Messageboard - General Columbus Discussion

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Detroit - Smaller Than Columbus?

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Detroit – Smaller Than Columbus?

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 46 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #434610

    Antonio
    Member

    The Chevy Vega was made in Lordstown Ohio where they make the Chevy Cruze now.

    The Ford Pinto was made in Ontario, New Jersey and Richmond. It’s safety record was actually much better than similair cars of it’s size and reliability better than most.

    http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Ford_Pinto

    #434611

    rus
    Participant

    Pablo wrote >>
    Unions have made concessions in recent years, probably not enough in management’s eyes. This is the same management with a business model that assumed low gas prices would last forever and continually fought CAFE and safety standards and sold Chevy Vegas and Ford Pintos to an unsuspecting public in the 1970s.
    Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns didn’t have unionized workers so they really should still be in existence and profitable, right?

    And the same union that demanded ever increasing wages, pension benefits and created work rules designed to ensure more employees were present than necessary.

    Then, toyota, honda, et. al. showed up and started making cars here. Rather than the adversarial system of union vs. management both sides worked together. Management treated workers like adults, listening to their suggestions for improvement. Labor was fairly compensated and worked in a safe environment. Win / win.

    Unless you’re the UAW or GM / Chrystler, of course. Then you keep fighting, blaming the other side for your problems and kill each other.

    No sense in letting management off the hook for their part in Detroit’s destruction, but the UAW had a hand in that too.

    #434612

    Antonio
    Member

    Memories…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vega_Pinto_Gremlin_in_Massachusetts_2010.JPG

    I always liked the AMC models with the special LEVI seat option.

    #434613

    Pablo
    Participant

    rus wrote >>

    Pablo wrote >>
    Unions have made concessions in recent years, probably not enough in management’s eyes. This is the same management with a business model that assumed low gas prices would last forever and continually fought CAFE and safety standards and sold Chevy Vegas and Ford Pintos to an unsuspecting public in the 1970s.
    Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns didn’t have unionized workers so they really should still be in existence and profitable, right?

    And the same union that demanded ever increasing wages, pension benefits and created work rules designed to ensure more employees were present than necessary.
    Then, toyota, honda, et. al. showed up and started making cars here. Rather than the adversarial system of union vs. management both sides worked together. Management treated workers like adults, listening to their suggestions for improvement. Labor was fairly compensated and worked in a safe environment. Win / win.
    Unless you’re the UAW or GM / Chrystler, of course. Then you keep fighting, blaming the other side for your problems and kill each other.
    No sense in letting management off the hook for their part in Detroit’s destruction, but the UAW had a hand in that too.

    Agree that both management and labor have responsibility in the decline but I tend to lean a little harder on management since they’re the ones creating the products for labor to build. The adversarial relationship between management and labor is the real culprit. It seems to me that both sides had their collective heads in the sand in the 70’s and, as an industry, were unable to rapidly adapt to global changes.

    “What’s good for GM is good for the USA”

    “That’s not my job, get the union steward”

    My ex worked for Honda in Marysville in the 80’s and early 90’s. The UAW was trying to organize the workers (a lot were for it) but Honda’s benefit and wage package was really good at the time so, what was the point? In an odd way, the UAW was forcing Honda to treat the workers well so, philosophically, the UAW was representing the workers (but no union dues for the coffers!). Don’t know if that’s the case today. In my opinion, the decline of the City of Detroit is purely a jobs issue and not one of a particular political party.

    #434614

    Pablo wrote >>

    rus wrote >>

    Pablo wrote >>
    Unions have made concessions in recent years, probably not enough in management’s eyes. This is the same management with a business model that assumed low gas prices would last forever and continually fought CAFE and safety standards and sold Chevy Vegas and Ford Pintos to an unsuspecting public in the 1970s.
    Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns didn’t have unionized workers so they really should still be in existence and profitable, right?

    And the same union that demanded ever increasing wages, pension benefits and created work rules designed to ensure more employees were present than necessary.
    Then, toyota, honda, et. al. showed up and started making cars here. Rather than the adversarial system of union vs. management both sides worked together. Management treated workers like adults, listening to their suggestions for improvement. Labor was fairly compensated and worked in a safe environment. Win / win.
    Unless you’re the UAW or GM / Chrystler, of course. Then you keep fighting, blaming the other side for your problems and kill each other.
    No sense in letting management off the hook for their part in Detroit’s destruction, but the UAW had a hand in that too.

