By on March 3, 2012

The UAW and other unions are on the case of Honda, Hyundai, and Daimler again. They threaten to picket dealers of the carmakers, and to disrupt their stockholders meetings. (Good luck doing this in Japan, Korea and Germany.) What did Honda, Hyundai, and Daimler do now? They did nothing, and the unions say it’s an outrage.

A coalition of 15 civil rights organizations and labor unions is trying to overturn a controversial new immigration law in Alabama. That law requires police to check the immigration status of anyone they detain, if they think that person is in the country illegally. The Obama administration says Alabama is messing with the federal government’s exclusive authority over immigration policy, and challenges the law in court.

What does that have to do with Honda, Hyundai, and Daimler? Nothing. Except that Honda, Hyundai, and Daimler have plants in Alabama, and the unions would like to have Honda, Hyundai, and Daimler on their side. The companies could bring their leverage in the state to bear.  The companies don’t want to get involved. Now the unions attempt to strong-arm them.

I can imagine that the foreign carmakers, being guests in the country, don’t want to be found on either side of this corrosive issue. Why do the unions attempt to force them on their side? Aren’t companies that were the target of an abortive UAW organize-the-transplants drive odd allies anyway? What’s wrong with the unions? My take: The unions simply want to discredit Honda, Hyundai, and Daimler with the Latino community.

Automotive News [sub] notes that Asian brands dominate new vehicle purchases among Hispanic buyers in the United States, with especially Honda accounting for 13.9 percent of the Hispanic market. The UAW could be trying to change this. “Nice demographic you have here. It’d be a shame if anything were to happen to it.”

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

65 Comments on “UAW Strongarms Transplants To Help Illegal Aliens...”


  • avatar
    GS650G

    Eh, people buy cars for a lot of reasons. Some complicated position on immigration law in some state some where isn’t one of the reasons.

  • avatar
    lilpoindexter

    Yeah…I’m trying to see on what level the title is appropriate for this chunk of news, and I’m drawing a blank….But doesn’t the new Fiesta have a hispanic guy who says he drives from San Fransisco to LA on one tank of gas, and then he still have gas left over to cruise Hollywood Blvd?

  • avatar
    Carl Kolchak

    This is where the union management is directly working against the membership. The union management , for the most part, looks at illegal immigrants as an untapped source of new membership. they figure, if they assist them, they will unionize a be loyal to the union management and the politicians who side with them.
    However, this works against the rank and file. Non union companies, some with “Off the books” employees, such as illegal aliens, drive down wages (primarily in the building trades) and makes union shops uncompetitive with the non-union contractors. I realize we are speaking of the auto unions, but when you are selling the biggest ticket item of all, next to a house, you do not want falling wages of your prospective customer.
    My last point is that the assumption that people of the same ethnicity, gender, social class or religion will necessarily support someone perceived as the same as them.This is not true. A good example would be politics: Neither of the two front-runners for the GOP Presidential nomination are Evangelical Protestants, who make up a great percentage of that electorate and in 2008, the US elected a man President who is of a different ethnicity than the majority of its citizenship.
    This is a very divisive scheme by the UAW and I think it will fail.

    • 0 avatar

      Good points. Cesar Chavez, the legendary founder of the United Farm Workers Union, used to denounce illegal immigrants to INS (precursor of ICE). He did that because he understood basic economics: that a surplus of cheap labor would undercut his members’ wages. Similarly, the US National Academy of Sciences reported in 1997 that from 1979-95 the wages of Americans who had not completed high school fell ~30%, roughly half of that due to mass immigration.

    • 0 avatar

      Well he genetically is a half white but more importantly he was raised as a white from day he was born. He certainly exploits his perceived blackness to avoid criticism and be perceived as an underdog. Who wants the first “black” president to fail at his first term? Nobody, including me. Everything will be done to get him re-elected for the second term. Otherwise US will be perceived as a racist state. But Senate and House might be overwhelmingly Republican so whole thing will look more like comedy. “History repeats itself twice – first as tragedy and second as farce” – said well about his presidency.

