Government Motors

[James48843]

GM Volt sales plummet. Only 603 sold in January...

Probably not the best car for the snow, but neither is mine.

GM sold 321 Volts in January of 2011. So sales went UP by 88% year over year.

I'd say that's pretty good.

Nissan said it sold 676 Leafs in January, down from 954 in December.


Yes, January isn't the best month to sell an electric car.

 

[James48843]

Overall, Chevrolet sales were down by just over 1%, but that factors in the fact that the HHR and AVEO have both been discontinued.



I'd say an 88% increase in Volt sales is a positive, not a negative for GM.

But again, GM isn't expecting to make a lot of money on Volts. GM makes it's money on twenty-six THOUSAND Silverado trucks, and thirteen THOUSAND Equinoxes, not on it's 600 Volts. The Volt is just to develop the technology of the future, and begin to transform the marketplace to other-than-gasoline only cars. The VOlt lays the groundwork for the cars that will be increasingly sold later in this decade, and into the next. And in that- GM leads the industry, and the Volt is doing exactly what it was intended to do- be the leader in this technology.

 

[RealMoneyIssues]

How much of that is fleet purchases, and of that, how much is USG?

 

[James48843]

How much of that is fleet purchases, and of that, how much is USG?

Fleet represents a portion of GM sales. A minor portion.

U.S. Sales & Production
|

International Sales Releases

Download Sales Release

GM’s U.S. Sales Down 6 percent in January

Wed, Feb 1 2012

DETROIT – General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) today reported total sales of 167,962 vehicles in the United States in January, down 6 percent compared with a very strong January 2011.


“Chevrolet drove our performance once again and sales of our fuel-efficient new cars were especially good,” and Don Johnson, vice president, U.S. Sales Operations. “The strength that the economy and the auto industry showed in the fourth quarter carried into January, so we believe the year is off to a good start.”


Chevrolet passenger car sales increased 13 percent. GM’s total passenger car sales increased 3 percent in January, led by a 30-percent increase in sales of fuel-efficient small and compact cars, which include the new Chevrolet Sonic, the consistently strong-selling Chevrolet Cruze and the new Buick Verano.


In addition, the Buick LaCrosse, which now offers the 36-mpg highway eAssist powertrain as standard equipment, posted a 6 percent year-over-year increase, and the Chevrolet Camaro was up 20 percent.

Camaro sales are up 20%.

I don't know about you, but I haven't driven a GSA owned Camaro yet.

Have you?

The US govt bought about 33,000 fleet vehicles from all manufacturers last year. That included 101 Volts.

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...lug-in-vehicles-for-fleet-led-by-gm-volt.html

 

[Minnow]

Your obsession with defending government motors is almost disturbing. Go look at where the equinox is made, or the camaro -- here's a hint: it ain't the United States. Look at the silverado: not all of those are made in the United States either. You know a good car actually made in the United States? A Toyota Camry. But last year you were all about the gas pedal recall and obsessed with these vehicles killing people -- later proven wrong (didn't see a retraction then -- and I don't expect one). But, the volt and it's recall because of actual documented battery fires (Yes, that's right: proven battery fires) doesn't merit a mention in James' world.

Spin in how you want. You're going to any way. And we bailed out this company for what? jobs in other countries?

 

[James48843]

...But, the volt and it's recall because of actual documented battery fires (Yes, that's right: proven battery fires) doesn't merit a mention in James' world.

Spin in how you want. You're going to any way. And we bailed out this company for what? jobs in other countries?

Volt battery fires?

Here is a fact for you. There wasn't a SINGLE battery fire of a Volt in the hands of a purchaser. None. Not one.

And there was no recall for Volt battery fires. None. Not a single recall. Not a single one.

Let's get that straight. Your obession with non-existent battery fires is worse than my obesssion with wanting to ensure AMERICAN MADE CARS succeed.


The battery fire you refer to...was a battery fire that took place THREE WEEKS after a CRASH TEST, in which a car was intentionally damaged in a crash test. That's a fact.

And yes, a short circuit cause a fire three weeks after the crash test.

There were probably 100 times the number of car fires in the same time period, caused by battery cables short circuiting, after a crash test, in conventional gasoline powered cars. When cars smash up, sometimes there are fires later. That's true in electric cars as well as gasoline powered cars. I'm sure more gasoline powered cars caught fire from battery cables shorting after a smash up over that same time period. But nobody really cared about them.

Yet those who are so right-wing hard over on destroying American manufacturing call up fictional problems that don't exist for Congressional hearings. http://thehill.com/blogs/transporta...-lawmakers-question-development-of-chevy-volt

What a friggin waste of Congressional time and effort. While the Country seriously needs Congress to focus on helping American workers succeed- the House is wasting time on that.

