Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.

Ford cancels Focus Active import plans due to China tariffs

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-06-18, 05:35 PM
  #121  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 30,536
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
........And, if trying to sell it here, try to pass on the tariff to the customers? Good luck.
With NAFTA, there are no tariffs. Mexico is part of NAFTA.
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 09-06-18, 05:40 PM
  #122  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 90,743
Received 85 Likes on 84 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill
With NAFTA, there are no tariffs. Mexico is part of NAFTA.
As I understood it, the old NAFTA agreement with Mexico is no longer valid. Trump signed a new agreement with Nieto a few days ago....or, at least, it was a revision to the existing one.

Last edited by mmarshall; 09-06-18 at 05:59 PM.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 09-06-18, 05:50 PM
  #123  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 30,536
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
As I understood it, the old NAFTA agreement with Mexico is no longer valid. Trump sighed a new agreement with Nieto a few days ago....or, at least, it was a revision to the existing one.
The current NAFTA agreement is in full effect. Nothing was signed. It was preliminary agreement. Congress will not pass any agreement without Canada.
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 09-07-18, 11:18 AM
  #124  
SW17LS
Lexus Fanatic
 
SW17LS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 55,890
Received 2,578 Likes on 1,857 Posts
Default

The problem with pensions is the length of time people live.

Its all well and good to say somebody who has worked for a company or the government for 30 years is entitled to a pension for the rest of their life. But, if somebody starts working for a company when they're 20, and they work 30 years and retire at 50, nowadays that person can solidly live into their 80s, 90s etc. So that means they receive their pension for longer than they worked...which just doesn't make sense.

Its just practical, a company can't pay income to all their current employees AND every retired employee that ever worked for them.
SW17LS is online now  
Old 09-07-18, 04:14 PM
  #125  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 90,743
Received 85 Likes on 84 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SW17LS
The problem with pensions is the length of time people live.

Its all well and good to say somebody who has worked for a company or the government for 30 years is entitled to a pension for the rest of their life. But, if somebody starts working for a company when they're 20, and they work 30 years and retire at 50, nowadays that person can solidly live into their 80s, 90s etc. So that means they receive their pension for longer than they worked...which just doesn't make sense.

Its just practical, a company can't pay income to all their current employees AND every retired employee that ever worked for them.
Most people, outside of uniformed services, even with pensions, don't retire at 50. The uniformed services let you retire after only 20 years (with a minimum pension) because of the hazards and sacrifices required of the job. Most people, though, don't retire till well into their 60s or later. I managed to get out at 55 with a good pension, but that was only because I, like some others, was grandfathered into an older system that no longer exists.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 09-08-18, 06:35 AM
  #126  
SW17LS
Lexus Fanatic
 
SW17LS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 55,890
Received 2,578 Likes on 1,857 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
Most people, outside of uniformed services, even with pensions, don't retire at 50. The uniformed services let you retire after only 20 years (with a minimum pension) because of the hazards and sacrifices required of the job. Most people, though, don't retire till well into their 60s or later. I managed to get out at 55 with a good pension, but that was only because I, like some others, was grandfathered into an older system that no longer exists.
The point is they COULD retire at 50 if they started when they were 20.

Even when people retire in their mid 60s now, they can legitimately live another 30 years in retirement. Pension plans were designed when people lived to be 70. Its just not realistic to expect a company to support a worker in retirement for as many years as they worked for them. That is a HUGE part of the struggles domestic automakers have.

My wife worked for a company (gov't contractor) years ago that had gotten down to 9 employees. They had like 500 retirees. Her job as one out of the 9 employees was to manage the pension benefits and health care for all of those retirees. Thats insane.
SW17LS is online now  
Old 09-08-18, 07:05 AM
  #127  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 30,536
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SW17LS
The point is they COULD retire at 50 if they started when they were 20.

Even when people retire in their mid 60s now, they can legitimately live another 30 years in retirement. Pension plans were designed when people lived to be 70. Its just not realistic to expect a company to support a worker in retirement for as many years as they worked for them. That is a HUGE part of the struggles domestic automakers have.

