Never Buy a GM car again!

[Andy]

There we go, I knew the insults would fly sooner or later.....

When people claim that someone is building the wrong product, and the company is outselling everyone else in the market, then you tend to get insulted. Any idiot should be able to figure out that is I am outselling everyone, then the problem likely isn't that I'm building a product no one wants. People don't buy products they don't want. So clearly they do want the product. To say otherwise, is plain stupid. If I'm going to deal with retarded children, I'm going to call them retarded children. When you want to grow up, and use basic logic, then we'll talk.

I have searched that chart up and down and can't find the numbers you posted anywhere on that chart. I would appreciate it if you would point out exactly which column and which row you are getting your numbers from because nowhere in the GM area is the number 1,049,966, nor is 578,020. The same applies for the Toyota numbers, the Ford numbers, and I guess if I felt like wasting my time on your FACTLESS drivel, I would find the same results for the remaining manufacturers you named.

I can find just as many charts as you can find via the internet to prove my point but you'll dispute it with your dying breath, SO, let's just take a look at the numbers you have and the chart you provided.........


Total cars sold:

GM 2008: 571,838 2009: 316,168
Toyota 2008: 630,095 2009: 387,317

And those numbers you CAN find on that fancy little chart.....

I agree. I can't figure that out either. My best guess is that when I copied the entire chart, it must have messed up. That confusing jumble is not how it looked when I clicked submit reply.

Anyway...

GM 2008 Sales
1,316,710
GM 2009 Sales
768,126

Toyota Motor 2008 Sales
1,046,854
Toyota Motor 2009Sales
638,795

Ford Motor Company 2008 Sales
938,566
Ford Motor Company 2009 Sales
595,665

Chrysler LLC 2008 Sales
750,369
Chrysler LLC 2009 Sales
402,900

Notice how GM outsold everyone in 2008? Notice how they are STILL outselling everyone in 2009?

Right. Class dismissed.

 

[Andy]

company A sells 100 crappy cars, for 100 each.. cost was 80 each....low sales made them drop prices and sell them for 85 to get them off the lots...

Comapny B makes cars people wanted, sticker was 100 again..cost again 80. cars sold out do to higher then expected Demand do to car they compeated against got poor mpg and gas doubled in price...all 90 cars sold for 100.

What was a better car to sell? the one that sold more? or the one that sold less and made more profits?

SALES DO NOT EQUAL QUALITY END OF STORY .

if that concept is to hard for you, maybe we can find some coloring books or something.....

Two things here.

First, do you think dealership wrangle over price with the factory, like a customer on the show room floor with a dumb as a post salesmen? No they do not. The dealership has no ability to dictate price. If a dealership sells a car for $10.00, that doesn't hurt the factory at all. Only the dealership is hurt by cutting price.

What the dealership does that hurts the factory is, it stops ordering cars it can't sell for enough to make a profit on. Is that what happened? Obviously not since GM... again.... OUT SOLD EVERYONE.

Quick example. I worked for a Caddy dealer when they switched the awful Catera over to the less awful CTS. When that switch over happened, the dealership sold the remaining Catera stock at a loss. They wanted them off the lot, and they wanted room for the CTS. So all the Cateras on the lot were sold for massive discounts. Note: The factory did not take a loss, we did. The factory was already paid. We're the ones that lost out on the deal.

Second... and maybe you didn't think of this... but did it ever occur to you that maybe the reason domestic cars are made with cheaper materials, is because labor costs are so high, they can't afford to make them to the same quality level as imports?

Look, you have two mid-size sedans. Essentially they are exactly alike. One is made with $40/hour labor by Toyota. The other is made with $70/hour labor by GM. Now both are going to make a car for a specific market. Which car is going to have more money to invest in better materials, and still stay within the price range for the market given?

Shockingly the one with lower labor costs, right? You can afford to put in better quality seats, and better quality leather, or panels, and maybe more bells and whistles, or better bells and whistles... when you are paying $30 less per hour of labor than your competitor.

