U.S. Employment: GM vs Toyota

[b***@usa.com]

GM employs 142,000+ people in the United States.
Toyota employs 36,632 people in the United States.

The sources:
http://www.gm.com/corporate/about/global_operations/north_america/usa.jsp
http://www.toyota.com/about/our_business/at_a_glance/our_numbers/direct_employment.html

Not only that, but the Toyota jobs are basically just lower paying
blue collar jobs, where as GM has 50,000 engineers working over here.
Toyota and other import car companies have brainwashed Americans into
thinking that buying their car is just as good or better for the
American economy than buying from the Big Three, because their car is
assembled over here, but that is baloney. My friends...when we buy
our cars from GM, Ford, or Chrysler, the money stays over here.
Otherwise, it just goes down the drain.

[Ralph Mowery]

Post by b***@usa.com
GM employs 142,000+ people in the United States.
Toyota employs 36,632 people in the United States.
http://www.gm.com/corporate/about/global_operations/north_america/usa.jsp
http://www.toyota.com/about/our_business/at_a_glance/our_numbers/direct_employment.html
Not only that, but the Toyota jobs are basically just lower paying
blue collar jobs, where as GM has 50,000 engineers working over here.
Toyota and other import car companies have brainwashed Americans into
thinking that buying their car is just as good or better for the
American economy than buying from the Big Three, because their car is
assembled over here, but that is baloney. My friends...when we buy
our cars from GM, Ford, or Chrysler, the money stays over here.
Otherwise, it just goes down the drain.

I don't know about the blue collar workers, but when Ford will fire a CEO
and give him $ 20 million to leave, something is wrong with our system...
Just as with Home Depot. Fired their CEO and gave him $ 120 million. Wish
I could get fired and get my part of that.

How many of the big 3 cars are made somewhere else and shipped here ?

[j***@hotmail.com]

The only thing I wanted to know is how paying $65/hour for people to
mow grass has any long term benefit to both management and labor.

Post by Ralph Mowery
I don't know about the blue collar workers, but when Ford will fire a CEO
and give him $ 20 million to leave, something is wrong with our system...
Just as with Home Depot. Fired their CEO and gave him $ 120 million. Wish
I could get fired and get my part of that.
How many of the big 3 cars are made somewhere else and shipped here ?

[why, me]

Post by j***@hotmail.com
The only thing I wanted to know is how paying $65/hour for people to
mow grass has any long term benefit to both management and labor.

Where did you get this figure from? My understanding is that the job
MIGHT be worth that much when you figure in overtime, employer taxes,
benefits, and overhead. I don't believe they get near that in straight pay.

Post by j***@hotmail.com

Post by Ralph Mowery
I don't know about the blue collar workers, but when Ford will fire a CEO
and give him $ 20 million to leave, something is wrong with our system...
Just as with Home Depot. Fired their CEO and gave him $ 120 million. Wish
I could get fired and get my part of that.
How many of the big 3 cars are made somewhere else and shipped here ?

[Edwin Pawlowski]

Post by j***@hotmail.com
The only thing I wanted to know is how paying $65/hour for people to
mow grass has any long term benefit to both management and labor.

Where did you get this figure from? My understanding is that the job MIGHT
be worth that much when you figure in overtime, employer taxes, benefits,
and overhead. I don't believe they get near that in straight pay.

They certainly don't, but that may be their actual cost for labor. The fact
is, Big 3 pay considerably more than the other car companies. Over the
years, the auto worker made a decent wage, good benefits, good retirement,
money during shutdowns, etc. For many years, rather than have a costly
strike, the automakers just added the cost of labor to the cost of the car
and the American public paid for it. All businesses pass of their cost of
doing business. Competition, however, paid a lot less and sold their cars
for less.

I don't know, off hand, what the actual rates are, but just as you pay $65
and hour for a plumber, $80 shop rates, the worker makes a lot less that
what is charged as the difference goes to overhead, taxes, etc.

