RE: Apology to most Tundra owners here
I would like to take a moment on behalf of the forum to apologize to most normal Tundra owners here who are happy to own a good truck and not feel the need to try and justify it for more than what it is or go giggle about stirring the pot back at Tundra Solutions. You are the people who help spread good and accurate reviews of this vehicle and are also generally nice to interact with.
The others giving you a bad name really need to disappear. They are essentially making the Tundra a laughing stock. Why they aren't suspended or banned here defies logic as if this behavior was being perpatrated on their own forum the offender would be banned within a few posts. It isn't like it hasn't been proven what their purpose and intent here is. More than one plainly came out and admitted it.
I'll have to admit that I read, then re-read this post, and I am still not sure how to respond to it. I truly don't think that American Made initially meant to "stir the pot," and for the most part, only intended to be informative, then to explain his logic and rationale. He was, in my opinion, attacked rather quickly and somewhat aggressively for doing so. I also firmly believe that if given the opportunity, he would be an informative and helpful member here, which brings me to my next point.
My first inclination upon reading your comment about "on their own forum" was to think that your Freudian slip was showing. Even in the act of offering an olive branch, factionalization was being set up. I am going to give the benefit of the doubt that when you said it you meant no offense, and certainly weren't intending to be divisive. As it is, I recognize that I am very much a novice when it comes to RVs and towing, and a relative newbie here, and don't spend as much time here as I otherwise would if I were towing (one of the reasons I joined was to gain information on the subject). However, I consider this as much "my" forum, as I do Tundra Solutions, of which I am also a member.
In the spirit of the original post, I will tip my hat in thanks.
RE: mythbuster
You have never heard of the Jobs Bank, you know the one that was all over the news. "Big Three auto workers getting paid 100% of their pay to sit in plants, News at 11" I Goggled it for you,LINK
Nope, I missed that one. Evidently my mind was definitely on other things at that point in time. Thanks for the google.
Back when Damn-Liar owned us they cut every plants budget by like 30% and told the Plant Managers to cut the work force to achieve this (it's amazing what people toss in their trash, memos) so she did. They laid off enough people to make up the cut in the budget. This was not a volume related lay off they just wanted to put more money in Damn-Liar's coffers, so everyone went in the Jobs Bank.
Just so you know, I am not a fan of Daimler either, and believe that, while Chrysler would still be having problems today, that those problems would not be so severe had it not been for the merger.
Yep back when Dad was in the Tool Room @ GM in Toledo most plants closed down for the model year change over. The workers had to take their vacation at that time (2 weeks of it) and most Skilled Trades would work during the shutdown. If you where in an assembly plant and the product was in high demand and was not changing then your plant would stay running. At some point in time the contract must have changed and you no longer had to use your vacation and you where laid off and collected unemployment.
This has changed with the last contract and we now have to use our vacation time again and can no longer collect unemployment and sub pay during the summer shutdown.
Myself I'm good with that, why should the company pay us if you have vacation time? But as you can guess this is not going over very well in the plants and I had a discussion with about 10 other workers about it.
They feel the UAW sold them down the river but I asked if this was your Company would you pay your workers for a 2 week shutdown or have them use their vacation? Well luckily the buzzer sounded and I got out of the break room in one piece!
Just like a drug addict it will take some time to wean the work force off of these benefits that we have gotten during the Good Times and hopefully it will drive out the dead wood and let them go back to the State Welfare System and get off of the UAW Welfare System. Yep I said that! :W
My personal opinion is that if there is a planned, annual shutdown for two weeks every year, that it should not be vacation, and it should not make one eligible for unemployment. I would be of the opinion that since those two weeks are planned, every year, that salary is adjusted accordingly and the employees are paid during those two weeks. Sounds like we are close to being on the same sheet of music on this one.
