Why car subsidies are good economics

[.FoMoCo.]

From Wednesdays SMH:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...718-22a03.html

opinion
Paul Bastian

Commentators line up to bag out the car industry. Too expensive they say. Not worth it they argue. The dollar makes it uncompetitive; our workers demands for living wages and conditions are just too high.
But it's damaging, and wrong.
Australians acknowledge that the manufacture of cars is central to our national interest. Australians welcome the jobs, the precision engineering skills, the local know how and brands and the flow on benefits that our car industry provides to manufacturing and our economy more broadly.
Essential Research recently released a poll showing almost 60 per cent of Australians support 'provisional assistance by Federal and State governments to ensure US motor companies continue to manufacture cars in Australia'.
Commentators who call for the end of the "handouts" demanding the industry either sink or swim, are not supported by the populace and are espousing a simplistic view.
Let's get this clear – while the vast majority of Australians support everything being done to keep high quality cars being made in Australia – everything is not being done.
It's a simple question of economics. The simplest rule in economics is the relationship between supply and demand. Co-Investment in the car industry provides supply-side support – but to properly realise the benefits of the Australian car industry we need to do more on the demand side.
In short, the co-investment scheme must be backed by a plan to buy Australian.
Over the next twenty years federal, state and local governments will purchase around 1.5 million cars. It's obvious that these cars should all come from Australia – but that’s not the reality.
As recently as 2004, over 1 million of these cars would have been made in Australia with the previous provision of local procurement arrangements.
In 2008, this changed, and ironically enough when we were hit with the GFC, governments at all levels moved away from their commitment and began purchasing more imported vehicles.
Today, only a third, or half a million of these cars will be locally sourced. It's nonsensical.
Australia's car industry is versatile. We make big and small cars in the Territory and the Cruze. We make efficient cars – rapidly expanding our capacity in hybrid, electric, gaseous and greener cars in response to increasing fuel costs and consumer preferences. There are no excuses for our governments not to buy Australian made.
And through our governments showing leadership and buying Australian made vehicles for their fleets we can encourage private fleets to purchase Australian. That would mean increasing sales of Australian cars by around 450,000 per year.
Despite the strong Australian dollar making it hard for our industry to compete around the globe, we still look outwards to international markets for our cars. The majority of Toyota's cars, and many of Holden's, are exported.
Australia's cars are also some of the safest new cars in the world. All Australian vehicles produced by Holden, Ford and Toyota are 5 star ANCAP rated or the highest quality in respect to safety. Yet 300,000 vehicles made overseas and bought here each year do not meet these standards.
Emissions and fuel efficiency coupled with innovative safety mechanisms and precision engineering means that the car industry drives the creation of new skills and the harnessing of science and technology.
But the high dollar and the most open vehicle market in the world resulted in 86% of all new cars in Australia being imported in 2011. Twenty-one percent of these attracted no tariff as they entered into the country and the rest attracted one of the lowest tariffs in the world at 5%.
Eighty percent of the vehicles imported into Australia come from four countries – Japan, Thailand, Korea and Germany. Yet all of these countries maintain a mix of tariffs and non-tariff regimes protecting their car industries at significant higher levels than we do creating impenetrable barriers for our cars.

Either we grow some muscle and smash down these barriers or we reciprocate with our own measures that reward safety, fuel and emissions innovation and make Australian made cars more attractive to consumers.
Car manufacturing is highly contested turf. Nations compete against one another to ensure that their workers produce vehicles – as it is deemed to be in their national interest.
Co-investment from the Australian government pales in comparison with the investment of other nations with automotive industries. In per capita terms, Australia invests $US18 per annum. Compare this to the $US330 in Sweden, $US260 in the USA and $US95 in Germany.
On the back of these numbers, Australia's investment provides tremendous value for money in relative international terms.
Australia's served well by co-investment. It provides skilled jobs, quality cars and places Australia as a world leader in manufacturing, science and technology. And despite the opinions expressed by some, it does come with reciprocal commitments.
In the case of GM Holden, the recent $275 million co-investment provided by our Government drew a commitment from GM to invest $1 billion in its Australian operations and maintain a presence for at least another decade. Similarly at Ford, the recent co-investment is already being put to use to design more fuel efficient models and Ford have committed to remaining here at least till 2016.
Unless we continue to co-invest and encourage demand, we will not only lose the skills, the opportunities and the know-how, we'll be disserving the national interest.
It’s the right time for our commentators to start talking up Australia’s car industry and promoting policies that encourage Governments, businesses and consumers to do themselves and their country a favour and buy the cars that we make here.

