Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;561008]WTF are you talking about? I think you misread something. If I'm a shareholder of Ford stock and the U.S. government is giving a tax break for consumers to buy GM products and not Ford products, that's a problem. Are you advocating that it's OK for the U.S. government to favor one company over another. This isn't Venezula....yet.

And I have no clue how my statement shows an impressive lack of understanding of basic investing.[/quote]

It should be noted that we're arguing hypotheticals, and grilling Obama here for something he hasn't even done yet: institute tax breaks especially for GM cars while under government ownership. It's kind of putting the cart before the horse to get on his case about this.

But, swooping in and buying up a controlling interest in GM after its management has positioned it to become one of the biggest failures in American business history? That shows highly suspect knowledge of business and investing.

I'd feel better if it were just a bailout, but buying up shares? Borders on reckless.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=Schneed10;561009]It should be noted that we're arguing hypotheticals, and grilling Obama here for something he hasn't even done yet: institute tax breaks especially for GM cars while under government ownership. It's kind of putting the cart before the horse to get on his case about this.

But, swooping in and buying up a controlling interest in GM after its management has positioned it to become one of the biggest failures in American business history? That shows highly suspect knowledge of business and investing.

I'd feel better if it were just a bailout, but buying up shares? Borders on reckless.[/quote]
Obama said earlier today that tax breaks will come for all hybird type cars.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=firstdown;560988]The problem is even with all this bail out money there is no guarantee any of this will work. We have dumped 20 billion into GM and are going to now dump another 30 billion and if that does not work they will dump even more money into GM. I'm guessing within a year we are going to dump another 20 to 30 billion more into GM over the 50 billion.[/quote]Well, when GM spends that money, it's not going to be burned in a fire. The money that they are spending is revenue to somebody, and most likely, that somebody will be a private entity. So, the contributions of the taxpayers aren't going to be in vain in the way you are suggesting. All that's happening is that the current state of the economy is forcing you to reinvest some of what you would otherwise consider discretionary income into our economic system in the name of stability. Wheter via a bailout increasing taxes, or an increase in the unemployment tax seems like semantics to me.

We're a society that is interdependent on each other to an extent. A scenario where a major part of society could just fall out and everyone else is unaffected just isn't feasible. From an economic standpoint, the bailout doesn't guarentee the success of GM per se, but unless the capital ends up being sucked up into the pockets of shareholders, it's guarenteed to benefit the overall economy in some way.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=Schneed10;561009]It should be noted that we're arguing hypotheticals, and grilling Obama here for something he hasn't even done yet: institute tax breaks especially for GM cars while under government ownership. It's kind of putting the cart before the horse to get on his case about this.

But, swooping in and buying up a controlling interest in GM after its management has positioned it to become one of the biggest failures in American business history? That shows highly suspect knowledge of business and investing.

I'd feel better if it were just a bailout, but buying up shares? Borders on reckless.[/quote]Agree on the hypothetical argument, we definitely need to wait and see. And agree 100% about buying up GM, not a good idea. I would've rather seen a bankruptcy without the U.S. government holding an ownership stake. On the unemployment vs. owning GM, I'll take the unemployment insurance route, at least the unemployment eventually ends. This GM could be an albatros on the gov't neck for many years (Amtrak).

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;561008]WTF are you talking about? I think you misread something. If I'm a shareholder of Ford stock and the U.S. government is giving a tax break for consumers to buy GM products and not Ford products, that's a problem. Are you advocating that it's OK for the U.S. government to favor one company over another. This isn't Venezula....yet.

And I have no clue how my statement shows an impressive lack of understanding of basic investing.[/quote]



I have misread something because I assumed you were merely referring to being upset if gov to told Ford how to run their business. Apologies. As for giving a tax-breaks to one company but not another in the same industry, well, that's unconstitutional and I would have a hard time envisioning anyone being that stupid.

p.s. The Obama administration has done a terrible job with the auto companies. I would have taken them over outright and resold them to the highest bidder after a few years. Shareholders should have been bought out and those who wanted to stick around would get first dib during the resale of the company.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;560993]Your arguement would make sense if American jobs were being saved when in fact GM is shipping jobs over-seas. The plant in Fredericksburg is being closed or so I've heard. So they're jobs are not beign saved? I say a picture of Detroit in a magazine. It doesn't look to me like the government did a really good job of saving people's jobs there, neither did GM. So why throw bad money after good?[/quote]Well, the foreign companies employ American labor as well, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable for our GDP if GM and Chrystler stop producing automobiles and their market share gets spread around to Ford, Toyota, VW, etc.

