Government Motors [Archive]

James48843

07-30-2009, 07:49 PM

Well, it's official.

"Cash for Clunkers' is being suspended effective midnight tonight.

It was SOOO successful, that they are afraid they are going to run out of money for the program that was supposed to last till November. Instead, it lasted 4 days, and now is being suspended, after a dramatic success in clearing out car lots.

Here is the news story tonight on the wires:

-----------------------------------------

AP sources: Govt to suspend 'cash for clunkers'

AP sources: Government to suspend 'cash for clunkers' program out of funding concerns

By Ken Thomas, Associated Press Writer
On Thursday July 30, 2009, 8:33 pm EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government plans to suspend its popular "cash for clunkers" program amid concerns it could quickly use up the $1 billion in rebates for new car purchases, congressional officials said Thursday.

The Transportation Department called lawmakers' offices to alert them to the decision to suspend the program at midnight Thursday. The program offers owners of old cars and trucks $3,500 or $4,500 toward a new, more fuel-efficient vehicle.
The congressional officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. Rae Tyson, a spokesman for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which administers the program, declined comment.
Congress last month approved the Car Allowance Rebate System program, known as CARS, to boost auto sales and remove some inefficient cars and trucks from the roads. The program kicked off last Friday and was heavily publicized by car companies and auto dealers.

Through late Wednesday, 22,782 vehicles had been purchased through the program and nearly $96 million had been spent. But dealers raised concerns about large backlogs in the processing of the deals in the government system, prompting the suspension.

A survey of 2,000 dealers by the National Automobile Dealers Association found about 25,000 deals had not yet approved by NHTSA, or nearly 13 trades per store. It raised concerns that with about 23,000 dealers taking part in the program, auto dealers may already have surpassed the 250,000 avehicle sales funded by the $1 billion program.

"There's a significant backlog of 'cash for clunkers' deals that make us question how much funding is still available in the program," said Bailey Wood, a spokesman for the dealers association.

Even before the suspension, some in Congress were seeking more money for the auto sales stimulus. Rep. Candice Miller, R-Mich., wrote in a letter to House leaders on Wednesday requesting additional funding for the program.

"This is simply the most stimulative $1 billion the federal government has spent during the entire economic downturn," Miller said Thursday. "The federal government must come up with more money, immediately, to keep this program going."

Brendan Daly, a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said they would work with "the congressional sponsors and the administration to quickly review the results of the initiative."

General Motors Co. spokesman Greg Martin said Thursday the automaker hopes "there's a will and way to keep the CARS program going a little bit longer."

Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/AP-sources-Govt-to-suspend-apf-3529110957.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=1&asset=&ccode=

Minnow

07-31-2009, 07:01 AM

hmmm... i guess it's ok to keep the printing presses going when it comes to the big guys... but when it comes to giving the common folk a little break, that spigot has to be turned off? -- it was a bad idea in the first place but a pretty clear litmus test as to where the government's loyalties really lie, eh?

James48843

08-01-2009, 04:11 AM

Cash for Clunkers stimulus supplemental passes the House. It would mean another 2 billion for this program- shifted money from existing stimulus bills into the cash for clunkers program.

How did YOUR representative vote?

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll682.xml

Now that it's passed the house- it moves on to the Senate next week. Car dealers are hoping it will pass, because the program started Monday this week, and has been widely successful at generating car dealer floor traffic. So successful, that it may have already consumed the money originally thought that it would last until November, in just a few days.

James48843

08-01-2009, 04:12 AM

CARS Back on the Road

The CAR Allowance Rebate System (CARS) is still operating.
Consumers can still take advantage of the government program and receive a $3,500 or $4,500 discount for their trade-in vehicle when purchasing or leasing a new vehicle.
Check back often to this site for updates and information.

http://www.cars.gov

OBGibby

08-01-2009, 07:24 AM

Seems like the program had good intentions but looks like it's going to turn out to be a waste of money. From what I understand, to get the rebate you having to trade in car getting 18mpg or less. I would think most cars on the road today get better gas mileage than that. Even the older cars that get 18mpg or less are probably being driven by folks not exactly ready or able to pay a monthly car payment on a new car, rebate notwithstanding. And the more expensive cars that get less than 18mpg - the folks that drive those types of luxury cars probably don't really care about the rebate. All that being said, how many people are really going to benefit from this? Is it worth the US government getting involved? I don't think so. Just my two cents, your mileage may vary.

James48843

08-07-2009, 08:43 PM

from http://www.unionvoice.com today:

Toyota takes tons of "Cash for Clunkers" money, then decides to close U.S. plant-

Toyota Motor Corp., which exports millions of vehicles to the United States, is considering closing the last remaining West Coast auto assembly plant in Fremont, Calif., the very state where it sells a huge percentage of its vehicles.

Meanwhile Toyota is ramping up production in Japan, upgrading 900 temporary workers to permanent status while its workers in the United States face plant closures and wage and benefit cuts -- not only in California, but in non-union plants in Kentucky, West Virginia, Canada and elsewhere.

It’s high time that our elected representatives start dealing with unfair trade issues. Our goal is simple: If you sell vehicles locally, they should be built locally by workers making decent wages and benefits.

Will you sign our petition to President Obama and Congress asking them to investigate and support ways to keep the NUMMI plant open?

Sign on-line petition here:

http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/nummi

McDuck

08-07-2009, 08:48 PM

while its workers in the United States face plant closures and wage and benefit cuts -- not only in California, but in non-union plants in Kentucky, West Virginia, Canada and elsewhere.

It’s high time that our elected representatives start dealing with unfair trade issues. Our goal is simple: If you sell vehicles locally, they should be built locally by workers making decent wages and benefits.

Will you sign our petition to President Obama and Congress asking them to investigate and support ways to keep the NUMMI plant open?

That sounds like an urban legend being pushes by union thugs.

McDuck

08-07-2009, 08:50 PM

A new Toyota TR-4?
(http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct2=us%2F0_0_s_6_0_t&usg=AFQjCNFgClChcRa4N1fcZI_RdXBo8c3v5Q&sig2=uMi5T6Pj95me_3Ki_CxFrw&cid=1292233902&ei=s9h8SrjVFanm9ASzs6GOAw&rt=SEARCH&vm=STANDARD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.examiner.com%2Fx-18816-Cincinnati-Auto-Mechanic-Examiner%7Ey2009m8d7-A-new-Toyota-TR4)Examiner.com

McDuck

08-07-2009, 08:53 PM

Show-me

08-08-2009, 05:55 AM

Who can afford to operate in Left Wing California? Look at the problems that State has and multiply them if the Country is run with the same values.

You would think the County would look at California and say "I don't want no part of that kind of mess."

Show-me

08-08-2009, 05:58 AM

One of their biggest industries and supporters are making movies anywhere but there. Go figure. They are doomed by their own hand.

CountryBoy

08-08-2009, 06:31 AM

That sounds like an urban legend being pushes by union thugs.

Surely the Unions wouldn't do this.

When we take back the Congress and White House the first thing we're gonna do is repeal the Wagner Act. See how the unions like that. Oh, yeah, if we repeal the Wagner Act there will BE NO MORE UNIONS.

from St. Louis Tea Party web site:

Union Thugs Deliver Unprovoked Beating on Black Conservative at Carnahan Town Hall
by admin on August 7, 2009

Email from eyewitness and attorney confirms that SEIU-logo’d thugs attacked and beat a black man for distributing Gadsen flags following a Town Hall in St. Louis County on Thursday. Race was a factor in the beating.

Quote:August 7, 2009
Dear Mr. Hennessy:

I am Kenneth Gladney’s attorney. Kenneth was attacked on the evening of August 6, 2009 at Rep. Russ Carnahan’s town hall meeting in South St. Louis County. I was at the town hall meeting as well and witnessed the events leading up to the attack of Kenneth. Kenneth was approached by an SEIU representative as Kenneth was handing out “Don’t Tread on Me” flags to other conservatives. The SEIU representative demanded to know why a black man was handing out these flags. The SEIU member used a racial slur against Kenneth, then punched him in the face. Kenneth fell to the ground. Another SEIU member yelled racial epithets at Kenneth as he kicked him in the head and back. Kenneth was also brutally attacked by one other male SEIU member and an unidentified woman. The three men were clearly SEIU members, as they were wearing T-shirts with the SEIU logo.

Kenneth was beaten badly. One assailant fled on foot; three others were arrested. Kenneth was admitted to St. John’s Mercy Medical Center emergency room, where he was treated for his numerous injuries. Kenneth was merely expressing his freedom of speech by handing out the flags. In fact, he merely asked people as they exited the town hall meeting whether they would like a flag. He in no way provoked any argument or altercation, as evidenced by the fact that three assailants were arrested.

We hope that Kenneth fully recovers from his injuries; however, he is in great pain at this time. We will be pursuing legal action at our discretion. This was a truly senseless hate crime carried out by racist union thugs. Regretfully, Representative Carnahan’s statements blaming Kenneth for being a disruptive force are wholly untrue and slanderous. We would like to think that an elected official in Representative Carnahan’s position would gather accurate information before carelessly rushing to judgment.

Kenneth supports conservative ideals, although he subscribes to no particular political party. We are calling on the SEIU, Representative Carnahan, and President Obama to condemn the racist actions of these union thugs. In the days to come, we will be investigating whether these thugs are working at the behest of Representative Carnahan and how strong their alliances to various organizations–such as ACORN–may be.
We hope the St. Louis Tea Party and tea party organizations around the country will protest Representative Carnahan’s offices and also protest SEIU offices in every major city across the U.S. These Democratic strong-arm tactics must end now.

Regards,

Attorney David B. Brown

The St. Louis Tea Party coalition joins in the call for apologies from Carnahan, SEIU, and President Obama. This criminal attack was inspired by DNC and BarackObama.com propaganda. Only Thursday morning, the White House promised “punch back twice as hard.” Clearly, the goons of SEIU decided to draw the first blood.

We believe that this attack was planned and intended to create a riot to discredit the American political resistence. Luckily, the patriots who attend tea parties and town halls did not take the bait. Mr. Gladney did not fight back. Mr. Gladney, like Crispus Attucks, suffered for the promise of freedom — the freedom his race was so long denied. We salute Kenneth Gladney. We are proud that he is on our side.

We all pray for Ken. May he recover quickly and fully from his injuries inflicted by leftist thugs in an attempt to subvert his First Amendment rights.

TELL THE SEIU THAT WE OPPOSE VIOLENCE

SEIU
5585 Pershing Ave.
Suite 130
St. Louis, MO 63112
PHONE: 314.367.0013
FAX: 314.361.8704

I haven't had the time to check Snopes, but I know it will be checked, caused the benevolent unions personel would never do this. No way, but then it might bring a different meaning to "Look for the Union Label". :D

Enough fun for the day. Gotta get my targets set up

CB (RWE)

Daughter's in town, so I'm in a great mood, cantcha tell. ;)

Show-me

10-29-2009, 01:21 PM

Clunkers: Taxpayers paid $24,000 per car

Auto sales analysts at Edmunds.com say the pricey program resulted in relatively few additional car sales.

By Peter Valdes-Dapena (autos@cnnmoney.com), CNNMoney.com senior writer
Last Updated: October 29, 2009: 12:59 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- A total of 690,000 new vehicles were sold under the Cash for Clunkers program last summer, but only 125,000 of those were vehicles that would not have been sold anyway, according to an analysis released Wednesday by the automotive Web site Edmunds.com.

Still, auto sales contributed heavily to the economy's expansion (http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/29/news/economy/gdp/index.htm?postversion=2009102912) in the third quarter, adding 1.7 percentage points to the nation's gross domestic product growth.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/28/autos/clunkers_analysis/?postversion=2009102910

Show-me

10-29-2009, 01:23 PM

This is similar to the Treasury give money to the Federal Reserve so that they can in turn buy Treasuries from the Treasury to keep rates artificially low. So now we have artificially raised GDP 1.7% and now that signals a recovery in progress. BAH HA HA HA!!!

Show-me

10-29-2009, 01:24 PM

The average rebate was $4,000. But the overwhelming majority of sales would have taken place anyway at some time in the last half of 2009, according to Edmunds.com. That means the government ended up spending about $24,000 each for those 125,000 additional vehicle sales.

Brilliant!!

CountryBoy

10-29-2009, 02:25 PM

From watching TV in the hospital today, I don't believe that the "so called experts" understand that the GDP was artificially high because of the Cash for Clunkers and Welfare for first time homebuyers pushed it higher and if the Gov't ever decides to stop all this welfare (stealing our money and our kids future), then we'll really see what kind of shape we are in and it won't be pretty.

We gotta let the economic cycle run it's course and not make the same mistake again by making money easy to come by and have folks get into debt all over again and spend more than they can afford. How stupid can we be? :worried: Some people never learn and thy name is ..... ;)

Oh yeah, that cash for clunker cost was really expensive/efficient and ya'll want the feds to run our medical system? :blink: How much evidence do people need.

CB

James48843

11-13-2009, 09:22 PM

SEC 8K filing

Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac Drive First GM Sales

Increase in 21 Months
DETROIT – A strong performance by GM’s four core brands – Chevrolet, Buick, GMC, and Cadillac – resulted in GM U.S. October sales of 177,603 vehicles, up 4 percent from last October, the company’s first year-over-year gain since January 2008. Total sales increased 13 percent when compared with September. The four brands accounted for about 95 percent of GM’s retail sales, an increase of 10 percentage points compared to the prior year.
“We’re very pleased with consumer acceptance to our newest cars, crossovers and trucks,” said Susan Docherty, GM vice president, U.S. Sales. “While we have more work to do, we are making progress and will continue our focus on delivering vehicles and a sales and service experience that brings consumers to Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac – and keeps them coming back.”
October quick facts:

•
Total GM sales increased 4 percent compared with October, 2008; retail sales were up 15 percent for the same period.

•
Year-over-year total sales increase is the first since January, 2008.

•
GM gains market share for the third straight month – estimated at 21 percent of the total light vehicle market.

•
Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac retail sales represented 95 percent of October retail sales vs. 85 percent in October, 2008.

•
Combined Buick/GMC retail sales were up 33 percent compared with last year, driving Buick-Pontiac-GMC retail sales up 12 percent.

Chevrolet Retail Sales Up 31 Percent
Strong retail sales of Chevrolet’s launch vehicles – Camaro, Equinox, and Traverse – led to a year-over-year increase in total sales of 9 percent, and a 31 percent increase in retail sales for the same period.
Chevrolet key facts:

•
Malibu retail sales for Malibu were up 84 percent compared to a year ago.

•
Camaro continues to distance itself from competition, selling nearly 8,000 vehicles during the month and we anticipate we will hold the top spot in the regular sports car segment.

•
Corvette retains the number one position in the luxury sports car segment with nearly 28 percent of the market.

•
Equinox share in compact crossover segment is growing, having more than doubled in a year to 10 percent – the highest since August, 2007; added a third shift to keep up with demand.

•
Silverado total sales of 31,800 were driven by the strength of Chevrolet’s “Truck Month” promotion.
“Chevrolet had a solid sales month in October supported by our 2009 launch products Camaro, Equinox and Traverse,” said Brent Dewar, vice president, global Chevrolet. “Our broad lineup appeals to a range of consumers, whether it’s the modern sports car, Camaro, appealing to performance enthusiasts or the Equinox and Traverse delivering what today’s families care about: safety, styling and efficiency.”
Buick – GMC Total Sales Up 20 Percent
Buick car and Crossover sales showed improvement in October vs. a year ago, led by the all-new LaCrosse and Enclave. Sales of the all-new GMC Terrain and GMC’s “Truck Month” promotion helped lift GMC total sales 20 percent, and retail sales 35 percent for the month, compared with last year.

Buick key facts:

•
Buick had its best total sales month for 2009 (9,053) and best since October ‘08, up 19 percent.

•
LaCrosse had strongest month since launch, up 36 percent compared with September 2009, and up 103 percent compared to October 2008.

•
Enclave total sales up year-over-year 38 percent.
GMC key facts:

•
GMC total sales were up 20 percent vs. October 2008, the highest monthly sales in 2009.

•
Terrain total sales were up 63 percent over combined Pontiac Torrent/GMC Envoy October 2008 total sales and up 124 percent from September 2009.

•
Sierra reported its highest total sales month of 2009, up 6 percent vs. October 2008.

•
Yukon/Yukon XL combined total sales were the highest since September 2008 (5,425), up 72 percent vs. October 2008.

•
Acadia total sales were up 7 percent year-over-year, while retail sales increased 30 percent compared to October 2008.
“We like the momentum we’ve seen in the sales of new Buick and GMC models,” said Susan Docherty, Buick-GMC general manager, and GM Vice President of U.S. Sales. “In October, Buick and GMC both had their best sales months of 2009, and in fact, total sales for these two brands were up 20 percent over October 2008 for the combined total of Buick, Pontiac and GMC.”
Cadillac Total Sales Up 22 Percent
Led by the performance of the all-new SRX, Cadillac sales increased by 22 percent compared to a year ago, and were up 2 percent vs. September.

MORE

Cadillac key facts:

•
SRX: total sales were 280 percent higher than October 2008 and were up 21 percent compared to September—the second best performance of the vehicle in history.

•
SRX: days supply is 34 days, based on month-end inventory.

•
Escalade: Year-over-year total sales were 37 percent higher and market share continues to outperform competitors, including the Mercedes GL and Lexus LX 570.
“The interest customers are showing in the new SRX is exciting – we are seeing Lexus, BMW and Mercedes customers trading their vehicles for the SRX,” said Bryan Nesbitt, Cadillac General Manager.
Other brands Sold 15,089 Vehicles in October
Total combined sales for Saturn, Pontiac, Saab and HUMMER were 15,089 for the month. As a percent of total GM sales, these brands represented 9 percent of sales, compared with 15 percent in October 2008.

McDuck

11-14-2009, 09:46 AM

a bunch of nonsense

http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1162/five-clunker-cars-to-avoid/

McDuck

11-14-2009, 09:52 AM

Ford to put air bags into back seat belts (http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1158/Ford-to-put-air-bags-into-back-seat-belts;_ylt=An8kCPqa4I5vys8IhfoNOdF4N9MF;_ylv=3)

phil

11-15-2009, 09:43 AM

Left-wing wackos? Sounds progressive.

Historically, California's economy has been controlled by huge corporations such as the Southern Pacific Railroad (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Southern_Pacific_Railroad), Standard Oil of California (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Standard_Oil_of_California) and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Pacific_Gas_and_Electric_Company).
California is responsible for 13% of the United States' gross domestic product (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Gross_domestic_product) (GDP). The state's GDP is at about $1.7 trillion

As far as moving to Texas, that may be necessary if KBR and all those really costly gummint contractors lose access to all the money they've been sucking out of the taxpayers for the past 7 years. I mean, spending over 700 BILLION in Iraq is just about enough.

James, You should have mentioned that plant was a 50-50 GM-Toyota plant.

It's BHO that's leaving California.

If he does, Toyota will probably just move to Texas.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/business/automotive/52588302.html
Why the hell would a business be in California with the left-wing wackos? For that matter, why would a manufacturer be in Obamastan?

McDuck

11-15-2009, 11:00 AM

Historically, California's economy has been controlled by huge corporations such as the Southern Pacific Railroad (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Southern_Pacific_Railroad), Standard Oil of California (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Standard_Oil_of_California) and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Pacific_Gas_and_Electric_Company).
California is responsible for 13% of the United States' gross domestic product (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Gross_domestic_product) (GDP). The state's GDP is at about $1.7 trillion

Phil talking some more trash.

