GM's Chinese sales top U.S.

To: starczar66

This makes perfect sense. Govt Motors sells best in a country like Communist China.

2 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:01:02 AM by Waryone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Take it to China, GM. They are your natural manure.

3 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:01:22 AM by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Garbage in, garbage out....

4 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:01:32 AM by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

I still object to fascism, communism and state capitalism, but there is something deliciously ironic about this particular news.

5 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:03:16 AM by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Chinese worlds leading producer of garbage and worlds leading purchaser of Government Motors garbage as well.

6 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:04:03 AM by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

I’ll bet the Chinese cars aren’t made by the UAW.

7 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:07:44 AM by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Waryone

Those “GM” cars sold in China, are not made in America.

Because the Chinese market is not open.

China insisted the cars sold in China, be made there.
Which country, America or China, is now doing ever better in trade and manufacturing?...

Hmm?

How’s that “free trade” thing working out so far?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR1fDL7x1Sg

Wake up people.

8 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:12:26 AM by Cringing Negativism Network (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR1fDL7x1Sg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]
To: Cringing Negativism Network

Of course, when a foreign firm opens shop up in the U.S., the protectionist retards yelp that “the profits are going overseas.” So what’s it gonna’ be?

9 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:23:54 AM by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]
To: 1rudeboy

Well the way things are headed, the “way it’s gonna be” is that people like you will continue to sell every job and asset in America until eventually there’s nothing left to sell.

At which point our once-mighty nation, by then racked by never before seen levels of poverty and joblessness, will have nothing left. No jobs. No talents. No factories.

Our military broke and without industry to support it.

And America will collapse. Forever gone.

It’s that simple.

Wake up people.

10 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:28:27 AM by Cringing Negativism Network (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR1fDL7x1Sg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]
To: 1rudeboy
the protectionist retards

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Your nascent buy-American persona seems to have died aborning, rudester.

Pity, that. It was very entertaining for a couple of days.
11 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:33:20 AM by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]
To: Waryone

The Chi-Coms are already accustomed to driving crappy cars. And because of their strong aversion to anything Japanese, it will be a long, long time before Japanese automakers are able to inject high quality into the Chinese market.

12 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:35:03 AM by Hoodat (.For the weapons of our warfare are mighty in God for pulling down strongholds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Well when you think about it, China essentially owns General Motors now.

13 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:36:04 AM by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Cringing Negativism Network
I'm generally a believer in free trade, but I remember when Reagan was in office, his commitment to free trade did not override common sense. It became apparent to him that the Japanese government was underwriting the Jap bike manufacturers in an attempt to run Harley-Davidson, the last American bike manufacturer out of business. They were dumping bikes at below cost on the US market. Reagan did not pull an Annie Hall, and go, "well lah-de-dah." He did enact tariffs on Japanese bikes until such time as they dropped the bike dumping.

A lot of people are so bound to an ideology, that they ignore when other countries are gaming the system for the purpose of bankrupting another player.
14 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:36:04 AM by Richard Kimball (We're all criminals. They just haven't figured out what some of us have done yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Ok...now let’s talk where the most profits come from.

15 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:37:35 AM by The Duke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Hoodat

They love the top of the line Buick model in China. It is a huge seller there.

16 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:39:35 AM by mono
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Proof that the Chi-Coms really aren’t that smart after all.

17 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:44:24 AM by WackySam (To argue with a man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: RegulatorCountry

Amazing that your strawman lasted as long as it did. Maybe you should’ve put a tariff on foreign strawmen, so that we all could pay more for them. Imagine the boom.

18 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:45:10 AM by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Hmmm...only Commies are dumb enough to buy gov’t manufactured vehicles?

19 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:47:42 AM by WKUHilltopper (Fix bayonets!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Cringing Negativism Network

I’m just saying . . . if you’re gonna’ wrap yourself in the flag, you shouldn’t be such a hypocrite about it . . . it demeans the flag.

20 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:48:08 AM by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]
To: Richard Kimball

And look what we’ve gotten . . . over priced, crappy motorcycles, and a firm that’s destined for a bailout.

21 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:49:29 AM by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]
To: 1rudeboy

Of course.

Not wanting to watch a relative handful of people with questionable loyalties, profit from selling everything of value in America to those who wish us harm.

Is so insulting to the flag generations of brave Americans steadfastly fought to keep strong and safe.