This should have been cleared up by now, I don't know anyone that volunteered to sit in the plant, most did everything they could not to. We did have about 4 people fired at my plant for fraudulently (sp) filling out work papers. They would have someone sign their paperwork so it looked like they where going to the Red Cross. The Red Cross called and asked if they had any more people to send over and the numbers didn't match so they looked in to it and the pound scum was removed. And nope the UAW was not able to get them back!
I would've guessed as much.
In order to receive any Government money some elected officials (good ole boys from Tenn and Texass) required the Jobs Bank to be terminated or NO MONEY.
Note that these are the same clowns that came out and said they couldn't intervene when the Banker's got their big ole bonuses. After all they had a contract that said they would get them.
Well we had a contract also that they tore up! But they sure talked up Toyota for "stepping up to the plate for there workers and Communities" sounds like someone got a big ole pay off to me!
Just so we're clear, I read about it in the news, never heard about it from any elected official. Another difference sounds like the program was a corporate driven program, as opposed to a worker/union driven one, but that just means I have a bit more respect for the union, not the manufacturers.
It does sound like we also share a disdain for our elected officials, and probably the news media as well. If you ever get down toward Springfield, give me a shout ahead of time, maybe we can share a beverage and kick back for a few. Just promise not to laugh at my Neon. It is a Dodge, after all.
RE: mythbuster
It appears that I have my work cut out for me this morning, and all on my first cup of coffee!
While I too would congratulate you on a thought provoking post and going further into the subject than many Americans, you fall short on what is actually a very complex subject economically.
The Tundra is but one minor model of but one foreign manufacturer. Taken as a whole, the numbers of IMPORTED vehicles by the transplanted foreign manufacturers sold in the U.S. are by far the majority of their sales. While many of the naive would like us to believe in their constant advertising of how integrated into America they are, how they employ American workers, and how they sell stock to the profit of Americans...we would be ignoring one of our most serious economic problems of the day...balance of trade.
Because of our insatiable desire to purchase foreign goods at manipulated foreign currency exchange rates, we continuously are forced to borrow from these same countries to float our ever increasing negative trade balances. Conversely, we are treated unfairly by these trade partners. While we welcome with open arms their automotive, electronics, toys, clothing products, etc. without tariffs to protect domestic manufacturers, the circumstances going the other way are very different. Very little research will show the onerous financial burdens put on our manufacturer's exports and to even dream of building a factory there is impossible. On the other hand, those States with these transplant manufacturing facilities have invested billions of dollars in tax and cash incentives to attract them.
While both you and the high school economics teacher present a rather compelling argument on the surface of things, unfortunately you both are espousing what would be the preferred propaganda of the proponents of that particular economic model. I would suggest you both would be well served to do a little deeper research and go a little deeper into economic theory before you become self-satisfied that you are supporting the right model. The question is complex as I stated before and you have cited the exact reason we are rapidly becoming a society of service workers and consumers and a third rate manufacturing Country.
I deliberately kept my answer as simple as possible. I did so because I truly didn't want to write a book on economics, and because I believe the discussion is political enough at this stage. You are correct, the situation is incredibly complex, and one could go into the fact that so much of our nation's debt is held by other countries, and what the possible repercussions of that simple fact is. We could discuss whether it makes any economic sense whatsoever to continue to print more money without any standard of backing it. We could discuss the concern of the dollar being replaced as a standard for international trade, or why it is kept artificially low against other currencies.
We could become even more specific and debate the merits of giving tax exemptions to manufacturers, and whether those exemptions are made up by the increased economic activity within areas where manufacturers settle. Even better, we could look into why we as a nation are punitive toward businesses and manufacturers that are headquartered here, and when in economic crisis tend to make things more difficult for them, virtually forcing them to go offshore in order to continue making a profit. Heck, we could follow that into a tangent on the relative merits of the FairTax.
I don't know about you, but I do enough persuasive writing and arguing in my day job (I'm an attorney), and don't feel like writing books here, especially when there have already been books written on the subject by those far more knowledgeable on the subject than I am. Looking at your post and what I have written directly above, surely you would agree that there have been volumes written on the subject(s) and that there is still no easy answer.
