Should the U.S and Canadian government impose more protectionism in regards to the automotive industry?
469966
yes i think they should
655673
trying to stop importing excellent made cars and electronics from Japan and make us suffer the horrible american cars that consumes more petrol than.... than... uhhh... and the inefficient american electronics.
181479
Vehicles and Industries, in my opinion.
376136
i don't know the specifics on this but there is one general rule that applies to all of our policies: US corporations vie for economic control over these nations, first and foremost. if a US-based environmental group is complaining about pollution is s.a. then it is likely a valid complaint, and they are also doing similar things in the US. But if the US government is complaining then it is most likely to put pressure on s.a. governments in order for the US to gain some kind of economic or political foothold. The US government itself DOES have concerns for the environment, but compare that voice to the voice of its economic hegemony and it is like a chicadee chirping next to a jet aircraft.
140434
US manufactures tons of things, including many cars.
1146734
We always need jobs for our people.  If any american company moves to another country, we should stop buying thier products.  I would rather buy from a foriegn company whos factory is in this country, than from an american company with a factory elsewhere, because they would be giving our people jobs.
410575
If you look at this from cars that are dependable then yes Toyota should be in it. Although not a US automaker Toyota pushes US makers to step-up their game and do better.
413766
first of all Ralph Klein will not have a chance to put his dreaded third way into effect anyway, and if by some miracle the public allows it the government would simply privatize certain public services. so in essence you would simply be paying the government to get pushed to the front of the line. and no American companies would be involved. Also if US companies were to somehow get into the equation we could use this as a sort of revenge against the US for the softwood lumber dispute. It sure would piss them off if we shaved the profits off the b astards NAFTA be damed
194083
Ford, hands down, there American too. Who cares about Honda and Toyota, if your not buying American then in my opinion your not American. When you buy a foreign car your money goes over seas, sure they have manufacturing facilities here, however, let's not make another country rich from our hard work.
202116
It needs to be better balance. We import far more than we are exporting. Importing may keep prices down, but the lack of balance is costing American's their jobs. If things are more cheaply made overseas, companies outsource or move their business to other countries and import the products. What good does it do to have things made more cheaply elsewhere, if you lose your job here and can't afford to buy them. We could even out the balance by taxing things that are imported. Yes, they would become a little more expensive, but companies wouldn't outsource as much, more American's would have jobs and our economy would be stronger. Trust me, we are paying more through taxes and programs to help those out of work than we would be paying in increases for imported goods. We really have to get this under control.
905000
I believe American Automakers will.  We've seen this happen before in the late seventies and early eighties when there was a huge shift to Japanese vehicles because they were so much more fuel efficient and generally had a better build quality.  By the mid eighties, Detroit had responded with great success in producing cars the consumer wanted.  By the late nineties, SUVs were all the rage and no one was really talking about American automakers build quality when the general public was snatching up Suburbans and Expedtions in droves.  In fact, the build quality wasn't and isn't really all that bad.  The real problem is this: Detroit is behind on the curve in building vehicles the general public wants.  They didn't forsee the huge upswing in oil prices and didn't adjust their manufacturing of SUV's in accordance with it.  When oil prices went up, the general public went to Honda, Nissan and Toyota who have specialized in builiding fuel efficient cars.  Meanwhile, the big 3 suffered losses as they continued to churn out SUVs and full size trucks.  Detroit has finally realized that they need to focus more on building more fuel efficient vehicles rather than depending on SUVs and full size trucks for the bulk of their profits.  Another thing killing detroit is the pension plans they are obligated to provide to their retirees.  Ford and GM are in the process of trying to buy out their employees and once they clear up their obligations, it will once again be full steam ahead for Detroit.  \n\nIf you have any doubt that american build quality is improving, geet into a 1992 Ford Taurus or a 1992 Ford Mustang and compare it a 2006 Ford Fusion or a 2006 Ford Mustang.  The difference should speak for itself.
