Tariff cuts to proceed

[HUNTER8]

Originally Posted by Shounak

That's why MG Rover was moved to China. There's only so much protection you can give to an industry.
.

MG Rover wasn't moved to China, they were bought out by a Chinese company. They are still producing in the UK and China.

Yep, that's what I meant. I should know because my parents both used to own new MG's. Now we've just got the ZT.

Pricks made us lose our new car warranty.

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

Don't care ? Obviously not, because you have no idea what goes on behind the front gates of those businesses. It's easy to rattle off numbers like $140,000 and make statements about 'efficiencies' or "lack there of".

Australian manufacturers innovate now, but don't let that get in the way of a good story. Innovation has had to happen in these plants, that's where the battle is ultimately going to be won or lost.

Design for manufacture, flexible cells, quick changeover, these are all part of Ford's manufacturing systems. Unfortunately the capital investment is so intensive in Automotive manufacturing business plans that fast & large changes across all systems is impossible - it is often linked to platform changes or new programs. Toyota and Holden have their systems that promote continuous improvement as does Ford.

FoA, for example, have one of the most lean and flexible stamping and assembly plants in the world. Visit the Broadmeadows Bodyshop. If that's not good enough, visit it when they add another platform (Focus) in a couple of years and tell me that they aren't innovative.

The Australian manufacturers are light years ahead of where they were 20 years ago both in cost and quality. This has been been driven by the reduction in Tariffs, no doubt, but to call the current plants inefficient and insinuating that they do not innovate is unfair.

Like I said earlier, "Get out into the real world" and learn something for yourself. If you did maybe you'd end up with something called business acumen.

BTW your international economics 'marks' mean "diddley squat" in the real world until you've earned your 'stripes'.

Start off doing some photo-copying then move onto doing a few "pie-charts" for your new boss for starters. Then again, I guess from reading your post above (about the value of your knowledge) you'll be moving straight on to running the OECD instead.

Just what makes you think that I haven't earned my stripes? What the hell does that even mean?

Have I worked a real full time job. Yes. Have I done real work in the private sector using my degree. Yes.

Seriously, if this was an essay I was writing, I'd have a list of references, a contention and fully structured arguments. As if I can be bothered doing that here.

Anyway, I think you need to think twice before making personal accusations. I don't know how you can make them without knowing a thing about my work/study history. If you knew a thing about where I've worked, you'd stop the baseless accusation immediately.

Btw, efficient is not the be all and end all. It's about having buyers for your products. That's all a company needs to do.

I think you need to read over my posts a little more carefully, then you might find out what I'm advocating.

[HUNTER8]

Originally Posted by Shounak

Yep, that's what I meant. I should know because my parents both used to own new MG's. Now we've just got the ZT.

Pricks made us lose our new car warranty.

So should the British government done something to protect it's car industry so you could keep your warranty?

Originally Posted by HUNTER8

So should the British government done something to protect it's car industry so you could keep your warranty?

Yes. Then maybe my parents wouldn't have had to pay $250 for the thermostat and $750 or something for the fuel pump module.

Not to mention the $2500 or so for changing the suspension on one wheel.

Maybe that's why they went bust? Who cares.

[HUNTER8]

Originally Posted by Shounak

Yes. Then maybe my parents wouldn't have had to pay $250 for the thermostat and $750 or something for the fuel pump module.

Not to mention the $2500 or so for changing the suspension on one wheel.

Maybe that's why they went bust? Who cares.

So let me get this right..........
British government should have protected it's inefficient car industry so you could keep your warranty, but Australian Government shouldn't protect our car industry?

Originally Posted by HUNTER8

So let me get this right..........
British government should have protected it's inefficient car industry so you could keep your warranty, but Australian Government shouldn't protect our car industry?

Exactly. Very well summarised there, old chap.

The British Govt have a duty of care to those affected by the MGR shut down.

[HUNTER8]

I'm game..............
Why should the government have protected them? Inefficient business, non competetive on the world and local market. No real innovations. Aren't you shooting your own arguments in the foot here?
Or do you have another suggestion for what the British government should have done to protect your warranty?

Originally Posted by HUNTER8

I'm game..............
Why should the government have protected them? Inefficient business, non competetive on the world and local market. No real innovations. Aren't you shooting your own arguments in the foot here?
Or do you have another suggestion for what the British government should have done to protect your warranty?

They should've protected them because I would be better off as a result.

My level of caring in this thread has just hit zero.

[HUNTER8]

Funny thats the thing about tariff reductions. Great idea as long as it doesn't affect the you.