To reiterate, what I do know is that based on the research, my Tundra was the best choice at the time, even though it was not the "intuitive" choice. The fact that it was made in the U.S., by U.S. workers, of a majority U.S. sourced components, and that all of those workers then had money to spend here in the U.S. only made the decision easier.
Oh, and I do agree with your conclusion, although I am not sure I agree with all of the premises it is based upon.
Are you freaking kidding me! Man don't know how I missed this in your post but hay you do know this is what I get my chops busted about on the board RIGHT? It was the UAW that started that program it's called the Jobs Bank (or was before the Feds took it away)! If we where laid off for any reason other then volume driven as in not selling cars, we went into the the JB program. If placed in the program you had to do one of three tings in order to get your pay. Option 1 go to school, or the UAW training center for job related training. Option two, work 8 hour a day 40 hours a week at a Non Profit Organization. Option three, report to your plant and sit in a room for 8 hours a day 40 hours a week (not very fun). So tell me why is it when we did this everyone cried and called us lazy, but when Toyota workers get the same thing they are a Great Group of guys? Please tell me I will love to hear this one!
I don't know whether what I am about to say will make you happy or disappoint you. I am not familiar with the program you cite. I don't understand being "laid off for any reason other than volume driven." I recall from growing up that there are scheduled plant closures for retooling and maintenance and the like. My dad was a machine repairman, so while everyone else was off for two weeks or so, he was working mandatory overtime. While that aspect of the program is one major contrast to what Toyota did when they were forced to idle the plant because they weren't selling vehicles, it is still something that I would tip my hat to, although there should have never have been an option three in my opinion. Either be productive or don't collect a check. Now, why exactly did the Feds do away with the program?
Oh, and thanks, you've taught me something new this morning, and I am still on my first cup of coffee.
Did you not read the post by "Major Dads" post where the numbers show that over 70% of Toyota shares(therefor profit) are owned by Japanese folks? Kinda proves the "profits go back to Japan" myth don't it?
Mav
Actually, the majority of shares are traded in Japanese stock markets. Of these, the vast majority are held by the Japanese. Shareholders may or may not receive dividends, but may just see an increase in the value of their shares based upon how the company is being traded. However, by looking solely at the stocks, you are neglecting the fact that profits are used to build, maintain and modernize facilities, to do R&D and design, and all of the other things that keep a company viable. Much of that money is currently staying in the U.S. If you want to quibble about whether 51% or 60% or 80% of Toyota's earnings "go back to Japan," then you are out of luck. It simply isn't something I am that interested in, any more than asking you for specifics of how much money from the building of your Dodge went to other countries.
RE: mythbuster
Personally, I don't care where my truck is made. I just bought what suited my needs best. If that truck happens to be one that has a head office in Japan next time, so be it.
I think that no vehicle is truely 100% forgein or domestic these days anyway. My truck chassis was assembled in Mexico (VIN begins with a 3), but the engine was built in the USA. I don't live in either one of those countries, but I still like my truck.
I couldn't agree more
RE: mythbuster
You'll never get it will you? Perhaps staring in the sun in Kuwait will continue to make you think that You are not hurting your fellow American by supporting them. My truck built in Michigan by Michigan workers for an American company that has thousands working right here in Michigan supporting our local economy and paying taxes here not over there!
Thanks for the ad hominem argument and the personal insult. I will say this: ONE of us will never get it, it seems. Since I am the one that came to the discussion armed with facts, logic and at least a basic understanding of business and economic models, and didn't just regurgitate the tired old claptrap, I will let you decide for yourself which one doesn't get it.
And while your Silverado may have been assembled in Michigan, it still had less American made components than my American made Tundra, according to the research I have done.
http://www.cars.com/go/about/us.jsp?section=P&content=rel&date=20080703
I'm just trying to figure out where all of those American workers from San Antonio and elsewhere pay their taxes, buy their food, houses and everything else........