  • avatar
    jimmyy

    Wall street republicans all hope Romney knocks out Obama, and we never have to put up with the UAW, the AFLCIO, and the rest of the union clowns martching around lower manhattan ever again.

    • 0 avatar

      So you think with the Republicans in the White House that the unions will have LESS to complain about ?

    • 0 avatar
      boltar

      Of course Wall Street wants Romney. That way the same party that caused the last crisis (you know, the one that kicked off the current Great Recession) can just continue. Bonuses for everyone!!

      • 0 avatar
        geeber

        If Wall Street wants Romney in the White House, it has a funny way of showing it – President Obama has raised more money from the financial sector than Romney or any other potential Republican candidate. (The source is a recent article in that right-wing rag, The Washington Post.)

        And the idea that the Republican Party solely caused the recent financial crisis is laughable. It ranks right up there with the contention that the crisis was caused by “deregulation.”

      • 0 avatar
        psarhjinian

        “President Obama has raised more money from the financial sector than Romney or any other potential Republican candidate.”

        This is because Wall St. is not stupid and knows Obama will likely win.

      • 0 avatar

        they also know O is a centrist, and that he saved their bacon in ’08 (to be sure, Bush got the policies started). I’m not being critical of either on this. We didn’t go into another great depression, which might well have happened under lesser leadership.

      • 0 avatar
        boltar

        My bad, Sorry, meant “party” as in beer-fest with chips and criminal scams providing lots of Wall Streeters with good times, not “Party” as in political party. Even I don’t think one can reasonably credit the Repubs alone for that.

  • avatar
    mshenzi

    I’m with l’l poindexter on this one– headline is misleading verging on ludicrous. The UAW’s arms aren’t strong much of anywhere anymore, least of all with non-unionized factories in Alabama. Headline suggests the UAW magically has lots of leverage, then reveals a nefarious plan that’s an eyerolling nothing. It’s like going to an aquarium and raising lots of noise about how the shark’s a menace that might jump out of its tank and bite someone.

    Seems like there’s a wee story behind the hyperbole: UAW might be hoping to embarass the transplant companies and make ’em a little uncomfortable about avoiding a situation that they’d rather avoid. It’s a small step in a much bigger issue, and it’s surely about politics, but let’s not get our britches all bunched up here.

  • avatar
    gslippy

    It is only a crude generalization to use the term “Latino community”; they’re not as homogeneous as most people think.

    Many vote conservative because of ‘family values’, taxation, or regulation concerns (like small-business owners), and believe immigrants should come to the US legally just as they did. And then there are those on the other side of those issues.

    The transplants are wise to stay out of this one.

  • avatar
    CJinSD

    People that buy Chryslers, GMs, and Fords are paying for this garbage. Want to support real Americans? Buy a car built in a transplant factory. Supporting the UAW is unconscionable.

    • 0 avatar
      mshenzi

      Everyone inadvertently pays for many things that they may disagree with– from government programs, to corporate lobbyists, to unions, to the closing of factories in the USA and subcontracting of manufacturing to East Asia. That’s the nature of a large, complex political economy. The UAW isn’t sullying a pristine meadow. For instance, many (all?) of these transplant companies support the proposed CAFE standards for 2025. By the logic of the above posting, if you buy one of their cars, you are giving aid and comfort to that agenda.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        I don’t have any choice about funding government programs, so that isn’t a valid argument. I believe the automakers had little choice but to be seen as supporting the CAFE regulations. This regime has shown a taste for attacking their enemies’ ability to conduct business. I do have a choice when I buy a car, and I won’t be supporting my enemies more than I must.

      • 0 avatar
        SV

        I’m not a big UAW fan either, but seriously, using language like “regime” and “enemy” in reference to the current administration is not going to mark you out as a well-balanced mind.

