Comments on: Things are tough all over

By: online traffic schools california

online traffic schools california — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:40:46 +0000

online traffic schools california…

ca in school traffic…

By: zuiko

zuiko — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:57:47 +0000

When the credit markets are closed, the guy who comes in with the most cash wins. I think their relative strength has more to do with that than anything else. Of course for them it is also just a matter of time. They just got a little more cash to burn before they run out.

By: JLenardDetroit

JLenardDetroit — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:50:09 +0000

with Legacy Benefits…. my Parents are going through all those (GM) changes now (while other family members went through them before with Ford)… the “cost savings” they expect will take time to be realized from both a real and accounting/books stand-point

By: kyle8

kyle8 — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:41:02 +0000

Saturn. Like you I had a hell of a time with domestic cars. Until I bought my first Saturn. I have had three of them now, and all were excellent.

By: Jack_Savage

Jack_Savage — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:40:48 +0000

with the fewest issues financially…

By: Jack_Savage

Jack_Savage — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:34:57 +0000

Company cars for the past 15 years, all domestic, all had problems from annoying to severe. Before that personal cars that were domestic and all had problems from severe to extremely severe.

Personal cars after I could afford to buy them: Toyota Celica, Mitsubishi Galant, Acura Integra, Honda Odyssey. Any problems we have had were very minor and handled at no charge, sometimes even well after warranty expired.

Cold day in hell before I shelll out money for a Big 3 vehicle.

By: janis

janis — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:32:52 +0000

None of them have had any major problems, and that includes my husband’s oldest truck, a ’92 Ford Ranger with well over 250,000 miles on it.

By: zuiko

zuiko — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:26:13 +0000

You don’t think they should be paid well, and you think they deserve blame for all their predecessors have done before them (it’s not as if these guys were even around when the domestic automakers started making mistakes). You think you are going to get anyone applying for that job?

As for receiving stock as compensation, paying in restricted stock grants is worse than paying in options… options do become worthless. Stock is always worth something… well at least outside of bankruptcy, anyway. And if you got the stock for free it’s all gravy anyway.

By: Rottimer

Rottimer — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 02:13:46 +0000

They may be making turn arounds now, but the fact is, people have lost a lot more than 50% on their investments while supporting ridiculous executive pay. Executive pay should be more closely tied to performance. And for those that will say that they receive a lot of compensation in stock, the truth is they receive that compensation in stock options. Options don’t cut it, because they still make money on declining stock value.

By: zuiko

zuiko — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:31:18 +0000

That is pretty much a fact of life. So far I believe nobody has had to pay for a battery pack for any of these cars. The manufacturers have just been eating the cost because they don’t want to see news stories about how someone had to pay $5,000 to replace the batteries in their hybrid. At some point that will have to end. Some of the bigger battery packs go for more than 5 grand, just for the part. I can’t imagine how much the LiIon batteries for the Volt will go for… it will probably be $20k+.

By: zuiko

zuiko — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:26:17 +0000

And I keep vehicles for a very long time. I still drive a 1995 Lincoln with 200k miles on it every day. The only issues I’ve had have been with small cars where they seem to cheap out on parts to make something at a price people are willing to pay for a small car (since they can’t do anything about the labor costs), and any GM products I have owned. No problems with the Fords, though.

By: zuiko

zuiko — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:21:33 +0000

That’s not a subsidy. It’s government procurement. The government has to buy that stuff… how else would you propose they get it? Raid the factory in the dark of night and take it? They aren’t offering $100m tax credits to people who buy patriot missile systems and install them at their homes. I don’t see how it is comparable to any subsidy program.

By: zuiko

zuiko — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:18:02 +0000

The $2-$3k subsidies we offer now are far too much. The subsidy should be more in the neighborhood of $0. If electric cars are not competitive for whatever reason, we shouldn’t be building them at all. We shouldn’t be throwing taxpayer money at the problem to make them competitive. The same goes for solar panels and everything else we throw taxpayer subsidies at.

As far as the EV1s go… they did not want the support costs of keeping that fleet out there. It would cost them a fortune to continue the infrastructure required to support a completely unique vehicle in the hands of a few hundred people. That is a big time money losing proposition. I think GM has enough problems with losing money without adding to them by supporting a white elephant from the 90s.

