am) Taken to an extreme by ignorance and/or apathy, a consumer could be buy stolen merchandise, child labor produced products, etc., and not even know it. In a competitive market, there are many good and essentially equal quality choices, therefore, maybe small issues like public policy will effect buyers decisions? Too bad many companies today are not neutral in this regard. Finally, the fact that I will not buy a Toyota and possibly other Hoosiers reading this forum will not is affecting the market one sale at a time!
|
|
|
Replying to: jrdwyer (Nov 07, 2006 7:59 am) Plenty indeed do...for years, clothing made overseas in developing nations was (and often still is) produced by what we would call child labor. I think you make an interesting point about public policy positions being a distinguishing factor in an increasingly competitive marketplace...but is there actually any policy issue where the buying public's opinion is overwhelmingly one-sided? If there were, in theory, the company would already have adapted its stance, rather than lose that majority business. Otherwise, firms with a political position calculate that people who support that position must be at least equal to those who disagree with it, therefore canceling each other out...the market value to the firm then becomes the consumers who buy based on the product's instrinsic qualities. |
|
|
Replying to: john_324 (Nov 07, 2006 8:25 am) But wouldn't Toyota want every customer they could get (not that they need it right now) and avoid political statements in the first place? I run a small business and avoid making any political endorsements because I feel it is not a prudent use of my time.
|
|
|
Replying to: jrdwyer (Nov 07, 2006 8:39 am) It does seem odd, yes. Usually, if firms are going to "go political", the saavy ones give to both parties/positions, as a way to hedge bets. But in this case, Toyota is probably expecting some big concessions from the governor, hence why it would expend its "market capital" on something so political and potentially alienating. From Toyota's pov: Value of pork from the administration > value of lost sales for its position. It's kinda depressing (one expects this kind of stuff from Ford and GM, but not a real competitor like Toyota), but it is the way of our system, for better or worse.
|
|
|
Replying to: john_324 (Nov 07, 2006 8:47 am) I guess our system needs to be changed and improved. Maybe the next batch of elected leaders will listen? |
|
|
I gotta agree with most of y'alls posts. My problem is that to many politicians receive corporate gifts which is messing up our political system. I think we need some real campaign finance reform and anyone running for office gets X amount of money and that leaves outside influences outside the inner circle. Until then we will have outside influences ruining our politics. Just my $0.02 opinion. Rocky |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kirstie_h (Nov 07, 2006 7:19 am) I agree with that for the most part. There are many companies out there that support things I do not, but unless its one of my "hot issues" I am not going to do much about it. However if its a hot issue for me I many times will find myself being influenced by that. Also many times there are other issues I will have with a company and a political issue just pushes it over the line (in a case where either the political issue or the other issues alone wouldn't). VOTE Yes VOTE EARLY, VOTE OFTEN.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views
Would You Avoid a Manufacturer Because of Bad Public Policy?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle


Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats