• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Компании2489
      • Показать ещё
      Разное700
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы390
      • Показать ещё
      Люди141
      • Показать ещё
      Формат39
      Международные организации48
      • Показать ещё
      Издания60
      • Показать ещё
      Показатели66
      • Показать ещё
      Сферы1
United Technologies
11 января, 21:57

Trump refuses to bend to the office of president

He’s attacking his opponents. He’s not offering up his tax returns. He’s not dropping his business ties. And he won’t condemn Putin.

11 января, 12:40

Watsco Increases Stake in Carrier Enterprise Joint Venture (Revised)

Watsco, Inc. (WSO) has raised its stake by 10% in a joint venture with Carrier Corporation for about $43 million.

11 января, 12:20

Производственные показатели концерна Airbus в 2016 году

Как сообщает французская газета «Le Point» в материале Fabrice Gliszczynski  «Incroyable! Airbus explose ses objectifs de production en 2016» , за счет титанических усилий, предпринятых в декабре 2016 года, европейская группа Airbus передала заказчикам в последний месяц года 111 пассажирских самолетов, тем самым общее число поставленных гражданских самолетов Airbys в 2016 году достигло 688 единиц. Хотя Airbus уступила первое место по их выпуску американской корпорации Boeing, однако европейская группа превзошла свои собственные планы, которыми подразумевалась поставка в 2016 году 670 самолетов. Об этом результате официально должно быть объявлено в среду.

10 января, 19:30

5 ETF Investment Ideas for 2017

We have highlighted some ETF areas that are likely to shine in 2017.

10 января, 17:30

Zacks Investment Ideas feature highlights: Etsy, IAC/InterActive, Boeing, United Technologies and Kate Spade

Zacks Investment Ideas feature highlights: Etsy, IAC/InterActive, Boeing, United Technologies and Kate Spade

06 января, 14:00

America Is Still Making Things

Manufacturing is dead. Long live manufacturing.

Выбор редакции
05 января, 00:00

Trump Has a Secret Weapon on Jobs and Trade

Paul Sracic, CNNFord Motor announced Tuesday that it would not invest in new manufacturing operations in Mexico, and instead would create 700 new jobs in Michigan. This follows on the heels of a similar announcement by the United Technologies unit, Carrier, in November that it would save hundreds of jobs at an Indiana plant, and not move them to Mexico.

04 января, 22:14

Tesla Promises 'Several Thousand' Jobs As Gigafactory Comes Online Early

Tesla Motors vowed on Wednesday that it would hire “several thousand” workers as the company begins battery production at its Gigafactory in Nevada. Even though its palatial, $5 billion facility is still less than 30 percent complete, the electric car and clean energy company said in blog post that it’s already manufacturing lithium-ion cells there. “[B]ringing cell production to the U.S. allows us to create thousands of American jobs,” the company wrote in the post. “In 2017 alone, Tesla and Panasonic will hire several thousand local employees and at peak production, the Gigafactory will directly employ 6,500 people and indirectly create between 20,000 to 30,000 additional jobs in the surrounding regions.” The company has also promised to increase hiring at its Fremont, California-based facility and a plant planned for Buffalo, New York. Tesla’s announcement comes amid intense scrutiny of U.S. manufacturers as President-elect Donald Trump steps up attacks on companies he accuses of moving jobs abroad to countries like Mexico. Ford Motor Company on Tuesday promised to add 700 jobs to a Michigan assembly plant as part of a $700 million investment that includes canceling plans to build a factory in Mexico. Wireless behemoth Sprint Corp. allowed Trump to take credit last month for 5,000 jobs the company plans to create as part of a deal finalized before the election. And air conditioning giant Carrier pledged to keep about 850 people employed at an Indiana factory after Trump struck a tax deal and potentially dangled lucrative federal contracts before Carrier’s parent company, United Technology Corp.  Tesla, whose CEO Elon Musk joined Trump’s economic advisory team, didn’t tip its hat to the president-elect. The company has long promised manufacturing jobs as part of its expansion in both Nevada and Buffalo. “Want to Bring Back Jobs, Mr. President-Elect?” New York Times columnist Andrew Ross Sorkin asked in a Dec. 6 headline. “Call Elon Musk.”  What changed is the timing. After Tesla last March unveiled the Model 3, its first affordably priced electric car, the company sold more than 400,000 preorders. In November, shareholders voted to approve Tesla’s $2.23 billion bid to buy SolarCity, the solar panel producer run by Musk’s cousins. Once the merger is complete, Musk envisions the combined company as a one-stop shop for electric cars, solar panels and battery systems to store excess energy at home, eliminating the need for fossil fuel-powered heating and cooling systems. The three-pronged product approach increased demand for lithium-ion batteries, forcing Tesla to move its production timeline at the Gigafactory up by two years. The facility, originally slated to enter mass production in 2020, will by next year produce 35 gigawatt-hours’ worth of lithium-ion batteries. According to Tesla, that’s “nearly as much as the rest of the entire world’s battery production combined.” “By bringing down the cost of batteries, we can make our products available to more and more people, allowing us to make the biggest possible impact on transitioning the world to sustainable energy,” the company wrote in a blog post. “Once complete, we expect the Gigafactory to be the biggest building in the world.” -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