    • 0 avatar
      mike978

      Regime – usually used for a dictatorship (such as North Korea or Cuba). This administration was duly elected. Just as it would have been wrong for anyone to say regime in 2001-2008.

    • 0 avatar
      carbiz

      Under the category of ‘Cutting your nose off to spite your face.’
      You honestly feel that you’d rather support Korea or Japan by purchasing a vehicle from one of their domestic auto companies, rather than support the UAW?
      I am no union fan, sir, but I’d rather pay DOUBLE for an air conditioner, electric mixer or car that is designed and manufactured on this side of the Pacific, with all its requisite patents and other intellectual properties staying here.
      As a Canadian, I am used to watching us take a back seat on the world stage. Anything we were able to start up on our own, generally got bought out or over-run by an American company.
      For an American to wish and pray for the demise of the Detroit auto companies just out of sheer spite or maniacal hatred, is astonishing.
      In case you haven’t received the memo, the American economy is in tatters. America is most likely bankrupt, for all intents and purposes. The blue collar jobs went to Asia. The white collar jobs went to South Asia. Who is going to be left? The Middle Class is being wiped out.
      It may be the greatest irony in history that Globalization did not benefit the countries that championed it. The billionaires got richer. The banks grew bigger. But who else actually benefited?

      • 0 avatar
        jimmyy

        Lots of 6 and 7 figure white collar jobs on the east and west coast. All because of globalization. It would be hard to tell these high income people to give up globalization and their high incomes just so uneducated union people can be overpaid in the midwest.

      • 0 avatar
        geeber

        Carbiz: It may be the greatest irony in history that Globalization did not benefit the countries that championed it. The billionaires got richer. The banks grew bigger. But who else actually benefited?

        Considering that the Japanese have forced the domestics to dramatically improve the build quality, refinement and durability of their products, I’d say everyone who has bought a new car within the last 4-5 years.

        Unless you are going to tell us that a 1999 Malibu or Intrepid was just as good as a 1999 Camry or Accord, or that we should pay more for inferior products to protect us from that awful scourge of globalization, which will provide this week’s dose of unintentional hilarity, if nothing else.

        Because, as we all know, everyone who buys a Toyota or Honda has been duped by those crafty Japanese, so we should listen to the person who sells domestic cars instead, because he is totally unbiased in his views.

  • avatar
    fincar1

    Sad-looking old union you got there…reduced to taking handouts from Democrat politicians.

  • avatar
    mike978

    “Asian brands dominate new vehicle purchases among Hispanic buyers in the United States, with especially Honda accounting for 13.9 percent ”

    Well Honda’s market share with Latino’s is only a little above its national brand. Hardly dominating.
    Not all GM, Chrysler or Ford vehicles are made by UAW labor.

  • avatar
    CJinSD

    Are any of those thug-free GM, Chrysler or Ford vehicles built in the US?

    • 0 avatar
      mike978

      probably not but your point is? If someone wants to buy a GM, Chrysler or Ford there are models built in Mexico, Canada or elsewhere.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        Why wouldn’t I rather buy a car built by Americans that aren’t part of the closed loop corruption between organized labor and the current regime than a car built in a foreign country so that more profits can be put into political contributions that elect people I share no values with? One of my current cars actually was built in Canada, but I’d have happily bought one made in the US were the trim level I want built in a right to work state.

  • avatar
    tparkit

    All part of how the UAW works together with the Left and the Obama administration. The Administration helped out the UAW, so now — with an election coming up — the UAW is going to see what it can do to support the Democrats regarding the hispanic voting bloc.

    It’s not at all far-fetched to think the carmakers can be coopted into working against their own interests. Toyota paid the danegeld at NUMMI, knuckling under to Washington and ponying up $250 million for the workers there.

    Misguided corporations are infamous for trying to buy peace with their attackers. For instance, the fossil fuel industry is a major contributor to the environmentalist racket. It’s blackmail, pure and simple.

