So Long All - Moving On

[edmscan]

In "long term reliability" the article says that GM lags behind. This is one of the reasons that I wouldn't buy American (I do agree that GM is probably the best of the American brands).

Guess seeing as how GM products just don't last as long as Japanese products, Japanese is still the way to go.

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by edmscan

In "long term reliability" the article says that GM lags behind. This is one of the reasons that I wouldn't buy American (I do agree that GM is probably the best of the American brands).

Guess seeing as how GM products just don't last as long as Japanese products, Japanese is still the way to go.

Yeah, I credit Suzuki (not GM) for the reliability of my Swift....plus the fact that it was ASSEMBLED IN CANADA (not in the U.S.) with (IIRC) mostly JAPANESE parts?

[UberSilver]

Originally Posted by edmscan

(I do agree that GM is probably the best of the American brands).

Ford has left GM in the dust! going on 10 years now.

[SeriousBlack]

Wow. I'm obviously not a Toyota hater (owned - and still own - my Yaris for six years). Prior to that I've also owned a Civic, Accord, Odyssey and Lexus. I can't believe the American car haters though. Seriously?

There are 2500 workers at the Oshawa ON plant that assemble the Camaro - jobs that I understand may soon move to Michigan. Does anyone really believe letting GM go bankrupt would have been good for the auto industry and competition generally? Frankly, Honda hasn't released an inspirational design with performance to match since the S2000, and Toyota seems to have rediscovered a pulse with the FRS, thanks in part to Subaru engineering. Most of their other vehicles in the past decade have resembled cookie cutter wedges with the visual appeal of Barbra Bush in a rain coat.

I suspect a number of posters on this forum have only lived during an era when American cars were unreliable, uninspired and undesirable. For that, I suppose you could be forgiven for dumping on the US manufacturer. Times have changed. Spare me the political commentary about the validity/logic behind the "bailouts". Ford, Toyota, BMW and Harley Davidson, among others, were also the recipients of bailouts. Interestingly, as of August 2012 it was Ford that still owed bailout money though it was not as publicized as the GM and Chrysler assistance:(http://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmul...-surprise-you/).

If anyone thinks a continental economy can survive without a vigorous, dynamic manufacturing sector, I have a broken three month old Toro weedwhacker made in China, purchased at Walmart, that I will sell to you.

I love driving - still love my Yaris but also love my Camaro for lots of different reasons, two of which are my daughters who love the convertible. My daughters hope to live in a North America that will still have a viable local economy 20 or 30 years from now. No apologies for trying to help that at all.

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by SeriousBlack

Wow. I'm obviously not a Toyota hater (owned - and still own - my Yaris for six years). Prior to that I've also owned a Civic, Accord, Odyssey and Lexus. I can't believe the American car haters though. Seriously?

There are 2500 workers at the Oshawa ON plant that assemble the Camaro - jobs that I understand may soon move to Michigan. Does anyone really believe letting GM go bankrupt would have been good for the auto industry and competition generally? Frankly, Honda hasn't released an inspirational design with performance to match since the S2000, and Toyota seems to have rediscovered a pulse with the FRS, thanks in part to Subaru engineering. Most of their other vehicles in the past decade have resembled cookie cutter wedges with the visual appeal of Barbra Bush in a rain coat.

I suspect a number of posters on this forum have only lived during an era when American cars were unreliable, uninspired and undesirable. For that, I suppose you could be forgiven for dumping on the US manufacturer. Times have changed. Spare me the political commentary about the validity/logic behind the "bailouts". Ford, Toyota, BMW and Harley Davidson, among others, were also the recipients of bailouts. Interestingly, as of August 2012 it was Ford that still owed bailout money though it was not as publicized as the GM and Chrysler assistance:(http://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmul...-surprise-you/).

If anyone thinks a continental economy can survive without a vigorous, dynamic manufacturing sector, I have a broken three month old Toro weedwhacker made in China, purchased at Walmart, that I will sell to you.