04 января, 22:14

Tesla Promises 'Several Thousand' Jobs As Gigafactory Comes Online Early

Tesla Motors vowed on Wednesday that it would hire “several thousand” workers as the company begins battery production at its Gigafactory in Nevada. Even though its palatial, $5 billion facility is still less than 30 percent complete, the electric electric car and clean energy company said in blog post that it’s already manufacturing lithium-ion cells there. “[B]ringing cell production to the U.S. allows us to create thousands of American jobs,” the company wrote in the post. “In 2017 alone, Tesla and Panasonic will hire several thousand local employees and at peak production, the Gigafactory will directly employ 6,500 people and indirectly create between 20,000 to 30,000 additional jobs in the surrounding regions.” The company has also promised to increase hiring at its Fremont, California-based facility and a plant planned for Buffalo, New York. Tesla’s announcement comes amid intense scrutiny of U.S. manufacturers as President-elect Donald Trump steps up attacks on companies he accuses of moving jobs abroad to countries like Mexico. Ford Motor Company on Tuesday promised to add 700 jobs to a Michigan assembly plant as part of a $700 million investment that includes canceling plans to build a factory in Mexico. Wireless behemoth Sprint Corp. allowed Trump to take credit last month for 5,000 jobs the company plans to create as part of a deal finalized before the election. And air conditioning giant Carrier pledged to keep about 850 people employed at an Indiana factory after Trump struck a tax deal and potentially dangled lucrative federal contracts before Carrier’s parent company, United Technology Corp.  Tesla, whose CEO Elon Musk joined Trump’s economic advisory team, didn’t tip its hat to the president-elect. The company has long promised manufacturing jobs as part of its expansion in both Nevada and Buffalo. “Want to Bring Back Jobs, Mr. President-Elect?” New York Times columnist Andrew Ross Sorkin asked in a Dec. 6 headline. “Call Elon Musk.”  What changed is the timing. After Tesla last March unveiled the Model 3, its first affordably priced electric car, the company sold more than 400,000 preorders. In November, shareholders voted to approve Tesla’s $2.23 billion bid to buy SolarCity, the solar panel producer run by Musk’s cousins. Once the merger is complete, Musk envisions the combined company as a one-stop shop for electric cars, solar panels and battery systems to store excess energy at home, eliminating the need for fossil fuel-powered heating and cooling systems. The three-pronged product approach increased demand for lithium-ion batteries, forcing Tesla to move its production timeline at the Gigafactory up by two years. The facility, originally slated to enter mass production in 2020, will by next year produce 35 gigawatt-hours’ worth of lithium-ion batteries. According to Tesla, that’s “nearly as much as the rest of the entire world’s battery production combined.” “By bringing down the cost of batteries, we can make our products available to more and more people, allowing us to make the biggest possible impact on transitioning the world to sustainable energy,” the company wrote in a blog post. “Once complete, we expect the Gigafactory to be the biggest building in the world.” -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

04 января, 00:05

Ready For The Jawboning Presidency Of Donald Trump

All signs point to Donald Trump becoming a jawboning president without equal in American history. That is, jawboning by exerting rhetorical bombast focused on people, corporations and institutions, with massive media propulsion behind the very personal presidency he will establish. It will be a natural daily extension of his boundless, easily bruisable ego. Trump has embraced these tactics as both a candidate and president-elect. He went after Carrier Corp. (a subsidiary of United Technologies) and Ford Motor Co. for shipping jobs to Mexico, after Boeing for charging too much for the new Air Force One and after Lockheed/Martin for over-pricing its F-35 fighter planes. Previous presidents, knowing they have the "bully pulpit," have generally been averse to the sort of jawboning that singles out specific firms and persons. President Harry Truman did take on a newspaper columnist who criticized his daughter, Margaret's, singing skills. President John F. Kennedy went after U.S. Steel and referred to price hikes from the industry as "a wholly unjustifiable and irresponsible defiance of the public interest." But generally, presidents do not want to be seen as bullies, preferring one competitor against another or frittering their presidential authority by getting into petty squabbles. In the midst of more serious matters of state, jawboning can be a serious distraction that alienates larger numbers of people who may side with the assailed. With Trump, none of this may matter. He has said repeatedly that he always slams back twenty times harder than anyone who slams him. He revels in his 20 million Twitter followers and loves how his tweets are carried by the mass media. That gives him a personal "mass media" which he controls, unfiltered by his antagonists in the press. Rather than playing the "going-through-channels" game in Washington, he'll want to throw his opponents off balance through personal attacks, including attacks on members of Congress and governors. He is into the psychology of human frailties, vanities and occupational vulnerabilities. He knows that jawboning one person, firm or politician will put others on the defensive wondering whether they will be next, or putting foreign powers off balance because of his furious unpredictability. The downside for Trump is that he will be so absorbed in jawboning and rebutting critics that he won't be paying attention to what his underlings are doing until trouble rises to his level for decision. Jawboning can lead to complex consequences when it comes from the most powerful office in the county. Should Trump use jawboning to give corporate gougers of workers, consumers, taxpayers and communities some pause and restraint, if not produce outright reversal of policy, he can become the champion of the underdogs and those bullied. He's already said that drug prices are too high. If he believes that plain fact, can you guess what he'll do next with his tweet on a specific company or a pay-or-die drug costing patients $100,000 or more a year? Trump is known not to like detailed immersion into issues or detailed briefings by civil servants. He likes to set the pace, establish the new focus of the day and, above all, get even with anyone who stands up to or embarrasses him. He seems to behave as if rules and norms do not apply to him. The strange Trump personality can radiate in many directions. Some results may be beneficial. Others - such as in the case of a stateless terror attack - may worsen a bad situation because of impulsive and violent over-reaction, leading to a worsening situation overseas and damage to the national interests, civil liberties and other constitutional rights of the American people. Want a New Year's resolution? Stay alert, keep up with your fellow citizens at the Congressional grassroots, stay informed on current events, and always be ready to foresee and forestall initiatives by politicians and corporatists that recklessly or greedily gobble up your tax dollars and undercut your health, safety and civil rights. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