Oh, and one last thing I do get, some people can't be convinced because they refuse to allow it. Sort of reminds me of the kid with hands over ears singing "LA LA LA LA I CAN"T HEAR YOU."
RE: mythbuster
As an old GI myself, I remember the post-Vietnam military days when we were held in contempt in many quarters. I appreciate all the men and women who serve and who have served. As the Washington culture can turn against military folks quickly (and seems to be), I think it is important for GIs to know we appreciate them--and maybe pay for their lunches now and then as well.
Well let me thank you for your service as well. I have spent a fair amount of time in San Antonio, and I can't say I have ever been in a place more friendly to the military to include a couple of instances of "your money is no good here," and "someone else picked up your tab."
RE: mythbuster
However, facts rarely make a dent historically in the waves of xenophobia and nativism that usually accompany recessions; but I do applaud your efforts in tilting at this windmill, Doc Ward. And I thank you for your service to our nation in the Middle East, even as others on this board may try to tag you as somehow un-American for buying an American made Toyota!
I have tilted at windmills forever, it seems. Try being a Neon enthusiast!!!! Thanks for pulling the research, even if it doesn't change minds, it at least brings facts to the table.
I'm never quite sure whether to say "you're welcome" or "thank you" when someone thanks me for my service, so I will say both. I have been proud to serve, and it is greatly appreciated and quite humbling to me when it is acknowledged.
Doc,
The tired old "all the profits go back to Japan" myth has been debunked many times. It still pops up from time to time though.
I have been noticing that more and more. Thanks!
RE: mythbuster
Not sure who said anything about pay in Japan other then one person pointing out how their CEO's don't pay theirself 10-150 mil a year!
Anyone know the difference between God and a CEO? ........................God never called himself a CEO!!!! :B
As far as the transplants go the Japaneses manipulated the currency to give their Auto makers an unfair advantage. Then add the fact that they have less then 5000 total retirees to support and I wounder why they are kicking our butts!
I asked some of Chrysler's design engineers up at the Detroit Auto Show why we (Chrysler) don't incorporate LED tail lights and use the clear lenses like GM, Ford and all of the imports use. I was told the cost was to great and our Customers don't want them!
Look at GM's vehicles after Damn-Liar let our Head Design Engineer go because he would not buckle under to their way of thinking. GM snatched him up and the first thing he built was GM's own PT Cruiser, Every thing you see coming out of GM right now would have been coming out of Chrysler had Robert Eton not sold us to the Devil.
Sorry GM and Chrysler both make cars and trucks that equal the Imports in quality and for GM in design (hopefully we can over come this) We have just been beat down by the media telling people that the Big Three's quality is sub par for so long that most believe it.
The Imports where JUNK in the 70's and 80's, for every American car you would see on the side of the road there would be three import's (Honda, Toyota and Dotson/Nisan) My wife's roommate had three Dotson's and I worked on them every week, junk brakes, bad head overheating issues, and the biggest (littlest really) RUST BUCKET I had ever seen! But she swore by them because her Dad was so Anti Union he would not allow them to own a Union made car as long as they live in his house. My DD BF is the same way supper nice kid but has been brained washed by his Dad, shame really his a nice kid.
Anyway if you don't like the big three then buy what you want but to say I'm never going to buy a Chrysler or GM because they got money from the Government is just plain stupid IMO!
Don
Let me preface this by saying that I am certainly not anti-Union. My father is a retired Journeyman, was in a union pretty much all his life. My grandfathers both worked in coal mines their entire lives. My wife is in a union. While I think that many of the larger unions in the U.S. have definite problems, I recognize the necessity of them, and I am thankful for them.
I also agree that the older Japanese vehicles could be rust buckets. I had an '82 Toyota that had a bed that was about to rust off the vehicle. Ironically, the bed was one of the few parts sourced in the U.S. It had rust elsewhere as well, but the bed... There is a reason you see so many older Toyotas with flat beds and the like on them.
