On the auto bailout

[guyjin]

I feel like I've asked this question before. oh well.

Are PCFXers as Japanophiliac with their vehicles as they are with their videogames?

(if there's any question about where the car really comes from, go by the guts, not the badge.)

[nat]

I'm all-American when it comes to my cars. Actually, I'm a Chrysler/MOPAR devotee. I own a Nissan pickup also, but that's only because my wife's father basically gave it to us. If I had my say, I would've bought a Dodge.

All that said, I haven't bought a new car in quite a few years as my old ones still run fine, and for another reason I'll touch on below.

I'm a firm believer that the American auto industry should not be allowed to go under, on the other hand, I'm not sure a "bailout" is warranted. It seems like a lose-lose situation, damned if you do, damned if you don't. I'm really disappointed with the direction the American automakers have gone in the last 10+ years, focusing on building bigger, less economical mini-semis instead of refining the sedan and compact car classes and working to make more energy-efficient autos. The American public is largely to blame also, however. If go out and stand by the street and watch 10 vehicles drive by, probably 7 out of 10 will be some type of SUV. That's fucking ludicrous. There is not a single person in the USA that needs a Ford Excursion, Chevy Suburban, or a Hummer. You can't even argue that point. You can try, but your arguments will be 100% meaningless because you will be 100% wrong. You cannot demonstrate to me a physical need for one of these vehicles, you simply can't. Yet the American public in general keeps buying up this shit, and usually, it's single individuals. Out of those 7 SUVs that pass when you're out by the road, count how many people are inside each one. I guarantee 6 out of the 7 will have only ONE PERSON in them. You just cannot argue on this point.

Point being, you cannot lay the blame entirely on the automakers-- some of the blame is due, most definitely, to the sheeple that herd to the dealerships in droves and lap the shit up like a baby yearning for his mother's tit. On the other hand, you can lay a lot of blame on the automakers for force-feeding this cowdung down the American public's throats for the past decade or so just to make a fast nickel. It's funny because when I first saw this trend beginning years ago, I knew it would eventually spell disaster. I ranted and ranted about it to my friends, most of whom probably thought I was a lunatic and looked at me funny as they drove to their nearest Ford dealer wearing shit-eating grins to pick up the latest and greatest in the Exploder line.

What we should really have in front of Congress right now is a proposal for a universal ass-whopping on all the dipshits who bought these vehicles over the past 10 years, complete with a mandatory swirlie. This time, I'll be wearing the shit-eating grin.



HUMOROUS ANECDOTE: I was driving home from work on Friday, and I heard the newest Cadillac commercial come on my local radio station. It was an advertisement for the Cadillac Escalade HYBRID, comparing the mileage to what you would get if you bought a VW Beetle. Yes, they are comparing an Escalade to a Beetle. I was like, are you fucking SHITTING me? They just don't get it, do they? GM will likely be filing for Chapter 7 in a few weeks here, and they think that creating a HYBRID of a colossally inefficient vehicle is the answer? This is their "solution?" This whole thing is going right over their heads.

[nectarsis]

Old Chrysler FTE nat...as up until recently Mercedes had their mitts on em.

As for me..technically japanese as we have a Kia minivan, and my Chevy Prizm is really a Toyota Corolla  ;)

[guyjin]

HUMOROUS ANECDOTE: I was driving home from work on Friday, and I heard the newest Cadillac commercial come on my local radio station. It was an advertisement for the Cadillac Escalade HYBRID, comparing the mileage to what you would get if you bought a VW Beetle. Yes, they are comparing an Escalade to a Beetle. I was like, are you fucking SHITTING me? They just don't get it, do they? GM will likely be filing for Chapter 7 in a few weeks here, and they think that creating a HYBRID of a colossally inefficient vehicle is the answer? This is their "solution?" This whole thing is going right over their heads.

It's probably a quick fix sort of thing - since you can literally slap something on any car to make it a hybrid.

