As soon as there is a market for a good there is an industry, and as soon as there is supply and demand there is a market, thus as soon as a product is made and sold there is an industry.Kmarion wrote:
Huh? Would you buy something if it wasn't of quality ?DrunkFace wrote:
Sales don't show you quality and America also has double market.
It really comes down to this. You think it started when a couple hundred came about. I think it started when 15 million were distributed across the world and not a couple towns over.
Poll
Is the US car industry in trouble
| Yes | 71% | 71% - 100 | ||||
| No | 13% | 13% - 19 | ||||
| Fuck off - American cars FTW. | 14% | 14% - 20 | ||||
| Total: 139 | ||||||
It's not that simple.Vilham wrote:
An industry is an industry, if other people dont understand that and claim an industry must use assembly line production that isnt my problem and doesnt make me wrong, it makes them wrong.PuckMercury wrote:
you are equally guilty, Vilham. You have done nothing but offer up random facts and state that they refute the original point. At no point did you state what you believe to be the genesis of an industry.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Yes it is. read the post i did above the one ive just quoted.Kmarion wrote:
It's not that simple.Vilham wrote:
An industry is an industry, if other people dont understand that and claim an industry must use assembly line production that isnt my problem and doesnt make me wrong, it makes them wrong.PuckMercury wrote:
you are equally guilty, Vilham. You have done nothing but offer up random facts and state that they refute the original point. At no point did you state what you believe to be the genesis of an industry.
hardly a back pedal mate. If you understood anything about the ramifications of the First world war, quite simple the economic conditions and the fact that most of the workforce had been killed fighting; meant that the Production and expansion of the car industry was not viable. However in the states suitable conditions prevailed economically/socially. this does not alter the fact that america didn't invent the car or start it's productiion ie "the industry" - the endPuckMercury wrote:
so now you're conceding the point, but saying credit should still be given to you in spirit because of WWI? Huh. Backpedal more. No superiority was ever stated originally, simply a statement of fact. You have turned that into some oppositional cock fight.IG-Calibre wrote:
By 1927 Europe was just about recovering from the ravages of the first world war in which millions of people died in europe, kinda hard to have an industry or get one started when there is no one alive to run the fucking thing is there?and so begins another unrelated sidebar on the US presidency.aardfrith wrote:
Your president will probably impose massive import taxes ...
Last edited by IG-Calibre (2006-09-12 08:56:58)
Manufacturing the product is probably the most crucial part of an industry. I understand what you are saying but I just think it takes more for it to be considered an industry. I can help someone carry a table out to their car, that doesn't mean I am in the moving industry.Vilham wrote:
Yes it is. read the post i did above the one ive just quoted.Kmarion wrote:
It's not that simple.Vilham wrote:
An industry is an industry, if other people dont understand that and claim an industry must use assembly line production that isnt my problem and doesnt make me wrong, it makes them wrong.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Don't ask me why people buy shit things but they do it all the time for all kind of products. Price is a big determinant, whats 'cool' or fashionable is also. Generaly the market is not inteligent in what it purchases and very few do any real reasearch into what there buying.Kmarion wrote:
Huh? Would you buy something if it wasn't of quality ?DrunkFace wrote:
Sales don't show you quality and America also has double market.
Also many really don't know any better or couldn't care less about what there buying unless it does basicaly what they want. Just because take away chinese will fill you up and taste alright, doesnt mean that there isn't somthing better, like a restuarant or actually going to china and tasting the 'unwesternised' equivalent.
Last edited by DrunkFace (2006-09-12 08:56:46)
When has the car industry NOT been in trouble?
Again, more noise but no actual assertions beyond, "It's not me - it's everyone else." I maintain we started the industry and utilized the assembly line as a tool in that actualization. It facilitated the ability of the foothold of the industry to be established and developed.Vilham wrote:
An industry is an industry, if other people dont understand that and claim an industry must use assembly line production that isnt my problem and doesnt make me wrong, it makes them wrong.PuckMercury wrote:
you are equally guilty, Vilham. You have done nothing but offer up random facts and state that they refute the original point. At no point did you state what you believe to be the genesis of an industry.
I understand them perfectly well, and never asserted that Europe was in an equal position to do anything at that point. I agree America was perfectly suited to heavy industry at the time. I simply stated what ended up happening, not any comment on superiority of us or inferiority of Europe. As we WERE in that position, we were able and succeeded in utilizing that advantage to develop the industry - the end.IG-Calibre wrote:
hardly a back pedal mate. If you understood anything about the ramifications of the First world war, quite simple the economic conditions and the fact that most of the workforce had been killed fighting; meant that the Production and expansion of the car industry was not viable. However in the states suitable conditions prevailed economically/socially. this does not alter the fact that america didn't invent the car or start it's productiion ie "the industry" - the end
Last edited by PuckMercury (2006-09-12 09:01:45)
Did you just compare buying a vehicle with Chinese take-out..lolDrunkFace wrote:
Don't ask me why people buy shit things but they do it all the time for all kind of products. Price is a big determinant, whats 'cool' or fashionable is also. Generaly the market is not intelligent in what it purchases and very few do any real research into what there buying.Kmarion wrote:
Huh? Would you buy something if it wasn't of quality ?DrunkFace wrote:
Sales don't show you quality and America also has double market.
