American Made

[Navy1960]

I am thinking you should run too! You can take McCain's seat when he retires from the senate! I would vote for ya if I lived in Arizona, I do vote Republican once in awhile if it doesn't have to do with Presidental or governor races!

While I apprecaite that very much Luissa, someone in Arizona especially here needs massive amounts of funding to win any Federal Office and the blessing of the party to even get on the ballot. Perhaps if the bottom falls completely out of the Aviation business then I might run for asssistant to the assistant county appraiser.. lol

 

[Navy1960]

You are right there! But I am one of those American who buy Japanese! I have had two Acura Integra's and they ran and worked better then some of my friends American made cars. The Japanese are just more efficient in the way the make things. I have heard they had less up keep cost of the Zero during the War and they don't allow for much room for error!
Plus another reason I have had an Acura is the resale value which is much higher on Honda/Acura and Toyota! I had an 86' Integra when I was younger and it was worth the same as this lady I worked with who had a Dodge Stratus!

Do you know what I commend some of these Japanese auto companies and Korean companies for doing. They have been for some time constructing automobiles in this country at an ever increasing rate. Now I have no statistics on this, but I do know that several Toyota and Honda models are built here in the United States. I have no issues at all with companies that do this. What I have a problem with in my original posting is this, our government through it's purchasing offices have gotten into the bad habit of buying products that are foreign owned and foreign built. As a taxpayer, IMHO the federal governement with taxpayer money should seek in it's purchasing efforts to buy American made products and those Hondas and Toyota are American Made as far as I am concerned. However, take the KC-45 tanker for example, EADS is the parent company of Airbus that makes aircraft in France. The Tankers will actually be built in France and painted and fitted out in Mobile, Al.

 

[DavidS]

David, you are looking real silly here and I was enjoying the 'adult' conversation. It's like having the National Enquirer pop up in a National Review article.

be gone!

Sean Hannity lover.

 

[GigiBowman]

Actually I don't love Sean, but he loves me....

So does Newt lol

But I'm not real sure if they loved my Ron Paul Button And to this day I still have my Ron Paul for President sign in front of my house, I always wear my pin and the bumper stickers will remain on my car.

 

[Luissa]

Do you know what I commend some of these Japanese auto companies and Korean companies for doing. They have been for some time constructing automobiles in this country at an ever increasing rate. Now I have no statistics on this, but I do know that several Toyota and Honda models are built here in the United States. I have no issues at all with companies that do this. What I have a problem with in my original posting is this, our government through it's purchasing offices have gotten into the bad habit of buying products that are foreign owned and foreign built. As a taxpayer, IMHO the federal governement with taxpayer money should seek in it's purchasing efforts to buy American made products and those Hondas and Toyota are American Made as far as I am concerned. However, take the KC-45 tanker for example, EADS is the parent company of Airbus that makes aircraft in France. The Tankers will actually be built in France and painted and fitted out in Mobile, Al.

That is the problem with today, during WWII making airplanes and other such things kept our economy going and provided jobs, now we just ship them over seas. And Honda I believe is made in Canada at least they used to be. And my brother in law who works for Toyota said they other night Chrysler will probably be bought out by Nissan or another company here soon.

 

[Chris]

I buy the best product.

I don't care where it's made.

My Toyota Camry was made in Georgetown, Ky., however.

 

[Navy1960]

I know that Toyota's Tundra Trucks are made in San Antonio, Tx. because when I fly down there to see my brother, and fly into a local airport near there, you can see the plant. I also know there is a Honda plant a rather large one some where in Ohio that makes Accords as thats what my daughter drives back and forth to school. I just found it interesting the sheer number of purchases that the Federal Govt. makes these days. Here is a little background on one I am familier with. The VH-71 presidential helicopter , in case you don't know what that is. it's "Marine One". for years, they were built by Sikorsky out of N.Y. and when the RFQ went out for a new one, well naturally Sikorsky put in a bid as well as team US101 which was an American company that would have the helicopters supposedly built here but was based on a UK/Italian design Westland. Well as soon as team US101 was awarded the contract it was discovered that it would be best of the helicopter was built overseas as according to the supplier there was no facility that could complete the contract here in this country. Now I am not one that advocates no companies but American companies can build for the US Military, but these assests should be built in this country if tax dollars are going to be spent on them IMHO.

