Skip to main content

Toyota Problems vs American Unions

Am I the only one other than TOYOTA to notice the over-zealous complaints recently?  It looks to me like Toyota did (or does) have a few problems. In the media it is sometimes an unproven reference to a sticky accelerator pedal. At other times it's a weird claim that if one of their vehicles is purposely driven TOO FAST and TURNED TOO QUICKLY it might go out of control - if it is driven by a driver who is really trying to turn it over.

How quickly the very few claims  have morphed into thousands?  The media have gone into a feeding frenzy.  Why this special attention? I DOUBT THAT ANY CAR MAKER HAS SAFER CARS THAN TOYOTA.   So who would benefit from damaging Toyota's reputation?  THE AMERICAN AUTOWORKERS UNIONS that's who. 
These unions have long been frustrated with their inability to organize the foreign auto companies that build cars in America.  It is these same unions that are responsible for putting our car manufacturers at a financial disadvantage in the market. Now they are building Toyota's relatively minor problems way out of proportion. 

Does TOYOTA really deserve it?

What do you think?.

Comments

Maggie Thornton said…
I agree with you. There is more than meets the eye in Congress hauling these people to the hill, and Ray Lahood telling people not to buy Toyota.

Government Motors will never replace Toyota, no matter that this administration tries to do. People love their Toyota brand.

Popular posts from this blog

Gloves Off

. OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS BETRAYED OUR TRUST AGAIN. Whether we are Democrat or Republican, Liberal or Conservative, makes no difference at all. Our legislators voted according to "what's best for them". It was clear that the people want to reduce the costs and improve access to our overall health care system. It was also VERY CLEAR that they did not want the 2000 page legislative monstrosity that was produced by a small number of far left liberal Democrats, who worked behind closed doors to fashion a pork filled blunderbuss that virtually no one has been able to read, or discuss, or debate, or offer alternatives to specific unreasoned clauses. It is (now) a BAD BILL , passed by BAD POLITICIANS, that compose a BAD MINORITY segment of America's out-of-control government. AND WE HAVE NO LOGICAL WAY TO PAY FOR IT EITHER. The far left liberals like to point at  SOCIAL SECURITY   as a text book success. They are wrong and will not admit it despite the concrete evide

Why Blackwater Mercenaries

Over some years the name Blackwater shows  up in the news. It is, by their own estimation, the largest mercenary group in the world. I think I first noticed it when reports from Iraq mentioned they were employed (by whom?) to escort and protect members of the Iraqi government from place to place. Then I became aware that they had joined several of the firefights between our marines and Iraqi enemies. I wondered just how these mercenaries (that supposedly came from the United States) were  hired by someone (who?) to fight? That led to the question of just who would be responsible if a situation involved the accidental killing of an innocent bystander? It  might be a little sticky for an unauthorised mercenary contracted by the United States but not a member of our military forces.  Or suppose a Blackwater type killed a military Iraqi combatant and was then captured by the enemy. Would he be treated as a spy, or as a American combatant, or whatelse?  And would the Geneva Convention

Sarah-palin-itus

. Am I the only one that watches the liberal roar caused by the soccer mom . . . and laughs?   I suspect Sarah is a nice and decent person who will eventually prove to be a better political critic than elected official. But who knows. She projects an effervescent personality, a better than average intelligence, and solid conservative values. Still,  as a political leader of consequence I suspect she is a female Peter. You do remember THE PETER PRINCIPLE don't you. Dixon