 

[top gun]

Totally irrelevant. So irrelevant, an idiot is the only person that could come up with this.

POCKET..... you still don't get that.... if the problem was with the types of cars GM was making.... THEY WOULD NOT BE OUT SELLING EVERYONE!

"Wah... GM built the Hummer!" Cry cry cry they are NUMBER ONE IN THE US! Do you not understand NUMBER ONE? As in TOP SELLING MANUFACTURE.

"WAH HUMMER! WAH! CRY HUMMER!"
Look at your post sparky. You come across more stupid by the second.
(whimper, whine) "But but... Hummer!"
Forest Gump could figure out that if they are out selling EVERYONE, then the type of cars they are selling isn't the problem. Are you less intelligent than Forest Gump?

Can you handle that sparky? Need some help with this? Need Forest to come over and educate you?

Moreover, maybe you missed it, but Ford has done some massive restructuring, and had done a lot to cut labor costs. In 2006 Ford shed 1/3 or it's work force. It cut deals with the Unions to reduce cost. In 2009, it signed an agreement with the Unions to trade nearly $10 billion in retired worker pension/medical payments (which it never should have agreed to anyway) for stock options instead.

Moreover, it closed down dozens of US plants, in favor of Canadian plants that have lower labor costs. Mainly due to government funded health care. Socialized care is great for business, horrible for patients, but great for business.

So yeah, Ford is surviving because they have reduced labor costs.

I see Andy isn't really a movie critic anymore than a financial expert. In the movie Forest Gump, Gump was actually a hero, was a champion at many things, and was a great person & father... AND WAS AN ultra successful businessman AND MULTI-MILLIONAIRE! But we understand... you must have left early to get home before curfew.

So if pocket is Gump... WOW how ahead is he to little Andy eating Cheetos in mommies basement.

Fact is you can sell a lot of units because you are the largest and most widespread and that doesn't make you "best" at anything. It can obviously be a convenience & price issue. The other thing is GM has a good secondary market (used car sales) BECAUSE THEY ARE CHEAP and not all that great. That helps move their new car market due to more rapid turnover.

Add to that being to bloated with brands like Hummer (gas hog can't give them away now). Saab... that they never promoted and SELF COMPETING brands and it's easy to see way GM needed to completely restructure to be competitive.

And then the constant whine about labor costs. Do you not understand that it was the company MANAGEMENTS fiduciary duty to not sign contracts if they were soooo bad. That's a MANAGEMENT mistake whether you like to admit it or not.

And furthermore if I was a Union worker busting his a$$ out in some plant and saw GM constantly throwing dump trucks full... hell, SEMI TRUCKS FULL of $100 bills & life long benefits at upper management I'd say the exact same thing.

If you can give money away like that then you must be doin' fine... give us working stiffs our retirements. So it's not just those mean greedy workers fault and you know it.

And then you say FORD (who is ALSO UNION) did all these things to make itself more cost effective. Which are all things that GM could have done as well. AGAIN MANAGEMENT FAILURE! That's why they needed to be replaced.

But at least you let it slip that National Healthcare is GREAT for business. Of course you jump back to your rant that it's not good for patients to try and run yourself some pitiful weak cover for having to say that.

But we all know this... National Healthcare is better than NO healthcare or heathcare people & businesses just plain can't afford to buy or to even offer anymore... a rapidly growing trend.

And I can tell you from personal experience all my friends living in Canada like their National Healthcare.

In fact when they find out how hundreds of thousands of people in the US EVERY YEAR loose everything including their homes... go totally bankrupt due to medical bills... they just literally can't believe that can actually happen and then they say...

Then I guess we LOVE our National Healthcare, eh!

 

[Andy]

Fact is you can sell a lot of units because you are the largest and most widespread and that doesn't make you "best" at anything. It can obviously be a convenience & price issue.

