While Muslim faithful are worshiping Allah, sounds of liquored up Texans chasing greased pigs may soon be heard outside the mosque.

"Comin' soon weekly Friday night pig racin'" reads the sign in the Houston suburb of Katy. It goes on to promote a greased pig-catching contest, the opportunity to purchase a slow pig to save its life and--of all things--a pork cook-off. Bring your own bottle, the sign also says and boasts the availability of "clean port-o-pots."

But the planned pig races are wallowing in controversy. A Muslim group having just purchased adjacent property to build a mosque is not amused by the new sign and upcoming swine activities as neighbors--including parishioners at a nearby church my mother pastors--are left wondering what's going to happen to the neighborhood.

Not far from the large pig racing sign, the other group has a small placard that says "KIA Community Center coming soon," I'm told, with the acronym standing for Katy Islamic Association....

The property owner claims the religious group had asked him to leave land occupied by his family since the 1800s, while Muslims deny ever having said that. But that's apparently what prompted the pig racing idea.

Pigs, as you probably know, are considered offensive and dirty animals by the religious group. Making matters worse, Fridays are considered a holy day for followers of Islam who--unless things change--will be flocking to the mosque while pig festivities are underway.

There is other opposition, as nearby homeowners in an upscale residential area have publicly expressed concern for mosque traffic, and fear the "unknown," as the Chronicle reported, while worrying what the construction of a gold dome-covered structure would mean for their own property values.

Now none of that is to explain why Ford and GM are doing so badly -- though an op-ed in today's Journal makes it out that failure to go green is their main problem. The op-ed is short on statistics and long on moral judgments, such as "it is ironic that [Ford's] just-departed CEO Bill Ford, who was known for his environmental interests, never succeeded in getting his leadership team to understand the need to make the environment a core element of the company's business strategy." As my DC lawyer/lobbyist friend puts it,

Claiming that Ford and GM are in trouble because they aren't eco-friendly enough is academic proof that people tend to see what they want to see.

Ford would be in trouble even if its products topped the list of hybrid and zero emissions automobile products, a tiny fraction of the market, just barely over 1% in some estimates, lower in others. Toyota isn't strong because of the Prius; indeed, it can indulge the Prius-set because it sells so many other vehicles which appeal to the 99% of the market which rejects the Prius. Toyota's big hit for 2007 will be its revamped Tundra truck with a bigger engine, stronger frame, and -- to make sure it's accepted in the number one truck market -- it will have a sticker which reads "Made-in-Texas."

Having long ago passed Ford, Toyota will knock off GM this coming year as the world's number one in auto and truck sales by selling more trucks. The Prius is a little thing, a toe-dip in a potential market, not a significant contributor to Toyota's sales. It sure does polish up the image in New Haven and Hollywood, though.

Here's a wake up call for the Yale professor: Ford made many management mistakes, including bad product designs. One of its management mistakes was to rely exclusively on truck and SUV sales as if GM was its only competition. So you get partial credit for your answer. You missed the biggest mistake: paying too much per vehicle in employee benefits, especially for retired workers. If Ford has to pay approximately $1200 per vehicle more than Toyota, doesn't that mean Toyota can afford to put a higher percentage of its money into the vehicle itself? Could this be one of many clues that Toyotas are perceived to be higher in quality? (The largest clue is that Toyotas are higher in quality.)

Nearly all of the jobs which Ford will eliminate are union jobs. A big part of the reason to fire these workers comes from the hard reality that company management can't renegotiate the contract with the UAW management.

I'd say that's the tragedy of today's union management -- whatever the industry -- they won't try to save the jobs of current workers because they'll have to agree to cut (or eliminate) benefits to retired workers. Better to stand quietly while all the union workers bitch at management.

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 9:23 AM | link