State Finance Directors Warn of More Trouble Ahead (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125814283469047497.html)
Wall Street Journal - ‎Nov 13, 2009‎
As of July 2009, California's budget shortfall was 49.3% of its general funds.
Budget insiders see worse ahead in Calif., Mich. (http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=437443) Stateline.org

California and Michigan Face Budget Challenges (http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=139646&cat=8) TransWorldNews (press release)

Worst-case for California's budget deficit next year? $25 billion (http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_13784035)
San Jose Mercury News ‎Nov 13, 2009‎
Insiders say the 2011 budget deficit could reach $25 billion. SACRAMENTO — With high unemployment continuing to eat at California's tax revenues, ...
(http://www.legalnewsline.com/news/224018-brown-bemoans-calif.-budget-process)
Brown bemoans Calif. budget process (http://www.legalnewsline.com/news/224018-brown-bemoans-calif.-budget-process) Legal News Line

California Budget Crisis Diaries: October sees more revenue (http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2009-11-12/politics-city-county-government/california-budget-politics-city-county-government/california-budget-crisis-diaries-october-sees-more-revenue) SDNN: San Diego News Network

Budget outlook grim thru 2012 (http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_c=yeqc8ile5hhal3&xid=yeo0k9wneul7ch&done=.yeqc8ile5i0al3) Capitol Weekly

Editorial: California lawmakers must face reality to balance state budget (http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_13773683)
Contra Costa Times - ‎8 hours ago‎
AFTER SO MANY bungled attempts to balance California's budget, perhaps the governor and Legislature finally will have the courage to face fiscal reality as ...

Students look beyond state (http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/2324668.html)
Sacramento Bee- ‎Nov 14, 2009‎
And some colleges in Oregon are using California's budget crisis as a marketing opportunity: Oregon State University in Corvallis has a Web page devoted to ...
(http://www.examiner.com/x-26779-SF-K12-Examiner%7Ey2009m11d13-Budget-cuts-will-cripple-California-colleges-and-universities)
Budget cuts will cripple California colleges and universities (http://www.examiner.com/x-26779-SF-K12-Examiner%7Ey2009m11d13-Budget-cuts-will-cripple-California-colleges-and-universities) Examiner.com

SDSU Associated Students to March in Protest of Budget Cuts (http://sdgln.com/news/2009/11/13/sdsu-associated-students-march-protest-budget-cuts) San Diego Gay & Lesbian News

phil

11-15-2009, 11:06 AM

Yep. This after 8 years of Bush and 14 years of Republican control of the economy. We didn't seem to have this problem when President Clinton was around. Then again, we also didn't rack up an enormous amount of debt. In fact, our nation was paying off our debt.

It just goes to show you what happens when we let in a new group with an agenda.

On the other hand, now California can finally get rid of the people that were responsible for these problems. Thanks for the post.

McDuck

11-15-2009, 11:21 AM

On the other hand, now California can finally get rid of the people that were responsible for these problems.

Could you explain what you meant by the statement?

McDuck

11-15-2009, 11:27 AM

Yep. This after 8 years of Bush and 14 years of Republican control of the economy. We didn't seem to have this problem when President Clinton was around. Then again, we also didn't rack up an enormous amount of debt. In fact, our nation was paying off our debt.

You have the answer in your post. The economy sucked over Clinton(double entendre) until the GOP win the House in 1995 after being out for 50 years and forcing Sick Willie to say "the era of big government is over"

James48843

11-15-2009, 11:42 AM

SDSU Associated Students to March in Protest of Budget Cuts (http://sdgln.com/news/2009/11/13/sdsu-associated-students-march-protest-budget-cuts) San Diego Gay & Lesbian News

I didn't know you were an avid reader of the San Diego Gay & Lesbian News, McDuck. But if you don't wanna tell, that's ok. I won't ask. :)

The point I was making when I posted the October auto sales results is that for the first time in quite a while, auto sales were starting to look up. Now, if we can just continue on that path, perhaps the auto industry can start making a profit again, and pay back the money it borrowed. I tend to think we'll see that pretty soon.

If I had my choice- I'd tax the hell out of imports, to equalize the health care advantage all the foreign car companies have over U.S. automakers. Put a 15% import duty on imported cars, and that would go a long way to equalize things.

phil

11-15-2009, 11:53 AM

President Clinton will be seen in history as one of the better Presidents we've had, though I will say that he bears some responsibility for the current economic problems. Being saddled with a conservative Republican Congress probably didn't help much. Now it looks like the administration has become Democratic and can finally address some of the structural problems in the economy.

Era of big government over? That's weird, since we had larger government outlays under Bush than we had under Clinton. In Clinton's first term, federal expenditures rose 4.7 percent. In his second term, they rose 3.7 percent. In the first term of the Bush administration, however, spending rose 19.2 percent.
Cumulative growth in federal expenditures, adjusted for inflation, during the Clinton years actually shrank by 1.1 percent. Yet, in the Bush first term, it rose 15 percent. McDuck, didn't you notice? It's all available news. Just look at the budget office and outlays.

When Bill Clinton was elected we were in debt. When he left office, not only did we have a balanced budget, but a surplus. Even if you take the bailouts of these banks out of the equation, Bush has left America trillions in debt. He has even borrowed money from other countries. It will take many many years before this country is solvent again.

Double entendre noted. McDuck is VERY progressive, it seems.

SDSU Associated Students to March in Protest of Budget Cuts (http://sdgln.com/news/2009/11/13/sdsu-associated-students-march-protest-budget-cuts)San Diego Gay & Lesbian News

You have the answer in your post. The economy sucked over Clinton(double entendre) until the GOP win the House in 1995 after being out for 50 years and forcing Sick Willie to say "the era of big government is over"

McDuck

11-15-2009, 12:16 PM

To Slick Willie, it never about the country, it was always just about him.

Bill Clinton says he never wanted to leave presidency (http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct2=us%2F0_0_s_36_0_t&usg=AFQjCNHsqS7HELhrflUIivGLb5TlsQoG5Q&sig2=cvznAmHjt0FYoKLsHzsETA&cid=1463211314&ei=HUMAS6iuCJOk9ASGi8z4Ag&rt=SEARCH&vm=STANDARD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-dyn%2Fcontent%2Farticle%2F2009%2F11%2F02%2FAR20091 10203566.html)
Washington Post - ‎Nov 2, 2009‎

phil

11-15-2009, 12:24 PM

I completely agree as to why we're not as competitive with the larger Japanese auto makers. The Japanese and the Germans have had nationalized healthcare for many years. Their corporations don't have to pay huge amounts of money in healthcare costs. Our corporations, particularly in manufacturing, have been paying out enormous amounts over the years.

I didn't know you were an avid reader of the San Diego Gay & Lesbian News, McDuck. But if you don't wanna tell, that's ok. I won't ask. :)

The point I was making when I posted the October auto sales results is that for the first time in quite a while, auto sales were starting to look up. Now, if we can just continue on that path, perhaps the auto industry can start making a profit again, and pay back the money it borrowed. I tend to think we'll see that pretty soon.

If I had my choice- I'd tax the hell out of imports, to equalize the health care advantage all the foreign car companies have over U.S. automakers. Put a 15% import duty on imported cars, and that would go a long way to equalize things.

phil

11-15-2009, 12:28 PM

But....what about the era of big government that you said was over under Clinton? Was that true? Did you even look at the numbers? You see, I was trying to agree with you. Unfortunately, I just can't get you to agree with you.

To Slick Willie, it never about the country, it was always just about him.

Bill Clinton says he never wanted to leave presidency (http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct2=us%2F0_0_s_36_0_t&usg=AFQjCNHsqS7HELhrflUIivGLb5TlsQoG5Q&sig2=cvznAmHjt0FYoKLsHzsETA&cid=1463211314&ei=HUMAS6iuCJOk9ASGi8z4Ag&rt=SEARCH&vm=STANDARD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-dyn%2Fcontent%2Farticle%2F2009%2F11%2F02%2FAR20091 10203566.html)
Washington Post - ‎Nov 2, 2009‎

McDuck

11-15-2009, 12:31 PM

Please delete.

phil

11-15-2009, 12:33 PM

We noted the double entendre in your post about President Clinton. What now? Triple entendre? That's a little complicated.

James48843

11-15-2009, 02:25 PM

Please delete.

Delete what?

I'll be happy to, if I can understand what you want deleted.

James48843

11-15-2009, 10:53 PM

GM to start repaying debt to U.S. government next month

Firm plans to retire $6.7 billion loan years before it is due

By Peter Whoriskey (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/articles/peter+whoriskey/)
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, November 16, 2009

General Motors (http://financial.washingtonpost.com/custom/wpost/html-qcn.asp?dispnav=business&mwpage=qcn&symb=GM&nav=el) is expected to announce on Monday that it will begin repaying its debt to the United States next month, years earlier than required.

The nation's largest automaker plans to pay $1 billion per quarter until the $6.7 billion loan is repaid, according to a source familiar with the matter.

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/15/AR2009111503270.html?hpid=topnews

James48843

11-24-2009, 12:40 PM

A Chinese-owned GM? It could happen

As Chinese automakers eye bargains around the world, some think they could make a play for GM once it goes public.

By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer
Last Updated: November 24, 2009: 4:46 AM ET

GM 2012: Future cars (http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/autos/0908/gallery.gm_future_product/index.html)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/galleries/2009/autos/0908/gallery.gm_future_product/images/launcher.jpg (http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/autos/0908/gallery.gm_future_product/index.html)
General Motors recently showed reporters and select members of the public what it plans to build over the next two years. View photos (http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/autos/0908/gallery.gm_future_product/index.html)

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- GM could one day be Chinese owned.

A shocking concept for the ultimate all-American company, but one some auto industry experts say isn't too far-fetched.

"I can tell you right now the Chinese are shopping heavily in the U.S. auto sector," said David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research, a Michigan think tank.

Cole said such a deal isn't imminent and wouldn't happen until GM starts selling shares to the public, likely a year or more from now. But he says buying GM would be a major opportunity for the nascent Chinese auto industry.

"The Chinese have a lot of our money and they're looking to invest it," he said.

More: http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/23/news/companies/gm_china/index.htm

phil

12-03-2009, 07:23 PM

Well, it happened today.

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/reuters/MTFH43891_2009-12-03_20-46-46_N03107875.htm

GM was not immediately available to comment. SAIC declined to comment.

It's interesting.....very interesting indeed. GM has sold a LOT of stuff to its Chinese manufacturing side. That includes a lot of intellectual property that was built for many years by the company's engineers.

It reminds me very much of what happened many years ago, when GM and Ford had opened up factories in Europe. The Germans made weapons in the factories. We bombed the factories and reimbursed GM for the damage done.

Joseph Heller's Catch-22 is the only book we need to reference. Milo Minderbender rules the world.

PessOptimist

12-08-2009, 08:57 PM

[snip]Joseph Heller's Catch-22 is the only book we need to reference. Milo Minderbender rules the world.

Anyone know where to trade M&M Enterprises stock?

I am now motivated to read that book again, 40 years later, to see what I think now.

Phil, his name was Milo Minderbinder. We must not have typographical errors or incorrect historic references lest we be percieved as ignorant.

phil

12-08-2009, 09:10 PM

Point well taken. Minderbinder it was. Let's call it a typo, unless I have permission to use artistic license, which would indicate that I did it on purpose?
How much to pay for artistic license, and where do I renew it?

The movie with Alan Arkin was also exceptional.

Anyone know where to trade M&M Enterprises stock?

I am now motivated to read that book again, 40 years later, to see what I think now.

Phil, his name was Milo Minderbinder. We must not have typographical errors or incorrect historic references lest we be percieved as ignorant.

PessOptimist

12-08-2009, 09:32 PM

Point well taken. Minderbinder it was. Let's call it a typo, unless I have permission to use artistic license, which would indicate that I did it on purpose?
How much to pay for artistic license, and where do I renew it?

The movie with Alan Arkin was also exceptional.

The artistic license is 33,329.95. I am the renewal agent. Send cash and I will get back to you.

I still am looking for M&M Enterprises stock.

phil

12-08-2009, 09:39 PM

I'll sell you mine. Found it when looking for parachute.

phil

12-08-2009, 10:58 PM

Though in the book it was CO2 cartridges.

James48843

12-10-2009, 10:30 PM

Chinese car market overtakes that of United States

Chinese car market overtakes US; shift could affect vehicle designs, energy, pollution

By Elaine Kurtenbach and Dee-Ann Durbin, AP Business Writers
On 5:10 pm EST, Thursday December 10, 2009

SHANGHAI (AP) -- China has overtaken the U.S. as the world's biggest market for automobiles, the first time any other country has bought more vehicles than the nation that produced Henry Ford, the Cadillac and the minivan.

Now that the Chinese buy more cars and trucks than Americans, the shift could produce ripples for the environment, gas prices and even the kinds of cars automakers design.

More than 12.7 million cars and trucks will be sold in China this year, up 44 percent from the previous year and surpassing the 10.3 million forecast in the U.S., according to J.D. Power and Associates.

China has long been expected to overtake the U.S. since its population of 1.3 billion is more than quadruple that of the United States. But the increase in sales happened much faster than anyone expected because of China's tax cuts, its stimulus program and a depressed American market.

Two years ago, J.D. Power predicted China would pass the U.S. in 2025. Earlier this year, it forecast 2009 sales of just 9 million vehicles for China.

After a sharp slowdown in auto sales late last year, the Chinese government cut taxes on small cars and spent $730 million on subsidies to encourage sales of SUVs, pickups and minivans. A big stimulus program also boosted truck sales by pumping money into construction.

More: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Chinese-car-market-overtakes-apf-3774294944.html

James48843

12-10-2009, 10:41 PM

Visteon Can End Most Health Insurance for Retirees (Update1)
(http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a4UHfExux5X0#)
By Steven Church

Dec. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Visteon Corp. (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=VC%3AUS), the bankrupt auto- parts maker once owned by Ford Motor Co., won court permission to quit paying health and life insurance costs for most of its retired workers.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Sontchi (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Christopher+Sontchi&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1) in Wilmington, Delaware, today overruled objections from union workers, agreeing with Visteon’s claim that it couldn’t afford the program, which may cost about $31 million this year.

The company said previously that the measures would affect about 7,000 current workers and retirees. Sontchi ruled that only about 110 current workers are entitled to the benefits because of a contract.

More: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a4UHfExux5X0

(Visteon was the parts supplier division of the Ford Motor company before being spun off in 2000. More than 70,000 Ford Employees took major pay cuts in the spinoff in 2000, and two previous rounds of pay cuts before their bankruptcy in May of this year. By 2007, the number of employees had fallen to below 50,000, as 16 parts plants were cut back to six. Visteon declared bankruptcy earlier this year, and now employees just over 11,000 salary and 22,000 hourly workers. This ruling today cuts off the health care insurance and life insurance policies for more than 7,000 former Ford/Visteon retirees. Visteon continues to be Ford Motor Company's biggest single supplier)

James48843

01-07-2010, 12:01 AM

The New GM increases sales in December, and increases market share:

qaVnwF1JN7U

Warrenlm

01-25-2010, 07:58 AM

Announced this morning: Ed Whitacre is named permanent, not interim, CEO.

James48843

02-15-2010, 02:31 PM

Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac Retail Sales Up 3 Percent
– Total Sales for These Brands Up 30 Percent

GM Total Sales Increase 14 Percent
Fourth Consecutive Month of Retail Sales Gains for GM’s Four Brands
Chevy Equinox, GMC Terrain and Cadillac SRX Retail Sales Up 161 Percent
Fleet Sales Comprise 29 Percent of Total Sales

DETROIT – U.S. dealers for GM’s brands – Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac – reported retail sales of 102,420, up 3 percent compared to January 2009, and 145,098 total sales (up 30 percent). These results were driven by the continued strong growth of new GM crossovers and passenger cars. For the month, GM dealers reported 146,825 total sales (including other brands), representing a total sales increase of 14 percent from the previous year.
“This is the fourth month in a row that Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac have shown a collective year-over-year retail sales increase,” said Susan Docherty, GM vice president, Sales, Service and Marketing. “Our long-term plan to continue to focus and strengthen our brands is delivering results.”

Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac comprised 98 percent of the company’s retail sales in January, compared to 85 percent a year earlier. Retail sales, including other brands, in the U.S. were 104,122 during the month. This represents a 10 percent decline from a year ago, driven by other brand sales – Pontiac, Saturn, Saab and HUMMER – that were 90 percent lower. GM dealers delivered 42,703 fleet vehicles, comprising 29 percent of total deliveries for the month.

Other Key Facts:

Chevrolet Equinox retail sales increased 67 percent; estimated retail share of the compact crossover segment is up 5 points (Jan. 2009 vs. Jan. 2010)
GMC Terrain retail sales were up 162 percent (compared to the vehicle it replaces, Pontiac Torrent); estimated retail share of the compact crossover segment is up more than 3 points (Jan. 2009 vs. Jan. 2010)
Cadillac SRX retail sales were up 218 percent vs. last year, the fifth consecutive month it has gained more than 100 percent year-over-year; SRX gained approximately 15 points of retail share in the Mid-lux SUV crossover segment (Jan. 2009 vs. Jan. 2010)
In their first year on sale, GM Compact Crossovers – Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain – have become the second best selling crossovers in the industry
GM sells more crossovers than any other automaker, representing approximately 20 percent of industry crossovers sold
Buick LaCrosse retail sales were up 142 percent, the fourth consecutive month it has gained more than 100 percent year-over-year; LaCrosse gained an estimated 12 points of retail segment share, making it number one in its segment (Jan. 2009 vs. Jan. 2010)
Chevrolet dealers sold 5,371 Camaros – the eighth straight month it has outsold Mustang

“Our launch vehicles such as the Chevrolet Equinox and Camaro, Buick LaCrosse, GMC Terrain, and Cadillac SRX continue to attract new customers to our brands,” Docherty said. “In addition to styling and fuel efficiency, customers have told us they want safe, high quality vehicles. They can have peace of mind knowing that our vehicles come standard with our 5-year, 100,000 mile powertrain warranty and OnStar.”

Management Discussion of January Sales Results

“Global economic recovery is picking up pace,” said Mike DiGiovanni, executive director, global market and industry analysis. “In the U.S., we are seeing a strong rebound in manufacturing and stabilization of consumer confidence, which will support a slow but steady improvement in the vehicle market.”
U.S. Economy

Leading economic indicators point to a continuing recovery in 2010, although risks remain
Job losses continue to decline, but initial claims of unemployment remain high, indicating continuing reduction in the labor force. Unemployment is likely to stay near 10 percent
Consumer confidence stabilized at the December level. Consumer vehicle buying attitude is improving, but consumers don’t anticipate a strong recovery in jobs and income
Home prices have stabilized in large parts of the country. Housing starts dropped 4 percent in December, but rising housing permits indicate construction will pick up in coming months
The manufacturing sector continues to expand. Corporate profit reports show the corporate sector is positioned to expand as the economy improves

U. S. Auto Industry

The U.S. January 2010 SAAR is estimated to be approximately 11.0 to 11.3 million (total industry estimate) – largely on par with Q4 2009 sales
Based on the strengthening U.S. economy, we are increasing our 2010 CY sales outlook to 11.5 to 12.0 million (total vehicle)

GM North America Production is increasing:

8376

While DEALER INVENTORIES ARE ABOUT 60% OF WHAT THEY WERE THIS TIME LAST YEAR:

8375

More: http://www.gm.com/corporate/investor_information/sales_prod/

James48843

02-15-2010, 02:53 PM

Complete sales figures:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9Mjg4NDN8Q2hpbGRJRD0 tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1

Bullitt

02-15-2010, 03:06 PM

What would they do without gov't... err I mean fleet sales?

Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac comprised 98 percent of the company’s retail sales in January, compared to 85 percent a year earlier...GM dealers delivered 42,703 fleet vehicles, comprising 29 percent of total deliveries for the month.

What will they think of next, the 30 year auto loan?

Home prices have stabilized in large parts of the country. Housing starts dropped 4 percent in December, but rising housing permits indicate construction will pick up in coming monthsHas anyone ever seen a car dealer or home Realtor come out and say, "Save your money, now is not a good time to buy. Prices will be lower in a few months." I haven't, yet this would be the best advice any of these people could give. Buy more, buy more now.

James48843

02-15-2010, 04:57 PM

What would they do without gov't... err I mean fleet sales?
.

A good number of those "fleet sales" are both Government police cars, and Rent-a-car sales.

Both are valid segments of the market.

James48843

03-02-2010, 03:42 PM

GM Feb 2010 total sales up 11%,
Chevy up 32%
Buick up 47%
from Feb 2009.
8541

Full report, by model, here:

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MzQ0ODl8Q2hpbGRJRD0 tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1

James48843

03-02-2010, 04:02 PM

Note:

I was at my local Chevy dealer this past weekend.

