Originally Posted by messenger13
I've always been a bit confused by this argument. Not confused by YOUR point of view, but from the "facts" financially speaking.
Your argument seems like it's built on the premise that H-Ds are an American product, and that all of the money stays here at home. But is that really the truth? We all know that a Harley's parts are becoming more & more out-sourced and the bikes are simply assembled in America. At that point, I really don't see much difference in buying a Beemer or a Harley. And what about all of the red-blooded Americans working at the BMW shops? Surely they are just as much a part of our economy as the H-D boys and girls.
Yepper, BMW dealerships and service centers in the US certainly are a part of the economy.
I don't have (nor am I willing to put forth the effort to find out
) a single shred of evidence to back up this next argument, but it seems to be logical conjecture: Other than the engine and actual assembly, probably little of an HD bike is manufactured in the US. However, none of the BMW is. This would lead me to prefer the gov't to buy HD over BMW.
Then you get into the whole "stakeholder" argument. Who owns each corp? What other corporations benefit from the sale of either bike? Which towns/communities benefit from the jobs produced not only by HD and BMW (and their service agencies) but also from the previously mentioned satellite companies (part manufacturers, distributors, etc). My assumption would be that the HD would produce more for the US economy than the BMW. I could be completely wrong here (not an uncommon condition), but I still have confidence in my argument.
On a completely different vein, I bet the Honda ST1300PA
would out accelerate and top-end any of the three bikes tested in that article.
Personally, I'd still take the RT-P, but I'm biased.
Oh, and before anyone goes thinking that I'm anti-overseas purchase or investment, I am not. But I do think that our government should buy locally first.