    • 0 avatar
      boltar

      So you seriously believe that if the UAW weren’t backscratching they would support a Republican candidate? Which one of the Republicans who even now insist they would have happily presided over the bankruptcy and dissolution of the entire American auto industry would the UAW rationally support?

      You don’t have to like them but to imply that their support of the administration that, in the face of criticism, managed to pull off a huge save of the domestic industry, is somehow either inappropriate or not completely consistent with their valid claimed goal of protecting workers jobs is just a bit nuts.

      • 0 avatar
        geeber

        The bankruptcy of GM and Chrysler would not have resulted in the dissolution of the entire domestic auto industry. It would have forced Ford, Honda, Hyundai, Nissan and Toyota to take steps to preserve the domestic supplier base – i.e., they would have been forced to spend their own money – but we would still have had a domestic auto industry.

        (This may come as a shock, but the transplant operations of Honda, Hyundai, Nissan and Toyota are also part of the domestic auto industry. It’s not 1965 anymore. GM, Ford, Chrysler and AMC aren’t the only companies engineering, designing and building cars in the United States.)

        The only way the domestic auto industry would completely vanish is if everyone in this country stopped buying cars. Even a GM and Chrysler bankruptcy wouldn’t have caused that to happen.

  • avatar
    Pch101

    “Now the unions attempt to strong-arm them.”

    According to the mainstream press, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights wrote letters to the automakers, asking for a meeting.

    I don’t blame the automakers for wanting to remain neutral, but a letter writing campaign requesting a chat isn’t exactly the equivalent of jackbooted thugs kicking down doors and firing up the ovens.

    As for the UAW’s participation, you’ve already reported yourself that they are now making some efforts to position themselves as a sort of civil rights support group. https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/02/uaw-planning-a-movement-for-social-justice-is-it-time-for-a-uaw-death-watch/ That sort of effort goes hand in hand with you’ve already published here.

    • 0 avatar

      Picket dealers? Disrupt stockholders meetings?

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        Since when did holding a picket sign become an act of strongarming?

        Let’s put this into perspective. The UAW is one of several groups that lent its support to some open letters that were sent to the automakers.

        Two of those companies have already had problems as a result of this law, as executives from Honda and Daimler have both had some unpleasant police encounters as a result of it:

        http://articles.cnn.com/2011-11-22/us/us_alabama-immigration-arrest_1_immigration-law-check-immigration-status-immigration-debate?_s=PM:US

        http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/02/alabama-car-boss-immigration-law

        If you wanted to overturn this law, don’t you think that it would be logical to appeal for help from those who have already been negatively impacted by it?

      • 0 avatar
        Jimal

        Every morning when I drive past the entrance to my wife’s employer there are a group from one of the local construction unions picketing; holding signs complaining that my wife’s company hired a contractor to do some construction work that doesn’t “meet safety standards”. In other words, a company that doesn’t employ union workers.

        I don’t see their protest as anything approaching “strong-arming”.

      • 0 avatar
        mshenzi

        Picketing and shouting for a few minutes at a stockholder meeting? That’s strongarming? Really?? Yawn and double yawn.

        Picketing has become a sign of weakness more often than a sign of strength in most of the USA– that picket would probably gain the dealers more sales than it loses them, if the posts on TTAC are anything to go by.

        Disrupting stockholder meetings is typically a 3-30 minute sideshow, if it happens at all. This is not a WTO meeting, and the UAW won’t be pulling in a crowd that intimidates anyone. Walter Reuther is 40 years dead, and it might as well be more than a century. The UAW is a mouse that squeaks, but it’s great red meat to conjure it into a threat that still roars. CEOs, cower before them! They’re the cutting edge of the America-Hating Knife! (Puh-lease.)

