Ok, so I said this.
Originally Posted by FreeEnterprise
Ok, Unions killed detroit.
Get rid of unions and their ability to not work for massive amounts of money and you will be doing better...
which party is pushed, and pushes unions?
Which party is attacking the airline trying to build a NON union plant?
Then Gonzo said this
Originally Posted by drgonzo
How about justifying this with facts rather than right-wing thinktank garbage? Be forewarned it will be difficult, as facts simply do not bear out your claim.
The reason the industry tanked was not unions in any way, shape, or form. Labor expenses add an insignificant amount of price to car -- it was poor management decisions that led to producing vehicles that people did not want or need. Corporate thinking is shortsighted and profit-centered, leading to a kind of societal blindness. It was a trivial task to justify or offset the slim labor cost differential.
Notice how all the foreign cars that outcompeted us during this time are from more socialized nations. That's not a coincidence.
Unions as of today are the only reason the US car industry still exists. What little political power workers have at least allowed it to be recognized what a devastating effect the conservative idea of letting the US auto industry die would have had, and provided a means by which to be involved in the rebuilding of the industry away from narrow corporate thinking. It has been a success.
Far more of a success than the prior corporate governance. Again this is not ancient history, just happened a few years ago. Quit trying to rewrite recent history.
I happen to be friends with guys who own companies that provide specialized engine parts to the auto industry, and we have talked at length about why American autos were destroyed in the 90's.
Fact is, UNIONS didn't want to go to higher tolerance manufacturing. Meaning, Honda and Toyota started producing cars with tolerances of .001, where the American counterpart was making cars with tolerances of .01.
Do you understand that the Japanese car would be better than the American car because .001 is a tighter tolerance than .01?
So when building an engine, having that much tighter tolerances means the car is much better built, you find problems and fix them as the tighter tolerances meant that you had to build a much better product. They were able to use higher end materials which also lasted longer, but it took an investment in better equipment to produce those parts. And the union members didn't want to learn new equipment so they pushed back, and since they have such power, they actually stopped the progress, and the Japanese auto makers picked up market share.
I purchased a 99 Acura TL brand new, and personally drove it 300,000 miles, without changing any major part on it. (only oil changes, and belts). I got 100,000 miles out of each set of tires, and 90,000 miles out of each set of brakes.
Because it was so well made. The American car companies realized they had to go to the .001 standard, so they too tried, but every time the union shut them down... Today they use that same standard, and their quality has gone way up, but the damage was done, as the public sees them as "lower quality".
That is a direct example of the unions hurting the companies they work for, because for them it was an EASIER job to do things to .01 tolerances with the old machines they had, if they had to work harder, and learn new equipment to go down to .001 they would a more difficult job... and unions don't like that. No matter what it means to their long term employment.
That is a REAL WORLD example of unions hurting Detroit...
If you would like to read another example, look at Boeing and their plant they built in SC... And watch how the unions/Obama tried to block that plant, as it wasn't union.