When it came time to buy my Tundra, my wife did all the work, since I was deployed at the time. She is more intelligent than I am, has a scientific mind, is methodical, and will research an issue until she is absolutely sure, especially on big item purchases. She went onto various forums and got opinion, did her reading from the auto/truck forums etc. She began with the assumption that she would get a Ford, since I have always liked Fords, and grew up with them. She also looked at Dodge, because I have also liked Dodge (I am the proud owner of a 2002 Neon R/T. You have to like Dodge to say that). She next looked at GMC, because she was eligible for incentives based upon an organization she is a member of. Without going into the lengthy details, despite all of this, she still decided on the Tundra. In discussing it with her, I couldn't fault her logic and I love the truck.
RE: mythbuster
You keep researching and you will find that the MAJORITY of money that comes from building Toyotas here goes right back to Japan. Granted there are SOME engineers and SOME research done here but the vast majority is in Japan. I've dealt with these people I learned their methods and business ideas. I have worked in their plants and seen first hand how they operate. If you think it's American to buy there stuff then you need more of you research.
Really? No offense, but do you understand how things such as publicly traded companies and economics in general work?
Let's start with the fact that Toyota is a publicly traded company, listed on Japanese stock exchanges as well as the New York Stock Exchange and the London Stock Exchange. This means that shareholders across the world benefit from Toyota's profitability, not just one owner, or owners or just shareholders in Japan.
Next, Toyota has built R&D facilities in the U.S. One of them is in Michigan, of all places. They have design facilities here, they have U.S. headquarters, in addition, they have a number of their manufacturing facilities in the U.S., many supplied by domestic suppliers. Now, economically, none of these are static entities. They aren't something that gets built and left to sit. They require a constant influx of capital (read: money, which comes from profits) in order to keep these facilities working, modern, and viable. Add to this the money from profits paid to suppliers, to workers, etc... and the majority of profits do not return to Japan.
Oh, and by the way, when Toyota needed to idle their San Antonio plant last year when gas prices caused truck sales to plummet, Toyota didn't lay any workers off. The workers furthered education, did community service, or whatever, and it cost Toyota tens of millions of dollars to do it. That sounds to me like an investment in workers and community that I haven't seen from the Big Three or the UAW.
Japan has more than sensitized their company s in order to dominate America, to them this is war and they are winning with your help
So the truth comes out. Ethnocentric paranoia raises its ugly head. If U.S. automakers can't compete on our home turf by producing a better product for a fair price, I would suggest that our domination is inevitable, regardless.
The funny thing is, when I researched it, the assertions I could find regarding "profits going back to Japan" came as responses to articles, not from any legitimate source.
RE: mythbuster
I think the point I was trying to make was we are bailing out a bankrupt company and they are still building in China. This is not fair to us.
What cars are they going to build and are they going to be imported back here or are they only going to be sold over there?
The imports would be bankrupt also if it where not for the billions they have gotten from their home countries! Way can't some of you understand this?
Don
I'm going to have to disagree with you here. While Toyota has received emergency loans from a government bank, it hasn't been to avoid bankruptcy. Instead, it has been to help stabilize U..S. operations during the economic downturn, to diversify holdings, and to help Toyota compete against American makers that are now using U.S. taxpayer funding to sell cars. Yes, Toyota, like other manufacturers are hurting right now, but not the way the U.S. makers are, and they haven't been hemorrhaging money the way the U.S. makers have been for awhile.
RE: mythbuster
By the way, how much does a Japanese CEO make compared to one of the Big Three? How about the line workers? Well Toyota workers make more then UAW workers if you believe the CEO of Toyota! I have always said the big boys and girls at the top are the ones killing the car companies not the workers!
I've long been of the opinion that it is both.