[Gosi]

Post by j***@hotmail.com
The only thing I wanted to know is how paying $65/hour for people to
mow grass has any long term benefit to both management and labor.

Where did you get this figure from? My understanding is that the job MIGHT
be worth that much when you figure in overtime, employer taxes, benefits,
and overhead. I don't believe they get near that in straight pay.

They certainly don't, but that  may be their actual cost for labor. The fact
is, Big 3 pay considerably more than the other car companies.  Over the
years, the auto worker made a decent wage, good benefits, good retirement,
money during shutdowns, etc.  For many years, rather than have a costly
strike, the automakers just added the cost of labor to the cost of the car
and the American public paid for it.  All businesses pass of their cost of
doing business.  Competition, however, paid a lot less and sold their cars
for less.
I don't know, off hand, what the actual rates are, but just as you pay $65
and hour for a plumber, $80 shop rates, the worker makes a lot less that
what is charged as the difference goes to overhead, taxes, etc.

The price of overhead and fat bonuses is also baked into the price of
the cars.
As they say then people vote with their feet.
That is they go to the place where they want to put their money.
It is ok to raise prices as much as you want if the public is willing
to pay for it and there is no alternative.
For some reason then GM grew to be the biggest and the best a long
time ago.
People wanted their cars and unfortunately GM thought that they could
continue raising prices as much as they wanted without continuing
making the best.
A reputaion is hard to get and easy to lose.
Lets say that GM would try to restart making quality and giving
quality service and pay attention to their customers it is more
difficult for them to regain confidence than acquiring it in the first
place.
Building up a growing company is relatively easy comparing to running
a company with a decreasing customer base and bad reputation.
Add to that if management does not face the issues and does nothing to
improve customer relations.
GM has been fighting all kinds of battles and is not winning very much
and may ultimately lose the war.
The individuals working for GM may be in for nasty changes of their
incomes and livestyles.
Who can they blame for it?
I am sure I am not to blame but that does not stop many replying to
this post now to this as if I am.

[Z***@cox.net]

Post by Gosi

Post by j***@hotmail.com
The only thing I wanted to know is how paying $65/hour for people to
mow grass has any long term benefit to both management and labor.

Where did you get this figure from? My understanding is that the job MIGHT
be worth that much when you figure in overtime, employer taxes, benefits,
and overhead. I don't believe they get near that in straight pay.

They certainly don't, but that  may be their actual cost for labor. The fact
is, Big 3 pay considerably more than the other car companies.  Over the
years, the auto worker made a decent wage, good benefits, good retirement,
money during shutdowns, etc.  For many years, rather than have a costly
strike, the automakers just added the cost of labor to the cost of the car
and the American public paid for it.  All businesses pass of their cost of
doing business.  Competition, however, paid a lot less and sold their cars
for less.
I don't know, off hand, what the actual rates are, but just as you pay $65
and hour for a plumber, $80 shop rates, the worker makes a lot less that
what is charged as the difference goes to overhead, taxes, etc.

The price of overhead and fat bonuses is also baked into the price of
the cars.
As they say then people vote with their feet.
That is they go to the place where they want to put their money.
It is ok to raise prices as much as you want if the public is willing
to pay for it and there is no alternative.
For some reason then GM grew to be the biggest and the best a long
time ago.
People wanted their cars and unfortunately GM thought that they could
continue raising prices as much as they wanted without continuing
making the best.
A reputaion is hard to get and easy to lose.
Lets say that GM would try to restart making quality and giving
quality service and pay attention to their customers it is more
difficult for them to regain confidence than acquiring it in the first
place.
Building up a growing company is relatively easy comparing to running
a company with a decreasing customer base and bad reputation.
Add to that if management does not face the issues and does nothing to
improve customer relations.
GM has been fighting all kinds of battles and is not winning very much
and may ultimately lose the war.
The individuals working for GM may be in for nasty changes of their
incomes and livestyles.
Who can they blame for it?
I am sure I am not to blame but that does not stop many replying to
this post now to this as if I am.