Paul Bastian is national secretary of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union

[.FoMoCo.]

I think the answer is clear: Government departments should be made to buy Australian. There is no excuse to buy imported cars in the current climate.

[Wretched]

Ok so what are the car makers doing to justify this continued support?
Where are their plans to expand their market share whether through exports or new products?
What is Ford doing with the Falcon and Territory? Are they to simply rely on government dept buying the cars? Is that really sustainable?

I am not happy to continue supporting a business that will not innovate or attempt to expand market share.

[BHDOGS]

Well wretched I am so I guess that cancels each other out So it stays

[.FoMoCo.]

Originally Posted by Wretched

What is Ford doing with the Falcon and Territory?

what, since 2004, when the government was buying twice as many australian made cars as now?

BF,BF MK2, FG, FG MK2, eco LPI, ecoboost, territory diesel, and its previous updates not enough for you?

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by .FoMoCo.

what, since 2004, when the government was buying twice as many australian made cars as now?

BF,BF MK2, FG, FG MK2, eco LPI, ecoboost, territory diesel, and its previous updates not enough for you?

So basically you want the government to keep supporting these guys through subsidies AND buy their cars because no one else is?

Ford, Holden and Toyota are part of multinational organisations.
What are each of these doing to sell more of their product to make more money?

I have no problem with government having to use locally assembled cars for their fleet but that alone isn't the justification to keep going. They need to justify the support through expansion to make more money.

Just propping them up doesn't really encourage any kind of growth or innovation. The parent companies will keep churning out what they are now with just enough updates that don't cost them too much that keeps people happy.

[burnz]

Originally Posted by Wretched

So basically you want the government to keep supporting these guys through subsidies AND buy their cars because no one else is?

Ford, Holden and Toyota are part of multinational organisations.
What are each of these doing to sell more of their product to make more money?

I have no problem with government having to use locally assembled cars for their fleet but that alone isn't the justification to keep going. They need to justify the support through expansion to make more money.

Just propping them up doesn't really encourage any kind of growth or innovation. The parent companies will keep churning out what they are now with just enough updates that don't cost them too much that keeps people happy.

so the multi billions from holden, ford, toyota.. (direct/indirect)
isnt worth the "small" loans from the gov?

[GT450]

I think if the short sighted , small minded people who are calling on the government to stop handouts, got their way and the thousands of people who are employed in the industry from suppliers to manufacturers to sellers were out of work they may see things differently.

I think they have no idea of how many people , most with families, it would involve and the cost to us all then would be horrendous. I think a lot of these people should do more research before letting rip in the media that the various manufacturing companies are taking big handouts then sacking people.
I am sure Ford did this as a last resort , not a first choice.

I am passionate about the motor industry , especially Ford , and have been since I was a boy and it makes me cringe when so called experts stick the knife in when they don't even consider the lack of protection , compared to our foreign opposition, the manufacturers have.

I hope common sense prevails and I hope the Falcon does too.
GT450

[.FoMoCo.]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Just propping them up doesn't really encourage any kind of growth or innovation.

Wretched, I hear what you are saying, and I actually agree that more can be done as far as marketing, for one, and a viable export plan, for another, as avenues of expansion.

However, the questions still remains, after the support that was there in 2004, and then largely until the GFC struck, were our local products being shunned for imports at a government level?

Is it that the products are inferior? You may say yes, many on here would disagree. Surely the ecoboost could at least be looked at as an option?