    Agree that both management and labor have responsibility in the decline but I tend to lean a little harder on management since they’re the ones creating the products for labor to build. The adversarial relationship between management and labor is the real culprit. It seems to me that both sides had their collective heads in the sand in the 70’s and, as an industry, were unable to rapidly adapt to global changes.
    “What’s good for GM is good for the USA”
    “That’s not my job, get the union steward”
    My ex worked for Honda in Marysville in the 80’s and early 90’s. The UAW was trying to organize the workers (a lot were for it) but Honda’s benefit and wage package was really good at the time so, what was the point? In an odd way, the UAW was forcing Honda to treat the workers well so, philosophically, the UAW was representing the workers (but no union dues for the coffers!). Don’t know if that’s the case today. In my opinion, the decline of the City of Detroit is purely a jobs issue and not one of a particular political party.

    +1

    Actually, Detroit’s decline has more do with the monolithic presence and influence of the automobile industry in the city than anything else. The auto companies used their influence directly and indirectly to block other industries from taking root in the city. This essentially tied Detroit’s fate to the fate of the auto industry, for better or for worse. This is why Detroit was never a true rival for Chicago, which has maintained a far more diverse economy and a generally positive trajectory.

    Similarly, while Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Buffalo sustained massive economic, job and population losses resulting from the collapse of manufacturing, they still had other industries and assets present (e.g. banking, universities, etc.) that helped them to eventually regain their footing somewhat. Detroit did not have this.

    Also, on a smaller yet still comparable scale, Youngstown has profoundly suffered for being a one-industry town. Steel was the life’s blood of the Mahoning Valley. When the mills closed down, Youngstown suffered the equivalent of a massive stroke, from which it has yet to recover.

    #434615

    berdawn
    Member

    rus wrote >>

    Then, toyota, honda, et. al. showed up and started making cars here. Rather than the adversarial system of union vs. management both sides worked together. Management treated workers like adults, listening to their suggestions for improvement. Labor was fairly compensated and worked in a safe environment. Win / win.

    my, what a rich fantasy life you must lead, rus! Those manufacturers set up primarily in right to work states with high unemployment where the employees benefited from several decades of regulations and protections and the state provided substantial support to reduce their start up costs.

    #434616

    DavidF
    Participant

    berdawn wrote >>

    rus wrote >>
    Then, toyota, honda, et. al. showed up and started making cars here. Rather than the adversarial system of union vs. management both sides worked together. Management treated workers like adults, listening to their suggestions for improvement. Labor was fairly compensated and worked in a safe environment. Win / win.

    my, what a rich fantasy life you must lead, rus! Those manufacturers set up primarily in right to work states with high unemployment where the employees benefited from several decades of regulations and protections and the state provided substantial support to reduce their start up costs.

    Shhh. Don’t let reality intrude on the free market fantasy.

    #434617

    Manatee
    Participant

    Call me naive, but I thought the rise and fall of cities like Detroit and Cleveland was part of larger economic trends like the rise and fall of the industrial revolution, and globalization and the new information/service economy. As well as the rise of the economy in the Sunbelt.

    I have no doubt unions played their part for the good and the bad, somewhere in that mix, but I wouldn’t place the blame solely on unions.

    #434618

    people211
    Member

    I saw the story about Detroit’s population decline on GMA this morning. I think it’s interesting though that when comparing Detroit to Columbus that the city of Detroit has a much smaller square mileage than Columbus. Detroit covers a little over 138 square miles.

    Wikipedia:

    Columbus
    The population of the city was 787,033 at the 2010 census.[9] Although Columbus is the most populous city in Ohio, this is due to the city’s relatively large territory (over 212 square miles (550 km2)), and not due to a high density rate. This explains why the Columbus metropolitan area has a relatively small population, and is smaller than both the Cleveland and Cincinnati metro areas…

    I’ve always wondered what Columbus’ population would be if it had similar square mileage to Cleveland (which I think has 79 sq miles to it.)

    #434619

    Antonio
    Member

    BuckeyeShadow wrote >>

    Pablo wrote >>

    rus wrote >>

    Pablo wrote >>
    Unions have made concessions in recent years, probably not enough in management’s eyes. This is the same management with a business model that assumed low gas prices would last forever and continually fought CAFE and safety standards and sold Chevy Vegas and Ford Pintos to an unsuspecting public in the 1970s.
    Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns didn’t have unionized workers so they really should still be in existence and profitable, right?