Also many really don't know any better or couldn't care less about what there buying unless it does basically what they want. Just because take away Chinese will fill you up and taste alright, doesn't mean that there isn't something better, like a restaurant or actually going to china and tasting the 'westernized' equivalent.
I think a little more education goes into Car buying.
I agree with the other things but look at all the tools out now to be able to research cars. When was the last time you picked up a magazine reviewing Chinese take out.
Last edited by Kmarion (2006-09-12 09:04:25)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I just bought an 07 honda accord. Stick that up your arse, GM! Oh wait, I still have my chevy parked out in front of my house...
Did Ford invent the car? NoPuckMercury wrote:
Again, more noise but no actual assertions beyond, "It's not me - it's everyone else." I maintain we started the industry and utilized the assembly line as a tool in that actualization. It facilitated the ability of the foothold of the industry to be established and developed.Vilham wrote:
An industry is an industry, if other people dont understand that and claim an industry must use assembly line production that isnt my problem and doesnt make me wrong, it makes them wrong.PuckMercury wrote:
you are equally guilty, Vilham. You have done nothing but offer up random facts and state that they refute the original point. At no point did you state what you believe to be the genesis of an industry.
Did Ford invent the production process of the car? No
Did Ford make the first car? No
Did Ford distribute the first car? No
Did Ford have the first company to make and distribute the car for profit? No
Did Ford use a new technology to improve the making and distribution of cars? Yes
He did nothing more then improve on an existing industry.
alright, yet another stream of assertions with no actual connection to the developed debate. What defines an industry, and at what point is said industry started? What differentiates between improving the production of an existing invention and creating an industry? Are you asserting that the mere invention serves as the start of the industry?
Kind of Ironic comming from you.Kmarion wrote:
Did you just compare buying a vehicle with Chinese take-out..lol
I think a little more education goes into Car buying.
Kmarion wrote:
I can be the first to produce a burger in my kitchen and go sell it on the corner. That doesn't mean I just started the industry. Selling burgers by the thousands across different continents and nations could be seen as starting an industry.
i'm not arguing that - however the statement made by that other poster mr "we started the industry" - well you didn't. - capiche? Invention & production of the car started in Europe where social and economic considerations stunted it's growth, America on the other hand mass produced cars, yes? It didn't start the car manufacturing industryPuckMercury wrote:
Again, more noise but no actual assertions beyond, "It's not me - it's everyone else." I maintain we started the industry and utilized the assembly line as a tool in that actualization. It facilitated the ability of the foothold of the industry to be established and developed.Vilham wrote:
An industry is an industry, if other people dont understand that and claim an industry must use assembly line production that isnt my problem and doesnt make me wrong, it makes them wrong.PuckMercury wrote:
you are equally guilty, Vilham. You have done nothing but offer up random facts and state that they refute the original point. At no point did you state what you believe to be the genesis of an industry.I understand them perfectly well, and never asserted that Europe was in an equal position to do anything at that point. I agree America was perfectly suited to heavy industry at the time. I simply stated what ended up happening, not any comment on superiority of us or inferiority of Europe. As we WERE in that position, we were able and succeeded in utilizing that advantage to develop the industry - the end.IG-Calibre wrote:
hardly a back pedal mate. If you understood anything about the ramifications of the First world war, quite simple the economic conditions and the fact that most of the workforce had been killed fighting; meant that the Production and expansion of the car industry was not viable. However in the states suitable conditions prevailed economically/socially. this does not alter the fact that america didn't invent the car or start it's productiion ie "the industry" - the end
Last edited by IG-Calibre (2006-09-12 09:21:53)
The FIRST manufacture and sale of a given product type by a legal company/ies.PuckMercury wrote:
alright, yet another stream of assertions with no actual connection to the developed debate. What defines an industry, and at what point is said industry started? What differentiates between improving the production of an existing invention and creating an industry? Are you asserting that the mere invention serves as the start of the industry?
Last edited by DrunkFace (2006-09-12 09:19:01)
By no means is that in the same context. You are not comparing apples to apples. I was talking about starting an industry. You were trying to compare the buying process of having dinner and buying a new car. That's a little ridiculous don't you think?DrunkFace wrote:
Kind of Ironic comming from you.Kmarion wrote:
Did you just compare buying a vehicle with Chinese take-out..lol
I think a little more education goes into Car buying.Kmarion wrote:
I can be the first to produce a burger in my kitchen and go sell it on the corner. That doesn't mean I just started the industry. Selling burgers by the thousands across different continents and nations could be seen as starting an industry.