From the very sort of existential foreign threats as - for example a technologically advanced, massively wealthy communist adversary with over one billion people, you want to sell our nation’s technology, factories and jobs to.

What could possibly go wrong.

/this space intentionally left sarcastic

22 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:55:48 AM by Cringing Negativism Network (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR1fDL7x1Sg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]
To: Cringing Negativism Network
"At which point our once-mighty nation, by then racked by never before seen levels of poverty and joblessness, will have nothing left. No jobs. No talents. No factories."

At which point China will wonder why it can't just take over american businesses located in their country completely. Maybe find some pathetic excuse to jail the american businessmen just for spite and install communist sympathizers in their place.

Karma and all that.

What comes around goes around.
23 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:56:36 AM by Soothesayer9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]
To: Cringing Negativism Network

Of course. No one is loyal but you. There, there . . . have a cookie.

24 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:57:01 AM by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Looks like Obama bailed out a Chinese company.

25 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:58:30 AM by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: grellis

The Chinese must have to pay through the nose for these.

Makes ya wanna go right out and buy a Chinese car, doesn’t it? The quality must be just built right in.

26 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:00:09 AM by SunkenCiv ("Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others." -- Otto von Bismarck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Obvious. China is used to buying crappy government-made cars.

27 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:05:19 AM by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Last Dakotan

You are right, but we have to remember the purpose
of the unions. The UAW was simply the instrument that
was used to transfer the largest corporation in the
world for decades to a foreign adversary. With out
a union, GM could have made layoffs, furloughs, cutbacks,
downsizing, firings, etc. to make it competitive in
the world market. The legacy costs from union membership
and family obligations made that impossible.
Let’s see- start working at a GM plant at age 18.
Work thirty years. Retire at 48 y.o.
Draw very costly retirement benefits and medical for forty
more years. Draining the company of well over any
worth that he added to the company. Multiply by a factor
of millions, you have recipe for a sure death. But,
if you transfer your remaining capital to a non-union
country, then you can attempt to put it back together
under another flag. NLRB, was the single most destructive
bureaucracy (so-called independent agency) ever instituted
by our federal government. This happened in 1934, and
you know who was in office- FDR. Our now second most
socialist president ever. We got to hold on until
November. God help us all, if we do not take back both
houses.

28 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:09:10 AM by Doulos1 (Bitter Clinger Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]
To: 1rudeboy
I'm digesting a bit what you are trying to say here. You are for complete open competitiveness on the open market and that America needs to learn its lesson and starve for a while to "learn it's lesson about markets"...right?

HMMMMM..let me guess...you are setup pretty yourself somehow, either retired or off the grid in some remote location with solar panels and a pot belly stove or you are a self loather hippy who doesn't need hot water for a bath anyway.

To heck with the rest of us suckers..eh RB?

Who gives a crap about future generations..you got yours and now its time to shut the door behind you and leave the rest of the crappy world behind.

Well I got news for you..we ain't gonna die or starve to death for your sick little fantasy... today or tomorrow.

You want global trade and a global government to go with it..then make it fair so everyone lives or STHU.
29 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:09:56 AM by Earthdweller (Harvard won the election again...so what's the problem.......?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

If the trend continues, General Motors will be known as China Motors. Good job, UAW.

30 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:11:35 AM by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Earthdweller

No, you have merely chanced-upon an argument that’s been going for years. The fact of the matter is, we do not have free trade with China, I am not in favor of free trade with China, and anyone who claims otherwise is either full of BS, or knows better and simply is trying to score rhetorical points over the bodies of people who don’t know any better.

31 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:14:33 AM by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Made for commies by commies.

32 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:16:48 AM by avg_freeper (Gunga galunga. Gunga, gunga galunga)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Earthdweller

Oh, and let me add, you’ll need to find someone else to blame for being a loser. I had nothing to do with it.

33 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:16:55 AM by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]
To: Waryone

This is no more than the current point in a trend, with global GM sales, that was evident as early as 2007, when a model of the Chevrolet brand was the largest selling model in China and a Buick model was the largest car in the “luxury” class.

This was before the financial crisis, before the GM bankruptcy, before their present major financial partners (U.S. Treasury).

The only thing today’s news on this matter presents is NOT reflective of anything in particular about GM’s current financial structure, but just a continuation of its marketing success in China. No matter how much of it’s production for the Chinese market occurs in China, the profits are GM’s. So, what is your complaint really about?

