Built like a Mercedes (?)

Page 7 of 17  
wrote:


It is not a poor argument. You still read top down and left to right. The fact is that logic flows in a logical direction, not from point to point. When people top post, 99% of the time nobody has any clue what they are replying to, as the point they are addressing could be anywhere in the OP.
************************* Dave
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Because he suffers from the "I-wanna-be-the-moderator" Syndrome. Sure, Usenet rules suggest bottom posting, but then those rules have never been brought up to modern Internet standards. Way back when, bottom posting was fine because modem speeds limiting the size of threads . . it took much longer to post a huge reply, so you kept things brief.
Now, with cable DSL, for example, top posting makes sense so you get to the reply much faster.
Of course, the other Usenet rules rarely gets used, the one about trimming posts as topics evolve.
Budd
Tom Lawrence wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Budd Cochran wrote:

What ridiculous nonsense.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
And there is no such thing as cable DSL.
--
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving
"Pooh Bear" < snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yes, you are, but I wasn't going to comment about it first..
Budd
Pooh Bear wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Or changing the subject of the thread. Oh, right - it's still on topic. The Mercedes is built in the same way as the majority of these posts

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Lawrence wrote:

OK serious answer: It's todo with mixing quotes and replies, which can be very effective.
--
> Someone says something.

I reply to this statement.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Budd Cochran wrote:

That's put me off Jaguar, Volvo, Saab, Land Rover, Ford, Vauxhall, and all the other American owned brands we buy in Europe then. F*** 'um foreign things. We'll buy European domestic products like Renault, Fiat and Peugeot instead.
But wait, how does nationalism and protectionism help all those American Ford and GM brands? Oh it doesn't, it guarantees even bigger losses for them. Perhaps Americans only believe in free trade when the going is good for them? Yes that is probably it.
Fact is, there is only one way to stem those losses at Ford and GM and that is for them to become more efficient and trade their way out. It can be done. Just look at the example of Nissan which under French management has been transformed from imminent bancruptcy to a modern success story in less than ten years.
There is nothing magical about Japanese or German industry. Just look at the present debacle at Mitsubishi which Daimler/Chrysler could not turn around.
If you want a global recession where you are absolutely guaranteed to have fewer sales and total business failures then certainly go protectionist. If you want continued relitive prosperity and employment then become competitive and grow your economy. There is no stopping China and other major competitors becoming more prosperous because they are coming around to the American way of doing business. If enough trade is done both ways then both economies win. Obviously America has more to lose and China has more to win but what you need is a win/win situation. It is inevitable though that China will become a stronger economy than the USA in the medium term.
Huw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
None of what you are saying makes much sense. Evidence of this is your claim that you'd buy Fiat, Peugot and Renault. Great, patronize your government by purchasing known inferior cars. Meanwhile, you extoll the virtues of a free market economy. Sorta hypocritical to throw government owned business in at the top of the diatribe, then revert to free market, and THEN claim the U.S. doesn't like a free market.
Not making sense to you? Great, neither does your essay.
--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Max Dodge wrote:

None of those are British and none are actually inferior. GM has just had to pay a huge sum to Fiat to get out of a contract it could not afford. Have you any experience of those cars? Millions of satisfied customers run them and I have just bought my first Fiat recently to go with my year old Range Rover and eight year old Land Cruiser. I am very satisfied with all of them.
Meanwhile, you

Fiat is a family owned business and neither of the others are government owned so I am not sure what you are on about.
then

Did I say that? No. But it is evident that some posters here do not wish it to be a free market when they are less competitive, only when they come out top. Rather hypocritical don't you think? The US government is sticking to free market principles in this case [they don't always, thinking of steel] but it is a few posters here that are arguing that they should put up the shutters. I am saying that it will do them more harm than good.