    And the same union that demanded ever increasing wages, pension benefits and created work rules designed to ensure more employees were present than necessary.
    Then, toyota, honda, et. al. showed up and started making cars here. Rather than the adversarial system of union vs. management both sides worked together. Management treated workers like adults, listening to their suggestions for improvement. Labor was fairly compensated and worked in a safe environment. Win / win.
    Unless you’re the UAW or GM / Chrystler, of course. Then you keep fighting, blaming the other side for your problems and kill each other.
    No sense in letting management off the hook for their part in Detroit’s destruction, but the UAW had a hand in that too.

    Agree that both management and labor have responsibility in the decline but I tend to lean a little harder on management since they’re the ones creating the products for labor to build. The adversarial relationship between management and labor is the real culprit. It seems to me that both sides had their collective heads in the sand in the 70’s and, as an industry, were unable to rapidly adapt to global changes.
    “What’s good for GM is good for the USA”
    “That’s not my job, get the union steward”
    My ex worked for Honda in Marysville in the 80’s and early 90’s. The UAW was trying to organize the workers (a lot were for it) but Honda’s benefit and wage package was really good at the time so, what was the point? In an odd way, the UAW was forcing Honda to treat the workers well so, philosophically, the UAW was representing the workers (but no union dues for the coffers!). Don’t know if that’s the case today. In my opinion, the decline of the City of Detroit is purely a jobs issue and not one of a particular political party.

    +1
    Actually, Detroit’s decline has more do with the monolithic presence and influence of the automobile industry in the city than anything else. The auto companies used their influence directly and indirectly to block other industries from taking root in the city. This essentially tied Detroit’s fate to the fate of the auto industry, for better or for worse. This is why Detroit was never a true rival for Chicago, which has maintained a far more diverse economy and a generally positive trajectory.
    Similarly, while Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Buffalo sustained massive economic, job and population losses resulting from the collapse of manufacturing, they still had other industries and assets present (e.g. banking, universities, etc.) that helped them to eventually regain their footing somewhat. Detroit did not have this.
    Also, on a smaller yet still comparable scale, Youngstown has profoundly suffered for being a one-industry town. Steel was the life’s blood of the Mahoning Valley. When the mills closed down, Youngstown suffered the equivalent of a massive stroke, from which it has yet to recover.

    Having lived in Michigan for many years before moving to Columbus, the corruption in Detroit on behalf of several different mayoral administrations is also a huge factor in Detroits decline and condition.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kwame_Kilpatrick

    #434620

    Pablo
    Participant

    That may certainly be a contributing factor but didn’t Detroit’s decline begin with the ’60s race riots and the oil crisis of the ’70s? Sounds like it was the perfect storm of city decline…

    #434621

    rus
    Participant

    berdawn wrote >>

    rus wrote >>
    Then, toyota, honda, et. al. showed up and started making cars here. Rather than the adversarial system of union vs. management both sides worked together. Management treated workers like adults, listening to their suggestions for improvement. Labor was fairly compensated and worked in a safe environment. Win / win.

    my, what a rich fantasy life you must lead, rus! Those manufacturers set up primarily in right to work states with high unemployment where the employees benefited from several decades of regulations and protections and the state provided substantial support to reduce their start up costs.

    I’ve no doubt financial incentives were factors, but I’d also argue unions just weren’t needed. The cultural effects of Deming on the Japanese, at least, remove a lot of the incentive for an adversarial system.

    You don’t need to join together and fight to be treated like an adult if you’re treated like an adult.

    #434622

    rus
    Participant

    Manatee wrote >>

    I have no doubt unions played their part for the good and the bad, somewhere in that mix, but I wouldn’t place the blame solely on unions.

    yep.

    #434623

    Antonio
    Member

    Pablo wrote >>
    That may certainly be a contributing factor but didn’t Detroit’s decline begin with the ’60s race riots and the oil crisis of the ’70s? Sounds like it was the perfect storm of city decline…

    Yes it did start in the 60’s after the riots, the corruption put into fifth gear.

    You’re right it was a perfect convergence of factors, one right after another compounding each other and feeding of one another.

    #434624

    rus
    Participant

    Antonio wrote >>

    Pablo wrote >>
    That may certainly be a contributing factor but didn’t Detroit’s decline begin with the ’60s race riots and the oil crisis of the ’70s? Sounds like it was the perfect storm of city decline…

    Yes it did start in the 60’s after the riots, the corruption put into fifth gear.
    You’re right it was a perfect convergence of factors, one right after another compounding each other and feeding of one another.

    Lot of factors in play, sure.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 46 total)

The forum ‘General Columbus Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.