By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Death of the Euro: Who the (heck) do you think you are?
Destruction of globalization will bring about a healthy dose of introvertedness back into the system. Globalists call it "protectionism." I see it differently. China and Russia struck a deal today where they agreed to trade with each other without using dollars. That's actually great. Those two knuckleheads over there will now get to deal with a very complex risk arbitrage scheme without leaning against the dollar for their own protection. Consider the ruble as it's bit the dust in national bankruptcy once before. Then on top of this is what I think of as a Payment Wall --- there will be plenty of transactions that will exist where China and Russia can ONLY trade with each other even if it's not the best economic outcome, or the dollar leaves the yuan peg in such a state that trade between Russia and China gets severely kinked because of ruble arbitrage.
China won't get its cake and eat it, too like some politicians fear---China is actually painting itself into a corner.
Then comes passing of inflation on to Americans, which China is trying to hard to avoid right now. When the inflation finally does reach our shores it will start a consumer backlash and drying up of demand. Other market participants will want to step in and fill China's void, including domestics.
Then mostly---the inflation they're trying to contain when it reaches us, suddenly turns Chinese long term debt investments into worthless crap. And China bought loads of 30 years when yields were horrifically low. Now we get to pay that debt back with virtually worthless money. Brilliant, no?
Mexico would LOVE that outcome---it lost loads of manufacturing to China, especially the textile business. Increased production shifting from China back to Mexico relieves immigration pressure for us as our economic system looks bad to immigrants, and xenophobia helps drive them away, wage pressure is already collapsed, productivity high, and US workers are suddenly now more competitive than when we weren't when Globalization was king.
Americans won't suffer long under this new disconnected world. We'll happily continue to be paid in worthless dollars, because we have plenty of resources within the country to satisfy local demand, and we have two neighbors that honestly will never leave us (Canada and Mexico). All 3 countries combined enjoy loads of resources that more than satisfy the needs of the population, and we will probably fall back on our local trading bloc and worry less about the BRIC countries. They more they try to gouge us, the further we will scream and run away from them, and buy less.
It just makes common sense that people aren't going to sit at home and be content with being poor and constantly miss the 1990s. Not for long anyway. How long do we want to wallow in misery? Cheer up.
Why doesn't anyone understand this? If I buy a Nissan Altima that looks better, performs higher, costs less and delivers higher value, why would I want a GM?
Go Wal-Mart and Sams Club!
Keep those idiots thinking!
Regards,
OW
PS, notice how I kept myself contained by not posting about the underwear car company?
I dunno, pretty much everything I buy at Walmart is a brand name product. They also don't hassle you like Target does sometimes on returns.
Wal~Mart and Sam's Club can go to China and stay there! Go Costco!
Our local SuperWalmart isn't to bad. It was recently renovated and it's not far from the University of Illinois, so the clientele is nicer to look at than your average Walmart;)
Then I'll buy one. My experience with GM products is 180 degrees from yours. So, would you buy a GM product if you don't see the value, then add every previous GM product you owned was disappointing in one way or another.
I used to say the same thing about Ford, but they have turned things around enough that I would buy another Ford again.
Some of it comes to taste like Coke or Pepsi. Both make cola, but I like the taste of Pepsi better. GM vehicles generally have a "feel" that I just don't care for. It's hard to explain, but when I drive a GM vehicle, they all tend to have traits that I don't like. That doesn't mean they are necessarily bad vehicles, but I'm going to buy something else that fits my taste.
Lemko, I know that you have great luck with GM, largely because the segment you choose (large sedans) is a stronger area. For a bigger softer riding sedan, you are correct!
GM has never built the best product in any segment I'm interested in. Certainly not in my lifetime.
As for Wal-mart, I go there occasionally since they're the closest place with a good selection of DVDs and dark chocolate M&M's.
Jobless Rate Up to 9.8%
The headline is misleading. The true number is somewhere north of 20%! It's only going to get worse after the holidays when store lay-off their seasonal employees. Of course we're not going to need to see the ill effects as 800K+ unemployed individuals lose their benefits. Fasten your seatbelts! It's gonna be a bumpy ride!
Yes, if i were buying in the market segment you are I'd probably buy GM as well.
diesel - Pepsi? How sad....
The real problem goes back to spending trillions on things starting in December 2008 and on that DOES NOT make jobs. Spending on GE and Wall Street friends of the people in power then does not make jobs. The "shovel ready jobs" joke meant they were ready for construction unions in summer 2010 not summer 2009.
If the government had intended to make jobs, it could have been done. Keeping people dependent is a better vote getter some thought.
Now we're all suffering with the 16-20% unemployment.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Chevy Volt fleets at GE
Over the next several years GE plans to convert half its vehicle fleet to battery power, including 15,000 Chevy Volts and perhaps 15,000 electric vehicles from other makers.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Walmart changed 3 hours after the death of Sam...the best rule was, if 3 people in a line to pay, Sam would open another register...he knew that the faster folks got out of the store, the more likely they would come back...now, lines can be 10+ deep and it does not matter...