Irrelevant. It doesn't matter if you are in fact the best at anything. Wendy's isn't the "best" food out there. Doesn't matter. They are still selling food, and they are still profitable. The question is, why is GM still selling better than anyone else, and is not profitable. Answer: cost of labor.

Add to that being to bloated with brands like Hummer (gas hog can't give them away now). Saab... that they never promoted and SELF COMPETING brands and it's easy to see way GM needed to completely restructure to be competitive.

Although valid point on the general front, still irrelevant to why they are not profitable. When they are out selling every other maker in the entire US, there is no excuse for not being profitable... except cost of labor. Honda sells a small fraction of what GM does and is profitable, and yet their prices are not different enough to be relevant. The difference is cost of labor.

And then the constant whine about labor costs. Do you not understand that it was the company MANAGEMENTS fiduciary duty to not sign contracts if they were soooo bad. That's a MANAGEMENT mistake whether you like to admit it or not.

That's fine. I agree with that. They should not have signed the contract, and bent over for the Unions. Of course this goes straight to my point that, cost of labor (regardless of who signed the contract) is the basic problem GM is facing.

If you can give money away like that then you must be doin' fine... give us working stiffs our retirements. So it's not just those mean greedy workers fault and you know it.

You are not a "working stiff". You are an elitist who judges others based on their income, and complains about Cadillacs not having all the features of your Lexus.

Further, I'm sure most Union workers simply thought the more the Unions get for them, the better. Most people are not economists or business accountants, and would never realize that long term consequences of their actions.

As for the rest, they likely thought "we are going to screw over those big wigs" and instead screwed themselves out of jobs. In any case, it's poetic justice. When you think you are going to "stick it to the rich", you end up sticking it to yourself.

And then you say FORD (who is ALSO UNION) did all these things to make itself more cost effective. Which are all things that GM could have done as well. AGAIN MANAGEMENT FAILURE! That's why they needed to be replaced.

That's fine or whatever. Of course I think I'd leave that to the board of directors. But again, my point which you have failed to refute is, it was a cost of labor issue. The Union contracts, priced themselves right out of a job. And shockingly, it did just that.

But at least you let it slip that National Healthcare is GREAT for business. Of course you jump back to your rant that it's not good for patients to try and run yourself some pitiful weak cover for having to say that.

Of course it's great for business in this case. Most businesses do not have to pay the total cost of employee health care. But in the case of UAW contracts, that was part of the benefit package. So of course when you are contractually required to pay for health care, then moving to a country you don't have to pay for health care is great. Instead the tax payers have to pay for health care. That's wonderful for auto makers with UAW contracts.

But we all know this... National Healthcare is better than NO healthcare or heathcare people & businesses just plain can't afford to buy or to even offer anymore... a rapidly growing trend.

And I can tell you from personal experience all my friends living in Canada like their National Healthcare.

In fact when they find out how hundreds of thousands of people in the US EVERY YEAR loose everything including their homes... go totally bankrupt due to medical bills... they just literally can't believe that can actually happen and then they say...

Then I guess we LOVE our National Healthcare, eh![/COLOR]

Right right. I've already pointed out dozens of articles and videos, and research, that all points to the same conclusion... Canadian health care system sucks awful. You can claim blaw blaw blaw, but I've read the reports, done the research, and seen the videos. It's not true.

People fly here to get treatment because their system is awful. People have literally died in the ER waiting to see a doctor. Mothers come the US to have their babies because local understaffed underfunded hospitals literally have no room for them. People actually get shipped around in Ambulances from hospital to hospital, searching for one with and open bed, or available medical staff.

If you want to start a thread on Canada, be my guest. I'll cite for you a hundred links, statistics and videos, showing the complete train wreck that is Canadian health care.

Like I said in another thread, if Canadian health care is so great and wonderful, why are their entire industries built around allowing people to escape their system?

Timely Medical Alternatives in Canada.
http://www.timelymedical.ca/
A company that explicitly provides service to Canadians that want health care, and are willing to pay for it. How would they have even the money to make a web page, let alone a staff, a 1-800 number, and nation wide service, if health care is free? Well that's easy... IT SUCKS! People are willing to pay to escape their crappy service.