If the economic response to failure of the american auto industry were a systematic movement in demand from the automotive industry to mass transportation, this would be an entirely different argument. Unfortunately, it just means people would go get their personal automobiles from a different manufacturer, and that certainly means fewer american jobs available.

GM absolutely can compete with the foreign automakers, they've just lost the batter over the last 30 years or so. I worry that maybe the entire industry may not be worth much in the long run, but that doesn't mean things won't improve in the near term future.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=firstdown;561013]Obama said earlier today that tax breaks will come for all [B]hybird[/B] type cars.[/quote]

Like this?

[IMG]http://www.superuse.org/images/952.jpg[/IMG]

Re: Obama Motors
 

I once warned about the "slippery slope" of government getting too involved, and many disgarded my thoughts...here we have government getting involved in a private entity getting 60%, and giving away 12% to Canada and we are worried about more about investment issues?
Furthermore, many here have called the Obama campaign "bordering on socialism", but most refuted that as well. Even went so far as to call others a bunch of names for thinking it.
hmmmm:
[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism]socialism definition | Dictionary.com[/url]

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=saden1;561019]I have misread something because I assumed you were merely referring to being upset if gov to told Ford how to run their business. Apologies. As for giving a tax-breaks to one company but not another in the same industry, well, that's unconstitutional and I would have a hard time envisioning anyone being that stupid.

p.s. The Obama administration has done a terrible job with the auto companies. I would have taken them over outright and resold them to the highest bidder after a few years. Shareholders should have been bought out and those who wanted to stick around would get first dib during the resale of the company.[/quote]No worries.

If the Obama Admin had a plan like yours with a more finite exit point, I'd be more comfortable with the plan. Although the Bush Admin had some issues with finite exit points also. :)

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;561037]No worries.

If the Obama Admin had a plan like yours with a more finite exit point, I'd be more comfortable with the plan. Although the Bush Admin had some issues with finite exit points also. :)[/quote]

Funny how that tid bit hasn't been tossed around enough, first Gitmo, now GM. That my friend is a "pattern".

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=Schneed10;560965]I still don't see the problem with that, either. It would still be your choice, take advantage of it and buy a GM with a tax break or if you're leery, buy the same Toyota for the same deal that you can today.

I philosophically agree with what you guys are saying in this thread, that having the government taking over corporations is never a good thing.

I just took umbrage with the notion that the government is forcing products on us, that's all. Suggesting so shows an impressive lack of understanding of basic business.[/quote]
When I said small cars are being forced on us, I was more referring to the CAFE standards that are going to force all car companies to make smaller cars, even if that is not what people want. I should have spoken more clearly on that.

I'm not against people buying small cars if that is what they want. People should be able to but whatever they want, whether it is a hybrid or a big SUV. I don't like the government telling companies that they have to build more fuel efficient cars that are going to be smaller and more expensive.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=jsarno;561036]I once warned about the "slippery slope" of government getting too involved, and many disgarded my thoughts...here we have government getting involved in a private entity getting 60%, and giving away 12% to Canada and we are worried about more about investment issues?
Furthermore, many here have called the Obama campaign "bordering on socialism", but most refuted that as well. Even went so far as to call others a bunch of names for thinking it.
hmmmm:
[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism]socialism definition | Dictionary.com[/url][/quote]

Oh, and just in case some of you don't know what comes after socialism in the marxist theory:
[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/communism]communism definition | Dictionary.com[/url]

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=BleedBurgundy;560991]um, anybody else think that the reason *most* europeans drive those "piece of shit" cars is out of necessity. High price of fuel, over congestion and limits on space make these cars necessary. Where exactly do you think we're headed, back to 1965 and cheap gas? And for those really wanting to bitch about the perceived lack of performance in electric cars, check out the [URL="http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/11/detroit-2009-dodge-circuit-ev-now-with-cross-hairs/"]numbers and 0-60 times[/URL] compared to internal combustion.[/quote]
Yes, [B]Europeans [/B]drive those cars out of necessity. We have a lot more space and cheaper fuel, so Americans drive bigger cars. We are not Europe, I don't know why everyone wants to do things that Europe is doing. This country was founded to get away from Europe.

