Obama: a strong gvt hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more evenly

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

"Globalization and technology and automation all weaken the position of workers," he said, and a strong government hand is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably.

He also would fund an "infrastructure reinvestment bank" that would finance $60 billion in high-speed railways, improved energy grids and other projects over a decade. He would double spending on basic research, subsidize investment in high-speed Internet hook-ups, and offer $4,000 a year in tuition credits for students who later perform public services.

To "capture some of the nation's economic growth," he said in the interview, "and reinvest it in things we know have to be done like science, technology, research and fixing our energy policy, then that is actually going to spur productivity."

Sen. McCain argues for as little government spending as possible and paints his opponent as a liberal who would tax more, spend more and drive the country into deficit. He backs a cap-and-trade system that would be used to fund energy technology, but Mr. Holtz-Eakin said the scale would be far smaller than the Obama plan. And, Mr. Holtz-Eakin said, a "green technology fund is plain silly. Silicon Valley has piles of money devoted to clean technology."

Sen. Obama made the case in the interview for large-scale government intervention in the energy market, saying that although venture funds are investing heavily in energy technology, there was a gap in funding that should be filled by Washington. He called it supporting the "middle stage" between innovation and commercialization. "You have this point in time when things haven't quite taken off yet and still entail huge risks," he said.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121366164848479237.html?mod=hps_us_whats_news

Cliff notes: technology bad, socialism good.

This guy scares the hell out of me.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I'm all for people making lots of money but what disturbs me is when a CEO gets 400 million dollars and the employees are stuck with their 2.5% annual merit increase... Why don't these executives accept 300 million and allow for the other 100 million to reward the people who actually did the work?

I am all for this type of redistribution of wealth..

[101A]

"Globalization and technology and automation all weaken the position of workers", is a truism.

The next quote is just a liberal being honest about what they think. It IS scary. "Strong Hand" does provide a more clear representation of what onerous taxation, and wealth redistribution is. It is taking forcibly. It is legalized theft.

[101A]

I'm all for people making lots of money but what disturbs me is when a CEO gets 400 million dollars and the employees are stuck with their 2.5% annual merit increase... Why don't these executives accept 300 million and allow for the other 100 million to reward the people who actually did the work?

CEO's don't work? They don't have skills? Board members and stock holders pay them those outrageous salaries (btw, please link the CEO that gets that kind of bling as salary) because they are nice - or because they make the stockholders more money?

Do you have a problem with what Duncan makes, or Tom Cruise? What about CEO/Owners? Can they reap the rewards of their OWN company's success?

And aren't we only talking about a very small handful of people here? In your mind, who all do you lump into the class of "CEO's making 400 million dollars"? If there ARE any of those in this country, I bet there are not more than a dozen. Why are you so worked up over such a small number of people?

[101A]

I am all for this type of redistribution of wealth..

Also, you DO know that the redistribution of wealth is based on income alone, right? Not job title.

[ChumpDumper]

CEO's don't work? They don't have skills? Board members and stock holders pay them those outrageous salaries (btw, please link the CEO that gets that kind of bling as salary) because they are nice - or because they make the stockholders more money?They get paid whether they make stockholders money or not.

Why is the CEO salary so much higher relative to the average worker than it was in the 50s?

Did CEOs work several hundred times less back then?

[101A]

They get paid whether they make stockholders money or not.

Why is the CEO salary so much higher relative to the average worker than it was in the 50s?


Because the job is more complex now; and there are fewer people relatively who have the skills to succeed, and make a company succeed than there were in the '50's, would be my guess. There are "star" CEO's that the boards want, and, as free agents, they get what the market will pay them. Look at star head coaches and what they make versus their assistants. The average "job", and what is demanded from it, however, has changed very little. Not to mention, with the introduction of millions of women into the work force, the number of people able to perform that job has grown considerably; thus lowering the price necessary to have that average job perfomred.

[101A]

They get paid whether they make stockholders money or not.


Sorry, didn't respond to this before.

Yeah, but like any other employee who doesn't do a good job, they get fired - and then it's that much harder to get the next job.

[ChumpDumper]

The average "job", and what is demanded from it, however, has changed very little.:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

Sorry, didn't respond to this before.

Yeah, but like any other employee who doesn't do a good job, they get fired - and then it's that much harder to get the next job.They get paid more when they get fired -- so much that they don't have to work another day in their lives.

[101A]

:lmao

Typical.

Actually, I was wrong, the jobs are probably less strenuous and taxing, what with the technology available.

