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
As with most presidents after 100 years only the good will be remembered and taught in school. Will GW Bush go down as the most humanitarian of all the Presidents?
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/02/14/what_george_w_bush_did_right
Perhaps you're in the wrong organization. I know a lot of under 45's who are doing very well. But they're in growing companies who excel in their markets. Of course there's not going to be as much mobility at old, stagnant companies.
The transplants are also doing well because of better product development, no legacy costs, and often being coddled and subsidized by local and national governments.
I don't believe there is any transplant that has been nearly as coddled as GM. The transplant coddling is for a reason - it brings substantial economic activity to a region, and more income to a government than the credits they give. Unlike big sports stadiums.
If the D3 have large legacy costs then they have nobody to blame but themselves. Chapter 11 is usually a way to get rid of those costs, but of course the GM BK wasn't exactly traditional and so because of the political motivations, GM did not shed nearly enough of its legacy to regain true competitiveness.
Maybe. Still, I don't blame the kids. It's not them setting up the curriculum in the school. Once again, we have no one to blame but ourselves.
Both parties have certainly done their share to establish control over K-12 education.
The Big-3 were coddled by the federal government, whereas transplants were coddled by state and local governments. It's not just limited to transplants, either.
Check out Amazon's expansion, for example, and take a look at who dishes out the gravy to get them to locate in a particular area.
IMO, we all like to think we are a capitalist society, but we're far more socialistic when it comes to business practices than we admit. And, its been that way since the railroads were being constructed after the Civil War.
Way OT now, but if I was to choose between him or Barry to sit down and have a beer with, and just relax and have a laugh - no talk or debates about policy, who did what, why who did what, etc, Dubya would probably be the choice. However, that might not always make the greatest leader.
You must not know of the huge concessions granted to transplants to set up shop, nor the amount of aid given by their respective nations in everything from direct subsidies to socialized public benefit systems to currency manipulation. They often also receive indirect aid from the US itself. They aren't out there building it themselves no more than any other automakers.
Socialism is socialism. Love it or reject it, one can't do both - although in this oligarchy, they sure try.
Sorry our opinions don't agree on that one. I know we agree on a lot of other things. I've also seen a number of posters supporting some of my thoughts, so it's not as if there's an all-right or all-wrong point of view here. Diversity of opinions is a good thing.
Socialism is socialism. Love it or reject it, one can't do both -
Totally disagree - the world is much more shades of gray than black and whit. Black and white is only useful for polarized people to ostracize the opposite points of view.
I can still remember my dad shaking his head and hearing him say "Color TV is a waste of money for some folks" in reference to highly "my way or the highway" opinionated people.
Assuming you've done a test drive, how did you like it?
Positives, negatives, general comments?
Socialism is socialism - no matter if produces black or red ink. We can play the game, or refuse to and penalize those who do so and want to play on our playground. Funny how those competitors haven't worked to offshore their industrial base like we have. Funny how they all benefit from our protection.
PS
If it cannot be built here safely and economically, DON"T ALLOW IT TO BE SOLD HERE.
Positives, negatives, general comments?
I test drove a 2012 a couple of months ago. Overall I really liked it, but I need a bit more seat time to be sure. I wish the seats could be lowered a bit more and the instrumentation is hard to read at a glance, but those aren't deal breakers. The engine makes the car feel faster than it is, and the exhaust note is flat-out terrific. It's really all the car I need for my DD. I still want to check out the BRZ/FR-S, and I've found an M Sport 135i in the same price range as well. I have to say that I'm really conflicted at this point...
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Sounds like a woman shopping in a wallpaper store... Too many choices. LOL!
I've driven a 500, just not an Abarth edition. I liked the interior (I didn't ride in the back, nor do I think I would enjoy that), but if all you have is 1-2 people in the car, it can be fun. My wife owns a Mini convertible she bought new in 2005, and I would describe the fun factor and roominess in the same way, although her Mini has a much stiffer ride. The Abarth may differ from the 500 I drove in that regard as well.