My wife worked for a company (gov't contractor) years ago that had gotten down to 9 employees. They had like 500 retirees. Her job as one out of the 9 employees was to manage the pension benefits and health care for all of those retirees. Thats insane.
While you are correct, in that pensions for these companies cannot sustain the length that people are living, you are not going to change the mind or opinion of mmarshall. Those with the pensions will never give them up (obviously), this is why there is the fight for them (I don't blame them). Some people only take jobs because of the pensions. Pension funds can also go to hell and collapse as well leaving those with out any. I personally do not have a company pension, neither does my husband, but I would never work somewhere just because of one. I have been my own boss my whole life for the most part.

My guess, the UAW will continue to sink GM, Ford and FCA in the long run. Eventually a collapse of one of them will occur, leaving just two of the big three.
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 09-08-18, 07:18 AM
  #128  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 90,743
Received 85 Likes on 84 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill
While you are correct, in that pensions for these companies cannot sustain the length that people are living, you are not going to change the mind or opinion of mmarshall. Those with the pensions will never give them up (obviously), this is why there is the fight for them (I don't blame them).
What you say is not necessarily true. I'm willing to (and can afford to) take some temporary cutbacks or freezes in my own pension for the good of the budget and economy. Trump, for example, wants to freeze Federal salaries and pensions next year.....just like Obama, Clinton, and Reagan did before him. I've personally got no problem with that, as long as it is not excessive or permanent. And Trump himself, for example, IMO, is no hypocrite.....he (reportedly) donates all 400K of his Presidential salary (and more) to charities.

But no, that does to change my basic view that those who faithfully gave many years of service to an organization should be compensated for it in retirement. Social Security covers part of that, but, in some ways, is inadequate.

Anyhow, again, I think we've gotten off topic...Ford Focus production.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 09-08-18, 07:52 PM
  #129  
FrankReynoldsCPA
Lexus Test Driver
 
FrankReynoldsCPA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 6,519
Received 65 Likes on 46 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
But no, that does to change my basic view that those who faithfully gave many years of service to an organization should be compensated for it in retirement. Social Security covers part of that, but, in some ways, is inadequate.
Did they work for free all those years?

Defined benefit(aka, pension) plans are by and large unsustainable. They're not that common anymore in the private sector for a reason. Your pension plan is afloat because it's paid for by the US taxpayer. Companies can't just raise taxes on people to cover their pension obligations.

Most of us contribute instead to a 401(k) plan with some form of contribution matching from our employers.

FrankReynoldsCPA is offline  
Old 09-08-18, 08:24 PM
  #130  
JDR76
Lexus Champion
 
JDR76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: WA
Posts: 12,355
Received 1,604 Likes on 1,022 Posts
Default

I consider myself incredibly fortunate to work for a company that provides me both with a pension and a 401(k) program with generous matching. The tariffs are starting to have a negative impact on our sales/orders but I think it’ll play out ok.
JDR76 is offline  
Old 09-08-18, 08:26 PM
  #131  
bitkahuna
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 73,906
Received 2,185 Likes on 1,417 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill
While you are correct, in that pensions for these companies cannot sustain the length that people are living, you are not going to change the mind or opinion of mmarshall. Those with the pensions will never give them up (obviously), this is why there is the fight for them (I don't blame them). Some people only take jobs because of the pensions. Pension funds can also go to hell and collapse as well leaving those with out any.
...
My guess, the UAW will continue to sink GM, Ford and FCA in the long run. Eventually a collapse of one of them will occur, leaving just two of the big three.
first off, people who retired with pensions were made a commitment, which should be honored if possible. Many took essentially thankless jobs in many cases without great pay in exchange for the comfort of 'knowing' they would have a secure retirement,

second, while noble of mmarshall to say he'd accept temporary cuts in his pension, he's definitely in a minority. The majority would only do so in exchange for some kind of more secure deal for 'later' but the problem is, companies and governments can and do go broke and have no choice but to renegue on their commitments, ultimately decided by courts usually.

third, as far as these kind of pensions... in the private world they're becoming rarer than sasquatch, replaced by 401k's and ira's (rra's in canada?) requiring responsibility and risk taking by the employees. Uaw workers are retiring and passing away lowering the 'obligation' as time goes on. Those deals won't be back.

so ultimately i see the problem as self-correcting in time, although the govt will be the last place to fix the problem because it just spends without concern and runs up bigger and bigger deficits and debt, but that too will end, and it won't be pretty.