Ok- you want to talk about where cars are made? The Chevy Equinox is NOT final assembled in the USA. You are correct. But the biggest single component of the Equinox, the 2.4 liter engine, IS made in the USA. Tonawanda, NY, to be exact. Where thousands of American citizens are employed. So are the tires, made in Indiana. So are various components- the seats, the struts, the wiring harnesses, the sheet metal. All components that come from USA facilties, to meet up with other parts made around the world, and crafted into fine automobiles in the USA, in Canada, in Mexico, and elsewhere.

But, had GM gone bankrupt, all those workers in Tonawanda, in Indianapolis, in Monroe, Michigan, etc. would have been without jobs. Period.

Yes, I believe it was correct and valuable to save the U.S. automakers from destruction.

Your mileage can vary. have fun.

Attack the American worker all you want. As for me, I'll always continue to defend the American worker, and buy American made cars. Period.

 

[Mapper]

Your obsession with defending government motors is almost disturbing

Just as so many folk's obsession w/ bashing GM. Toyota and GM and every other major automaker pay workers all over the globe to build cars that are sold all over the world. GM is headquartered in the US and uses a vast US supply chain. There's more to a company than assembly line workers, i.e. designers, engineers, etc. etc.. I can't comprehend how anyone (anyone in the "generic" sense, not pointing at particular person here or otherwise) in their right mind can complain about a government not focusing on domestic jobs AND suggest that supporting GM was a mistake? Do GM workers and affiliated corporations in the US not pay taxes? Would that loss of revenue not have an effect on our debt? Would those lost jobs not increase unemployment? Would those lost jobs not impact the housing market? Would those lost jobs not impact additional household spending? morale? etc?

If someone doesn't like American products then they don't have to buy em', that's a choice; but cheering against American workers (at all levels) and American companies is just plain weird to me.

 

[James48843]

You know a good car actually made in the United States? A Toyota Camry.

No.

Corollas are manufactured in Japan and in Brazil (Indaiatuba, São Paulo), Canada (Cambridge, Ontario), China (Tianjin), India (Bangalore), Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Philippines, South Africa (Durban), Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey and Venezuela.


Production has previously been made in Australia (Victoria) and the United Kingdom (Derbyshire).


Production in the United States (Fremont, California) ended in March 2010. Source:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aJlxuxndoOsM





They don't make Toyota Corrollas in the USA anymore.

 

[Mapper]

For what it's worth he said Camry, not Corolla. Many Camrys, not all, are indeed made in the US.

 

[James48843]

For what it's worth he said Camry, not Corolla. Many Camrys, not all, are indeed made in the US.

Sorry- you are correct- I cited Corolla, not Camry.

I find it both disturbing and sad that Toyota Camry's are now made, among other places, in a plant in Indiana.

It's sad because the plant is located at 5500 State Route 38.


Indiana State Road 38 is also known the Bataan Memorial Highway.

 

[SPN46er]

Camry ≠ Corolla

http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story...ct=ami&story=amMade0611&referer=&aff=national

 

[Minnow]

One minor point to begin with: You are correct that the Volt's haven't had a whole car recall. Some of their tested batteries have. That's what I meant and it was inarticulate but I meant no "spin" by it. But the batteries cause fires that are more difficult to fight -- you don't fight a lithium-ion fire the way you fight a conventional car fire. That's a fact.

I don't hate american workers or american companies. I only have one point to counter all the blabbering about GM: Ford didn't take a bailout. GM became a financial institution that happened to make cars. Ford didn't. Bad business on the part of GM -- 'nuff said.

You said:

I find it both disturbing and sad that Toyota Camry's are now made, among other places, in a plant in Indiana.

It's sad because the plant is located at 5500 State Route 38.


Indiana State Road 38 is also known the Bataan Memorial Highway.



What is disturbing about that? The Japanese figured out a long time ago that the auto market was a global endeavor (as did the Germans). Sure wish the U.S. had figured that out as quickly as they did but we did not. Both are former enemies that is true. They are a couple of our best allies now. We made a good peace with them and hopefully we will continue to follow their business models instead of our own outdated ones. I had both grandfathers and a few great uncles fight in WWII. They have passed on now but none of them had any problems with the way the peace was handled by either side. A couple of the uncles and one grandfather even drove Japanese and German cars. Go figure.

I see no problem with Japanese or German auto manufacturers employing americans in their manufacturing and parts factories, their middle level positions and their executive offices right here in the U.S. and abroad. No, I don't have a problem with that. Your mileage may vary.