03 января, 21:18

Ford Scraps Plans For Mexico Plant, But Says It's Not Because Of Trump

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); Ford Motor Company scrapped plans on Tuesday to open a $1.6 billion factory in Mexico. Instead, the automaker said it will invest $700 million to expand a plant in Flat Rock, Michigan, adding 700 new jobs.  The company plans to build a new stable of electric vehicles and self-driving cars at the factory, including a hybrid-electric Mustang and F-150 pickup truck. The plant will also roll out new technology, such as a station that wirelessly charges electric vehicles. While on the campaign trail last year, President-elect Donald Trump attacked Ford’s plans to move production of its Focus vehicle line to Mexico. He later falsely claimed he’d convinced the company to keep a plant open in Kentucky. In fact, Ford had never planned to close the plant. The company said that Trump was likewise not responsible for its latest decision. “We didn’t cut a deal with Trump. We did it for our business,” Ford CEO Mark Fields told CNN on Tuesday. Still, Fields praised the incoming administration at a press conference on Tuesday morning.  “We’re encouraged by the pro-growth policies President-elect Trump and the new Congress have indicated they’ll pursue,” Fields said. “We believe these tax and regulatory reforms are critically important to boost U.S. competitiveness.”  Like many automakers, Ford has over the last two decades moved some production of small vehicles to Mexico, where labor costs are cheaper. In most cases, though, U.S. jobs remained at Ford. When the company moved production of the Ford Focus to Mexico, workers who’d previously assembled the small car switched to making more popular SUVs and pickup trucks.  “To cancel a plant in Mexico is huge,” Jeremy Acevedo, analyst at the auto site Edmunds, told The Huffington Post. “There’s no industry quite as embroiled with unions and driving down labor costs as the auto industry.”  Ford’s plan to add more jobs in Michigan has strong union support.  “This is equivalent to a new assembly plant,” Jimmy Settles, vice president of the United Automobile Workers union, said during the press conference. “We fought very, very hard to make certain we could make a commitment early on for them to put this autonomous vehicle in the United States.” “Too many times in the past we have produced quality vehicles and we have seen our jobs go overseas,” he added. The announcement came hours after Trump criticized General Motors, another Detroit auto giant, for assembling some Chevrolet Cruze hatchbacks sold in the U.S. at a plant in Mexico. The biggest threat to jobs, however, may not be outsourcing, but automation. Advances in robotics and artificial intelligence, coupled with 3D-printing technology, are likely to eliminate a great many jobs in the manufacturing industry over the next decade. Last year, billionaire Elon Musk showed off an array of robots already working in his Tesla Gigafactory, the $5 billion manufacturing facility where Musk plans to build electric cars and lithium-ion batteries.  In November, Trump struck a deal with the air conditioning giant Carrier to keep about 850 factory jobs in Indiana, in exchange for tax incentives and, potentially, lucrative federal contracts for Carrier’s parent company, United Technology Corp. Days later, United Technology CEO Greg Hayes said the company planned to invest $16 million at the Indiana factory “to automate to drive the cost down so that we can continue to be competitive.” “Now, is it as cheap as moving to Mexico with lower-cost labor? No,” Hayes said during an appearance on CNBC’s “Mad Money.” “But we will make that plant competitive just because we’ll make the capital investments there.” Arthur Delaney contributed to this report. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