[ChumpDumper]

Typical.

Actually, I was wrong, the jobs are probably less strenuous and taxing, what with the technology available.:lmao :lmao

It's the CEOs who do all the work!

[101A]

:lmao :lmao

It's the CEOs who do all the work!

Typical, again.

Do you ever ACTUALLY engage in conversation. Are you capable of it?

[ChumpDumper]

Why should I?

You have proven your point quite well.

Workers don't work. CEOs are the real workers.

[MannyIsGod]

101 - I don't even disagree with much of what you're arguing but the way you phrased it is so LOL that I don't even know what to say.

I don't like Obama's stance on Economics either. I think he's incorrect on a lot of things. I also don't think that a vital role of the presidency is to declare economic policy beyond what work they do on a budget even even then Congress has more to do with it. Congress is where you should look for a better direction of economic policy.

If people want to vote their president based on Economic policy then Obama is not their candidate.

[xrayzebra]

I'm all for people making lots of money but what disturbs me is when a CEO gets 400 million dollars and the employees are stuck with their 2.5% annual merit increase... Why don't these executives accept 300 million and allow for the other 100 million to reward the people who actually did the work?

I am all for this type of redistribution of wealth..

Do you feel that way about Hollywood. You know they actors getting filthy rich and the cameramen, carpenters and whatnot getting jack. Or how bout that damn Tiger he got 1 mil 3 for a weeks work and the groundskeepers got jack. on and on and on. Oh, and Tiger gets about 2-3 hundred million a year for endorsements and the makers get beans. on and on and on. And Obama made his whole salary for the Senate and only showing up sometimes.....on and on and on

[ChumpDumper]

Sorry, didn't respond to this before.

Yeah, but like any other employee who doesn't do a good job, they get fired - and then it's that much harder to get the next job.Let's see, GM lost $39 billion last year and saw its stock drop 19%.

What do you think happened to the CEO?

He got a 64% raise.

It makes perfect sense, doesn't it?

[JohnnyMarzetti]

I see repugs are real nervous that their candidate is going to get trounced.

[xrayzebra]

Let's see, GM lost $39 billion last year and saw its stock drop 19%.

What do you think happened to the CEO?

He got a 64% raise.

It makes perfect sense, doesn't it?

Ah, and all the Chairman of the Senate Banking Committe got was lower points. Really not fair, is it.

[ChumpDumper]

What a horrible attempt to change the subject, even for you.

[T Park]

I see repugs are real nervous that their candidate is going to get trounced.

No Im nervous about my country turning to socialism.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I see repugs are real nervous that their candidate is going to get trounced.

Actually I could care less about my 'candidate', but the USA turning into the USSA scares the shit out of me for the future of America.

Oh, and I agree with the tangent that CEOs get too much relative to their workers, that's bullshit. But Obama's talking about basically hitting anyone who actually has a decent job and taking more of their wages.

As it is I'm still paying for my college financial aid debt, I'd rather not have him get elected and decide I need to be paying for the lazy fucks in this country who won't get off their ass and get a job.

[MannyIsGod]

No Im nervous about my country turning to socialism.

:lol

This is funny.

[MannyIsGod]

Actually I could care less about my 'candidate', but the USA turning into the USSA scares the shit out of me for the future of America.

Oh, and I agree with the tangent that CEOs get too much relative to their workers, that's bullshit. But Obama's talking about basically hitting anyone who actually has a decent job and taking more of their wages.

As it is I'm still paying for my college financial aid debt, I'd rather not have him get elected and decide I need to be paying for the lazy fucks in this country who won't get off their ass and get a job.

One word: Congress

And if democrats control congress and get the presidency like it looks like will happen this fall, you have only yourself and other conservatives to blame. The absolute disaster that was the Bush administration is about to reap what it sowed.

[xrayzebra]

:lol

This is funny.

Yeah, really hilarious. Just a really great day for all of America. Read on court jester.

FOXNews.com
Be Careful What You Wish For, Congress

Wednesday, June 18, 2008
By Neil Cavuto



Well it seems like House Democrats have found a president they can believe in.

Not Barack Obama, who wants the job.

And certainly not George Bush, who has the job.

But Hugo Chavez, who as far as I know, doesn't qualify for the job.

But Chavez qualifies for something else. Something Democrats have increasingly been demanding in the United Sates. Something Chavez has been doing in Venezuela.

Nationalizing the oil companies.

Specifically, some House Democrats want to nationalize oil refineries. This way the government could better control the flow of the oil supply.