And yes, we could have cheap gas again if the government didn't stop us from drilling our own oil and building new refineries.

I know electric cars have good performance. Electric motors deliver instant torque and can rev ridiculously high. Electric cars are also more expensive though and take too long to charge, but their problems are being worked on. I have nothing against electric cars. If there is a market for them, they should be built.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;560958]The Obama Car

It steers to the left, smokes, is overpriced, and will only work for four to eight years.[/quote]

:lol:

Re: Obama Motors
 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3Yju1_WD9Q&feature=related]YouTube - 1969 camaro burnout[/ame] , can a Hybrid run like this ?

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=steveo395;561045]Yes, [B]Europeans [/B]drive those cars out of necessity. We have a lot more space and cheaper fuel, so Americans drive bigger cars. We are not Europe, I don't know why everyone wants to do things that Europe is doing. This country was founded to get away from Europe.

And yes, we could have cheap gas again if the government didn't stop us from drilling our own oil and building new refineries.

I know electric cars have good performance. Electric motors deliver instant torque and can rev ridiculously high. Electric cars are also more expensive though and take too long to charge, but their problems are being worked on. I have nothing against electric cars. If there is a market for them, they should be built.[/quote]

So we should replace our current standard of fuel (gasoline) that we are currently running into a shortage problem on, with a standard of fuel (electricity) that we are currently having a shortage problem on??

Don't get me wrong, I like what we are doing with electric cars, but if we all switch to electric cars, where is that power going to come from. We already have power diverted from Canada to meet the demands, and our demands on electricity are FAR greater than those of fossil fuels.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=budw38;561048][url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3Yju1_WD9Q&feature=related]YouTube - 1969 camaro burnout[/url] , can a Hybrid run like this ?[/quote]

Horticulturists everywhere are upset at the misuse of rubber on that! lol.

Great car man...I love the 69 Camaro! I've been watching the Mecum auto show a lot lately, and I freeze every time I see a 69 camaro. Makes me wish I had an unreasonable amount of expendable income!

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=jsarno;561050]Horticulturists everywhere are upset at the misuse of rubber on that! lol.

Great car man...I love the 69 Camaro! I've been watching the Mecum auto show a lot lately, and I freeze every time I see a 69 camaro. Makes me wish I had an unreasonable amount of expendable income![/quote]
Hey , how are you Jsarno ? That is not my car , I did have a 71 SS Chevelle that was pretty damn sweet , until some clown smashed it one morning. If I ever get to the point where I earn 100k / year , I just might buy another ?

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=steveo395;561045]Yes, [B]Europeans [/B]drive those cars out of necessity. We have a lot more space and cheaper fuel, so Americans drive bigger cars. We are not Europe, I don't know why everyone wants to do things that Europe is doing. This country was founded to get away from Europe.

And yes, we could have cheap gas again if the government didn't stop us from drilling our own oil and building new refineries.
[/quote]


It's not a matter of "want" to be like Europe, it's need. Let me put on my capt. obvious hat: There is a finite supply of oil, it will run out, even if you run around every corner of the U.S. with a drill and a pipeline. So, yes oil prices are going to go up more and more as there is less and less. The only reason we have "more space" than europe is because we haven't been here as long to breed and overpopulate like the overgrown cockroaches that we are. That too will change with time. So, if you want to see what the US will look like in a few decades (or whenever) take a look at Europe. Similarly, I know the "we need to drill in the ANWR" folks are generally the same crew that teach intelligent design in their schools, so any mention of natural selection is verboten. That said, this process is pretty much an example of evolutionary design. The cars that adapt to the changing environment and restrictions will "live on" while the gas guzzling behemoths will go "extinct." So you can go kicking and screaming the whole way if you want, it's what's coming.