03 января, 21:18

Ford Scraps Plans For Mexico Plant, But Says It's Not Because Of Trump

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); Ford Motor Company scrapped plans on Tuesday to open a $1.6 billion factory in Mexico. Instead, the automaker said it will invest $700 million to expand a plant in Flat Rock, Michigan, adding 700 new jobs.  The company plans to build a new stable of electric vehicles and self-driving cars at the factory, including a hybrid-electric Mustang and F-150 pickup truck. The plant will also roll out new technology, such as a station that wirelessly charges electric vehicles. While on the campaign trail last year, President-elect Donald Trump attacked Ford’s plans to move production of its Focus vehicle line to Mexico. He later falsely claimed he’d convinced the company to keep a plant open in Kentucky. In fact, Ford had never planned to close the plant. The company said that Trump was likewise not responsible for its latest decision. “We didn’t cut a deal with Trump. We did it for our business,” Ford CEO Mark Fields told CNN on Tuesday. Still, Fields praised the incoming administration at a press conference on Tuesday morning.  “We’re encouraged by the pro-growth policies President-elect Trump and the new Congress have indicated they’ll pursue,” Fields said. “We believe these tax and regulatory reforms are critically important to boost U.S. competitiveness.”  Like many automakers, Ford has over the last two decades moved some production of small vehicles to Mexico, where labor costs are cheaper. In most cases, though, U.S. jobs remained at Ford. When the company moved production of the Ford Focus to Mexico, workers who’d previously assembled the small car switched to making more popular SUVs and pickup trucks.  “To cancel a plant in Mexico is huge,” Jeremy Acevedo, analyst at the auto site Edmunds, told The Huffington Post. “There’s no industry quite as embroiled with unions and driving down labor costs as the auto industry.”  Ford’s plan to add more jobs in Michigan has strong union support.  “This is equivalent to a new assembly plant,” Jimmy Settles, vice president of the United Automobile Workers union, said during the press conference. “We fought very, very hard to make certain we could make a commitment early on for them to put this autonomous vehicle in the United States.” “Too many times in the past we have produced quality vehicles and we have seen our jobs go overseas,” he added. The announcement came hours after Trump criticized General Motors, another Detroit auto giant, for assembling some Chevrolet Cruze hatchbacks sold in the U.S. at a plant in Mexico. The biggest threat to jobs, however, may not be outsourcing, but automation. Advances in robotics and artificial intelligence, coupled with 3D-printing technology, are likely to eliminate a great many jobs in the manufacturing industry over the next decade. Last year, billionaire Elon Musk showed off an array of robots already working in his Tesla Gigafactory, the $5 billion manufacturing facility where Musk plans to build electric cars and lithium-ion batteries.  In November, Trump struck a deal with the air conditioning giant Carrier to keep about 850 factory jobs in Indiana, in exchange for tax incentives and, potentially, lucrative federal contracts for Carrier’s parent company, United Technology Corp. Days later, United Technology CEO Greg Hayes said the company planned to invest $16 million at the Indiana factory “to automate to drive the cost down so that we can continue to be competitive.” “Now, is it as cheap as moving to Mexico with lower-cost labor? No,” Hayes said during an appearance on CNBC’s “Mad Money.” “But we will make that plant competitive just because we’ll make the capital investments there.” Arthur Delaney contributed to this report. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

03 января, 20:52

Ford (F) Stock Gaining on Mexico Plant Cancellation, "Vote of Confidence" in Trump

Shares of Ford Motor Company (F) jumped more than 2.5% in morning trading Tuesday following the automaker's announcement that it is cancelling plans to build a new manufacturing plant in Mexico and instead will invest $700 million in its home state of Michigan.

03 января, 19:47

Компания Ford отказалась от строительства завода в Мексике из-за Трампа

Компания Ford отменила планы по строительству завода в Мексике за 1,6 млрд долларов, выделенные на это деньги автопроизводитель решил направить на производство в США. В течение четырех лет компания направит 700 млн в производство в Мичигане, что создаст 700 новых рабочих мест. Планы компании изменились на фоне заявлений избранного президента США Дональда Трампа, который выступает резко против за вынос производства в другие страны, передает РИА «Новости». Так, во вторник Трамп пригрозил крупными налогами компании General Motors за беспошлинный ввоз в США произведенных в Мексике автомобилей. В начале декабря он также обещал ввести большие налоги для компаний, выводящих бизнес за рубеж, но продающих товары в США. В ноябре избранный президент также убедил корпорацию United Technologies отказаться от планов по переносу бизнеса в Мексику.

03 января, 18:15

Donald Trump Attacks GM Over Chevy Cruze Production, Threatens Tax

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); DETROIT/WASHINGTON, Jan 3 (Reuters) - U.S. President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday blasted General Motors Co and threatened to impose a “big border tax” for making some Chevrolet Cruze cars in Mexico, which the U.S. carmaker defended as part of a strategy to serve global customers, not sell them in the United States. “General Motors is sending Mexican made model of Chevy Cruze to U.S. car dealers-tax free across border. Make in U.S.A. or pay big border tax!” Trump said in a post on Twitter. GM said it makes its Cruze sedan in the United States and that all of those sold in the United States are made in a plant in Lordstown, Ohio. “GM builds the Chevrolet Cruze hatchback for global markets in Mexico, with a small number sold in the U.S.” it said in a statement posed on its website without giving numbers. Shares of GM rose 1 percent to $35.19 after falling about 1 percent following Trump’s tweet before the market opened. Last month. Trump announced the formation of a council to advise him on job creation, a group comprised of leaders from a variety of major U.S. corporations including GM Chief Executive Officer Mary Barra. GM said in 2015 it would build its next-generation Chevrolet Cruze compact in Mexico as automakers look to expand in the Latin American nation to take advantage of low labor costs and free trade agreements. GM said in 2015 it would invest $350 million to produce the Cruze at its plant in Coahuila as part of the $5 billion investment in its Mexican plants announced in 2014. GM said earlier this year it would import some Cruze cars from Mexico. According to Automotive News, GM began producing the Cruze in Mexico last year, making 52,631 cars there. In comparison, it built 319,536 of them in the United States. Previous versions of the Cruze sold in Mexico were made in a GM South Korea plant, it reported. The shift is part of a larger trend among Detroit’s Big Three automakers to produce more small cars for the North American market in Mexico in an effort to lower labor costs, while using higher-paid U.S. workers to build more profitable trucks, sport utility vehicles and luxury cars. In November, GM said it planned in early 2017 to lay off 2,000 employees at two U.S. auto plants, including the one in Lordstown. U.S. small car sales have been hurt by lagging consumer demand and low gas prices. GM’s U.S. Cruze sales are down 18 percent through November. Representatives for the United Auto Workers union could not be reached immediately for a response to Trump’s tweet. Trump’s comments are the latest in a string of Tweets targeted at companies over jobs, imports and costs before he takes office on Jan. 20, including United Technologies Corp’s Carrier unit and U.S. defense companies. The Republican, who will succeed Democratic President Barack Obama, campaigned with tough rhetoric on trade and promises to protect American workers and called out several companies by name, including GM rival Ford Motor Co (Additional reporting by Susan Heavey; Editing by Jeffrey Benkoe) -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

