If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   GM asks for $2.6B "to build hybrids." In other news, "to build hybrids" replaces "won't they think of the children?"   (reuters.com) divider line 279
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

5602 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Apr 2009 at 6:10 AM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



279 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-04-01 11:47:14 PM
Yes, by all means, let's burn MORE ethanol!
 
2009-04-02 12:10:00 AM
Alright, FINE. I'll pay for it. Jeez.

But if I do, I better get a free car.

Or at least a really good deal on a car.

Or at least a low interest rate on the ass-raping loan.

Or maybe just an air-freshener.

Or maybe a coupon for money off an air-freshener.
 
2009-04-02 12:17:54 AM
DarthBrooks: Yes, by all means, let's burn MORE ethanol!

Huh? There's nothing about new flex-fuel or ethanol vehicles in the article I see.
 
2009-04-02 12:27:55 AM
DarthBrooks: Yes, by all means, let's burn MORE ethanol!

Hybrid =/= ethanol. This is for electric/gas hybrids. I do agree with the ethanol sentiment though, probably the worst energy idea ever.
 
2009-04-02 01:04:06 AM
GAT_00: I do agree with the ethanol sentiment though, probably the worst energy idea ever.

CORN SHOULD BE IN EVERYTHING! YEARGH!!
 
2009-04-02 01:20:49 AM
I really don't understand the argument on hybrids. If I want to buy a Prius, why is it a bad thing? I looked at the car and it seems like a good deal for me. I drive about 400 miles per week. What am I a missing? Can someone explain?
 
2009-04-02 01:51:25 AM
How about NO! Does NO work for you?

Carve off the healthy parts and die. Fark off, assholes. We gave you a chance and you screwed it up. Go away and die.

Your healthy bits will be bought up and life will go on.

Long Live Cadillac and Chevy trucks!
 
2009-04-02 03:05:54 AM
When it comes to GM, I only want to buy an electric car if I buy one from them. And I only want it if it's awesome, cheap and stylish. That is what I can get from Japanese-based manufacturers.

I don't know why the car execs weren't able to see industry-wide change coming, the change that everyone else saw - the growing green movement over the 2000s saw it early, the press saw it after 2001 and the up-and-down oil prices of this decade, the consumers have flocked to more fuel-efficient cars for years now. The Honda Insight was released in 2000. And GM wants to build a hybrid - NOW? A little late to the game; even Ford has built hybrids in partnership with other car companies.

What I've been hearing lately from GM and Chrysler (much less from Ford, which has adapted much more readily) is apologists in the media, saying that Toyota and Honda's expansion into SUVs and trucks for the North American market means GM and Chrysler's entire business model based on high volume sales of trucks and SUVs is still sound. Apparently, they didn't explore the concept of market research in Detroit until they needed government handouts. Nor do they understand vision and competition or protection of their brands.

Of course, GM particularly has big problems because of decisions made in the 1950s-1970s on legacy pensions and health insurance. GM is the chief example of why the United States' lack of universal public health care hurts business badly. But their overall tough circumstances as a business doesn't excuse their reluctance to innovate and keep pace with the technological developments of their competitors. If anything a fight for survival should have pushed them to do cars better than Honda, Toyota, etc.

As for Chrysler, after the spectacle of them blackmailing the Canadian government to get bailout money and ripping the CAW in the media (something GM hasn't done quite as much of - I actually heard the new CEO of GM say nice things about Kenny Lewenza at his initial press conference), I'm not interested in buying a car from them now or at any point in the future. They've earned so much bad will I don't know how their brand will recover. I'm not being a douchebag deliberately and I'm not a major union boosting type, but I just see no reason why I would ever buy a car from them when I have so many other, better choices, from tiny tiny compacts like the Smart Fortwo to well-designed hybrids from Toyota and Honda to big-ass trucks like the Ford F-150. And on top of the better choices they behave reprehensibly as a company. No interest.
 
2009-04-02 06:13:06 AM
Yeah, and when will the government start requiring us to buy these HM hybrids...
 
2009-04-02 06:13:20 AM
fark hybrids. They stopped making these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1
And made Hummers instead.
 
2009-04-02 06:13:53 AM
GM asks for $2.6 B 'won't they think of the children'?
 
2009-04-02 06:15:18 AM
bobbette
Why do you hate America?
 
2009-04-02 06:16:21 AM
bobbette: GM is the chief example of why the United States' lack of universal public health care hurts business badly.

