GM spent a lot of money to "buy up and destroy mass transit"

The automobile did not come to dominate American transportation by chance or by public choice. It happened as part of a plan by auto makers to buy up and destroy mass transit companies. General Motors
led the way.
As recently as the 1920s, many American cities and towns were connected by a network of electric railroads and interurban trolleys. Within cities, electric street railways, trolleys, and elevated trains, moved large numbers of people easily and cheaply, with minimal congestion and pollution.
But steel-wheeled electric/rail mass transit systems did not serve the needs of the automobile manufacturers and their allies in the steel, rubber, glass, concrete, and oil industries.
http://www.ejnet.org/rachel/rehw439.htm
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"as reciently as the 1920s".... how are you viewing time, by milleniea ?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Gee, another conspiracy theory aimed at GM. In this group. Imagine that!

Nice job. Killing two birds with one stone. Traffic jams AND pollution are GM's fault.
Hillarious, but the best is yet to come.

My guess is, (but whom am I to question the author of this article???????), the "steel-wheeled electric/rail trasit system did not serve the needs of the AMERICAN CONSUMER, who wanted the freedom to move WHERE and WHEN he wanted, which public transit, of course could never provide.
Then, of course, there is the small matter of privacy one has in his own auto as opposed to being squeezed like sardines in public transit..............................

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gee, another conspiracy theory aimed at GM. In this group. Imagine that!
********* GM officials have admitted that some of its practices are close to conspiracies. In particular, they admitted that they had intentionally made cars, the desirability of which, decreased rather rapidly with age. (Some call this "planned obsolescence", and that is a good a name as any.)
Wasnt the phrase "If it is good for General Motors, it is good for the country" another hint at their intent to manipulate the market area?
No giant company willingly lets a market change to its detriment, if it can help it. NONE
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message news:f53acd93-4f60-

Do you have a cite for this?

Whether it happened or not, it was the 1920's. What next, blame GM for us all having cars instead of horse-drawn carriages?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I believe it was Bob Lutz who made a statement tantamount to the above. It should be easy to find.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

Please do, because I've had no luck thus far.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Here is a brief clip. I heard and saw Lutz on TV accept some responsibility for the attitudes that caused them to behave as they did. I respected him greatly for it, because without introspection, identification of problems, and a positive path to resolve them, nothing is ever done.
"In an interview heard on All Things Considered on NPR Friday, Lutz told host Robert Siegel that, "We took our eyes off the ball in the '70s, '80s and early '90s," when it came to product quality........"
Maybe you can find the rest of this if you are interested.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Admitting they had quality issues, and admitting they built cars to purposely fall apart in a few years are two totally different things.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message>>

I think that if you find the text I was referring to, you will see that he was suggesting there were more than just a few quality issues.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No it wasn't. I get particularly upset when people take something like a very old expression, made in a certain context, and reapply it with a totally different motive attached. The phrase is worth researching a bit, to discover who made it, when and why. It was indeed a true statement at the time, much like John Lennon's infamous statement was true, albeit grossly misunderstood. GM was one of the biggest, if not the biggest employer at the time and the health of GM directly reflected the health of the American economy.

Nor do even small companies, if they can do anything to budge the market at all. What is the problem with that?
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@windstream.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually, it is consumer choice. Now that I take a train to work, I can tell you it is a garbage way to travel, second only to airlines+security. Morning isn't so bad, people are freshly showered and some sleep in. But on the way home, you can tell the Mexcian had refried beans and FDS seems like a nicer smell.
If my employer had parking for me, I would ditch the train. It is fourth class travel.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Worse than buses?

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.