03 января, 18:15

Donald Trump Attacks GM Over Chevy Cruze Production, Threatens Tax

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); DETROIT/WASHINGTON, Jan 3 (Reuters) - U.S. President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday blasted General Motors Co and threatened to impose a “big border tax” for making some Chevrolet Cruze cars in Mexico, which the U.S. carmaker defended as part of a strategy to serve global customers, not sell them in the United States. “General Motors is sending Mexican made model of Chevy Cruze to U.S. car dealers-tax free across border. Make in U.S.A. or pay big border tax!” Trump said in a post on Twitter. GM said it makes its Cruze sedan in the United States and that all of those sold in the United States are made in a plant in Lordstown, Ohio. “GM builds the Chevrolet Cruze hatchback for global markets in Mexico, with a small number sold in the U.S.” it said in a statement posed on its website without giving numbers. Shares of GM rose 1 percent to $35.19 after falling about 1 percent following Trump’s tweet before the market opened. Last month. Trump announced the formation of a council to advise him on job creation, a group comprised of leaders from a variety of major U.S. corporations including GM Chief Executive Officer Mary Barra. GM said in 2015 it would build its next-generation Chevrolet Cruze compact in Mexico as automakers look to expand in the Latin American nation to take advantage of low labor costs and free trade agreements. GM said in 2015 it would invest $350 million to produce the Cruze at its plant in Coahuila as part of the $5 billion investment in its Mexican plants announced in 2014. GM said earlier this year it would import some Cruze cars from Mexico. According to Automotive News, GM began producing the Cruze in Mexico last year, making 52,631 cars there. In comparison, it built 319,536 of them in the United States. Previous versions of the Cruze sold in Mexico were made in a GM South Korea plant, it reported. The shift is part of a larger trend among Detroit’s Big Three automakers to produce more small cars for the North American market in Mexico in an effort to lower labor costs, while using higher-paid U.S. workers to build more profitable trucks, sport utility vehicles and luxury cars. In November, GM said it planned in early 2017 to lay off 2,000 employees at two U.S. auto plants, including the one in Lordstown. U.S. small car sales have been hurt by lagging consumer demand and low gas prices. GM’s U.S. Cruze sales are down 18 percent through November. Representatives for the United Auto Workers union could not be reached immediately for a response to Trump’s tweet. Trump’s comments are the latest in a string of Tweets targeted at companies over jobs, imports and costs before he takes office on Jan. 20, including United Technologies Corp’s Carrier unit and U.S. defense companies. The Republican, who will succeed Democratic President Barack Obama, campaigned with tough rhetoric on trade and promises to protect American workers and called out several companies by name, including GM rival Ford Motor Co (Additional reporting by Susan Heavey; Editing by Jeffrey Benkoe) -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

03 января, 17:35

Трамп раскритиковал General Motors за производство автомобилей в Мексике

Избранный президент США Дональд Трамп заявил, что General Motors не должна ввозить в страну собранные в Мексике автомобили беспошлинно, компании, по его мнению, лучше производить машины в США. Дилеры в США, по словам Трампа, получают собранные в Мексике автомобили Chevrolet Cruze без пошлины. «Делайте их в США или платите пограничную пошлину!», - передает слова Трампа РИА «Новости». Однако в компании опровергли слова Трампа. «Все седаны Chevrolet Cruze, которые продаются в США, производятся в штате Огайо», - заявили в General Motors, в Мексике же производятся машины для продажи на мировых рынках, в США попадает лишь небольшое количество этих автомобилей. Трамп во время предвыборной кампании заявлял, что хочет вернуть рабочие места в Америку, призывая размещать производство крупных компаний не за границей, а в США. В начале декабря он также обещал ввести высокие налоги для компаний, которые выводят бизнес за рубеж, но продают товары в США. В конце ноября Трамп также убедил корпорацию United Technologies отказаться от планов перенести часть бизнеса из штата Индиана в Мексику.