[SB076]

Shounak - in your opinion what do you beleive would happen to the economy if (as the economy slows) some 68,000 (direct) jobs were lost as a result of the closure of the local automotive manufactuing industry? Please also keep in mind the indirect jobs that would be lost as well as the ramifications to other industry? Just one other thing another industry that is currently relying on additional help is farming, however for years that industry propped up the nation and may do so in again in future. That industry deserves support as does the automotive industry in my opinion to lose either or both would have future consequnces to the nation which are unmeasurable at this stage. Tarrifs have already been cut and are at 10% I beleive they should stay at 10% until there are signs that the industry is recovery or there is a global change to how other governments protect their industry. Again why should Australia offer no protection when other countries do?

[SB076]

Originally Posted by sleekism

If anybody read a recent edition of wheels the so called "handouts" aren't really as such. They are not in cash they are in fact in the form of import "credits" whereby manufacturers get a discount on tariffs on imported vehicles from their own brand. It also goes on to say that if you that the tax paid by the locals is in fact greater than the Government subsidies so technically they aren't subsidised.

If someone wants to read a good book on how to "compete" with Japanese manufacturers than I suggest the book "automobile factory of despair"

http://blog.autospeed.com/2008/04/11...ry-of-despair/

Here is an extract:

Correct in reading through the article the $1.1 billion was made up of approx. $521 million (tarrif protection) and $537 million of ACIS credits - therefore the comment that the government funds $1.1 billion is misleading (all this can be found on page 16 on the link that wretched posted) The effective amount that the government provided was less than $70 million

Originally Posted by SB076

Shounak - in your opinion what do you beleive would happen to the economy if (as the economy slows) some 68,000 (direct) jobs were lost as a result of the closure of the local automotive manufactuing industry? Please also keep in mind the indirect jobs that would be lost as well as the ramifications to other industry? Just one other thing another industry that is currently relying on additional help is farming, however for years that industry propped up the nation and may do so in again in future. That industry deserves support as does the automotive industry in my opinion to lose either or both would have future consequnces to the nation which are unmeasurable at this stage. Tarrifs have already been cut and are at 10% I beleive they should stay at 10% until there are signs that the industry is recovery or there is a global change to how other governments protect their industry. Again why should Australia offer no protection when other countries do?

1. The worst is over with the economy slowing. It's beginning to gain ground again. The RBA went too far with the rate hikes, that explains the much of the strength of the US dollar and the ASX decline.

Things will get better on that front.

2. Farming. Victoria has one of the most advanced farming practices in the world. It was a topic I didn't know too much about until I went to a lecture with Mark Vaille. Apparently Victorian dairy farmers are literally the most advanced with their automated systems etc. It sounds like they don't even need subsidies.

3. Again. For the MILLIONTH time. I say that tariffs should not be abolished. You persist in setting up this straw man and burning it down. Yet the straw comes from you.

I think tariffs are necesary in the short run. However they should not be built into a companies business plan.

It's a bit like Centrelink or Unemployment benefits. I think it's great to help people out when they're struggling, but not nothing someone should live off permanently.

The international competitiveness of these industries should be re-examined because they've been protected by tariffs for ages. If they can compete without tariffs, awesome. If not, you'd probably have to do what any other business would do in that situation. These tariffs make alternatives more expensive at the cost of taxpayers also. I'm not a big fan of a better quality foreign car that could be cheaper, actually be more expensive because of govt revenue.

I find tariffs like feeding a man, when gradually lowering them is teaching him to fish. The government is on the right track here by gradually reducing the tariff's, but I'm definitely not saying that they should be abolished completely. All you have to do is read pretty much any of my 15 posts above to see that.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread. It's taking up too much of my time.

[sleekism]

Originally Posted by Shounak

1. The worst is over with the economy slowing. It's beginning to gain ground again. The RBA went too far with the rate hikes, that explains the much of the strength of the US dollar and the ASX decline.

Things will get better on that front.

2. Farming. Victoria has one of the most advanced farming practices in the world. It was a topic I didn't know too much about until I went to a lecture with Mark Vaille. Apparently Victorian dairy farmers are literally the most advanced with their automated systems etc. It sounds like they don't even need subsidies.

3. Again. For the MILLIONTH time. I say that tariffs should not be abolished. You persist in setting up this straw man and burning it down. Yet the straw comes from you.

I think tariffs are necesary in the short run. However they should not be built into a companies business plan.