 

[top gun]

Irrelevant. It doesn't matter if you are in fact the best at anything. Wendy's isn't the "best" food out there. Doesn't matter. They are still selling food, and they are still profitable. The question is, why is GM still selling better than anyone else, and is not profitable. Answer: cost of labor.

That was but one problem and if you were honest you'd just admit it and save us all a lot of time explaining it to you.

Although valid point on the general front, still irrelevant to why they are not profitable. When they are out selling every other maker in the entire US, there is no excuse for not being profitable... except cost of labor. Honda sells a small fraction of what GM does and is profitable, and yet their prices are not different enough to be relevant. The difference is cost of labor.

Again that simply is not the true & FULL story. If that were true you could pay the workers $15 per hour and give everyone in management $10,000,000,000 per year and be profitable while in the same time period shrinking from a high of over 50% US market share down to todays 19%.

While it's true due to market conditions and a loosing of market share to foreign owned companies there was excess burden at GM... but it was all across the board. Their entire business plan was outdated and bad. The difference being every single contract & benefit was signed off on by the company itself. That's MANAGEMENTS fault no matter how many times you try and deflect it.

That's fine. I agree with that. They should not have signed the contract, and bent over for the Unions. Of course this goes straight to my point that, cost of labor (regardless of who signed the contract) is the basic problem GM is facing.

You can't blame the working man when he sees upper management getting multi-millions in salaries and more millions in benefits and stock options on the increase every single year for wanting things like a retirement plan.

The company was not realistic about what was to come. That's why they'll be much stronger now. Watch and see...

You are not a "working stiff". You are an elitist who judges others based on their income, and complains about Cadillacs not having all the features of your Lexus.

In fact I'm a VERY hard "working stiff". Been working hard sometimes while going to school since I was 16... let's see that's 36 years now. I'm a person that's owned and operated companies related to the auto industry.

And I actually like some Cadillacs like the CTS. My problem is I don't think you're credible on financial or vehicle advice when you tell me you make a whopping 13K per year and drive a 1982 Buick... sorry I just don't see that as highly qualified.

Oh... and I know you like to keep up with what car I drive. I traded my Lexus for a Black with Amaretto leather Audi A6... it's just like the one in the Transporter movies. Very, very cool... and still gets me 28 mpg or more on the highway.

Right right. I've already pointed out dozens of articles and videos, and research, that all points to the same conclusion... Canadian health care system sucks awful. You can claim blaw blaw blaw, but I've read the reports, done the research, and seen the videos. It's not true.

People fly here to get treatment because their system is awful. People have literally died in the ER waiting to see a doctor. Mothers come the US to have their babies because local understaffed underfunded hospitals literally have no room for them. People actually get shipped around in Ambulances from hospital to hospital, searching for one with and open bed, or available medical staff.

I'm just telling you what real everyday people that live in Canada tell us...most of our friends live in Yellowknife and Toronto.

They can't believe you can loose everthing you own just because you get severely ill.

They don't have any trouble getting in to see a doctor for routine things.

They won't even visit us unless the by a heath insurance rider covering them while they're here.

And the things they have to wait on up there may of people in the US could never afford because THEY HAVE NO INSURANCE.

Is it perfect up there, no. Is it perfect down here, no. We'll find a combination that works. I love America and we've got a great President now who's really trying to do a good job!

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Two things here.

First, do you think dealership wrangle over price with the factory, like a customer on the show room floor with a dumb as a post salesmen? No they do not. The dealership has no ability to dictate price. If a dealership sells a car for $10.00, that doesn't hurt the factory at all. Only the dealership is hurt by cutting price.

What the dealership does that hurts the factory is, it stops ordering cars it can't sell for enough to make a profit on. Is that what happened? Obviously not since GM... again.... OUT SOLD EVERYONE.