 

[Turboswede]

Bang, ok I am all buy American and I drive an Accord, it was made in Ohio and the EPA considers it domestic due to content, but it’s still not a Ford of Chevy.

America is all about personal choice and I do not have a problem with consumers buying whatever product they want, but the US government is not a “typical” consumer.

Ok, bias warning… bias warning… bias warning… bias warning… bias warning…

As a Seattleite I was absolutely gob smacked about the Airbus contract. For the past 50 years the system works like this, European and Asian countries support business through direct subsidy while the US supports ours through defense spending. That’s a little simplistic but that’s how it worked.

Example, the 707 was derived from the KC-135, which itself employed many of the advances from the KC-97 a derivative of the B-29. The 737’s that transport people all over the world every day all have their development roots in tax dollars paid by the Federal government.

As the Europeans traditionally didn’t have the same kind of defense budgets as the US they eventually merged their separate businesses one by one into the Airbus consortium. From the beginning in the 70’s the consortium was heavily subsidized so that most of the aircraft sold (the original 300s and 310s) were at prices under the manufacturing cost. Where Airbus sold aircraft at a profit, it did so by providing subsidized financing for airlines on the brink of bankruptcy (Eastern, Pan Am, etc.)

I am not saying that one is better than the other, jut that it was a nice arrangement that allowed the WTO to throw out either party’s arguments against unfair business practices.

The pending tanker contract with Airbus has upset this balance and should not be allowed. My understanding of the deal is that the A330 derived tanker can be procured at a lower price than the 767 tanker and the performance of the A330 is markedly superior. The kicker is that the reason the A330 is less expensive is that the construction is heavily subsidized by the European member states, why?... to provide manufacturing jobs to EU members.

The thing is, the trickle down of taxable income to workers, contractors and sub-contractors is not factored into the procurement cost. Put simply, if Marcel in Toulouse will work for $20 per hour and Steve in Renton will work for $22 per hour, it still makes sense to give the contract to Steve. Out of Steve’s $22, Steve will be paying about $1.50 per hour back in income taxes and $3.30 back in payroll taxes (when combined with Boeing’s Share). So the net cost of having Marcel rather than Steve assemble that landing gear strut assembly is $2.80. It’s just good financial sense for the US government to “Buy American”.

 

[Navy1960]

Bang, ok I am all buy American and I drive an Accord, it was made in Ohio and the EPA considers it domestic due to content, but it’s still not a Ford of Chevy.

America is all about personal choice and I do not have a problem with consumers buying whatever product they want, but the US government is not a “typical” consumer.

Ok, bias warning… bias warning… bias warning… bias warning… bias warning…

As a Seattleite I was absolutely gob smacked about the Airbus contract. For the past 50 years the system works like this, European and Asian countries support business through direct subsidy while the US supports ours through defense spending. That’s a little simplistic but that’s how it worked.

Example, the 707 was derived from the KC-135, which itself employed many of the advances from the KC-97 a derivative of the B-29. The 737’s that transport people all over the world every day all have their development roots in tax dollars paid by the Federal government.

As the Europeans traditionally didn’t have the same kind of defense budgets as the US they eventually merged their separate businesses one by one into the Airbus consortium. From the beginning in the 70’s the consortium was heavily subsidized so that most of the aircraft sold (the original 300s and 310s) were at prices under the manufacturing cost. Where Airbus sold aircraft at a profit, it did so by providing subsidized financing for airlines on the brink of bankruptcy (Eastern, Pan Am, etc.)