BTW- I lived in Europe for 6 years, this country becoming more like that continent is not a bad thing, imho.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=jsarno;561049]So we should replace our current standard of fuel (gasoline) that we are currently running into a shortage problem on, with a standard of fuel (electricity) that we are currently having a shortage problem on??

Don't get me wrong, I like what we are doing with electric cars, but if we all switch to electric cars, where is that power going to come from. We already have power diverted from Canada to meet the demands, and our demands on electricity are FAR greater than those of fossil fuels.[/quote]

I think the big difference is that we can make more electricity, we really can't make any more oil. (I'm not counting bio fuels as "oil")

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=GTripp0012;561015]Well, when GM spends that money, it's not going to be burned in a fire. The money that they are spending is revenue to somebody, and most likely, that somebody will be a private entity. So, the contributions of the taxpayers aren't going to be in vain in the way you are suggesting. All that's happening is that the current state of the economy is forcing you to reinvest some of what you would otherwise consider discretionary income into our economic system in the name of stability. Wheter via a bailout increasing taxes, or an increase in the unemployment tax seems like semantics to me.

We're a society that is interdependent on each other to an extent. A scenario where a major part of society could just fall out and everyone else is unaffected just isn't feasible. From an economic standpoint, the bailout doesn't guarentee the success of GM per se, but unless the capital ends up being sucked up into the pockets of shareholders, it's guarenteed to benefit the overall economy in some way.[/quote]
If your did not hear I believe that GM no longer has share holders. The problem I see is we have allready dumped 20 bil into GM with no results so now we are going to dump another 30 bil into a long shot to see if that works. I'm guess that 30 bil will turn into another 50 bil. I don't think the impact of GM going under would be 80 bil in unemployment benifits.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=BleedBurgundy;560991]um, anybody else think that the reason *most* europeans drive those "piece of shit" cars is out of necessity. High price of fuel, over congestion and limits on space make these cars necessary. Where exactly do you think we're headed, back to 1965 and cheap gas? And for those really wanting to bitch about the perceived lack of performance in electric cars, check out the [URL="http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/11/detroit-2009-dodge-circuit-ev-now-with-cross-hairs/"]numbers and 0-60 times[/URL] compared to internal combustion.[/quote]

Damn! Sub-5 zero to sixty!? There aren't many cars that can do that, and the ones that do are pretty expensive. I wonder how much this car will cost?

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=BleedBurgundy;561116]It's not a matter of "want" to be like Europe, it's need. Let me put on my capt. obvious hat: There is a finite supply of oil, it will run out, even if you run around every corner of the U.S. with a drill and a pipeline. So, yes oil prices are going to go up more and more as there is less and less. The only reason we have "more space" than europe is because we haven't been here as long to breed and overpopulate like the overgrown cockroaches that we are. That too will change with time. So, if you want to see what the US will look like in a few decades (or whenever) take a look at Europe. Similarly, I know the "we need to drill in the ANWR" folks are generally the same crew that teach intelligent design in their schools, so any mention of natural selection is verboten. That said, this process is pretty much an example of evolutionary design. The cars that adapt to the changing environment and restrictions will "live on" while the gas guzzling behemoths will go "extinct." So you can go kicking and screaming the whole way if you want, it's what's coming.

BTW- I lived in Europe for 6 years, this country becoming more like that continent is not a bad thing, imho.[/quote]


Good stuff man...the big picture is not often visualized. :thumb:

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=BleedBurgundy;561116]It's not a matter of "want" to be like Europe, it's need. Let me put on my capt. obvious hat: There is a finite supply of oil, it will run out, even if you run around every corner of the U.S. with a drill and a pipeline. So, yes oil prices are going to go up more and more as there is less and less. The only reason we have "more space" than europe is because we haven't been here as long to breed and overpopulate like the overgrown cockroaches that we are. That too will change with time. So, if you want to see what the US will look like in a few decades (or whenever) take a look at Europe. Similarly, I know the "we need to drill in the ANWR" folks are generally the same crew that teach intelligent design in their schools, so any mention of natural selection is verboten. That said, this process is pretty much an example of evolutionary design. The cars that adapt to the changing environment and restrictions will "live on" while the gas guzzling behemoths will go "extinct." So you can go kicking and screaming the whole way if you want, it's what's coming.