Quick example. I worked for a Caddy dealer when they switched the awful Catera over to the less awful CTS. When that switch over happened, the dealership sold the remaining Catera stock at a loss. They wanted them off the lot, and they wanted room for the CTS. So all the Cateras on the lot were sold for massive discounts. Note: The factory did not take a loss, we did. The factory was already paid. We're the ones that lost out on the deal.

Second... and maybe you didn't think of this... but did it ever occur to you that maybe the reason domestic cars are made with cheaper materials, is because labor costs are so high, they can't afford to make them to the same quality level as imports?

Look, you have two mid-size sedans. Essentially they are exactly alike. One is made with $40/hour labor by Toyota. The other is made with $70/hour labor by GM. Now both are going to make a car for a specific market. Which car is going to have more money to invest in better materials, and still stay within the price range for the market given?

Shockingly the one with lower labor costs, right? You can afford to put in better quality seats, and better quality leather, or panels, and maybe more bells and whistles, or better bells and whistles... when you are paying $30 less per hour of labor than your competitor.

actuly they do, sorry, sorry that you are again not informed as to what you are talking about.as a dealer we took what cars we wanted, if they needed to get rid of some, we got deals on them...

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Two things here.

First, do you think dealership wrangle over price with the factory, like a customer on the show room floor with a dumb as a post salesmen? No they do not. The dealership has no ability to dictate price. If a dealership sells a car for $10.00, that doesn't hurt the factory at all. Only the dealership is hurt by cutting price.

What the dealership does that hurts the factory is, it stops ordering cars it can't sell for enough to make a profit on. Is that what happened? Obviously not since GM... again.... OUT SOLD EVERYONE.

Quick example. I worked for a Caddy dealer when they switched the awful Catera over to the less awful CTS. When that switch over happened, the dealership sold the remaining Catera stock at a loss. They wanted them off the lot, and they wanted room for the CTS. So all the Cateras on the lot were sold for massive discounts. Note: The factory did not take a loss, we did. The factory was already paid. We're the ones that lost out on the deal.

Second... and maybe you didn't think of this... but did it ever occur to you that maybe the reason domestic cars are made with cheaper materials, is because labor costs are so high, they can't afford to make them to the same quality level as imports?

Look, you have two mid-size sedans. Essentially they are exactly alike. One is made with $40/hour labor by Toyota. The other is made with $70/hour labor by GM. Now both are going to make a car for a specific market. Which car is going to have more money to invest in better materials, and still stay within the price range for the market given?

Shockingly the one with lower labor costs, right? You can afford to put in better quality seats, and better quality leather, or panels, and maybe more bells and whistles, or better bells and whistles... when you are paying $30 less per hour of labor than your competitor.

yea its all labors fault...though Ford uses the same labor...and the Toyota's and Honda's and others are also made in the US...but blame the worker. never blame those in charge when you can blame the workers

 

[PredFan]

No problem, I don't guy American cars anyway.

 

[Andy]

yea its all labors fault...though Ford uses the same labor...and the Toyota's and Honda's and others are also made in the US...but blame the worker. never blame those in charge when you can blame the workers

You do realize that "those in charge" have changed several times now. If the problem was entirely management, and the problem wasn't labor costs, then changing who's in charge would fix the problem.

Well, Obama has his hand picked CEO at GM now... and shockingly they are still going into bankruptcy. Huh.... maybe it isn't management that is causing the lack of profitability. I'm not saying that prior choice didn't cause this, as obviously they signed the union contracts that caused them to go unprofitable. But the bottom line is, labor costs are the cause.

Further, Ford doesn't use the same labor. They might deal with the same Union, but the contract is different. Like I said before, Ford renegotiated with the Unions back in 2006. One of the things they did was massively reduce benefits, to the tune of $10 Billion. Those workers at Ford that agreed to the new contract which reduced Fords labor costs, are now reaping the rewards of that by keeping their jobs during a recession, unlike GM and Chrysler workers.

And again, my main point was that this BS about them not making the right car is false. GM cars are out selling every manufacture in the US. That's all there is too it.

 

[Andy]

actuly they do, sorry, sorry that you are again not informed as to what you are talking about.as a dealer we took what cars we wanted, if they needed to get rid of some, we got deals on them...

I don't think I believe you. First, it's illogical that GM would allow different dealerships, to pay different prices for the same product. That would cause dealerships to go spastic over others dealership getting different prices. In fact, that's likely lawsuit territory.

Second, when GM cars are outselling all other manufactures, GM would have little reason to offer a lower price to dealership. Although demand has dropped, it's dropped across the board. Toyota sales are down. Honda sales are down. Ford and Chrysler sales are down. Everyone's sales are down. Yet Honda Factory is not selling their cars for any less, they are just building fewer of them.

Why then would GM be selling for less, when the demand for their products is higher than any other manufacture? Further, I'm not seeing a drop in invoice price to any dealerships yet. So unless GM is committing fraud, I wager they are selling them for exactly how much they say they are.

Finely, in this letter, the owner of a Dodge franchise states that he will end up with over $3 Million in new car stock, that he can't sell since Chrysler is closing his franchise. The letter was posted on here somewhere, but I can not find it. So instead I'll just post the link.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/letter_from_a_dodge_dealer.html

Now, if he could just sell the car for less, and pay the factory less for the cars, then there shouldn't be a problem. Therefore, I wage he can't dictate price to the factory. Instead it sounds like he alone will take the hit for lost money on inventory.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

I don't think I believe you. First, it's illogical that GM would allow different dealerships, to pay different prices for the same product. That would cause dealerships to go spastic over others dealership getting different prices. In fact, that's likely lawsuit territory.

Second, when GM cars are outselling all other manufactures, GM would have little reason to offer a lower price to dealership. Although demand has dropped, it's dropped across the board. Toyota sales are down. Honda sales are down. Ford and Chrysler sales are down. Everyone's sales are down. Yet Honda Factory is not selling their cars for any less, they are just building fewer of them.

Why then would GM be selling for less, when the demand for their products is higher than any other manufacture? Further, I'm not seeing a drop in invoice price to any dealerships yet. So unless GM is committing fraud, I wager they are selling them for exactly how much they say they are.

Finely, in this letter, the owner of a Dodge franchise states that he will end up with over $3 Million in new car stock, that he can't sell since Chrysler is closing his franchise. The letter was posted on here somewhere, but I can not find it. So instead I'll just post the link.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/letter_from_a_dodge_dealer.html

Now, if he could just sell the car for less, and pay the factory less for the cars, then there shouldn't be a problem. Therefore, I wage he can't dictate price to the factory. Instead it sounds like he alone will take the hit for lost money on inventory.

its like talking to a brick wall...GM made lots and lots of cars no one wanted. they where poor quality and only sold when sold for a lot less then the cars they competed against. And yes management changed..but in name mostly, not in way of thinking. They all think like you...and thus chapter 11

 

[top gun]

its like talking to a brick wall...GM made lots and lots of cars no one wanted. they where poor quality and only sold when sold for a lot less then the cars they competed against. And yes management changed..but in name mostly, not in way of thinking. They all think like you...and thus chapter 11

IT'S KINDA HARD TO BELIEVE HUH?

I mean seriously... Andy just keeps saying GM was kicking a$$ and if those filthy dirty workers hadn't asked for retirement plans everything would have been great! He's lost in space!!!

But this is a common thing amongst Republicants. They can't blame the big corporations because that's who they work for. Everything is about a race to the bottom for the workers and the corporation management gets it all. More contributions for the pubbies that way. They know the workers aren't going to break their way so screw them!

