Looking for a mid-size domestic car recommendation

Page 3 of 16  


they
small
That is why Toyota is building a R&D and a Development plant here in michigan. That is why they assemble and make parts here in michigan. Not just the cars. They plan to employ some some 15-30k people by time they are done with it. The number 2 automaker is apparantly reinvesting where they make their money. However, it is still a foreign company since you have to pay the foreign tax on your stock dividend. But still, I would be more apt to buy a Toyota who is building more plants and other facilities here, then a company that is looking to push more facilities out of the country. Not that I think any particular area should be strictly dependent on one industry. But now I am just babbling.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| On Sun, 15 Aug 2004, James C. Reeves wrote: | | > You can knock Chrysler off your list...Daimler owns them now (German), | > so it is no longer considered "domestic" by most. | | Perhaps not by you, but you are not "most". | | Cars built in North America of primarily North American parts are | considered "domestic" for legal purposes, regardless of whether the | nameplate says "Dodge" or "Nissan" or whatever. |
The car may be "domestic", from a legal definition, however the company that produced it is not. A larger percentage of the profits, as a general rule, leave the US on its way to the high wage salaries, R&D, design teams, etc. of the host country where the HQ is location as a result.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"James C. Reeves" wrote:

Versus a high percentage lining the pockets of fat cats in Michigan?
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
C. E. White wrote:

You got a problem with that?
--Geoff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Geoff wrote:

Yes. For instance:
"Wagoner's total 2002 compensation package reached $14.7 million in 2002, compared with $7.43 million in 2001, when the company failed to achieve financial targets, according to the company's proxy released Thursday."
Do you really think the guy running GM is worth $14.7 million dollars? I don't.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
C. E. White wrote:

I don't think it's any of my damn business what he or anyone else earns in their paycheck. His salary is the result of a deal struck between that Wagoner and his employer, and he was well-served to negotiate the best deal for himself that he could, whether you or I or anyone else thinks that he's 'worth' that or not. Obviously, if the board of directors thought he was overpaid, they'd cut his salary. If they were somehow in cahoots together and the overly large salaries were really causing actual harm to the company, the stock price would plummet as the company failed to perform. These things have not happened, so I think it is fair to conclude that Mr. Wagoner has struck a fair deal for himself with General Motors, which in case you didn't know, is currently the largest automobile manufacturer *in the world*. Would I want fourteen million dollars to live with the headache of running and being made accountable for an operation that large? You're goddamned right I would, and I think I would deserve it. Half of the freaking State of Michigan is relying upon that man to make good decisions and keep the General Motors empire -- with finances larger than many individual countries -- rolling along making a profit. *My* income depends, in part, on his making good decisions.
Do you mean to tell me that GM shouldn't reward an individual for an effort of that magnitude?
Do you mean to tell me that GM shouldn't try to attract the best and the brightest among us to positions that have that sort of responsibility?
Do you mean to tell me that GM should place that sort of responsibility in the hands of somebody who's willing to do the job cheap?
Do you mean to tell me that somehow *your own* contribution to society at large is commensurate with his, and therefore he is not deserving of his salary because *you* do not make as much?
What I would like to know is who nominated you as being the arbiter of who should get paid and how much? I would also like to know how your system of values has gotten so completely f**ked over that you think that the people who *make it possible* for half of an entire state to have good employment, homes over their heads, food in their mouths and educations for their children shouldn't get paid more than X dollars, regardless of what X happens to be. Are the people of the State of Michigan unimportant to you, because they happen to be distant from where you are? Is America's industrial economy something that is to be subject to the snivelling whims of people such as yourself who think that the fat cat CEOs are overpaid and 'there outta be a law?'! Do you think the shareholders of GM are so stupid they are willing to let Mr. Wagoner rip them off?
Thankfully, folks such as you *aren't* running the country. I can only hope that this condition persists in November.
I'll tell you one more thing while I'm at it: I don't make $14 million dollars a year. You probably don't make $14 million dollars a year either. Want to know why? Because neither one of us has the talent, drive, skill, experience, willingness and commitment that Mr. Wagoner manifests in his daily life. That's why he is WORTH $14 million a year, and you and I aren't. Period. I'm happy with what I earn. I would suggest that if you aren't happy with you earn, that you do something about it, and quit complaining about those who have risen to the top. That won't get you anywhere, and it sure as hell doesn't help anyone else either.
--Geoff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Geo. wrote:

If the world was a fair place, I wouldn't care what executives make. However, most large corporations are run like the '60 era Soviet Union. The Board of Directors are members of an exclusive club and they slap each other on the back while running their corporate empires for their personal benefit. Sometimes, a few crumbs reach the average investor, but that is usually a mistakle that is rectified in the next quarter. Board of Directories routinely reward incompetence with huge raises and sweet heart stock deals. They are little more than reverse Robin Hood Gangs - steal from the poor and give to the rich. If stock holders exercised any real control, then I could live with it. But for the most part, small investors are just gambling when they invest in the stock market. The big players (banks, mutuals, etc.) are all part of the big Casino that people think is a stock market. They make sure they (the BIG boys) get theirs and they don't give a d%^m about the little guy, except to have him feed more money into their coffers so that they can live like a Sultan. Having kept a job during the reign (and I do mean reign) of one of the greatest flim flam artist of the 20th century, I can tell you that the picture from the bottom of the food chain is a lot different than the one portrayed in the media. When you aren't allowed to buy pencils for a month, because the company must make arbitrary 3rd quarter numbers, or some other such nonsense, you know the people running the company are insane, or that they are cooking the books to make themselves look good.
Ed
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
C. E. White wrote:

Here's a big, time-saving hint, Ed: Life ain't fair. It isn't supposed to be. Get over it.
However, most large corporations are run

Oh, geeze. Here we go with the class envy.

Yep, that's why GM is in business: to rip off the little guy.
Silly me, I thought they built vehicles and provided financing.
If stock holders

Well, duh! Did you just figure this out? Of *course* it's gambling, *who* told you otherwise? Some MBA?
The big players (banks,

Guess what, Ed: everyone tries to cast their job performance in the best possible light. That is simple human nature. If you really expect otherwise, you're badly misinformed.
As far as living like a Sultan is concerned: I've got *no* argument with anybody who has the means to live in the manner they so choose. They don't bother me, and I'm quite sure I don't bother them. Most contribute *far* more than their fair share to society through their efforts and taxes, and dammit, I'm not going to be the one to try and take their chosen lifestyle away from them. I may not always agree with how they live, and I may not want to be like them, but does it hurt me that they do so? Absolutely not. I just hope they buy enough cars and computers to make for a persistent, positive upswing in the parts of the economy that concern me, and as for the rest, that's between them and their maker (if any.)
--Geoff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Agreed
maybe yes, maybe no

Right.... A car manufacturer that is unable to retain it's massive market share and is forced to go after a completely different market in order to survive. (tells one more about the banking industry than it does the auto sector)

The stock market is not supposed to be gambling. Ever heard of a prospectus? or an Audit? The people at Enron & Tyco forgot about those as well.

Hmm... If you realized how little effort many of these people at the top put in to get or retain their positions you may well change your view (perhaps time will be a patient enough educator for you) if it doesn't upset you at the moment because you do not feel affect feel blessed. However don't forget another place and time ("let them eat cake") where there was a similar massive class divide. ("Petite Bourgeois") which was followed by a change in the economic structure & the ensuing "removal of the heads" of various establishments.
The people of France suffered quite badly, the elite's only suffered very briefly whilst their heads were removed.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. We should be striving for a Meritocracy not a return to Feudal rule under any other name.
PS this isn't intended as a personal attack, merely a critique of your points.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Full_Name wrote:

Look, the world changed in the 1970s, and America's borders started to open up. You expected GM to retain the market share it had in the 1960s when there was virtually NO foreign competition worth mentioning?

Like I said before, what they make and what they do to get it is none of my damn business, and I think it ought to be viewed as same by everyone else. That said, I posited some *really good* reasons why the people on top make the money they do. Debate those, whydontcha?
However don't forget another place and time ("let them eat

Good Lord, 'class divide'? Horsepucky. The 'class divide' is being manufactured by the American Left. It's a complete fabrication!
Everyone else seems to realize that you get what you want in this country through creativity, dedication and effort.

There's no danger of a return to feudalism in America. And I tire quickly of comparisons between (socialist) Europe and the United States. Of course Europe's economy sucks and the U.S. people get paid better and have a higher standard of living. This comes as a surprise to you?
Europe's problem is that it has been seduced by socialism and leftist policy. Things will get far, far worse there before they improve.