I would like to know if there is any other human on Planet Earth that has has such good luck with GM cars as lemko...I seriously doubt it... :P
If Government Motors finds it tough to sell a one trick pony, 50 thousand dollar econobox to the public, I could see the thing becoming an exclusive "fleet special" like the Express, Impala or Rentibu therefore selling them in bulk to companies like GE or others.
What's good for GE is good for GM (which is good for the UAW).
Back then Wal Mart not only sold American made goods they FEATURED them! Big signs - Made in USA! They negotiated their deals back then as well but they went through a fair bit of trouble to have domestically manufactured goods. Things like t shirts and socks and such. No more.
Yay globalization and the myth of "free trade"...
If you have seen the sites, then seen them in Walmart, you know you have moved to Mars or Saturm cause them folks ain't quite human...
If Government Motors
You need to broaden your smear of GM with that term.
$31,600,000,000 went to Ford, Toyota, BMW, and Chrysler in secret money.
http://jalopnik.com/5704575/
The Fed also lent $13 billion to investors who bought bonds backed by loans to new car buyers from automakers and banks. The Fed made clear that while investors got the loans, the move was meant to keep the lenders in business; the credit arms of Ford, Chrysler, Nissan, Volkswagen, Honda and Hyundai all benefited directly.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Not enough Lemkos to keep it USA-owned, I'm afraid.
We'll see.
Regards,
OW
They were loaning them money to make loans to sell toyotas, not washing machines. They certainly weren't using the money to sell Chevies!! A loan is a loan.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
But they didn't take control, fire the board and CEO, and then OWN a big part like they did (and do) with Government Motors!
They did give them money. I don't know what was given in exchange as security that parallels the security Obama holds in GM.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I know the Malibu is older than Fusion and Altima et al, but I still think it's the best-looking one. Not crazy about the Mitsubishi Diamante-style taillights, but in profile it looks German to me (an improvement over looking Japanese I think)--it has an elegance lacking in the others. And hey, it's built in Kansas City by an American-headquartered corporation! But those two things knock it right out of the running for a lot of people on this board, for some reason.
Not quite. This is from my post of a few days ago:
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/11/30/rasmussen-reports-more-car-buyers-looking-for- - -american-are/
While it may not speak specifically of the Big 3, more people are looking to buying American built cars and trucks, as opposed to just looking for the best deal. That can only help the Big 3's American plants like Fairfax.
I'm not crazy about the tail on it and would tone down the front as well (I'd shrink the bowtie and maybe make it blue instead of bronze) but it's not like it's a bad design.
Next time I'm looking I'll make a point of including it in my search. I'm not so much a Camry guy (though my wife has one and loves it) and Honda ruined the Accord this generation so the opening is there.
As far as I'm concerned, some vehicles manufactured by the BIG 3 aren't even worth 4 figures, let alone 5. But that's just based on my personal experience and what I've heard from friends and family that bought from the big 3. Horror stories!
Corvair>Vega>Chevette>Cavalier>Cobalt>Cruze
Based upon my seeing the Cruze at the LA Auto show, perhaps the sixth time is the charm for GM small cars! It looks great, now let's see if it holds up over at least 5 years.
Uplander, I appreciate your comments even though we may disagree. Have you driven the competition, or owned any non GM or non-US nameplate vehicles? I don't think you can be really objective unless you live with a variety of vehicles for a while.
For example, not disputing the decency of say, your Cavaliers and the miles you got on them. I wonder how they compared to the competition of the time? And what about models that were disasters in the beginning? The earlier Vegas turned off tons of buyer to GM forever - not just them, but their families and friends who saw what happened. GM does have a habit of introducing vehicles that have big flaws, then over time they fix them. But the damage is done. Witness the Fiero as a prime example, but the Corvair also fits into that category. They need to get it right up front, and perhaps their newer models are falling into that category. But reputations take a long time to destroy, and a long time to rebuild.
You think it's ok to hold grudges against the Germans and Japanese for 70 years, yet people who were shafted by GM cars in the '70's, '80's, 90's should come running back?
I think if you put World War II on one side of a scale--remember, there are thousands alive on all sides who participated--tell a [non-permissible content removed] hunter he needs to 'get on with it'--and put the sins of the Big Three on the other side, the scale is pretty lopsided. It just seems to me that people want you to pass on World War II, but still hold a grudge for thirty years about a freakin' car. If somebody said in 1965 that they wouldn't buy a new Mustang because their '46 Ford was crappy, we'd have rolled our eyes at him. Now's it's the norm.
I might also add your "70 years" comment is exaggerated to make your point. The war ended in late 1945.