    • 0 avatar
      boltar

      “Mainstream press” would be a term which doesn’t seem to include this site. Maybe they should change the name to thefairandbalancedtruthaboutcars.com.

      In other news: cars without back seats to be banned as a form of artificial birth control, ten most popular cars among atheists and how to run them off the road for Jesus when you see one, MINIs designed by and for Pinkos, the best sports truck for your money.

  • avatar
    Lokki

    Legal behavior and smart behavior are different. The UAW first tried to force their way in the front door at these companies. The workers did not invite them to stay. Now, the UAW is trying to force these same companies into hiring undocumented (and therefore by definition illegal) immigrants putting the workers at these companies into competition for jobs with illegal workers. I don’t think that this will endear them to the workers who already rejected them. Thus it would appear that the UAW is abandoning its attempts to organize these companies.

    In addition, it would seem that the UAW’s core constituents might have enough sense to realize that their union must also be encouraging illegal competitors to apply for -their- jobs. Is the UAW also abandoning them to focus on organizing a different group of workers?

    Perhaps I’m wrong here and if so I’m certain I’ll be told how this focus benefits (legal) American workers, the UAW as an organization, and its traditional members. For myself, I only see a benefit (and only a therotically potential benefit) for one of the three.

  • avatar
    tedward

    This is definitely the cynical view of the action. Or…the union could be viewing this policy as a general worker’s rights issue, which is kind of their purpose. I’d bet their self-interest here would lie more in showing non-union workers the kind of work that a union would do for them than in any desire to position these brands against the interests of a customer demographic.

    Simpler is better.

  • avatar
    Lokki

    Workers of the world, united?

  • avatar
    Mike Kelley

    About all the big unions care about in this country is furthering their left-wing agendas. As a Steelworker, I know that any time my International benefits me it is purely by accident. Letting more and more “undocumented Democrats” into this country is the last thing most blue-collar workers want, but it is high on the wish list of our union bosses. That and getting Obama and his ilk re-elected.

  • avatar
    jimmyy

    Before Obama, I would have considered the purchase of a Detroit car, but only if the brand demonstrated Toyota/Honda like reliability and resale.

    Now, I will never purchase a Detroit car. Never. No way. I know Wall Streeters that dumped their Suburbans and Escalades in favor of Land Cruisers because of Obama and the UAW. I am bringing up my kids as Republicans that will never purchase anything associated with Detroit because of the UAW. This is what happens when you mix Democratic type politics with products. Nice job UAW.

    • 0 avatar

      Are these the same Wall Streeters who got $475 billion in TARP bailout funds from George Bush ?

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      There are lots of reasons t avoid Detroit cars, but Obama isn’t one of them. Republicans do crony capitalism better than Democrats, but they both do it enthusiastically.

      Also, I don’t take Wall Street as an example of how to behave well — I’ve seriously considered working there, but many of the companies have rather juvenile, fratish, and aggressive work-cultures. This is not really something I admire or want to emulate, no matter how much they pay. Allocating capital in our society is a worthwhile activity, but that’s only a small part of what Wall Street does — most of what they do seems to be running a betting pool on the real economy.

      Good luck bringing up your kids with your ideology, I guess… My parents tried to bring me up in a particular ideology, and I rebelled against it. Your kids would be far better served if you looked for the truth, and worked to achieve wisdom. I don’t see much in the way of truth or wisdom coming out of the Republican party these days. (Or from any of the parties, for that matter.)

  • avatar
    boltar

    Don’t follow the news much, do we? Or did you just not get the significance of the fact that good ole Alabama — why anyone could ever worry about civil rights there I can’t imagine — arrested a German Mercedes manager who couldn’t produce documentation on the spot when pulled over. Perhaps — I know ths is a stretch for some of you — the UAW simply figures after that experience that perhaps foreign manufacturers would be receptive to expressing reservations over the law.

    You don’t have to be remotely in favor of illegal immigration to oppose Alabama’s looney enforcement law.

