GM says it "disappointed" and "betrayed" consumers

Discussion in 'Economy' started by NOBama, Dec 9, 2008.

  1. NOBama
    Offline

    NOBama Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,242
    Thanks Received:
    173
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +173
    More

    Sorry, we screwed you. Now give us some loot :eek:

    This ad should have been in the WSJ rather than some obscure trade rag that only industry executives, lobbyists and other insiders read.
     
  2. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Well GM may have given their apologies, but they failed to cite one of the causes of their problems, government mandates. Therein lies the problem with this bailout. Every member of congress wants to tell the automakers which cars to build, what size, who will build, and where they will build while not having a clue to the auto industry.

    This is a disaster that the people of the US will be paying for, long after we're all driving non-US brand cars.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. NOBama
    Offline

    NOBama Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,242
    Thanks Received:
    173
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +173
    I’m not a big fan of government mandates but in the case of automakers, mandates almost seem necessary especially regarding safety and mileage. Otherwise, we’d probably still be driving cars with metal dashboards, no seatbelts, and getting 15mpg.

    The big 3 have a notorious habit of saying “make me” (because they've had a 3 way cartel for so long?) when it comes to improving their product which, IMO, is one of the reasons their in the deep stuff now.
     
  4. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    No we wouldn't. People wouldn't buy those cars. Bottom line, the companies should be reorganized under Chapter 11. They need new management and they need to rework those contracts. Mandating the types of cars isn't going to work, especially with 500+ non-engineers.
     
  5. NOBama
    Offline

    NOBama Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,242
    Thanks Received:
    173
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +173
    We wouldn't what? Drive cars with metal dashboards, no seat belts, and poor gas mileage, if that's all that was available? I kind of doubt that and I'm sure many of us have had several of those cars.

    I definately on board with your "Bottom line".
     
  6. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,551
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,427
    But they DID buy those cars.... until the government said STOP MAKING THEM.
     
  7. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    That's all there was to buy.

    Another example of why some government regulations make damned good sense.

    No auto company could AFFORD to make safer cars because they cost more to make and the public would have continued buying the cheaper unsafer cars,

    So by mandating that the auto industires made cars safer, they ALL had to do so.

    Bottom line is that the fataility rates (per mile driven) has gone down about 400% from what it was when I first started driving.

    Seatbelts were the NUMBER ONE lifesaver BTW.
     
  8. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,440
    Thanks Received:
    5,409
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,294
    My first car was a '57 Pontiac, second a '59 Pontiac Bonneville. The second car I put seatbelts in myself, and did so for every car I owned thereafter untill the car manufacturers put them in as mandated by the government.

    I find Annie's trust in business rather odd. After all, the business community made no effort to clean up toxic pollution until the government mandated it. And they well knew that the pollution was toxic, and adversly affecting children. Their bottom line mattered more than the health of the children of this nation, and that remains the case. Government regulation of industry is an absolute neccessity for the protection of the citizens of this nation.
     
  9. NOBama
    Offline

    NOBama Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,242
    Thanks Received:
    173
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +173
    Actually, that issue hasn't gone away, we've just moved it to third world countries, even China. Recently, I saw a documentary about how we now export (illegally) things like computer monitors to third world countries for disposal because they're so toxic.

    Pollution also factors in when it comes to why much of our manufacturing industries moved offshore. A lot of people think they moved offshore just to achieve reduced labor and material costs but, that's not entirely true. Pollution is one of the dirty little secrets our government doesn't like to talk about.
     
  10. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    But that's not 'all that's available', which is the whole problem. They are making cars no one wants, at prices that are higher than they are worth.
     

Share This Page