GM scraps high perforrmance division

[gtjoey]

Dbk ,our goal ,first and foremost is to keep people reading these posts:biggrin.It makes the day go by:thumbsupWe all know to take it with a little grain of salt, so lets keep going as the phones are totally dead:eek

The numbers you posted are correct for the foreign makes , one problem WE ARE BLEEDING THOSE NUMBERS PER MONTH!
Every Chrysler 300 that rolls off the line costs the maker 1,500 over for med benefits its a fact.
GM, FORD AND CHRYSLER all paid up to 2,000 employees each of certain nationalities a salary every year to do NOTHING, thats a fact.
I cannot guarantee my children lifetime maj.med. benefits for life after I die! its a fact!
My grandfather worked for the washburn wire factory from 1917 to 1962 all union, he made 17 dollars a week, I GET IT, after his union bosses split to rio in the 60's he got nothing.. I get it , im not union bashing im just stating my opinion that they dont work!
Last but not least, heres what it comes down to..

WHAT G.M. CHRYSLER PRODUCT DO YOU WANT RIGHT NOW, BEGGING FOR?
If your young out of school its slim pickens, so chevelles,rivieras,442's/. Does this make any sense......gtjoey1314:thumbsup

 

[dbk]

p.s, just for giggles I configured myself a mack daddy Focus at Ford.co.uk and it was around $38k. A $38k Focus selling as a DD in the U.S will occur someday between "freezing in hell" and "never" :lol

 

[gtjoey]

Ityped wrong , i meant NO chevelles etc. oops:biggrin gtjoey1314

 

[dbk]

The numbers you posted are correct for the foreign makes , one problem WE ARE BLEEDING THOSE NUMBERS PER MONTH!

Yes, and that is not just because of legacy costs. It's because the domestic auto industry product lineup has been skewed toward products people stopped buying due to a lack of energy policy. They also had way too much capacity to adequately drop millions of units a year out of the plan when the economy imploded.

Every Chrysler 300 that rolls off the line costs the maker 1,500 over for med benefits its a fact.

And this is why they are offloading all their hourly health care obligations to a VEBA.

GM, FORD AND CHRYSLER all paid up to 2,000 employees each of certain nationalities a salary every year to do NOTHING, thats a fact.

And the jobs bank is over at all three companies.

I cannot guarantee my children lifetime maj.med. benefits for life after I die! its a fact!

I'm not sure what company does that. My healthcare benefits as the dependent of an autoworker ended when I got a job, which was when I turned 18. As far as I know, they end no matter what when dependents turn 25.

My grandfather worked for the washburn wire factory from 1917 to 1962 all union, he made 17 dollars a week, I GET IT, after his union bosses split to rio in the 60's he got nothing.. I get it , im not union bashing im just stating my opinion that they dont work!

You know I'm anti-union (sorry Pete). But this is way beyond the Union at this point.

WHAT G.M. CHRYSLER PRODUCT DO YOU WANT RIGHT NOW, BEGGING FOR?

Again, that doesn't have anything to do with legacy costs. GM builds all kinds of reasonable cars. Chrysler not so much. But the "build cars people want" argument doesn't hold much water with me when GM sold 9 million cars last year.

 

[gtjoey]

SO WE AGREE!!!!!:huge:
Ill be pres of FORD , you vice PRES, LETS BUILD THE MARKV BABY!!!!!!Then in 2 years you take over and ill just go to washington and smile:biggrin enjoy my friend...gtjoey 1314/0004 :thumbsup

 

[Cyclenirvana]

KMC, the small car market in the U.S will never be successful as long as the U.S government does not pursue any kind of energy policy. People in Europe and Asia buy small cars out of necessity, either because of prohibitively high fuel costs or overflowing urban centers that can't accommodate large cars. You can make a high content compact or subcompact for a high price and people will buy it. They have proven over and over and over that they will not do that here. Just think, a U.K Focus RS is nearly a $50k car! How big is the $50k focus market? :lol Or even $35k? Or $25k?