I love driving - still love my Yaris but also love my Camaro for lots of different reasons, two of which are my daughters who love the convertible. My daughters hope to live in a North America that will still have a viable local economy 20 or 30 years from now. No apologies for trying to help that at all.

I don't think you should have to take what I was mentioning into consideration when choosing a car because you are Canadian and the rule of law in your country wasn't violated as it was in mine....and your tax money didn't go to help with the subversion of those laws, my tax money did. I only asked that the rule of law be followed. That isn't a political request. Obama made it political by the favoritism that he showed to the UAW Health Plan. As Charles Lane wrote in the Washington Post, the UAW got a much better deal than it would have from a private equity firm. And yes, I think that a managed bankruptcy would have would have been better generally for competition because it would have eased the burden of union contracts. Also, the government still could have been involved money wise in a managed bankruptcy.

I don't think a continental economy can survive without a vigorous, dynamic manufacturing sector, I just think a continental economy can survive without a unionized manufacturing sector. Auto plants in Right to Work states in the US South are but one example of this.

I don't think unions need to exist for us (as North Americans) to have a viable local economy 20 or 30 years from now.

Re the link to Forbes, I read that and a couple of other articles on the subject. It is my understanding that GM and Chrysler were the only companies that took a bailout for their manufacturing operations. Re the 'financing arms' ( of Toyota, Ford, BMW, etc. as well) the Fed essentially stepped in to recreate a 3rd party market for the loans as that had dried up during the credit crises. We'll never know if some other entity would have stepped in to fill that role if the fed hadn't. Re the loans to Ford for electric car research, etc., we don't know why that was something Ford was interested in. Perhaps advance knowledge of Obama's increased CAFE staandards that some feel will add at least $5,000.00 USD to each car.

Your story tugs at my heart for 2 reasons:

1 -- Your car. It is beautiful, and you should enjoy it. When I first got my DL (at age 16 + 3 months) I had a car to drive that my dad bought in case he was without a company car. It was an old first generation Firebird convertible...burgundy with a white top. Your car (as you likely realize) has some styling cues from the first generation Camaro and the first generation Firebird.

2 -- Mentioning how your daughters feel about your new car. I don't have any kids, but my cousin adopted as a single mom and she and my aunt and I traveled to bring her back to the family. We met her on what was legally her 1st birthday. A few weeks before she turned 6, she asked me if she could call me dad. I said no, you only have one parent, but you know I love you more than I have ever loved anyone. I told her I don't think I'll ever have kids, but I promised her that If I did I might love them as much as I love her, but not more. Emotionally, she is like a daughter to me. She just turned 11. I want her to have the same adventurous spirit re driving (and traveling in general) that her great grandfather had, and that her grandmother and I have. I'll be as involved in that vehicle wise (re $$...and time if desired) as her mom will allow .

[SeriousBlack]

Originally Posted by nookandcrannycar

I don't think you should have to take what I was mentioning into consideration when choosing a car because you are Canadian and the rule of law in your country wasn't violated as it was in mine....and your tax money didn't go to help with the subversion of those laws, my tax money did. I only asked that the rule of law be followed. That isn't a political request. Obama made it political by the favoritism that he showed to the UAW Health Plan. As Charles Lane wrote in the Washington Post, the UAW got a much better deal than it would have from a private equity firm. And yes, I think that a managed bankruptcy would have would have been better generally for competition because it would have eased the burden of union contracts. Also, the government still could have been involved money wise in a managed bankruptcy.

I don't think a continental economy can survive without a vigorous, dynamic manufacturing sector, I just think a continental economy can survive without a unionized manufacturing sector. Auto plants in Right to Work states in the US South are but one example of this.

I don't think unions need to exist for us (as North Americans) to have a viable local economy 20 or 30 years from now.