Last edited by bitkahuna; 09-08-18 at 08:54 PM.
bitkahuna is offline  
Old 09-08-18, 08:45 PM
  #132  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 30,536
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bitkahuna


first off, people who retired with pensions were made a commitment, which should be honored if possible. Many took essentially thankless jobs in many cases without great pay in exchange for the comfort of 'knowing' they would have a secure retirement,

second, while noble of mmarshall to say he'd accept temporary cuts in his pension, he's definitely in a minority. The majority would onky do so in exchange for some kind of more secure deal for 'later' but the problem is, companies and governments can and do go broke and have no choice but to renegue on their commitments, ultimately decided by courts usually.

third, as far as these kind of pensions... in the private world they're becoming rarer than sasquatch, replaced by 401k's and ira's (rra's in canada?) requiring responsibility and risk taking by the employees. Uaw workers are retiring and passing away lowering the 'obligation' as time goes on. Those deals won't be back.

so ultimately i see the problem as self-correcting in time, although the govt will be the last place to fix the problem because it just spends without concern and runs up bigger and bigger deficits and debt, but that too will end, and it won't be pretty.
Isnt this kind of what I said?
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 09-08-18, 08:57 PM
  #133  
bitkahuna
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 73,906
Received 2,185 Likes on 1,417 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill
Isnt this kind of what I said?
Maybe some of it but you said 1 or more of the big 3 will fail due to pensions and i don't agree.
bitkahuna is offline  
Old 09-09-18, 07:06 AM
  #134  
SW17LS
Lexus Fanatic
 
SW17LS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 55,890
Received 2,578 Likes on 1,857 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill
While you are correct, in that pensions for these companies cannot sustain the length that people are living, you are not going to change the mind or opinion of mmarshall. Those with the pensions will never give them up (obviously), this is why there is the fight for them (I don't blame them). Some people only take jobs because of the pensions. Pension funds can also go to hell and collapse as well leaving those with out any. I personally do not have a company pension, neither does my husband, but I would never work somewhere just because of one. I have been my own boss my whole life for the most part.

My guess, the UAW will continue to sink GM, Ford and FCA in the long run. Eventually a collapse of one of them will occur, leaving just two of the big three.
I gave up trying to change mmarshall's mind a long time ago lol

I wouldnt give up my pension that I earned either (if I had one). I've fought my whole life to be delivered what has been promised to me by companies. Its more just an understanding that going forward, companies and the government have to dramatically change or eliminate pension plan programs for current and future employees. Not fair to do that to current retirees who worked and planned on having that pension. Making good on that promise is the company's responsibility IMHO.
SW17LS is online now  
Old 09-09-18, 10:40 AM
  #135  
UDel
Lexus Fanatic
 
UDel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: ------
Posts: 12,274
Received 296 Likes on 223 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SW17LS
The problem with pensions is the length of time people live.

Its all well and good to say somebody who has worked for a company or the government for 30 years is entitled to a pension for the rest of their life. But, if somebody starts working for a company when they're 20, and they work 30 years and retire at 50, nowadays that person can solidly live into their 80s, 90s etc. So that means they receive their pension for longer than they worked...which just doesn't make sense.

Its just practical, a company can't pay income to all their current employees AND every retired employee that ever worked for them.
I agree, with people living longer pensions are the big money drainers, it is not the base pay, it is the pensions/healthcare after the employee retires which costs businesses and in most cases taxpayers so much money and there are abuses too. I don't believe tax payers should have to fund pensions for other people when they don't get pensions they are paying for themselves either.
UDel is offline  


Quick Reply: Ford cancels Focus Active import plans due to China tariffs



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:25 PM.