It's a bit like Centrelink or Unemployment benefits. I think it's great to help people out when they're struggling, but not nothing someone should live off permanently.

The international competitiveness of these industries should be re-examined because they've been protected by tariffs for ages. If they can compete without tariffs, awesome. If not, you'd probably have to do what any other business would do in that situation. These tariffs make alternatives more expensive at the cost of taxpayers also. I'm not a big fan of a better quality foreign car that could be cheaper, actually be more expensive because of govt revenue.

I find tariffs like feeding a man, when gradually lowering them is teaching him to fish. The government is on the right track here by gradually reducing the tariff's, but I'm definitely not saying that they should be abolished completely. All you have to do is read pretty much any of my 15 posts above to see that.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread. It's taking up too much of my time.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

I will make the point though that most farming in this country wouldn't survive a year without Government subsidies especially dairy as the world has a HUGE surplus.

Up my way Cattle Farmers depend on on thousands of little subsidies including rent on Crown Land that hasn't been increased in 50 years. Not to mention the "drought assistance" which has been going on for years hiding the fact that a lot of Australian land is now unsuitable for farming. Even if you look at the services sector you will find thousands of subsidies to help "small businesses".

I daresay without the plentitude of Government grants and special legislation most small businesses wouldn't be operating.

[Wretched]

The Brack's report is in.

I have to say that I am in favor of the reduction in the tariffs now. I am seeing benefits and as with anything the negatives. However I think it will work in the long term, bearing in mind it is only a reduction not a complete removal...yet.

The green fund is a good idea to help move towards alternative fueled cars. There is also a mention of exports in mind too. This whole idea so far is a lot better, it is more focused on rewarding innovation rather than handing out willie nillie.

So far I am impressed.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by Wretched

The Brack's report is in.

I have to say that I am in favor of the reduction in the tariffs now. I am seeing benefits and as with anything the negatives. However I think it will work in the long term, bearing in mind it is only a reduction not a complete removal...yet.

The green fund is a good idea to help move towards alternative fueled cars. There is also a mention of exports in mind too. This whole idea so far is a lot better, it is more focused on rewarding innovation rather than handing out willie nillie.

So far I am impressed.

I think the government has made the wrong decision until the industry shows signs of improvements, I would hesitate to reduce/remove tarrifs, as they may be the last thing standing between keep business in Oz or it going off shore. EDIT If the industry picks up then by all means reduce/remove them, If we reduce/remove them (like currently planned) we may find ourselves in a similiar position to the US and they still had tarrifs to protect them.

I hope Holden and Ford make better use of the green fund than Toyota. I think the government jumped the gun promising $$$ to Toyota to build a Hybrid Camry when Toyota already had plans for that and that would have occured anyway. The frustating thing about the Toyota grant is that it does little to secure jobs (the Hybrid system and components will be imported) Therefore all the technology/manufacturing etc stays overseas.

[Bossxr8]

Australia already has the 3rd lowest automotive tariff level, so why the hell make it even lower. It should be kept at the same level until all the other auto manufacturing countries lower their tariffs to the same level. Thats a fair playing field, none of this fairy land free trade crap the government try to push. Its just a joke.

[ltd]

I've made my opinions on this idea of reducing tarriffs known often to the chagrin of others in this thread, but I'll reiterate it for the dummies.
Shounak, just because you are an economics student or master or whatever, doesn't make your opinion any more valid than anyone else here. CEO's and economists disagree on most assessments, and in this case I think you'll find that the Bill Osbourne and Alan Mulally disagree entirely with you.
What you assert in your assessments is patently textbook; it ignores real world influences and factors such as increased costs and forecast increases in costs of production. You talk about cutting tarriffs and the need for Australian manufacturers to evolve into worlds best practice when in fact, the highest input cost in most manufacturers in this country is labour. With the fed now talking of increased SGC components, the minimum wage rates increasing and the unions discussing yet another pay claim what do you think is happening to the margins at both Holden and Ford. Why should the parent companies decide to stay in businesses which are making continual losses? One of the reasons we even have new models is in the fact that as an employer of thousands of Australians, concessions must be made by governments to entice investment.

The announcement by Bracks (jobs for the boys no?) in his kindergarden standard report is nothing but a textbook approach to a real world situation of which the ramifications won't be felt until this utopian stupidity is implemented.
Further, you have shot yourself in the foot with your behest at MG going under because of reduced tarriffs, yet you advocate the same industry killing policy here. If you actually did some research, you would find that Australia has the third lowest tarriffs in the world, lower than any SE Asian nation. When we have worlds best practice or near it as we have at Ford who essentially are a low volume manufacturer, you propose cutting them off further?