I've never been inside a BRZ/FR-S at all, but I'd guess entry/exit might be a tad different, especially for one like me with a bad lower back that flares up occasionally. I'd also think it might be similar to my Z4 coupe.
Overall, I suspect you would be happy with any of the 3. Let us know which one you end up buying.
No doubt the 135 would be exciting, and a bit more room. You're a BMW guy, so you know what to expect. If its in the same price range, I'm guessing its pre-owned, and the other choices new.
It's not you. When I sat in one at the auto show and closed the door, I didn't get the reassuring "thunk" one gets on many other cars. Then again, it might not be any different than the Versa or Yaris as I didn't try those.
IIHS gave it a "good" score for side impact so it's safe.
I don't remember having that impression, as it didn't seem anything different to me than any other car in the same size/price range. Maybe it was as you describe and I just didn't notice.
I remember the big impression I got from it was how different the ride was from my wife's Mini. Much softer, and the steering wasn't anything like I expected. Made the car feel much larger than it actually was, whereas I was expecting go-cart style response.
Impossible, since CEO's are always highly overpaid. If he was fired after 30 days of non-performance, then I could understand, but they collected far more than a month's pay.
Send your complaint to the executives, CEO's, dealership managers, and customer service reps of the D3 for that one. You shouldn't be complaining to the American consumers.
It is called burning bridges. The D3 burned theirs long ago. Burned bridges is exactly what happened to many of their customers. There is no way to get back across, even if the grass really is greener on the other side than it was before. Frankly, the grass is so green on the Japanese and German side, I see no reason to leave.
You should complain to these companies that perhaps they should use some of our tax dollars on rebuilding these bridges to former customers with refund checks.
I haven't driven a base 500, but the Abarth's ride is definitely taut. About the same as an MCS, if you ask me. The steering feedback isn't the greatest, but I still liked it better than the tillers of the F30 3ers I've driven.
So it's got that going for it...
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
What about Nissan hiring away Ram's top gun? Questionable to say the least.
Hell hath no fury... like an Andres scorned?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Cute how you managed to squeeze a Mopar name in there. :P
It was dumb unintentional on my part. Good catch Andre.
I would have capitalized it...
Hell hath no Fury
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I had a Fury at one time. It was an '89. It was pretty good. In fact, it wasn't just "good", it was "Gran"
It had two problem areas though...carburetor was cranky and it ate starters. I hate to say it, but the carb was a GM unit, force-fitted onto the Mopar. A Rochester Quadrajet. The starter? If what my mechanic at the time, Lord rest his soul, was telling the truth, it was the same unit they put in the Honda Accord at the time.
I think it ate about 5 of those suckers in the course of its time with me. I like to joke that the problem was that the car was rejecting its transplants! :shades:
I always thought that Gran Sedan, sounded funny to say. I think that was a one-year only thing for 1974. That year they had the Fury I, II, and III, but at the top of the heap was the Fury Gran Sedan and Gran Coupe.
For 1975, they came out with the "New, Small Fury", which was just the old intermediate Satellite restyled. And then they started calling the big car Gran Fury, with base, Custom, and Brougham trim levels to sort of compete with Bel Air, Impala, and Caprice.
I always thought the big '74-75 Plymouths were good looking cars. Here's a 1975 Gran Fury, either a base model or Custom. I always liked the clean lines...a bit GM-ish, but blockier.
I never liked the 1975 Brougham as much, with its single headlights and more upright, pretentious grille. They ended up using this front-end for all Gran Furys in 1976-77.
Something that I just thought of...the Fury is probably one of the few domestic nameplates that really never got dragged through the muck, like what happened to so many others. The very first Fury in 1956 was the top line Plymouth, and so was the final Gran Fury in 1989. It never had to suffer the indignity of the K-car treatment like the New Yorker and even Imperial did. And the name never really got demoted over the years, as was common at GM and Ford. For instance, Bel Air, Impala, Fairlane, and Galaxie were all once at the top of the chain, but then they kept getting moved down, and in the end were usually strippo/rental cars. Although, through most of the 1980's, the bulk of Gran Furys and Diplomats were fleet cars...police cars and taxis!