What you say would be true IF the Toyota model was cheaper then the
comparable offerings from the big three, but it is not. In many cases
it is actually more expensive.

[Z***@cox.net]

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

Post by j***@hotmail.com
The only thing I wanted to know is how paying $65/hour for people to
mow grass has any long term benefit to both management and labor.

Where did you get this figure from? My understanding is that the job MIGHT
be worth that much when you figure in overtime, employer taxes, benefits,
and overhead. I don't believe they get near that in straight pay.

They certainly don't, but that may be their actual cost for labor. The fact
is, Big 3 pay considerably more than the other car companies. Over the
years, the auto worker made a decent wage, good benefits, good retirement,
money during shutdowns, etc. For many years, rather than have a costly
strike, the automakers just added the cost of labor to the cost of the car
and the American public paid for it. All businesses pass of their cost of
doing business. Competition, however, paid a lot less and sold their cars
for less.

But that is all past-tense. Compare a Toyota model offering to a
comparable model from any of the big-three and there is no cost
savings in purchase price. However, where savings may come into play
is in overall "lifetime" ownership costs.

For a long time the Japanese dumped a lot of their products in our
marketplace and the average American consumer buys based on purchase
cost. Do you think that Wal-Mart shoppers give any consideration to
the fact that the products they are purchasing come from China and
have put American workers out of jobs?

When the American factory worker looses his or her job they cannot buy
the products made by other factory workers which of course leads to
those workers loosing their jobs as well. All-in-all you end up with
a toilet spiral with everything going down the shitter and nobody
having the monies to buy goods & services. The more the American
worker/consumer turns to imported products because of their price, the
more they are putting their own job at risk.

Post by Edwin Pawlowski
I don't know, off hand, what the actual rates are, but just as you pay $65
and hour for a plumber, $80 shop rates, the worker makes a lot less that
what is charged as the difference goes to overhead, taxes, etc.

Anyone who owns their own business is more then aware of this. The
cost of carrying an employee greatly exceeds just what the employee
makes as a hourly rate. The greater the tax burden, mandated
government costs such as medical care, minimum wages, and so forth
that we put on the business the greater said burden. All of these
costs are simply based onto the consumer. Many people just don't seem
to understand that business do not pay taxes, they collect them. Any
tax burden is built into the products & services they sell.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

Post by Z***@cox.net
But that is all past-tense. Compare a Toyota model offering to a
comparable model from any of the big-three and there is no cost
savings in purchase price. However, where savings may come into play
is in overall "lifetime" ownership costs.
For a long time the Japanese dumped a lot of their products in our
marketplace and the average American consumer buys based on purchase
cost. Do you think that Wal-Mart shoppers give any consideration to
the fact that the products they are purchasing come from China and
have put American workers out of jobs?

Correct on the past tense. Why should they sell their cars for less when
people (be it right or wrong) as willing to pay more for them. Right now,
Hyundai wants to build a customer base and they sell good cars for a lot
less. Toyota and Honda have good reputations as perceived by the customer
so they have no reason to price cut. Frankly, unless I had a cost analysis
of both I can't say if the cars cost more of less to build or if the quality
of some material are any better.

Post by Z***@cox.net
When the American factory worker looses his or her job they cannot buy
the products made by other factory workers which of course leads to
those workers loosing their jobs as well. All-in-all you end up with
a toilet spiral with everything going down the shitter and nobody
having the monies to buy goods & services. The more the American
worker/consumer turns to imported products because of their price, the
more they are putting their own job at risk.

The perception of a good deal is what keeps some companies in business.
People actually think they are saving money shopping at big box stores but
the local merchants often sell identical products for the same or even less
and have a selection of items the big box stores won't bother with. Price
is the driving factor and as consumers, we want to save money no matter how
much it costs to do so.