34 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:17:52 AM by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]
To: 1rudeboy
Of course, when a foreign firm opens shop up in the U.S., the protectionist retards yelp that “the profits are going overseas.” So what’s it gonna’ be?

I haven't looked at GM's EDGAR filings in a long time, but I would be surprised if much (if any) of these "profits" are repatriated.

I believe that GM's sales in China are actually under joint ventures with Chinese partners ("New GM" now has less than a 50% stake in each of these, I believe), and the ostensible profits are mostly retained by the JVs.

In their most recent 10-Q (you should be able find it by browsing through http://www.gm.com/corporate/investor_information/sec/), I didn't see anything about large amounts of profits from these ventures; in fact, on page 71, the 10-Q says "The increase in vehicle sales related to our China joint ventures is not reflected in Total net sales and revenue as China joint venture revenue is not consolidated in our financial results."

However, I haven't kept up with GM, and certainly the split between "New GM" and "Old GM" doesn't help the clarity of these filings. I think that we have at least a few posters who know quite a bit about GM's international operations, some maybe one of them will chime in.
35 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:27:28 AM by snowsislander (In this election year, please ask your candidates if they support repeal of the 1968 GCA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]
To: snowsislander

I would argue, without looking, that hardly none of the profits are repatriated. Which would leave a rational person to look at our tax code, instead of yammering about “free trade.”

36 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:29:07 AM by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

The secret plan is to sell China lots of crappy GM cars so they can’t get to work and keep their GDP growth at 9% [vs our anemic 2% if we’re lucky]!!?

37 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:29:56 AM by HardStarboard (If the Gulf had happened on Bush's watch - he'd have been drawn and quartered.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: Cringing Negativism Network

“China insisted the cars sold in China, be made there.
Which country, America or China, is now doing ever better in trade and manufacturing?.”

On this particular score, you make a very good point.

What should be done, with respect to the manufacturing conditions that China insists on with foreign manufacturers?

We can impose two conditions on China.

Matching conditions in China, “Chinese” manufacturers, seeking sales in the domestic U.S. market, could be required to move their operations to the U.S., in “joint ownership” ventures where the U.S. partner has 51% or more of the principal ownership rights.

But, out of respect for our domestic “free market” economy, those “Chinese” manufacturers would be required to NOT have any element of the Chinese government as owners, part-owners or in any aspect of controlling, operational interest in the company.

We would either massively reduce Chinese imports, or force even more “liberalization” of their economy; but at least “free trade” would be “more equal” trade, more balanced trade.

38 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:31:37 AM by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]
To: Richard Kimball
"A lot of people are so bound to an ideology, that they ignore when other countries are gaming the system for the purpose of bankrupting another player. "

I am generally a free trader, but we do have to interject some common sense into our trade policies. And, it's tough to have discussions about trade policy absent discussions about the labor market and labor laws (and other regulations) in this country.

I was reading my some of my Apple SEC filings, and their primary OEM, Foxconn caught my eye. Their main assembly location in China employs hundreds of thousands of people - in one location. It's a shame that a great company like Apple can't build those iPhones, iPods and iPads in this country. But, if they did, the prices would probably be 4 to 5 times the current retail price, and of course no one would buy them, so there would be no market; No market, no jobs.

It's a vicious catch-22. I'm not sure what the right answer is, but transferring the kind of wealth we are to both the Chinese and the Arab states isn't going to be sustainable for much longer.
39 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:42:17 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]
To: Richard Kimball
By the way, it's just not a US problem. I believe almost all of the Nokia phones are made in China as well, FWIW.
40 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 6:44:57 AM by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

Out of curiosity, how much does a car sell for in china? Is GM selling them cheaper, making the difference from the US taxpayer?

41 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 7:04:53 AM by sten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: 1rudeboy
And look what we’ve gotten . . . over priced, crappy motorcycles, and a firm that’s destined for a bailout.

Whether you like them or not, once Reagan kept Harley from going out of business, they captured 45% of the cruiser market and have operated profitably without government assistance for thirty years. The Japanese have copied Harley's retro style shamelessly, and in their cruisers, usually hide the company name. When people buy a Yamaha cruiser, they want people to think it's a Harley.

Europe did something similar with Airbus. Airbus got government funding to sell their planes at below cost. The plan was to force Boeing and Lockheed out of business, then raise the price to where they were profitable. It wasn't successful.

