Is it morally wrong to buy a Toyota?
Oct. 7th, 2006 07:53 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
beth_leonardIs it morally wrong to buy a Toyota?
That's the question that's keeping me up tonight. I'm sure most of my friends reading this journal would say "Duh. No." but most of my friends probably don't have grandparents who worked for GM for 30+ years, and weren't raised to believe that American is the greatest country on earth, and one of the things that makes it that way is that we stick up for each other in good times and bad.
My grandfather liked working for GM. He likes getting a pension from GM. I'd like for GM to continue to do well.
The problem is that we need a new minivan. The only two brands recommend by Consumer Reports are Honda and Toyota. We looked at quite a few brands of minivan today, and the Honda and Toyota have much more trunk space, due to where the spare tire is kept, and how the back seat folds down into the well.
I like trunk space. I need trunk space. I put two huge strollers into my car every Thursday when I drive the carpool.
Why don't the GM cars have as much trunk space? Is it a patent issue? I wouldn't be surprised.
I need to look at the Saturn Relay tomorrow, but unless it's very impressive, I think the Toyota will be the car we buy. With the options we want, the MSRP on the 2006 Toyota is $25K. We found a gold brand-new 2005 GM Pontiac SV6 still on the lot that the dealer will part with for $22K.
The Relay is our last hope for an American car. I get the GM Family discount, which is about 10% off the sticker price of a new vehicle (varies by model). Even with the discount, and American car is only a few thousand less than the Toyota. Will I pay $3000 for more trunk space and an 8th seat?
So I guess I'd ask my friends, is there anything about Toyota I don't know? Are they the Walmart of car dealers? Do they treat their employees right? Even the women and the American ones? Am I giving up on my own personal values by buying a Toyota? Or are they just another company that deserves to sell me a product as much as the other guy?
Sincerely,
--Beth
PS. I don't shop at Walmart.
That's the question that's keeping me up tonight. I'm sure most of my friends reading this journal would say "Duh. No." but most of my friends probably don't have grandparents who worked for GM for 30+ years, and weren't raised to believe that American is the greatest country on earth, and one of the things that makes it that way is that we stick up for each other in good times and bad.
My grandfather liked working for GM. He likes getting a pension from GM. I'd like for GM to continue to do well.
The problem is that we need a new minivan. The only two brands recommend by Consumer Reports are Honda and Toyota. We looked at quite a few brands of minivan today, and the Honda and Toyota have much more trunk space, due to where the spare tire is kept, and how the back seat folds down into the well.
I like trunk space. I need trunk space. I put two huge strollers into my car every Thursday when I drive the carpool.
Why don't the GM cars have as much trunk space? Is it a patent issue? I wouldn't be surprised.
I need to look at the Saturn Relay tomorrow, but unless it's very impressive, I think the Toyota will be the car we buy. With the options we want, the MSRP on the 2006 Toyota is $25K. We found a gold brand-new 2005 GM Pontiac SV6 still on the lot that the dealer will part with for $22K.
The Relay is our last hope for an American car. I get the GM Family discount, which is about 10% off the sticker price of a new vehicle (varies by model). Even with the discount, and American car is only a few thousand less than the Toyota. Will I pay $3000 for more trunk space and an 8th seat?
So I guess I'd ask my friends, is there anything about Toyota I don't know? Are they the Walmart of car dealers? Do they treat their employees right? Even the women and the American ones? Am I giving up on my own personal values by buying a Toyota? Or are they just another company that deserves to sell me a product as much as the other guy?
Sincerely,
--Beth
PS. I don't shop at Walmart.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-10-08 03:52 pm (UTC)OK, when we're talking about Japan here, which is also a first-world country, it makes sense to apply whatever minimum standard is consistent with how you'd like to see workers treated in this country. But I tend to see people talking about this in the context of third-world countries, and in particular being irate that these standards of work are often a lot lower than they would be in the US -- without taking into account that, even so, those jobs may be a hell of a lot better than the prevailing wages and working conditions. (A dollar a day isn't such a bad wage if the average in your country is fifty cents, you know?) I strongly suspect that supporting companies whose jobs represent improvements over the prevailing economic condition, whether or not the absolute quality of those jobs is desirable, is the way to ultimately increase third-world standards of living to actually desirable levels.
(Of course, being an ancient historian, my whole perspective is colored by the knowledge that, until recently, more or less nobody had indoor plumbing. Even rich people.)
Anyway. In general, I think "proper stewardship" has to be contextual, and insisting on US-culturally-appropriate worker norms for every job in the world is probably a good way to ensure that people in a lot of the world don't have jobs. But, since you're talking about Japan here, not, say, Botswana, this argument doesn't really apply, and I think it's reasonable to apply whatever consumer incentives in that direction seem morally comfortable :). I mean, clearly part of the value of the car for you isn't just in the cargo space or the gas mileage or whatever, but also in the ethics of the company, and since you value that, may as well be willing to pay for it :).
(NB: I'd say that GM has so far taken good care of its previous generation, but I wouldn't bet that they will continue to do so; GM has had to take on billions of dollars of debt to maintain its pension fund, which is it unable to support from revenue, and is able to play accounting games to cover the full extent of its liability; eg source. Not that GM is alone in this; quite a number of companies and governments have the same problem (*cough* social security), which is one of the things that definitely does not thrill me about the world economy over the next few decades. I expect massive defaults one of these days and correspondingly plan my retirement savings under the assumption social security will not exist when I get there...and am, in the meantime, relieved that my employer does not offer a pension.)