They are OUT OF MALIBU's.

Sold out now. Also shortages of Equinox.

Today GM said they won't reopen any plants, even though they are sold out of cars at some locations at the present time.

From: http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_14498617
------------------------------------------------------------------

GM won't reopen any factories despite vehicle shortages

Associated Press

Posted: 03/02/2010 11:53:26 AM PST

DETROIT — General Motors Co. will not reopen any factories, even though it has shortages of several new models, the company's top sales executive said Tuesday.
Vice President of Sales Susan Docherty told reporters on a conference call that GM needs to use its current factories to the maximum rather than taking the expensive step of reopening a closed plant.

Dealers have reported shortages of some new models, such as the Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain midsize crossover vehicles, and some GM executives have been pushing to reopen a factory to boost production while the models are still hot.

"We don't need to do that," Docherty said. "We need to leverage our existing footprint."

At the Detroit auto show in January, GM North American President Mark Reuss raised the possibility of reopening a factory, and Vice Chairman Bob Lutz said that was how Chrysler gained market share in the 1990s when it had hot-selling products.

But Docherty said GM is just now seeing the benefits of adding third shifts at the factory in Ontario where the Terrain and Equinox are made, as well as the Fairfax plant at Kansas City, Kan., that makes the Chevrolet Malibu midsize sedan, she said.

James48843

03-09-2010, 08:36 AM

Prius with stuck accelerator glides to safe stop

EL CAJON, Calif. – A California Highway Patrol officer helped slow a runaway Toyota Prius from 94 mph to a safe stop on Monday after the car's accelerator became stuck on a San Diego County freeway, the CHP said.

Prius driver James Sikes said that the incident Monday occurred just two weeks after he had taken the vehicle in to an El Cajon dealership for repairs after receiving a recall notice, but he was turned away.

"I gave them my recall notice and they handed it back and said I'm not on the recall list," Sikes said.
In a statement, Toyota said it has dispatched a field technical specialist to San Diego to investigate the incident.

More: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_runaway_prius

James48843

03-09-2010, 08:37 AM

Note: My GM dealer got a dozen Malibus in last Thursday. All but one were gone yesterday.

Fivetears

04-23-2010, 01:55 AM

Ed Whitacre is now paying big for TV airtime to boast to the taxpayer how GM has paid back its debt (+ interest) in full. When is he going go public and restore the collateral financial damages caused to all the public stockholders? Ya know... it's just the American way of doing things; doing business; forgive and forget; forget and bury; Ed Whitacre is counting on it. Hurry John Q. Public, go grab a Malibu.

James48843

04-23-2010, 03:05 AM

The new GM will have it's stock offering before the end of the year. They aren't quite ready to do it now. Wait until after the Cruze and the Volt are launched before they sell stock.

Sometime between August and October. Mark it down. More likely October than August. And the taxpayer will be big winners when they do.

Warrenlm

04-23-2010, 04:44 AM

James48843

04-23-2010, 05:57 AM

I was looking for this thread. Why does everyone forget the billions loaned to GM and then written off, and now focus on this current talk about having paid off the money given to the company?

All those billions get repaid when the company stock goes public. The government now owns 61% of GM, and those which you refer to are what purchased that portion of the company. When the USA sells that stock on the open market, it will be repaid and then some.

GM got a total of $52 billion from the U.S. government and $9.5 billion from the Canadian and Ontario governments as it went through bankruptcy protection last year. At first the entire amount of U.S. aid was considered a loan as the government tried to keep GM from going under and pulling the fragile economy into a depression.
But during bankruptcy, the U.S. government reduced the loan portion to $6.7 billion and converted the rest to company stock, while the Canadian government held $1.4 billion in loans. Those loans were repaid Tuesday, five years ahead of schedule.
The automaker hopes to begin repaying the remaining $45.3 billion to the U.S. government and $8.1 billion to Canada via a public stock offering, perhaps later this year. The U.S. government now owns 61 percent of the company and Canada owns roughly 12 percent.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=10431659

James48843

04-23-2010, 06:05 AM

Through March 31 of this year, GM sales overall up 15.6%, even though several brands have now been discontinued, and multiple plants closed and 23,000 workers terminated.

9088

Three major U.S. assembly plants were closed permanently,
(Orion, Wilmington, and Spring Hill, TN). Shreveport has discontinued all Hummer production, and is slated for closure as well.

and nine production lines closed down.

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9NDIxMzJ8Q2hpbGRJRD0 tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1

Fivetears

04-23-2010, 11:08 AM

I think James got caught holding GM stock. :rolleyes: I was a sworn GM fan before the bailout. After the watching the automaker's Congressional side show performance and all the rest of GM's sob-a$$ed story... I've reached the conclusion Ed Whitacre and his clan are no better than the thiefs running AIG. GM can stuff that Volt electrical plug... Buy FORD.

Bullitt

04-24-2010, 03:19 PM

Subsidize more, sell more fleet sales (government Malibu's), get those folks who bought 5 months ago to trade up at their 6 month anniversary to a brand new car, open an IPO, throw the 'new GM' stock into the S&P 500 or maybe back into the DJIA and then flood the market with shares to unsuspecting blue hairs along with pension and index funds who will be forced to buy shares as it will be included in it's indexed benchmark.

After that, Mission Accomplished.

http://www.bobsviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/obama-mission-accomplished.jpg

Warrenlm

05-03-2010, 07:44 AM

"taxpayers will lose around $30 billion on G.M."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/business/02gret.html

Truth seekers the nation over, therefore, are indebted to Senator Charles E. Grassley (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/g/charles_e_grassley/index.html?inline=nyt-per), Republican of Iowa, who in recent days uncovered what he called a government-enabled “TARP money shuffle.” It relates to General Motors (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/general_motors_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-org), which on April 21 paid the balance of its $6.7 billion loan under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/credit_crisis/bailout_plan/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier).
<snip> ...“So it’s good news in that they’re reducing their debt,” Mr. Barofsky said of G.M. But he went on to note that G.M. was using other taxpayer money to make the loan repayment,
<snip> It’s certainly understandable that G.M. would want to spin its repayment as proof of improving operations. But Mr. Grassley said he was troubled that the Treasury went along with the public relations campaign and didn’t spell out how the loan was retired.
<snip> “Much of it will never be repaid,” Mr. Grassley added. “The Congressional Budget Office (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/c/congressional_budget_office/index.html?inline=nyt-org) estimates that taxpayers will lose around $30 billion on G.M.” ...BT(break transmision)

James48843

05-03-2010, 12:08 PM

For Release: May 3, 2010

Chevrolet-Buick-GMC-Cadillac Sales Increase 20 Percent in April

• Combined Retail Sales for Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac Increase 33 percent
• Seventh Consecutive Month of Combined Sales Gains for GM’s Four Brands
• Calendar-Year-to-Date Sales for GM’s Four Brands are up 31 Percent </I>

DETROIT – A combined retail sales increase of 33 percent for Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac propelled total sales for GM’s four brands in the U.S. to 183,091 during the month. This represents a 20-percent increase from a year ago. For the calendar year-to-date, combined total sales for Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac are up 31 percent.
The continued year-over-year sales increases are largely being driven by the company’s launch products, which now represent one of every four GM vehicles sold at retail. Year-to-date, combined sales of the Chevrolet Camaro, Chevrolet Equinox, Buick LaCrosse, GMC Terrain and Cadillac SRX are up nearly 300 percent, at 110,176, compared to the vehicles they replaced.
“Clearly, our launch vehicles are hitting the mark with consumers who are looking for bold styling, quality, safety and fuel efficiency,” said Steve Carlisle, vice president of U.S. Sales Operations. “But our results aren’t limited to just our newest vehicles. Sales of our full-size pickups and our mid-sized crossovers continue to strengthen.”
Retail sales of GM’s full-size pickups, the Chevrolet Silverado, Avalanche and GMC Sierra were up a combined 20 percent in April, and are up 8 percent year-to-date. Retail sales of GM’s mid-sized crossovers – the Chevrolet Traverse, Buick Enclave and GMC Acadia – increased 26 percent in April and are 15 percent higher year-to-date.
“The good news is that we have more on the way, including the all-new Buick Regal this spring and the Chevrolet Cruze in the third quarter,” added Carlisle.
Chevrolet dealers reported sales of 135,369 – 17 percent higher than April, 2009. Retail sales for the brand were 32 percent higher for the month. Retail sales of the Chevrolet Malibu surged 38 percent for the month – the seventh consecutive month of year-over-year sales increases. The Chevrolet Silverado, Equinox, Traverse and Camaro all posted year-over-year retail sales increases of 20 percent or more (read more) (http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/news/news_detail.brand_chevrolet.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2010/May/0503_chevsales)

Buick sales rose 36 percent for the month to 12,181 – the seventh consecutive month of double digit year-over-year sales increases. Retail sales for Buick rose 42 percent during April. Buick LaCrosse had its best retail month since 2005, with an increase of 237 percent for the month. Year-to-date sales of the LaCrosse have increased 154 percent, with 42 percent of sales coming from consumers who replaced a non-GM vehicle (read more) (http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/news/news_detail.brand_buick.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2010/May/0503_buicksales)
GMC sales of 24,224 were 18 percent higher than last year, while retail sales for the brand were up 37 percent. Sales were led by retail sales of the GMC Terrain, which were up 537 percent for the month versus the vehicle it replaced. For the year, sales of the Terrain are up 313 percent. The Terrain continues to attract new customers to the brand, where 46 percent of buyers are trading in a non-GM make (read more) (http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/news/news_detail.brand_gmc.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2010/May/0503_gmcsales)
Cadillac sales increased 36 percent to 11,317, while retail sales improved 31 percent for the month. April retail sales of the SRX were 504 percent higher than a year ago, and are up 405 percent for the year. The SRX continues to bring new customers to the Cadillac brand. Year-to-date, 49 percent of SRX buyers traded in a competitive brand (read more) (http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/news/news_detail.brand_cadillac.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2010/May/0503_cadsales)
Month-end dealer inventory in the U.S. stood at about 430,000 units, which is about 3,000 higher compared to March 2010, and about 311,000 lower than April 2009.
April Key Facts:

Chevrolet: total sales up 17 percent compared to a year ago; retail sales up 32 percent; Chevrolet Equinox retail sales increased 276 percent; Camaro retail sales continued to set the pace for the sport segment with 7,830 deliveries; Chevrolet Traverse retail sales were up 30 percent for the month, and are up 10 percent for the year; Silverado retail sales were up 23 percent, the second consecutive month with a retail sales increase of 20 percent or more.
Buick: total sales up 36 percent; retail sales up 42 percent; Buick LaCrosse retail sales rose 237 percent and are up 154 percent for the year; Buick Enclave retail sales rose 29 percent in April and are up 11 percent for the year.
GMC: total sales up 18 percent; retail sales up 37 percent; GMC Terrain retail sales were up 537 percent for the month and 313 percent for the year; GMC Acadia retail sales increased 20 percent for the month and are up 26 percent year-to-date
Cadillac: total sales up 36 percent; retail sales up 31 percent; Cadillac SRX retail sales were up 504 percent for the month and 405 percent for the year; Cadillac CTS had its best month of the year, with retail sales up 9 percent vs. March.
Fleet sales for GM’s four brands were 58,000 for the month, down 2 percent vs. the prior year.
Crossovers for GM’s four brands doubled sales in April compared to last year.
Combined Total and Retail sales for Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac have increased year-over-year for seven straight months.
About General Motors: General Motors, one of the world’s largest automakers, traces its roots back to 1908. With its global headquarters in Detroit, GM employs 217,000 people in every major region of the world and does business in some 140 countries. GM and its strategic partners produce cars and trucks in 34 countries, and sell and service these vehicles through the following brands: Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, FAW, GMC, Daewoo, Holden, Opel, Vauxhall and Wuling. GM’s largest national market is the United States, followed by China, Brazil, Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Italy. GM’s OnStar subsidiary is the industry leader in vehicle safety, security and information services. General Motors acquired operations from General Motors Corporation on July 10, 2009, and references to prior periods in this and other press materials refer to operations of the old General Motors Corporation. More information on the new General Motors can be found at www.gm.com (http://www.gm.com/).

Bullitt

05-03-2010, 05:28 PM

I don't know if that's a sarcastic mosaic or a yippee Ki-yay billboard, but let's look at the fine print.

General Motors Co., Ford Motor Co. and Toyota Motor Corp.’s April U.S. sales increases missed analysts estimates amid the “ebb and flow” of the economic recovery..."Incentives are just not doing the job that they were before,” said Michelle Krebs, an analyst at research firm Edmunds.com in Santa Monica, California. “By the end of the month, their effectiveness was waning. If the industry is going to rely on incentives, they’ve got to find new tricks for May.”http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-03/gm-ford-toyota-april-sales-gains-trail-estimates-update2-.html

Bullitt

05-15-2010, 09:11 AM

Then (2007):
Blackstone IPO

In essence, the skeptics accuse Blackstone of abiding by that old Wall Street adage: When the smart money dries up, it's time to chase the dumb money. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/blackstone-ipo-is-the-smart-money-cashing-out

Now (2010):
GM IPO

Now the what-if question for increasingly bullish investors convinced the worst is behind for the battered sector: What's the industry's playbook for a possible double-dip?http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6496TK20100510

Bullitt

05-18-2010, 06:27 PM

Job losses of 25% since the bailout.... that could qualify as a post under the Deflation Thread, but this article specifically hammers GM. How sad is it that this IPO will get UNLOADED to unsuspecting believers in a few months?

The White House pitched this costly taxpayer-funded bailout as a bid to save American jobs. But in reality, GM's reported U.S. employment shrank by nearly 25% just since last year's bailout and is almost certain to continue falling.

Since GM has lost additional billions of dollars and seen a continued decline in its market share after it formally emerged from bankruptcy last year, it remains unclear how much (if any) of this "investment" taxpayers will get back.http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=534273

James48843

05-18-2010, 07:43 PM

Job losses of 25% since the bailout.... that could qualify as a post under the Deflation Thread, but this article specifically hammers GM. How sad is it that this IPO will get UNLOADED to unsuspecting believers in a few months?
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=534273

It is true that 25% of GM jobs went away.

It is also true that 202,000 GM jobs remain. And the company is building cars now at far lower expense. And that the quality of the products remaining is exceptionally good, and sales are now growing again.

If they hadn't saved GM, those 202,000 people would be out of work, and not just them- there are perhaps a million more tied to those 202,000 that would be out of work as well. You can't just count the GM jobs- you also have to look at all the suppliers, dealers, etc that tie to that company to get a real picture of the potential adverse job impact GM going out of business would have meant.

James48843

11-26-2010, 10:24 AM

Yr94zStsk8E

burrocrat

11-26-2010, 10:31 AM

do the new cars come with a free 'foodstamps' bumper sticker?

Steadygain

11-26-2010, 11:38 AM

do the new cars come with a free 'foodstamps' bumper sticker?

:laugh::laugh::)

That's good !!! Really good !! :cool:

PessOptimist

11-26-2010, 11:42 AM

do the new cars come with a free 'foodstamps' bumper sticker?

Only the Volt and then only if you have the "renewable energy only" electron filter on the charger. This gives you a zero carbon footprint and makes you eligible.

Silverbird

11-26-2010, 11:51 AM

Good news: GM's Cars are getting pretty good ratings these days...

Bad news: with all the recalls of foreign cars. :suspicious:

Arrgh...uninsured red light runner did in our car. We are ok. What to buy. Sigh, about to punt and buy used.

burrocrat

11-27-2010, 07:28 AM

if i was shopping for a 'new' ride,

check out ford escape, they got a 4 cylinder hybrid fwd that does great in the city and developed areas.

not so good in the country with long stretches and hills and severe weather, but the 6 cylinder 4wd still gets great mileage and will get through whatever you need to out there.

late models are expensive, but a dang good ride, plus you get the moral benefit of supporting a company that saw the danger and positioned itself to avoid failure, reward success i say. seat foam is even made of a soy-based material for the greenies.

disclosure - i own ford stock in my private account.

Steel_Magnolia

11-27-2010, 10:19 AM

Arrgh...uninsured red light runner did in our car. We are ok. What to buy. Sigh, about to punt and buy used.
Sorry about the car, SB, but we are SO glad that you're ok! :)

Buster

11-27-2010, 08:54 PM

Arrgh...uninsured red light runner did in our car. We are ok. What to buy. Sigh, about to punt and buy used.

Yes, glad no injuries..:)

To your question:

Is your car totalled?

If yes, What was your car that was totalled ? Did you like it, do you want another like it?

..what kind of monthly payment can you or do you want to afford?

This will help me or others to help you narrow down what to look for next..
I will say USED, low miles that was a program car/lease return are the better buys..Check out "Autotrader.com"

James48843

11-27-2010, 09:23 PM

Best deals on used cars: Buy a former G-Car.

http://autoauctions.gsa.gov/autoauctions/home.seam

I tend to think the ones in Ok City or Fort Worth are probably the best buys- little rust possibilities.

James48843

12-01-2010, 02:01 PM

Download Sales Release (http://media.gm.com/content/dam/Media/gmcom/investor/2010/NovSales.pdf)
General Motors Sales Increase
21 Percent in November

Wed, Dec 1 2010

GM’s four brands are on track to gain market share for the year
Chevrolet monthly sales rise 18 percent; year-to-date sales are up 17 percent
Buick monthly sales increase 36 percent; year-to-date sales are up 54 percent
GMC monthly sales improve 30 percent; year-to-date sales are up 28 percent
Cadillac monthly sales increase 21 percent; year-to-date sales are up 38 percent
DETROIT– General Motors dealers reported 168,704 total sales in November, a 21-percent increase from the prior year for the company’s four brands. The gains were the result of balanced contributions from Chevrolet, Buick, GMC and Cadillac cars, crossovers and trucks. With sales for GM’s four brands up 22 percent through November, GM is on track to gain market share for the year.
November retail sales for the company’s brands rose 20 percent compared to a year earlier.
“Each brand came to the party in November,” said Don Johnson, vice president, U.S. sales operations. “These results show that our brands continue to gain momentum with consumers who want stylish, fuel-efficient vehicles.”

Source: GM.com
http://www.gm.com/news-article.jsp?id=/content/Pages/news/us/en/2010/Dec/1201_gmsales.html

Bullitt

12-03-2010, 04:48 PM

Another 4.5 million shares unloaded by Canada Development Investment for a profit of $149.6 Million. Previously they sold 30 million shares for nearly $1 Billion on 11/23. Not to mention the UAW unloaded $2.1 Billion worth of stock on the 23rd as well. These are not options, these are open market sells.
http://www.insidercow.com/forms/2010113/0000950142-10-001778.xml

No worries. A see a few officers made purchases of 800 shares recently. Still a ways to go to offset over 100 million shares worth of insider selling alone.

James48843

01-04-2011, 12:39 PM

GM sales up 21% in 2010 for Buick, Cadillac, Chevy and GMC

Christina Rogers / The Detroit News

General Motors Co.'s sales were up 21 percent in 2010 for its four core brands, and 16 percent for December compared with a year ago, the automaker announced today.

GM's four brands sold 118,435 more vehicles in 2010, its first full year out of bankruptcy, than it did with eight brands in 2009.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110104/AUTO01/101040394/GM-sales-up-21--in-2010-for-Buick--Cadillac--Chevy-and-GMC#ixzz1A5pveHuU

More than 10,000 of the new Cruze's sold. that's a postive sign.

James48843

01-04-2011, 12:42 PM

General Motors 2010 Calendar Year Sales Up 21 Percent; December Sales Increase 16 Percent – Best Month of 2010

2011-01-04

GM’s four brands sell 118,435 more vehicles in 2010 than eight brands did in 2009

GM December retail sales up 27 percent, best month in 2010
Chevrolet sales improve 16 percent in 2010
Buick sales rose 52 percent in 2010 – the highest improvement of any major brand
GMC increased sales 29 percent for the year
Cadillac sales gain of 35 percent in 2010 is the highest for major luxury brands
DETROIT– General Motors dealers reported 223,932 total sales in December, a 16-percent increase from a year ago for the company’s four brands. The gain was driven by solid retail sales which were 27 percent higher than a strong December a year ago. For the calendar year, total sales for GM’s four brands increased 21 percent to 2,202,927, while retail sales rose 16 percent for the year. GM’s four brands sold 118,435 more vehicles this year than the company did with eight brands in 2009, and will gain total and retail market share for the year.
More: http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/news/news_detail.brand_gm.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2011/Jan/0104_gmsales

Buick was a star- with sales up 40% year over year. Looks like Buick, with a much higher price point, is going to give far better profits to GM than Pontiac did. .