As for me..technically japanese as we have a Kia minivan,

Kia is Korean.

[Duo_R]

so when we are talking "American," are we talking about Japanese cars built in the U.S. or U.S. cars built overseas?

[guyjin]

so when we are talking "American," are we talking about Japanese cars built in the U.S. or U.S. cars built overseas?

you're just being obtuse. 

[Turbo D]

I drive a 1996 Dodge Ram Van 1500 . The Ram Van has been modified with a 3-chamber Flowmaster muffler, so you'll now when I'm rolling down the street. It's a v6, but it has plenty of pep. I've been driving it around since high skool and have boned many women in the back (its the commercial model with no windows in the back .)

[nectarsis]

HUMOROUS ANECDOTE: I was driving home from work on Friday, and I heard the newest Cadillac commercial come on my local radio station. It was an advertisement for the Cadillac Escalade HYBRID, comparing the mileage to what you would get if you bought a VW Beetle. Yes, they are comparing an Escalade to a Beetle. I was like, are you fucking SHITTING me? They just don't get it, do they? GM will likely be filing for Chapter 7 in a few weeks here, and they think that creating a HYBRID of a colossally inefficient vehicle is the answer? This is their "solution?" This whole thing is going right over their heads.

It's probably a quick fix sort of thing - since you can literally slap something on any car to make it a hybrid.

As for me..technically japanese as we have a Kia minivan,

Kia is Korean.

well the Prizm then 

[termis]

Well, I got me one of those Prizms myself, except mine's the Australian badge (Holden Nova) -- built down under with the Toyota guts.

Anyway, I'm not country-loyal when it comes to any product ('cept my primary motorbike, which is Italian ).  Though I can see that Japanese cars on the whole are better built, I buy what gives me better value for my money, and that's not necessarily Japanese.  i.e. I just got a 2nd hand x-box, cause they were pretty cheap, and seemed to offer a lot for the money, especially with emulation/media center capabilities and all that...

As for the bailout, though I'd be sad to see some auto brands gone forever, I'd want to see some serious changes to management and/or practices to warrant taxpayer money going to help bailout these losers.  (I have to be careful saying that, cause I haven't paid US taxes in like... 6 years now  )

The big three's whole "let's put all our eggs in the SUV basket" is just bad long-term strategy, not to mention irresponsible.  I do wonder though if SUVs are slowly going to make a comeback with the gas prices going down...  I hope not... 

[PCEngineHell]

Kia and Hyundai have been the companies of choice for our family as of late.

[OldRover]

Mitsubishi for us.

[Joe Redifer]

I own a Honda but the transmission was built in Japan, the engine built in the US and it was all assembled in Canada.  Therefore I cannot vote.

I am against the bailout.  The automakers need to learn from their mistakes if they are to survive, otherwise they'll think that if the worst happens, mommy will help them out.  Assholes.

I am also against hybrids.  It takes nearly a decade to recoup the extra cost you pay for one on gas savings.  My car gets 36 MPG city.  Why would I want to pay extra for a huge, heavy battery that will need to be replaced eventually (for lots of $$$) and a "Hybrid" tag attached to the back of my car?  I am also not a believer of man causing global warming.  Believe Al Gore all you want, but he's full of it.  It's kind of funny that back in 1973 they were all freaking out about global cooling, all caused by man using the same pollutants.  What's the next scare, global room temperature... caused by man?

[SuperDeadite]

No car for me currently.  I used to cruise around my university in a Geo Prizm though.  It was rusted, loud, and smelled like gasoline.  All the chicks loved it.   

[Turbo D]

I am also against hybrids.  It takes nearly a decade to recoup the extra cost you pay for one on gas savings.  My car gets 36 MPG city.  Why would I want to pay extra for a huge, heavy battery that will need to be replaced eventually (for lots of $$$) and a "Hybrid" tag attached to the back of my car?  I am also not a believer of man causing global warming.