    • 0 avatar
      geeber

      Mabye if the federal government were actually doing its job – i.e., enforcing the country’s immigration law – Alabama wouldn’t have to pass this type of law in the first place. There’s an idea!

  • avatar
    carbiz

    The unions are facing extinction and they know it. 100 years ago, they did a lot of good, but in many ways they are obsolete today.
    Mike Kelley, I wouldn’t go assuming that the immigrant block votes Democrat these days. In Canada, the Liberal Party had just about declared Manifest Destiny in being the perpetual party in power, then suddenly the wheels fell off the cart. The Liberals had always counted on the ‘immigrant vote’ as a given. However, in many parts of Canada, the immigrants have reached a critical mass whereby they don’t need the rest of us anymore, so they vote for issues that matter to them. Multiculturalism is simply a given. The Conservatives have been happily snapping up these new votes, leaving the Liberal party in total disarray.
    Similarly, in the U.S., many of the states in the south-west are finally waking up to the startling revelation that Mexico has reclaimed its former territory without firing a shot.
    The Hispanics do not have to beg the Democrats or the Republicans for anything. Time is on their side. Already New Mexico is going to slip into majority of Spanish origin. Hispanics comprise 16% of the American population, but it is growing at nearly four times the national average. Although it is ‘estimated’ that 60% of all Hispanics were born in the U.S., it is still a fact that the majority are concentrated in the South-West and in those states the demographic shift is going to change the very fabric of America.
    By 2050, nearly 1/3 of the U.S. population will be of Hispanic origin.
    Welcome to the New World Order. Undoubtedly the UAW sees it coming. How about people on TTAC?

    • 0 avatar

      I think you are over-estimating Hispanic immigration. Birth rate is already falling in Mexico and in near future Mexico is facing workforce shortages and immigration from Central America. Mexican population grew almost 10 times last century but nothing lasts forever and there will be abrupt end to Mexican immigration to US. And then you will cry because Americans do not want to work as mechanics or whatever that requires manual work – they prefer to sit in office instead. Just take two European Catholic countries like Italy and Spain. In both these countries birth rate is the lowest in the world and they are facing depopulation in near future. And they certainly are not immigrating to Germany (or US) to find jobs and better life. Just opposite – Spain has illegal immigration from Mexico (despite of being not as easy to sneak into) and together with Italy they are are facing serious problem with immigration from Africa. And they have to – the working population is rapidly declining each year. Jobless rate is very high in Spain – go figure – people want easy jobs in Spain too.

  • avatar

    Honda, Toyota, Hyudai and VW are rasists who watch Fox news and vote for Republicans.

  • avatar
    OldWingGuy

    So here’s my question:
    As a Canadian, when I am in the US and get stopped by the police, I expect to have to produce a license and registration. If I can’t produce these, I would expect to be in a lot of trouble.
    Also, I wouldn’t find it unusual if the police asked a few questions about where I’m staying, what border crossing I took, etc.
    So I don’t get what the big deal is about the police asking about your citizenship. If you can’t produce a license and registration (which I assume an illegal immigrant could not), wouldn’t they be in a mess of trouble (ie vehicle being towed, off to jail, etc) ?
    I realize this sounds incredibly naive, but we don’t have many illegal immigrants where I’m from.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      You’re expecting the police to act in a professional manner…!

    • 0 avatar
      Astigmatism

      There’s more to it than showing a license and registration if you get stopped by police. The Honda executive who was arrested in November, for example, produced his passport, work permit and an international drivers license, but that still didn’t satisfy the requirements of the Alabama law.

      • 0 avatar
        Carrera

        Astigmatism!
        You’re wrong on two counts:
        The guys was a German executive working for Mercedes.
        The guy didn’t have any documents with him. Immagine if the cop did not react because the guy is a white German and rich probably. The cop would have been called a republican, racist pig by the liberal (all of it) media.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        “You’re wrong on two counts. The guys was a German executive working for Mercedes.”