Re the link to Forbes, I read that and a couple of other articles on the subject. It is my understanding that GM and Chrysler were the only companies that took a bailout for their manufacturing operations. Re the 'financing arms' ( of Toyota, Ford, BMW, etc. as well) the Fed essentially stepped in to recreate a 3rd party market for the loans as that had dried up during the credit crises. We'll never know if some other entity would have stepped in to fill that role if the fed hadn't. Re the loans to Ford for electric car research, etc., we don't know why that was something Ford was interested in. Perhaps advance knowledge of Obama's increased CAFE staandards that some feel will add at least $5,000.00 USD to each car.

Your story tugs at my heart for 2 reasons:

1 -- Your car. It is beautiful, and you should enjoy it. When I first got my DL (at age 16 + 3 months) I had a car to drive that my dad bought in case he was without a company car. It was an old first generation Firebird convertible...burgundy with a white top. Your car (as you likely realize) has some styling cues from the first generation Camaro and the first generation Firebird.

2 -- Mentioning how your daughters feel about your new car. I don't have any kids, but my cousin adopted as a single mom and she and my aunt and I traveled to bring her back to the family. We met her on what was legally her 1st birthday. A few weeks before she turned 6, she asked me if she could call me dad. I said no, you only have one parent, but you know I love you more than I have ever loved anyone. I told her I don't think I'll ever have kids, but I promised her that If I did I might love them as much as I love her, but not more. Emotionally, she is like a daughter to me. She just turned 11. I want her to have the same adventurous spirit re driving (and traveling in general) that her great grandfather had, and that her grandmother and I have. I'll be as involved in that vehicle wise (re $$...and time if desired) as her mom will allow .

Hi - a few comments. First, I think you should be commended for such a respectful, courteous reply. It's clear you feel strongly about the US assistance plan. I know this isn't a forum for political debate so I won't dwell on this, but there's a few points of which you should be aware of. In 2009, the federal government (Canada) and the provincial government of Ontario loaned GM $1.4 billion. That loan was paid back in full with interest by 2010. As for "legalities", I think we'd agree that a good lawyer can argue heads is tails and tails is heads depending on what his/her retainer is (I'm a prosecutor so I know of what I speak).

I have nothing but the utmost respect for the U.S. and the principles upon which the nation was founded. However, your nation, like most, is still struggling with what role, if any, government should play in its affairs. In the 1980s, the government of Alberta (an oil producing province) was outraged when our federal government created a national oil company and wanted to ensure Canadians were not paying more for our own oil than foreign customers. They objected to what they termed "federal government control" and wanted their own federal government to have no hand in "their" resources. In the past year, two large Canadian oil companies have been sold to the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC), the first sale with a majority interest, the second with a 49% share because so many Canadians were outraged we were sacrificing control of our own resources to a self-professed communist state with serious questions about its commitment to fundamental human rights.

The point of this is in just over 25 years, the landscape has changed - I think our commitment to our nations and way of life has to as well. While we kick and scream at each other over what our federal political parties and own governments are doing, each day corporations that have leeched tax subsidies and resources from our "free" nations are selling our fiscal independence to entities that could give a damn about our freedoms or those of our children. I personally never saw GM or Chrysler seeking assistance in that light. I (and I'm sure you and others on this forum) know a few friends who work at GM/Ford/Chrysler dealerships. They were deathly afraid for their jobs and livelihood, but are very grateful for having pulled through.

It may well be that GM, Chrysler, Ford et al are equally brutal, selfish corporate giants that don't care about North America. After all, Chrysler is now owned by Fiat! I just think it's important that North America remains a relevant player in an enterprise so important as the auto mfg industry, and I'm not so beat up about the notion of government stepping up to defend our national interest in cases such as this. It was a loan, after all.

Finally, as for your story, I am truly touched by what you've written about the 11 year old in your life. It just goes to show that no matter how many things we point to in our lives that make us different, we have a lot more in common than we care to admit to.

Peace.