Turbo Regal is engineering wise a true game changer. Just watch.

Good products coming out now. Turbo Regal. Cruze. Malibu. All great cars.

James48843

02-01-2011, 12:21 PM

GM sales up 21% for January.

Chrysler sales up 23% for January.

Ford sales up 27% for January.

That's it. Recession's over.

Everybody back into the pool!

http://www.detnews.com/article/20110201/AUTO01/102010406/GM-reports-20--sales-jump-in-January

James48843

03-01-2011, 08:42 PM

Retail Sales Propel General Motors to 49 Percent Gain in February

�� Year-over-year retail sales gain of 70 percent highest on record
�� Car, Truck and Crossover segment retail sales each rise 59 percent or more
�� GM’s newest vehicles continue to gain customers – retail sales up 119 percent

Chevrolet: Chevrolet dealers delivered 142,919 total vehicles in February, a 43-percent increase versus last year.

Retail sales for Chevrolet rose 69 percent and were propelled by improving Cruze sales, which were 212 percent higher than the compact car it replaces.

Silverado retail sales rose 84 percent, while Equinox posted its best February ever, with retail sales almost doubling, up 98 percent (read more).

�� Buick: Buick reported 15,807 total sales, a 73-percent increase compared to February 2010. This includes a 90-percent surge in year-over-year retail sales, led by Regal (3,541units), Enclave and LaCrosse, which had retail sales 45 and 28 percent higher than last year, respectively. This marks the 17th consecutive month of year-over-year
sales gains for the brand (read more).

�� GMC: GMC reported total sales of 32,534, a 59-percent increase compared to the same month last year. This marks the 17th consecutive month of year-over-year sales increases. Retail sales were 61 percent higher than last year, spurred by Sierra, Terrain, Yukon and Acadia – up 87 percent, 76 percent, 63 percent and 25 percent, respectively
(read more).

�� Cadillac: Cadillac reported total sales of 15,768 for February – 70 percent higher than last February, with retail sales increasing 83 percent. February was the 13th consecutive month of year-over-year total and retail sales gains. CTS retail sales rose 159 percent, driven by strong demand for the all-new CTS Coupe and Sedan. SRX retail sales were
up 62 percent compared to a year ago, and the Escalade family saw retail sale rise 27 percent versus February last year (read more).

Nice job, General Motors. The AMERICAN CAR IS BACK!

More: http://media.gm.com/content/dam/Media/gmcom/investor/2011/FebruarySales.pdf

burrocrat

03-01-2011, 08:55 PM

Retail Sales Propel General Motors to 49 Percent Gain in February

yep that +49% is pretty good, only -2% now if you count the 51% taxpayer contributions to the bottom line.

y'all want food stamps with that?

edit: oops, it's called SNAP now and plus you get a free debit card, my bad.

James48843

03-04-2011, 01:47 PM

Big problem.

Supplier plant making interior plastics for multiple car makers has had a massive fire. Many Auto Plants, including GM, Ford, Mazda, and Chrysler adversely affected and shutting down shifts as a result.

DETROIT – General Motors Co. canceled production shifts at assembly plants in Flint, Mich., and Lordstown, Ohio, and made changes at several others because of a fire at an auto parts plant in Michigan that makes interior components for a number of automakers, the company said Thursday.

Other GM plants affected by Wednesday's fire include Arlington, Texas; Detroit-Hamtramck; Lansing Delta Township in Michigan; Fort Wayne, Ind.; and Oshawa Consolidated in Canada. GM said it was running shorter shifts, rescheduling production and changing overtime plans at plants.

GM production in Lordstown, Ohio, which has about 4,150 hourly workers building the Chevrolet Cruze compact car, was suspended indefinitely effective Friday morning. At Flint Assembly, GM said most of the 2,100 employees building Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra HD trucks will stay home Friday. Production at the Flint plant was expected to resume Monday, GM said. Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC said Thursday they didn't have production issues related to the fire, but were monitoring the situation. Chrysler said the parts plant makes interior components for its Toledo North Assembly Plant in Ohio; and plants in Windsor and Brampton, Ontario.

Magna employees were evacuated when the blaze was discovered, and no injuries were reported. Production was temporarily halted at the 187,000-square-foot plant that employs about 450 and makes dashboards, consoles, door panels and other parts for GM, Ford, Chrysler, Nissan and Mazda vehicles.

I saw the smoke from this fire on Wednesday. The just-in-time way they do things now means a MAJOR problem for many auto plants ahead.

Details:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110304/ap_on_re_us/us_auto_supplier_fire_3

James48843

05-05-2011, 02:41 PM

Despite problems with securing parts from Japan last month- sales for April were up again overall. GM sales up 26.4% in April, and largest profits in a long, long time.

http://media.gm.com/content/dam/Media/gmcom/investor/2011/9352001AprDel.pdf

GM is back- stronger than ever.

Headlines calling it "a blowout quarter" for the first quarter- with $3.2 billion in profits.

http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2011/05/05/GM-Earnings-050511.aspx

And to think- some in Congress wanted to make GM disappear into liquidation and only have foreign cars...

Read it and weap.

RealMoneyIssues

05-05-2011, 05:56 PM

Yeah, too bad we're gonna lose money on the TARP funds GM received...

Viva_La_Migra

05-05-2011, 05:59 PM

Yeah, too bad we're gonna lose money on the TARP funds GM received...
I don't know, you might be able to recoup your share by buying some discounted shares when they go up for sale here soon. The only problem is, if Government Motors goes bankrupt again, you'll lose your investment. The Obama administration doesn't care about shareholders.

RealMoneyIssues

05-05-2011, 06:00 PM

I don't know, you might be able to recoup your share by buying some discounted shares when they go up for sale here soon. The only problem is, if Government Motors goes bankrupt again, you'll lose your investment again.

We all will, as we are all taxpayers (well, I assume all of us here at least) :D

James48843

06-09-2011, 06:14 AM

Scrappy

06-09-2011, 08:05 AM

One of the remarkable new technology GM cars for 2012: New technologies combine to create a semi-hybred called an "e-Assist" vehicle, boosting mileage significantly.

Buick LaCrosse with e-Assist- E85 capable too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUnI6pMwqLA

I like Buicks and this new LaCrosse......but "remarkable new technology", "boosting mileage significantly"?

I know they are in no class comparison, but 20 years ago a person could buy a GEO that got over 50 MPG for one fourth the price of a Prius or this new Buick.

I know someone who bought a GEO that now has 475,000 miles and is still running that has required no maintenance other than break jobs and timing belts.

In 1991, I could get 29 MPG with an Oldsmobile 98 Touring Elite, 6 cylinder and much bigger car than this Buick.

Remarkable gimmick marketing!

Mapper

06-09-2011, 08:15 AM

Wow, GM is starting to make appealing cars and folks are deriding the company? God forbid they could move a product w/out taking a loss on it.
Well maybe GM should go back and focus more on big trucks and low-grade small cars. Would we all be happier then? :rolleyes:

There's a whole host of reasons early Geos and lightweight small cars are no longer practical vehicles for moving families. The most obvious reason is parked in front or your own home OR half of your neighbors homes...a big guzzling truck from the good-ole GM and good-ole Ford. The highway is a battlefield.

Viva_La_Migra

06-09-2011, 11:50 AM

Wrngway

06-09-2011, 12:11 PM

I know they are in no class comparison, but 20 years ago a person could buy a GEO that got over 50 MPG for one fourth the price of a Prius or this new Buick.

I know someone who bought a GEO that now has 475,000 miles and is still running that has required no maintenance other than break jobs and timing belts.

In 1991, I could get 29 MPG with an Oldsmobile 98 Touring Elite, 6 cylinder and much bigger car than this Buick.

Remarkable gimmick marketing!

You can't compare milage ratings from '91 with those of 2012. The last revision was in 2008 and incorporated faster speeds & acceleration, use of air conditioning, and colder weather. In short, the newer ratings are more demanding.

You're right, the Geo isn't in the same class. It has a 1.0L engine and manual transmission and is an economy car to boot. No air bags, no beefed up structural reinforcement, jazzy sound system, bluetooth, heated/cooled seats, etc..

As for the Olds 98 you mentioned, the revised ratings are 16 city/24 hwy. Sure you were able to get more, but if you're going to compare cars, you need to compare them being driven under the same circumstances. Thus "your mileage may vary". I'd say the e-assist blows the '91 olds out of the water milage wise. It's a 3,800 lb car...37 mpg on the highway is outstanding.

Now you may not care about mileage as much, so there's a 300 hp V6 available. Last years model, without direct injection, still beats your olds in mileage, not to mention at the stoplight.

Scrappy

06-09-2011, 02:44 PM

You can't compare milage ratings from '91 with those of 2012. The last revision was in 2008 and incorporated faster speeds & acceleration, use of air conditioning, and colder weather. In short, the newer ratings are more demanding.

You're right, the Geo isn't in the same class. It has a 1.0L engine and manual transmission and is an economy car to boot. No air bags, no beefed up structural reinforcement, jazzy sound system, bluetooth, heated/cooled seats, etc..

As for the Olds 98 you mentioned, the revised ratings are 16 city/24 hwy. Sure you were able to get more, but if you're going to compare cars, you need to compare them being driven under the same circumstances. Thus "your mileage may vary". I'd say the e-assist blows the '91 olds out of the water milage wise. It's a 3,800 lb car...37 mpg on the highway is outstanding.

Now you may not care about mileage as much, so there's a 300 hp V6 available. Last years model, without direct injection, still beats your olds in mileage, not to mention at the stoplight.

Wrngway,

all valid and good info. My interest and bewilderment is primarily in the technology and a little in the marketing.

I am puzzled as to why any automaker can't get much if any better economy than they could 20 years ago. (Regardless of demanding ratings) The "gadgetry" and safety aspects of new cars is impressive and drastically changed from 20 years ago but it almost seems as if no progress has been made on a car/engine to get incredible gas mileage like say 60-70 MPG. (Which I would have guessed in 1991 that we would be getting in 2012.)
Then when they market a car that has a new technology like this LaCrosse to get 7 MPG more than the std version it takes 10 years or more to compensate for the extra initial cost????

The marketing aspect of cars now days reminds me of Golf club infomercials and cell phone advertisement.
5G baby! Gotta get 5G...........:)

Mapper

06-09-2011, 02:55 PM

Wrngway,

all valid and good info. My interest and bewilderment is primarily in the technology and a little in the marketing.

I am puzzled as to why any automaker can't get much if any better economy than they could 20 years ago. (Regardless of demanding ratings) The "gadgetry" and safety aspects of new cars is impressive and drastically changed from 20 years ago but it almost seems as if no progress has been made on a car/engine to get incredible gas mileage like say 60-70 MPG. (Which I would have guessed in 1991 that we would be getting in 2012.)
Then when they market a car that has a new technology like this LaCrosse to get 7 MPG more than the std version it takes 10 years or more to compensate for the extra initial cost????

The marketing aspect of cars now days reminds me of Golf club infomercials and cell phone advertisement.
5G baby! Gotta get 5G...........:)

The gadgetry and, more specifically safety aspects, make cars notably heavier...thus negating much of the combustion efficiency gains. Which is why driving an economy car from the 80s is a scary prospect on the modern highway.

That said, it would be nice if we could see much better efficiency gains. Reducing weight would help a lot, sadly there are a whole lot of +7,000 lb hunks of steel hurdling down the freeway near you. I still drive an actual car, I hate the feel of trucks. I'd love the efficiency of an early Geo or Honda but you wont catch me getting behind the wheel.

Plus, as stated earlier, the LaCrosse is much bigger car than anything in the past getting +35 MPG...again, weight.

Wrngway

06-09-2011, 05:44 PM

It wasn't until recently that fuel economy was at the forefront of buying decisions, and the development time for a new model generally takes about 4 years. It's an incredibly complicated process. If you like a good read, check out "All Corvettes Are Red". It chronicles the on-again off-again process to get the '97 Corvette to market. It's probably a bit dated now, but you can see some of the things that led GM to the state its in as well as the engineering and business challenges.

Concerning weight, it's all about trade-offs. Safety & structural rigidity vs. performance vs. cost. Target performance vs. business case. You can make a car incredibly light using certain expensive materials and price it out of the market you're trying to hit. Add to that trying to develop a chassis that will meet safety requirements in a variety of markets around the world and you can begin to appreciate the challenges.

I would say that a lot of GM's newer products are competitive and class leading in many areas, especially in the area of fuel efficiency. It's promising to see the back to basics focus on product. I try to make the D.C. auto show every year. One area I paid attention to was the interiors. It wasn't until two years ago when I started to actually see the U.S. brands start to meet their competitors on appearance and material quality. This year it's clear they've exceeded many. Check out a Malibu or Equinox and compare it with one of their older models, the Impala which is a fleet queen and the change is evident. I was surprised when I got into one of the new Camry's to find that they were falling behind the curve despite their reputation.

When compared to competitors, Ford & GM are right in the thick of things. Chrysler's crash program improvements over the last year have helped, but it's still a laggard, stuck with platforms designed in an era of cheaper gas.

I've also been following JD Power and associates vehicle quality studies. Looking at initial and long term quality studies over the past 10 years, there's been a consistently narrowing difference between leaders and laggards. The difference between the top and bottom brands in the 2011 dependability study are 1.1 to 2.2 problems per car after 3 years. That means in 2011 they were testing 2008 cars. It's almost a dead heat now. Here are other recent studies, I think they tweaked their rating methodology around 2003.

2000: Industry Avg 4.5(can't find entire study for '00 to '02)
2001: Industry Avg 3.8
2002: Industry Avg 3.6
2003: 1.6 to 5.1
2004: 1.6 to 4.7
2005: 1.4 to 4.0
2006: 1.4 to 4.4
2008: 1.2 to 3.4
2009: 1.2 to 2.6
2010: 1.1 to 2.6

For 2011 U.S. brands led for the first time in the initial quality study. Not the final word for sure, but promising for the future.

Perception follows reality and from what I can see things are turning around for the better. Sorry for the long-winded post. I enjoy following the auto industry if you can't tell. :embarrest:

James48843

06-14-2011, 08:48 PM

Chrysler moving jobs from Mexico to Michigan:

The Pentastar V6 is made in a newly built plant in Trenton MI. Certain components of the engine are made in Mexico but Chrysler announced they will be reopening the old Trenton plant in order to build those parts. Basically they're moving about 250 jobs from Mexico to the United States.

http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php...d-plant-active (http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/2011/06/trenton-approves-breaks-for-chrysler-to-keep-old-plant-active)

nnuut

06-14-2011, 09:00 PM

I can imagine Bill Clinton is really pissed off!

Buster

06-14-2011, 09:27 PM

James48843

08-02-2011, 12:19 PM

GM just issued July sales results.

While the Cruze sales continued a brisk pace, other models didn't do so well. Silverado sales were nearly flat, a Impala sales took a dive. That Impala slump was not at all predicted. Impala sales down by 47%, Cadillac sales off 25%.
http://media.gm.com/content/dam/Media/gmcom/investor/2011/70300JulDel.pdf

http://investor.gm.com/sales-production/

Overall, sales were up by 8%, but looking deeper at the numbers, it looks terrible to me- sales of the more profitable cars were not good at all.

http://media.gm.com/content/media/us/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2011/Aug/gmsales

I think the economy is skidding backwards now. We're in a world of hurt.

James48843

09-02-2011, 12:53 AM

Much better news in the GM sales figures released today.

Sales jumped significantly in August.

After only climbing 8% in July, the market improved considerably in August, and GM sold 18% MORE CARS in August than they did in the same month last year. GM sold a total of 218,479 vehciles in August.

See
http://media.gm.com/content/dam/Media/gmcom/investor/2011/62179AugDel.pdf

The figures jumped, EVEN WITH the last few days of the month being sidetracked in many east coast markets by Hurricane Irene, which interrupted sales in some states. Still, GM had health gains in many models.

Finally, one more piece of good news. The Chevy Sonic, a new subcompact car, began production in Michigan in August with the first 280 Sonics produced in the USA being delivered. Full scale production should begin within the next 60 days as they train new employees in building the Sonic. The Sonic is expected (http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/11q2/2012_chevrolet_sonic-first_drive_review)to be a high-volume small car, alnoth not quite at the volume of cars like the Cruze (which sold over 21,000 last month- four times the rate of the Colbaslt it reaplced)

the Sonic, a new American built small car to replace the Korean built Chevy Aveo, is the first really small car added to a production line anywhere in the USA in years.

Good news for jobs for American auto workers. Two tier GM wages are in place at the Lake Orion Sonic production plant, with about half the work force earning the tradiotional UAW wage of $28 an hour, and half the work force being paid half that. $14/hour. A third group of line support workers, contractors not employed by GM directly, are being hired and trained as well, at a wage rate of $10.10 a hour to build the Sonic.

The starting base MSRP price of the new American made Chevy Sonic (http://www.chevrolet.com/sonic-family/)is just $13,735.

15202
Sonic 4 door Sedan, from $13,735

Also available as a 2 door hatchback version.

Here is the interior shot:

15203

RealMoneyIssues

01-23-2012, 12:41 AM

Jan 20, 2012

Feds clear Chevrolet Volt electric car in fires probe

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2012/01/feds-clear-chevrolet-volt-electric-car-in-fires-probe-/1

Well, even though GM stock is up over 25% for the year, I suspect this should give the stock a boost.

Is buying a Volt or GM stock a better investment?

James48843

01-23-2012, 01:11 AM

..

Is buying a Volt or GM stock a better investment?

It depends, really. The Volt is doing very well, thank you.

Sales of the Volt in it's first year have been far ahead of the sales of the first year of the Toyota Prius.

17189
But the news isn't the Volt.
No one expects to make huge profits off the Volt- that's not what it's for.

The news is that GM has increased it's North American Production Sales by over 17% this year.

That's a healthy rise. And it means profit for the company.

17188

Thankfully the company was not dissolved, which is what many (R)'s were calling for in 2009.
Instead, more than one hundred thousand U.S. employees still have jobs, and more than 2.5 million cars were made in North America by the various GM divisions.

RealMoneyIssues

01-23-2012, 01:19 AM

Thankfully the company was not dissolved, which is what many (R)'s were calling for in 2009.
Instead, more than one hundred thousand U.S. employees still have jobs, and more than 2.5 million cars were made in North America by the various GM divisions.

Wow, you have WAY too much time on your hands...

Yes, I would have been fine with GM, and all the other companies who received government money, going bankrupt... sorry, they screwed up and should have paid for it.

As it is, we paid for it. How much did the USG actually get back from GM? Oh, and who actually owns GM? The stock holders? Who is the majority holder?

James48843

01-23-2012, 01:20 AM

Globally, GM sold more than 9 million cars and trucks, resuming it's place as the top auto producer in the world.

http://investor.gm.com/news-article.jsp?id=/content/Pages/news/us/en/2012/Jan/0119_chevysales.html

Chevrolet Achieves Best-Ever Global Sales in 2011 Thu, Jan 19 2012 DETROIT – Chevrolet sold 4.76 million vehicles around the world in 2011, setting a global sales record and driving General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) global sales to more than 9 million vehicles, a 7.6 percent gain compared with 2010.

GM gained four-tenths of a point of market share to 11.9 percent of the global vehicle industry. Sales were up in all four reporting regions – North America, South America, Europe and International Operations – as GM sold a total of 9,025,942 vehicles compared with 8,385,484 in 2010.

The United States led the way for Chevrolet with total vehicle sales of 1,775,812, up more than 13 percent from 2010. China posted record sales of 595,068, up 9.5 percent from the previous year. Other markets that posted significant year-over-year increases include Vietnam (79 percent), Russia (49 percent), Turkey (30 percent) and Germany (21 percent).