30 декабря 2016, 18:30

Defense Stock Roundup: Lockheed Martin Steals the Show; Raytheon, Boeing Win Big

Defense majors Lockheed Martin Corp. (LMT), General Dynamics Corp. (GD), United Technologies Corp. (UTX), Boeing Company (BA) and Raytheon Company (RTN) secured a number of orders from the DoD daily funding session.

30 декабря 2016, 15:20

Donald Trump's Political Supporters Need To Hold Him To Account

The unexpected outcome of last month's election loosed the horrors of the liberal imagination. The America that we all "knew" to exist doesn't. "They" are coming to round up all of society's victims. Of course, we're still waiting. (With luck, Hollywood celebrities will be the first to go to the camps.) And we're likely to continue waiting for quite some time. But while Donald Trump has generally pleased the Right with his Cabinet appointments, he has demonstrated that he cares little for the rule of law and believes not at all in free markets. Arbitrary presidential intervention in the economy "is the way it's going to be," he declared, and "corporate America is going to have to understand." Which should worry anyone committed to free enterprise and limited government. And requires that Republicans in Congress and elsewhere to keep him within legal bounds. The Carrier deal fulfills the worst of the president-elect's inclinations. Forget the overall argument for trade. Americans are better off if they are able to purchase cheaper products from abroad. Lower-priced goods and services are particularly important for those of modest means, who gain the most from free trade. Moreover, job growth is stronger if the economy is more competitive. Jack up the price of steel and automobiles are more expensive, etc. If Trump closes off the economy, he shouldn't expect the rest of the world to rush to buy U.S. goods and services. No surprise, the majority of Americans favors a more open economy. Trying to "save" high-cost jobs is expensive. Indeed, protectionism routinely spends far more per position than workers receive. It would be better to cut out complicated trade restrictions and simply pay people directly. Except that the public would then know how much they actually were pay for other people's jobs. Politicians prefer to hide the expense. So it is with Carrier. Those employed are happy to keep their jobs. The rest of us will bear the cost, however. The Donald wanted a high profile political win. The issue well illustrates the lessons of Public Choice economics: visible, clamorous interests gain at the expense of the inert general public. Congress engages in boundless special interest spending for the same reason. Well-organized looters strip the Treasury bare because Americans won't lobby to save the buck or two that the ethanol producers, sugar growers, exporters, overseas investors, apartment owners, labor unions and so many others mulct from individual taxpayers. Conservatives always decried this process. They shouldn't embrace it with a nominal Republican as president. The financial pay-off in the Carrier deal is one problem. Vice President-elect Mike Pence is still Indiana's governor, so he was able to raid that state's coffers to the tune of $7 million. Unlucky Hoosiers. (If Donald Trump, who criticized corporate subsidies for job creation during the campaign, is as rich as he claims to be, he should have offered to pay!) Since Carrier is owned by United Technologies, a defense contractor, one could imagine promises, or threats, also being made regarding the firm's future access to military dollars. Trump claimed not to have mentioned the issue, but he didn't have to. UT's CEO indicated that it was this possibility which caused him to shift course. Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers called the episode "more of a mugging than a bribe." State subsidies are a common though counter-productive means to pay firms to come or stay. Trump's high profile ploy has increased expectations of future pay-offs, meaning the price will increase. Anyone who could plausibly shift production abroad in the future need merely hint about the possibility while indicating their willingness to be bought off. How can President Trump say no? Of greater concern, however are the president-elect's threats. Not his drive-by-tweeting, despite the unease that it might engender simply because of the president's reputation as "the most powerful man on earth." But his threat to punish and reward companies as he sees fit. The rule of law is supposed to treat all who are equally situated equally. Yet Carrier is not the only U.S., let alone Indiana, company with plans to outsource production. Moreover, taken literally, Trump intends to make the economy quite unfree. For instance, while celebrating his crony capitalist "success" in Indiana, he declared: "Companies are not going to leave the U.S. anymore without consequences." Indeed, he added, "Leaving the country is going to be very, very difficult." Trump tweeted "Any business that leaves our country for another country, fires its employees, builds a new factory or plant in the other country, and then thinks it will sell its product back into the U.S. ...without