Marvelous. So they're opposed to more drilling.

But not opposed to more government.

Shocking. Please cue a FOX News Alert.

And given the government's impeccable record taking over so many aspects of our lives, why shouldn't it just take over our oil refineries.

That government lockbox has done wonders to shore up social security.

Trillions spent on the war on poverty, and still a lot of poverty.

And who better to lecture an industry on properly spending money than a government that can't keep track of its own?

Given their scrupulous attention to financial detail and cost controls, who better to police gas gouging than the very folks who perfected tax gouging?

So that's their response. Let the government handle it.

That's like me guarding a bake shop to make sure someone doesn't steal the cannolis. News flash! Not wise.

Just like this isn't wise. Because be careful what you wish for, Congress.

When you own the refineries, you own them — lock, stock, and eye-popping barrel.

Because when you own the refineries, you're responsible for the refining.

And the costs of that refining, and maintaining, and distributing, and supplying, and trading.

But I guess if Hugo Chavez can do it, why shouldn't you?

Never mind he's just a petty dictator.

You're just petty politicians, who'd sooner sign onto the wisdom of a tyrant in another country, than the demands of ticked off voters in your own.

[ChumpDumper]

^ That's a lot of bandwidth to dedicate to something that will never happen.

[boutons_]

socialism in USA is as real as WMD in Iraq.

Right-wingers are dumb-as-shit suckers for any old right-wing talking points and scare-mongering.

Without govt intervention, the predatory corps and capitalists would "free-market-ly" fuck us all over.

eg, the health care system, the food system (Monsanto monopolizing seed patents and selling GM seeds that don't produce seeds), BigPharma, etc, etc.

[Wild Cobra]

Automation is a good thing. It allows products to be made cheaper. Yes, there is less need for jobs. However, when items are made cheaper, people have more money to grow other industries. The job market is flexible and stays intact.

I have about 11 years of experience as a technician on various automation equipment. Even as it gets more reliable and produces more, I have been displaced in the job market. I have seen how prices go down, and seen some good insight into the subject matter.

Why not just imply that's why the unemployment rate went up this last time?

[Wild Cobra]

As for redistribution of wealth. It never works. Once you take it to the point that a persons work is shared by everyone, people race to see who can be the laziest producer. It is only when the productive get to keep the gains of their hard work when we have the most productive society.

[boutons_]

"Once you take it to the point that a persons work is shared by everyone"

who's talking about that straw other than you?

tax is the main tool for wealth redistribution, and dubya made damn sure the wealth his tax cuts concentrated enormous wealth at the top, while low/middle incomes stagnated/declined. The wealth of the top 5% ain't never gonna trickle down, what a laffer.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

One word: Congress

And if democrats control congress and get the presidency like it looks like will happen this fall, you have only yourself and other conservatives to blame. The absolute disaster that was the Bush administration is about to reap what it sowed.

You're preaching to the choir here, the Bush Administration did a great job of fucking up.

It just sucks that it was so bad that now we're going to go from getting bent over to being bent over and having a telephone pole shoved up our collective asses.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

"Once you take it to the point that a persons work is shared by everyone"

who's talking about that straw other than you?

tax is the main tool for wealth redistribution, and dubya made damn sure the wealth his tax cuts concentrated enormous wealth at the top, while low/middle incomes stagnated/declined. The wealth of the top 5% ain't never gonna trickle down, what a laffer.

It's not a straw when your fucking boy wonder Obama is stating it as a fundamental platform piece.

I know you refuse to admit Obama is anything other than perfect, but you really need to work on your reading comprehension.

[ChumpDumper]

The headline would have been more effective had it been an actual Obama quote.

[Wild Cobra]

who's talking about that straw other than you?


Well tell me. When is there enough wealth distribution enough for you socialists sissies? One day, we will take that path, and never recover.

[MannyIsGod]

You're preaching to the choir here, the Bush Administration did a great job of fucking up.

It just sucks that it was so bad that now we're going to go from getting bent over to being bent over and having a telephone pole shoved up our collective asses.

I don't think its going to be nearly the way you think. I don't think Obama is going to be able to do much to set groundbreaking economic strategy. There will be more of the same with minor differences and politiicians saying LOOK WHAT WE DID when in reality they didn't do much.

And as long as he does what he says for forgien policy and on a few other fronts, I'll be very pleased.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I don't think its going to be nearly the way you think. I don't think Obama is going to be able to do much to set groundbreaking economic strategy. There will be more of the same with minor differences and politiicians saying LOOK WHAT WE DID when in reality they didn't do much.