“ Chevrolet’s impressive growth in both established and developing markets is the result of a strong new product lineup that meets the diverse needs of consumers around the world,” said GM Chairman and CEO Dan Akerson. “In addition to Chevrolet’s record-setting sales, the entire lineup of GM vehicles is meeting customer needs for fuel-efficient cars and work vehicles as well as unmatched luxury.”

Chevrolet is building its global presence by delivering cars like the Cruze, Sonic (Aveo) and Spark, the all-new midsize global Malibu, and crossovers and trucks like the Orlando and Colorado that are designed for the varied driving conditions and customer preferences around the world.

The Chevrolet Cruze compact sedan led the brand with global sales of more than 670,000 in 2011, making it the best-selling Chevrolet nameplate around the world with more than 1.13 million sold since its launch in 2009. In the United States, Chevrolet was the best selling passenger car brand in 2011, thanks in large part to the success of the Cruze.

More than 15 markets experienced record Chevrolet sales in 2011 with the largest year-over-year increases in Peru (81 percent), Vietnam (79 percent), Thailand (57 percent), South Africa (50 percent) and Israel (46 percent).

The top 10 Chevrolet sales markets in 2011 were:

Market

Total 2011 Sales

United States

1,775,812

Brazil

632,201

China

595,068

Russia

173,485

Mexico

162,461

Canada

150,540

Argentina

133,491

Uzbekistan

121,584

India

111,056

Colombia

105,783

“Without doubt the new Chevrolet portfolio has been a catalyst for our success around the world,” said Tim Lee, president of GM International Operations. “The launch of the Chevrolet brand in South Korea along with tremendous growth in China and across the rest of our international operations is proof that Chevrolet is becoming a first choice for customers around the globe.”

As Chevrolet enters its second century, it continues to become a more global brand, with more than 60 percent of its sales outside the U.S. market.
“In 2012, we will continue to expand our range with even more great vehicles as we pursue further growth in our key markets,” Lee said.
On a corporate basis, GM’s two largest markets in 2011 were China, where GM and its joint venture partners increased sales 8.3 percent year over year to 2,547,203 vehicles, and the United States, where GM sold 2,503,820 vehicles, up 13.0 percent compared with 2010. GM is the market leader in both countries.

General Motors Global Sales Summary

Units
2011

Units
2010

% Change

% of Industry
2011

% of Industry
2010

Point Change

North America

2,924,140

2,625,411

11.4

18.4

18.2

0.2

Europe

1,735,335

1,662,963

4.4

8.8

8.8

0.0

South America

1,064,631

1,024,960

3.9

18.8

19.9

(1.1)

International Operations

3,301,836

3,072,150

7.5

9.5

8.9

0.6

Total Global

9,025,942

8,385,484

7.6

11.9

11.5

0.4

GM North America = United States, Canada, Mexico and other North American markets
GM in Europe = Western, Central and Eastern Europe plus Russia
GM International Operations = Asia-Pacific, North Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East
Note: Iran, North Korea, Syria and Sudan are excluded from sales volume and market share calculations

###

GM is profitable, and has announced a dividend to it's U.S. Government preferred stock shareholders of $0.59
a share in March.

James48843

01-23-2012, 01:39 AM

...

As it is, we paid for it.
How much did the USG actually get back from GM?
Oh, and who actually owns GM?
The stock holders?
Who is the majority holder?

GM paid back all of the money it was loaned.

The U.S. government has a 27% stake in the company right now, and the UAW retiree medical plan, and the Canadian govenment both are large stock holders.

17190

Other major stock holders are investment firms and mutual funds:

17191

Mutual funds hold a significant portion of the shares too.

17192

James48843

01-23-2012, 01:44 AM

As I said- the purpose of building and selling the volt today isn't to make huge profits.

The purpose is to develop the technology, and bring down the price, of the new technology of battery powered electric cars.

And introduce the public into next-generation vehicles at the leading edge of technology.

It puts GM in a leadership position to bring the cars of 2015, and 2020, and 2030 into focus.

It's to give GM a technological edge in the next technologies.

Which is exactly what GM is doing, and why it's a good idea to help GM along in the Volt.

Here you can enjoy a video about the success of the production of the Volt:
http://video.foxnews.com/v/4392165/building-the-chevy-volt/

RealMoneyIssues

01-23-2012, 01:50 AM

If the USG was paid back all it loaned, why does the USG still have a 27% stake in the company? That doesn't make sense.

James48843

01-23-2012, 02:09 AM

If the USG was paid back all it loaned, why does the USG still have a 27% stake in the company? That doesn't make sense.

Yes, it does. The stock was purchased by the USG to indicate a long-term relationship, long enough to allow GM to recover, transition with new models, and
become profitable again. You can't do everything at once.

Now the cash which was originally requested in order to be working capital has been paid back to the USG, and the debt remaining is held in the form of preferred shares. The USG is selling those preferred shares when it makes sense to- when the overall stock price rises enough to make it worthwhile.

At the moment, GM is making a profit. In 2011 it made about $3 a share. In 2012 it should do considerably better than that. It's current P/E ratio is showing as 5. Please let me know if you can find another major corporation, with sales and earnings growing at double-digits, that has a P/E of just 5. Id love to learn about that company.

RealMoneyIssues

01-23-2012, 02:13 AM

Thanks for the info James.

nnuut

01-23-2012, 07:26 AM

Appears to be a case of calling a DUCK an Eagle, still looks like a Duck to me.

Viva_La_Migra

01-23-2012, 01:01 PM

Yes, it does. The stock was purchased by the USG to indicate a long-term relationship, long enough to allow GM to recover, transition with new models, and
become profitable again. You can't do everything at once.

Now the cash which was originally requested in order to be working capital has been paid back to the USG, and the debt remaining is held in the form of preferred shares. The USG is selling those preferred shares when it makes sense to- when the overall stock price rises enough to make it worthwhile.

At the moment, GM is making a profit. In 2011 it made about $3 a share. In 2012 it should do considerably better than that. It's current P/E ratio is showing as 5. Please let me know if you can find another major corporation, with sales and earnings growing at double-digits, that has a P/E of just 5. Id love to learn about that company.

They paid off the bail out, with other bail out funds (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/22/grassley-slams-gm-administration-loans-repaid-bailout-money/). That's like using a credit card to pay off another credit card. The debt is still there.

I hope GM pays back ALL of the bail out loans and buys the government held stock back soon. The government should not have a stake in a private company like this.

James48843

01-23-2012, 01:26 PM

They paid off the bail out, with other bail out funds (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/22/grassley-slams-gm-administration-loans-repaid-bailout-money/). That's like using a credit card to pay off another credit card. The debt is still there.

I hope GM pays back ALL of the bail out loans and buys the government held stock back soon. The government should not have a stake in a private company like this.

That is very old and obsolete information from April of 2010.

In December of 2010, the new GM bought back an additional $2.1 billion worth of stock held by the U.S. treasury. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/12/gm-buys-2-1b-of-governments-equity/

nnuut

01-23-2012, 01:39 PM

:confused:

White House ups expected Obama auto bailout losses to $23.6B

Published: Thursday, November 17, 2011, 10:45 AM Updated: Thursday, November 17, 2011, 11:49 AM

By Michael Wayland | MLive.com (http://connect.mlive.com/user/mwayland/index.html)MLive.com

The U.S. government expects to lose more than $9 billion more than previously expected (http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2011/06/white_house_reports_government.html) from its $85 billion auto industry bailout, according to reports.
Nov. 14, the Detroit News: (http://detnews.com/article/20111114/AUTO01/111140434)“In its monthly report to Congress, the Treasury Department now says it expects to lose $23.6 billion, up from its previous estimate of $14.33 billion.
"The Treasury now pegs the cost of the bailout of GM, Chrysler Group LLC and the auto finance companies at $79.6 billion. It no longer includes $5 billion it set aside to guarantee payments to auto suppliers in 2009.”

http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2011/11/white_house_ups_expected_losse.html

James48843

01-23-2012, 03:10 PM

Officials said that figure is down from the 60 percent the Treasury Department originally estimated the government would lose following its $80 billion bailout of Chrysler Group LLC (http://topics.mlive.com/tag/Chrysler/index.html) and General Motors Co. (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CEgQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Ftopics.mlive.com%2Ftag%2FGeneral% 252520Motors%2Findex.html&ei=nH_mTbWzNJG4twfA7tzkCg&usg=AFQjCNEYghxNrIscp1_E9vK4B18h5zpfvQ&sig2=PDAJxo6yPBkZzeZuMX1SXQ) in 2009.

The report comes a week after Chrysler repaid its remaining debt (http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2011/05/marchionne_chrysler_has_change.html) of $5.9 billion in U.S. loans and a $1.7 billion loan from the Canadian government.

Earlier in the year, GM announced that it had repaid a little more than half of the $50 billion it received in federal aid. (http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2010/12/general_motors_repays_federal.html)
Both companies were far ahead of their scheduled repayments.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who toured a Detroit Chrysler plant in May (http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2011/04/us_treasury_secretary_geithner.html), said the government “will recover much more than most predicted, and far sooner."

So yes, it's 60% BETTER than the losses originally thought to be, AND the auto makers have been repaying the debt much sooner than originally expected.

Is it perfect? No. But it's better than is was, and all the US automakers are doing much, much better than originally thought.

RealMoneyIssues

01-23-2012, 03:49 PM

So yes, it's 60% BETTER than the losses originally thought to be, AND the auto makers have been repaying the debt much sooner than originally expected.

60% better, I just don't see those numbers... where do you get that?

James48843

01-23-2012, 08:52 PM

60% better, I just don't see those numbers... where do you get that?

In that Detroit News article. It was there this morning. Unfortunately, it's now showing 'page not found".

There also is this article:

http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2011/11/former_obama_car_czar_auto_bai.html

nnuut

01-23-2012, 09:05 PM

"expects to lose $23.6 billion" that's not chicken feed Granite head! 17213

James48843

01-24-2012, 07:19 AM

60% better, I just don't see those numbers... where do you get that?

Here is that article again:

http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2011/06/white_house_reports_government.html

nnuut

01-24-2012, 07:28 AM

Here is that article again:

http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2011/06/white_house_reports_government.html
June 1. 2011, the one I posted was from Nov 17, 2011 this is OLD NEWS!

tsptalk

02-01-2012, 11:03 PM

The Volt is doing very well, thank you.

Sales of the Volt in it's first year have been far ahead of the sales of the first year of the Toyota Prius.

17189

GM Volt sales plummet. Only 603 sold in January... (http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120201/AUTO01/202010410/1148/AUTO01/Volt-sales-fall-January)

Probably not the best car for the snow, but neither is mine.

James48843

02-02-2012, 04:41 AM

GM Volt sales plummet. Only 603 sold in January... (http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120201/AUTO01/202010410/1148/AUTO01/Volt-sales-fall-January)

Probably not the best car for the snow, but neither is mine.

GM sold 321 Volts in January of 2011. So sales went UP by 88% year over year.

I'd say that's pretty good.

Nissan said it sold 676 Leafs in January, down from 954 in December.

Yes, January isn't the best month to sell an electric car.

James48843

02-02-2012, 05:15 AM

Overall, Chevrolet sales were down by just over 1%, but that factors in the fact that the HHR and AVEO have both been discontinued.

17408

I'd say an 88% increase in Volt sales is a positive, not a negative for GM.

But again, GM isn't expecting to make a lot of money on Volts. GM makes it's money on twenty-six THOUSAND Silverado trucks, and thirteen THOUSAND Equinoxes, not on it's 600 Volts. The Volt is just to develop the technology of the future, and begin to transform the marketplace to other-than-gasoline only cars. The VOlt lays the groundwork for the cars that will be increasingly sold later in this decade, and into the next. And in that- GM leads the industry, and the Volt is doing exactly what it was intended to do- be the leader in this technology.

RealMoneyIssues

02-02-2012, 05:20 AM

How much of that is fleet purchases, and of that, how much is USG?

James48843

02-02-2012, 05:56 AM

How much of that is fleet purchases, and of that, how much is USG?

Fleet represents a portion of GM sales. A minor portion.

U.S. Sales & Production
|

International Sales Releases (http://investor.gm.com/sales-production/international.jsp)

Download Sales Release (http://media.gm.com/content/dam/Media/gmcom/investor/2012/0201Sales.pdf)http://investor.gm.com/images/pdf-download-icon.png
GM’s U.S. Sales Down 6 percent in January

Wed, Feb 1 2012

DETROIT – General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) today reported total sales of 167,962 vehicles in the United States in January, down 6 percent compared with a very strong January 2011.

“Chevrolet drove our performance once again and sales of our fuel-efficient new cars were especially good,” and Don Johnson, vice president, U.S. Sales Operations. “The strength that the economy and the auto industry showed in the fourth quarter carried into January, so we believe the year is off to a good start.”

Chevrolet passenger car sales increased 13 percent. GM’s total passenger car sales increased 3 percent in January, led by a 30-percent increase in sales of fuel-efficient small and compact cars, which include the new Chevrolet Sonic, the consistently strong-selling Chevrolet Cruze and the new Buick Verano.

In addition, the Buick LaCrosse, which now offers the 36-mpg highway eAssist powertrain as standard equipment, posted a 6 percent year-over-year increase, and the Chevrolet Camaro was up 20 percent.

Camaro sales are up 20%.

I don't know about you, but I haven't driven a GSA owned Camaro yet.

Have you?

The US govt bought about 33,000 fleet vehicles from all manufacturers last year. That included 101 Volts.

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-24/obama-administration-buying-116-plug-in-vehicles-for-fleet-led-by-gm-volt.html

Minnow

02-02-2012, 07:03 AM

Your obsession with defending government motors is almost disturbing. Go look at where the equinox is made, or the camaro -- here's a hint: it ain't the United States. Look at the silverado: not all of those are made in the United States either. You know a good car actually made in the United States? A Toyota Camry. But last year you were all about the gas pedal recall and obsessed with these vehicles killing people -- later proven wrong (didn't see a retraction then -- and I don't expect one). But, the volt and it's recall because of actual documented battery fires (Yes, that's right: proven battery fires) doesn't merit a mention in James' world.

Spin in how you want. You're going to any way. And we bailed out this company for what? jobs in other countries?

James48843

02-02-2012, 08:09 AM

...But, the volt and it's recall because of actual documented battery fires (Yes, that's right: proven battery fires) doesn't merit a mention in James' world.

Spin in how you want. You're going to any way. And we bailed out this company for what? jobs in other countries?

Volt battery fires?

Here is a fact for you. There wasn't a SINGLE battery fire of a Volt in the hands of a purchaser. None. Not one.

And there was no recall for Volt battery fires. None. Not a single recall. Not a single one.

Let's get that straight. Your obession with non-existent battery fires is worse than my obesssion with wanting to ensure AMERICAN MADE CARS succeed.

The battery fire you refer to...was a battery fire that took place THREE WEEKS after a CRASH TEST, in which a car was intentionally damaged in a crash test. That's a fact.

And yes, a short circuit cause a fire three weeks after the crash test.

There were probably 100 times the number of car fires in the same time period, caused by battery cables short circuiting, after a crash test, in conventional gasoline powered cars. When cars smash up, sometimes there are fires later. That's true in electric cars as well as gasoline powered cars. I'm sure more gasoline powered cars caught fire from battery cables shorting after a smash up over that same time period. But nobody really cared about them.

Yet those who are so right-wing hard over on destroying American manufacturing call up fictional problems that don't exist for Congressional hearings. http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/automobiles/206447-sparks-fly-as-lawmakers-question-development-of-chevy-volt

What a friggin waste of Congressional time and effort. While the Country seriously needs Congress to focus on helping American workers succeed- the House is wasting time on that.

Ok- you want to talk about where cars are made? The Chevy Equinox is NOT final assembled in the USA. You are correct. But the biggest single component of the Equinox, the 2.4 liter engine, IS made in the USA. Tonawanda, NY, to be exact. Where thousands of American citizens are employed. So are the tires, made in Indiana. So are various components- the seats, the struts, the wiring harnesses, the sheet metal. All components that come from USA facilties, to meet up with other parts made around the world, and crafted into fine automobiles in the USA, in Canada, in Mexico, and elsewhere.

But, had GM gone bankrupt, all those workers in Tonawanda, in Indianapolis, in Monroe, Michigan, etc. would have been without jobs. Period.

Yes, I believe it was correct and valuable to save the U.S. automakers from destruction.

Your mileage can vary. have fun.

Attack the American worker all you want. As for me, I'll always continue to defend the American worker, and buy American made cars. Period.

Mapper

02-02-2012, 08:11 AM

Your obsession with defending government motors is almost disturbing

Just as so many folk's obsession w/ bashing GM. Toyota and GM and every other major automaker pay workers all over the globe to build cars that are sold all over the world. GM is headquartered in the US and uses a vast US supply chain. There's more to a company than assembly line workers, i.e. designers, engineers, etc. etc.. I can't comprehend how anyone (anyone in the "generic" sense, not pointing at particular person here or otherwise) in their right mind can complain about a government not focusing on domestic jobs AND suggest that supporting GM was a mistake? Do GM workers and affiliated corporations in the US not pay taxes? Would that loss of revenue not have an effect on our debt? Would those lost jobs not increase unemployment? Would those lost jobs not impact the housing market? Would those lost jobs not impact additional household spending? morale? etc?

If someone doesn't like American products then they don't have to buy em', that's a choice; but cheering against American workers (at all levels) and American companies is just plain weird to me.

James48843

02-02-2012, 08:40 AM

You know a good car actually made in the United States? A Toyota Camry.

No.

Corollas are manufactured in Japan (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Japan) and in Brazil (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Brazil) (Indaiatuba (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Indaiatuba), São Paulo (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/São_Paulo)), Canada (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Canada) (Cambridge, Ontario (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Cambridge,_Ontario)), China (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/People's_Republic_of_China) (Tianjin (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Tianjin)), India (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/India) (Bangalore (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Bangalore)), Indonesia (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Indonesia), Malaysia (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Malaysia), Pakistan (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Pakistan), Philippines (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Philippines), South Africa (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/South_Africa) (Durban (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Durban)), Taiwan (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Taiwan), Thailand (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Thailand), Turkey (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Turkey) and Venezuela (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Venezuela).

Production has previously been made in Australia (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Australia) (Victoria (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Victoria_(Australia))) and the United Kingdom (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/United_Kingdom) (Derbyshire (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Derbyshire)).

Production in the United States (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/United_States) (Fremont (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/Fremont,_California), California (http://www.tsptalk.com/wiki/California)) ended in March 2010. Source:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aJlxuxndoOsM

They don't make Toyota Corrollas in the USA anymore.

Mapper

02-02-2012, 08:48 AM

For what it's worth he said Camry, not Corolla. Many Camrys, not all, are indeed made in the US.

James48843

02-02-2012, 08:57 AM

For what it's worth he said Camry, not Corolla. Many Camrys, not all, are indeed made in the US.

Sorry- you are correct- I cited Corolla, not Camry.

I find it both disturbing and sad that Toyota Camry's are now made, among other places, in a plant in Indiana.

It's sad because the plant is located at 5500 State Route 38.

Indiana State Road 38 is also known the Bataan Memorial Highway (http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=968&dat=19760610&id=vf0kAAAAIBAJ&sjid=kBEGAAAAIBAJ&pg=1573,2303229).

SPN46er

02-02-2012, 08:59 AM

Camry ≠ Corolla

http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=top&subject=ami&story=amMade0611&referer=&aff=national

Minnow

02-02-2012, 09:33 AM

One minor point to begin with: You are correct that the Volt's haven't had a whole car recall. Some of their tested batteries have. That's what I meant and it was inarticulate but I meant no "spin" by it. But the batteries cause fires that are more difficult to fight -- you don't fight a lithium-ion fire the way you fight a conventional car fire. That's a fact.

I don't hate american workers or american companies. I only have one point to counter all the blabbering about GM: Ford didn't take a bailout. GM became a financial institution that happened to make cars. Ford didn't. Bad business on the part of GM -- 'nuff said.