        Sorry, but you are wrong. There were **two** separate incidents. The first involved a Daimler executive. The second involved a Honda executive. Astigmatism is describing what happened with the Honda executive.

        You will find articles about each of these in one of my other posts above.

      • 0 avatar
        Astigmatism

        Swing and a miss, Carrera:

        http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/02/alabama-car-boss-immigration-law

      • 0 avatar
        Carrera

        Astigmatism and PCH,
        You guys were right. There were too incidents. I just never heard of the Honda Exec. Thanks for providing the guardian link. I read the article and it isn’t saying much. They are just saying that the Honda guy was ticketed…for what? We don’t know. We’re led to believe because he was a foreigner, but I think the Guardian is a bit disingenous the way they present the article. I know that many states, once you become a temporary resident with a work visa, give you anywhere between 30-90 days to get a local license. Could it be that he never got an Alabama license and he got a ticket because of that? I don’t know…just sayin’.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        To be fair to the cops in Alabama, one of the problems may have been with the drivers license.

        An International Driving Permit is not a drivers license, nor is it a form of ID. Rather, it is a multilingual translation of the original drivers license. The IDP by itself is not valid; the original drivers license has to be presented along with it.

        In addition, US states aren’t signers to the international convention that governs the IDP. While it doesn’t hurt to carry one, the IDP has no legal validity here and a foreign driver that is visiting the US needs to have a valid license that was issued in his home country, and to have it in his possession whenever he is driving.

        As far as I can tell, neither executive was carrying his license at the time that he was stopped. In Alabama, driving without a valid license is a misdemeanor (although the charges will be dismissed if one can show that he had a license at the time that he was cited.) Perhaps that was an issue with both of these cases.

    • 0 avatar

      In other countries it may be different but everyone in the world has birth given right to come to America, to live and work here, vote for whoever he likes (preferably for Democrats because Republicans are racists) without presenting any identification (and why the heck do you want to have identification card – we are not a fascist state except some states like Arizona) and get all social services and healthcare government is capable to provide. You can pay taxes to if you want but there is enough rich people in America to pay for all that. Citizenship is obsolete concept from old world and should be abolished once and for all. We are all citizens of the world.

    • 0 avatar
      Carrera

      Well, you don’t think it’s a big deal because you’re coming to USA legally. The ones that think it’s a big deal are the illegals and their supporters.

  • avatar
    jimbobjoe

    “to disrupt their stockholders meetings. (Good luck doing this in Japan…”

    I want to point out that disrupting stockholder meetings is a time honored practice in Japan. The disruptors are the Yakuza (Japanese Mafia) who are out to embarrass companies in an attempt to get bribes. It is so bad in fact that Japanese companies try hard to schedule their stockholder meetings at the same time so that the disruptors are unable to hit all the companies (plus the meetings are notoriously short–usually only 30 to 45 minutes.)

    Here’s an article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sōkaiya

  • avatar
    racer-esq.

    The UAW pushes for a libertarian immigration policy, and all of the supposed libertarians sh*t their pants. That looks a lot like pure contrarianism from people with 8 year old minds.

    Alabama’s immigration law is protectionist, protecting people in Alabama from outside competition for jobs and housing. I have no problem with it, but people claiming to be 100% free market should.

    The interesting thing is the Alabama law is the kind of thing that the UAW would have strongly supported in the past, but it learned that it cannot afford to alienate Latinos.

    This is not an effort to get Latinos to hate transplant cars, this is an effort to get Latinos to like unions.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    “The UAW pushes for a libertarian immigration policy, and all of the supposed libertarians sh*t their pants. That looks a lot like pure contrarianism from people with 8 year old minds”

    As someone who is **totally okay** with fully porous national borders and unrestricted emigration, this made me smile. Nicely done.

