You see, most D3 supporters do not understand that the way to help D3 is to increase regulation, CAFE, emission standards and such. We all know that Chinese cars are horrible in crash tests, but if they'd sell in USA people would still buy them, because they would be ultra cheap and LOADED with tech. Imagine a 12K Corolla looking vehicle that has standard NAV and more, something like that would sell.

Too keep NEW companies from countries that do not follow laws from entering USA we need more standards, for example today Chinese companies probably would not meet our roof standards, but they will in 5 years, should the government in 3 years come out and order even tougher standards, that will force those Chinese companies to go back to the drawing board once again and rebuild their cars, which will take time, because their cars sell on price and not quality. Meanwhile companies that do sell in USA can anticipate tougher standards ahead thru lobbyists and such.

When cars become more about cheap labor and parts than quality, that is when USA and all non Chinese car industry will die. Slave labor is almost free, do not forget that, but if these companies can not meet our standards they simply wont be able to sell in USA.

↓↑report

SeaUrchin,
You have a really good point, but somehow I think that kind of policy is only manageable in the short-term. Although Chinese automakers have a lot of hurdles to overcome before any of their vehicles will be viable in the U.S., there's no reason to think they wouldn't eventually figure it out even if you make crash test standards extra stringent, or what have you. You can only over-regulate things for so long.

The Tata, however, like the smart, was not conceived for Americans or American roads, and would have its own hurdles to overcome in making it to market, so the $2500 pricetag isn't realistic if it comes to the U.S. I do think that most in this country would indeed think of this car along the same lines as the smart -- something you might buy so that little Jimmy can scoot off to high school, or tool around downtown, and not much else.

↓↑report

Sea Urchin you are showing bad understanding of the automotive industry. First of all labor doesn't represent much in the cost of a car; second using manual labor to assemble cars means usually lower quality. The Chinese can't undercut the competition based on labor costs alone. But they are improving.

And finally, Chinese cars are showing significant improvement in crash tests.

↓↑report

Disagree.

Federally mandated content is not an advertising feature. It's a requirement to get your product on the market at all. But, say, NHTSA 49 CFR 571 5.4.3 compliance is not a selling feature. Consumers don't understand it or give a crap about it so they won't voluntarily pay extra for it.

And every dollar of product price that goes to meeting those federal hoops is one less for the image and luxury features where your profit margin comes from.

↓↑report

Dan you are right, but it keeps the competition at bay.

Look let's be hones here, if Chinese enter USA in the next 3-5 years at least 1 of D3 is as good as dead.

I'll give you a great example, Europeans have great diesels, but they are illegal in USA because they do not meet our standards, if they were legal, as gas went thru the roof Germans would have captured huge % of the market because diesel gets better MPG.

I hate to advocate anti free market ideas but i do not want to see US Auto to die.

↓↑report

Sea Urchin is up to his usual nonsense.

The North American car industry does not need tricks. They are fully capable of competing. What they need is a level playing field. It is pretty tough to import vehicles into China and if you want to build them there you are forced to partner with a Chinese manufacturer who is then free to rip off all your technology. It is also virtually impossible to import into Korea. These closed home markets give their manufacturers an edge. The rules should be pretty simple. Your automakers will get the same access to the North American market as our automakers get to yours. I also think we should expect any business selling vehicles here to manufacture them to the same labour and environmental standards we expect from domestic makers.

↓↑report

Judi, i agree 100%, but as you can see some countries will not open up and in other countries they steal technology.

What you describe is utopia. What do you propose we do until we come there?

↓↑report

And what did Sea Urchin say that was not rational? Everything, everyone here is saying is pure theory. None of us know. It's suggestive dialog. As far as I'm concerned SU has some good points. As does everyone here. But it's not nonsense...

It's due diligence! Which I wonder Sea Urchin! You're a diligent thinker, why aren't you more left leaning than right? I'm neither (non party) but I remember you saying things that were very "right leaning" in statements yet your thoughts are fairly thorough! Doesn't make sense to me! The left is in my opinion, a little more far-sighted....

↓↑report

Randy i am a neocon, but it pains me too see D3 die like that. We all know that certain countries do not follow trade laws, so i want us to do something to help our companies as well. By that i do not mean a bailout, i just mean a slight help.

↓↑report

Judi, at least China lets foreign companies sell cars. In Japan and Korea, that's virtually impossible.

↓↑report

@ rodrigo_coimbr5, "using manual labor to assemble cars means usually lower quality." - exactly , look at the poor quality of Rolls Royce , Ferrari , etc....

↓↑report

Fiziks

Who and why would buy an American car in Japan. With all respect, but only very few cars with technology sourced from European operations would be competetive on JDM.

↓↑report

I don't find it rational to say that we just keep increasing safety standards beyond what is reasonable just to keep foreign competition out.

I think it is pretty simple to recipricate trade laws. Apply laws against Chinese, Korean and Japanese imports that mirror their import laws. Just seriously discussing it would cause them to run to the bargaining table in a panic. They only do what they are doing right now because they know we are too gutless to do anything about it.

Environmental and labour standards are another thing but not impossible to legislate. What is needed is political will. I am actually not a trade protectionist but I think free trade is worthless if it doesn't go both ways.

↓↑report

Uhh...China doesn't restrict imports of American cars more than the US restricts imports of Chinese cars...China doesn't even currently export a single car to the US. And while they give a better tax rate on domestically built cars, so do we so as far as the car relationship goes they're being pretty fair. It's not even unfair for them to ask that car companies who want to build factories there partner up, otherwise they would forever only be exploited only as customers and cheap labor since they didn't have any home grown competition. They basically found a quick way to get some homegrown competition going by having foreign companies trade some know-how in return for getting to produce and sell stuff in their very lucrative market, there's nothing unfair about that.

So far GM has the largest market share in China and China hasn't sold a single car in the United States, so more restrictive automotive import laws would hurt our car companies more than theirs. Most of their sales are all domestic anyway since their market is so huge-their car companies have plenty of money to make without needing access to the US market, but none of the foreign automakers would be able to survive without China. If VW didn't have China they'd be screwed, if GM didn't have China they'd be somehow even more screwed if that's even possible, if Toyota didn't have China they'd be screwed too since their Japanese sales have tanked along with the entire US auto market. Even Hyundai depends on China for a huge portion of their sales.

Seriously for all the whining about China on autoblog you'd think their car companies had bankrupted the Big 3, but if it weren't for the Chinese auto market GM would have been bankrupt even sooner. Jeez.

↓↑report

Sea Urchin, I respect what you are saying...no one wants to see D3 go down, but I just don't understand why the government should give domestic car manufacturers a slight edge so they don't fail. If they do fail, it's because their company is poorly operated or they can't meet the demands of the modern consumer. Either way, it is their fault and they deserve to fail.

A level playing field would have the competition put a little fire under D3's butts to start producing better products! Knowing what consumers like is all that the companies need to succeed, not federal regulations...

↓↑report

@erik

Level playingfield? The importers have the advantage of closed protected markets, fixed currencies, and subsidized medical and pensions.

Meanwhile we legislated import small car performance in the late 70's giving imports an easy time of making rapid marketshare, give victory to any lawsuits leveled against them (because the plaintiff is from the home state and Big Old Meanie GM is from outside the state) and required them to satisfy labor laws and quotas all the way to the top.

Failure was baked in. The problem was the government not acting before they actually failed.

↓↑report

That's funny. I had the very same thought. Saturn

↓↑report

I was thinking the exact same thing. A new product for Penske to put in the showrooms.

↓↑report