The $1 million dollar a year family makes 20 times more than the family of $50,000/year. They should contribute more, that's 2,000%.
Yeah, but how much more, that is the question. A family of four with two children young enough to qualify for the child tax credit can actually make up to around $50,000 per year and not only pay NOTHING in federal taxes, but actually get money back!
In contrast, let's say this $1M family ends up paying about 15% total in federal taxes, thanks to writeoffs, capital gains rates, etc. That's $150,000 that they've paid in taxes.
So, the argument can be made that the $1M family is over-paying, while the $50K family is a leech on society.
Of course, that's not the case, as the $50K family is still paying sales tax, state and local taxes, social security, property taxes if they own instead of rent, helping business by buying cars, food, furniture, clothing, etc. So they are still contributing to society.
Poorer people don't have much to begin with, so the gov't can only take so much from them. So, they have to take more from the richer people. But, there has to be a reasonable cutoff. Take away too much, and you lose the incentive to work harder. Of course, the gov't provides all sort of handy little loopholes for the filthy rich...
That's what the "sin" taxes and lottery are for;)
Very interesting that some rear end styling cues from Mopar Stratus type cars showed up later on the rears of BMWs. Also, wasn't there some styling of the early 90's Ford Thunderbird that also was on BWM. Did the Ford take from BMW?
I could well be wrong on this, but wasn't there a year that Plymouth called a four-door "Gran Coupe", a "Gran Coupe"?
I can identify years of Mopars quite accurately from the '50's to about '74, but models and such confuse me a bit. I think Mopar did more shuffling, adding, and dropping of model names in that period than GM or Ford. Not scientific, of course, just my memory.
I remember at the time ('70 or '71) thinking it was odd that a nicely-trimmed car like a Gran Coupe was only available on the pillared coupe, or two-door sedan body. Seems I read years later that this was partly done to use up Fury I and Fury II two-door sedan bodies! Not sure how true that is or might be.
That, I"m not sure. But I think you're right that the very first Gran Coupe was only available as a pillared coupe, and that was 1970. I've seen one show up on occasion at the Mopar show in Carlisle. I believe the Gran Coupe hardtop debuted for 1971, but can't remember if they also offered it as a pillared style as well.
1972 was the first year of the Gran Sedan, but it looks like they called it a Sedan, not a Coupe, according to this literature (warning, big file)
Strangely enough, this 1962+ Rover PB5 was the first 4 door (that I know of) to be called a "coupe" - sleeker than the standard sedan:
I know what you mean. I can still accurately tell the year makes and models of cars from the mid 1930's to the mid 1970's (well, not 100%, but I can usually get very close to the year). I think its because I was really into cars much more then, as well as cars used to look quite different within makes and models.
Now that everyone in deep into aerodynamics, so many makes look incredibly similar. It's very easy to confuse one with another until you get very close to the car, and even then it can be a tad confusing.
Trying to obtain agreement on what's a "fair share" to pay in taxes is like trying to get everyone to agree on what to cut to eliminate the deficit and balance the budget..everyone likes the idea, but they also want all the load placed on someone else's shoulders.
Now, here's an example of a lop-sided tax for sure... In SC, sales tax on a car is topped out at $300. The guy buying a Rolls pays the exact same amount as the guy buying the base Hyundai. Seems a bit skewed in favor of the high-dollar buyer to me. It's been that way since I moved here in 1977, with no inflation adjustments.
For instance, I couldn't tell the difference between a 1979 Chrysler New Yorker and a 1980. And I own two 1979's! The only way I would be able to tell would be to look at the VIN. Or open the hood and see what engine it had. The '79 had a standard 360-2bbl (318-4bbl in CA), while the 1980 had a standard 318-2bbl. The 360 was offered, but rarely ordered.