Post by Z***@cox.net
costs are simply based onto the consumer. Many people just don't seem
to understand that business do not pay taxes, they collect them. Any
tax burden is built into the products & services they sell.

Don't get me started. Tax the homeowner and they scream at the town
meeting. Pass those same taxes on to business and no one cares. Or the town
wants a project done and our leaders say not to worry, the state is paying
for it. There are many incredibly stupid people in this country that have no
idea who pays for what.

[ron]

Say it isn't true Zomby! I keep hearing that Obama and Clinton and to a
tiny bit lesser degree McCain that the "Government" will pay for everything!

I used to be a heavy construction estimator/engineer before I went to work
for the government!! I always used about 150% of base wage to cover workers
comp, OH, taxes, SSA, FICA, union fringes etc to figure labor cost - this
was in the 60's! I am sure with the crap added to the employer the cost is
more now. By the way I think Toyota dealer shop rate is about 105/hr, here
but haven't paid attention to it recently.

Ron in Ca

[David Z]

Post by Z***@cox.net
Compare a Toyota model offering to a
comparable model from any of the big-three and there is no cost
savings in purchase price. However, where savings may come into
play is in overall "lifetime" ownership costs.

Reliability and engineering are key factors for me. It's hard to put a
price on knowing that (1) each time you get in your car it will perform as
expected, and (2) you won't spend hours out of your day in car repair mode.

In the early 80s, I bought my last American-branded car. I lived in Detroit
and had to drive to my clients' offices on occasion, many of them in the
auto industry. At the time, Japanese cars had earned a reputation for
better reliability, but I thought I would give the US car companies a chance
to catch up before buying foreign. To my amazement, they never did.

When I bought my first Japanese-made car in the late 80s (1987 Acura Legend
Coupe), it was already quite common to see a variety of foreign cars in the
employee parking lots of auto-related companies.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

At the time, Japanese cars had earned a reputation for better
reliability, but I thought I would give the US car companies a chance to
catch up before buying foreign. To my amazement, they never did.

Sure they did, in the early 90's.

[David Z]

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

At the time, Japanese cars had earned a reputation for better
reliability, but I thought I would give the US car companies a chance to
catch up before buying foreign. To my amazement, they never did.

Sure they did, in the early 90's.

The US car companies "caught up" in the sense that they narrowed the gap
substantially, but never equalled the leading Japanese companies in
reliability. And then, the Japanese car companies continued to improve and
leave the US companies in the dust once again. Keep in mind we're talking
purely about reliability here. IMO, the US companies never really "caught
up" when it comes to ergonomics, fuel efficiency, and overall customer
satisfaction.

[80 Knight]

Post by David Z

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

At the time, Japanese cars had earned a reputation for better
reliability, but I thought I would give the US car companies a chance to
catch up before buying foreign. To my amazement, they never did.

Sure they did, in the early 90's.

The US car companies "caught up" in the sense that they narrowed the gap
substantially, but never equalled the leading Japanese companies in
reliability. And then, the Japanese car companies continued to improve
and leave the US companies in the dust once again. Keep in mind we're
talking purely about reliability here.

<snip>

Is that why Toyota recalls more vehicles every year then all other auto
makers? That's definitely "reliability".

[JoeSpareBedroom]

Post by 80 Knight

Post by David Z

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

At the time, Japanese cars had earned a reputation for better
reliability, but I thought I would give the US car companies a chance
to catch up before buying foreign. To my amazement, they never did.

Sure they did, in the early 90's.

The US car companies "caught up" in the sense that they narrowed the gap
substantially, but never equalled the leading Japanese companies in
reliability. And then, the Japanese car companies continued to improve
and leave the US companies in the dust once again. Keep in mind we're
talking purely about reliability here.

<snip>
Is that why Toyota recalls more vehicles every year then all other auto
makers? That's definitely "reliability".