You said:

I find it both disturbing and sad that Toyota Camry's are now made, among other places, in a plant in Indiana.

It's sad because the plant is located at 5500 State Route 38.

Indiana State Road 38 is also known the Bataan Memorial Highway (http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=968&dat=19760610&id=vf0kAAAAIBAJ&sjid=kBEGAAAAIBAJ&pg=1573,2303229).

What is disturbing about that? The Japanese figured out a long time ago that the auto market was a global endeavor (as did the Germans). Sure wish the U.S. had figured that out as quickly as they did but we did not. Both are former enemies that is true. They are a couple of our best allies now. We made a good peace with them and hopefully we will continue to follow their business models instead of our own outdated ones. I had both grandfathers and a few great uncles fight in WWII. They have passed on now but none of them had any problems with the way the peace was handled by either side. A couple of the uncles and one grandfather even drove Japanese and German cars. Go figure.

I see no problem with Japanese or German auto manufacturers employing americans in their manufacturing and parts factories, their middle level positions and their executive offices right here in the U.S. and abroad. No, I don't have a problem with that. Your mileage may vary.

Minnow

02-02-2012, 09:43 AM

Sorry- you are correct- I cited Corolla, not Camry.

Would it kill you to address ME directly when you admit you are wrong and I am right? I extend the same courtesy to you on a semi-regular basis. :D

Minnow

02-02-2012, 10:25 AM

I can't comprehend how anyone (anyone in the "generic" sense, not pointing at particular person here or otherwise) in their right mind can complain about a government not focusing on domestic jobs AND suggest that supporting GM was a mistake? See my previous post to James about Ford. We did not bail out the auto manufacturer we bailed out the financial institution that happened to make cars.Do GM workers and affiliated corporations in the US not pay taxes? Workers pay taxes, true. Companies do not -- they collect them and then pass the costs on to you the consumer via the price in the product. That's the way that works. Would that loss of revenue not have an effect on our debt? Revenue has nothing to do with debt, it relates to deficits. You are either deliberately or inadvertently confusing the terms, so the short answer is "no." Would those lost jobs not increase unemployment? Would those lost jobs not impact the housing market? Would those lost jobs not impact additional household spending? morale? etc? You are going a little off topic talking about morale and secondary spending but I see your point. So, if a job is a job is a job, then I might get behind infrastructure spending to put these folks to work, but I just don't like making our manufacturing industry and its companies nothing more than Government Sponsored Entities like Fannie and Freddie -- just something wrong with that in my mind.

Again, your mileage may vary.

James48843

02-02-2012, 10:55 AM

Would it kill you to address ME directly when you admit you are wrong and I am right? I extend the same courtesy to you on a semi-regular basis. :D

Sorry. Yep, I saw Camry and thought Corolla. My mistake. Sorry.

James48843

02-02-2012, 11:01 AM

Would that loss of revenue not have an effect on our debt? Revenue has nothing to do with debt, it relates to deficits. You are either deliberately or inadvertently confusing the terms, so the short answer is "no."

Deficits have EVERYTHING to do with debt. If we had tax income equal to government spending outflow, we would have no deficit. If we had no deficit, then we would accumulate no debt.

If revenues are cut off, as in what happens when U.S. manufacturing disappears and no longer pays taxes, then the revenues of the government are reduced, and the deficit goes up. Deficit goes up, and the debt mounts. Debt mounts, and we all suffer long-term.

Companies survive, and taxes get paid. Taxes get paid, and the deficit is smaller. And that's better for the debt, and for the country as a whole. No?

James48843

02-02-2012, 11:04 AM

Would those lost jobs not increase unemployment? Would those lost jobs not impact the housing market? Would those lost jobs not impact additional household spending? morale? etc? You are going a little off topic talking about morale and secondary spending but I see your point. So, if a job is a job is a job, then I might get behind infrastructure spending to put these folks to work, but I just don't like making our manufacturing industry and its companies nothing more than Government Sponsored Entities like Fannie and Freddie -- just something wrong with that in my mind.

So....you would get behind infratucture spending to help jobs, but not manufacturing spending? If we built roads or dams instead of cars, that would be o.k.? But from your point of view- the fact that there is a product that moves instead of a product that stands still, that's what makes the difference in your book ?

Just wondering...

RealMoneyIssues

02-02-2012, 11:06 AM

James48843

02-02-2012, 11:08 AM

How about we reduce spending instead of asking for more money to spend?

Ok. Sure. Where would you reduce the spending to the point where the budget would balance under current revenues. What would you suggest we cut?

Not just a little slice here or there, mind you - but what would you cut to make up the entire difference between what we take in, and what goes out, today?

Personally, I think we need to work at both ends of the problem. But in your suggested world, if all is going to be gained by cuts, what would you cut?

P.S. here is a chart which shows that revenues have collapsed as a result of the Bush tax cuts, at the same time spending has gone up as a result of two wars:

17415

Source:

http://www.thestreet.com/stock-market-news/11078128/us-gdp-vs-revenue-vs-spending.html
U.S. GDP vs. Revenue vs. Spending
Charting the United States’ GDP growth against spending and revenue growth paints a very telling picture; revenue (tax receipts) has collapsed in conjunction with the ‘Bush tax cuts’ and deficit spending has rapidly accelerated in the last three years of Democratic leadership. These numbers suggest that ‘far-left’ and ‘far-right’ ideologies are ripping America apart at the seams.

James48843

02-02-2012, 11:10 AM

By the way- government helping ease economic problems of business is not unique to the U.S., or to only in our economic struggles. Governments help their own economies all the time.

Here is what China is doing right now- to help their suddenly struggling housing markets, and the downturn in Chinese export growth:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204740904577197033941536866.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204740904577197033941536866.html)

RealMoneyIssues

02-02-2012, 11:13 AM

Ok. Sure. Where would you reduce the spending to the point where the budget would balance under current revenues. What would you suggest we cut?

Not just a little slice here or there, mind you - but what would you cut to make up the entire difference between what we take in, and what goes out, today?

Personally, I think we need to work at both ends of the problem. But in your suggested world, if all is going to be gained by cuts, what would you cut?

Everything, and we should repeal what ever law allows for base line budgeting. No one should get an automatic increase in their budget unless they can prove they need it.

Get rid of the IRS and put this in it's place.

Income x 0.20 = Tax
send it the the Treasury, done...

Simple, just not popular.

RealMoneyIssues

02-02-2012, 11:15 AM

James48843

02-02-2012, 11:40 AM

Get rid of the IRS and put this in it's place.

Income x 0.20 = Tax
send it the the Treasury, done...

Simple, just not popular.

Ok., Fine. IRS budget is $13 billion dollars.

So we slash the IRS completely and totally, and save $ 13 billion dollars.
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=235959,00.html

Of course, we have no one left to go after those who would owe taxes then, now would we. Do you think we'd still be able to achieve high rates of voluntary tax collection if we eliminate the entire IRS?

$13 billion saved.
That's a start ,to be sure.

Here is where it all comes from, and where it all goes:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/30-years-spending-priorities-federal-budget-2012/

We still have a deficit of $1.1 TRILLION dollars. That means $13 billion cut is less than 1% of the difference.

Where will you get the other 99% of cuts?

RealMoneyIssues

02-02-2012, 11:44 AM

Wow, you can't see the forest for the trees...

Never mind, I won't let you take me down that rabbit hole. Which, BTW, is why I don't go to your political website... Sorry

I agree that we disagree

Have a great day.

Minnow

02-02-2012, 12:05 PM

Deficits have EVERYTHING to do with debt. If we had tax income equal to government spending outflow, we would have no deficit. If we had no deficit, then we would accumulate no debt.
[/B]

I said "Revenue has nothing to do with debt, it relates to deficits." Deficits are accounted and debt is cumulative -- I know you understand the two terms, It was Mapper I was addressing because I believed his follow up point confused the terms. Nothing more.

You asked:
So....you would get behind infratucture spending to help jobs, but not manufacturing spending? If we built roads or dams instead of cars, that would be o.k.? But from your point of view- the fact that there is a product that moves instead of a product that stands still, that's what makes the difference in your book ?

Just wondering...

Yes, you get my point but it has nothing to do with whether or not something can move or not. The bridges, dams, roads, etc. you mention benefit us as a whole and I don't mind tax dollars being spent on those things. Manufactured items sold on an open market do not benefit us all. They benefit the company making them. Sure the company making the product employs some of us, they pay taxes (through the price they charge for the product), and, if they are benevolent, contribute to charitable causes within their local (or global) community. However, their existence is predicated upon profit. The government should not be in the business of backstopping their inability to turn a profit. I got no problem with the government spending money ensuring I have the right to life (e.g. defense spending, dams and water projects assuring a higher standard of living), liberty (e.g. bridges and roads allowing me freedom of movement/travel), and the pursuit of happiness (e.g. spending $ on schools so our progeny can do so). Now, don't get sidetracked into thinking I believe these resources are, by any means, being allocated corrrectly, but I don't mind the outlay on those things.

Manufacturing cars? One word: NO!

James48843

02-02-2012, 12:35 PM

Yes, you get my point ...
Manufacturing cars? One word: NO!

I guess it's just a matter of perspective, prioroities, and where you want the lines drawn, then.

I got no problem with the government spending money ensuring I have the right to life (e.g. defense spending, dams and water projects assuring a higher standard of living),

Higher standard of living is certaily a different level of Maslow's higherarchy than defense spending is.

17416

Sure, we need defense, and that is definately in the broad base there, in the second tier "red zone" of security.

But dams- as you rightly point out, a dam holds back water, and that can be both a resevoir to drink from, and power to power industry. Both items that kind of push into the red zone on the Maslow's chart. But then again, so does "security of employment" on the chart.

Luckily, we don't need to take community assets (tax money) to help out car companies very often. In fact, we've done it twice now. Chrysler in the early 80's, and now both GM and Chrysler in 2009. Both times it was an unforseen economic downturn that could have had very very bad long-term economic consequences on hundreds of thousands of American workers.

And both times it seems to have worked to stem prevent the massive unemployment that could have resulted from the economic shock had they gone under.

Like I say, it's a matter of one's priorities, and what they think the nation's resources should be used to save--education and schools, or jobs and employment.

Then again- if there were no jobs, both would take a huge hit, wouldn't they? we wouldn't be able to fund education, AND we'd have a huge drain through unemployment compensation, and trying to stimulate the creation of NEW jobs in new sectors. That would cost society a lot, maybe even a lot MORE than saving Auto jobs would cost, I would say.

Minnow

02-02-2012, 01:02 PM

I guess it's just a matter of perspective, prioroities, and where you want the lines drawn, then.

Not to bicker, but IMHO no it most certainly is not. It is about principles and fundamental rights. Drawing lines or slicing the american pie is what american politics (the allocation I mentioned earlier) is all about -- and you know that. Backstopping private industry should not enter into the equation. A person does not have the right to a job, therefore; the government should not "ensure" that right. Our founding document(s) simply recognized our fundamental rights, it did not bestow them upon us. But we are getting into political theory here and Tom will stop us soon, so I'll stop.

American automakers, as private entities should resolve themselves to lead (like Germany/Sweden and Japan), follow (downsize and get leaner so they can regain their competitive edge and not get bloated as before [can you say GMAC financing?]), and the government should stay the hell out of the way. Again, your mileage may vary.

Oh, Maslow was a pretty astute fellow, but having just briefly studied him in college, it's my opinion that his theories do not extrapolate very well. In other words, good theory, too bad the theorist is full of $h!t. :laugh:

FishSqueezer

02-02-2012, 01:15 PM

This forum needs one of these:

http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/forum/smileyvault-popcorn.gif (http://www.smileyvault.com/)

Mapper

02-02-2012, 01:28 PM

Sweden!!...I was able to stay out of this until you said that!
Volvo and Saab were financially failing until Ford and GM, respectively, purchased them years ago. Ford managed to sell Volvo to the Chinese. Saab could not be saved, in part, because GM was unwilling to give up heavy intellectual property invested in order to support Saab as long as it did...but moreso because the business case just could not be made.

Governments in Germany and Japan, especially Japan, massively support their auto industries...even before you consider healthcare liabilities :worried:. VAG, the Volkswagen group currently battling arm and arm with GM for global market dominance, is HEAVY into finance. We can talk about free market ideals all we want but in this global marketplace the deck would be seriously stacked against us. Which brings up those massive worker healthcare costs our industries need to pay...or our support of defense contractors...but I'll stop myself right there.

Anyway, I agree with not supporting private industry as a general rule and I agree with the SERIOUS need for infrastructure spending. However, letting GM, or the banks for that matter, fail would have a massive event for the US economy. We have no way of knowing what might have happened...but we certainly know it would have been unimaginably disruptive.

As to other points made:
Deficit and Debt are negatives on the balance sheet. NO, they aren't the same; but tax revenue is a positive that is used to offset negatives...for the sake of this general discussion that is all that really matters.

The only reason I ever weighed in on this convo was to point out that there is also whole lot of GM bashing going on. I never was a big fan of GM or their vehicles but GM, Ford, Chrysler at their core, are much more "American" companies than the other global automakers. GM was failing for a myriad of reasons. The gov't was on the hook one way or another; hopefully by helping GM restructure it's costs the gov't can make a better return on it's investment than if they had let it fail and had to support/retrain all of GMs employees and rebuild that level of industry from the ground up.

James48843

02-02-2012, 01:43 PM

Minnow

02-02-2012, 01:49 PM

Mapper, you just made my point(s) for me. Why did Ford and GM even entertain buying Volvo and Saab? Mainly they just made bad business decisions and got a Brand name with very little else. Why should our taxes/tariffs go to back a private company's bad decisio? Plus, go look more deeply why Volvo and Saab were no longer profitable. Quick answer: they got bloated just like their american counterparts. Same will happen to VW unless they change their ways.

Germany and Japan are export countries, not import countries -- big difference between them and us. Their economies are highly dependent upon their respective auto industries. Watch how the Japanese manipulate the yen to maintain a favorable trade balance. The U.S. could stand alone given our wealth of natural resources. We do need a manufacturing base but a government-backstopped one? I think not. Do we need the banking sector at all? One could argue that it has become necessary given the modern age, however; it is parasitic by its very nature and not "so" necessary. Many credit unions and banks weathered the storm just fine with no help at all -- shouldn't the big banks have followed their model?

As for what would've happened if we had not bailed out the auto industry, they would've filed, reorganized, gotten leaner and more competitive or another investor(s)/entrepreneur(s) would have stepped up to the plate and given it a go. Probably would've hired the better, harder working employees and executives as well. As for the banking industry, there's plenty of money to be made with good old fashioned banking in our system. Same results. It would've been disruptive, yes, but at least we would have stuck to our principles. I don't remember anyone telling me I had a right to money and a bank account when I took Government or History 101. :laugh:

Minnow

02-02-2012, 02:00 PM

The 2012 Chevy Malibu.
Can I put you down for one?

I don't buy new cars anymore... but if you got one of these rusting out in your barn I might consider it:http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRitZ2etupJO6PlDxiI8XKuleTp7cx92 k8euPfj8c7QsDQrua9S0A

Mapper

02-02-2012, 02:08 PM

Saab and Volvo were niche manufacturers that ultimately couldn't compete. Sorry, but calling them bloated like GM or VAG is wrong by orders of magnitude. I don't know why they got purchased by GM/Ford but it was during an era of massive conglomeration in large industry. Likely it was so that GM and Ford could diversify their respective audiences. Both were ultimately liquidated during the crisis. Volkswagen Group's stated goal is to, in short order, be the largest automaker in the world. Clearly a lot of business people in that company find it a profitable proposition.

Mapper

02-02-2012, 02:12 PM

Would you care to buy one of these? It's American made.

It's been Car of the Year for 2012 by Sport Auto Magazine.

And it get MPG equal to the Toyota Camry, but rates much better in crash tests.

The 2012 Chevy Malibu.
Can I put you down for one?

I also only buy used . Actually I'm in the market for a used Volvo XC70...that is, right after I get bored with my Passat. I have a Chevy Astro AWD as 2nd vehicle...that thing is a workhorse...my ski and dog carrying machine. Love getting all changed for skiing right inside the van! Malibu doesn't do it for me.

Minnow

02-02-2012, 02:16 PM

Saab and Volvo were niche manufacturers that ultimately couldn't compete. Agree wholeheartedly!! Sorry, but calling them bloated like GM or VAG is wrong by orders of magnitude. It was a quick answer to a broad question. Let me clarify: Saab and Volvo were bloated because they took on too much manufacturing without the corresponding increase in product quality. Again, like you said, they were a niche producer. VAG is different but if they rely too heavily on the finance branch, mark my words, they will suffer the same fate, because Germany cannot control the Euro like Japan can "control" the Yen. I don't know why they got purchased by GM/Ford but it was during an era of massive conglomeration in large industry. Likely it was so that GM and Ford could diversify their respective audiences. Both were ultimately liquidated during the crisis. Bad business decision THEY should pay for not ME the American taxpayer. Volkswagen Group's stated goal is to, in short order, be the largest automaker in the world. Clearly a lot of business people in that company find it a profitable proposition. Absolutely and they do make some quality products, no doubt, just like the American carmakers do.

Point being: keep private industry private in the U.S. We will be better off in the long run.

James48843

02-02-2012, 03:26 PM

I don't buy new cars anymore... but if you got one of these rusting out in your barn I might consider it:http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRitZ2etupJO6PlDxiI8XKuleTp7cx92 k8euPfj8c7QsDQrua9S0A

Nice-

That's a 1970, isn't it?

The 71's had different lens around the lights up front.

Minnow

02-02-2012, 03:31 PM

Nice-

That's a 1970, isn't it?

The 71's had different lens around the lights up front.

Yup, you know your cars. If you believe the personalized license plate up front, then it has the big 454 in it. Love those old muscle cars!!!

nnuut

02-02-2012, 05:56 PM

I just want ALL of our money back from GM, WHEN, HOW!

nasa1974

02-02-2012, 06:26 PM

Would you care to buy one of these? It's American made.

It's been Car of the Year for 2012 by Sport Auto Magazine.

And it get MPG equal to the Toyota Camry, but rates much better in crash tests.

The 2012 Chevy Malibu.
Can I put you down for one?

17419

My wife drives a 2004 Malibu. I drive a 2001 Dodge full size conversion van and looking to trade it in for a Ford F150 crewcab. I have also owned 4 Toyota's, one Buick (never own one again), a real old Olsmoble Delta88, a Chevy full size conversion van and an Isuzu pickup truck.

nnuut

02-02-2012, 06:48 PM

MY neighbor bought a 2010 and likes it, SO WHAT, It's about our companies competed with the competition.

Buster

02-02-2012, 08:33 PM

Hummer is doing very well, thank you....Don't that look oh so official?:rolleyes:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b47/Atwater/xel.jpg

Warrenlm

02-03-2012, 04:58 AM

I just want ALL of our money back from GM, WHEN, HOW!Does that include the initial $15 billion before bankruptcy that was written off and forgotten by our oracles Brian and Diane and the rest of the administration's propaganda machine?

James48843

02-03-2012, 06:18 PM

Remember the Mayan calendar prediction for December of 2012?

Not to worry.

Chevrolet has it covered:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxFYYP8040A

Minnow

02-03-2012, 09:39 PM

James48843

02-04-2012, 07:14 AM

Chevy Volt ad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDKTdYKjt3s

RealMoneyIssues

02-05-2012, 10:12 AM

Troll Alert!!!

Thanks for the respect and adult discussion James, Mapper and others. Funny how some folks can go for 2 or 3 pages of heated dialect and never even mention the word liberal, conservative, republican or democrat. Others? well.... not so much.

Troll and Adult being the key words here. Hence the reason I have decided not to get dragged into the losing discussion with people who think it's best to give free money away and tax success...

Good postings until now (sans FWM) everyone!

nnuut

02-14-2012, 07:57 PM

Hey Hugo, I like George Bush! I hope your hero makes it through the year.

Warrenlm

02-15-2012, 07:04 AM

"BO". I like that. Has a nice ring to it.

James48843

02-16-2012, 08:28 PM

GM posts its highest profit ever: $7.6 billion

Wow.

