Sounds like a real nice little love story to me...you're so easy to please...cute.....

Idiot much, Peter17?

@Peter17: I disagree - it wasn't the money that made the difference; it was the insistence that with the loan came a change in the inept management that led to the problems (and poor product design decisions) at GM. People didn't buy more GM cars in the global market because of their bailout. The unfortunate events in Japan put their auto industry at a tremendous disadvantage. Regardless, hats off to the people of GM, in all areas, for focusing on improving their products.

LOL Daniel!!!

Bush bailed out GM.

Bush Aids Detroit, but Hard Choices Wait for Obama

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/20/business/20auto.html?pagewanted=all

Daniel - I'm with you. Give credit where credit is due. Obama saved GM and thousands of jobs. Mitt Romney wrote an article about how we should let GM go bankrupt. Great job, President Obama!

Bush II only prolonged the agony and passed the hard decision on to Obama, like all of his failures and everything else. If he wanted to save GM he could have used TARP and come up with a permanent solution instead of waiting for a new president and Congress to save GM and Chrysler. Republicans were ready to ship those jobs with GM and Chrysler overseas like all of the others that left during the Bush II years. Obama knew we needed this automotive industry to stay in America. He was right, again!

Yes, only the delusional will not accept that OUR PRESIDENT came to the aid of GM, saving possibly hundreds-of-thousands of American jobs.

Yep, left to the GOP, GM, most of our banking system, and the country would be a collapsed heap of ruble. Oh yeah, surely the "welfare checks for the wealthy" taxpayer bailout for billionairs would still be motoring on,

Peter, really now. Part of the agreement was that GM shut down four of it's brands which resulted in people being laid off. I'd hardly consider that to be shoveling money to the UAW.

Exactly, Dick. Obama's presidency can be tracked by every hard decision he's made that addressed the problems inherited when he took office. The decision to "bail out" GM resulted in thousands of jobs saved (American jobs, no less) from the assembly line to the supply chain. Give credit where credit is due, indeed.

Obama 2012

Not at all surprised. General Motors is the standard by which all the worlds car manufacturers are measured. I dislike the phoney baloney marketing of painted tin cans posing as viable automobiles often presented by so many competitors. GM is a great corporate manufacturer and you couldn't beat the UAW workers with a stick. Great Americans! Good job by all!

Ever notice how extremely easy it is to spot a Fox news viewer, they are the one who knows nothing and makes claims that are not only untrue, but defy even basic logic. Ya Peter, you're the idiot in question.

Obama did good on this one, but he's dropped way too many balls. Plenty of other folks out of jobs because Obama did nothing about jobs for 3 years. But I am positive, the folks at Chevy are grateful for this one.

Obama bailed out GM because of the union support for him getting elected as president. What about the millions of small mom and pop businesses that need help? why aren't they getting the bailouts that they need to survive?

Dick,

Republicans were ready to ship those jobs with GM and Chrysler overseas like all of the others that left during the Bush II years

Reminds me of Obama and his help securing jobs for GE in China.

All presidents after Bush and Obama will help support international business. Get over it.

tontosh,

As much as you probably won't believe me, those mom and pop shops have benefited from GM and Chrysler not going out of business.

The sad thing is some people, mainly republicans, want republicans back in to manage the country. It shows how short their memory is that the republicans caused this mess and they think they can fix it. If the republicans would have been in charge the last 3 years our unemployment would be DOUBLE what it is now. Along with grandma and granddad sitting on the curb after their house was foreclosed on because republicans stripped away their social security.

So if this news is so great, why is GM stock well below the IPO level and about half what it needs to be in order for the US taxpayer to get back the money they loaned GM?

The article clearly states that GM benefited from natural disasters that hit their competitors. How is that rolling to the top?

The autos have been bailed out before only to later need to be bailed out again. The problem is always the same. It is the mix of what is sold, the fact that GM consistently rolls out new products that are fraught with issues, and eventually the wage and benefit structure exceeds the falling margins that results in unsteady earnings.

Now we have the Volt that has issues.

The GM CEO is now on record asking the Obama administration to hike the gas tax by $1/gal in order to spur buyers to buy the more energy efficient cars. So even with all sorts of credits for this green energy it isn't enough to meet those sales numbers and now he wants to hike gas by a $1 more on everybody in order to sell their product?

The sad thing is people don't realize how our government actually works.

Idiot much, Peter17?

He's a republican cult follower, nothing else.

As this thread proves, the righties have their blinders on and no amount of evidence to the contrary can convince them.

To hell with them.

Mr. Indiana,

I lean more right than left, Would you like to have a discussion?

Bobby Jones Bia,

I deal with businesses that are struggling and need to sell or shut down and let me tell you there are plenty of them out there that are NOT benefiting from the GM or Chrysler and are on the verge of bankruptcy and getting NO help from this government or banks. I would say that a great number of businesses would shut down NOW if they could walk away from their lease contracts.

Just curious...why was this comment collapsed? I didn't insult anyone, I just stated my opinion. I realize other people have different opinions and I think that's great. What I don't understand is the apparent need to silence or demonize those that have different opinions.

Also, before anyone calls me a Fox cultist, I'm an independent that voted for Obama (and Kerry), and although I'm generally not happy with what Obama has done on economic issues, I do support most of his social initiatives.