Hybrids also create more pollution to build than regular vehicles. Lets all not forget the main culprit to blame for global warming; the cow!

[Joe Redifer]

I am doing my part by eating as many cheeseburgers as possible!

[Keranu]

I drive a crappy, but perfectly working, Saturn. So I voted American.

I thnk Hybrids are dumb too. You should choose if you want to go completely gas free or not.

[NecroPhile]

It's a Ford for me, straight outta Michigan.

Point being, you cannot lay the blame entirely on the automakers-- some of the blame is due, most definitely, to the sheeple that herd to the dealerships in droves and lap the shit up like a baby yearning for his mother's tit. On the other hand, you can lay a lot of blame on the automakers for force-feeding this cowdung down the American public's throats for the past decade or so just to make a fast nickel.

I lay the blame almost entirely at the buyer's feet, as no manufacturer put a gun to the buyers' heads and made them buy what they didn't want; the manufacturers do share a small part of the blame though, since they promoted the hell out of these bad ideas on wheels.  That said, the big three in Japan aren't much less culpable, as they also build gas guzzling trucks and suvs (Honda less so, though their weak sauce Ridgeline gets similar mileage to far more capable full size pickups).

My car gets 36 MPG city.

Besting the EPA rating by nearly 40%, eh?  Impressive.

[guyjin]

I am also not a believer of man causing global warming.  Believe Al Gore all you want, but he's full of it.  It's kind of funny that back in 1973 they were all freaking out about global cooling, all caused by man using the same pollutants.  What's the next scare, global room temperature... caused by man?

so, because science was wrong before, it must be wrong now? you know better than that, Joe. 

[Ceti Alpha]

I own a Honda but the transmission was built in Japan, the engine built in the US and it was all assembled in Canada.  Therefore I cannot vote.

I am against the bailout.  The automakers need to learn from their mistakes if they are to survive, otherwise they'll think that if the worst happens, mommy will help them out.  Assholes.

I am also against hybrids.  It takes nearly a decade to recoup the extra cost you pay for one on gas savings.  My car gets 36 MPG city.  Why would I want to pay extra for a huge, heavy battery that will need to be replaced eventually (for lots of $$$) and a "Hybrid" tag attached to the back of my car?  I am also not a believer of man causing global warming.  Believe Al Gore all you want, but he's full of it.  It's kind of funny that back in 1973 they were all freaking out about global cooling, all caused by man using the same pollutants.  What's the next scare, global room temperature... caused by man?

Yeah, I remember I had a Ford Probe that my dad passed down to me. While the frame/body was American, the engine was Mazda, and was assembled in Canada. Not too many "purebred" cars anymore.

I go by the "ShamWow" advertisement: "Made by the Germans. You know that the Germans always make great things."

[Joe Redifer]

Besting the EPA rating by nearly 40%, eh?  Impressive.

Actually, I'm a tad disappointed.  My 2003 Honda Civic usually got 41 mpg in the city.

I lay the blame almost entirely at the buyer's feet

Then why is it only the US automakers who are failing?

[NecroPhile]

Actually, I'm a tad disappointed.  My 2003 Honda Civic usually got 41 mpg in the city.

I get 57 mpg in my car and pull sub 9 second E.T.s in the quarter mile.

Then why is it only the US automakers who are failing?

Their troubles can't so easily be explained; if it is that simple, then please explain why Ford isn't participating in the bailout.

Sales are down for everyone, but what really hurts the big three are the extensive legacy costs:
 
  1) Too many brands, especially in GM's case.  Multiple brands increase development costs and lessen the impact of advertising dollars without appreciably increasing sales, yet they can't easily (or cheaply) be phased out due to state laws protecting local dealerships.
  2) Too many stealerships.  They're expensive to equip and train, but as noted above, they can't be closed very easily.  The manufacturers could pass the burden on to the dealerships, but they'd just pass the increased cost on to the consumer, ending with overpriced product filling their lots.
  3) The ever rising cost of health care.  Until relatively recently, nearly all big three cars were built in the US and foreign cars were built in their respective homelands; meaning that the big three is paying for far more employees (past and present) receiving overpriced health care in the States, whereas the others can rely on socialized medicine.

