Posted on 09/09/2011 7:50:58 PM PDT by SanFranDan
An astounding figure to us peons, but it’s dwarf peanuts in the big picture.
Yep ... That is the same rationale for my next vehicle to be either a Ford F250 or Mustang. I utterly refuse to purchase ANY vehicle from GM ... Now or ever.
And Ford didn't screw over their bond holders to pay off the UAW.
Plus the FLEX looks cool.
However, I drive almost 200 miles a day just getting to work and back and it was time for a new car. So, when I went looking, the only place I went was to the local Ford dealer. I was looking for a new Mustang V-6. At 300 hp and 30 miles to the gallon it sounded ideal. Well, they did not have any in stock, so I had to settle for a very low milage 2009 Mustang GT. What a ride!! It only gets 25 mpg, but i can live with it.
Ford need not remind me.
I’ll be damned if I’d ever purchase a chrysler or g.m. product ever again. I’d purchase a Yugo first.
Like Obammy, f-em.
General Motors Co. is hiding behind its former self in an attempt to dodge being responsible for fixing suspension problems on more than 400,000 vehicles.
The Detroit automaker says it is not responsible for the suspension repairs on more than 400,000 Chevrolet Impala models from 2007 and 2008 because the flaw predated its bankruptcy.
Aug. 19, Reuters: “ … In a recent filing with the U.S. District Court in Detroit, GM noted that the cars were made by its predecessor General Motors Corp. (not Co.), now called Motors Liquidation Co or "Old GM," before its 2009 bankruptcy and federal bailout.”
The current company, commonly known as the "New GM," said it did not assume responsibility under the reorganization to fix the Impala problem, but only to make repairs "subject to conditions and limitations" in express written warranties, according to Reuters.
Experts not involved with the lawsuit, which sparked the debate, say it is quite common for a company to not assume any responsibility for problems facing their pre-bankrupt company.
"It is fairly common," said Daniel P. Dalton, of Bloomfield Hills-based Dalton & Tomich PLC. “It is one reason why companies go into bankruptcy.
“In General Motors’ cause, as well as Chrysler … the idea is let the bankruptcy court trustee decide the value of the claims as opposed to going through the judicial system.”
Dalton told MLive Detroit all the bad assets and the lawsuits that “Old GM” faced went, and continue to go, to Motors Liquidation, not the "new" company.
This isn’t the first-time GM has hid behind its bankruptcy to avoid litigation.
In October, Motors Liquidation -- not GM -- reached a $773 million environmental settlement agreement with the Obama administration to improve nearly 90 of former GM sites in 14 states.
Under the program, vacant properties, facilities and offices left barren by GM’s bankruptcy were expected to be razed or rehabilitated under the plan.
.
Me too. We've have two of them.
Awesome ad. It’ll go viral. Great anti-Obama message. I love my Subaru WRX, and the Mrs. loves her Nissan Xterra, but it’s good to see this old US company poking Gubmint Motors in the eye.
Civic here. I love my civic. Great car.
Will never buy a GM as long as I live. I’d rather buy a car made in a right to work state.
Taxpayers to lose about $14 billion in auto bailout
WASHINGTON — Taxpayers will lose about $14 billion in the government's $80 billion bailout of Chrysler and GM, the White House said Wednesday, portraying the outcome as good news since the losses are far lower than originally anticipated.
Seizing on the figures, the Obama administration took credit for the resurgence of the U.S. auto industry, assuring taxpayers that the government's bailout of Chrysler and GM was an investment worth making.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.