I think if you put World War II on one side of a scale--remember, there are thousands alive on all sides who participated--tell a [non-permissible content removed] hunter he needs to 'get on with it'--and put the sins of the Big Three on the other side, the scale is pretty lopsided. It just seems to me that people want you to pass on World War II, but still hold a grudge for thirty years about a freakin' car. If somebody said in 1965 that they wouldn't buy a new Mustang because their '46 Ford was crappy, we'd have rolled our eyes at him. Now's it's the norm.
I might also add your "70 years" comment is exaggerated to make your point. The war ended in late 1945.
OK, correction noted. 65 years is the correct value.
I suspect none of those alive who masterminded WWII are those who are running or designing foreign cars today.
Agreed that the WWII sins are much worse than the Big 3. But with the Big 3 (and IMHO especially GM), the sins were protracted over at least 30 years, shameful, and damaging to US markets. By 1965 the Germans and Japanese were our friends and behaving better. GM was just getting started.
Because of GM's (including the UAW) incompetence, the US superiority of automaking went downhill. The writing was on the wall in the '70s, in the '80's, in the '90s, and in the first half of the 00's. Thousands of dealers, customers, and contractors were adversely affected. Management failed to make the tough choices that were necessary to restore the true competence of their company. And then when it all fell apart, they blamed the economy and flew on their corporate jet crying to Washington to have the citizens bail them out. I don't like rewarding that. Rewarding incompetence and failure is not what capitalism and free markets are about.
Even if you don't agree, perhaps you can understand my reasoning.
I think you missed my point. It started back then. For GM, it continued right up to at least 2005. So it is not a long time ago for them. It is just a long-lasting pattern. That tends to be what destroys reputations. One mistake, even a big one -- not so bad if recovery is quick. But 35 years? :surprise:
ALL makes have had some crap. But GM had much more than its share of crap over that entire time period. While some vehicles may have been great (lemko's bigger cars, for example), GM had a long string of big problem vehicles. Add to that low reliability in so many cases. Add to that poor styling, especially for sedans. Add to that the dismal quality of the interiors of most of their sedans over that time period. I don't know how anybody being honest could say that most of GM's vehicles were right up there with their competition over that time period.
Agree. And similarly we can post all the deficiencies of various foreign brands a specific models as found by postings on the internet as well as acknowledged problems in some cases. But the pro foreign folks only pass those off a internet noise. However, the same internet noise for GM products is taken with more validity by some.
In 2003 or so as more problems from the mass market CAmry/Accord level cars started showing up, I kept saying they were regressing to the mean. That has happened. At the same time GM's products have improved, some more than others, just as other company's marques have dropped not all at the same rate.
As for the bad products and poor styling, I've enjoyed cars which have lots of room quality interiors, thicker than others metal in the body and doors, and safety in size. My leSabres have been great. The 1977 Cutlass Supreme 2-door is perhaps the car I most enjoyed driving. The 1985 J-car Skyhawk was a blast to drive with the OHC 1.8 L. motor. My two Centuries rolled many interstate miles and were very comfortable and safe in the event of a collision because they weren't tinsel boxes. I'm still looking for that deficiency on the part of GM over the opposition I might have chosen. I don't accept the tenet that all foreign brands are good. Just look at the Odyssey forum, Accord VCM, Civic, and toyota discussions to see about how other cars have regressed to the mean.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Agreed, but your comment above pretty much shows that GM has been getting better (coming from a bad place) and Toyota (not sure I agree about the Accord) getting worse, but coming from a better place.
A lot of the disagreement probably comes from what type of vehicle you like. If I liked big trucks or SUVs, then I would have been driven to the US makers in the 80's and 90's. I would have looked at the foreign makes and thought they were pretty pathetic, and for the vehicles I wanted, I would be correct.
OTOH, since I like smaller sedans that are of higher quality and sporty, I looked at the US competition and found very little that was decent. This is also a reasonable conclusion during that time period. For me, in 1985 I wanted a nice smaller sedan. I looked at the US makes and the best I could find was the Ford Tempo! I ended up buying a VW Jetta. In 1998 I wanted an even more upscale smaller sedan. I did look at the Lincoln LS and the Caddy Catera. I also looked at the BMW 3 and the VW Passat before buying an Audi A4. There was really no viable competition from the US makes, for what I was looking for.
Today, for the first time, GM is finally putting out some compelling smaller sedans. The new Regal is nice, as is the Cruze. But I still don't know how their reliability will be.
So a lot of our disagreement is based upon what type of vehicles we actually like.
Of course, there's a whole other discussion about what constitutes and American car. Manufacturing is so globalized today that it is simplistic to think the categories are clear. And to feel that the only important difference is where the company is headquartered ignores the fact that some pretty despicable companies (Enron, MCI) have been headquartered here. Ford has done pretty well. Chrysler did poorly but a lot of blame falls on Daimler. GM was a disaster from a management perspective. I don't see why them being US owned is anything to admire.