I'll brb, I'm going to the bathroom to start the turd laying industry.
Last edited by Kmarion (2006-09-12 09:23:02)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
FOR GODS SAKE! at the top of this whole page i defined an industry! do you not read!PuckMercury wrote:
alright, yet another stream of assertions with no actual connection to the developed debate. What defines an industry, and at what point is said industry started? What differentiates between improving the production of an existing invention and creating an industry? Are you asserting that the mere invention serves as the start of the industry?
As soon as there is a market for a good there is an industry, and as soon as there is supply and demand there is a market, thus as soon as a product is made and sold there is an industry.
READ!
Last edited by Vilham (2006-09-12 09:22:45)
Personally I reckon the Chinese are going to be the front runners in car production in the not too distant future. Chinese cars at the moment are complete crap, but so were Japanese cars when they started out. China have bought rover, the last British car manufacturer (apart from little companies building very specialised cars, or race companies like Mclaren). China also have the manufacturing capacity to build loads of cars very cheaply.
I reckon all western car manufacturers are doomed really, but the US ones more imminently than others. There will always be a place for highly engineered German cars and for ridiculous Italian cars too though.
I reckon all western car manufacturers are doomed really, but the US ones more imminently than others. There will always be a place for highly engineered German cars and for ridiculous Italian cars too though.
I love my Jeep BTW.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
so it's simple, the discrepency lies not in a view of the past but in a concept of perception with respect to industry. I would purport that an industry only "begins" when the product is available or implimented on a wide scale. Flying cars for instance exist, but I would certainly not say there is an industry associated with them.
Uhm, relax? I wasn't referencing your post or you at all, it was another individual who I choose not to assume had the same view as you. Ergo, I requested an individual interpretation. You alright now? Need a valium?Vilham wrote:
FOR GODS SAKE! at the top of this whole page i defined an industry! do you not read!
As soon as there is a market for a good there is an industry, and as soon as there is supply and demand there is a market, thus as soon as a product is made and sold there is an industry.
READ!
Last edited by PuckMercury (2006-09-12 09:30:17)
Sorry if there are any former Longbridge workers here but Rovers were crap even before the Chinese became involved. The last decent British manufacturer was bought up by BMW - Rolls Royce - or if you're looking at smaller companies, by a Russian guy - TVR.Bertster7 wrote:
Personally I reckon the Chinese are going to be the front runners in car production in the not too distant future. Chinese cars at the moment are complete crap, but so were Japanese cars when they started out. China have bought rover, the last British car manufacturer (apart from little companies building very specialised cars, or race companies like Mclaren). China also have the manufacturing capacity to build loads of cars very cheaply.
I reckon all western car manufacturers are doomed really, but the US ones more imminently than others. There will always be a place for highly engineered German cars and for ridiculous Italian cars too though.
Well, as for the topic.
Is it in trouble ? Probably.
Has it been in trouble before? Hell ya.
Will they get out of it? Most defiently.
Do they still dominate the market? Without question.
Is it in trouble ? Probably.
Has it been in trouble before? Hell ya.
Will they get out of it? Most defiently.
Do they still dominate the market? Without question.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Well what fun is recentering the debate?
I agree it's in trouble, but I don't think it is going away any time soon. If anything it will only get better as the existence of free market economics will force either that or it's demise. I'm betting they'll choose to improve over cease to be.
I agree it's in trouble, but I don't think it is going away any time soon. If anything it will only get better as the existence of free market economics will force either that or it's demise. I'm betting they'll choose to improve over cease to be.
Ford did not start the car industry. He did however revolutionize it by introducing the assembly line (which led to great success for Ford in an already existing industry), a practice other manufacturers picked up on later except for high luxury vehicle makers such as Rolls Royce, Minerva,...
There is no room for discussion or interpretation here.
There is no room for discussion or interpretation here.
Yes that is a fact, but the point in his statement that you simply missed, is that the Automobile industry was started in the US of A. The large-scale, production-line manufacturing of affordable automobiles was debuted by Ransom Eli Olds at his Oldsmobile factory in 1902, later adopted by Mr. Henry Ford. As by definition Industry is The tendency to work persistently, the market was born here in the US. Simple fact, don't get your panties in a wad. The US Auto Industry is on shaky ground, concerning GM and less notably Ford, however Daimler-Chrysler is doing just fine, as well as Panoz, Saleen, etc., etc.Vilham wrote:
Theres an American car industry?? jking
"We started the industry, we will adapt like always." - Kmarion
The automobile powered by the Otto gasoline engine was invented in Germany by Karl Benz in 1885. Before making statements like that learn the truth. Heres somewhere to start http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Ford