Let's take up your issue with the British government, In Australia a Daewoo Cerato costs $12990 on road, yet in britain the same car costs 11000 pounds. Once you do the conversion it is about $25000. Why the difference you ask? Because it is what the market is prepared to pay even though the market is influenced by any cheaper alternative such as a locally made car. Now, more than ever, with the devalued US dollar we have a higher exchange rate which means foreign cars are less expensive; do you think that this helps competition for the locals or not? How can we compete when foreign currency and standards of living aren't the same; often with vast disparities which translate to much lower production costs in other countries? Why should Australia be the dumping ground of asian manufacturers in their quest to produce millions of little unsafe and unroadworthy cars which in fact net them a sizeable profit? What price do you put on a life? (Check out the link, I'm not being alarmist nor nationalistic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vAN2cx2UIE)

I would ask that you bear in mind a few other factors too; the cost of mild steel in the last financial year increased 90% in Australia, has this been translated into higher vehicle costs? No, it has been absorbed once again although the coking coal and Iron Ore has been sold to china at less than half the rate it is available here through poor negotiations; how is it fair that Holden and Ford now have to wear some ineffectual bureaucrats poor negotiation skills?
I agree with you that Tarriffs, quotas etc inhibit free trade, but unless other countries remove their barriers to trade we are just ****ing in the wind and will only rid ourselves of industry which contributes billions to the economy as well as employs tens of thousands of people, once it is gone we will never get it back. I think if looking at reducing tarriffs we should apply to each nation what they apply to us. 70% in one country for our exports then fine, their cars and products will attract the same 70% here. 20% on exports in another country then again, 20% on imports from same country here, this would surely be more akin to a level playing field.
Just remember though, don't expect much from this lot in the fed, all they care about is the Toyota Hybrid and are only paying lip service to the locals.

[ltd]

Here's yet another reason why we need to protect our own in 5 star safety rated cars like the FG falcon as opposed to cheap (and soon to be cheaper) asian imports.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dimg2...eature=related

[Bossxr8]

Well said.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by ltd

*snip of a great rant*

So what makes you more of a so called expert than the next person?
You can't just shoot someone down, accuse them of living in an academic world without knowing their experiences. What do we know about yours? Not that I care, but would you like it if i said you're just some hick working at one of these car makers bagging someone out in a desperate plea to save your own job?

Judging by what you have written maybe we shouldn't be manufacturing here at all. The cost of raw materials, wages, etc just doesn't make Australia a viable place to produce goods. I don't think its going to get any better soon.

As a tax payer I don't want my money propping up unproductive businesses across the board. The money should be given to encourage better productivity and innovation. I am not seeing this currently.
Why should I be punished for buying a more superior product from another country? The goal should be to encourage the local products to lift their game and reduce the prices of their products to make them more attractive rather than increasing the prices of imports to deter people from buying them. No thanks.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by Wretched

So what makes you more of a so called expert than the next person?
You can't just shoot someone down, accuse them of living in an academic world without knowing their experiences. What do we know about yours? Not that I care, but would you like it if i said you're just some hick working at one of these car makers bagging someone out in a desperate plea to save your own job?

Judging by what you have written maybe we shouldn't be manufacturing here at all. The cost of raw materials, wages, etc just doesn't make Australia a viable place to produce goods. I don't think its going to get any better soon.

As a tax payer I don't want my money propping up unproductive businesses across the board. The money should be given to encourage better productivity and innovation. I am not seeing this currently.
Why should I be punished for buying a more superior product from another country? The goal should be to encourage the local products to lift their game and reduce the prices of their products to make them more attractive rather than increasing the prices of imports to deter people from buying them. No thanks.

What makes me more informed? I don't base opinions on hype, I actually base them on life experience and veritable facts. Further, I also weigh up both sides of the debate and can see the obvious holes in the abolition of tarriffs theorem proposed by arguably one of the biggest drama queen politicians in the land; Bracks.
Unlike you, I actually realise that the government needs to take in X amount of dollars per year to run the country. Currently, the government would be taking in X billions on car tarriffs of 10% per year. If they cut this to 5%, then it will be worth half of X Billion in tarriff revenue. This leaves a massive budgetary shortfall which has to be filled somehow, so this would essentially be met by the taxpayer ie you and I. Now, I realise that your whole argument is based on paying taxes to prop up the car industry so, if we have to fill the void that car tarriffs provide a revenue stream for, won't we just end up paying the tax again? Also consider this, taxes are never designed for shortcomings and are often overestimated so they would end up with a higher percentage than you currently pay now. Not very smart and we lose our car industry to the short term cheap chinese and korean manufacturers. I say short term cheap because once we obliterate our industry, then these manufacturers will do what they have done in the UK and just charge more.

