"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John H. wrote:

From a link on the 'Time' site:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...134773,00.html

Why do overseas firms seem to thrive, building profitable cars with U.S.
workers, while Detroit languishes? For example, in the first quarter of
2005,
Nissan made $1,603 on every vehicle sold in North America, while GM lost
$2,311,
according to Harbour Consulting. For starters, the transplants, generally
with
reputations for higher quality than American brands, don't offer the deep
discounts that U.S. makers employ. **And foreign manufacturers don't
carry the
legacy costs that drag U.S. companies down.** [Emphasis added] Workers
at
foreign companies' nonunion shops make roughly the same in wages and
benefits as
unionized employees in Detroit. But Asian and European firms, with
younger
workforces in the U.S., aren't saddled with crippling pension and
health-care
obligations. GM spends $1,525 per vehicle in the U.S. on health care,
compared
with $300 per vehicle at Toyota.


They have national health insurance, or variations on it. D'oh.

Even for their non-union workers working in American plants?