Uh oh. Logic bomb. Can you spot it, before someone urinates on your face?

[Edwin Pawlowski]

Post by 80 Knight
<snip>
Is that why Toyota recalls more vehicles every year then all other auto
makers? That's definitely "reliability".

Recalls more or has more recalls? There is a difference.

[Don Schmidt]

Great observation!

My wife had a '92 Corolla she just traded in on a '07 Corolla; in those 15
years, no recalls.

I wish I could say the same for my '01 Cadillac DHS.
--
Don
Vancouver, USA

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

Post by 80 Knight
<snip>
Is that why Toyota recalls more vehicles every year then all other auto
makers? That's definitely "reliability".

Recalls more or has more recalls? There is a difference.

[80 Knight]

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

Post by 80 Knight
<snip>
Is that why Toyota recalls more vehicles every year then all other auto
makers? That's definitely "reliability".

Recalls more or has more recalls? There is a difference.

The fact is, Toyota got greedy, and tried to get to the #1 auto maker too
quickly, and in doing so, they let there quality slip considerably. Not
that it was all that great before either.

[HLS]

Post by 80 Knight

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

Post by 80 Knight
<snip>
Is that why Toyota recalls more vehicles every year then all other auto
makers? That's definitely "reliability".

Recalls more or has more recalls? There is a difference.

The fact is, Toyota got greedy, and tried to get to the #1 auto maker too
quickly, and in doing so, they let there quality slip considerably. Not
that it was all that great before either.

Apparently it is not so simple as you suggest.

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/jun2006/bw20060601_836628.htm?chan=autos_autos+index+page_news

[HLS]

Post by HLS
Apparently it is not so simple as you suggest.
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/jun2006/bw20060601_836628.htm?chan=autos_autos+index+page_news

Just had the little GM pickup into the dealership this morning.. After
losing the
second alternator (total mileage 30,000), now the ECM is out and has to be
replaced.

The quality just ISNT there. Maybe in some other GM creations, but I have
been stung on the last several I have owned.

GM dodged recalling a lot of problems caused by their mistakes and quality.

It is, I believe, the way GM has handled problems, versus the way other
manufacturers
have handled them, that result in the loyalty issues.

[80 Knight]

Post by HLS

Post by 80 Knight

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

Post by 80 Knight
<snip>
Is that why Toyota recalls more vehicles every year then all other auto
makers? That's definitely "reliability".

Recalls more or has more recalls? There is a difference.

The fact is, Toyota got greedy, and tried to get to the #1 auto maker too
quickly, and in doing so, they let there quality slip considerably. Not
that it was all that great before either.

Apparently it is not so simple as you suggest.
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/jun2006/bw20060601_836628.htm?chan=autos_autos+index+page_news

Same shit, different Day HLS. When Toyo makes a recall, they are praised for
thinking of there customer's. When GM issues a recall, they are trashed by
those same people.

[GIga]

Long Dong? Is that you?

GIga

Post by 80 Knight

Post by HLS

Post by 80 Knight

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

Post by 80 Knight
<snip>
Is that why Toyota recalls more vehicles every year then all other
auto makers? That's definitely "reliability".

Recalls more or has more recalls? There is a difference.

The fact is, Toyota got greedy, and tried to get to the #1 auto maker
too quickly, and in doing so, they let there quality slip considerably.
Not that it was all that great before either.

Apparently it is not so simple as you suggest.
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/jun2006/bw20060601_836628.htm?chan=autos_autos+index+page_news

Same shit, different Day HLS. When Toyo makes a recall, they are praised
for thinking of there customer's. When GM issues a recall, they are
trashed by those same people.

[Mike hunt]

Ya' think? ;)

Post by 80 Knight

Post by HLS

Post by 80 Knight

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

Post by 80 Knight
<snip>
Is that why Toyota recalls more vehicles every year then all other
auto makers? That's definitely "reliability".

Recalls more or has more recalls? There is a difference.