That's pretty darn good for a company that Mitt wanted to end.
GM turns a record profit on solid sales gains. Good products mean a good future.

More: GM posts its highest profit ever: $7.6 billion - Yahoo! Finance (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gm-posts-highest-profit-ever-224153896.html)

tsptalk

02-16-2012, 10:00 PM

James48843

02-16-2012, 10:36 PM

Unfortunately, we're (U.S. taxpayers) are still down about $25 billion on our investment. The stock price would have to double from here to break even. Could happen, I guess.

I also read that they plan to eliminate pension contributions for the 19,000 workers who still receive them and switch them to 401K contributions, so you must be torn about that. It helps us get our money back faster, but the unions can't be too happy about it.

The Unions of GM have said- they will do whatever it takes to make sure GM is profitable, that taxpayers get their money back, and that jobs remain. That hasn't changed. The commitment to a successful GM hasn't changed. It's real, and what has to be done, has to be done.

On the flip side- workers expect that once GM pays off it's debts, that GM will share the profits with it's employees in the years ahead.

When GM succeeds, it's employees succeed.

GM builds the best cars in the world. GM employees are the most productive car company employees
in the world.

Warrenlm

02-17-2012, 06:06 AM

I thought it was the white collar pension contributions, non union, that were eliminated? Does the $25B include the amount "invested" by the USG and lost in the bankruptcy? Were any secured bondholders forced to lose money like they were for Chrysler? On that matter all I've heard in defense of that governmental action is that they were meanies who deserved to lose money.

WorkFE

02-17-2012, 07:19 AM

GM builds the best cars in the world. GM employees are the most productive car company employees in the world.

GM automobiles have gotten better but when you build the BEST cars in the world you generally don't need help to stay afloat. Your product does that for you. Bottom line, years of garbage got them into that mess.

Viva_La_Migra

02-17-2012, 09:14 AM

GM automobiles have gotten better but when you build the BEST cars in the world you generally don't need help to stay afloat. Your product does that for you. Bottom line, years of garbage got them into that mess.

Yep. Like the 1995 Chevy Cavalier I once had the misfortune to own. That experience turned me away from GM. It'll be a long while before I choose to buy GM again.

I'm almost convinced to get a used Ford F250 Super Duty Diesel pickup. I've been in need of a pickup, but I don't like giving up my gas sipping Toyota daily driver.

WorkFE

02-17-2012, 09:48 AM

It ain't no gas sipper but they will have to pry my fingers from the steering wheel when I trade in my SD. I'm not sweating it yet, I've got another 250K miles to go.

James48843

02-20-2012, 06:14 PM

Here you go Buster. A bit about the Chevy Volt.

As I said- it gets 25 to 45 miles on a single charge, which costs about $1.34, or about 3 cents per mile.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JRj0FD5YIo4#!

Sure, the car costs a bit more on the front end. But the fuel you save over the long run pays for the difference.

Here's Jay Leno picking up his new Chevy Volt:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XEUa0_17lsI#!

James48843

02-24-2012, 07:58 AM

Well Buster- you posted that e-mail circulating Faux Business Channel Eric Bolling junk the other day about the Chevy Volt.

I showed you then that that piece was wrong, and the writer had erred in moving the decimal place one digit off.

Today, Snopes picks the falsehood apart:

snopes.com: Cost to Operate the Chevy Volt (http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/chevyvolt.asp)

Are you ready to buy a Volt yet?

Good deal---better MPG than a new Hummer. :D

:-)

James48843

02-25-2012, 09:44 PM

New car to keep an eye on: Buick Verano.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNThMITDcIM

17840

It was introduced nationwide in December- and sales doubled in January.

It compares favorably for both cost and features with other cars of its class.

Compare Vehicles: 2012 Buick Verano vs. 2012 Chevrolet Impala vs. 2012 Chevrolet Volt vs. 2012 Chevrolet Cruze (http://www.edmunds.com/car-comparisons/?veh1=101322219|sedan&veh2=101393664|sedan&veh3=101388714|hatchback&veh4=101390883|sedan&show=0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8&comparatorId=6005271)

tsptalk

03-02-2012, 03:54 PM

GM temporarily halts production of Volt - The Hill's Transportation Report (http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/automobiles/213889-gm-halting-production-of-chevy-volt)

RealMoneyIssues

03-02-2012, 05:10 PM

GM temporarily halts production of Volt - The Hill's Transportation Report (http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/automobiles/213889-gm-halting-production-of-chevy-volt)

temporarily laying off 1,300 employees

Why is the union allowing this?

James48843

03-02-2012, 06:16 PM

Why is the union allowing this?

You're kidding, right?

The Volt discussion has gone political. Right-wingers are bad-mouthing it, causing the production of this to become a punching bag. How do you think any Union can counter the right-wing politicization of the Volt?

""We did not develop the Chevy Volt to be a political punching bag," General Motors CEO Daniel Akerson testified before Congress in the same January hearing. "We engineered the Volt to be a technological wonder."

The fact is that they have shut down production to do some tweaks to the model production line for the benefit of California drivers. California last week approved the Volt to be eligible to use the HOV lanes. However, they had to change the exhaust system slightly to meet California's rules, and also increase the battery warranty from 7 to 10 years.

See http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/feb/23/2012-chevrolet-volt-okd-california-hov-lanes/

As a result, GM wants to clear out the 2011 models from dealers, make the line changes at the Detroit Volt plant, and then restart production in about a month.

The workers get laid-off in the meantime while they work on changing the line. Actually, layoffs for plant mods are done all the time, without regard to whether or not the product is a Volt. Layoffs is one of the normal hazards of car manufacturing workers.

RealMoneyIssues

03-02-2012, 06:21 PM

You're kidding, right?

The Volt discussion has gone political. Right-wingers are bad-mouthing it, causing the production of this to become a punching bag. How do you think any Union can counter the right-wing politicization of the Volt?

""We did not develop the Chevy Volt to be a political punching bag," General Motors CEO Daniel Akerson testified before Congress in the same January hearing. "We engineered the Volt to be a technological wonder."

Dang James, settle down. I was asking about why the GM auto workers union, that owns a large portion of the company, would allow the laying off of it's employees. That's it, nothing more.

Wow, breathe...

nnuut

03-02-2012, 06:36 PM

17945 :laugh:

James48843

03-02-2012, 06:58 PM

Dang James, settle down. I was asking about why the GM auto workers union, that owns a large portion of the company, would allow the laying off of it's employees. That's it, nothing more.

Wow, breathe...

The United Auto Workers (UAW) does not "own a large portion of the company." That is a myth.

The UAW's Medical trust fund owns a 10 percent share in the company. That doesn't even get the medical trust fund a seat on the board of directors. That is simply some shares of stock, which GM kicked in to help pay the pension medical benefits promised to workers in many years of contracts. Since GM could not pay what they owed, they gave the trust fund new company shares of stock for that fund. It's not the UAW who owns those shares- it's the GM retiree medical trust fund.

The United Auto Workers do not have any say in the day-to-day management of the company. The UAW workers build cars. Management plans, directs, forecasts, decides which models to build, and which factories the cars will be built in. While the UAW can voice it's opinion, it has no power to directly influence any decision.

See Fact check: Politicians make artful swerves on auto bailout - DailyHerald.com (http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120225/business/702259972/)

Warrenlm

03-02-2012, 08:53 PM

It's absolutely irrelevant that Trumka visits the White House staff 2-3 times per week and speaks with them daily. It was not noticed by management that Waggoner was sacked, bondholders were told about the IRS, Henderson moved out, Whitacre moved on after ill chosen words....come on....the world knows the truth....

paydirt

03-02-2012, 09:59 PM

It is with great trepidation that I post this, since I like the Volt. But I was actually hoping that it's production was over. Then my Volt would be worth a $$$$FORTUNE$$$$!

nnuut

03-02-2012, 10:04 PM

nnuut

03-02-2012, 10:19 PM

Got to cure that battery problem!
March 2, 2012, 4:40 p.m. EST
GM to halt Volt production for five weeks: WSJ
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gm-to-halt-volt-production-for-five-weeks-wsj-2012-03-02

tsptalk

03-03-2012, 12:27 AM

GM to halt Volt production for five weeks: WSJ

That's so 30 seconds ago (http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/business-talk/7325-government-motors-19.html#post351514). :D

RealMoneyIssues

03-03-2012, 12:30 AM

The United Auto Workers (UAW) does not "own a large portion of the company." That is a myth.

The UAW's Medical trust fund owns a 10 percent share in the company. That doesn't even get the medical trust fund a seat on the board of directors. That is simply some shares of stock, which GM kicked in to help pay the pension medical benefits promised to workers in many years of contracts. Since GM could not pay what they owed, they gave the trust fund new company shares of stock for that fund. It's not the UAW who owns those shares- it's the GM retiree medical trust fund.

Leadership Overview (http://www.uawtrust.org////Home/about/leadership/leadership/overview/sb.cn)

Fiduciary oversight of the Trust is provided by an 11-member Committee consisting of six (6) independent members and five (5) members appointed by the UAW. The Committee has the responsibility for designing and delivering medical benefits to eligible UAW retirees, surviving spouses and dependents. To provide these benefits, the Committee can use only the assets available in the Trust Fund. The Trust Fund has three separate accounts for each UAW retiree population of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler
Committee Biographies (http://www.uawtrust.org////Home/about/leadership/Committee/CommitteeBiographies/sb.cn)
I think I see the UAW leadership there... my eyesight is a little blurry...

The United Auto Workers do not have any say in the day-to-day management of the company. The UAW workers build cars. Management plans, directs, forecasts, decides which models to build, and which factories the cars will be built in.
Agreed.

While the UAW can voice it's opinion, it has no power to directly influence any decision.
Are you really that naive? You can say that publicly all you want, but I have personal experience in the manufacturing, auto, and energy industry that shows that to be untrue...

RealMoneyIssues

03-03-2012, 01:04 AM

GM chief: "We got a second chance" - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57379759/gm-ceo-bankruptcy-for-years-without-bailout/)

U.S. taxpayers have recovered nearly half of their $50 billion investment in GM when the U.S. Treasury took a majority stake in the company back in 2009. The government still owns 500 million shares. And if it wants to sell and just break even, GM's stock will have to double in value from where it is today.

Can you imagine how long it would take to offload 500 million shares even if GM stock got to $54.34???
Look at what happens as Bill Gates offloads 20 million each quarter of his MS stock... 500 million, wow... We will be holding that "bag" for decades...

GM Close on 2/17/2012 - $27.17, double $54.34 => $27.17 Billion owed to the US Taxpayers

http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/forum/smileyvault-stirthepot.gif (http://www.smileyvault.com/)

paydirt

03-04-2012, 02:34 PM

I alway thought that the Volt was the most promising Electric/GAS car any maker had come up with, and it's really fast in the electric mode, but probably really weak in the gas mode, wing wing! Now the battery problem has disappointed everyone and that applies to all of the copycats. They have to assure that this tremendous bank of batteries is safe, and I don't think that has happened, remember the exploding laptops, can you imagine. ZAP!!!!!!!!!

There's not enough time in life to address all criticisms, but at least the battery issue is an interesting one.

The Volt uses lithium-ion batteries.
1). Pure lithium has a problem with water:
2Li + 2H2O --> 2LiOH + H2 + heat
Not good.
2). Lithium-ion batteries have a problem of going into thermal runaway around 350F. Not good.

Lithium batteries were first pioneered as early as 1912; by 1970?, non-rechargables; and by 1991, Sony's first rechargable.
That's 100 years of development going into making these batteries safe; still, however, additional lessens were learned when there was a battery fire. This stuff fills books.

Anyway, back to the Volt. There were 2 battery fires as the result of NHTSA tests simulating a side impact and rollover. The fires did not break out until several hours to several days after the test and unattended. The reports I've read generally said that the coolant leaked and eventually created a short circuit. Maybe somewhat questionable, because lithium-ion batteries are circuit protected from external shorts (an internal fuse blows). Maybe it was just a weak short, enough to slowly heat things up, but not enough to blow the fuse. I think it took time for the coolant to form crystals which formed the short circuit.

Should I be concerned by this? Not really. The Volt's computers monitor the batteries temperature at all times, even when it's turned off. Coolant and fans are operated by computer whether you're driving, charging or leaving it set unattended. Maintenance issues are reported on displays and also go to "On-Star" who will notify you, or in the event of an accident, notify the emergency response teams. Chevy has provided the public fire department emergency response teams with procedures in how to discharge the batteries. Chevy will also respond to a Volt accident with its own team to make sure the batteries are discharged. To satisfy NHTSA, additional reinforcement is added in the battery tunnel. All this for a hazard that is extremely rare in the first place. I'm not sure if gasoline is as safe as this. Of course, if it happens to me, I'll sing a different tune.

James48843

03-04-2012, 03:37 PM

Leadership Overview (http://www.uawtrust.org////Home/about/leadership/leadership/overview/sb.cn)

Committee Biographies (http://www.uawtrust.org////Home/about/leadership/Committee/CommitteeBiographies/sb.cn)
I think I see the UAW leadership there... my eyesight is a little blurry...

That is the leadership of the MEDICAL CARE TRUST FUND- not of GM.

GM is NOT the medical trust fund.

There are no Union members on the Board of Directors of GM. None.

Think whatever you want- the Union does not make decisions for GM's management. Period.

James48843

03-04-2012, 03:41 PM

There's not enough time in life to address all criticisms, but at least the battery issue is an interesting one.

The Volt uses lithium-ion batteries.
1). Pure lithium has a problem with water:
2Li + 2H2O --> 2LiOH + H2 + heat
Not good.
2). Lithium-ion batteries have a problem of going into thermal runaway around 350F. Not good.

Lithium batteries were first pioneered as early as 1912; by 1970?, non-rechargables; and by 1991, Sony's first rechargable.
That's 100 years of development going into making these batteries safe; still, however, additional lessens were learned when there was a battery fire. This stuff fills books.

Anyway, back to the Volt. There were 2 battery fires as the result of NHTSA tests simulating a side impact and rollover. The fires did not break out until several hours to several days after the test and unattended. The reports I've read generally said that the coolant leaked and eventually created a short circuit. Maybe somewhat questionable, because lithium-ion batteries are circuit protected from external shorts (an internal fuse blows). Maybe it was just a weak short, enough to slowly heat things up, but not enough to blow the fuse. I think it took time for the coolant to form crystals which formed the short circuit.

Should I be concerned by this? Not really. The Volt's computers monitor the batteries temperature at all times, even when it's turned off. Coolant and fans are operated by computer whether you're driving, charging or leaving it set unattended. Maintenance issues are reported on displays and also go to "On-Star" who will notify you, or in the event of an accident, notify the emergency response teams. Chevy has provided the public fire department emergency response teams with procedures in how to discharge the batteries. Chevy will also respond to a Volt accident with its own team to make sure the batteries are discharged. To satisfy NHTSA, additional reinforcement is added in the battery tunnel. All this for a hazard that is extremely rare in the first place. I'm not sure if gasoline is as safe as this. Of course, if it happens to me, I'll sing a different tune.

How many customer owned Volts have burst into flame sitting in the driveway? Zero.

How many customer owned Volts have burst into flame on their own, in any situation outside of after a major damage from a test accident? Zerio.

There is no fire problem with Volts.

These are not Ford Pintos. Period.

RealMoneyIssues

03-04-2012, 05:20 PM

That is the leadership of the MEDICAL CARE TRUST FUND- not of GM.

GM is NOT the medical trust fund.

There are no Union members on the Board of Directors of GM. None.

Think whatever you want- the Union does not make decisions for GM's management. Period.

Naive perspective, but thanks for clarifying what I didn't say.

paydirt

03-04-2012, 08:43 PM

How many customer owned Volts have burst into flame sitting in the driveway? Zero.

How many customer owned Volts have burst into flame on their own, in any situation outside of after a major damage from a test accident? Zerio.

There is no fire problem with Volts.

These are not Ford Pintos. Period.

...er, well, actually there was a fire problem with Volts which I thought I had explained had been addressed. Lithium-ion batteries are a legitimate cause for concern not only in automobiles, but also in aircraft:

"Carrying lithium-ion batteries on an aircraft is "mostly" a hazardous materials issue for the Federal Aviation Administration (http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Organizations/Government+Bodies/Federal+Aviation+Administration), says Adam Comis, press secretary for the House Committee on Homeland Security.
The FAA, which regulates flight safety, classifies lithium batteries as hazardous materials because they "present chemical and electrical hazards" and are a fire risk." Are lithium-ion batteries the next threat to airline safety? - USATODAY.com (http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/2010-08-16-airlinebatteries16_CV_N.htm)

Also, actually, the Ford Pinto problem was a fire hazard problem in rear end collisions, unaddressed by proper protection and placement of the gas tank. Still, I agree with you that these are not Ford Pintos.

James48843

03-04-2012, 09:02 PM

I know lithium batteries are potentially dangerous if short circuited. (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/wreckage-of-asiana-747-400f-found-three-months-after-crash-364049/)

The point I was making is that the alleged Volt fire issue was not an issue of a customer owned car, but rather of an isolated case of damaged cells after an accident. If you don't have an accident, there is not an issue.

That's all I'm saying. Much ado about nothing. The Volt does not burst into flame on it's own parked in the garage. Period.

nnuut

03-04-2012, 09:37 PM

TICK, TICK, TICK, BOOM!:eek: 17963

Show-me

03-05-2012, 06:03 AM

Kind of like saying if you don't have a accident you don't need a seat belt or if you don't get hit in the rear of your Ford Pinto...............

I know lithium batteries are potentially dangerous if short circuited. (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/wreckage-of-asiana-747-400f-found-three-months-after-crash-364049/)

The point I was making is that the alleged Volt fire issue was not an issue of a customer owned car, but rather of an isolated case of damaged cells after an accident. If you don't have an accident, there is not an issue.

That's all I'm saying. Much ado about nothing. The Volt does not burst into flame on it's own parked in the garage. Period.

Show-me

03-05-2012, 06:05 AM

Crash safety is a huge selling/confidence point to a owner or future owner.

James48843

03-05-2012, 08:02 AM

Crash safety is a huge selling/confidence point to a owner or future owner.

The fire question wasn't something that happened IN a crash.

The fire question was something that happend WEEKS after a crash, when a car with an exposed battery plate was left outside, and rain water dripped into the core when the plastic case split in the side-impact collision, and caused it to short and overheat.

No risk to the safety of occupants - as it wasn't something that happened IN the collision.

Now, since we've just rehashed this for about the nth time, can we all agree that there is NOT an operational safety problem with the Volt, and it's safety record is, in fact, better than most cars out there.

James48843

03-05-2012, 08:10 AM

For the record- the Volt has a 5-star crash rating.

17965

You are welcome to compare that to any other similar size car of it's class.
Home | Safercar -- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) (http://www.safercar.gov)

Enjoy.

nnuut

03-05-2012, 11:02 AM

The fire question wasn't something that happened IN a crash.

The fire question was something that happend WEEKS after a crash, when a car with an exposed battery plate was left outside, and rain water dripped into the core when the plastic case split in the side-impact collision, and caused it to short and overheat.

No risk to the safety of occupants - as it wasn't something that happened IN the collision.

Now, since we've just rehashed this for about the nth time, can we all agree that there is NOT an operational safety problem with the Volt, and it's safety record is, in fact, better than most cars out there.
Like I said, reminds me of a Time Bomb, TICK, TICK, TICK, BOOM!
So every time you get a fender bender yoru car could blow up anytime, guess you would have to get the battery pack disassembled and inspected after every accident, no matter how severe?

Viva_La_Migra

03-05-2012, 12:06 PM

Like I said, reminds me of a Time Bomb, TICK, TICK, TICK, BOOM!
So every time you get a fender bender yoru car could blow up anytime, guess you would have to get the battery pack disassembled and inspected after every accident, no matter how severe?

I guess this can be said of any vehicle out there. Gasoline cars can explode, and have. A fuel cell vehicle could explode if the hydrogen tank ruptures near sparks or flames. CNG vehicles can also explode under similar conditions. The safety rate of EV's right now is only high because there are so few of them on the road relative to the number of other fossil fuel powered vehicles on the road.