To say that there is no innovation becomes a catch 22 when there is a massive drop in sales that they used to count on as a staple income.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Just propping them up doesn't really encourage any kind of growth or innovation. The parent companies will keep churning out what they are now with just enough updates that don't cost them too much that keeps people happy.

So change the conditions of funding, make it only apply to vehicles that fit the criteria the government want to push.
You want funding for a large car?
Well Mr. Ford or GM , you have to agree to models that achieve certain weight and fuel economy targets
for the majority of vehicles to be sold, introduce a CAFE styled limitation on car makers fleets but use the
Euro test cycle combined economy number, preventing manufacturers sneaking through with
good highway only figures.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by .FoMoCo.

From Wednesdays SMH:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...718-22a03.html

Is car manufacturing more important than other parts of our manufacturing industry?
We have engineers drawing up designs and plans for equipment for the mining industry, they send these plans to China to be built.

Has anyone thought that maybe the wrong industries are being subsidised?



http://www.afrsmartinvestor.com.au/p...miWxQwXlcMlEcO

[SVR73]

some great points. with other businesses, if your not viable I'd say too fn bad, thats life but losing the car industry could be a huge kick in the guts to australia. we've lost enough manufacturing as it is.

What I want to know is when we will see great looking cars again. this era or car design stinks.
where are all the exciting car designs. it would help if both ford and holden and even the whole world made cars that are attractive looking. A falcon is not just a reliable, driving style based economical family car, some are mean machines with grunt and good handling and used to look tough back in the 70's when I came along but I dont mind some BA-FG's today

I own an AU because I loved the shape since the start and of course the AU1 XR bodykit with the bi plane. still got one and will never sell it. now its not to everyones taste and I admit that its not perfect in my eyes either but it looked different to everything else except maybe a Jaguar cars *** end and has road presence, just like the EL GT does

you can see an AU1-3 XR real quick from a distance from all the other cars.

So stop making conservative looking cars with economy first in mind, make exciting looking cars with great performance and all the mod cons that people want inside a car today. what most expect today standard in a new car today is way different to decades ago. gotta give them the goodies on the inside too

[Dr Smith]

Johnydep, do you think the mining industry is not subsidised? The diesel rebate alone adds to billions. And I'll repeat my earlier comment to an article I posted countering something like this one, how come it's economists/financial "guru's" on six figure salaries that always put up these arguements. The Thai goverment is here right now poaching industries to set up in Thailand. And yet Ford Aust. got blocked from exporting there until now and yet Thailand is now one of the biggest suppliers of vehicles to Australia. And before anyone arc's up I'm actually a manufacturer of goods in this country, I get my fingernails dirty making something in an actual factory I own on Australian soil, and I'm more then happy with continued subsidies to the auto industry because my neighbour supplies Toyota and the average salaried workers he employs need the work and I'd rather they work as much as they do to get a pay packet and not live of welfare which costs more and has far more dire negative socio-economic side effects.

Edit: what sort of protectionism is the author refering to. I thought the auto industry had a minor level of import tariffs etc..

[SVR73]

make tough looking and performing falcons and commys that would help. theirs a few that are good but they could be so much more

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by SVR73

some great points. with other businesses, if your not viable I'd say too fn bad, thats life but losing the car industry could be a huge kick in the guts to australia. we've lost enough manufacturing as it is.

What I want to know is when we will see great looking cars again. this era or car design stinks.
where are all the exciting car designs. it would help if both ford and holden and even the whole world made cars that are attractive looking. A falcon is not just a reliable, driving style based economical family car, some are mean machines with grunt and good handling and used to look tough back in the 70's when I came along but I dont mind some BA-FG's today

I own an AU because I loved the shape since the start and of course the AU1 XR bodykit with the bi plane. still got one and will never sell it. now its not to everyones taste and I admit that its not perfect in my eyes either but it looked different to everything else except maybe a Jaguar cars *** end and has road presence, just like the EL GT does

you can see an AU1-3 XR real quick from a distance from all the other cars.