 

[Minnow]

Sorry- you are correct- I cited Corolla, not Camry.

Would it kill you to address ME directly when you admit you are wrong and I am right? I extend the same courtesy to you on a semi-regular basis.

 

[Minnow]

I can't comprehend how anyone (anyone in the "generic" sense, not pointing at particular person here or otherwise) in their right mind can complain about a government not focusing on domestic jobs AND suggest that supporting GM was a mistake? See my previous post to James about Ford. We did not bail out the auto manufacturer we bailed out the financial institution that happened to make cars.Do GM workers and affiliated corporations in the US not pay taxes? Workers pay taxes, true. Companies do not -- they collect them and then pass the costs on to you the consumer via the price in the product. That's the way that works. Would that loss of revenue not have an effect on our debt? Revenue has nothing to do with debt, it relates to deficits. You are either deliberately or inadvertently confusing the terms, so the short answer is "no." Would those lost jobs not increase unemployment? Would those lost jobs not impact the housing market? Would those lost jobs not impact additional household spending? morale? etc? You are going a little off topic talking about morale and secondary spending but I see your point. So, if a job is a job is a job, then I might get behind infrastructure spending to put these folks to work, but I just don't like making our manufacturing industry and its companies nothing more than Government Sponsored Entities like Fannie and Freddie -- just something wrong with that in my mind.

Again, your mileage may vary.

 

[James48843]

Would it kill you to address ME directly when you admit you are wrong and I am right? I extend the same courtesy to you on a semi-regular basis.

Sorry. Yep, I saw Camry and thought Corolla. My mistake. Sorry.

 

[James48843]

Would that loss of revenue not have an effect on our debt? Revenue has nothing to do with debt, it relates to deficits. You are either deliberately or inadvertently confusing the terms, so the short answer is "no."

Deficits have EVERYTHING to do with debt. If we had tax income equal to government spending outflow, we would have no deficit. If we had no deficit, then we would accumulate no debt.

If revenues are cut off, as in what happens when U.S. manufacturing disappears and no longer pays taxes, then the revenues of the government are reduced, and the deficit goes up. Deficit goes up, and the debt mounts. Debt mounts, and we all suffer long-term.

Companies survive, and taxes get paid. Taxes get paid, and the deficit is smaller. And that's better for the debt, and for the country as a whole. No?

 

[James48843]

Would those lost jobs not increase unemployment? Would those lost jobs not impact the housing market? Would those lost jobs not impact additional household spending? morale? etc? You are going a little off topic talking about morale and secondary spending but I see your point. So, if a job is a job is a job, then I might get behind infrastructure spending to put these folks to work, but I just don't like making our manufacturing industry and its companies nothing more than Government Sponsored Entities like Fannie and Freddie -- just something wrong with that in my mind.

So....you would get behind infratucture spending to help jobs, but not manufacturing spending? If we built roads or dams instead of cars, that would be o.k.? But from your point of view- the fact that there is a product that moves instead of a product that stands still, that's what makes the difference in your book ?


Just wondering...

 

[RealMoneyIssues]

Deficits have EVERYTHING to do with debt. If we had tax income equal to government spending outflow, we would have no deficit. If we had no deficit, then we would accumulate no debt.[/B]

How about we reduce spending instead of asking for more money to spend?

 

[James48843]

How about we reduce spending instead of asking for more money to spend?

Ok. Sure. Where would you reduce the spending to the point where the budget would balance under current revenues. What would you suggest we cut?

Not just a little slice here or there, mind you - but what would you cut to make up the entire difference between what we take in, and what goes out, today?

Personally, I think we need to work at both ends of the problem. But in your suggested world, if all is going to be gained by cuts, what would you cut?

P.S. here is a chart which shows that revenues have collapsed as a result of the Bush tax cuts, at the same time spending has gone up as a result of two wars:



Source:

http://www.thestreet.com/stock-market-news/11078128/us-gdp-vs-revenue-vs-spending.html
[h=1]U.S. GDP vs. Revenue vs. Spending[/h]
Charting the United States’ GDP growth against spending and revenue growth paints a very telling picture; revenue (tax receipts) has collapsed in conjunction with the ‘Bush tax cuts’ and deficit spending has rapidly accelerated in the last three years of Democratic leadership. These numbers suggest that ‘far-left’ and ‘far-right’ ideologies are ripping America apart at the seams.

 

[James48843]

By the way- government helping ease economic problems of business is not unique to the U.S., or to only in our economic struggles. Governments help their own economies all the time.

Here is what China is doing right now- to help their suddenly struggling housing markets, and the downturn in Chinese export growth:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204740904577197033941536866.html