I am not saying that one is better than the other, jut that it was a nice arrangement that allowed the WTO to throw out either party’s arguments against unfair business practices.

The pending tanker contract with Airbus has upset this balance and should not be allowed. My understanding of the deal is that the A330 derived tanker can be procured at a lower price than the 767 tanker and the performance of the A330 is markedly superior. The kicker is that the reason the A330 is less expensive is that the construction is heavily subsidized by the European member states, why?... to provide manufacturing jobs to EU members.

The thing is, the trickle down of taxable income to workers, contractors and sub-contractors is not factored into the procurement cost. Put simply, if Marcel in Toulouse will work for $20 per hour and Steve in Renton will work for $22 per hour, it still makes sense to give the contract to Steve. Out of Steve’s $22, Steve will be paying about $1.50 per hour back in income taxes and $3.30 back in payroll taxes (when combined with Boeing’s Share). So the net cost of having Marcel rather than Steve assemble that landing gear strut assembly is $2.80. It’s just good financial sense for the US government to “Buy American”.

Well I must add my own bias warning here,
Boeing has had over 50 years of experience in the aerial refueling business and the KC-45 a.k.a. is using totally untried technology in it's new concept flying boom. Not to mention that the KC-767 is a result of the original RFQ from the US Air Force and was accepted on a lease buy before it was killed in the Armed Services Committee. The follow-on RFQ's were as a result of EADS suggestions to the all new US Air Force selection team based on an air bridge formula that was not part of the original bid. The other thing that you don't see much of here is the cost to the Air Force for upgrading existing facilities to make room for the A330 because of it's much larger size and the resulting loss in jobs here in the United States due to depot Repair facilites not ready to handle the KC-45.

 

[Care4all]

Here are some thoughts to ponder everyone when thinking about that next glowing and inspirational speech.

President Obama walks out of the White House doors in the west wing, parked in front of the White House is his black 2011 Cadillac Hybrid Limo with it's Toyota Based Hybrid engine built in Japan. His press secretary takes him to his awaiting Italian made VH-71 presidential helicopter where he is wisked off to Andrews Air Force Base to attend a summit of the G-8. He walks aboard Air Force One and is handed a towel to wipe the rain from his brow with the presidential seal that say's West Point Stevens made in Pakistan, and walks to his office on Air Force One. While aboard and several hours after take-off and somewhere over the Atlantic the pilot annouces a mid-air refuel with an awaiting French built US Air Force KC-45. Once this is accomplished the President is reminded about his impending speech before the G-8. So the president takes his Chinese made Lenovo laptop out of his bag and whispers to his press secretary and whispers remind me again what the theme is? The press secretary then responds with , how American Manufacturing is the best in the world.!!


The point behind my little story here, is to point out that if the US government does not have the faith to purcahse American made products for it's own use , how then can the same people faithfully ask you to do the same?

i wonder what happened to this...the BUY AMERICAN ACT? Is it our president the one over riding it? i don't get it? was it watered down?

The Buy American Act (BAA - 41 U.S.C. § 10a–10d) was passed in 1933 by the U.S Congress, which required the United States government to prefer U.S.-made products in its purchases. Other pieces of Federal legislation extend similar requirement to third-party purchases that utilize Federal funds, such as highway and transit programs.

In certain government procurements, the requirement purchase may be waived if purchasing the material domestically would burden the government with an unreasonable cost (the price differential between the domestic product and an identical foreign-sourced product exceeds a certain percentage of the price offered by the foreign supplier), if the product is not available domestically in sufficient quantity or quality, or if doing so is in the public interest.

The President has the authority to waive the Buy American Act within the terms of a reciprocal agreement or otherwise in response to the provision of reciprocal treatment to U.S. producers. Under the 1979 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) Government Procurement Code, the U.S.-Israel Free Trade Agreement, the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement, and the World Trade Organization (WTO) 1996 Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), the United States provides access to the government procurement of certain U.S. agencies for goods from the other parties to those agreements. However, the Buy American Act was excluded from the GPA's coverage.