No, it is an example of a business making deals with employees based on things that hadn't happened yet and were by all means best case scenario. No one in the country owes anyone anything when it comes to their employer farking them over, period.
 
2009-04-02 06:20:43 AM
Fark GM. They continued to cater to soccer moms, mid-life crises, and small penises markets despite the asinine hikes in gas prices.
 
2009-04-02 06:57:07 AM
Britney Spear's Speculum: Fark GM. They continued to cater to soccer moms, mid-life crises, and small penises markets despite the asinine hikes in gas prices.


Precisely the reason you LET THEM FAIL. Regardless of whether it is due to labor or their product-LET THEM FAIL.

If someone were overpaying people to sell ice to eskimos, would anyone advise a bailout for them?
 
2009-04-02 06:58:21 AM
Brett Favre
Yeah, and when will the government start requiring us to buy these HM hybrids...

THIS!
 
2009-04-02 07:00:11 AM
2.6B will get us a Cimarron Hybrid, which is exactly like the Volt but has a Cadillac badge. Looking forward of another decade of just barely good enough GM products!
 
2009-04-02 07:05:48 AM
Having worked for GM the last time (or was it the time before the last one? 1980) they threatened to go into bankruptcy, I am of the firm opinion that every farking employee from the floor sweeper right up to the chairman of the board make too farking much money.

Every one of them should take a 60% cut in pay (bigger cuts for managment). New, unskilled, employees should start at minimum wage, not at farking $35,000 per year. And they should get basic health insurance not this farking cover everything that might go wrong shiat for only $10 co-pay.

/flame on
 
2009-04-02 07:09:31 AM
Remember the so-called "energy crisis" when politics regarding the Middle East caused the oil-producing countries to turn the taps off resulting in fuel-rationing, the 55 mph national speed limit, federal grants for installing set-back thermostats and upgrading your home insulation?

This was a wake-up call in the EARLY 1970s. This should have been the end of the gas-guzzlers FOREVER.

Unfortunately, the Oil-rich nations decided NOT to continue to cut their collective noses off to spite their faces. Oil prices tumbled. AND EVERYONE FORGOT.

All who forgot about this event are to blame here.

The auto industry itself for marketing the wasteful and poor-quality vehicles.
The redneck yeehaws and other narrow-minded consumers that continues to demand these wasteful vehicles
The politicians for caving to political pressure from the auto industry and giving "trucks" exemptions for fleet fuel-economy targets.
The UAW for not realizing blood cannot be gotten from stones.

Fark 'em all.
 
2009-04-02 07:12:43 AM
After shafting Saturn like that, they can all die in a fire for all I care. Sure, they weren't perfect cars, but damn, they were made in america by americans. Time to go for VW or Toyota or something. Assholes.
 
2009-04-02 07:17:06 AM
Royish: fark hybrids. They stopped making these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1
And made Hummers instead.


THIS. They should have continued with the EV (and even with hybrids), rather than buddying up to the oil companies and screwing over the consumer. Let them go bankrupt. Teach them, and all the other car companies, a much needed lesson.
 
2009-04-02 07:21:54 AM
Iplaybass: Royish: fark hybrids. They stopped making these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1
And made Hummers instead.

THIS. They should have continued with the EV (and even with hybrids), rather than buddying up to the oil companies and screwing over the consumer. Let them go bankrupt. Teach them, and all the other car companies, a much needed lesson.


Piss on that. Why hasnt anyone done a micro turbofan to generator + electric "only" car - smaller footprint, burns anything, and puts the turbofan to use, for once in vehicles.

Hybrids are a bad joke. My SC2 got better millage than most and didnt have to dump 500lbs of worthless batteries around. Maybe if people made cars better, people would see this. MPG is relative to the crap your vehicle has to move around. Also figure in cost of battery replacement, and a lot of other worthless garbage these cars totally love having, and most of it is worthless the way its built today.

See: http://www.its.ucdavis.edu/news/enews/archive/special-issue.html for how your suburban can get 28mpg.
 
2009-04-02 07:23:25 AM
How about building cars that people want and can buy at a price that is profitable? If you can't do that then go out of business. Brilliant new idea.
 
2009-04-02 07:24:02 AM
Does anyone else have an issue with GM calling the Volt an "all electric" car even though it has almost the same sized engine as a Hyundai Accent to power a generator?
 