[Joe Redifer]

Don't forget the auto unions.  Each person on the line makes about $75,000 or so.  Of course this is not good enough for them and they want more.  MOAR!!!!

[OldRover]

The auto bailout is failing in Congress, and I'm neither surprised nor disappointed. I hope some of them go under. Besides, they're just feeding off of the stupid bank bailout that passed earlier in the year...which was also unnecessary.

[Ceti Alpha]

Actually, sales aren't down for everybody. Toyota and VW, for instance, are seeing record sales. People are just turning to other cars.

I think there should be a bailout, but I believe that the public should have an interest in GM if/when this happens. GM should be held accountable on the product they roll out. If they are using public money, they should be forced to produce cars that are efficient. Period.

That being said, this whole "bail-out" thing with the banks is crazy. Socialism for the rich, pure capitalism for the poor and middle class. It reeks.

The invisible hand of capitalism is a myth. The free market has failed.

[Keranu]

I go by the "ShamWow" advertisement: "Made by the Germans. You know that the Germans always make great things."

Hahaha, I love that commercial and especially that line! 

[blueraven]

My thoughts on the Auto Bailout as a mechanic;

Where was congress in 1964 when Studebaker/Packard was in trouble?

South Bend, Indiana's economy was wiped out in 1964 as a result of this auto closure; despite engineering that was ahead of it's time (first American production car with Disc Brakes; standard on the Avanti in 1962, optional on the Lark and Hawk) they were unable to compete with the "Big Three" because of significant body style changes, a lack of effective marketing to youth, and poor buisness decisions made during the merger with Packard (based in Detroit) in 1958. They were the last of the independents.

The South Bend factory shut down in '64 and moved to Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, producing vehicles from spare parts in 1965-66 with re-labeled Chevrolet engines (The Skybolt 6; a 235 Chevy 6 and the Thunderbolt; a 283 Chevy V8) until it's liquidation and conversion into the Studebaker-Worthington holding company, now an industrial finance division of the Bank of Long Island, NY.
 
Nash, De Soto, Hudson, and Kaiser/Fraiser (the other independents, plus a few others) were all merged (over the course of about 10 years, from around 1958 to 1968, give or take a few) to form AMC, which was then absorbed by Chrysler, and abandoned completely by Chrysler Corp by 1981. 

GM in the early 00's "introduced" sliding rear roof technology on the Hummer, H2, and Cadillac Wagons which was actually available on the Studebaker Lark Wagonaire, in 1962). They sued the two engineers that "resurrected" the Studebaker name in 2001 (basing the new Avanti on a Corvette chassis, and the XUV on the Hummer) for copyright infringement on the XUV model and settled out of court in 2004. GM claimed they copied the Hummer with the Studebaker XUV, and Studebaker claimed patent infringement on it's previous models. This drove Studebaker out of business once again...

I guess my point is that Studebaker never got a fair shake or a bailout. They had a superior product, and were ruined by poor decisions. My heart goes out to the folks back then in '64 and right now in '04-'08 who have lost their jobs and pensions. My friends at the Chrysler plant included, who make low $20K's and are now unemployed. They are the real victims here.

However, Studebaker wasn't bailed out of their situation, and therefore, in my opinion, neither should GM or Chrysler.  They destroyed the competition, "borrowed" from others, got greedy with SUV production, ignored the consumer, lured the poor into financing, and fought against safety regulations tooth and nail. Now it's coming back to bite them in the ass. They deserve a taste of their own cooking; It is certainly well-seasoned.

Here is a photo of a supercharged 1962 Avanti. In my opinion, It's the Mod-chipped RGB blue-LED Duo RX of automobiles. (24mpg hwy in 1962!) 