If we wanted to fill the coffers with cash to fix roads and fund mass transit, eliminate the issue of manufacturers constantly chasing product lineups that rely on forces out of their control, and end our dependence on foreign oil, we'd slap a dollar for dollar tax on fuel tomorrow. This has been proven the world throughout over and over.

Truck share in the U.S went down to 7-8% when gas went up to $4 a gallon. By the time it dropped back to $2 it was right back up to 15%. This cycle will never end. People in the U.S purchase vehicles rationally, and they will not buy Ford Fiestas when gas is $2.50 a gallon and they can fill up a medium sized SUV, and in turn, it makes building these cars at a reasonable profit a nightmare.

I'm Mr. Anti-Tax, but this is one I'd live with because it kills several national issues at once. Agree or disagree?

Agree completely. I hate taxes. But one area I think would be helpful is a gasoline tax. I test drove a BMW 335d a few weeks ago. I really liked it...but with the $1 extra per gallon for diesel fuel and the relative scale between diesel and gasoline, I just could not justify it. A situation more like Europe would cause all of us to rethink what we drive and how far we commute, including alternate fuels. This not only has benefits from a consumption stand-point but also benefits the environment.

Only thing I would add to DBK's post regards the cost of cars outside of the US. Most countries tax their autos (and most all purchases for that matter) with excess taxes (such at the VAT tax). This means that cars, for example, cost at least 15-20% more than in the U.S. Helps pay for what Michael Moore inappropriately calls "free" health care...but that is another topic for discussion! :biggrin

 

[djs]

A lot of factors to consider here.
Legacy costs mean a variety of things.
1. Pensioners are living a LOT longer; i.e. they're recvng benefits waaay past what actuaries estimated when these older plans were designed/implemented. I read last year that GM has over 1000 retirees over the age of 100 (that's right, the century mark), and no one ever thought that was possible.
2. Health care costs are at ridiculous rates of growth, and a large % of those costs are related to malpractice/litigation costs. If you don't believe it, as your wife's OBGYN, that is if they're still practicing.
3. Health benefits are directly responsible for exacerbating #1 because retirees have access to health care that allows them to live longer when in the past they would have already expired. Compounding this aggravation is continued health care/quality of life issues that actuaries never imagined; the 80 year old recvng a new hip or knee, the patient on his 3rd or 4th pacemaker, etc.

As far as the $1/gal tax idea, I'm all for it but for the fact I don't trust how the gov't will use it. In Illinois, for example, the State Toll way system was supposed to be paid for by 1965, and any future $$ collected was only to be used for improvements/repairs of the toll ways. Guess again. By vote of the state legislature, toll way funds manage to find their way to all sorts of other projects. Additionally, we in Illinois have another little gem, the State Lottery which was established for raising $$ for education, and education only, in IL. Ditto the toll way issue. Lotto $$ are directed/scammed wherever the Legis cares to allocate it, and the only thing that the Lotto has accomplished is growing into a number of games (daily, little lotto, etc.) that the least of our population (the have nots) can afford to use. It has replaced the Mob's numbers racket, but at what price? It's an artificial tax on those who can least afford it, and the original intent of the revenue has been lost.
I'm all for the idea of weaning the U.S. off foreign oil and the $1/gal tax might help that, if only we could control how Congress would implement it. Once something is taxed and law, I'm afraid we're ripe for exploitation.

 

[Sinovac]

If we wanted to fill the coffers with cash to fix roads and fund mass transit, eliminate the issue of manufacturers constantly chasing product lineups that rely on forces out of their control, and end our dependence on foreign oil, we'd slap a dollar for dollar tax on fuel tomorrow. This has been proven the world throughout over and over.

This is exactly right. Unfortunately, this issue is the political equivalent of the "third rail". This approach was advocated in the 1970s. Had we had the courage to do it then, our foreign policy in the Middle East (with the exception of Israel) would look no different than our current foreign policy in Africa. That is to say, we largely wouldn't give a crap because the region would hold much less strategic importance.