retribution or consequence, is WRONG!" He threatened to impose a 35 percent tariff in retaliation. That is, he would tax Americans buying those companies' products. Companies should "be forewarned prior to making a very expensive mistake!" This policy is what one would have expected from a left-wing redistributionist and government planning enthusiast. Everything that has ever been produced here must always be produced here. Consumers should always sacrifice their interests to influential and well-organized bands of producers. Government officials know who should make what where and are entitled to treat companies accordingly. A similar philosophy appears likely to dominate the incoming administration. At the Carrier plant, supposed conservative stalwart and Vice President-elect Mike Pence declared that "The free market has been sorting it out and America's been losing." Trump added "Every time, every time." Donald Trump's America doesn't sound that much different from Bernie Sanders' America. But the problem is not just economic. It is the prospect of one person, whatever his intentions, utilizing essentially unaccountable, untrammeled power. And there's no reason to believe that Trump or his successors would feel constrained to only exercise their power for "good" reasons. What if a firm is seen as obstructing what the president sees as "important" national objectives? What if a company's chief executive simply has the temerity to criticize the president or his policies? The president-elect attacked Boeing for the potential $4 billion cost of replacing Air Force One, threatening to cancel the contract. Of course the deal is expensive. Any one-off project is going to cost more than a mass production model. Of course money could be saved somewhere, especially if the government reduced its technical requirements. But few people want to skimp when the president's safety and effectiveness are at stake. It is unlikely that Trump has a clue as to what the new AF1 should include or cost. Yet his verbal assault came suspiciously soon after the company's CEO criticized Trump's counterproductive protectionist plans. And observers have noted that few businesses are willing to challenge policies which would hurt them as well as America. Reported the Washington Post: "At another time, talk of a steep, punitive tariff would have provoked outrage from U.S. corporations. But faced with an impulsive tweeter-in-chief, corporate America's response has been muted." Pharmaceutical companies also may find themselves in Trump's cross-hairs. The president-elect declared to Time: "I don't like what has happened with drug prices." So what are his plans? There could be no doubt: "I'm going to bring down drug prices." That sounds good, until companies cut research since they can't count on a return sufficient to cover the costs of failures as well as successes. Ironically, Trump's decision to not just politicize but penalize business decisions in response to market forces will discourage foreign investment, now about $3 trillion. America long has been seen an economic sanctuary in an unstable world. But if the whims of the president rather than dictates of law come to drive U.S. economic policy, companies will have good reason to look for other homes for their money. Of course, the U.S. is not the only country where even large companies act supine when faced by demands from an overbearing government executive. One element of South Korea's ongoing political crisis is the fact that the president's shamanist friend shook down major firms for foundation contributions. Company executives admitted that they were afraid to rebuff a request that appeared to have presidential backing. Explained Huh Chang-soo, who heads GS Group and chairs the Federation of Korean Industries: "It's a South Korean reality that if there is a government request, it is difficult for companies to decline." It's not a model America should emulate. Federal industrial policy long has had its fans, but allowing government to pick winners and losers is bound to be a dismal failure. Worse, though, would be a presidential industrial policy, by which Trump would attack or promote companies based on the phase of the moon, or whatever else happened to motivate him that day. Despite his abundant belief in himself, not everything he does is "terrific." Donald Trump is a new phenomenon, but the specter of presidents browbeating business is not. President John F. Kennedy was determined to roll back steel industry price hikes, and both yanked federal contracts and loosed antitrust attorneys in an attempt to enforce his will. The companies ultimately capitulated, at least in the short-term. But no one ultimately benefitted from such an abuse of power. There's already too much crony capitalism in the American economic system. If the president-elect continues to attack the principles of limited government and individual liberty, congressional Republicans will need to step in. Ultimately the people must say stop. Especially those who backed his candidacy. This article was first posted to American Spectator online. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