RE: mythbuster
I think the question about American made has to include the fact that if you are buying Toyota or one of the others you are not only supporting a non-American product but also you are feeding and providing a job to the bookkeepers, engineers,designers, Secretarys, executives, and all of the rest of the support personnel, not to mention the parts suppliers and the bankers. This only compounds when you add in their government subsidies.
So just buying a product made in Japan does do far more to hurt your fellow Americans then what meets the eye.
My Tundra was made in San Antonio, TX, out of a majority of American made parts. Toyota and Nissan both have design and engineering in the U.S. as well. And remember, to keep plants operating requires capital improvements, which means a continuing investment within our country. While some "profits" do go back to Japan, those profits also pay employees, contractors and others.
By the way, how much does a Japanese CEO make compared to one of the Big Three? How about the line workers?
As someone said above, I research, research, research, then buy what I believe is the best vehicle to fit my needs and my budget. It might be American, it might not.
RE: What happened to the Tundra post?
You need thicker skin to be on these forums.
I hope that I have better things to do with my time than thickening up my skin so that I can better put up with what I read from many in that thread.
I'll agree that sometimes Tundra/Titan owners (see my sig) take some heat every now and then, but in this instance that wasn't the case. This was purely about being obscenely overloaded and safety issues.
I saw it as the former in large part. We can agree to disagree on whether "obscenely" fits, but even to the extent it was about being overloaded, I saw it being attack first, let the dust clear, then attack again.
Now, if you're going to continue hanging around these forums, buy a Ford, ownership will toughen you up! :)
Without meaning any disrespect to the "domestics," but when the Tundra was researched and purchased, it was the best vehicle to fit my needs.
DocWard & Ron3rd: I’m sorry to hear, that one thread soured your experiences to the whole forum. It also left a bad taste in my mouth. The thread was closed before I read most of the 54 pages and didn’t get a chance to reply. In any public forum you will get brand bashing and who has the biggest Johnson. I’m too old to play that game, because next time I don’t know what I’ll own. What really got to me is that no one challenged the OP that he was breaking the law in Canada. When the OP said: that he was told by the MTO and OPP that he wasn’t breaking any laws; he should have asked them “why are his taxes paying for a manned provincial weigh scale if there is no laws to enforce”? I for one found it offensive that someone would start a thread, knowing that it would cause a cat fight, but it is a public forum and the OP is entitled to his opinion. What he wasn’t entitled to, was to make a mockery of the Canadian Legal System and to tell other members of this great forum that it is open season to carry and tow anything you want in Canada. It is my opinion that if anyone that knows he is over the rating of a vehicle and comes on a public forum to justify that he is legal and when 90%+ of the members try and tell him that he could be unsafe, he is more worried about his money then his, his family or our safety. Anyone can go to the MTO web site and look up the laws, it is sad that the OP chose to ask friends and be so misinformed in my opinion. The point is that in our countries, people have rights and laws are made to protect those rights and the weight laws are put in place to stop us from doing things unsafe. Sure I pull the, I’m right and you’re all wrong from time to time, but not when it comes to my safety! I do thank that Moderator for not closing the thread earlier and respect his decision to close it, when members were making personal attacks. Please don’t let one thread turn into a negative, look at the positive and enjoy your RV.
Again, no disrespect intended, but knowing the OP from another forum to which we both belong, I am confident in his concern for the safety of himself and his family, but also for the general public at large. Oh, and before anyone jumps to the conclusion that I joined or have participated because of knowing him, I will just say that I was a member here before I knew him, and I do prefer not to be an instigator, but sometimes feel compelled to offer my opinion. I'm a lawyer, I am sure many would expect nothing less.
RE: What happened to the Tundra post?
The things I found rather interesting about the previous thread:
Big Three owners, who often can't get along themselves, will lock elbows together when an interloper comes in. It matters not where the vehicle was built or the majority of the parts "sourced." The "profits go back to Japan," so it must be bad. Of course, saying the profits go back to Japan is an amazing simplification of what actually occurs, so it must either be a way of justifying their own purchase to themselves, or a defense of the Big Three and the UAW. Whatever the reason, it seems to be misplaced anger.