Then you have a problem. Are you a street sweeper or the office coffee maker by any chance?
Huw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Oh, I dunno...Fiat reliability/rust resistance is still not great (otherwise I might own an Alfa Romeo, which I try to rent when in Italy) and in Britain the French cars tend to cluster low down in the satisfaction stakes though some, e.g. Renault, do well in the EuroNCAP tests.
(Admittedly Fiat produces some funky cars...and, of course, owns Ferrari...)
I guess Renault could be considered private as the French govt only owns about 16%.
DAS
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
--
"Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news: snipped-for-privacy@individual.net...
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dori A Schmetterling wrote:

I can't see why their reliability is not as good as any. Rust resistance is OK and they use as many galvanised panels and have as good a warranty as anyone. Rust was a particular problem when scrap metal had to be incorporated in sheet steel and was a particular problem in Italian, French and Japanese cars of a period up to the early 90's.
and in Britain the French cars tend to cluster low down in the

Italian engineering has always been absolutely top notch although their electrics have not always been even adequate. This has changed markedly over the last fifteen years. I own several pieces of sophisticated electronically controlled industrial units built in Italy from the early 90's and they are rust resistant and I have never had a single electronic problem from their engine management, full electronic transmission management or chassis management systems alone or their comunication with each other. Admittedly mid 80's models with far less sophistication had a reputation for wiring loom fires but time moves on.

Certainly it is private with a minority shareholder which happens to be a Govt investor. EU rules on competition prevent any unfair investment though.
Huw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It is interesting that in my field (pharmaceutical process machinery) that there are some very nicely-designed Italian machines but I have heard some negative comments about the quality. Also in one case, the technology is rather peculiar for the purpose (and they don't sell many, even in Italy).
On the other hand, certain lock and automatic gates mechanisms are dominated by Italian companies, and good they are, too. I am thinking of CISA and FAAC (or whatever it's called).
DAS
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
--
"Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news: snipped-for-privacy@individual.net...
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Fiat was owned by the Italian governement, likewise Renault by the French. Using either as an example of free market business is moot. I do have experience with these cars in the States. Fiat was generally not able to take the pounding of distance driving, Renault was impossible to fix due to propriatary and (French) governmental restrictions on parts, and Peugot simply weren't numerous enough to bother with.

False. Both Fiat and Renault were owned at some point by the governemnts of their respective origin.

Not at all. I am very pleased with the position in which DC has placed itself, particularly the Chrysler division. It is notable that DC and Chrysler in particular are well off financially, doing more business than previous years, and having a better balanced line of product. This is not a coincidence. Further, I am not complaining about free market economy, nor am I complaining about "foreign" vehicles cruising our highways. Indeed, I believe competition makes for a better vehicle.
However, as I stated in my original reply, the OP wasn't worried about company profit or quality, but the fact that DC vehicles were heavy, and thus less efficient than other brands. Somehow, even though I pointed it out, you missed that in the original post.

No argument here. However their reply isn't particularly about the companies, but the welfare of the nation as a whole.

The problem is obviously on your end, where you think that such jobs would render someone unable to see through your inept reply.
--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Max Dodge wrote:

Fiat is owned by the Agnelli family and it is almost bigger than the Italian state. It owns many mutinational brands like CaseNewHolland [CNH] which have a big US presence.
likewise Renault by the

The French government have no more than a 16% shareholding in Renault while Renault has a substantial holding in Nissan.
Using either as an example of free market business is moot. I

Very few US cars can cut it in Europe either. Only Chrysler/Jeep really have any presence here. Others have tried and failed due to poor quality and dynamics. Chrysler is controlled by German Daimler anyhow. Oh yes and BMW X5 and Mercedes M are American built and sell in considerable numbers here but they are hardly representative of the rest of the crap produced. In any case the build quality of my MClass was appaling and worse than any European car I have had since a Ford Fiesta of 1977. Actually my particular M was assembled in Austria and was better built than most of the petrol American built ones. Apparently the new models are much improved in all respects.

Well that is a symptom of a socialist phase that Europe went through. It is a historical anachronism which has not been true for many years. Fiat has recently been in financial trouble but nothing like the problems at Ford and GM. In fact GM had a contract to buy Fiat which they had to buy themselves out of last year. It is part of the reason GM are in the pickle they are in. There is much cross polination between the brands and Fiat supply many diesel engines to GM Europe while they now build a small car to be branded as a Ford as well as a Fiat. Fiat also build cars and supply engines for Suzuki of Japan.