2009-04-02 07:25:00 AM
I'm reading between the lines here, but GM seems to be acknowledging that no one is going to buy a $40,000 Volt and that it's probably not going to get that 40 miles on just batteries. GM's existing hybrids have such high cost and limited usefulness that no one in their right mind is going to buy one. A Tahoe hybrid starts at more than $50,000. You can get a V8 Lexus SUV for less than that. Mileage is awful, but no one that is buying a $50,000 truck is going to be interested in fuel economy. A Malibu hybrid would never last long enough to justify fuel savings over the regular model.

The sooner GM goes bankrupt the sooner it may be able to start competing on something other than being an "American" car company.
 
2009-04-02 07:28:13 AM
IKillBugs: Does anyone else have an issue with GM calling the Volt an "all electric" car even though it has almost the same sized engine as a Hyundai Accent to power a generator?

Yeah that irritates me A LOT.
 
2009-04-02 07:32:39 AM
Life2Death: Why hasnt anyone done a micro turbofan to generator + electric "only" car

Because gas turbines are only fuel-efficient at near full power (so it would need to keep switching on and off, charging and discharging the battery); and because they're super expensive to maintain.

/ Next question.

Royish: fark hybrids. They stopped making these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1
And made Hummers instead.


The EV1 was a terrible vehicle as a commercial proposition. Battery technology wasn't anywhere near good enough to make it a practical option for... well, just about anyone. Although battery technology has come a long way since then, it'll probably be another five years before recharging performance and cost make mass-market plug-in hybrids a commercial reality.
 
2009-04-02 07:37:20 AM
Day_Old_Dutchie: The UAW for not realizing blood cannot be gotten from stones.

Because it just isn't a GM thread without some UAW hate, amiright?
 
2009-04-02 07:38:44 AM
Iplaybass: IKillBugs: Does anyone else have an issue with GM calling the Volt an "all electric" car even though it has almost the same sized engine as a Hyundai Accent to power a generator?

Yeah that irritates me A LOT.


Honda makes commercial generators with enough strength to rum most appliances in an average home, and they are marginally larger than the engine on my lawn mower. Why don't they use one of them?
 
2009-04-02 07:41:03 AM
opiumpoopy: Life2Death: Why hasnt anyone done a micro turbofan to generator + electric "only" car

Because gas turbines are only fuel-efficient at near full power (so it would need to keep switching on and off, charging and discharging the battery); and because they're super expensive to maintain.

/ Next question.

Royish: fark hybrids. They stopped making these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1
And made Hummers instead.

The EV1 was a terrible vehicle as a commercial proposition. Battery technology wasn't anywhere near good enough to make it a practical option for... well, just about anyone. Although battery technology has come a long way since then, it'll probably be another five years before recharging performance and cost make mass-market plug-in hybrids a commercial reality.


If they had continued R&D on the EV1, they might have developed the perfect, or at least better, battery by now, and made plenty of money on licensing fees from other automakers wanting to use said batteries.
 
2009-04-02 07:42:39 AM
bobbette: When it comes to GM, I only want to buy an electric car if I buy one from them. And I only want it if it's awesome, cheap and stylish. That is what I can get from Japanese-based manufacturers.

I don't know why the car execs weren't able to see industry-wide change coming, the change that everyone else saw - the growing green movement over the 2000s saw it early, the press saw it after 2001 and the up-and-down oil prices of this decade, the consumers have flocked to more fuel-efficient cars for years now. The Honda Insight was released in 2000. And GM wants to build a hybrid - NOW? A little late to the game; even Ford has built hybrids in partnership with other car companies.

What I've been hearing lately from GM and Chrysler (much less from Ford, which has adapted much more readily) is apologists in the media, saying that Toyota and Honda's expansion into SUVs and trucks for the North American market means GM and Chrysler's entire business model based on high volume sales of trucks and SUVs is still sound. Apparently, they didn't explore the concept of market research in Detroit until they needed government handouts. Nor do they understand vision and competition or protection of their brands.

Of course, GM particularly has big problems because of decisions made in the 1950s-1970s on legacy pensions and health insurance. GM is the chief example of why the United States' lack of universal public health care hurts business badly. But their overall tough circumstances as a business doesn't excuse their reluctance to innovate and keep pace with the technological developments of their competitors. If anything a fight for survival should have pushed them to do cars better than Honda, Toyota, etc.

As for Chrysler, after the spectacle of them blackmailing the Canadian government to get bailout money and ripping the CAW in the media (something GM hasn't done quite as much of - I actually heard the new CEO of GM say nice things about Kenny Lewenza at his initial press conference), I'm not interested in buying a car from them now or at any point in the future. They've earned so much bad will I don't know how their brand will recover. I'm not being a douchebag deliberately and I'm not a major union boosting type, but I just see no reason why I would ever buy a car from them when I have so many other, better choices, from tiny tiny compacts like the Smart Fortwo to well-designed hybrids from Toyota and Honda to big-ass trucks like the Ford F-150. And on top of the better choices they behave reprehensibly as a company. No interest.