P.S. I have a 6-cyl 95 Ford Ranger as a work truck, and a Hot Rod on blocks. If I get another vehicle, It will be a 40+ mpg Honda or a hybrid/diesel Toyota pickup truck to replace the 150K Ranger. 

[Joe Redifer]

I hate blue LEDs.  So tacky, and way too damned bright.

[NecroPhile]

Actually, sales aren't down for everybody. Toyota and VW, for instance, are seeing record sales. People are just turning to other cars.

You clearly don't know what you're talking about.  Here's the latest sales figures taken from the manufacturer's respective websites:

Toyota - November sales down 33.9% compared to November 2007; year to date sales down 10.4% compared to same time last year (September was the last time that YTD numbers were given, but sales were down 29.5% in September and 25.9% in October, so the current total is obviously a lot higher than 10.4%).
VW - November sales down 19.2% compared to November 2007; year to date sales down 2.1% compared to same time last year.

For comparison, here's a few more:

Honda - November sales down 31.6% compared to November 2007; year to date sales down 5.8% compared to same time last year.
GM - November sales down 41% compared to November 2007; I can't find year to date sales figures.
Chrysler - November sales down 47.1% compared to November 2007; year to date sales down 27.7% compared to same time last year.
Ford - November sales down 30.6% compared to November 2007; year to date sales down 19.7% compared to same time last year.
Hyundai - November sales down 40% compared to November 2007; year to date sales down 11% compared to same time last year.

I think there should be a bailout, but I believe that the public should have an interest in GM if/when this happens. GM should be held accountable on the product they roll out. If they are using public money, they should be forced to produce cars that are efficient. Period.

Still clueless, eh?  They're already building fuel efficient cars.

Chevy Aveo - 27/34
Honda Fit - 27/33
Nissan Versa - 26/31
Toyota Yaris - 29/36

Chevy Cobalt - 25/37
Honda Civic - 26/34
Nissan Sentra - 25/33
Toyota Corolla - 26/35

Chevy Malibu - 22/30
Honda Accord - 22/31
Nissan Altima - 23/31
Toyota Camry - 21/31

Chevy Silverado - 14/19
Honda Ridgeline - 15/20  <--not really a competitor, but as close as it gets
Nissan Titan - 13/17
Toyota Tundra - 13/17

Chevy HHR - 16/23 (21/29 in SS trim <--WTF?!?)
Honda Element - 20/25
Nissan Rogue - 22/27
Toyota Matrix - 26/32

Chevy Equinox - 17/24
Honda CR-V - 20/27
Toyota RAV4 - 21/27

Chevy Traverse - 17/24
Honda Pilot - 17/23
Nissan Pathfinder - 15/22
Toyota Highlander - 18/24

Chevy Tahoe - 14/20
Nissan Armada - 12/18
Toyota Sequoia - 14/19

As you can see, GM's fuel efficiency is quite competitive when compared to the Japanese big three (all numbers were culled from MSN).  The only place that they don't compete is the small CUV market, as the HHR doesn't really fit in and the Equinox is V6 only.

Where was congress in 1964 when Studebaker/Packard was in trouble?

The failure of even one of the big three would damage the economy on a far greater scale than the failure of Studebaker.  If a US company similar is size to Subaru or Saab were failing today, nobody would care.

[OldRover]

The failure of even one of the big three would damage the economy on a far greater scale than the failure of Studebaker.  If a US company similar is size to Subaru or Saab were failing today, nobody would care.

Of course, neither Subaru nor SAAB supports U.S. politicians...

[nectarsis]

Saab has been a GM brand for years now.

[NecroPhile]

Of course, neither Subaru nor SAAB supports U.S. politicians...

That has nothing to do with the point being made (that comparing Studebaker to GM and Chrysler is like comparing apples and oranges).

[Turbo D]

non sequitur to the false analogy! Srry, just finished the Eng14 final, lol.

