[LOWDOWN]

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

However, I will NEVER buy any car from a foreign brand built anywhere

...and since you're being totally objective about this, your reasoning is valid...

You somehow think you can defend the rule buy which Toyota does business by finding cases of the exception in which GM does the same thing, and then bash GM of occasionally doing the things that you defend Toyota for always doing.

Actually, I haven't bashed anyone...sorry...I've simply pointed out some similarities/irregularities/differences that some don't care to see, or missed in passing...


GM does build some stuff in China and Korea (I wouldn't buy any of it by the way), and Toyota does build some stuff inside the US, but across the whole product line, GM builds more in the US.

I should hope so...they have, after all, a few billion of our tax buck$ propping them up..."paid in full" with TARP funds, also our tax buck$...can you say "shell game"? And "some" production, there? They're very close to building as many, there, as here. And to sustain that, like Toyota, much of their profits stay there in the form of reinvestment. After all, if you're going to design Buicks including Lacrosses over there, you have to have a few bucks to pay the "locals"...

Rather than defending the global nature of the car business (which I recognize exists) you seem to merely have the classic knee-jerk reaction of America=inferior in all cases for all reasons.

...and I said that, WHERE? I've never referred you to the "JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study-2010", have I? But since you raise the issue...

http://www.cars91.com/news/j-d-power...ic-perception/

Gee, by sales-related average, "Domestics" except Ford would be "below industry average" of 155/100. Is that being knee-jerk?

(Toyota's throttle problem was because an American company supplied the part, really?)

Simply put, in response to the biased site listed, the parts WERE manufactured here, regardless, weren't they?


And while I by no means defend the bailout (I'm very much against it) to pretend that the Japanese government hasn't been subsidizing Toyota in various way for years is very disingenuous.

...as disingenuous as GM's "support"... call it a tie...

I'm not defending GM.

At times, and in certain cases, that would be extemely difficult to do, but what you state above might lead some to think otherwise...


I'm merely pointing out how illogical it is to use GM's business as an example of why Toyota should get a pass for the way they do business.

Huh? Can you please 'splain this? Do you mean GM should do things differently, or Toyota should do things GM's way? NO ONE's getting a pass, near as I can tell... Toyota is paying for their mistakes, and we're paying for GM's till they get back on their feet...and that includes their TARP funds used to "pay in full" their now-outstanding-to-TARP money... Ain't Washington/Detroit math grand?

As to "investment strategies" by the automakers, they simply cannot afford to ignore "local investment" for myriad reasons. And the greatest reason, besides the obvious "political expendience", is their long-term viability...

For too long, GM had the parochial ideal that "unless it was conceived/designed/executed in America, it was less than the 14th Floor deserved, and less than worthy". Lutz, finally, put a bullet in the head of that notion. Bancruptcy, hopefully, buried it... No one can simply ignore "anything from anywhere, anymore"... And Chinese and Korean investment/production are the current living proof of that... Without them, GM and others are DONE!

BTW, avoiding non-North American developed product should have some rethinking their Camaros... Australia is its own continent...