The fact is, Toyota got greedy, and tried to get to the #1 auto maker
too quickly, and in doing so, they let there quality slip considerably.
Not that it was all that great before either.

Apparently it is not so simple as you suggest.
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/jun2006/bw20060601_836628.htm?chan=autos_autos+index+page_news

Same shit, different Day HLS. When Toyo makes a recall, they are praised
for thinking of there customer's. When GM issues a recall, they are
trashed by those same people.

[David Z]

Post by 80 Knight

Post by David Z

Post by Edwin Pawlowski

At the time, Japanese cars had earned a reputation for better
reliability, but I thought I would give the US car companies a chance
to catch up before buying foreign. To my amazement, they never did.

Sure they did, in the early 90's.

The US car companies "caught up" in the sense that they narrowed the gap
substantially, but never equalled the leading Japanese companies in
reliability. And then, the Japanese car companies continued to improve
and leave the US companies in the dust once again. Keep in mind we're
talking purely about reliability here.

<snip>
Is that why Toyota recalls more vehicles every year then all other auto
makers? That's definitely "reliability".

Surely you must be aware that Lexus has won JD Powers reliability survey for
something like 12 of the last 12 years. Also, Comsumer Reports' ratings
confirm and validate JD Power's rankings. If Lexus' reliability record
doesn't convince you, nothing will.

That said, there are some recent signs that the shine from that record is
dimming. Even so, Lexus remains the undisputed king of reliability for now.

[Mike hunt]

I guess that explains why we are loosing so many jobs to other counties and
why we should not tax Big Oil more ;)

Post by Z***@cox.net
Anyone who owns their own business is more then aware of this. The
cost of carrying an employee greatly exceeds just what the employee
makes as a hourly rate. The greater the tax burden, mandated
government costs such as medical care, minimum wages, and so forth
that we put on the business the greater said burden. All of these
costs are simply based onto the consumer. Many people just don't seem
to understand that business do not pay taxes, they collect them. Any
tax burden is built into the products & services they sell.
--
"Before all else, be armed" -- Machiavelli

[DaveW]

Post by Mike hunt
I guess that explains why we are loosing so many jobs to other counties

It's shocking that someone with such a clever nickname has such a
loose grasp of the language.

[Mike hunt]

No US auto manufacture pays $65 to ANY worker. What you should be asking
is why import brand vehicles sell for 20% more than domestic brand vehicles
of the same size with the same equipment, yet the workers in US imports
brand assembly plants earn around 20% less than union workers ;)

Post by j***@hotmail.com
The only thing I wanted to know is how paying $65/hour for people to
mow grass has any long term benefit to both management and labor.

Post by Ralph Mowery
I don't know about the blue collar workers, but when Ford will fire a CEO
and give him $ 20 million to leave, something is wrong with our system...
Just as with Home Depot. Fired their CEO and gave him $ 120 million.
Wish
I could get fired and get my part of that.
How many of the big 3 cars are made somewhere else and shipped here ?

[Josh S]

Post by Mike hunt
What you should be asking
is why import brand vehicles sell for 20% more than domestic brand vehicles
of the same size with the same equipment, yet the workers in US imports
brand assembly plants earn around 20% less than union workers

Could it be they build better cars.
The customers certainly like them, based on the sales trends.

[Mike hunt]

The import brands try to give the impression that the vehicles they sell in
North America are made in North America, but that simply is not factual.
According to the US Department of Commerce site, around 85% of the vehicle
sold in the US by both GM and Ford are made in North American of around 80%
NA parts. NO import brand builds anywhere near 50% of the vehicle they
sell in North America in North America and the vast majority of parts in the
vehicle they assembled in North America are made elsewhere.