If we were truly serious about energy independence, we would embark on a massive building project to construct as many nuclear plants as possible. I can hardly wait for all these plug in electric vehicles to come on line-all being fed by coal fired power plants. What a great plan.

I'm no alarmist, but what I see happening in this great country disturbs me to no end. Although I have never owned a GM vehicle, I pray for their survival.

 

[dbk]

As far as the $1/gal tax idea, I'm all for it but for the fact I don't trust how the gov't will use it. In Illinois, for example....

Illinois? Political corruption? Never! :rofl

I share the same fear, but we'll fight a losing battle forever if we don't do something. Transparency in where the funds are spent would be the key issue.

 

[dbk]

This is exactly right. Unfortunately, this issue is the political equivalent of the "third rail". This approach was advocated in the 1970s. Had we had the courage to do it then, our foreign policy in the Middle East (with the exception of Israel) would look no different than our current foreign policy in Africa. That is to say, we largely wouldn't give a crap because the region would hold much less strategic importance.

If we were truly serious about energy independence, we would embark on a massive building project to construct as many nuclear plants as possible. I can hardly wait for all these plug in electric vehicles to come on line-all being fed by coal fired power plants. What a great plan.

I'm no alarmist, but what I see happening in this great country disturbs me to no end. Although I have never owned a GM vehicle, I pray for their survival.

You and me both dude. It's so insane that so many obvious solutions exist, but it's as if nobody is listening. Are people really this dumb? "We can't wait to clean up the earth and get rid of all that dirty oil...by relying on the nastiest, most horrifying source of energy there is!" What?!? All the better though, because lord knows if we built nuclear power plants they'd be guarded by $8 an hour security contractors who forgot to turn on the cameras.

We can dream though. I know the auto industry sits awake at night dreaming of the U.S Government doing so. It would take all the guess work out of the product cycle plan. And no more redundant $847k cars for the 368th Prince in line to the throne.

But you're right, it is the political radioactive bomb no politician will ever touch.

 

[KMCBOSS]

KMC, the small car market in the U.S will never be successful as long as the U.S government does not pursue any kind of energy policy. People in Europe and Asia buy small cars out of necessity, either because of prohibitively high fuel costs or overflowing urban centers that can't accommodate large cars. You can make a high content compact or subcompact for a high price and people will buy it. They have proven over and over and over that they will not do that here. Just think, a U.K Focus RS is nearly a $50k car! How big is the $50k focus market? :lol Or even $35k? Or $25k?

If we wanted to fill the coffers with cash to fix roads and fund mass transit, eliminate the issue of manufacturers constantly chasing product lineups that rely on forces out of their control, and end our dependence on foreign oil, we'd slap a dollar for dollar tax on fuel tomorrow. This has been proven the world throughout over and over.

Truck share in the U.S went down to 7-8% when gas went up to $4 a gallon. By the time it dropped back to $2 it was right back up to 15%. This cycle will never end. People in the U.S purchase vehicles rationally, and they will not buy Ford Fiestas when gas is $2.50 a gallon and they can fill up a medium sized SUV, and in turn, it makes building these cars at a reasonable profit a nightmare.

I'm Mr. Anti-Tax, but this is one I'd live with because it kills several national issues at once. Agree or disagree?

I agree - but only because I believe if Congress passed the tax hike, it would get all the dumbocrats in DC kicked out of office!

 

[gtjoey]

This is when g. , ford and chrysler were king!!!!!

I HOPE I DID THIS RIGHT.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auszi9bUr3o

For most you will cry and laugh at the same time, for some you wont understand. THIS IS WHY WE LOVED AMERICAN CARS!!!!! WAITING FOR THE NEW MODEL EVERY YEAR!!! KNOCK OFFS, SMASHING FERRARI'S INTO GATES,
ENJOY!!!!!!! Please post how you feel about cars then compared to today, there is a difference.....ENJOY!!! GTJOEY 1314/0004:thumbsup

 