The high initial cost of the volt will keep me from getting one. That, and the high cost of electricity in CA, which is only going to get higher as the summer months get closer. I would also prefer that they do a hybrid with a diesel engine, so I can use biodiesel.

paydirt

03-05-2012, 12:08 PM

Like I said, reminds me of a Time Bomb, TICK, TICK, TICK, BOOM!
So every time you get a fender bender yoru car could blow up anytime, guess you would have to get the battery pack disassembled and inspected after every accident, no matter how severe?

After Chevy installed the reinforcement in the center battery tunnel, NHTSA retested and the Volt successfully passed. These tests are very severe, so unless you crash like a NASCAR driver, I don't think I'd be too worried.

Mapper

03-05-2012, 12:19 PM

Yeppers!
Better stick to keeping safe fuels/fluids like gas, oil and CNG in our cars. At least we know THOSE aren't flammable and it's perfectly safe to pump them into our engines at high PSIs all while starting the motors with lead acid batteries. Whew! I feel sooo much safer. Oh, wait a second?

nnuut

03-05-2012, 12:43 PM

Mapper

03-05-2012, 01:01 PM

Yes, I sure do; and I noticed we weren't discussing the safety of that...just the batteries.

So, what are we really worried about, safety or a challenge to the status quo?

We can speculate all we want but it will be years before we learn if there are any egregious engineering oversights that make the Volt unsafe. What we do know is that the Volt is engineered to the same occupancy protections standards as any other car and has performed as well or better at protecting occupants than most cars in it's class during crash tests. There will always be freak accidents but, at this point, to suggest the Volt has engineering defects rendering it any more unsafe to drive than any other car is baseless.

Viva_La_Migra

03-05-2012, 01:32 PM

Minnow

03-05-2012, 01:48 PM

Anyone here ever have to fight a metal or alkaloid metal fire? If you have, then you know you do not fight these things the same way that you fight a conventional fire. So, exactly how confident do you feel that your local fire department has the equipment (an ABC dry chemical fire extinguisher will do in a pinch -- but you really need a Lithium X entinguisher) and the know how to actually fight the fire properly.

Now add on that cost to the public for providing the equipment to the local fire depts. plus the training in fighting those fires to the costs of the volts being on the road.

The risk may indeed be low but you can be darn sure that it will not escape the watchful eyes of the insurance industry and their risk assessment teams. Bank on it.

Still seems too high a price to pay for what amounts to a boondoggle with no proven results.

From inception to tires on the pavement, an economical gas engine or diesel seems both more economical, efficient and more environmentally friendly for those still on their green trip.

paydirt

03-05-2012, 02:28 PM

Mapper

03-05-2012, 02:37 PM

Well, sometimes that's progress, you know, like "boldly go where no man has gone before," and "which one of you nuts has got any guts."

Now that's the American Spirit!

RealMoneyIssues

03-05-2012, 02:40 PM

Now that's the American Spirit!

No, the American Spirit is doing it without Government support, true entrepreneur-ism...

Minnow

03-05-2012, 02:44 PM

Well, sometimes that's progress, you know, like "boldly go where no man has gone before," and "which one of you nuts has got any guts."

Well, your first quote came from Star Trek... frankly I don't want my tax dollars going where no man has gone before.

The second is from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest while Randle P. McMurphy was trying convince mental patients to change an insane mental ward policy/schedule.

So your quotes, while cute and most certainly clever, are more apropos to an individual defending my position.

By the way, if I haven't welcomed you to the message board, then "Welcome." And I sincerely respect the way you state your positions. Cudos to you.

Mapper

03-05-2012, 02:53 PM

No, the American Spirit is doing it without Government support, true entrepreneur-ism...

Oh sure.

Well if that were the case we'd be sitting under candle light discussing horses and buggies...via pen and paper delivered by the Pony Express. Of course us folks in the West would probably not be here because the non-existent Federal Gov't wouldn't have bankrolled the land purchases/swaps/grabs or defended the pioneers OR promoted westward expansion during the era of the Homestead Act. Of course if you want to go down that road we could also discusses the technological advancements made by the government during WWII. No, nope, this government supported research & development is totally new :rolleyes:

RealMoneyIssues

03-05-2012, 02:58 PM

Oh sure.

Well if that were the case we'd be sitting under candle light discussing horses and buggies...via pen and paper delivered by the Pony Express. Of course us folks in the West would probably not be here because the non-existent Federal Gov't wouldn't have bankrolled the land purchases/swaps/grabs or defended the pioneers OR promoted westward expansion during the era of the Homestead Act. Of course if you want to go down that road we could also discusses the technological advancements made by the government during WWII. No, nope, this government supported research & development is totally new :rolleyes:

Yuppers, giving tax credits to consumers for buying products promoted by a government owned company is the way of the future... sad

Minnow

03-05-2012, 02:59 PM

No, nope, this government supported research & development is totally new :rolleyes:

Good point Mapper. Have you checked out any of the links on Thorium that I have scattered on TspTalk? If so, I would like to hear your thoughts. I wouldn't mind tax dollars going toward that.

Mapper

03-05-2012, 03:04 PM

Yuppers, giving tax credits to consumers for buying products promoted by a government owned company is the way of the future... sad

Good Morning Sir! Welcome to Reality.
Sometime look up the story of how building the transcontinental railroad was funded or how the vast majority of our military technology gets developed (I could go on, and on, and on) and then get back to me about how this is the "way of the future".

Mapper

03-05-2012, 03:07 PM

Good point Mapper. Have you checked out any of the links on Thorium that I have scattered on TspTalk? If so, I would like to hear your thoughts. I wouldn't mind tax dollars going toward that.

Yes, I have. If the information available is correct than I agree with you completely. Unfortunately so much of the information is scattered...and thorium is hardly something I would consider myself educated about...because the information is so scattered. When I read about it I kept wondering about what was missing, because it seems too good to be true. If it is true, it should be acted upon.

Mapper

03-05-2012, 03:09 PM

Back on subject:

Chevy Volt and corporate twin Opel Ampera just named European Car of the Year by the European Motoring Press. Congratulations GM...and whichever Americans own you!

Chevy Volt and Opel Ampera Are Jointly Named European Car of the Year - NYTimes.com (http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/05/chevy-volt-and-opel-ampera-are-jointly-named-european-car-of-the-year/?ref=automobiles)

RealMoneyIssues

03-05-2012, 03:11 PM

Good Morning Sir! Welcome to Reality.
Sometime look up the story of how building the transcontinental railroad was funded or how the vast majority of our military technology gets developed (I could go on, and on, and on) and then get back to me about how this is the "way of the future".

Once again, y'all compare apples to oranges to promote your agenda. I said my peace, and it is a sad state of affairs when you have to give a tax credit to consumers to purchase something that would probably not be bought otherwise (cash for clunkers comes to mind too).

Have a great day with your bloated government. At some point, we too, will be looking for a bailout; I hope China's GDP has grown enough by then so that there is someone with the money to provide the bailout. Wow, those austerity measures imposed here in the good 'ole USA are going to be painful... Are you prepared? Will the USD be worth anything by then?

Have a great day!

Minnow

03-05-2012, 03:12 PM

Oh sure.

Well if that were the case we'd be sitting under candle light discussing horses and buggies

And I must point out that Thomas Edison funded Menlo Park through his own and other private monies - a big reason we're not using candlelight, correct?. And Henry Ford did not use government money for his automobile factory -- a big reason the horse and buggy went away, no? History is important, wouldn't you agree?

Minnow

03-05-2012, 03:14 PM

Here you go Mapper:

a good site: www.energyfromthorium.com (http://www.energyfromthorium.com)

Mapper

03-05-2012, 03:26 PM

Sorry my friend, grounding this discussion in historically verifiable reality does not constitute an agenda or a promotion of bloated government. If you want to discuss the philosophy of free-market capitalism then go ahead and do so...but that isn't the crux of this discussion

My point is that everyday average Americans have frequently pooled their resources together and done amazing things as team. I wish GM success. In the face tremendous opposition they went out on a limb to bring a series hybrid vehicle to market. Yep, they needed some help and our government saw a case to invest in the company. Maybe that was a mistake but I like their new cars, there are plenty I'd consider buying.

Mapper

03-05-2012, 03:30 PM

Yes Minnow, my comments involved plenty of hyperbole. More specifically I was thinking of rural electrification (TVA, BPA etc) and the road/interstate network. The ventures of Goodyear and his involvement with government to drive a change from street cars to buses is another well known example. I never said gov't was the end all be all, despite assumptions to the contrary. I'd say there has been a long history of gov't private industry cooperation in the large scale implementation of promising new ideas.

Minnow

03-05-2012, 03:36 PM

Sorry my friend, grounding this discussion in historically verifiable reality (see my post below #229)does not constitute an agenda or a promotion of bloated government. If you want to discuss the philosophy of free-market capitalism then go ahead and do so...but that isn't the crux of this discussion (and I would counter that this is exactly what this discussion is about -- your mileage may vary).

My point is that everyday average Americans have frequently pooled their resources together and done amazing things as team. (in the private realm -- see below regarding Edison and Ford ... they did not do it alone). I wish GM success. (I do not wish ill will on any GM worker). In the face tremendous opposition they went out on a limb to bring a series hybrid vehicle to market. (I would say serious would mean cost-effective. Again your mileage may vary.) Yep, they needed some help and our government saw a case to invest in the company. Maybe that was a mistake (Yes it was no maybes about it) but I like their new cars, there are plenty I'd consider buying. (I only like the Corvette, Camaro and some of the Buick Sedans... That is only an opinion -- not enough to literally rob the american taxpayer through the tax incentives.)

I think RMI is done, so the referee said I was tagged in. :D

Minnow

03-05-2012, 03:41 PM

Yes Minnow, my comments involved plenty of hyperbole. Big difference between "plenty of hyperbole" and your retort stating it was historically verifiable reality. Wouldn't you agree? More specifically I was thinking of rural electrification (TVA, BPA etc) and the road/interstate network. The ventures of Goodyear and his involvement with government to drive a change from street cars to buses is another well known example. Excellent examples that tend to benefit the public as a whole rather that government-chosen beneficiaries. I never said gov't was the end all be all, despite assumptions to the contrary. I'd say there has been a long history of gov't private industry cooperation in the large scale implementation of promising new ideas. Which is why Thorium holds so much promise. Almost a Manhattan project without the end goal being nuclear annihilation of an enemy.

Also cudos to you for keeping this a logical discussion without the political buzzwords.

Mapper

03-05-2012, 03:44 PM

Alright. This discussion is about the fact that the Government bailed out GM, no?

So, people may WISH for free market capitalism but rarely does it exist. Our government provides services from pooled resources, a.k.a. taxes and this is not a new thing. Certainly there is, and always has been, disagreement on where to invest those resources...hence why companies use lobbyists. Those lobbyists use money to exert undue influence over democratically elected lawmakers. An imperfect system...I'd say so! We may not like it but it's the hand were dealt.

The Volt is a Series Hybrid, an electric vehicle with a range extending generator. I did not say serious hybrid, although I think it a serious technological step into an expanding market; every automaker is now bringing electric and hybrid vehicles to market...for GM sit this one out would be utter folly. To be honest when the Prius first came out many of the detractors said it would fail because a Series Hybrid was the way to go...largely because it was tested successfully in Series Hybrid Diesel locomotives.

I also really like many of the new Buicks and think Corvettes have become much more appealing in recent years. Not a big Camaro fan but I can certainly see the draw

Mapper

03-05-2012, 04:05 PM

As to the "plenty of hyperbole" comment. I chose examples that benefited tremendously from government supported industries. As stated subsequently, there were private/government partnerships wherein the gov't absorbs the majority of the capital risk involved in a particular venture.

I must state here that I give credit to Ford who, pre-recession, saw the writing on the wall OR got just plain lucky, when it came to being a more nimble, adept, performer and restructuring it's debt early. Ford looked ahead and developed smaller, fuel-efficient platforms and hybrid drivetrains and stayed ahead of the curve. GM was a larger entity and lacked such foresight.

As a proponent of smaller fuel efficient cars I was singing the praises of Ford long ago, roughly 2006, when it liquidated significant real property to finance development of smaller efficient platforms. Those decisions, at the time, were the ire of many who saw the idea of turbocharged V6 truck, a mid-sized hybrid sedan, a mid-sized sedan w/ a good, efficient 4cyl engine or small commercial van as absolute foolishness. It's kind of funny how many people overlook exactly what was involved in that timely, smart business decision. If only GM and Chrysler had been so timely...we might have had a vibrant auto industry w/out gov't intervention. Ironically it was inability to look ahead and adapt to the changing market that put those companies at a disadvantage...and somehow we continue to decry the industry's efforts to adapt.

paydirt

03-05-2012, 04:34 PM

Well, your first quote came from Star Trek... frankly I don't want my tax dollars going where no man has gone before.

The second is from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest while Randle P. McMurphy was trying convince mental patients to change an insane mental ward policy/schedule.

So your quotes, while cute and most certainly clever, are more apropos to an individual defending my position.

By the way, if I haven't welcomed you to the message board, then "Welcome." And I sincerely respect the way you state your positions. Cudos to you.

Thanks for the welcome, Minnow; and for the cudos. I don't want to take too much credit for my comment. After all, you pitched it; all I did was swing.

Mapper

03-05-2012, 04:37 PM

At some point, we too, will be looking for a bailout; I hope China's GDP has grown enough by then so that there is someone with the money to provide the bailout.

Been there a long time already...Bonds. Interestingly enough other countries are so impressed with the relative stability of the good ole USA that they now give us their money without expecting ANY real return. It's an investment in stability rather than for profit. Those countries pursuing extreme austerity can NOT offer that kind of stability so they must pay higher interest rates in return for their higher risk.

Speaking of comparing apples and oranges. The US has autonomy with respect to it's currency. Countries of the European Union do not. The failures of the EU monetary system stem from a having a monetary union w/out a strong political union. IF Greece could devalue it's currency to enhance it's competitiveness the austerity would not be needed...instead, because of the Euro, Greece is limited to deflation and imposed austerity OR default and return to it's own currency, which would obviously be devalued. That is how they must "restart" their internal economy.

The US is a different story, and other countries are more than happy to give us money...money which we could be investing in our future and using to "restart" our own economy. Macro economics is a different animal from household budgets. If we wait to invest then yes, we may to resort to austerity...especially if the dynamic changes and other countries want more in return for their investments...via higher interest rates, but that's currently a choice not an imposition.

James48843

03-06-2012, 01:06 AM

.... Ironically it was inability to look ahead and adapt to the changing market that put those companies at a disadvantage...and somehow we continue to decry the industry's efforts to adapt.

Some folks like "Change", and some folks don't like "Change". They'd rather still be riding horses. That seems to be just how it is.

Anyway- back to the subject- those are some pretty nice new cars being cranked out by GM these days.

Love that Camero.
17997

RealMoneyIssues

03-06-2012, 05:47 AM

Been there a long time already...Bonds. Interestingly enough other countries are so impressed with the relative stability of the good ole USA that they now give us their money without expecting ANY real return. It's an investment in stability rather than for profit. Those countries pursuing extreme austerity can NOT offer that kind of stability so they must pay higher interest rates in return for their higher risk.

Speaking of comparing apples and oranges. The US has autonomy with respect to it's currency. Countries of the European Union do not. The failures of the EU monetary system stem from a having a monetary union w/out a strong political union. IF Greece could devalue it's currency to enhance it's competitiveness the austerity would not be needed...instead, because of the Euro, Greece is limited to deflation and imposed austerity OR default and return to it's own currency, which would obviously be devalued. That is how they must "restart" their internal economy.

The US is a different story, and other countries are more than happy to give us money...money which we could be investing in our future and using to "restart" our own economy. Macro economics is a different animal from household budgets. If we wait to invest then yes, we may to resort to austerity...especially if the dynamic changes and other countries want more in return for their investments...via higher interest rates, but that's currently a choice not an imposition.

Until they are not... What happens when we prove their faith unfounded?

Not too much of that around anymore...from Oil Co tax subsidies, Wall St Investors being able to write off losses, farm subsidies Renter lanlord tax breaks, etc...

All of which should be stopped... Now that everyone knows that the government will bail them out, they will take stupid chances and we, the taxpayer, will be doing the paying...

Minnow

03-06-2012, 06:46 AM

Some folks like "Change", and some folks don't like "Change". They'd rather still be riding horses. That seems to be just how it is.

Anyway- back to the subject- those are some pretty nice new cars being cranked out by GM these days.

Love that Camero.

Yeah, I'd like banks and big business to stand on their own for a change. I'd like workers and potential workers to stop expecting a handout for a change. I'd like government to stay out of my wallet for a change. I'd like some forward thinking people to get elected to office and change the idiotic energy policy this country has for a change.

I'm obviously not who you were addressing because, I love progress. I dig my air conditioning. I love being able to travel anywhere in the world on a whim (or if I was rich I could). I appreciate having all the modern conveniences that I do. I respect the old ways of doing things but I can also respect a need to move forward in an intelligent way and in case you were wondering I've seen very little in that regard coming down the pike lately.

And for the sake of all that's holy Jim, you're from Michigan... it's spelled Camaro and only the Transformers movie maker thinks that racing yellow looks cool. That bada$$ car needs to be red, black or white with wide orange racing stripes. Jiminy Christmas!!!!

RealMoneyIssues

03-06-2012, 07:41 AM

Viva_La_Migra

03-06-2012, 08:36 AM

Yeah, I'd like banks and big business to stand on their own for a change. I'd like workers and potential workers to stop expecting a handout for a change. I'd like government to stay out of my wallet for a change. I'd like some forward thinking people to get elected to office and change the idiotic energy policy this country has for a change.

I'm obviously not who you were addressing because, I love progress. I dig my air conditioning. I love being able to travel anywhere in the world on a whim (or if I was rich I could). I appreciate having all the modern conveniences that I do. I respect the old ways of doing things but I can also respect a need to move forward in an intelligent way and in case you were wondering I've seen very little in that regard coming down the pike lately.

And for the sake of all that's holy Jim, you're from Michigan... it's spelled Camaro and only the Transformers movie maker thinks that racing yellow looks cool. That bada$$ car needs to be red, black or white with wide orange racing stripes. Jiminy Christmas!!!!

Actually, I like Bumblebee! Reminds me of my first car: 1972 Chevy Nova, yellow, with a black vinyl top. Wish I had that car now! I'm sure it's worth more than the $1500 I paid for it in 1986.:cool:

Minnow

03-06-2012, 08:54 AM

Actually, I like Bumblebee! Reminds me of my first car: 1972 Chevy Nova, yellow, with a black vinyl top. Wish I had that car now! I'm sure it's worth more than the $1500 I paid for it in 1986.:cool:

Sweet... big block? either way definitely more than $1500... did you sport it with a denim jacket and a mullet? (that's how I looked cool in my first car, too). Those were the days.

Mapper

03-06-2012, 09:37 AM

Honestly I'm rather impressed with many of the Big 3s new models. Had an opportunity to rent and put almost 1000 miles on a Chrysler Town & Country, not something I was overtly excited about. I have to tell you though, that was one nice mini-van, it hauled 5 adults and a load of ski gear in very comfortable style. The, revamped for 2012, Charger, Durango and Grand Cherokee are all looking pretty sweet too

Back to GM.
Speaking of a return to glory. Cadillac is putting out some really nice models and concepts. Having a brand people aspire to is important...the previous crop of Cadillacs were nice enough but hardly inspirational. I think GM is doing an excellent job of appropriately filling different market niches with it's different brands and models. As boring as the everyday mid-size family car niche is, I must say I'm looking forward to what Chevy brings out to update the Malibu. While the current model was a massive leap forward for Chevy it's no longer an example of what GM is capable. Take the new Buick Regal, for example, that's an extremely nice mid-sized sedan. I bet the Malibu replacement becomes a solid competitor. I haven't driven a Cruze yet, but the ones I see on the road have a look of quality and attention to detail that was not remotely present in the Cavaliers or the Cobalt.

Camaro seems to be selling reasonably well. I see a surprising number of them on the road.

Edit: And in a nod to a previous era. You just have to respect the Chevy crate motors, drop them in just about anything for extremely reliable performance.