And as long as he does what he says for forgien policy and on a few other fronts, I'll be very pleased.

I have a hard time believing that universal health care won't put a financial burden on us all. You've got the lazy and you've got what, 10 million illegals that will now have even more access to our health care system. I just don't see how that won't have a significant impact on us all, unless he's planning on having the printing presses fired up to the point that the dollar trades even with the peso.

[O-Factor]

Obama is starting to really not sit well with me.

[Nbadan]

...unless he's planning on having the printing presses fired up to the point that the dollar trades even with the peso.

We're almost there now....

[jochhejaam]

Here's another campaign "promise" that he won't be able to deliver.

Obama pledges $4,000 yearly tuition tax credit in Michigan campaign stop

(Blade, The <---another Obama butt-kissing news periodical>(Toledo, OH) (KRT) Via Acquire Media NewsEdge) Jun. 18--
TAYLOR, Mich. -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama met with students at a community college yesterday to highlight his plans for a $4,000 annual tuition tax credit, the second day he has contrasted his plans on bread-and-butter issues with his Republican rival, John McCain.


Mr. Obama said education "isn't an issue you hear Senator McCain talking much about. He's out of touch. He's voted time and again to stop us [from] making college affordable" <that's because he's not a socialist, i.e., he doesn't believe in robbing the hard-working to subsidize your bloated, massive entitlements, you lousy, lying, no integrity, disingenuous, poc>.

The McCain campaign did not immediately respond to Mr. Obama's charge.


On Monday, Mr. Obama met with a family in Flint, Mich., with a $40,000 income and contrasted his proposals for a tax cut with those of Mr. McCain.

Tuesday's event was held at the Downriver campus of the Wayne County Community College District, where about 30 students who receive financial aid traded comments and questions with Mr. Obama about the burdens of paying for their educations.

Mr. Obama has proposed a $4,000 refundable tax credit per student, per year, for tuition, meaning it would be paid even if the individual paid no taxes. It would cover two-thirds of tuition at the average public college or university, and all of the tuition and some expenses at many community colleges, Mr. Obama said. The student would have to commit to 100 hours of public service to receive the help.

Student Demetrius Jenkins, 18, said he will owe about $6,000 in tuition to transfer to a four-year college, after receiving grants and federally guaranteed loans to cover about $10,000.

"One of the things I'm having trouble with is private loans," he said. Mr. Obama and the college's financial aid officer, Marcus McGrew, advised him to avoid private loans if possible.

"I'd make sure we have this additional $4,000 tuition credit so you don't have to resort to the private market," Mr. Obama said. He bemoaned "unscrupulous" lenders and said he wants more regulation of the private market.

"I feel that if he is elected, the issues he is concerned about will come about," Mr. Jenkins said afterward.

A 43-year-old part-time student at Wayne State who said her daughter, a full-time student at Eastern Michigan University, is in danger of losing her academic eligibility for her financial aid asked Mr. Obama for advice.

He suggested she spend less time watching TV, text-messaging friends, and going to movies and more time studying.

"If your daughter has an opportunity to attend a four-year school and get a degree, there are no excuses. She's got to keep her grades up and graduate," Mr. Obama said.

The mother, Stephanie Baker, said she plans to play back a recording of the event for her 20-year-old daughter, Autumn.

"She is such a staunch Obama supporter, it'll be like God talking to her <OMG!!!> ," Ms. Baker said.

Dental hygiene student Marilyn Pace teared up in a one-on-one meeting with Mr. Obama.

Ms. Pace said she is about $1,500 short of paying for tuition and supplies for her dental hygiene studies, on top of struggles paying living expenses and helping her father with medical expenses from a kidney transplant.

In her case, Mr. Obama and a college loan counselor said a private loan should be able to close the gap.

"Money is a really big issue for me, just paying for it all," said Ms. Pace, 23, who said she has $13,000 in debt. She said she will graduate with an associate's degree and will be able to apply for jobs once she passes her board and clinical exams. She said jobs in her chosen profession pay $25 to $30 per hour.

Mr. Obama said he plans to pay for his campaign promises, including universal health care, by raising taxes on incomes above $250,000 <B.S.!> He also said he would have the government make college loans directly, saving billions of dollars now going to private banks.
http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2008/06/18/3504381.htm

If Hillary was the Queen of pandering, he's the King!
I'd venture to guess he's already working on the reasons he wasn't able to deliver on this pissant promise.