[blueraven]

Of course, neither Subaru nor SAAB supports U.S. politicians...

That has nothing to do with the point being made (that comparing Studebaker to GM and Chrysler is like comparing apples and oranges).

Greater scale and damage to the economy now, yes. However, My argument was not to compare the size of the two companies, I'm saying nobody helped them out.
 
The situation as to why the companies were/are going bankrupt is nearly identical. I don't think their fiscal mismanagement is apples and oranges.

[Joe Redifer]

While most manufacturers are building better, more fuel efficient (though still wimpy in that regard) cars, they still can't fly.  We're coming close to 2015, folks.  All cars must fly or be able to be converted to fly by then.

[NecroPhile]

Greater scale and damage to the economy now, yes. However, My argument was not to compare the size of the two companies, I'm saying nobody helped them out.
 
The situation as to why the companies were/are going bankrupt is nearly identical. I don't think their fiscal mismanagement is apples and oranges.

Why the companies are going bankrupt is mostly irrelevant.  The bailout for GM and Chrysler is to keep their failure from pushing the economy further into recession, so comparing their bailout to the one that never came for Studebaker is akin to comparing apples and oranges.

[Joe Redifer]

I like oranges better.  Far more flavorful than apples.  However you don't need to peel apples so they are better when you are on the go.  People say that apples and oranges cannot be compared.  They totally can.

[PCEngineHell]

[Ceti Alpha]

Haha. That "right-wing-SUV-drivin'-MAN" deserves a pie in the face. They're so easy to spot.

...crap! I forgot to put my patchouli oil on today. 

[OldRover]

Anyone who drives an SUV without reason aside from ego deserves to have their ass kicked.

[NecroPhile]

Anyone who drives an SUV without reason aside from ego deserves to have their ass kicked.

If you believe that practicality always trumps desire, then the same can be said about anybody that drives anything more than the smallest economy car with the most efficient engine available (does anybody really need a V6 Camry/Accord/etc).  95% of my driving is in town, so would my ass need kicking if I were to buy a hybrid Tahoe (1mpg less than an I4 Accord), an Escape (same mileage as an I4 Accord), or an hybrid Escape (50% better mileage than a I4 Accord)?  My point being that people should buy what they want, pay at the pump accordingly, and also pay on the front end with the gas guzzler tax (no autos should be exempt).

I don't drive an SUV, but I don't exactly drive a fuel efficient car either.  I compensate by car pooling and bike riding, consequently only driving about 5000 miles per year and burning less fuel than your average four cylinder shit box owner.  Does that make me a better person?  No, it just makes me happy.

[nat]

I compensate by car pooling and bike riding, consequently only driving about 5000 miles per year and burning less fuel than your average four cylinder shit box owner.  Does that make me a better person?

In a word, yes.

[OldRover]

My point being that people should buy what they want, pay at the pump accordingly, and also pay on the front end with the gas guzzler tax (no autos should be exempt).

It has less to do with personal choice and more to do with personal responsibility. It is both socially and environmentally irresponsible to drive around a whale of a car if it's not needed. Just because one can afford something doesn't mean they should actually buy it. But alas, we live in a "me first" decadent society, so such morals are thrown out the window of the newest H2.

You don't need to be driving the most fuel-efficient rat-box of a car to avoid said ass-kicking. But there is a line that certainly needs to be drawn.

I don't drive an SUV, but I don't exactly drive a fuel efficient car either.  I compensate by car pooling and bike riding, consequently only driving about 5000 miles per year and burning less fuel than your average four cylinder shit box owner.  Does that make me a better person?  No, it just makes me happy.

Actually, yes...it DOES make you a better person.

[quoth09]

I pretty much agree with the first reply to this thread; Nat's first post.

The car companies are idiots, and the people buying them are too, especially the SUV and Hummer buyers.