BTW- I lived in Europe for 6 years, this country becoming more like that continent is not a bad thing, imho.[/quote]
No the people who say drill in ANWR say use the resources we have while we come up with a better solution and its a quick fit to our current needs. I welcome the day the we have the technology to move away from oil but right now we really don't. I'm not really one to talk becuase my truck gets around 15 mpg (I drive it very little) and my boat holds 135 gallons of gas which will last me almost a month unless I do alot of fishing. So I'm all for better gas milage.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=budw38;561052]Hey , how are you Jsarno ? That is not my car , I did have a 71 SS Chevelle that was pretty damn sweet , until some clown smashed it one morning. If I ever get to the point where I earn 100k / year , I just might buy another ?[/quote]

I'm making it man, thanks for asking. How bout yourself?

71 SS Chevelle was a sweet car...was it the 454? What was your color combo?

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=BleedBurgundy;561118]I think the big difference is that we can make more electricity, we really can't make any more oil. (I'm not counting bio fuels as "oil")[/quote]

If we "can" make more, why aren't we? We don't have enough energy right now, so why aren't we making more?

Re: Obama Motors
 

Fail. Didn't know Obama would have to be a car salesman in addition to being President.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=BleedBurgundy;561116]It's not a matter of "want" to be like Europe, it's need. Let me put on my capt. obvious hat: There is a finite supply of oil, it will run out, even if you run around every corner of the U.S. with a drill and a pipeline. So, yes oil prices are going to go up more and more as there is less and less. The only reason we have "more space" than europe is because we haven't been here as long to breed and overpopulate like the overgrown cockroaches that we are. That too will change with time. So, if you want to see what the US will look like in a few decades (or whenever) take a look at Europe. Similarly, I know the "we need to drill in the ANWR" folks are generally the same crew that teach intelligent design in their schools, so any mention of natural selection is verboten. That said, this process is pretty much an example of evolutionary design. The cars that adapt to the changing environment and restrictions will "live on" while the gas guzzling behemoths will go "extinct." So you can go kicking and screaming the whole way if you want, it's what's coming.

BTW- I lived in Europe for 6 years, this country becoming more like that continent is not a bad thing, imho.[/quote]

Natural Selection eh?

[url=http://www.livescience.com/culture/090602-evolution-gm.html]How Evolution Could Sink (or Save) GM | LiveScience[/url]

Re: Obama Motors
 

[url]https://community.chryslerlistens.com/external.svc?page=qualification&qualification_ticket=raf[/url]

Here you go. Chrysler Listens. Log in and tell them why you would or wouldn't buy their cars. I would say this is not political but more of a giant think tank that filters back up to engineers, designers, and management.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=drew54;561415][URL]https://community.chryslerlistens.com/external.svc?page=qualification&qualification_ticket=raf[/URL]

Here you go. [B]Chrysler Listens[/B]. Log in and tell them why you would or wouldn't buy their cars. I would say this is not political but more of a giant think tank that filters back up to engineers, designers, and management.[/quote]


Apparently not in their survey if you say "No, I do not own, nor would I consider purchasing" a Chrysler."

[quote]At this time, we're seeking people with a different criteria match for this community. Still, we'd love for you to share any ideas or recommendations you have about our company and our products at chryslerlistens.com. [/quote]

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=Schneed10;560938]They won't be forcing them on you, for crying out loud. You can always choose a Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW, Volkswagen, Volvo... and on and on if you don't like what the new GM has to offer.

I'm not a fan of the US Government taking over corporations, but this is overreaction at its finest.[/quote]

Yeah, I mean, I though GM was bankrupt because few people were buying their cars. Now NO ONE will buy them & we will ALL be driving Hondas, Toyotas, Hyundais, etc.

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=SmootSmack;561191]Natural Selection eh?

[url=http://www.livescience.com/culture/090602-evolution-gm.html]How Evolution Could Sink (or Save) GM | LiveScience[/url][/quote]

They stole my shit! er something...

Re: Obama Motors
 

[quote=jsarno;561175]If we "can" make more, why aren't we? We don't have enough energy right now, so why aren't we making more?[/quote]

because it's easier to burn shit for fuel. i'm not even kidding.