1165842
I don't think either country needs the other primarily because we have such a vast global market to select from. \n\nHowever, let's consider the following: \n\nCHINA:\nSocialist Government\nPopulation: About 1 billion\n\nUSA:\nCapitalist / Democratic Government\nPopulation: About 300 Million\n\n2005 US-China Imports: $243,470.1  (US Dollars)\n2005 US-China Exports:   $41,925.3\n(The US is on track to exceed both numbers in 2006 by 15-30%)\n\nThe figures above do not necessarily mean the US is dependent on China however. If you consider the economic system of each country, our imports can be based heavily on wants, whereas the imports of China would more likely be based on needs vice wants. \n\nIt stands to reason that either the US or China could obtain such goods from another country, thus not making them dependent on each other.  However it could be determined whether a country is dependent on on a certain type of import.  Then the question is, what (if anything) is unique to China or the US?\n\nBased on populations, it would seem to reason that China would have the greater need, but that could also depend on how self-sufficient they are in comparison to the US.\n\nI think any country would want to have the financial power that the US has. But perhaps they believe they can get there by different means. So do they really need the US to get there? Perhaps only as an example to either follow or avoid.\n\nI think the more we change our mentality from 'us versus them', to a global exchange and support system that is designed to benefit all countries who work together, I think then perhaps we will finally be on the right track.\n\n-------------------------\n\n"...if China becomes the next superpower, you can blame discount multibillion dollar retailers in America for taking down the USA." - jane l\n\nWhy blame Walmart? They saw a need and filled it, a hallmark of the 'American Way'.  Instead, consider why do people BUY from Walmart? Because they save money NOW. Why pay $200 for something you can get for $132 at Walmart? American's have spoken with their dollars, they choose to buy from the places that charge less. The REAL problem is probably more related to: \n 1) Cost of living in America\n 2) Educating the public on the effects of how they spend their dollars. The push to purchase "Made in America" items was a good start. But not enough.\n \nStart addressing those things, and we might see that the Walmarts of the world are not the enemy, but a vehicle we can use for either goal.
622261
To add to #1, imposing tariffs also often results in higher prices for consumers. Witness Bush's tariffs on imported steel. It resulted in higher prices for steel, which while good for steel companies (temporary), caused real harm to industries that use steel.\n\nFor example, the automotive suppliers who use steel were hit hard, with many going bankrupt being squeezed between steel's rising costs and OEM's refusal to renegotiate contracts, forcing some of them to sell products at a loss. So more jobs were lost than saved by this protectionism.\n\nTariffs can also trigger trade wars, damaging the economies of all countries involved.
327215
They are doing it with General Motors cars as well. Televisions from RCA (Thompson Electronics), and I am sure thousands of other things America has given them with our outsourcing. Our trade with Communist China is upside down too with the Republican Administration of George Bush. 3% from us to them, and over 20% from them to America. They have broken Americas trade agreement for years now, and Bush wont do anything about it. They are Communists and an enemy to the United States. They are using the extra revenue to extend their military also. It's a bad deal all around. America is going to try to remove the republicans from our Congress in November hopefully.
757093
Our tarriffs aren't nearly high enough.  Due to NAFTA CAFTA, and our mind boggling trade deficit with China, I could vomit.\n    We need to bring back protectionism.
197984
We have not been 'shipping' our jobs overseas.\n\nWe transitioned from a manufacturing economy almost thirty years ago into an information or tech based economy, which does not mean we don't manufacture anything. It means we do not make the widgets or components that are necessary for building a car. We develop or manufacture the DESIGN for automobiles (or any product) that can be produced with fewer people, at a lower cost, and will be more efficient in terms of the number of miles the vehicle will operate without need for servicing its components.\n\nOur economy is still in a transitional phase. We are starting to MANUFACTURE some of our own widgets/components  in the US again because it is more cost effective to produce the product here than to manage the political difficulties that have become costly in unstable countries.\n\nIt is still a learning process for all of us.
1116324
Actually, the government really ISN'T the problem in this case. Nor is it the Auto Industry, or even Big Oil. The problem here is the consumer. Us. The vast majority of us want big cars that go fast, lots of lights in out huge homes, and to throw away everything and buy new things. Most people don't really care that this lifestyle cannot be sustained. They just want that 68" TV. Until the consumers change, nothing else will.