Post by Ralph Mowery

Post by b***@usa.com
GM employs 142,000+ people in the United States.
Toyota employs 36,632 people in the United States.
http://www.gm.com/corporate/about/global_operations/north_america/usa.jsp
http://www.toyota.com/about/our_business/at_a_glance/our_numbers/direct_employment.html
Not only that, but the Toyota jobs are basically just lower paying
blue collar jobs, where as GM has 50,000 engineers working over here.
Toyota and other import car companies have brainwashed Americans into
thinking that buying their car is just as good or better for the
American economy than buying from the Big Three, because their car is
assembled over here, but that is baloney. My friends...when we buy
our cars from GM, Ford, or Chrysler, the money stays over here.
Otherwise, it just goes down the drain.

I don't know about the blue collar workers, but when Ford will fire a CEO
and give him $ 20 million to leave, something is wrong with our system...
Just as with Home Depot. Fired their CEO and gave him $ 120 million.
Wish I could get fired and get my part of that.
How many of the big 3 cars are made somewhere else and shipped here ?

[larry moe 'n curly]

Post by Mike hunt
The import brands try to give the impression that the vehicles they sell in
North America are made in North America, but that simply is not factual.
According to the US Department of Commerce site, around 85% of the vehicle
sold in the US by both GM and Ford are made in North American of around 80%
NA parts. NO import brand builds anywhere near 50% of the vehicle they
sell in North America in North America and the vast majority of parts in the
vehicle they assembled in North America are made elsewhere.

One model Mazda made in Michigan was labelled as having about 90%
domestic content, more than some Chryslers, GMs, or Fords.

[Jeff]

Post by Mike hunt
The import brands try to give the impression that the vehicles they sell in
North America are made in North America, but that simply is not factual.
According to the US Department of Commerce site, around 85% of the vehicle
sold in the US by both GM and Ford are made in North American of around 80%
NA parts. NO import brand builds anywhere near 50% of the vehicle they
sell in North America in North America and the vast majority of parts in the
vehicle they assembled in North America are made elsewhere.

Toyota buys close to $28 billion a year of parts and services in the US.

And the Toyota Camry, Sienna and Tundra all are made with 75% or more
domestic content (domestic defined as made in the USA).

<http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=top&subject=ami&story=amMade0707>

What's the URL of your site?

Jeff

Post by Mike hunt

Post by Ralph Mowery

Post by b***@usa.com
GM employs 142,000+ people in the United States.
Toyota employs 36,632 people in the United States.
http://www.gm.com/corporate/about/global_operations/north_america/usa.jsp
http://www.toyota.com/about/our_business/at_a_glance/our_numbers/direct_employment.html
Not only that, but the Toyota jobs are basically just lower paying
blue collar jobs, where as GM has 50,000 engineers working over here.
Toyota and other import car companies have brainwashed Americans into
thinking that buying their car is just as good or better for the
American economy than buying from the Big Three, because their car is
assembled over here, but that is baloney. My friends...when we buy
our cars from GM, Ford, or Chrysler, the money stays over here.
Otherwise, it just goes down the drain.

I don't know about the blue collar workers, but when Ford will fire a CEO
and give him $ 20 million to leave, something is wrong with our system...
Just as with Home Depot. Fired their CEO and gave him $ 120 million.
Wish I could get fired and get my part of that.
How many of the big 3 cars are made somewhere else and shipped here ?

[Hachiroku ハチロク]

GM employs 142,000+ people in the United States. Toyota employs 36,632
people in the United States.

Toyota hasn't yet had a layoff. GMs layoffs not only add to the price of
the cars, but also to the taxpayer's burden as well.

[weird]

Amen Brother.
Buy American!!!!

Post by b***@usa.com
GM employs 142,000+ people in the United States.
Toyota employs 36,632 people in the United States.
http://www.gm.com/corporate/about/global_operations/north_america/usa.jsp
http://www.toyota.com/about/our_business/at_a_glance/our_numbers/direct_employment.html
Not only that, but the Toyota jobs are basically just lower paying
blue collar jobs, where as GM has 50,000 engineers working over here.
Toyota and other import car companies have brainwashed Americans into
thinking that buying their car is just as good or better for the
American economy than buying from the Big Three, because their car is
assembled over here, but that is baloney. My friends...when we buy
our cars from GM, Ford, or Chrysler, the money stays over here.
Otherwise, it just goes down the drain.

