"Top poster - full quoter". Kind of has a ring to it.
I think a good country music writer could make a song out of that. No - come to think of it, Al Yankovic. I think it would fit one of Tom Petty's or the Eagles' songs, but I can't think of the name of it.
So.... Motor Trend is using the same logic as Rush Limbaugh now? (Who blames the Democratic **minority** in congress 1998-2006, Bill Clinton, and Jimmy Carter for our current economic woes?)
Despite the admiration I have for him generally, Iacocca didn't do well the last few years. Hanging onto the K platform for one more encore as an imitation big car (Dynasty/New Yorker) was a terrible mistake.
OK, then that disproves your point about how Chrysler wanted to be involved.
Time. As you observe above, they took their money out of Mitsubishi. And they sold their share of Diamond-Star. They were pulling out and Mercedes got them involved again.
I ***agree*** a car named "Colt" was sold later. I ***disagree*** the car named "Colt" sold after the Omni/Horizon introduction was in the same market segment as the Omni/Horizon. See above... "cut out Mitsubshi in that size class".
For example 77 Colt at a 92 inch wheelbase, 78 Horizon at 99 inches.
Think the Plymouth Champ style Colt. Remember the one with the twin stick trans?
It doesn't make sense that the guys who pulled away, who built their own cars and own engines for segments where they previously bought from Mitsubishi, and made money doing it, wanted to become mere vehicle distributors again.
You don't know Nissan would have done well under Schrempp. Gee, he might have turned all the Nissan cars into wagons and all the Infinitis into trucks!
Somebody's opinion that doesn't match up with the facts I see.
Uh, Lloyd, that's the point. Decisions to do these things were with Mercedes in charge.
Oh, and the Caliber... I checked a friend's today and the VIN starts with a 1, which I've only seen on US assembly of big three cars (Toyota, Nissan, etc NA assembly get a 4 first in the VIN) and the door decal says manufactured by Daimler Chrysler. So are you sure of the origin of this car?
Ed - All you have to do to understand the collapse of the mortgage/banking industry is trace the history of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) - started - yes - with Carter, strengthened by Clinton, and then the lack of oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (you've no-doubt seen the youtube video of those embarrassing hearings ("lynchings", etc.), and know of Franklin Raines (Obama campaign financial adviser), taking 90 million - $90,000,000.00 - dollars in personal bonuses by cooking Fannie Mae's books at critical times to trigger said bonuses while he was its CEO?).
Chrysler's situation aside (you injected the wider politics into your post), it is dishonest to deny that very real history and how it was more than a butterfly wing flutter that triggered what we are seeing.
They all were a factor. I think there are idiots that think rules about finances are arbitrary and aren't real - and a lot of those idiots are in our government. As the saying goes, reality is a bitch. We shall see in the not-too-distant future if any lessons have been learned. My fear is that the answer to that is 'no'.
I agree with Rush L. about almost everything. One thing I have always disagreed with him on is that there's no need to worry about the deficit
- he's always maintained that it doesn't mean anything. (well that, and I also drink filtered tap water)
How? It was the Chrysler folks who argued that DC should invest in Mitsu and not Nissan.
No, it was the Chrysler execs who argued for getting involved with Mitsu again.
Yes. Bigger than Fiesta.
They felt using Mitsu to develop small-car platforms was what they needed. Plus, they felt a presence in Asia was needed. The Mercedes folks favored a tie-in with Nissan, but the Chrysler folks favored one with Mitsu.
Some expert's objective opinion. You are hardly either an expert or objective.
And again, I remind you, it was the Chrysler folks who convinced DC to go with Mitsu.
The platform was developed by Mitsu. It's made in a Chrysler plant. Just like the Ford Taurus uses a platform Volvo helped develop, but it's made in a Ford plant. It's not a Mitsu car; it uses a Mitsu platform. You can really do a little research and find this out.
Please consider that many of Rush's views are single solutions to single problems that don't consider the other effects of the solution.
I had a conversation with a former co worker about Rush's proposal that Repubs should vote in Dem primaries and vote for Clinton. After a few exchanges, I said "Well people who do that must be convinced their guy, McCain, is going to lose the general election, so getting Clinton as President would in their view be the lesser of two evils".
Answer was "Oh, no, McCain's going to win". So I said "If that's true then Repubs voting in the Dem primariy doesn't matter. So why do it?". .
Well, he had no answer to that. But he went away convinced I was wrong without being able to say why.
What? Those chemicals in unfiltered water don't hurt you!
Yea, I never did convince my self described radical conservative friend that wars aren't good for the economy. He frequently said wars are good for the economy.
Course, his answer to any economic woe was that "we have the most guns".
Many people are so sick of Bush they don't even want to bother blaming him. They just want him gone. Note that his "regret" over the poor intelligence that lead to the war in Iraq was a ho hum event. Yet you'd think that Bush coming close to admitting error would be big news and people would just love to poke at him over it. Yet it was nothing.
I wonder if he's going to pardon himself before he leaves.
Well, in corporate finance as well as in the economy, decisions made 20 years ago DO come to fruition today.
One of his many mistakes. He did a great job of saving the company. Once it was healthy, he should have stepped aside and allowed the engineers to create and be competitive again, rather than hanging onto a survive on a shoestring mentality.
You read my reply without any idea what I was replying to?
Where it would have made no sense. In order to comprehend the reply you had to know what it was a reply to. Even you had to figure out that it was in reply to what you had said. Someone else reading my post without having first read yours would have no idea what was going on.
It has nothing to do with attitude. It has to do with presenting parts of an ongoing conversation in a comprehendable manner. Unless, that is, you are concinced tht only your contribution matters. Then you may as well snip everything and just post your comment.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.