So stop making conservative looking cars with economy first in mind, make exciting looking cars with great performance and all the mod cons that people want inside a car today. what most expect today standard in a new car today is way different to decades ago. gotta give them the goodies on the inside too

So its fair that any other business that for whatever the reason isnt competitive with others is fine to close .....
Well all the businesses who decided to shut shop and sell exclusive online now,probably make more money in the pocket every month , but is it fair for others who still rent bricks and mortar and cant compete price wise that have to shut ....
Is it also fair that people nowadays dont have the cash they have years gone by and are now more savvy with there money ,actually lookin at what their new car will cost in services,breakdown costs,maintance , parts costs and what itll loose in the first 5 years ???
Buy a name brand and loose alot due to the massive market flood,or the new model is less to buy than the previous model,or buy something built overseas that doesnt cost as much and doesnt depreciate as much % wise
Who really drives one of the big 3 nowadays ???
What really annoys me is, the CEOs get paid ridiculous amounts of money calculated on what they can do with a company,they still get their ridiculous pay yet to make the company look profitable they sack the blokes who are making them look good
Get the CEOs to take a pay cut or get sacked if they cant steer a business to a decent profit...
Would you pay someone a good wage if they arent productive ???

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by jpd80

So change the conditions of funding, make it only apply to vehicles that fit the criteria the government want to push.
You want funding for a large car?
Well Mr. Ford or GM , you have to agree to models that achieve certain weight and fuel economy targets
for the majority of vehicles to be sold, introduce a CAFE styled limitation on car makers fleets but use the
Euro test cycle combined economy number, preventing manufacturers sneaking through with
good highway only figures.

Precisely what I am trying to get at, thank you.

Originally Posted by .FoMoCo.

Wretched, I hear what you are saying, and I actually agree that more can be done as far as marketing, for one, and a viable export plan, for another, as avenues of expansion.

However, the questions still remains, after the support that was there in 2004, and then largely until the GFC struck, were our local products being shunned for imports at a government level?

Is it that the products are inferior? You may say yes, many on here would disagree. Surely the ecoboost could at least be looked at as an option?

To say that there is no innovation becomes a catch 22 when there is a massive drop in sales that they used to count on as a staple income.

To be honest locals were probably shunned to an extent. I'd say the Territory was chosen over the Falcon in many ways, the Focus too. With Ford expanding their range I would expect less and less to go with the Falcon and more to other vehicles in the range.

To a point I would agree, I don't see the need for a public servant having a government car for themselves that is a large sedan when a hatch back will do just as good a job. this is where it comes down to what is available.

The ecoBoost IMO is a far better proposition than ecoLPI in this instance.

I agree that R&D costs money and these are local arms of huge international organisations, I would expect them to use the resources from other regions instead of constantly re inventing the wheel. Ford slooooowly is doing this but more needed to be integrated into the Falcon based products from the onset.

[Franco Cozzo]

I've got a better idea, some of the money the government collects from the mining industry, fuel excise, GST, tobacco taxes, alcohol taxes and income taxes can be used to purchase Holden and Ford from their parent companies and have them as government owned.

[39ClevoUte]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

I've got a better idea, some of the money the government collects from the mining industry, fuel excise, GST, tobacco taxes, alcohol taxes and income taxes can be used to purchase Holden and Ford from their parent companies and have them as government owned.

This touches on the true problem. We are selling trillions of $ of raw matterials to foreign countries. Money is bartering, no mater what some people think, at the end of the day you can only do one thing with foreign money and that is to buy something with it from that country.

The gov can't block imports from these countries....or whats the point of selling the raw materials.........therefore all local industry is at risk.

It makes sense to tax the exports as much as possible so that the gov can spend some of this windfall on nation building endeavours. This lowers standards of living, but also causes people to buy local and increase local well being. And this can happen at all shades inbetween as well.

[zipping]

I buy Australian built Fords. I'm pasionate about Fords its the only material brand/Corporation that I have an affinity with. I believe the FG is a quality car.

The cold hard truth about subsidies is they don't work. If a product can't stand on its own two feet its doomed. It's why green energy will never get anywhere imo. All that happens is money in the form of taxes is taken from the productive part of the economy and redirected to unproductive parts, which puts a drag on the economy. It produces rent seekers, who can't be profitable without the subsidy.