[MannyIsGod]

I have a hard time believing that universal health care won't put a financial burden on us all. You've got the lazy and you've got what, 10 million illegals that will now have even more access to our health care system. I just don't see how that won't have a significant impact on us all, unless he's planning on having the printing presses fired up to the point that the dollar trades even with the peso.

You and I both know Universal HC isn't going to happen.

[101A]

Let's see, GM lost $39 billion last year and saw its stock drop 19%.

What do you think happened to the CEO?

He got a 64% raise.

It makes perfect sense, doesn't it?

Bob Lutz is a hell of a car guy. He's making dramatic changes that are going to pay HUGE dividends at GM for years to come. So much of the profit at GM relied on big trucks and SUV's - of course they were going to lose money right now. Lutz, striking a dramatic change at GM is looking to the future; to compete with foreign cars here in both quality, design and engineering. Reallly the brightest light in Detroit is Lutz; and one ANY company doing business in the USA would want; you might want to pick a different CEO to pick on

[101A]

You and I both know Universal HC isn't going to happen.


Universal health care (not universal, socialized health care, mind you) WILL happen in the next term.

[Extra Stout]

Bob Lutz is a hell of a car guy. He's making dramatic changes that are going to pay HUGE dividends at GM for years to come. So much of the profit at GM relied on big trucks and SUV's - of course they were going to lose money right now. Lutz, striking a dramatic change at GM is looking to the future; to compete with foreign cars here in both quality, design and engineering. Reallly the brightest light in Detroit is Lutz; and one ANY company doing business in the USA would want; you might want to pick a different CEO to pick on
Competitive automobiles made by General Motors:

1. Chevrolet Malibu
2. Cadillac CTS
3. *crickets*

[DarkReign]

Do you have a problem with what Duncan makes, or Tom Cruise? What about CEO/Owners? Can they reap the rewards of their OWN company's success?

...and therein lies the crux of our economic system in this country.

I tried finding the quote (it elludes me) but it went something like...

"Capitalism is work of many owned by the few."

Basically, corporations being owned by one or few people while employing 1000s is a flawed design. The CEOs do work, they are worthy of thir positions most of the time, but that they alone reap the benefits from the many is flawed (by some's estimation).

Dont expect to me argue for or against such a notion, as I am neither qualified nor swayed one way or the other, but the argument is there.

ES used a word in another thread that I wasnt familiar with, so I had to look it up.

Distributism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism).

It does seem odd that so much money can be reaped for (your great-grandfather) having a good idea only once. Just seems...strange.

[101A]

"Once you take it to the point that a persons work is shared by everyone"

who's talking about that straw other than you?

tax is the main tool for wealth redistribution, and dubya made damn sure the wealth his tax cuts concentrated enormous wealth at the top, while low/middle incomes stagnated/declined. The wealth of the top 5% ain't never gonna trickle down, what a laffer.

Who said anything about trickle down, he talked about production.

[101A]

Competitive automobiles made by General Motors:

1. Chevrolet Malibu
2. Cadillac CTS
3. *crickets*

3. Pontiac G8

Malibu being competitive is HUGE!! With the demise of the FS pickups; THAT will be the bread and butter of the line-up, able to compete with Accords/Camrys - and don't look now; Elantras.

Now look at when Lutz was made CEO, and when those cars you mentioned were brought to market - direct correlation. Over the next several years, there will be more.

[101A]

...and therein lies the crux of our economic system in this country.

I tried finding the quote (it elludes me) but it went something like...

"Capitalism is work of many owned by the few."

Basically, corporations being owned by one or few people while employing 1000s is a flawed design. The CEOs do work, they are worthy of thir positions most of the time, but that they alone reap the benefits from the many is flawed (by some's estimation).

Dont expect to me argue for or against such a notion, as I am neither qualified nor swayed one way or the other, but the argument is there.

ES used a word in another thread that I wasnt familiar with, so I had to look it up.

Distributism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism).

It does seem odd that so much money can be reaped for (your great-grandfather) having a good idea only once. Just seems...strange.

Corporations owned by 1,000's have many "high" income employees. Upper management, sales staff, professional development, etc...

[101A]

3. Pontiac G8



4. Pontiac Solstice
5. Corvette
6. Chevy Cobalt (competivie if not class leading, but certainly >>>>>>> Chevette!)
7. Upcoming Camaro will be a nice ride.
8. Not an "automobile" but he Tahoe hybrid is gonna do well, and gets good pub.