[on d bit]

p.s, just for giggles I configured myself a mack daddy Focus at Ford.co.uk and it was around $38k. A $38k Focus selling as a DD in the U.S will occur someday between "freezing in hell" and "never" :lol

on every other site i visited people were complaining/whining about the new 38k taurus sho! never mind its a bigger car than the original taurus. never mind it has the tech you will see in bmw merc and lexus. never mind it has the power of a v8 with the mileage of a v6. never mind it has huge mod upside. throw that stuff out the window.

all that people could say, is that they will not pay 38k for a taurus! :eek

 

[scode]

on every other site i visited people were complaining/whining about the new 38k taurus sho! never mind its a bigger car than the original taurus. never mind it has the tech you will see in bmw merc and lexus. never mind it has the power of a v8 with the mileage of a v6. never mind it has huge mod upside. throw that stuff out the window.

all that people could say, is that they will not pay 38k for a taurus! :eek

If you adjust for inflation, that is only $200 more than the origional. Idiots:frown

 

[B O N Y]

Interesting comment On-d and S-code...

I watched the dialog on a Ferrari site, the folks that had compliments for FMC were F car owners, the folks with the trashy remarks were wet behind the ears dreamers. Your correct about critical remarks. It impacted me to the point that I hope to own one of the first SHO's.

I have recently driven several Ford loaners and they all impress me. I drove Chip Beck's Taurus and it was a well balanced machine.

Code, have to agree with you,.... except they are ****ing idiots

 

[gtjoey]

The car looks great, now if we only had a real corporate/family tax incentive to buy it , i think it would help for the masses.For me the cost isnt the issue but an american buy inc. program and a family discount somehow would put the car on the map!:thumbsupgtjoey1314/0004

 

[dbk]

on every other site i visited people were complaining/whining about the new 38k taurus sho! never mind its a bigger car than the original taurus. never mind it has the tech you will see in bmw merc and lexus. never mind it has the power of a v8 with the mileage of a v6. never mind it has huge mod upside. throw that stuff out the window.

all that people could say, is that they will not pay 38k for a taurus! :eek

That's because your average person on the internet whining is a bonhead. Plain and simple. The vast majority of people saying "Oh I'd never buy car X" are usually right, because they all drive 86 Chevy Berettas. Someone on my local muscle car board actually said "For that kind of money I'd rather have a CTS-V." Right, because $68k and $37k are in the same league.

On the same board there were some boneheads complaining that cars now were too expensive, and I actually went through the hassle of providing the following:

Cars are actually "cheaper" today than they have been in nearly 30 years.

 

[MG 42]

If we were truly serious about energy independence, we would embark on a massive building project to construct as many nuclear plants as possible. I can hardly wait for all these plug in electric vehicles to come on line-all being fed by coal fired power plants. What a great plan.

I'm no alarmist, but what I see happening in this great country disturbs me to no end. Although I have never owned a GM vehicle, I pray for their survival.

We haven’t been allowed to build nuclear power plants in years, we are dismantling some older hydro dams because of “environmental concerns”, we can’t drill for more oil, wind & solar won’t work on large scale, population increasing and yet we are told electric cars are what we should drive?

And now this:
Feb 18, 2009 "EPA is expected to act for the first time to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that scientists blame for the warming of the planet, according to top Obama administration officials.
The decision, which most likely would play out in stages over a period of months, would have a profound impact on transportation, manufacturing costs and how utilities generate power.”

We may all be riding bicycles and burning oil lamps at night before too long. We are being beaten back to the Stone Age. Survival is the word of the year.

 

[BlackICE]

We may all be riding bicycles and burning oil lamps at night before too long. We are being beaten back to the Stone Age. Survival is the word of the year.

No, you can't do that either. Breathing produces CO2 and so does using oil lamps. The only solution is for people to stop breathing. I suggest the President, his cabinet and Congress lead by example.

 

[S592R]

We may all be riding bicycles and burning oil lamps at night before too long. We are being beaten back to the Stone Age. Survival is the word of the year.

No we'll be sitting around with these things on our desks http://www.earthtechproducts.com/p2600.html
I wonder when someone is going to invent the wind up computer? Geez! :ack