[nookandcrannycar]

Originally Posted by SeriousBlack

Hi - a few comments. First, I think you should be commended for such a respectful, courteous reply. It's clear you feel strongly about the US assistance plan. I know this isn't a forum for political debate so I won't dwell on this, but there's a few points of which you should be aware of. In 2009, the federal government (Canada) and the provincial government of Ontario loaned GM $1.4 billion. That loan was paid back in full with interest by 2010. As for "legalities", I think we'd agree that a good lawyer can argue heads is tails and tails is heads depending on what his/her retainer is (I'm a prosecutor so I know of what I speak).

I have nothing but the utmost respect for the U.S. and the principles upon which the nation was founded. However, your nation, like most, is still struggling with what role, if any, government should play in its affairs. In the 1980s, the government of Alberta (an oil producing province) was outraged when our federal government created a national oil company and wanted to ensure Canadians were not paying more for our own oil than foreign customers. They objected to what they termed "federal government control" and wanted their own federal government to have no hand in "their" resources. In the past year, two large Canadian oil companies have been sold to the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC), the first sale with a majority interest, the second with a 49% share because so many Canadians were outraged we were sacrificing control of our own resources to a self-professed communist state with serious questions about its commitment to fundamental human rights.

The point of this is in just over 25 years, the landscape has changed - I think our commitment to our nations and way of life has to as well. While we kick and scream at each other over what our federal political parties and own governments are doing, each day corporations that have leeched tax subsidies and resources from our "free" nations are selling our fiscal independence to entities that could give a damn about our freedoms or those of our children. I personally never saw GM or Chrysler seeking assistance in that light. I (and I'm sure you and others on this forum) know a few friends who work at GM/Ford/Chrysler dealerships. They were deathly afraid for their jobs and livelihood, but are very grateful for having pulled through.

It may well be that GM, Chrysler, Ford et al are equally brutal, selfish corporate giants that don't care about North America. After all, Chrysler is now owned by Fiat! I just think it's important that North America remains a relevant player in an enterprise so important as the auto mfg industry, and I'm not so beat up about the notion of government stepping up to defend our national interest in cases such as this. It was a loan, after all.

Finally, as for your story, I am truly touched by what you've written about the 11 year old in your life. It just goes to show that no matter how many things we point to in our lives that make us different, we have a lot more in common than we care to admit to.

Peace.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. My aunt and I refer to life as 'Before' and 'After'. We know we were happy, fortunate people enjoying our lives before my then 1 year old little cousin entered the picture....but the thought (now, and during the entire intervening 10 years) of a world without her alive and in it is so unimaginable that we wonder how happy we really were before such a wonderful force of nature. I know I didn't care as much about what would happen to the state of the world (on many levels) after I'm gone before she was around. She has such an incredible mother, that the rest of us just love her and subtly try to plant 4 words in her head -- listen to your mother. I know the incredible feelings and experiences I've had are experienced manyfold by her mother, and from your words I imagine you feel the level my cousin does with your daughters....as parents, being the final arbiters of discipline, guidance, responsibility etc. parents deserve the credit.

Expanding on what you were writing about feelings toward children illustrating similarities, wanting the children in our lives (our own or not) to have wonderful lives in a better world may be the only thing that crosses just about every political, religious, or economic difference in the world.

Just out of curiosity, I typed 'What would have happened if the Canadian government had not lent GM over 1 billion dollars in 2009' into the DuckDuckGo search engine. One of the hits (number 3) was the article 'The Auto Bailout and the Rule of Law' by Todd Zywicki, the George Mason University Foundation Professor at the George Mason University School of Law, in Virginia. I certainly learned a few things from the article that I didn't know beforehand (that it was only the Chrysler bondholders that were ultimately 'hung out to dry', etc) but his perspective commits my feelings 'to paper' far more eloquently than I can. The URL for the article is:


http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publi...-the-rule-of-l


Among the highlights :

- That GM was an obvious candidate for a 'standard' Chapter 11 (like other corporations) because it was "financially distressed" and not "economically failed".

