>#1 and #2 allowed East Asia and the >EU to demolish the US auto and
>machine-tools industries
So why then does Ford own Mazda and GM own Isuzu, with almost controlling shares of Suzuki and Fuji Heavy (Subaru)? These companies have also been making overtures at Honda, since Honda's go-it-alone strategy can't match the Toyota 20 billion dollar war chest.
It's the oversized market capitalizations that US companies enjoy, and, as Enron showed, the ability to move all that money around like, like...the Bushes and the Bin Ladens. Of course what GM Credit (along with GE Credit etc) really wants to own are some Japanese banks.
True, US protectionism helped Nissan and Mitsubishi to end up being owned by what are essentially European companies (Renault and Daimler-Chrysler, respectively). In the case of Nissan, eventually it will be a partnership of equals because Nissan has the factories and the manufacturing know-how that Renault doesn't (though I wouldn't make too much of Nissan's recent profits just yet, since they came from selling off assets more than anything). In the case of D-C, Mitsubishi will make eventually most of what goes out branded as Chrysler and teach Daimler how to make something besides overpriced luxary cars. Word out is that after making a survey of their proletariat factories in the US and Japan, the Kings of Daimler wondered why they bought the uncooperative Chrysler for so much when the clearly superior Mitsubish offered so much more. Still others argued that Chryslers' credit portfolios and dealerships in the US made it worthwhile.
And machine tools, whether owned by US or Japanese interests, are going to China.
Charles Jannuzi