Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
16738 messages, Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 10:07 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: gagrice (May 29, 2008 11:04 am)  ) A couple of more years and no kid will even know what a paper route is, and they'll wonder why you wouldn't want the news delivered on demand to your PC screen anyway. They'll be busy programming and fixing the robots that build cars. Something tells me that IT workers have unions they can join too.
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (May 29, 2008 11:07 am) Regards, OW
|
|
|
Replying to: circlew (May 29, 2008 12:32 pm)
|
|
|
stand the thought of all those illegals here (as Pres, I would deport them tomorrow and set up a Star-Trek force field around the US to keep them out), I must confess that they have a fantastic work ethic... Somebody once wrote into the Atlanta paper that the panhandlers (that's beggars) in the streets were chasing away tourists (duh!) but that nobody ever saw a Hispanic panhandler, as they were all out working... Maybe for every illegal we keep, we can send Mexico one or two of our welfare recipients...even swap, no charge...
|
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (May 29, 2008 7:06 pm) |
|
|
|
| that the illegal farm workers are helping the farmers get the work done for less labor costs for them to pay out. That means(meant, now the ghastly is so high its negating the lower illegal-induced fruit and vegetable prices)lower vegetation prices for all of us. When we were still in north-central Washington state, the city of Burlington to be exact, the illegal population working in the fields was huge. | |
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (May 28, 2008 12:51 pm) History of the implementation NAFTA was initially pursued by politicians in the United States and Canada supportive of free trade, led by Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, U.S. President George H. W. Bush, and the Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari. The three countries signed NAFTA in December 1992, subject to ratification by the legislatures of the three countries. There was considerable opposition in all three countries. In the United States, NAFTA was able to secure passage after Bill Clinton made its passage a major legislative priority in 1993. Since the agreement had been signed by Bush under his fast-track prerogative, Clinton did not alter the original agreement, but complemented it with the aforementioned NAAEC and NAALC. After intense political debate and the negotiation of these side agreements, the U.S. House of Representatives passed NAFTA on November 17, 1993, by 234-200 vote (132 Republicans and 102 Democrats voting in favor; 43 Republicans, 156 Democrats, and 1 independent against),[7] and the U.S. Senate passed it on the last day of its 1993 session, November 20, 1993, by 61-38 vote (34 Republicans and 27 Democrats voting in favor; 10 Republicans and 28 Democrats against, with 1 Democrat opponent not voting -- Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND), an ardent foe of NAFTA, missed the vote because of an illness in his family).[8] SANCTIONS OF JAPAN: THE OVERVIEW; 100% TARIFFS SET ON 13 TOP MODELS OF JAPANESE CARS By DAVID E. SANGER Published: May 17, 1995 Living up to its threat to impose harsh sanctions on Japan, the Clinton Administration placed a 100 percent tariff today on 13 luxury car models that accounted for $5.9 billion in sales in the United States last year, including the flagship products of Toyota, Nissan and Honda. The tariff, the largest ever imposed by the United States against any trading partner, is to go into effect at 12:01 Saturday morning. Customs inspectors will be instructed to double the wholesale price of every Toyota Lexus, Nissan Infiniti and a number of other cars that roll off Japanese transport ships -- an increase that would make the cars all but unsalable. But Administration officials said the sanctions would be rescinded if Japan and the United States could reach an accord by June 28, giving the two countries six weeks to resolve a dispute that has already gone far beyond the immediate issue of the openness of Japan's market for American cars and car parts. As the argument has broadened tremendously in recent weeks, both sides have warned that the alliance of the world's two largest economies is being badly corroded. "We've put ourselves pretty far out on this one, and there is no backing away now," one of Mr. Clinton's top trade officials said today. "We came to the conclusion that either we draw the line here, or throw in the towel on Japan." Japanese officials contended today that the sanctions violated international trade laws, and said that within days they would bring an action against the United States at the new and still-fragile World Trade Organization in Geneva. In Tokyo, Ryutaro Hashimoto, the Minister of International Trade and Industry, whose prospects of becoming prime minister are resting largely on his handling of the trade dispute, accused Washington of imposing "numerical targets" that Japan must meet "under the threat of unilateral actions, which is nothing but Government intervention in private business activities, and poses a serious challenge to the free trade system." Japanese auto makers were more direct. "The U.S. Government