Of the big 3 (Big 2, and somewhat larger than average 3rd), GM has the brightest future. Lutz has been the visionary behind that.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

You and I both know Universal HC isn't going to happen.

A Democratic Congress that is hellbent on keeping their grasp on office by making their constituents dependent on the government for everything with a marxist in the White House?

I wouldn't be so sure.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Mr. Obama has proposed a $4,000 refundable tax credit per student, per year, for tuition, meaning it would be paid even if the individual paid no taxes.

USSA! USSA! USSA!

Socialism, economics for Obama :tu

[Homeland Security]

3. Pontiac G8.
:lmao Check the sales.

[Homeland Security]

4. Pontiac Solstice :lmao Fiero, part 2.

5. Corvette I concede that one.

6. Chevy Cobalt (competivie if not class leading, but certainly >>>>>>> Chevette!) :lmao The Cobalt? :lmao You might as well tattoo "GM FANBOY" on your forehead.

7. Upcoming Camaro will be a nice ride.Let's put it this way: they're putting a 4-cylinder engine in the base Camaro to try to minimize the bleeding next year.

8. Not an "automobile" but he Tahoe hybrid is gonna do well, and gets good pub.Check what's happened to sales of the Acadia, which gets about the same gas mileage as the Tahoe Hybrid. Not gonna work.


Of the big 3 (Big 2, and somewhat larger than average 3rd), GM has the brightest future. Lutz has been the visionary behind that.
GM has hemorrhaged $6 billion in cash so far this year, or 20% of their remaining reserve. They will do fine as a multinational corp. due to their Asian operations. But North American manufacturing is circling the drain.

[Homeland Security]

Maybe if you proles elect Mr. Sock Monkey, he'll offer GM a bailout. But we're content to let them outsource everything.

[101A]

:lmao Fiero, part 2.
I concede that one.
:lmao The Cobalt? :lmao You might as well tattoo "GM FANBOY" on your forehead.
Let's put it this way: they're putting a 4-cylinder engine in the base Camaro to try to minimize the bleeding next year.
Check what's happened to sales of the Acadia, which gets about the same gas mileage as the Tahoe Hybrid. Not gonna work.


GM has hemorrhaged $6 billion in cash so far this year, or 20% of their remaining reserve. They will do fine as a multinational corp. due to their Asian operations. But North American manufacturing is circling the drain.

The G8's brand new, and GM has MUCH to do to improve its image, especially among the target market of that car. I stand by my assessment of the other vehicles; although not class leading, they are "competitive" from a driving, ergonomic, style and quality standpoint. Not so 10, or even 5 years ago.

"GM Fanboy"

lol; always been a "Ford" guy when comparing brands, but have never bought a post - '70 domestic vehicle, er, take that back, bought my Mother in Law a Focus in '01...anyway I currently own 2 Hondas, a Nissan, the aforementioned Focus, and a '67 Mustang. Doesn't mean I can't have an open mind about what is out there.

[ChumpDumper]

Bob Lutz is a hell of a car guy. He's making dramatic changes that are going to pay HUGE dividends at GM for years to come. So much of the profit at GM relied on big trucks and SUV's - of course they were going to lose money right now. Lutz, striking a dramatic change at GM is looking to the future; to compete with foreign cars here in both quality, design and engineering. Reallly the brightest light in Detroit is Lutz; and one ANY company doing business in the USA would want; you might want to pick a different CEO to pick on


Let's see, GM lost $39 billion last year and saw its stock drop 19%.

What do you think happened to the CEO?

He got a 64% raise.So he's being rewarded for what he might do?

Nice work if you can get it.

Cobalt ROFL.

[ChumpDumper]

bought my Mother in Law a Focus in '01Sounds about right.

[jochhejaam]

Cobalt ROFL.

Out of 29 small cars ranked, the 2008 Cobalt finished 17th, right behind Toyota's Corolla <---pretty good company.



-The Cobalt family is a serious presence in the compact-sedan segment." -- Car and Driver

-"The Chevrolet Cobalt will satisfy the needs of drivers looking for economy of price, economy of operation, and a nice, quiet ride." -- New Car Test Drive

-"Solidly built, suitably refined, and attractively priced, it's an American car that can compete with its foreign rivals. Although by no means a driver's car, The Cobalt is quiet and refined by the standards of the class." -- Motor Trend

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/2008-Chevrolet-Cobalt/

[Extra Stout]

Don't talk to me like that! I work too hard... I work too hard for that! I am a division manager in charge of 29 people! I drive... I drive... I drive a Chevy Cobalt!