Quote Originally Posted by maladroit
even if the entire thread was solely about the UAW, it still wouldn't invoke the straw man fallacy when *I* raise the issue of foreign unions because it doesn't distort your position on the UAW...the way you interpret straw man, anyone who puts forth a position that is not within your narrow parameters is guilty of the straw man fallacy...that is not how that particular fallacy works
It was based on the UAW, and the fact that other auto firms do not have the same opportunity costs as those that are locked into the UAW. You refuted this by building a straw man, in the form of stating that the UAW cannot be the cause because Germany has unions and they do just fine. That is a fallacy...

us automakers with unions WEREsuccessful before they started making bad management decisions...i agree management could cut costs by booting out the unions, but the union is not the most serious problem facing the big three automakers, and it certainly didn't cause the sales of their automobiles to plunge over the past four years
LOL, so now we are debating about profit? I thought it was that UAW represented companies were failing (bankruptcy concern), and your position was that it is not caused by the UAW.

check out this article from the wall street journal explaining why toyota won - it doesn't cite unions among the five fatal flaw of GM/Ford:
Why Toyota Won - WSJ.com
Toyota has won, this is true. But the reason GM is blowing through $40 billion a year is not because Toyota has won. They have structured contractual liabilities.

And i guess JAMES P. WOMACK is the authority on auto firms? You will have provide something with substance, not rhetoric.

everytime i go shopping for a car, toyota cars cost more, even if they're built in canada, even if they are used...i could spend hours doing a price comparison between each line of cars but it's not worth my time to prove the obvious
Is this another way of saying, you are guessing?

because foreign unionized automakers are very successful at selling their more expensive cars here, even though they have to pay to ship them across the ocean on top of their unionized wages and benefits
Are they? Did you read the sales numbers from last year? Is this another instance of you making a guess?

then what did you mean earlier in this thread when you wrote: "No it is the Unions." in response to allrollsin21 who wrote: "Poor management is what is ailing the US Automakers."? US automakers were successful for decades despite having unions...foreign unionized automakers continued to increase sales of their cars in the usa after the 2004 plunge in big three automakers sales...the difference isn't because of unions or no unions: it's because of management
Way to take my quote out of context:thumbsup: Care to address why you felt obligated to leave out the remainder of my quote?

No it is the Unions. Why does Toyota have no problem placing manufacturing plants throughout the midwest? They are non union, therefore they do not have to deal with the overhead discrepancy. Why else is GM buying out employees?
:jointsmile:


when i use an argument like that, you falsely accuse me of employing the straw man fallacy
It pertains to the context of your statements. You claim that it is management, so i asked you why a company that runs a tight ship in Germany cannot produce the same results in the US? Do you care to answer?

the big three auto firms were posting losses and eating through their cash reserves and idling plants since 2004 while the foreign automakers were increasing their sales, building cash reserves, and operating at near capacity...the failure of the big three proves my point that they are managed poorly...see that wall street journal article for more details
In any business without contractual constraint, when your liabilities exceed your revenue, you cut costs. Do you honestly believe GM would not cut labor costs to curtail production due to lessoning demand if they were legally able? An examination of both GM and Toyota's books show something quite remarkable. There is a $15 billion dollar difference in labor cost even though they have a similar production output (roughly 10 million vehicles per year).



still not getting it, eh? ok...here's how the straw man fallacy works...if i responded to your question about the big three automakers going under in a recession by asking why you hate america so much, that would be a distortion of your position, and i would be attacking the straw man instead of your argument...you claim that talking about anything outside of the UAW is a straw man argument, when it is merely a related issue...you can argue that the related issue of foreign unions isn't a valid comparison, but you can't argue that i attributed the issue of foreign unions to YOU and then attacked you for bringing up foreign unions
I listed a source that provides the volume of vehicles produced by German manufactures sold in the US. With all German auto representing roughly 10% of the market, Say's law becomes important. Supply creates its own demand. Do you understand?

Now, with that in mind, why would you try and refute this quote:
No it is the Unions. Why does Toyota have no problem placing manufacturing plants throughout the midwest? They are non union, therefore they do not have to deal with the overhead discrepancy. Why else is GM buying out employees?
with a premise based on German unions outside of the US? It has become painfully obvious: you cannot stay within the realm of the debate to prove your point, and gravitate towards other positions in an attempt to do so.



i read that article...a $4000 labour cost gap per vehicle is impossible...at $73/hour, that would add 55 hours ON TOP of toyota's labour cost per vehicle...the average labour per vehicle is only 30 hours...as the article notes, $2000 of that $3200 savings was in the form of employee reductions and plant idling because sales were dropping, and that has nothing to do with unions (and more to do with management)...the labour cost savings from wage and benefit negotiations was only $400 which is less than the cost of adding undercoating to a new vehicle...saving $400 per car on wages/benefits wouldn't have saved GM and it certainly won't save it now
Cost gap does not = labor cost gap... The only person to bring up a $4,000 labor cost gap was you.

i don't challenge it...i embrace that idea by saying that toyota has a comparative management/quality/reputation advantage which far outweigh it's labour cost advantage...toyota would still be making a profit if it paid it's us workers $73/hour instead of $48
Labor cost is only part of the problem. Liabilities owed to unions is another. If Toyota had to operate under this constraint, they would be going under as well.

for the same reason toyota would buy out its employees if they were unable to sell enough cars and they were facing bankruptcy
Toyota does not have to buy a union worker out. :thumbsup:

that's like saying, the boxer is losing not because of the repeated blows to his face and upper body...he is losing because his opponent does not face the same beating...it's not the unions, it's the unions...interesting logic...there must be a fallacy for that
Very bad analogy... The boxer is losing because he is unable to maneuver out of the corner because the ref will not allow it. There we go much better. Can you debate without taking things out of context or resorting to fallacies?

it's not the unions, it's the united autoworkers union...i looked at the profit per vehicle for toyota and honda and they would have made a profit even with the UAW while the big three were bleeding red ink for years...not having the UAW is an advantage, but having the UAW isn't why the big three are failing
Another guess!

GM Balance Sheet

Toyota Balance Sheet

GM had over $461,000,000,000 in total liabilities in 2005, compared to Toyota's $154,000,000,000. Nice try, better luck next time...
GoldenBoy812 Reviewed by GoldenBoy812 on . bailout plan may widen to more industries Wide array of U.S. companies start competing for bailout money Published: Sunday, October 26, 2008 | 2:20 PM ET Canadian Press: Martin Crutsinger, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON - The bailout is now the hottest lobbying game in town. Insurers, automakers and American subsidiaries of foreign banks all want the Treasury Department to cut them a piece of the largest government rescue in U.S. history. The betting is that many with their hands out will be successful, especially with Rating: 5