conducts its trade policy in a coercive manner completely beyond our comprehension," said the executive vice president of the Toyota Motor Company, Masaharu Tanaka. In private, Japanese Government officials contended that Mr. Clinton was simply playing Presidential politics, trying to shore up his support among labor unions and middle-class voters who see their jobs threatened by Japan's long reach into the American market. But American officials say that for the first time they have found a way to hit Japan where it hurts -- and when it hurts most, with the strong yen already ravaging Japanese profits. It is unclear how long Japan's auto makers could endure the huge loss of sales that would come from a tariff that would add $20,000 to $40,000 to the cost of each car. After years of battling their way into the American luxury market, they would suddenly be surrendering it to Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Jaguar and some competitive American models. "The U.S. is not going to stand by and watch its workers and its products unfairly treated," said Mickey Kantor, the United States trade representative, who has led the drive to be far tougher with Japan than any past administration has. Among American workers, he said, "very, very few people will be hurt." In fact, the list Mr. Kantor announced today was more a political masterpiece than an economic one. All the cars on the list are produced in Japan, and they all make minimal use of American parts; no vehicles made at Japanese "transplants" in the United States are affected. All of the cars involved cost more than $25,000, enabling Mr. Clinton to argue that he has punished Japan without hurting middle-class American consumers. As one of Mr. Clinton's political advisers said in half-jest the other day, "So we lose the Lexus vote in Greenwich." There are several possibilities for what could happen next. The simplest is that Japanese officials, concluding that they have misread Mr. Clinton's determination, try to patch together the minimal concessions necessary to resolve matters before the June 28 deadline. Presumably, most of the talking would take place before Mr. Clinton and Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama meet at the conference of the Group of Seven nations in Halifax, Nova Scotia, which begins on June 15. But several Administration officials warned today that they expected the two leaders' meeting to be inconclusive and said they doubted that Japan's Government would resolve internal disputes fast enough to act before the deadline. The second possibility is that no agreement will be reached until Japanese auto makers feel enough pain to press the politicians to solve the problem. con't.........
|
|
|
Replying to: rockylee (Jun 03, 2008 12:34 pm) A third -- and probably less likely -- possibility is that Japan will decide to tough it out, for fear that caving in on autos would lead to similar pressure regarding other industries. Japanese officials could calculate that such a move would ultimately cost them less and would give them a chance to argue that the sanctions are a violation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Many American experts on trade law say Japan could win such an argument, although Mr. Kantor insists that the United States is within its rights to act unilaterally against Japanese imports. He contends that Section 301 of the Trade Act grants broad powers to retaliate after concluding that a trading partner is discriminating against American imports. Still, he may not want to test that proposition before a neutral panel in Geneva. Today the Director General of the World Trade Organization, Renato Ruggiero, made what some trade experts saw as a veiled warning to the United States. Mr. Ruggiero, whose appointment the United States opposed for more than a year before reluctantly endorsing him, said, "I expect both parties to abide by the W.T.O. rules and procedures, which they know well." In public the Administration has maintained a solid front on the trade issue, trying to send Japan the message that it must make progress on the economic issues if it wants to make sure there is no damage to the political ties, and ultimately the security ties, between the countries. But several Administration officials say there are signs of growing internal tension over the issue. Mr. Kantor has called for a full-court press, several White House officials say, while Laura D'Andrea Tyson, the new head of the National Economic Council, has been trying to temper the public oratory to prevent an already nasty argument from getting uglier. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE4DA1738F934A25756C0A96395826- - 0 Your republican elected leaders called Bill Clinton, a communist, socialist, etc, etc, when he implemented this !!! He later unfortunately backed down from enforcing this tariff which is why we have un free trade today with the Japanese. They still manipulate their currency and have trade barriers designed to keep low cost competitive imports out !!! I know some will say the Japanese, won't buy our stuff any ways because they are nationalistic but it's the "principle" which matters to me !!!! -Rocky |
|
|
|
so selling Kia's in Manistee won't even begin to cut the mustard, eh? Too bad. They sell them like hotcakes up there. 
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