The reason they kept with the SUVs long after the writing was on the wall was because they are short-sighted idiots beholden to short-sighted shareholders who only care about which vehicles will net them the most profit. As Day Old Dutchie pointed out, the US automakers were caught flatfooted when the VW Beetle showed up on our shores (giving us the Corvair), and they were caught flat-footed when Oil Crisis '73 happened (giving us the Pinto and the Vega). By Oil Crisis '79, GM did manage to roll out down-sized full-sized cars, but they also gave us the Citation and the great-in-theory-bad-in-practice V8-6-4 engine which just about killed off the diesel market for domestic cars.

I agree with your assessment of Chrysler, and I'm a Mopar fan. Other than the Challenger and Viper, their entire car line is a shambles, and their minivan dominance has run its course. You have a company with Dan Quayle on its board thinking they can outsmart the rest of the auto industry, and they got in over their heads quicker than Gleek fighting alongside the Justice League. But then again, at least they didn't pay $31 billion for Chrysler like Daimler-Benz did a few years earlier so I guess stupidity is relative. It's just a shame that Chysler seems to be getting managed by exponentially more clueless people with each go round.

It's like Automotive Idiocracy these days. Unretire Bob Lutz, and make HIM Car Czar.
 
2009-04-02 07:44:35 AM
They don't use a home generator because those have about 5-10kw of output. To charge an electric car you need about 300kwh. That means your little Honda genny would have to run for 30 hours to charge the car.

One horsepower is 750w. Cars need about 100 horsepower, or 75,000 watts. Your household electrical outlets are capable of about 2,000 watts.

This means even plugged into a standard outlet, it would take 35 hours or so, but you'll need to use it tomorrow.
 
2009-04-02 07:46:19 AM
Okay fine, here's your 2.5 billion, on what terms would you like to pay that back? And here's your interest rate you'll notice it's highly favorable. What? Oh you were expecting a grant? Well what can I do to get you into a 2.5 billion dollar loan today?
 
2009-04-02 07:49:03 AM
Goggles_Pisano: they got in over their heads quicker than Gleek fighting alongside the Justice League.

Sheer genius right there.
 
2009-04-02 07:50:07 AM
Kelbel: I really don't understand the argument on hybrids. If I want to buy a Prius, why is it a bad thing? I looked at the car and it seems like a good deal for me. I drive about 400 miles per week. What am I a missing? Can someone explain?

You're missing a couple things

1. Lithium is an extremely limited resource.
2. Hybrids are far more expensive upfront, count your interest on your car loan and you're probably paying more per mile.
3. Battery production is extremely messy
 
2009-04-02 07:50:40 AM
GM doesn't "ask" for anything anymore.
 
2009-04-02 07:50:53 AM
NewportBarGuy: How about NO! Does NO work for you?

Carve off the healthy parts and die. Fark off, assholes. We gave you a chance and you screwed it up. Go away and die.

Your healthy bits will be bought up and life will go on.

Long Live Cadillac and Chevy trucks!


That's always nice to see. Let's put this in perspective real quick, shall we?

GM: Largest auto manufacturer in the WORLD from pre-1930-2008. They ask for 2.6 Billion dollars, and it's FARK THEM HURRRRRRR

AIG/Wall Street: sat around manipulating your money for however long you entrusted it to them. They ask for 700 Billion dollars. General response: They're the backbone of our financial system, they must get their bonuses, blah blah blah.

GM at least produces SOMETHING of value. Wall street lost 269 times as much money, did it WWWAAAAYYYYY faster, and at the same time wasn't producing ANYTHING, not cars, not trucks, nothing. Yeah, let GM fail. Buick is only the most reliable car on earth right now, having dethroned Lexus after lord-knows-how-many years.
 
2009-04-02 07:51:23 AM
I get almost 30mpg out of my V8 luxury sports car all by upgrading it with performance parts. So it's a win/win situation for me. The companies need to make a higher quality of product. A lot of people aren't like me and willing to invest money on their vehicle after purchase. I am aware I need to worry about the environment but I refuse to pay for a small cheaply made car which is the same price of a 4 door sedan.

/I save on gas when I am not stomping it to the floor.
 
