Comments on: Can GM (Government Motors) Survive?

By: Pops in Vienna

Pops in Vienna — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:48:56 +0000

Back when I lived in America I owned both a GM and a Chrysler automobile. Both cars were poorly made and were constantly in the shop. I want to forget the numerous battles I had with the dealerships about warranty issues. I stopped buying US cars and started buying Japanese. Since that time I never had any problems. In fact, one Toyota had over 400,000 miles on it.

My friends, that’s why GM and Chrysler are failing. They make crap cars. Obama and his minions can’t change that. The only way Obama can kill off the Japanese competition is to legislate so many regulations that it will make it impossible for them to manufacture for a US market.

They might call GM and Chrysler by another name but as long as Obama is president they’ll have to keep the union employees “employed” or risk losing the rust belt vote in the next election.

By: Oldguy

Oldguy — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:14:26 +0000

Phase one: takeover of bailed out auto companies and stopping the making of suv’s and light trucks.
Phase two: union card check for foreign auto transplants in the U.S..
This last could cause large problems with foreign governments and could set off a trade war and censorship in international courts(including our own).

By: Don Rhudy

Don Rhudy — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:57:49 +0000

I was always a GM buyer until 1980, when my Chevy Diesel truck blew up and I had to sue GM to make it right. My best GM product was a 1968 302ci Camaro, the little racer. I was thinking about the upcoming Camaro, but now that the government is dictating things to GM, I’ll never buy GM again. Not only that, but I won’t do business with anyone who takes government money or votes Democrat.

By: JFM

JFM — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:43:48 +0000

For those conservative few, who repeatedly bash Obama I have to ask. Where was your conservatism when Bush killed 4000 young men and women for nothing but a lie

Well you are lying. Because Bush pointed at WMDs as one of _many_ reasons to invade Irak. His purpose was to introduce democracy inb thge Middle East believeing it would defuse Arab agressivity against rest of world (IMHO he was very naive here: as long as Islam stands this agressivity will remain). And _none_ of the people who opposed him told the WMDs were a lie. All_ belived them to be real. Be it for Hans Blick, for Annan, for Chirak, for Putin or for… yourself. They believed them to be real and were all too happy to allow Saddam get nukes as long as it pissed America and allowed them to sell 1 dollar goods for ten dollars with the oil for food scam. Thgat is the truth and all your lies will not change it even if according to gobbelsian doctrine you repeat it ten thoussand times.

Aldo don’t try to make us believe you care about soldiers lives. You don’t. In fact you hate and despise them, just like your likes hated them during Vietnam and called them baby killers all while Vietcong and Khmer Rouge perpetrated their atrocities. Also I still remember the sorrow in your circles the day Saddam was captured. All you cared was that it would help Bush. And you feared, you downright feared that his capture would decrease violence in Irak. That was what people were saying in left wing blogs.

Note: Germany wasn’t behind Pearl Harbor and wouldn’t have decalred war to the United States without Roosevelt’s continuous provocations in the preceding months (like US Navy ships attacking U Boots). Are you laying American dead in Europe at his feet?
While we are at it, Vichy France wasn’t involved in the attack on Pearl Harbor and wasn’t at war with the United States. Are you laying the dead in “Torch” to Roosevelt’s feet.

By: James

James — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 12:20:58 +0000

For those conservative few, who repeatedly bash Obama I have to ask. Where was your conservatism when Bush killed 4000 young men and women for nothing but a lie, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. I spent two years in Iraq, and I can say unequivocally…we didnt need to go there. You know if GM had abandoned these self-destructive policies they wouldnt be asking for government welfare. The GM stockholders should have asked for the CEO’s head on a platter last year when they started failing. They knew they were in dire straits well before Obama became president. But media big mouths like Rush and Schnitt find fault with EVERYTHING Obama will do, but yet werent convincing enough to sway the vote to keep him from being elected. If I remember right, GM and Chrysler approached the Government for help, it wasnt the government stepping in “rescuing” them. I stopped buying “American” cars long time ago. Does anyone remember when GM started moving it productions to Mexico or are we so short memoried. Thats when they stopped being the “heartbeat of america” as they’re adds said a long time ago. I say screw them. Its about time that they restructure, kick the UAW and ALL unions out of the door and get back to business.

By: McRib

McRib — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 01:59:44 +0000

They will divide GM into two parts – Good GM and Bad GM. The new names will be Barrack Motors and General Motors. The cars will resemble the acronyms.

By: Will

Will — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:13:00 +0000

I have been a GM buyer for 29 years and hate to see them fail,but as a conservative using common sense,the only way for GM is bankruptcy. It seems Ford is the only real American company.

By: Gozer the Carpathian

Gozer the Carpathian — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 05:30:03 +0000

Honestly my family has been a GM family for at least 40 years. I currently own a ’06 Chevy Colorado and I enjoy it, but my wife owns a Mazada 3 and since we bought it we’ve been honestly looking at Mazada for our future vehicles. While they don’t make trucks I don’t see why I wouldn’t want to continue with their products vs. GM in the forseable future.

By: Joe Bison

Joe Bison — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 00:39:46 +0000

The only way GM will survive is by downsizing
and building cars people want. They and the
UAW/CAW brought this down on themselves by
signing contracts that in the long term were
non-viable.

Also GM turned off a lot of loyal buyers by
building crap cars. In recent times for
one example the V6 plastic gaskets. Everyone
suffered blown head gaskets. A lot of problems
must have become apparent to GM early on,yet
the problems persisted across multiple model
years turning buyers off their product.

Many buyers, especially ones in the group of
Asians, will not touch domestic cars. The only
exceptions are where there is no Honda or
Toyota anywhere near the domestics price range
or there is really special deals in the range
that the domestic can not be making any money
off it.

Also potential buyers are worried about their
new car warranties if GM or Chrysler go under.

The role of government can’t be ignored either.
As soon as they began mandating CAFE standards
that favored foreign makers the domestics
began going downhill. This was the Community
Investment Act of the auto industry.

By the way I own 2 GM trucks so I know the
problems they have. However, I have the
facility to work on them myself. If I had
to rely on GM dealers or private garages
I would not own one.

By: D Foster

D Foster — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 23:01:01 +0000

GM and Chrysler have become wards of the U.S. Government, and UAW partners, Ford Motor is having Dick Gephardt join their board of Directors, another UAW supporter. I see the U.S.A. Auto, GM, Chrysler and Ford nothing less than dead as international auto companies. They will just be making cars designed by Congress and Enviromentilist. Both anti business units.
Will never buy another car from these mismanaged companies.
Acura, BMW or Mercedes all make automobile’s in America, will buy one of these next.