    Why is it that only the rich can leverage globalization? Why can’t the (relatively) poor walk through borders? Similarly, if the wealthy can create fictional people (corporations) to protect themselves from liability, why can’t the less-wealthy create fictional people to collectively bargain?

    Good for the goose, good for the gander, etc.

    So how about this: how about we scrap free trade while we’re busting the balls of immigration? Or if we’re hell-bent on breaking unions, why don’t we do away with corporations at the same time—after all, they’re both collectivist fictions enabled by government. I mean, fair’s fair.

    (for that matter, what about abortion and capital punishment?)

    • 0 avatar
      gslippy

      Borders define the limits of people-groups with differing views on any variety of subjects. Often, those differences can lead to war or infiltration by the more aggressive party, and so nations take steps to protect their borders.

      Your utopian view of porous orders would change if you lived in a country under constant threat from its neighbors (a most extreme example being Israel). Fortunately, Canada has little to fear from the South. However, US economic success and policies have made it a magnet for all sorts of people willing to exploit it or destroy it. Efforts to limit such exploitation are required as a result.

      I assume you have locks on the doors of your home, or is it porous, in keeping with your philosophy?

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        Open minds open borders open markets.

        A house is property. According to someone with free market beliefs citizenship is not. Next you will be claiming that a job is a property right.

        Making exceptions to pure libertarianism is a slippery slope. It leads to arguments that the government can provide roads or healthcare more efficiently than the free market.

        I believe that citizenship is a property right, but that is the nationalist socialist in me, not free marketeer in me. Yes, there was a really bad nationalist socialist in history, but that was an extreme. And he was also someone that screamed about the threat of terrorism a lot – which should make you wonder about anyone that screams about the threat of terrorism. Modern Japan, South Korea and Germany are still strongly nationalist socialist countries.

        All of the idiots above that claim they are going to boycott “American” auto companies because of the UAW should get a clue about the world. I have no particular love for “American” automakers, but what do these idiots think, Japan, South Korean and Germany are, Ayn Rand’s libertarian utopias? Wrong. All three are socialist countries with strong unions. Unions in South Korean burn down the factory.

  • avatar
    racer-esq.

    Open minds open borders open markets.

    A house is property. According to someone with free market beliefs citizenship is not. Next you will be claiming that a job is a property right.

    Making exceptions to pure libertarianism is a slippery slope. It leads to arguments that the government can provide roads or healthcare more efficiently than the free market.

    I believe that citizenship is a property right, but that is the nationalist socialist in me, not free marketeer in me. Yes, there was a really bad nationalist socialist in history, but that was an extreme. And he was also someone that screamed about the threat of terrorism a lot – which should make you wonder about anyone that screams about the threat of terrorism. Modern Japan, South Korea and Germany are still strongly nationalist socialist countries.

    All of the people above that claim they are going to boycott “American” auto companies because of the UAW should get a clue about the world. I have no particular love for “American” automakers, but what do these people think, Japan, South Korean and Germany are, Ayn Rand’s libertarian utopias? Wrong. All three are socialist countries with strong unions. Unions in South Korean burn down the factory.

    • 0 avatar
      racer-esq.

      In all honesty I disagree with psarhjinian also. I understand how there can be open migration in libertarian world where everything is private, but I have no idea how open migration can work in a world where the government does provide education, healthcare and other services.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • R Henry: Eco-Sport
  • MRF 95 T-Bird: Yes the “Trophy” 4 was a 389 with one bank lopped off. The 326 was the V8 option on the 61-63...
  • Scoutdude: You can’t fire more than 2 plugs with one coil simultaneously. If you hooked them all up to a single...
  • TR4: If the plugs are wired in parallel, only one will fire, whichever has the narrowest gap. When this plug’s...
  • ToolGuy: Pretty sure the HMMWV uses an exoskeleton. :) Just kidding, it’s an aluminum body on a steel frame....

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Timothy Cain
  • Matthew Guy
  • Ronnie Schreiber
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth