Obama Motors

GTripp0012 · 06-01-2009, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

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?

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.

BleedBurgundy · 06-01-2009, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

Obama said earlier today that tax breaks will come for all hybird type cars.

Like this?

jsarno · 06-01-2009, 06:20 PM

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:
socialism definition | Dictionary.com

Slingin Sammy 33 · 06-01-2009, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

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.

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.

jsarno · 06-01-2009, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

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.

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

steveo395 · 06-01-2009, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schneed10

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.

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.

jsarno · 06-01-2009, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsarno

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:
socialism definition | Dictionary.com

Oh, and just in case some of you don't know what comes after socialism in the marxist theory:
communism definition | Dictionary.com

steveo395 · 06-01-2009, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BleedBurgundy

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 numbers and 0-60 times compared to internal combustion.

Yes, Europeans 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.

htownskinfan · 06-01-2009, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

The Obama Car

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

budw38 · 06-01-2009, 07:05 PM

YouTube - 1969 camaro burnout

, can a Hybrid run like this ?

jsarno · 06-01-2009, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveo395

Yes, Europeans 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.

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.

jsarno · 06-01-2009, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by budw38

YouTube - 1969 camaro burnout , can a Hybrid run like this ?

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!

budw38 · 06-01-2009, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsarno

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!

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 ?

BleedBurgundy · 06-02-2009, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveo395

Yes, Europeans 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.

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.

BleedBurgundy · 06-02-2009, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsarno

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.

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")

06-01-2009, 06:20 PM	#48
jsarno Franchise Player Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: 31 Spooner St. Age: 38 Posts: 9,534	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: socialism definition \| Dictionary.com __________________ Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Obama Motors

Parking Lot