I'm completely opposed to the bailout, same goes for the financial bailout for banks as well. The way I see it, if they can't make it, they need to go under. The whole thing shouldn't have even been an option for them, and whichever members of the government that approved such crap need to be kicked out of their position/office.

I have been driving the same car for the last 8 years (this Febuary will be 8 ), and I was probably going to be buying another one here soon. Due to this bailout crap, and especially due to the CEO of GM's remark that if they go under, there will be a depression (BULLSHIT), I will NOT be buying a vehicle from any of the 3. It's the equivalent of me boycotting them, and if everyone else did the same thing, they would have a lot more problems than needing a bailout.


Same goes for Exxon/Mobil: I would rather walk than fill my tank with their 'record profits during a time when gas is $3 a gallon' fuel, especially when they are retiring some 60 something year old with a package of several hundred billion dollars, when he won't even live long enough to spend even 1/10th of it. Kinda funny how their gas is usually 10 cents more than everyone else anyway.

[nectarsis]

My point being that people should buy what they want, pay at the pump accordingly, and also pay on the front end with the gas guzzler tax (no autos should be exempt).

It has less to do with personal choice and more to do with personal responsibility. It is both socially and environmentally irresponsible to drive around a whale of a car if it's not needed. Just because one can afford something doesn't mean they should actually buy it. But alas, we live in a "me first" decadent society, so such morals are thrown out the window of the newest H2.

You don't need to be driving the most fuel-efficient rat-box of a car to avoid said ass-kicking. But there is a line that certainly needs to be drawn.

I don't drive an SUV, but I don't exactly drive a fuel efficient car either.  I compensate by car pooling and bike riding, consequently only driving about 5000 miles per year and burning less fuel than your average four cylinder shit box owner.  Does that make me a better person?  No, it just makes me happy.

Actually, yes...it DOES make you a better person.

Doesn't that line of think go DIRECTLY against apost from a different thread?  ;)

Perhaps because this is supposedly the "land of the free"?

[OldRover]

Doesn't that line of think go DIRECTLY against apost from a different thread?  ;)

Perhaps because this is supposedly the "land of the free"?

Not really. This is the "land of the free", not the "land of the intelligent".

[Ceti Alpha]

It really does irk me that the banks are getting bailed out for wildly handing out these sketchy mortgages to anyone and their dog, but the people are left high and dry. Same goes for the "Big Three" (Not so big now, are ya?!  ). There are so many things wrong with these bailouts, it's hard to know where to begin. To me it just screams socialism for the rich, and capitalism for the poor and middle class. Where are the handouts going to stop? Up here we have virtually every industry asking for money. I never thought I'd side with Republicans, but at least some of them are saying no to these guys.

Ford is the only company that should get some money. They're actually doing quite well in Europe and Asia because they sell small, more fuel efficient cars overseas - and whadaya know, the cars are selling over there. So they have the car models ready to go now, not in five or ten years. They still messed up, but they are worth saving.

[nat]

Rover nailed it when he said it has everything to do with "personal responsibility." Actually, he pretty much nailed it with everything he said, same with Quoth.

Either way, we can stop quibbling for the time being-- Bush approved a 17 billion dollar bailout package for 'em just yesterday or the day before.

And ceti, it looks like your government is getting in on the fun, too.

[nectarsis]

Doesn't that line of think go DIRECTLY against a post from a different thread?  ;)

Perhaps because this is supposedly the "land of the free"?

Not really. This is the "land of the free", not the "land of the intelligent".

Yet saying if someone who owns a "whale of a car thats not needed" is socially irresponsible, and deserves an asskicking.  While I agree on the environmental impact, if someone had the $ to buy one...what does does that have to do with a "me first" society.  That can be said of any muscle car of the 60's/70's, to the overpowered imports of today.  If I had the $ to own (and maintain/gas) a SUV/full size truck I would.  If I don't beat the crap out of it offroad, does that make me socially irresponsible? Nope it's what I like/want.  Up here having 4WD would be a godsend a LOT.  The same arguement can go for almost anything..I mean the plastic, and other components that make our games/systems caould be used to make cheaper medical equipment, etc.  Just because you don't agree with someone driving a battleship on wheels, their $/perogative.  Hence "land of the free."  NOT the goverments job to tell us what we can drive. ;)

[OldRover]

nectarsis...you just don't get it. I'm sorry, man.