If you don't understand the nature of product dumping to kill a competitor, try playing poker against someone with thirty times the money you have in a no limit game. All he has to do is raise more than you've got and you'll never win a hand.
42 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 7:12:29 AM by Richard Kimball (We're all criminals. They just haven't figured out what some of us have done yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]
To: starczar66

The article refers to GM as owned by U.S. taxpayers. Shch a statement should make all of us wretch. The U. S. government owns G.M. The taxpayers no more own GM than the people of the Soviet Union owned the productive capacity in that communist state.

Marx’s BS notwithstanding, government officials and Communist Party members “owned” the means of production in the Soviet Union. They allocated the capital and they reaped the rewards. In the U.S., government officials and GM’s union employees (who are really government employees and, along with other unionized government workers, are analogous to Communist Party members in the USSR) allocate capital connected with GM and reap the rewards.

If you want to support Marxism, buy a GM product.

43 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 7:24:09 AM by olrtex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: olrtex
The article refers to GM as owned by U.S. taxpayers. Shch a statement should make all of us wretch.

Yes, if you look at GM's investor FAQ (found as a link from http://www.gm.com/corporate/investor_information/), you run across this:

3. Can I buy shares in General Motors Company? Will there be an initial public offering?

There are currently no shares of General Motors Company for sale to the public. It will initially be owned by the U.S. Treasury, the governments of Canada and Ontario, the UAW VEBA and Motors Liquidation Company. We expect that shares of the General Motors Company will be publicly traded in the future, and this may involve an initial public offering. Also, as early as the second quarter of 2010, General Motors Company may be contractually required by its new stockholders to register their stock for sale to the public; however, we do not know when or if any of these stockholders will sell any of their shares.


44 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 7:32:53 AM by snowsislander (In this election year, please ask your candidates if they support repeal of the 1968 GCA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]
To: OldDeckHand
Yep. There's another problem, though, that I don't see us getting around. The standard of living in the US has been very high, especially compared to what we'd usually refer to as "emerging markets," India and China, especially. A guy in India who is very bright and very competent is working 14 hour days in a fairly high tech field and maybe has a moped.

Post a picture of a Tata, which is a dream car for the average Indian, and you'll get about twenty FR posters laughing at it. Top speed of 60 mph, no A/C, two cylinder 620CC engine (a lot of people here wouldn't have a motorcycle with an engine that small.) It's our joke and their dream. How long can we continue to keep our end of the bathtub full while theirs is empty? Globalization is a reality, and your point that Apple can't build their products here cause they'd cost five times as much is exactly true.

Little note: I went to the local Hobby Lobby to buy a small set of acrylic paints. They had four different brands which were similar in product quantity, etc. Two were made in the US. One was made in Europe. One was made in China. The US and European sets were over $20. The Chinese one was $5. Back to our original points. If the US is to be competitive, working low end jobs has to become more profitable than welfare, meaning we have to quit paying people not to work. People say they want American products, but are not willing to pay four times the price for a US product. The first products that went overseas were low-skill products, like clothing. Now, emerging markets can produce high tech products better and cheaper than we can, and increasingly, design is moving there also. We've put off the equalization of standard of living by borrowing, but we've reached the end of that road. A lot of people are not going to like what comes next.
45 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 7:37:23 AM by Richard Kimball (We're all criminals. They just haven't figured out what some of us have done yet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


To: Cringing Negativism Network
China insisted the cars sold in China, be made there.

Everyone seems to have forgotten that the APTA agreement between Canada and the U.S. has been in existence since 1965 and nobody seems to have a problem with that....
48 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 9:36:27 AM by Hot Tabasco (Peanut butter was just peanut butter until I found Free Republic.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]
To: starczar66
China last year halved the sales tax on new vehicles to 5 percent and set aside 5 billion yuan ($733 million) in subsidies for customers who replace old models, helping insulate the country from slumping global demand.

GM had better live it up. the chinese market will dry up for 2 years (or more) just like the US market has done when the chinese government ends it's "yuan for clunkers" program.
49 posted on Tuesday, July 06, 2010 9:51:56 AM by JohnBrowdie (http://forum.stink-eye.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
To: 1rudeboy
Maybe you should’ve put a tariff on foreign strawmen, so that we all could pay more for them. Imagine the boom.

It was good enough for the Founders, lol. Financed federal government in it's entirety. Imagine the boom with no federal income tax and no IRS, just tariffs on imports.