- "And yet, loose as it was, the TARP legislation did not permit the use of the allotted funds to bail out automakers. The car companies, after all, were not "financial institutions" (Professor Zywicki noting Boston University Law Professor Gary Lawson's text from the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.

- In a September 2009 report, the Congressional Oversight Panel of TARP noted that the basic legality of the auto bailout was one of 'considerable debate' and characterized by 'ambiguity' in the legislative language and congressional intent. However, no specific instance of 'ambiguity' was cited. This was never tested in court because standing on the issue was denied to Chrysler creditors by the bankruptcy court, which argued that the specific mechanism behind the bailouts wasn't relevant to their claims. The Supreme Court of The United States later held any further challenges to the legality of any aspect of the Chrysler case to be moot, without offering specific justifications.

- In the Chrysler case, creditors who held the companies SECURED bonds were steamrolled into accepting 29 cents on the dollar, while the underfunded pension plans of the UAW, who = UNSECURED creditors, received 40 cents on the dollar.

- No unpaid 'deficiency claims' (which creditors here could certainly hold) were allowed in either the Chrysler case or the GM case.

- U.S. Bankruptcy laws were overhauled in 1978 precisely to eliminate the practice of rushed corporate bankruptcy sales, but the practice was allowed re Chrysler and GM.

- In April of 2009, Obama (in a speech) publicly attacked a group of hedge funds that were among Chrysler's creditors -- who were merely standing up for their contract and property rights -- as profiteers, criticizing them for their unwillingness to make the same sacrifices as other investors but not, of course, UAW members. ()

- The only group of Chrysler's bondholders who complained at every stage of the process and continued to press on were the Indiana State Teacher and Police Pension Funds, but the Supreme Court of the United States refused to hear their case.



Your sage reference to good lawyers being able to argue that tails = heads and heads = tails depending on the retainer made me chuckle for two reasons:

1. You're right. Two lawyers on opposite ends of the thought spectrum on this issue could pick through this article and, with supporting information from some other sources, could each write what some would find to be compelling briefs on the subject. And the article I found is intended to be just that, an informative article. (It just, as a whole (not just the highlights I noted), illustrates my perspective and the concern I have re any long term effects (any precedent that could be cited in the future)).

2. There are more lawyers in my family than any other profession or occupation. They range from just starting out to (on your side of the aisle) the head of the DA's sex crimes unit for a large county and (on the other side of the aisle) the managing partner of an office of one of the 10 largest law firms in the world. I'm not a lawyer, but there is quite a bit of 'shop talk' at various family gatherings and I've heard your 'sides of the coin' point alluded to before (although not with the wonderful candor of your words).



I hope all of the enjoyment you were seeking when you purchased your convertible comes to pass over the course of your ownership, and that your daughters enjoy it as well.

Peace

[edmscan]

Originally Posted by daf62757

Your comments about sinking low to buy American is somewhat disturbing. Is that some kind of elitist Canadian comment? Do you realize that most American cars are also Canadian too? So would you sink low enough to buy a Canadian car too?

I don't know what you are getting at but I wouldn't buy a Canadian made car either. The funny thing is that you say yourself "Nothing beats a Toyota". Why am I being criticized for preferring Japanese made cars ?

In my mind cars made in other countries still are not as reliable in the long term. (there are a few exceptions but I am not going to get into that) All I am saying is that I will not buy cars from American automakers .. as in my mind they are not as reliable. Give me a Honda or Toyota that is made in Japan any day.

[WeeYari]

Originally Posted by daf62757

Your comments about sinking low to buy American is somewhat disturbing. Is that some kind of elitist Canadian comment? Do you realize that most American cars are also Canadian too? So would you sink low enough to buy a Canadian car too?

Since the OPs Camero which is sparking all this nonsense is actually Canadian made, let's ammend edmscan's statement to a more correct North American build.

Enjoy the Camero Serious. I'm really loving the domestics going retro with the North American muscle era.