I ask you, what makes you better informed?
I'm writing my opinion mate, if you don't like it then feel free to reply.
BTW, business confidence is at a 30 year low and investment is heading off shore in droves yet our resident economist says the recession is over? Technically, a recession is negative growth, we have yet to experience the worst of this one. This is why I took umbrage at his assertion.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by Wretched

So what makes you more of a so called expert than the next person?
You can't just shoot someone down, accuse them of living in an academic world without knowing their experiences. What do we know about yours? Not that I care, but would you like it if i said you're just some hick working at one of these car makers bagging someone out in a desperate plea to save your own job?

Judging by what you have written maybe we shouldn't be manufacturing here at all. The cost of raw materials, wages, etc just doesn't make Australia a viable place to produce goods. I don't think its going to get any better soon.

As a tax payer I don't want my money propping up unproductive businesses across the board. The money should be given to encourage better productivity and innovation. I am not seeing this currently.
Why should I be punished for buying a more superior product from another country? The goal should be to encourage the local products to lift their game and reduce the prices of their products to make them more attractive rather than increasing the prices of imports to deter people from buying them. No thanks.

Why do you think its ok for other governments to support and protect their manufacturers but its not ok for the Aus Government to do the same?

As for you comments regarding the manufacturing industry being unproductive and "needs to innovate" As someone that has travelled overseas and viewed foreign manufacturing (plus hosted many commisioning agents from around the world, who have viewed our processes, equipment and procedures) Our manufacturers are highly innovative, utlising world class equipment, personal and procedures. I suggest you have a look at why manufacturing struggles in this country and suggest you take into account the conditions we operate under as opposed to overseas countries.

I suggest you get out experience this (local manufacturing) for yourself so you can make an informed decision

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by SB076

I suggest you get out experience this (local manufacturing) for yourself so you can make an informed decision

Good idea for a few posting here.......

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by ltd

What makes me more informed? I don't base opinions on hype, I actually base them on life experience and veritable facts. Further, I also weigh up both sides of the debate and can see the obvious holes in the abolition of tarriffs theorem proposed by arguably one of the biggest drama queen politicians in the land; Bracks.

Basically you're saying you have an opinion, and like most of us here it has equal weight. You are coming from one point of view while others are seeing it another way. Perfectly natural but what I was getting at was you clearly having NFI about Shounak's experience/skills yet because he has a different opinion to you its wrong.

Unlike you, I actually realise that the government needs to take in X amount of dollars per year to run the country. Currently, the government would be taking in X billions on car tarriffs of 10% per year. If they cut this to 5%, then it will be worth half of X Billion in tarriff revenue. This leaves a massive budgetary shortfall which has to be filled somehow, so this would essentially be met by the taxpayer ie you and I. Now, I realise that your whole argument is based on paying taxes to prop up the car industry so, if we have to fill the void that car tarriffs provide a revenue stream for, won't we just end up paying the tax again? Also consider this, taxes are never designed for shortcomings and are often overestimated so they would end up with a higher percentage than you currently pay now. Not very smart and we lose our car industry to the short term cheap chinese and korean manufacturers. I say short term cheap because once we obliterate our industry, then these manufacturers will do what they have done in the UK and just charge more.

I ask you, what makes you better informed?
I'm writing my opinion mate, if you don't like it then feel free to reply.
BTW, business confidence is at a 30 year low and investment is heading off shore in droves yet our resident economist says the recession is over? Technically, a recession is negative growth, we have yet to experience the worst of this one. This is why I took umbrage at his assertion.

Now I do realise the government need money to run the country so there is no need to be smart about it. However the current system obviously isn't working good enough when they're spending more money keeping a dying sector afloat than they're making. I think some people here are overreacting drama queens and making a mountain out of a mole hill.

What this report has recommended is NOT to abolish the industry but to bring it into the 21st century. It is only a 5% reduction in the tariffs which I am sure some of the money would be recouped from the LCT increase. Sure the changes will bring some pressure onto the locals to perform better but isn't that a good thing? Rewarding them for building vehicles we want and adjusting to the market and attempting to secure vehicle making in this country or a little while longer.