30 декабря 2016, 15:20

Donald Trump's Political Supporters Need To Hold Him To Account

The unexpected outcome of last month's election loosed the horrors of the liberal imagination. The America that we all "knew" to exist doesn't. "They" are coming to round up all of society's victims. Of course, we're still waiting. (With luck, Hollywood celebrities will be the first to go to the camps.) And we're likely to continue waiting for quite some time. But while Donald Trump has generally pleased the Right with his Cabinet appointments, he has demonstrated that he cares little for the rule of law and believes not at all in free markets. Arbitrary presidential intervention in the economy "is the way it's going to be," he declared, and "corporate America is going to have to understand." Which should worry anyone committed to free enterprise and limited government. And requires that Republicans in Congress and elsewhere to keep him within legal bounds. The Carrier deal fulfills the worst of the president-elect's inclinations. Forget the overall argument for trade. Americans are better off if they are able to purchase cheaper products from abroad. Lower-priced goods and services are particularly important for those of modest means, who gain the most from free trade. Moreover, job growth is stronger if the economy is more competitive. Jack up the price of steel and automobiles are more expensive, etc. If Trump closes off the economy, he shouldn't expect the rest of the world to rush to buy U.S. goods and services. No surprise, the majority of Americans favors a more open economy. Trying to "save" high-cost jobs is expensive. Indeed, protectionism routinely spends far more per position than workers receive. It would be better to cut out complicated trade restrictions and simply pay people directly. Except that the public would then know how much they actually were pay for other people's jobs. Politicians prefer to hide the expense. So it is with Carrier. Those employed are happy to keep their jobs. The rest of us will bear the cost, however. The Donald wanted a high profile political win. The issue well illustrates the lessons of Public Choice economics: visible, clamorous interests gain at the expense of the inert general public. Congress engages in boundless special interest spending for the same reason. Well-organized looters strip the Treasury bare because Americans won't lobby to save the buck or two that the ethanol producers, sugar growers, exporters, overseas investors, apartment owners, labor unions and so many others mulct from individual taxpayers. Conservatives always decried this process. They shouldn't embrace it with a nominal Republican as president. The financial pay-off in the Carrier deal is one problem. Vice President-elect Mike Pence is still Indiana's governor, so he was able to raid that state's coffers to the tune of $7 million. Unlucky Hoosiers. (If Donald Trump, who criticized corporate subsidies for job creation during the campaign, is as rich as he claims to be, he should have offered to pay!) Since Carrier is owned by United Technologies, a defense contractor, one could imagine promises, or threats, also being made regarding the firm's future access to military dollars. Trump claimed not to have mentioned the issue, but he didn't have to. UT's CEO indicated that it was this possibility which caused him to shift course. Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers called the episode "more of a mugging than a bribe." State subsidies are a common though counter-productive means to pay firms to come or stay. Trump's high profile ploy has increased expectations of future pay-offs, meaning the price will increase. Anyone who could plausibly shift production abroad in the future need merely hint about the possibility while indicating their willingness to be bought off. How can President Trump say no? Of greater concern, however are the president-elect's threats. Not his drive-by-tweeting, despite the unease that it might engender simply because of the president's reputation as "the most powerful man on earth." But his threat to punish and reward companies as he sees fit. The rule of law is supposed to treat all who are equally situated equally. Yet Carrier is not the only U.S., let alone Indiana, company with plans to outsource production. Moreover, taken literally, Trump intends to make the economy quite unfree. For instance, while celebrating his crony capitalist "success" in Indiana, he declared: "Companies are not going to leave the U.S. anymore without consequences." Indeed, he added, "Leaving the country is going to be very, very difficult." Trump tweeted "Any business that leaves our country for another country, fires its employees, builds a new factory or plant in the other country, and then thinks it will sell its product back into the U.S. ...without retribution or consequence, is WRONG!" He threatened to impose a 35 percent tariff in retaliation. That is, he would tax Americans buying those companies' products. Companies should "be forewarned prior to making a very expensive mistake!" This policy is what one would have expected from a left-wing redistributionist and government planning enthusiast. Everything that has ever been produced here must always be produced here. Consumers should always sacrifice their interests to influential and well-organized bands of producers. Government officials know who should make what where and are entitled to treat companies accordingly. A similar philosophy appears likely to dominate the incoming administration. At the Carrier plant, supposed conservative stalwart and Vice President-elect Mike Pence declared that "The free market has been sorting it out and America's been losing." Trump added "Every time, every time." Donald Trump's America doesn't sound that much different from Bernie Sanders' America. But the problem is not just economic. It is the prospect of one person, whatever his intentions, utilizing essentially unaccountable, untrammeled power. And there's no reason to believe that Trump or his successors would feel constrained to only exercise their power for "good" reasons. What if a firm is seen as obstructing what the president sees as "important" national objectives? What if a company's chief executive simply has the temerity to criticize the president or his policies? The president-elect attacked Boeing for the potential $4 billion cost of replacing Air Force One, threatening to cancel the contract. Of course the deal is expensive. Any one-off project is going to cost more than a mass production model. Of course money could be saved somewhere, especially if the government reduced its technical requirements. But few people want to skimp when the president's safety and effectiveness are at stake. It is unlikely that Trump has a clue as to what the new AF1 should include or cost. Yet his verbal assault came suspiciously soon after the company's CEO criticized Trump's counterproductive protectionist plans. And observers have noted that few businesses are willing to challenge policies which would hurt them as well as America. Reported the Washington Post: "At another time, talk of a steep, punitive tariff would have provoked outrage from U.S. corporations. But faced with an impulsive tweeter-in-chief, corporate America's response has been muted." Pharmaceutical companies also may find themselves in Trump's cross-hairs. The president-elect declared to Time: "I don't like what has happened with drug prices." So what are his plans? There could be no doubt: "I'm going to bring down drug prices." That sounds good, until companies cut research since they can't count on a return sufficient to cover the costs of failures as well as successes. Ironically, Trump's decision to not just politicize but penalize business decisions in response to market forces will discourage foreign investment, now about $3 trillion. America long has been seen an economic sanctuary in an unstable world. But if the whims of the president rather than dictates of law come to drive U.S. economic policy, companies will have good reason to look for other homes for their money. Of course, the U.S. is not the only country where even large companies act supine when faced by demands from an overbearing government executive. One element of South Korea's ongoing political crisis is the fact that the president's shamanist friend shook down major firms for foundation contributions. Company executives admitted that they were afraid to rebuff a request that appeared to have presidential backing. Explained Huh Chang-soo, who heads GS Group and chairs the Federation of Korean Industries: "It's a South Korean reality that if there is a government request, it is difficult for companies to decline." It's not a model America should emulate. Federal industrial policy long has had its fans, but allowing government to pick winners and losers is bound to be a dismal failure. Worse, though, would be a presidential industrial policy, by which Trump would attack or promote companies based on the phase of the moon, or whatever else happened to motivate him that day. Despite his abundant belief in himself, not everything he does is "terrific." Donald Trump is a new phenomenon, but the specter of presidents browbeating business is not. President John F. Kennedy was determined to roll back steel industry price hikes, and both yanked federal contracts and loosed antitrust attorneys in an attempt to enforce his will. The companies ultimately capitulated, at least in the short-term. But no one ultimately benefitted from such an abuse of power. There's already too much crony capitalism in the American economic system. If the president-elect continues to attack the principles of limited government and individual liberty, congressional Republicans will need to step in. Ultimately the people must say stop. Especially those who backed his candidacy. This article was first posted to American Spectator online. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.