2009-04-02 07:52:01 AM
Goggles_Pisano: GM did manage to roll out down-sized full-sized cars, but they also gave us the Citation

What kind of name for a car is the "Citation"? Sure, it can mean getting an award, but it can also mean getting a ticket.


Here are some other car names from the team who thought that one up:

"Drive the new 2009 Moving Violation!"

"You'll enjoy the tight handling of the new GM Speeding Ticket"

"Drive in the lap of luxury with the new model You're-the-wrong-color-in-the-wrong-neighborhood-and-are-about-to-get-your-tail- light-'broken'"
 
2009-04-02 07:52:17 AM
ChaoticLimbs: They don't use a home generator because those have about 5-10kw of output. To charge an electric car you need about 300kwh. That means your little Honda genny would have to run for 30 hours to charge the car.

One horsepower is 750w. Cars need about 100 horsepower, or 75,000 watts. Your household electrical outlets are capable of about 2,000 watts.

This means even plugged into a standard outlet, it would take 35 hours or so, but you'll need to use it tomorrow.


Sounds like plug in electrics are pretty much impossible with todays technology, and no matter how much they want to call the Volt "all electric" it's really a gas powered car.
 
2009-04-02 07:53:07 AM
GM refused to learn in the 70's. They were in death throws when they came out with the SUV craze. SUVs are cheap to make and can to for a huge retail price. There is a big profit margin in SUVs. GM needed money, SUVs were easy money. They were in financial trouble long ago, they just put it off for a few years by selling us gas guzzling penis extensions. People did not demand SUVs out of the blue. They created a product and then did a very calculated marketing effort to convince people they wanted these vehicles.

Toyota and Honda saw what was coming in the 70's. We should not be paying for GM's repeated business mistakes. After they announced they were giving Saturn the axe I quit holding out any hope that they would pull their heads out of their collective arses. At least Ford has sort of evolved. I hate Ford cars the one I owned was a total piece of crap but at least they have tried to evolve. Chrysler can just DIAF.

All that money we are pissing away on the US automakers should instead be going to creating new jobs for all of the autoworkers. The money would be much better spent and the lone excuse GM has been using for us to get involved was the massive loss of jobs.

If Ford and Tesla end up being the only two US based automakers I would be fine with that as long as we quickly find some replacement jobs for all those people.
 
2009-04-02 07:53:44 AM
bobbette: Of course, GM particularly has big problems because of decisions made in the 1950s-1970s on legacy pensions and health insurance. GM is the chief example of why the United States' lack of universal public health care hurts business badly. But their overall tough circumstances as a business doesn't excuse their reluctance to innovate and keep pace with the technological developments of their competitors. If anything a fight for survival should have pushed them to do cars better than Honda, Toyota, etc.

GM and really all of the Big Three (the UAW was always careful to set up identical contracts) have become privately-funded welfare states. GM has to keep up with the Japanese and German governments in providing healthcare while simultaneously keeping up with Toyota and Mercedes in auto manufacture. It's really too much to ask. Either the government needs to take over those UAW pensions, or the UAW needs to grow a pair and learn to live in reality.
 
2009-04-02 07:53:55 AM
NewportBarGuy: We gave you a chance and you screwed it up.

Horseshiat. You guys have been trashing GM for a couple decades. One side tightening the anchor around their necks with Unions and the rest of the liberals trashing their products.
 
2009-04-02 07:54:14 AM
Xenomech: Goggles_Pisano: GM did manage to roll out down-sized full-sized cars, but they also gave us the Citation

What kind of name for a car is the "Citation"? Sure, it can mean getting an award, but it can also mean getting a ticket.


Here are some other car names from the team who thought that one up:

"Drive the new 2009 Moving Violation!"

"You'll enjoy the tight handling of the new GM Speeding Ticket"

"Drive in the lap of luxury with the new model You're-the-wrong-color-in-the-wrong-neighborhood-and-are-about-to-get-your-tail- light-'broken'"


You should read up on their introduction of the Nova to spanish speaking countries.
 
2009-04-02 07:54:32 AM
bobbette: GM is the chief example of why the United States' lack of universal public health care hurts business badly

You're gonna get some antagonistic replies with that comment. Most people can't think beyond one step when it comes to economic policies.
 
2009-04-02 07:57:43 AM
Mortimer14: Having worked for GM the last time (or was it the time before the last one? 1980) they threatened to go into bankruptcy, I am of the firm opinion that every farking employee from the floor sweeper right up to the chairman of the board make too farking much money.