It isn't like they didn't know about the changes anyway, they've had an outline since the 80's. If they couldn't adjust to suit the changes by now then they have only themselves to blame.

Job losses are inevitable in any industry going through change and to be honest with or without these changes I would think they'd occur. Ford and Holden are not doing so well with their parent companies hemorrhaging $$. Would Ford of America really want to keep manufacturing cars here at such a cost? R&D is a different thing.

Now I have never said I was more informed than anyone here, I simply questioned your snipes at people who simply have a different opinion to yours.
Obviously we all have different opinions and that is good (what I mention is my own opinion and do not think people to take it seriously), but to start personal attacks on people without knowing them personally or their background is a little low and considered desperate.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by Wretched

.... Now I do realise the government need money to run the country so there is no need to be smart about it. However the current system obviously isn't working good enough when they're spending more money keeping a dying sector afloat than they're making. I think some people here are overreacting drama queens and making a mountain out of a mole hill.

How did you come to that conclusion? The report states that the Automotive industry is second to mining and with exports worth $5 billion pa . Now in addition to that you have 60,000+ workers paying tax and making contributions (via GST etc) Plus you have all the other industries that indirectly supply the automotive industry (accountants, lawyers, people that work at the corner store etc etc). Then to add to that you have hundreds of component manufacturers paying taxes that supply to the automotive industry.

Originally Posted by Wretched

What this report has recommended is NOT to abolish the industry but to bring it into the 21st century. It is only a 5% reduction in the tariffs which I am sure some of the money would be recouped from the LCT increase. Sure the changes will bring some pressure onto the locals to perform better but isn't that a good thing? Rewarding them for building vehicles we want and adjusting to the market and attempting to secure vehicle making in this country or a little while longer.

Whether the industry survives (or to what extent) no one can be sure about - my concern as with others is why is it that the Australian Government removes what little protection is remaining when other countries are not doing the same. In this global market why should Australia manufacturing be at a disadvantage?

Wretched just out of curiosity what industry are you in?

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by SB076

How did you come to that conclusion? The report states that the Automotive industry is second to mining and with exports worth $5 billion pa . Now in addition to that you have 60,000+ workers paying tax and making contributions (via GST etc) Plus you have all the other industries that indirectly supply the automotive industry (accountants, lawyers, people that work at the corner store etc etc). Then to add to that you have hundreds of component manufacturers paying taxes that supply to the automotive industry.



Whether the industry survives (or to what extent) no one can be sure about - my concern as with others is why is it that the Australian Government removes what little protection is remaining when other countries are not doing the same. In this global market why should Australia manufacturing be at a disadvantage?

Wretched just out of curiosity what industry are you in?

Just tell me how well the locals are going with their sales? Are they themselves confident about their future here and what are they doing to secure it? Yes we know Ford is building the focus, that is a big plus.
What have they done so well in the last decade?

I am in the IT industry so I know all about changes and moving with the times. Our clients are from a variety of industries with one being a car manufacturer so we do get to see and become familiar with all the changes happening.

[ltd]

^^^^^^^^^

That qualifies you to SFA in manufacturing.
I would safely assume that SB076 actually knows a thing or two about impediments to manufacturing in this country, and I firmly believe this abolition of our protections is an ideology fraught with danger.
BTW, what do you think happens to the revenue raised from tarriffs? Where do you think it goes?

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by ltd

^^^^^^^^^

That qualifies you to SFA in manufacturing.
I would safely assume that SB076 actually knows a thing or two about impediments to manufacturing in this country, and I firmly believe this abolition of our protections is an ideology fraught with danger.
BTW, what do you think happens to the revenue raised from tarriffs? Where do you think it goes?

I never pretended to know anything about manufacturing unlike some here.
I simply have taken a stance that I believe based on the facts I have read.
As this is my opinion I do believe people to take it with a grain of salt and that is fine with me.

I will be looking forward to a better range of vehicles, I don't want to be told what I have to buy through taxes. The market is there for the locals to take advantage, lets see if they can.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by Wretched

I never pretended to know anything about manufacturing unlike some here.
I simply have taken a stance that I believe based on the facts I have read.
As this is my opinion I do believe people to take it with a grain of salt and that is fine with me.

I will be looking forward to a better range of vehicles, I don't want to be told what I have to buy through taxes. The market is there for the locals to take advantage, lets see if they can.

I'm not arguing your right to have an opinion at all; I'm asking what you think happens to the money that is collected from tarriff revenue the fed gov currently receives.