Most cars are built heavier due to the equipment fitted and improved safety standards. The Mercedes brand has always made heavier cars than BMW for instance but it is all relitive. Their small cars are lighter than their big cars while a variety of engines are available for each model. If lightness is your thing, they produce the Smart car which is as small and light as anyone could wish.

The welfare of the nation is tied absolutely to the profitability, success and expansion of its companies. Not of a particular company but of all the companies that employ the population that makes a nation.

Then it is an indictment of your promotion system that you may have or have not got higher up the ladder I believe. Or it may be an indictment of the effort you put into your job. Any way it does not look good.
Huw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

My point remains, and is substanciated by your statement. Your examples are poor representation of free market philosophy.

Well, once again, you've missed the point of the original post. This was one of efficiency, and the effect on oil consumption.

Not entirely true. There are many other factors, including employment rate (related to how much is imported instead of manufactured here), inflation (cost of living versus income), and management of the companies. One of the factors that makes a company more succesful and able to expand is to raise its market share. Cuting imports is one thing that would allow for that. Thus, eliminating that possibility, as you suggest, means one advantage is stripped from the manufacturer. We can debate the merits ad infinitum, but to regard it as wholly a negative action forgets the overall picture. In DC's case, such a move might be positive, as Mercedes isn't that big a market share, while Chrysler is, thus, Chrysler would profit from such a move, while Mercedes would not be substancially harmed. Result: DC makes more money.

False. It reeks of your inability to understand that such jobs may be held by people of intellegence who have to start somewhere on the ladder of success. Where better than the bottom to understand completely what makes a business tick? Of course, if you prefer the "Peter Principle", that would explain your attitude and lack of respect for those working "beneath" you.
--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Max Dodge wrote:

How far back in history do you want to go? What happened some thirty years or more ago is hardly relevant to now or even the relevant past. It is certainly not relevant to what is happening to Delphi, GM and Ford today. Unless you think the US govt will buy GM and it is a good idea. The British socialist Govt just let privately owned MG/Rover go bust and that too was a nationalised industry at some point in the past. As indeed was Ford owned Land Rover and Jaguar.

I think you will find that Mercedes cars with moderate engines are much more efficient and economical today than they were ten to twenty years ago depite gaining weight. Yes they could be even more economical but that is mainly in the hands of the consumer who can downsize vehicle and engines and even use diesel for significantly increased efficiency.

People earn what they are worth on the whole. Not always of course. If a high flier with aptitude spends more than a few days cleaning then management needs improving.
Huw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

False. In fact, labor unions (which are a 1920-30 phenomenom) are a reason for the high cost of cars today. Thus, 60 and 70 years ago events took place that affect how things work today. If you are ignorant enough to think that something that happened on a large scale 30 years ago is irrelevant today, you have lost the lesson of history. In fact, this is one case where management was inefficient but the labor WAS efficient, as we now have a glut of SUV's and poor planning on management's part.

You are barely catching up. This isn't about Mercedes becoming more efficient over time. The point was that heavier cars use more fuel.

I see you think all things work perfectly. If such a person were promoted into an already functioning management, exactly what position would they take that would make the management more efficient? Perhaps the reason such a person is not promoted is that the management is already working well, and no room to promote exists. Need I remind you that efficient management takes stock of all possibilities, such as who gets sacked in order to promote the kid at the coffee machine?
--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Max Dodge wrote:

Curious then that where cars do take a real pouding such as in India, the locally made Padmini is a Fiat dericative and in many Middle Eastern and African countries that Peugeots stand up well to the task.
Graham
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Perhaps you think that is a real pounding, but reality tells me that use in the States can be very harsh to a car that isn't designed here in the States. Like it or not, each region has its own design characteristics. Stuff designed outside the states tends to be less than up to the task here in the States. I hate to say it, but americans in general tend to be heavier than other humans. Thus cars take more abuse. Part of that is because we drive longer distances, as we don't have the rail system, nor the same lifestyle as Europe or the middle east. Another factor in those distances is the fact that we don't have restrictive borders as frequently as other regions do, thus we drive farther more frequently. Add to this that our fuel has traditionally been cheaper, and you have yet another reason we drive a lot. I have yet to see a pick up truck from Japan deal with the loads we dump on our pickups. This decade may see that opinion change in the half ton market.
--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.