 

[Navy1960]

i wonder what happened to this...the BUY AMERICAN ACT? Is it our president the one over riding it? i don't get it? was it watered down?

Here is what happened Care,

25.001 General.
(a) The Buy American Act—

(1) Restricts the purchase of supplies, that are not domestic end products, for use within the United States. A foreign end product may be purchased if the contracting officer determines that the price of the lowest domestic offer is unreasonable or if another exception applies (see Subpart 25.1); and

(2) Requires, with some exceptions, the use of only domestic construction materials in contracts for construction in the United States (see Subpart 25.2).

(b) The restrictions in the Buy American Act are not applicable in acquisitions subject to certain trade agreements (see Subpart 25.4). In these acquisitions, end products and construction materials from certain countries receive nondiscriminatory treatment in evaluation with domestic offers. Generally, the dollar value of the acquisition determines which of the trade agreements applies. Exceptions to the applicability of the trade agreements are described in Subpart 25.4.

What this means is come countries are treated on this list as if they are the same as American made, as is the case with the UK, Canada, Mexico, France, Germany, and others. So in the eye's of the DoD a company in Alabama technically is no different than a company in London.

 

[Care4all]

Here is what happened Care,

25.001 General.
(a) The Buy American Act—

(1) Restricts the purchase of supplies, that are not domestic end products, for use within the United States. A foreign end product may be purchased if the contracting officer determines that the price of the lowest domestic offer is unreasonable or if another exception applies (see Subpart 25.1); and

(2) Requires, with some exceptions, the use of only domestic construction materials in contracts for construction in the United States (see Subpart 25.2).

(b) The restrictions in the Buy American Act are not applicable in acquisitions subject to certain trade agreements (see Subpart 25.4). In these acquisitions, end products and construction materials from certain countries receive nondiscriminatory treatment in evaluation with domestic offers. Generally, the dollar value of the acquisition determines which of the trade agreements applies. Exceptions to the applicability of the trade agreements are described in Subpart 25.4.

What this means is come countries are treated on this list as if they are the same as American made, as is the case with the UK, Canada, Mexico, France, Germany, and others. So in the eye's of the DoD a company in Alabama technically is no different than a company in London.

and that's just bullcrap! what a sleesy way to get around it!

 

[Navy1960]

and that's just bullcrap! what a sleesy way to get around it!

Welcome to our congress Care. I often think that most of the people we elect are very happy the average citizen does not read the things they pass and just takes on faith what they tell them. Some of these things directly effects what I do for a living so it pays to know them. However, it goes to the heart of the matter and that is all the wastefulness in government and at the same time telling you and I they need to raise this tax. or that one because they cannot fund this program or stimulate the economy. When you have a "bailout" bill that contains spending and tax programs for wooden bow and arrow makers then that should tell the American Public all they need to know.

 

[Turboswede]

Welcome to our congress Care. I often think that most of the people we elect are very happy the average citizen does not read the things they pass and just takes on faith what they tell them. Some of these things directly effects what I do for a living so it pays to know them. However, it goes to the heart of the matter and that is all the wastefulness in government and at the same time telling you and I they need to raise this tax. or that one because they cannot fund this program or stimulate the economy. When you have a "bailout" bill that contains spending and tax programs for wooden bow and arrow makers then that should tell the American Public all they need to know.

True, unless of course you are a wooden bow & arrow maker, in which case it looks like the money you contributed to the “American Fletchers Association” was well spent.

 

[Navy1960]

True, unless of course you are a wooden bow & arrow maker, in which case it looks like the money you contributed to the “American Fletchers Association” was well spent.

You do have to commend that lobby work don't you? I wonder how one finds a position in the American Fletchers Lobby on K Street? lol