Forbes says that 6 of the 7 worst new cars are being made by GM and
Chrysler, the same level of quality we can expect from ObamaCare.
You're going to get an ObamaClunker for health care with treatment
decided by bureaucrats on the basis of lowest cost. Good Job Dims.

On 4/12/10 10:28 AM, Frogwatch wrote:
Forbes says that 6 of the 7 worst new cars are being made by GM and
Chrysler, the same level of quality we can expect from ObamaCare.
You're going to get an ObamaClunker for health care with treatment
decided by bureaucrats on the basis of lowest cost. Good Job Dims.


No wonder your business is failing; the CEO is insane. GM and Chrysler
management ensured their companies made crap cars before the government
infusions...and so did Ford's management.

--
Conservatives - just pretend Obama's health care legislation is another
unnecessary war and you'll feel better about it.

On Apr 12, 10:28*am, Frogwatch wrote:
Forbes says that 6 of the 7 worst new cars are being made by GM and
Chrysler, the same level of quality we can expect from ObamaCare.
You're going to get an ObamaClunker for health care with treatment
decided by bureaucrats on the basis of lowest cost. *Good Job Dims.

Ford deserved kudos not only because they didn't take any fed money,
but also because their quality is now better than the rest, including
Toyota.

Meanwhile GM posted a 4.3 billion dollar loss for the second half of
2009. That butt-ugly Camaro is not going to save them.

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 08:14:33 -0700 (PDT), Jack wrote:

On Apr 12, 10:28*am, Frogwatch wrote:
Forbes says that 6 of the 7 worst new cars are being made by GM and
Chrysler, the same level of quality we can expect from ObamaCare.
You're going to get an ObamaClunker for health care with treatment
decided by bureaucrats on the basis of lowest cost. *Good Job Dims.

Ford deserved kudos not only because they didn't take any fed money,
but also because their quality is now better than the rest, including
Toyota.

Meanwhile GM posted a 4.3 billion dollar loss for the second half of
2009. That butt-ugly Camaro is not going to save them.

My Dutch friend, a very liberal guy, commented that the European news is talking
about how much the US news is coming out against Toyota...with little or no
mention of the other car makers' recalls. They attribute it to the power of the
UAW and the attitude of the American press.

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 07:28:58 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Forbes says that 6 of the 7 worst new cars are being made by GM and
Chrysler, the same level of quality we can expect from ObamaCare.
You're going to get an ObamaClunker for health care with treatment
decided by bureaucrats on the basis of lowest cost. Good Job Dims.

Union made with the help of bad management. What a recipe for
disaster.

On 4/12/10 11:18 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 07:28:58 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

Forbes says that 6 of the 7 worst new cars are being made by GM and
Chrysler, the same level of quality we can expect from ObamaCare.
You're going to get an ObamaClunker for health care with treatment
decided by bureaucrats on the basis of lowest cost. Good Job Dims.

Union made with the help of bad management. What a recipe for
disaster.


Your naivete is boundless. German autoworkers, Japanese autoworkers,
Spanish autoworkers, in fact, autoworkers in most democracies are
unionized. Even Ferrari autoworkers are unionized. *If* GM and Chrysler
are making "substandard" cars, it is entirely the fault of management.


--
http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 11:28:34 -0400, hk
wrote:

autoworkers in most democracies are
unionized. Even Ferrari autoworkers are unionized. *If* GM and Chrysler
are making "substandard" cars, it is entirely the fault of management.

I would agree that there are some unions that assist with, and
encourage, good quality. The UAW has never impressed me that way.
Whether or not that is ultimately the fault of management is certainly
arguable. What is perfectly clear is that the UAW has an unblemished
track record for opposing the modernization of work rules and other
improvements in productivity.

On Apr 12, 10:34*am, hk wrote:
On 4/12/10 10:28 AM, Frogwatch wrote:

Forbes says that 6 of the 7 worst new cars are being made by GM and
Chrysler, the same level of quality we can expect from ObamaCare.
You're going to get an ObamaClunker for health care with treatment
decided by bureaucrats on the basis of lowest cost. *Good Job Dims.

No wonder your business is failing; the CEO is insane. GM and Chrysler
management ensured their companies made crap cars before the government
infusions...and so did Ford's management.


Where did you get the idea that his business is failing?

On Apr 12, 11:17*am, John H wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 08:14:33 -0700 (PDT), Jack wrote:
On Apr 12, 10:28*am, Frogwatch wrote:
Forbes says that 6 of the 7 worst new cars are being made by GM and
Chrysler, the same level of quality we can expect from ObamaCare.
You're going to get an ObamaClunker for health care with treatment
decided by bureaucrats on the basis of lowest cost. *Good Job Dims.

Ford deserved kudos not only because they didn't take any fed money,
but also because their quality is now better than the rest, including
Toyota.

Meanwhile GM posted a 4.3 billion dollar loss for the second half of
2009. *That butt-ugly Camaro is not going to save them.

My Dutch friend, a very liberal guy, commented that the European news is talking
about how much the US news is coming out against Toyota...with little or no
mention of the other car makers' recalls. They attribute it to the power of the
UAW and the attitude of the American press.

Well of course the Europeans will say it's the bad Americans that are
being unfair... they have their own attitudes. It's pretty common
knowledge that the Japanese auto makers have operated using "secret
recalls" and warranties for years. They tend to try to save face,
when the US car makers were compelled by closer scrutiny here in the
states to issue public recalls.

Many people love their Hondas, but the one Honda I've owned was the
most troublesome car I've owned. It had more issues than the two
Explorers that came after it.

Remind your friend of the US press going after Ford in the Explorer
roll-over fiasco. That was trumped-up BS... I hit a chunk of metal on
the interstate running 75mph. It hit the front diff, bounced off the
gas tank skid plate, and cut a four inch gash in my left rear tire,
deflating it instantly. I lifted off the gas, drifted over to the
emergency lane, and changed my tire. No drama. The Explorer was no
worse than any other SUV for instability, it was just the most
popular, with so many on the road the rate of occurance was high. I
think it was Car and Driver who rigged up a tire on an Explorer to
deflate instantly, and they did a series of tests that showed it was
stable. Drivers simply over reacted and caused them to crash.

Agree on the UAW though... they are corruption defined.

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:03:10 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:01:24 -0700 (PDT), Jack
wrote:

Many people love their Hondas, but the one Honda I've owned was the
most troublesome car I've owned.

I had 2 Hondas that were pretty good and not hard to work on but my
current Prelude needs a timing belt and the first line in the shop
manual instructions to replace this belt is "remove engine".
This is the kind of engineering that GM would be proud of (similar to
the old Nova V-8 that required you to loosen a motor mount and raise
the engine to get to one of the spark plugs).
The difference is, this is not some 4 cylinder econobox that they
tried to cram a V-8 in. This car came off the drawing board this way.
BTW Honda will do it for $1000.

I once had a '67 MGB GT. I bought it with a bad clutch, but got it for $150,
which was a pretty good deal.

The first step in replacing the clutch was, "Remove engine". I know how you
feel.