Australians buy imported cars these days for a variety of reasons. The market has shifted and no amount of subsidies is going to turn that around.

Subsidies monies should be redirected into adaption/education and the successful parts of the economy. We don't produce cheap or desireable cars in relation to the rest of the world. Game over.

[mik]

one thing i have thought for some years, .......... it is`nt just ozzy cars hurting, there is a lot of industry hurting, and a lot of it is because of policy from the powers that be.
Over the years they have taken more and more control of wages and profits by way of taxes and indirect charges,
add to that some industry`s dissapeared almost altogether over the years due to policy that favours imports, recent additions to the taxing regime will add to the pain of some industries more than others,
as industry is struggling because of the policy due to powers that be, imo it`s their duty to either change policy or give help to those needing it, the next couple of years with the extra cost of co2 tax if it stays and how govco distributes out the help to companies will be interesting.

[mik]

Originally Posted by zipping

I buy Australian built Fords. I'm pasionate about Fords its the only material brand/Corporation that I have an affinity with. I believe the FG is a quality car.

The cold hard truth about subsidies is they don't work. If a product can't stand on its own two feet its doomed. It's why green energy will never get anywhere imo. All that happens is money in the form of taxes is taken from the productive part of the economy and redirected to unproductive parts, which puts a drag on the economy. It produces rent seekers, who can't be profitable without the subsidy.

Australians buy imported cars these days for a variety of reasons. The market has shifted and no amount of subsidies is going to turn that around.

Subsidies monies should be redirected into adaption/education and the successful parts of the economy. We don't produce cheap or desireable cars in relation to the rest of the world. Game over.

no Fords are desireable? i would disagree on that point, i`d love a GT/GS or F6 or G6ET or even one of the economy models, but to each his own, from a consumer point of view i would agree they cost a lot compared to some imports, they also cost a lot to build here in Australia, there lies the problem, the playing field is not level.
a few have said Aussie cars are`nt kitted out quiet as well as some imports, looking at it from a business point of view, you can`t just put every possible device in a car in short space of time, , cost is huge, has anybody taken note of the changes additions made to the falcon over the last 3/4 years?
i`m old with a crappy memory, but straight to mind comes the super charged FPV 40 million?, ECO LPI$$$$$ ??? , the Eco Boost $$$$ ????, territory diesel $$$$ ??, 5 and 6 speed auto`s, add to that body, safety and electronic upgrades? and all in time of increaseing cost to business and cost of living to consumers who want everything cheaper,
again RE: level playing field, there has to be a happy medium in fair trading, it`s not just our car makers that are struggling.

[jpd80]

If you could have a platform that spanned four key vehicles, that manufacturer would span almost 50-60% of the market

- small sedan
- Small SUV/CUV
- Mid-large sedan
- Mid-large SUV/CUV

If you could build Focus - Mondeo and Kuga-Territory sized vehicles on one basic platform
or two closely aligned platforms sharing parts without compromising weight and strength,
I think that suite of vehicles would almost guarantee success in the Aussie market place.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

Johnydep, do you think the mining industry is not subsidised? The diesel rebate alone adds to billions....

Edit: what sort of protectionism is the author referring to. I thought the auto industry had a minor level of import tariffs etc..

I didn't mention subsidising the mining industry, neither does the article.

My mention of the mining industry was in regards to the thousands of jobs and millions of dollars we miss out on, in the manufacturing industry, from losing contracts to China.

The mining industry is just a customer.

At the moment they contract equipment designs to our local engineers, but get everything built in China. These are not small $50,000 car sized items, they are huge drilling towers, lifting devices, extraction machines, etc. Millions of dollars, all designed here, built in China.

Why not send the subsidies to a different part of our manufacturing industry, one that can earn more dollars and create more jobs, to get our companies building. Spend the money on our people to become qualified, spend the money on our manufacturing and education.

It's all about putting the money in the right places.

The article is just pointing out that subsidising one industry ends up hurting another. By taking money from competitive successful industry, they put a burden on it and make it uncompetitive with higher taxes, levies, etc.