Every one of them should take a 60% cut in pay (bigger cuts for managment). New, unskilled, employees should start at minimum wage, not at farking $35,000 per year. And they should get basic health insurance not this farking cover everything that might go wrong shiat for only $10 co-pay.

/flame on


This!!!

GM's total compensation to it's employees is almost twice what companies like Toyota and Honda are paying. That's not even addressing the legacy costs.

IMHO they need to go into bankruptcy, shed all these expenses, get their heads outta their arses as far as their product line, and emerge a stronger competitive company.

There is a reason why the import companies have 2 divisions. Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infinity, Honda/Acura. GM has Saturn/Chevy/Pontiac/Buick/Cadillac/GMC/etc. WAY too much overlap. They should cut down to Chevy/Buick/Caddy. Roll Saturn, Pontiac, and GMC into Chevy and cut the number of models dramatically. If they focused their design/development resources on fewer models they would be better cars overall.

Hummer is a specialty brand and should live or die on it's own merits.
 
2009-04-02 07:58:09 AM
They have it backwards...you build a hybrid, then you ask for 2.6 mil (from teh consumers).
 
2009-04-02 07:58:38 AM
HMS_Blinkin: NewportBarGuy: How about NO! Does NO work for you?

Carve off the healthy parts and die. Fark off, assholes. We gave you a chance and you screwed it up. Go away and die.

Your healthy bits will be bought up and life will go on.

Long Live Cadillac and Chevy trucks!

That's always nice to see. Let's put this in perspective real quick, shall we?

GM: Largest auto manufacturer in the WORLD from pre-1930-2008. They ask for 2.6 Billion dollars, and it's FARK THEM HURRRRRRR

AIG/Wall Street: sat around manipulating your money for however long you entrusted it to them. They ask for 700 Billion dollars. General response: They're the backbone of our financial system, they must get their bonuses, blah blah blah.

GM at least produces SOMETHING of value. Wall street lost 269 times as much money, did it WWWAAAAYYYYY faster, and at the same time wasn't producing ANYTHING, not cars, not trucks, nothing. Yeah, let GM fail. Buick is only the most reliable car on earth right now, having dethroned Lexus after lord-knows-how-many years.


There's no way to respond to your post. Your ignorance of economics and finance is blinding.
 
2009-04-02 07:59:08 AM
HMS_Blinkin: That's always nice to see. Let's put this in perspective real quick, shall we?

GM: Largest auto manufacturer in the WORLD from pre-1930-2008. They ask for 2.6 Billion dollars, and it's FARK THEM HURRRRRRR

AIG/Wall Street: sat around manipulating your money for however long you entrusted it to them. They ask for 700 Billion dollars. General response: They're the backbone of our financial system, they must get their bonuses, blah blah blah.

GM at least produces SOMETHING of value. Wall street lost 269 times as much money, did it WWWAAAAYYYYY faster, and at the same time wasn't producing ANYTHING, not cars, not trucks, nothing. Yeah, let GM fail. Buick is only the most reliable car on earth right now, having dethroned Lexus after lord-knows-how-many years.


That's an awful large brush you're using there, son. Had you even the remotest clue what NewportBarGuy typically posts, you'd know that he's twice as pist over the financial boondoggle as he is over the auto bailouts. Amazingly enough, you can hate both.
 
2009-04-02 07:59:44 AM
Day_Old_Dutchie: Remember the so-called "energy crisis" when politics regarding the Middle East caused the oil-producing countries to turn the taps off resulting in fuel-rationing, the 55 mph national speed limit, federal grants for installing set-back thermostats and upgrading your home insulation?

This was a wake-up call in the EARLY 1970s. This should have been the end of the gas-guzzlers FOREVER.

Unfortunately, the Oil-rich nations decided NOT to continue to cut their collective noses off to spite their faces. Oil prices tumbled. AND EVERYONE FORGOT.

All who forgot about this event are to blame here.

The auto industry itself for marketing the wasteful and poor-quality vehicles.
The redneck yeehawsself-absorbed yuppies and other narrow-minded consumers that continues to demand these wasteful vehicles
The politicians for caving to political pressure from the auto industry and giving "trucks" exemptions for fleet fuel-economy targets.
The UAW for not realizing blood cannot be gotten from stones.

Fark 'em all.



FTFY. "Rednecks" are probably among the few kinds of people who would actually use a big vehicle for what it was intended. It's the city folk with no need for a 4x4 and who use their SUVs as they would a compact car who are the wasteful ones.

Other than that, spot on.
 
Displayed 50 of 279 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report