[SMS]

Post by weird
Amen Brother.
Buy American!!!!

Hmm, should I buy a Chevrolet Suburban made in Silao, Mexico, or a
Toyota Sequoia built in Princeton, Indiana?

Should I buy a Chevrolet Impala made in Oshawa, Ontario, Canada or a
Toyota Camry built in Georgetown, Kentucky?

Which company is exporting blue collar jobs to Mexico and Canada, and
which company is building new factories and design centers in the U.S.?

[JoeSpareBedroom]

Post by b***@usa.com
GM employs 142,000+ people in the United States.
Toyota employs 36,632 people in the United States.
http://www.gm.com/corporate/about/global_operations/north_america/usa.jsp
http://www.toyota.com/about/our_business/at_a_glance/our_numbers/direct_employment.html
Not only that, but the Toyota jobs are basically just lower paying
blue collar jobs, where as GM has 50,000 engineers working over here.
Toyota and other import car companies have brainwashed Americans into
thinking that buying their car is just as good or better for the
American economy than buying from the Big Three, because their car is
assembled over here, but that is baloney. My friends...when we buy
our cars from GM, Ford, or Chrysler, the money stays over here.
Otherwise, it just goes down the drain.

Sometimes when you own an American car, other money goes down the drain,
like your own income. My first two cars were Fords, and they were broken so
often that it affected my ability to get to work. I'll stick with cars that
continue to operate dependably, and don't have stupid problems when they're
still "young". Toyota, in other words.

You will now point out that no car is without problems. Don't bother. That's
obvious, but does nothing to support your opinion.

[Mike hunt]

Who told your to say that?

Post by JoeSpareBedroom

Post by b***@usa.com
GM employs 142,000+ people in the United States.
Toyota employs 36,632 people in the United States.
http://www.gm.com/corporate/about/global_operations/north_america/usa.jsp
http://www.toyota.com/about/our_business/at_a_glance/our_numbers/direct_employment.html
Not only that, but the Toyota jobs are basically just lower paying
blue collar jobs, where as GM has 50,000 engineers working over here.
Toyota and other import car companies have brainwashed Americans into
thinking that buying their car is just as good or better for the
American economy than buying from the Big Three, because their car is
assembled over here, but that is baloney. My friends...when we buy
our cars from GM, Ford, or Chrysler, the money stays over here.
Otherwise, it just goes down the drain.

Sometimes when you own an American car, other money goes down the drain,
like your own income. My first two cars were Fords, and they were broken
so often that it affected my ability to get to work. I'll stick with cars
that continue to operate dependably, and don't have stupid problems when
they're still "young". Toyota, in other words.
You will now point out that no car is without problems. Don't bother.
That's obvious, but does nothing to support your opinion.

[Josh S]

In article

Post by b***@usa.com
GM employs 142,000+ people in the United States.
Toyota employs 36,632 people in the United States.
http://www.gm.com/corporate/about/global_operations/north_america/usa.jsp
http://www.toyota.com/about/our_business/at_a_glance/our_numbers/direct_employ
ment.html
Not only that, but the Toyota jobs are basically just lower paying
blue collar jobs, where as GM has 50,000 engineers working over here.
Toyota and other import car companies have brainwashed Americans into
thinking that buying their car is just as good or better for the
American economy than buying from the Big Three, because their car is
assembled over here, but that is baloney. My friends...when we buy
our cars from GM, Ford, or Chrysler, the money stays over here.
Otherwise, it just goes down the drain.

Better half the pot than none at all.
At least they are building good cars here, not importing them all.

BTW GM imports their smaller cars from Korea.