They crush everything they don’t want to support or be liable for. Those fancy customized vehicles they build for demos with all the aftermarket modifications? They get crushed. They have them built up to show off the vehicle and what can be done with it, but they don’t want the liability that comes with selling it to anybody.

By: zuiko

zuiko — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:06:26 +0000

Not sure why people feel the need to rip on executive pay all the time. As a shareholder I certainly don’t want them to hand the President’s office over to the lowest bidder. That is a position that can make or break a business. It does me no good to get 50% lower returns on my investment because they cheaped out on the management and saved me 0.00000000000000000001% on executive compensation. As a shareholder, I’m willing to pay whatever it takes to get decent management.

Now you can make the claim that management is bad right now (though that has nothing to do with their compensation), but I don’t think superman could turn any of these businesses around at this point, so it is hard for me to heap too much blame upon current management, who came into a lousy business with their hands tied by union contracts.

By: larueladue

larueladue — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:01:39 +0000

and I have nothing but good to say about that vehicle. It is ugly (we call it “The Cube”) but I have never had a more sure-footed vehicle in snow and ice. It has the “real-time 4-wheel drive” and it is amazing what you can negotiate. Gets okay mileage too (about 24-28 mpg). And you can put a lot of stuff inside it… They are deceptive large inside…

However, our next vehicle will be a used Ford truck: just cannot live without one. (This is the first time since 1982 that I have been without a pcickup!) Too many dogs, horses, trailers, etc…

By: JLenardDetroit

JLenardDetroit — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:37:28 +0000

I was just saying… we know darn well that Democrats ARE GOING TO SUBSIDIZE, in the name of GREEN (forcing them to build the stuff whether market for it or not or the technology is really ready for the road)…. So I would just like it to directly help the Purchaser!! It is the LEAST OFFENSIVE… but still offensive!

If I’m going to be SHOT, I’d like to pick the spot they are going to shoot me… The Foot is better than the Head Best, of course, if we could wrestle the gun away from them all-together… but that is not going to happen via the ballot-box for awhile… Too many IDIOTS (IMO) in this country have given the SOCIALISTS… er… sorry… “Progressives” almost absolute unfettered Power for the next 2 years.

And again…. The TARP funds are going to be spent by somebody… BETTER IT BE BUSH DIRECTING/SPENDING THOSE FUNDS THAN LEAVING ANY OF IT FOR OBAMA TO FUNNEL TO DEMOCRAT CHOICES (ACORN, unions, black hole Green projects, etc…) More on that thought here: RS: Bush should spend every penny of TARP monies immediately… here is why!.

By: bclarkj

bclarkj — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:34:12 +0000

Military is the ONE area the government is constitutionally permitted to be involved in and manage how they see fit. Some people think that whatever we want them involved in, we just vote on it. That’s not what our constitution allows. Shows how far we’ve come (or how far we’ve tanked with our education in civics and government).

Government has no business in commerce other than making sure laws are followed.

By: Rottimer

Rottimer — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:09:54 +0000

What about military expenditures? I’m pretty sure that you don’t want an entirely free market for Patriot missiles or F-35′s. What if China, which has a ton of cash and to whom we owe a ton more wanted to purchase them and were willing to pay more than the U.S. was?

Just saying, free markets, although great, don’t solve each and every problem.

By: NightTwister

NightTwister — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:04:21 +0000

Obama will bankrupts the coal industry and electric energy costs will increase tenfold. Electricity is the last source I’d want my car to be powered with.

By: Rottimer

Rottimer — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:01:48 +0000

You can blame the UAW for Detroit’s higher costs, but you can’t blame the UAW for Detroit’s idiotic business decisions. That the CEO, COO, CFO and Vice Presidents will all keep cushy jobs, will all recieve millions in retirement packages, while all those union workers lose their jobs makes little sense. The companies would will still go under.

The UAW needs to make concessions. They need to allow workers to be laid off, w/o pay. But management needs to make concessions of their own. Someone is responsible for their perpetual loss of market share and that person or those persons need to be let go as well.