Secondly, it seems that many immediately closed their minds after reading that American Made was towing beyond the manufacturer's stated capacity. Instead of attempting to understand if there was any logic to his decision making, which it seems to me there was, they simply released the hounds and went on the attack. Among those who lashed out immediately, I don't recall seeing one say, "OK, explain your rationale to me, point by point." It was "No, bad...Bad...BAD I say!" The axle would never handle it, the frame would snap, cats and dogs would live together. There was also never a suggestion of "gee, have you tried to think of ways to reduce weight?," or attempts to be helpful.
All in all, it has kind of soured my experience here, and I think that in the future, if and when I do start towing with my own Tundra, I will be quite reluctant to come here for advice or support. I'm not sure it will be worth the effort to sort through the attacks that I can now anticipate for driving a Tundra, being uneducated on the subject, and for making what members see as a mistake.
RE: 2007 Tundra Tow Vehicle with 34 foot trailer: the numbers.
Well, I can say I am a Tundra owner, although if you check my join date, you will find I have been around for just a little while...
I'm glad to know I have a good truck for my purposes, too.
RE: Tundra as Tow-Mobile: 1,200 miles, 12,000 lbs, 10 MPG
.....In all fairness to Chrysler, they did have large cash reserves and ongoing R&D prior to the merger with Daimler. It appears that Daimler bled them dry, didn't put anything back into the company, then tossed them aside.
Do a little research on this, you will find it was Chrysler that drained Daimler of MILLIONS. Which is why the gave it away, to stop the blood letting from their vaults. They sort of "paid" the current investors to take Chrysler.
I will do a little research, but I recall Chrysler having several billion in reserves prior to the merger. I was under the impression that their reserves were part of what made them the focus of merger interest.
Edit: In doing a quick google search, I find references in various sources about Chrysler having anywhere from $8 to 25 billion in cash reserves, but nothing from a "news source." I will have to do a bit more research when I have the time and inclination.
RE: Tundra as Tow-Mobile: 1,200 miles, 12,000 lbs, 10 MPG
I wasn't aware of Toyota needing a bailout from the Japanese government. So, I did the obvious and googled it. What I found was that Toyota had gone to a Japanese government backed bank to seek emergency lending, to the tune of about $2 billion. Typically, one goes to a bank for loans, the last I checked. If trends hold, they could be looking at their first net annual losses since 1950, due to the contraction in the international economy. At this point in time, the company as a whole appears to be solvent.
Compare this to Chrysler and GM. Going to the government directly for, the last I checked, tens of billions of government subsidized bailouts. I have yet to hear the word "loan" and it has clearly been an emergency situation, keeping the companies afloat through taxpayer money, not through the banking process. The bailouts clearly haven't worked either, as Chrysler is filing for bankruptcy and GM is likely going to do the same.
In all fairness to Chrysler, they did have large cash reserves and ongoing R&D prior to the merger with Daimler. It appears that Daimler bled them dry, didn't put anything back into the company, then tossed them aside.
In regard to Tundra, it is apparent to me that purchasing my Tundra contributed to the American economy in an amount comparable to a purchase of from one of the Big Three. And yes, in my opinion, I got a better vehicle. Toyota has also shown dedication to the workers as well. When the Tundra line was idled last year, they figured out ways to keep everyone employed, through continuing education, community projects or whatever, even though it wasn't directly "profiting" the company.
As for the towing, I will admit that I am not as knowledgeable as others on topic, and if I am ever going to tow with mine, it will likely be a bumper pull horse trailer, or perhaps a TT. Nothing that I expect to challenge its capacities. I will say though that I know the OP through another forum as an intelligent and thoughtful person, even though I have been known to disagree with him once in awhile, and I would anticipate that he put much thought into his decision making process. Take that for what it's worth.