[nat]

Doesn't that line of think go DIRECTLY against a post from a different thread?  ;)

Perhaps because this is supposedly the "land of the free"?

Not really. This is the "land of the free", not the "land of the intelligent".

Yet saying if someone who owns a "whale of a car thats not needed" is socially irresponsible, and deserves an asskicking.  While I agree on the environmental impact, if someone had the $ to buy one...what does does that have to do with a "me first" society. 

Because owning these things (SUVs) has an outreaching effect on other people, not just yourself. It's selfishness to the letter.

You already mentioned the environmental impact yourself, which is a major deal whether most people want to realize it or not. Fossil fuels are running out, and these ridiculous tanks are making sure that happens all the sooner. While SUVs are plenty safe for the driver, that's where the safety benefits end. They are inherently dangerous for EVERYONE ELSE around, in every way. They are large and obtuse, so you can't see around them. They are heavy and if you are in a collision with a smaller vehicle are more likely to seriously injure/kill the other driver. Even if the other driver sustains no injury, it's likely your SUV will obliterate their smaller car. Your visibility of close-to-ground-level objects is extremely limited in an SUV, heightening the chances of running over a pet or small child. The size of SUVs alone is an issue-- with the world's population increasing exponentially, and available "free space" in general diminishing. You would think we'd be moving towards smaller vehicles, not the other way around.

Beyond these tangible threats, there's always the whole "Fuck you, I've got a bigger cock/SUV than you" meathead attitude that usually accompanies. While it's probably not something that's going to cause anyone any harm, I could do without it.

That can be said of any muscle car of the 60's/70's, to the overpowered imports of today.  If I had the $ to own (and maintain/gas) a SUV/full size truck I would.  If I don't beat the crap out of it offroad, does that make me socially irresponsible? Nope it's what I like/want. 

But in a way, it does. You don't need an SUV. Nobody does. You can't argue that point, you just can't. Society made it all these years without them. If they went away, I'm pretty sure we'd all be OK. Anyone who has enough kids to actually fill one of these fuckers up is already acting irresponsibly right out of the gate.

Your first instinct is going to be to argue "But we don't need this or that either", but the difference is, most of the other frivolous things we indulge in life aren't negatively impacting society as a whole.

I like collecting video games. I don't need to. But on the other hand, doing so doesn't pose risk of injury/death to my neighbor or have a negative impact on society in general.

Up here having 34SD wouls be a godsend a LOT.  The same arguement can go for almost anything..I mean the plastic, and other components that make our games/systems caould be used to make cheaper medical equipment, etc. 

I have no clue what "34SD" is, BTW.

But as for your argument, you have a great point. Probably 97% of the nation lives very selfishly in day to day life, in general. From our grocery shopping, to the stuff we don't even think about, like flushing the toilet. We have a long way to go if we want to be able to comfortably inhabit this planet for years to come. It's really, really hard to live selflessly in today's society what with mass manufacturing and how so many industries are intertwined. I try to live as "green" as possible in my life and do my part. But the "SUV epidemic" that has overcome this country in the past decade is a MAJOR, MAJOR issue.

Just because you don't agree with someone driving a battleship on wheels, their $/perogative.

I could give a shit what Joe Blow up the street does, as long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else. Unfortunately, if Joe Blow is driving around in a Suburban, he's affecting a lot of people.

Hence "land of the free."  NOT the goverments job to tell us what we can drive. ;)

Unfortunately it's this kind of mentality that will ensure there will be no "land of the free" if something isn't done about some of these issues.