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by johnydep

I didn't mention subsidising the mining industry, neither does the article.

My mention of the mining industry was in regards to the thousands of jobs and millions of dollars we miss out on, in the manufacturing industry, from losing contracts to China.

The mining industry is just a customer.

At the moment they contract equipment designs to our local engineers, but get everything built in China. These are not small $50,000 car sized items, they are huge drilling towers, lifting devices, extraction machines, etc. Millions of dollars, all designed here, built in China.

Why not send the subsidies to a different part of our manufacturing industry, one that can earn more dollars and create more jobs, to get our companies building. Spend the money on our people to become qualified, spend the money on our manufacturing and education.

It's all about putting the money in the right places.

The article is just pointing out that subsidising one industry ends up hurting another. By taking money from competitive successful industry, they put a burden on it and make it uncompetitive with higher taxes, levies, etc.

If the equipment is built overseas is that because no one can build here or they are not price competitive, (I'm not familiar and would I be right that you work in that area?). I've seen companies like Loreal close down their plant in Sandringham Vic and import from Asia. The local plant had excellent quality, safety etc however the Asian plant had far greater capacity. The Australian dollar is hurting manufacturing however the average consumer doesn't necessarily notice the negative effects that are involved. Plus at 22million we aren't really big enough so that domestic demand fuels big growth in domestic-sourced supply such that these industries are also competitive on an international basis.

I feel if an industry already exists somewhere else, subsidising it to bring it here is far more difficult and more expensive then saving something already operating here. Hence my question on whether the mining equipment is made here already. One from left field: If it is then maybe a policy for the mining companies something like you buy Australian and we match it with the diesel fuel type subsidies (or something else of equal value). If they buy less locally the fuel subsidy drops in equal proportion.

I do agree that any subsidies for any industry needs total, clear cut parameters for explicit "returns" through products/outcomes whatever. Something has to be seen, touched and exist as a result.

Maybe saving car workers jobs saves more jobs at the moment then subsidising other industries. Who knows?

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

If the equipment is built overseas is that because no one can build here or they are not price competitive, (I'm not familiar and would I be right that you work in that area?). I've seen companies like Loreal close down their plant in Sandringham Vic and import from Asia. The local plant had excellent quality, safety etc however the Asian plant had far greater capacity. The Australian dollar is hurting manufacturing however the average consumer doesn't necessarily notice the negative effects that are involved. Plus at 22million we aren't really big enough so that domestic demand fuels big growth in domestic-sourced supply such that these industries are also competitive on an internaional basis.

I feel if an industry already exists somewhere else, subsidising it to bring it here is far more difficult and more expensive then saving something already operating here. Hence my question on whether the mining equipment is made here already. One from left field: If it is then maybe a policy for the mining companies something like you buy Australian and we match it with the diesel fuel type subsidies (or something else of equal value). If they buy less locally the fuel subsidy drops in equal proportion.

I do agree that any subsidies for any industry needs total, clear cut parameters for explicit "returns" through products/outcomes whatever. Something has to be seen, touched and exist as a result.

Maybe saving car workers jobs saves more jobs at the moment then subsidising other industries. Who knows?

No I don't work in the industry, I have a mate that is involved with drawing up the plans. He tells me that he needs to hire more people, but there is no one local and now he is looking overseas. He also tells me that the cost of materials, electricity, taxes, rates etc is what is stopping production in Australia.

Who said that we don't have the capacity to build here? Why did Governments set up the Submarine project in the late 80's, which is still building. We've got the capacity and the industry, it's just not cost competitive due to the high overheads.

Why is our electricity and raw materials so high? Has nothing to do with the exchange rate; it's the Government taxes and levies, Council rates, etc.

We've been saving car jobs for 50 years, and still the jobs shrink, the plants get smaller and production less.

Dig up the Hawke/Keating Government's Button plan, read it.