I appreciate the distinction.
--Geoff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I don't know how it works in the US but in the UK there is often little connection between top executive pay and share-price performance. To think that a plummeting stock-price always results in overpaid execs getting pay cuts is a pipe dream. It's become an issue in the UK and, indeed, the CEO of GlaxoSmithKline (world's second-largest pharma company, an Anglo-American corporation) was recently forced to take an emoluments cut because of a shareholder revolt.
It may not be my business what a specific CEO gets if I am not a shareholder, but it CAN BE viewed as a social issue. To think that remuneration committees and executives are not in a back-scratching society is naivety. In Europe many executives from, e.g. German and Dutch financial institutions were shocked at the salaries in the Anglo-Saxon companies they acquired in London. In fact, it has been rumoured that one reason that Daimler-Benz was so keen to get involved in the USA and be listed on the NYSE was so that its CEO (Juergen Schrempp) could have a vastly-inflated US-level salary.
Sorry, but NO person is worth a salary of 14 million dollars a year to run even GM. Bill Gates and Steve Balmer are 'worth' their zillions because they are owners/shareholders of a cash-manufacturing machine they started, and good luck to them. Does anybody honestly believe that a GM CEO would do the job less well if paid a quarter of the present salary??? People at that level do that job for many reasons, including power.
DAS
--
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Geoff wrote:

Ah. Everyone ought to think just like you do. Understood.

Sure. So then there's no such thing as Americans who lack access to basic healthcare, for instance?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Geoff wrote: | | > what they make and what they do to get it is none of my damn business, | > and I think it ought to be viewed as same by everyone else. | | Ah. Everyone ought to think just like you do. Understood. | | > Good Lord, 'class divide'? Horsepucky. The 'class divide' is being | > manufactured by the American Left. It's a complete fabrication! | | Sure. So then there's no such thing as Americans who lack access to basic | healthcare, for instance? |
Those that I know (including some family members) that don't have health insurance is because they don't want to pay for it. They can easily afford it and they simply choose not to get it. "Access" is truly not the problem some politicians claim. Everyone can buy health insurance here in the states if they choose to...it is available.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
James C. Reeves wrote:

Hi...
Yup. The thousands of homeless americans should just run right out and buy it.
Ken
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| > | On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, Geoff wrote: | > | | > | > what they make and what they do to get it is none of my damn business, | > | > and I think it ought to be viewed as same by everyone else. | > | | > | Ah. Everyone ought to think just like you do. Understood. | > | | > | > Good Lord, 'class divide'? Horsepucky. The 'class divide' is being | > | > manufactured by the American Left. It's a complete fabrication! | > | | > | Sure. So then there's no such thing as Americans who lack access to basic | > | healthcare, for instance? | > | | > | > Those that I know (including some family members) that don't have health | > insurance is because they don't want to pay for it. They can easily afford it | > and they simply choose not to get it. "Access" is truly not the problem some | > politicians claim. Everyone can buy health insurance here in the states if | > they choose to...it is available. | > | | Hi... | | Yup. The thousands of homeless americans should just | run right out and buy it. | | Ken |
Those people likely have bigger problems than health insurance...like why they aren't taking advantage of available social services that would remedy the situation you describe. That is available also. At some point one has to decide to help themselves.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Unfortuantely those programs do not have the funds to handle the need. The money is going to Iraq.

business,
being
basic
health
afford
problem
states if

they
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| Unfortuantely those programs do not have the funds to handle the need. The | money is going to Iraq. |
No, the funds are there for those that seek it. Site a source that has documented that large numbers of people are being turned down their request for aid for lack of funds. Usually they're turned down because they won't meet the conditions for the aid (things like submit job applications).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

business,
basic
afford it

some
if
The homeless americans can get a J-O-B. I know its a rough situation here for some people. I know I am in one myself. But there are jobs. Truth is a lot of homeless people don't want to do anything. Thus if you don't want to work for it, you shouldn't get it. This isn't a vacation.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dunno what's it's like in the US but in the UK quite a few homeless are mentally ill and need looking after and not instructions from warm and comfortable people on high to get a job. They're on the streets because the government closed many mental institutions and tipped the inmates into "Care in the Community", a well-meaning move that assumed these people had relatives who would take of them.
How many homeless have you spoken to or read about?
DAS
--
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Exactly true in the US too plus there are plenty of working homeless.

to
here
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.