This is a link to a blog comparing average US executive salaries/compensation to those of comparable Japanese executives, in this case, bankers.
http://laborrightsblog.typepad.com/international_labor_... The graph posted on this forum comparing American company (Ford) auto worker pay with Japanese company US auto worker pay is misleading in certain ways (though interesting in terms of the breakdown). It's misleading when you consider that Toyota wages are actually higher than the Big 3 wages by a dollar or two or three an hour. Honda and Nissan are a little lower but Toyota is higher. So the generalization that "Japanese" companies are more competitive because they pay less is false. Toyota is the most competitive of the three big Japanese companies and they pay higher wages in the US on average than the US companies pay their workers. So much for the connection between higher wages and competiveness and blaming the workers based on comparison with the Japanese companies.
http://www.aftermarketnews.com/Item/28594/uaw_losing_pa... http://www.daytondailynews.com/n/content/gen/ap/Auto_Wo... But the media won't report this. I guess they have their agenda.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200812060002 What i am trying to understand is, why are the Japanese cars called "imports" if they are made in the US? What percent of the American market for Japanese cars is supplied by cars produced by US companies and what percent are produced in Japan? Are some of them bought from companies made in Japan? Since Japanese health care (and old age pensions?) are state funded, this would obviously reduce production costs for companies producing cars in Japan--the point being, if the US wants to have globally competitive companies, the US government should take over the responsibility of providing health care benefits, as is done in other civilized companies with which the US competes. Otherwise, how can US companies compete? I imagine there may be high protectionist tariffs on imports but i haven't found this information yet.