[prydey]

wretched - what innovation would you like to see?? i notice you making similar comments in a few threads at the moment.

you want a lighter falcon? have a look at the cost of lighter large cars around the world. building with aluminium costs money. sure, you might save a couple 100kg, but you couldn't sell them for mid $30k. most weight is from making the car safe. FG is one of the higher scoring 5 star rated cars out there. that not innovative enough for you?

want a more economical large sedan? ecoboost? that not innovative enough. state of the art engine giving excellent economy in a large car.

the way some people carry on its like they think ford and holden have just continued churning out 1980's style cars!!

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by johnydep

No I don't work in the industry, I have a mate that is involved with drawing up the plans. He tells me that he needs to hire more people, but there is no one local and now he is looking overseas. He also tells me that the cost of materials, electricity, taxes, rates etc is what is stopping production in Australia.

Who said that we don't have the capacity to build here? Why did Governments set up the Submarine project in the late 80's, which is still building. We've got the capacity and the industry, it's just not cost competitive due to the high overheads.

Why is our electricity and raw materials so high? Has nothing to do with the exchange rate; it's the Government taxes and levies, Council rates, etc.

We've been saving car jobs for 50 years, and still the jobs shrink, the plants get smaller and production less.

Dig up the Hawke/Keating Government's Button plan, read it.

I think we already had a ship building industry and hence kept jobs here by doing it locally, even if it cost more, although Collins subs were louder then Concorde initially.

The elecricity industry is very "interesting". It's privatised here in Vic and much of the cost increases are due to infustructure replacement. Being privatised they haven't spent money on maintenance like the previous goverment owned SEC. Now there are very strong rumours that those involved are actually "goldplating infrustructure", that is doing far more then is required because they are allowed to pass on these costs to the power retailers and hence on to us. Power company profit increases seem to suggest this is the case.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by prydey

.......

the way some people carry on its like they think ford and holden have just continued churning out 1980's style cars!!

No, just 1980's sales figures.

I don't know what the sales figures were then compared to now, but most people commenting on what Ford and Holden need to do, are just trying to say - car manufactures need to sell more cars to be competitive. They need to export. They need to build cars that appeal to a larger market.

At the moment we are handing them money to do this, yet their management is happy to tread water.

Does these foreign owned companies want their Australian production to grow and export? Do they want to invest in their plants on Australian soil?

If they do, make a commitment by investing their dollars. If they did that, I'm sure that most tax payers wouldn't mind the Government helping.

At the moment, it looks all to familiar - Mitsubishi Australia.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

.

The elecricity industry is very "interesting". It's privatised here in Vic and much of the cost increases are due to infustructure replacement. Being privatised they haven't spent money on maintenance like the previous goverment owned SEC. Now there are very strong rumours that those involved are actually "goldplating infrustructure", that is doing far more then is required because they are allowed to pass on these costs to the power retailers and hence on to us. Power company profit increases seem to suggest this is the case.

It's privatised in SA as well, and part of the deal is that the owners must pay the Government a dividend.

Governments also tax the fuel used in the production of electricity, as well as the fuel for all it's vehicles and workers, etc. Then there's Company tax, levies on water, land tax, Council rates, etc. These are all moneys collected by Governments to help them run the country, and subsidise other industries.

[Jacko*]

I think Ford Australia has been on a downward trend in sales for quite some time now, the world has changed a lot in the last decade but Ford Australia has only recently realized the need for a different product than what they have been marketing. There has been a steady move away from family sedans & wagons, with move toward suv's as it is perceived that they are more practical or economical. Ford Australia should have reacted more swiftly to offer the Australian consumer what they wanted. The Ford Territory is a world class vehicle but it's new diesel power plant should have been a four cylinder only across the range not a six. There are Korean built suv's running four cylinders that have better torque and power to weight ratio than the Territory selling for much less with a five year warranty. If the Territory was a four cylinder diesel not six, had 5 year warranty and was less than $45000 drive away I would have bought one, instead I bought a Hyundai Santa Fe. I don't think I am alone choosing a foreign built car, Australian car manufacturers need to recognize the need for change and act quickly, the government need to lead by example and buy Australian built exclusively and match tariffs imposed by other nations.
Just my 2c.