You are absolutely correct about quality and I'd be glad to pick little Andy up... take him to my friends pre-owned car lot and we could just compare quality between say a 4 or 5 year old Chevy and a comparable Toyota... or Honda... or ANY NUMBER OF OTHER BRANDS. Look at the entire package, fit & finish quality, gas mileage, reliability ratings the whole thing. Chevys sell cheaper on used car lots because that's all you can get for them PERIOD!

And here's another thing. Andy talks about new car pricing and MSRP like he has a clue. Pleeeease!!!

Does the MSRP mean anything? NO... it's a totally inflated made up number. Does Andy even know about "back door dollars" and what they are? Of course not never mentioned them once in all this "official pricing" talk he regurgitates.

Fact is OFTEN with domestic cars there has to be an after sales kick back or "back door" money. That's how the dealers can sell there cars seemingly below INVOICE... not MSRP sticker price by DEALER INVOICE. They have such problems moving them at regular prices they've been in many cases giving them away with almost no profit at time of sale and then the dealer kicks them back some for at least moving units.

Where does that money come from? It comes from the corporation taking some of the hit so marginal dealers could stay in business.

This is EXACTLY WHY GM and Chrysler are narrowing their dealerships. So that the ones remaining can actually make more money per unit or at the very least sell the same amount of units at fewer locations hence making those dealerships stronger and much more competitive with competing brands.

There's so much Andy just doesn't understand about the car business that spitting out Republicant talking points ain't never gonna save him in ANY debate. He's simply either telling half truths or in most cases just plain wrong.

And here's the real tale of the tape proving that he just wants our auto industry to fail because he doesn't want anything to come out better under President Obama.

Now that the Unions have done all the major give backs he said they were never entitled to (I guess collective bargaining is a bad thing) he just looks for other reasons to HOPE & PRAY our US auto industry fails.

It's sad and unAmerican in my book.

 

[PredFan]

There, I spoke my piece. Those that are wise Americans, will avoid Government Motor cars in the future.

The Obama admin will soon make the crap cars,
that they themselves refused to buy, in the past.
This is called CHANGE!

Building small, inferior and unsafe cars is the predictable Obama plan.
Just as long as they get ~ 35 mpg.


It's really that simple.

If that plan is followed, then the GM cars
will really turn out to be overpriced, crappy ones.
Government Motors will simply suck billions of tax dollars each
year that is operates.


True Americans should buy Ford, Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Hyundai and cars from other companies.

The two corrupt, car companies to avoid will be Fiat/Chysler and GM Government Motors. They both have stolen money from taxpayers that will never be paid back, NEVER!

There UAW is also the problem not the solution.

The government will make the cars they want you to drive, then they will force you to buy and drive them. Either by taxing you to death or by outlawing the competition.

 

[laughinatreps]

My problem is I don't think you're credible on financial or vehicle advice when you tell me you make a whopping 13K per year and drive a 1982 Buick... sorry I just don't see that as highly qualified.

ROFLMAO!!!! I missed that part!!! Mainly because I wasn't going to listen to his continuous fact less drivel, but damn, I didn't realize how far out of his ass he was speaking from!!!!!!! Thanks Top for setting me straight!!!!!! GM #1.......roflmao........I'm cryin here......lmao

 

[pocketfullofshells]

The government will make the cars they want you to drive, then they will force you to buy and drive them. Either by taxing you to death or by outlawing the competition.

actuly the public pretty much got annoyed waiting for American car companies to make them what they wanted...japan did it for them....People don't want gas guzzling cars, they want fuel efficient ones. Whats sad is all this same stuff I keep hearing, sounds alot like recycled stuff from when the goverment said put seat belts in cars...and then air bags....and they cried it will kill the industry....only to now have cars showing off that they have 6 air bags, and all kinds of safty things....as a selling tool. I watch the ads, and guess what , they are all pointing out MPG, its a selling point, and you know why? People want it.

The goverment is not asking car dealers to do anything the people who buy them dont want and have not asked for along time. And Yes Toyoata and Honda will have to do it all the same...But so long as people like andy have any say, GM Chrysler and such will always be 10 years behind the times....