There's not much difference between a 1976 and a 1977 Pontiac LeMans. In fact, my '76 LeMans is wearing a '77 grille, because it got hit at some point in its life. I think the only difference is the grille inserts, which are easy swap items for the most part. Although I've heard that you can interchange the inserts between a '76 base LeMans, '77 base LeMans, and '77 Grand LeMans, but there's something about the way the inserts of a '76 Grand LeMans bolt in that makes them not swappable across the other three. Leave it to GM to do something like that! :confuse:
The 1989-1997 Thunderbird borrowed heavily from the E24 6 Series(which was styled by Paul Bracq and introduced in 1976):
To my eye the 1983 to 1988 Thunderbird was a much more successful design- particularly the 1983-1986 cars:
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Looking back though, I appreciate it a lot more these days, although I actually prefer the '87-88, by a slight margin. I think these cars are the ones that really deserve credit for getting aerodynamic designs out there. I know a lot of people say it's Audi, but to my eye, Audi's aerodynamics of the time were more an exaggeration of the GM wedge.
I always thought the '84 Tempo/Topaz were kinda grubby looking little things, and the Taurus wasn't that vastly different. Just midsized and cleaned up a bit. My guess is that the reason the '83 T-bird and Cougar don't get more credit is that they were personal luxury coupes, a market that ultimately proved to be a dead end.
If I were seeking out a personal luxury coupe from that era, I think I'd still go for a GM like a Cutlass Supreme, Regal, Monte Carlo, or Grand Prix. Even though the T-bird/Cougar make them look old, I still like the style of the GMs. And the GM cars were bigger inside. Technically, those '83-88 T-bird/Cougars were compacts, and when I sit in on, I can feel it.
I kinda like the '89+ T-bird and Cougar. Better than GM's FWD Regal/Grand Prix/Cutlass Supreme, at least. But, they're heavy, chunky, and not all that space efficient. Still, if I found a nice one with a V-8, I wouldn't be ashamed of it. One thing that I appreciated, even though the execution was flawed, is that they actually offered a green interior on them, whereas most green cars probably have a beige or putty interior. But, alas, it wasn't that attractive of a green. It was okay on the fabrics and carpet, but on the leather and plastics, it had a greasy look to it.
One thing that always impressed me about the '83-88 T-bird, was that I thought it hid its overhang pretty well. It was about 198" long (the '89+, was actually a touch shorter), but only on a 104.4" wheelbase. That sounds like a really bad ratio to me, but I think it carries it off rather well.
I prefer the '87-88 too. Those were nice cars for their day. Back then I lusted for a Turbo Coupe with a manual trans. They still look decent today, though they are a rare sight.
Yeah the Tempo/Topaz was pretty nasty, but it's not the competing domestics were any better. The Taurus/Sable was a game changer as it left behind the generic box look. They stood out back then. No it wasn't a great car, but it had a presence about it that created demand.
If I were seeking out a personal luxury coupe from that era, I think I'd still go for a GM like a Cutlass Supreme, Regal, Monte Carlo, or Grand Prix. Even though the T-bird/Cougar make them look old, I still like the style of the GMs. And the GM cars were bigger inside. Technically, those '83-88 T-bird/Cougars were compacts, and when I sit in on, I can feel it.
That would be a tough call for me. While they may have competed in the same space, IMO they were fairly different. The GM trio were more traditional in style and technology where the TBird/Cougar were more cutting edge with things like the availability of fuel injection, electronic ride control, 4 wheel disk brakes, and you could get a manual trans in a Turbo Coupe.
OTOH, I always liked the Olds Cutlass Supreme. Sure a Grand National would be cool (but to much of a one trick pony for me), but there was something about the Cutlass I liked. A Hurst model would be cool, regardless, as long is it has the 307, I'd be happy.
Did I mention the girls liked them?