Peter17,

I agree with your assessment. Just like the airlines in the 80's, GM would have been better off going through a normal bankruptcy restructuring. Instead, their cost numbers are still an issue (they are better, but not where some competitors are), and the precedent that was set by not following the agreed upon hierarchy for repayments is something that will increase borrowing costs for GM and other companies for many years to come. (which means future job losses or less job creation)

I'm glad that GM is doing well. Yes, Obama used taxpayer money to bail out a private company, but should he have? What about the Music Store that went out of business here in 2009? Why didn't Obama bail them out? I know they dont' have a powerful group of union lobbiest, but still, five people lost their job.

In any event, perhaps GM can now repay ALL the money provided to GM by taxpayers, at least the 50% of us who DO pay Federal Income Tax, at least 97% of the taxes.

According to a 2010 report: "Neil Barofsky, the government TARP watchdog, testified before the Senate Finance Committee. He explained that GM did not use earnings to repay its TARP debt. The April quarterly report to Congress from his office stated: “The source of funds for these quarterly [debt] payments will be other TARP funds currently held in an escrow account.”

Also, it's nice that so many of you are extolling the virtues of Obama saving "Hundreds of thousands of jobs". Well, why isn't Obama doing anything to save Kodak? Doesn't he care about THOSE "hundreds of thousands of jobs?" What about the 1,100 people who lost their jobs in Solydra? What about the tens of thousands of members of the Armed Forces who are being discharged or Federal employees being "RIF'd" over the next year or two.

.

and poor product design decisions

GM was A close Number two for just a little bit and they have to go bankrupt? they bleed money so fat that it was no wonder why they had to go bankrupt. The Legacy cost is what has killed GM not worker pay but to pay the people not working that is what was and still is the largest burden they have.

Another problem was their dealer network they had a lot of crapy dealers selling cars and repairing them. this is where their customer relation comes from. A sales man sells confidence in the product and the technician repairs the customers faith in the vehicle. where this brake down happens you loose customers.

John,

"Well, why isn't Obama doing anything to save Kodak? Doesn't he care about THOSE "hundreds of thousands of jobs?" What about the 1,100 people who lost their jobs in Solydra? What about the tens of thousands of members of the Armed Forces who are being discharged or Federal employees being "RIF'd" over the next year or two."

That's exactly what I am trying to say, there are millions of small mom and pop businesses that are getting NO help but Obama chooses who he want's to help or NOT help, this is NOT right.

Obama bailed out GM because of the union support for him getting elected as president.

Tontosh, you do know that the evil union = the American middle class, don't you? Should they not vote for the candidate of their choice because they're union-represented?

Pedestrian,

Union members are part of the middle class, but they are not "the middle class". Most middle class workers are not unionized.

One reason I objected to government interference in the GM restructuring is, government was taking taxpayer money (which mostly comes from the middle class) to support one specific group of workers. This effectively means another group of workers (i.e.; the non-unionized middle class) has to sacrifice to allow the union workers to maintain their lifestyle.

In my opinion, that is not right. I do not ask for handouts to support my lifestyle, and I object to the government taking my money to support someone else's lifestyle.

tontosh,

Your right there are people that go into business that don't make it. I am one of them. I started my business when it was the best time for me. Unfortunately that was in 2004. It's part of the risk we take as entrepreneurs.

That doesn't mean small businesses are not benefiting from GM staying in business. Many suppliers are small businesses, local shops, doctors offices, etc.

The irony is democrats don't realize that vilifying the "rich" they are actually including many small and struggling businesses in that category.

GM and Chrysler got bailed out for two reasons. They were huge, and both political parties had something to gain from it.

Pedestrian:

you do know that the evil union = the American middle class, don't you?

Surely you realize that only about 12% of Americans are members of unions right, according the the Department of Labor

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

That's a far each to say unions = middle class. My wife, who's an RN, became part of a union recently (SEIU). She's been a nurse for 20 years without union support, does a great job, gets fair pay, but now, suddenly she has to pay $86 a pay period for the "privilege" of being part of a union that does NOT represent her views and doesn't NOTHING visible for the nurses who were given a Dog and Pony Show about the benefits of unionization. So, SEIU takes my wifes money, primarly to help elect Democrats, against my wife's desires.

"Change we can belive in..." at least for Union Fatcats

.

.

Bobby Jones,

I too had my own business for over 20 years, I was a small time manufacturer with 8 employees but all the competition from China and all the regulations just made me give up, I never got any support from any kind of government.

I do understand that there are small businesses that will benefit from GM and Chrysler bailouts but there would have been plenty of other small businesses that would have benefited just as much if all the small mom and pop businesses were bailed out.

My personal belief is that NO ONE should get a bailout but if there is one than everyone should get it also.

John, that's 12% of Americans that are being demonized on a regular basis by the right. I'll be curious to hear from you regarding your wife's shift hours and overtime pay. In our local medical center the nurses were working back-to-back shifts with no increase in pay until SEIU stepped in.

Peter17,

GM went through bankruptcy. All Obama did was shovel money to the UAW to repay them for support during his presidential campaign. The outcome for GM would have been the same without government intervention, but their bond holders would have been better off and the UAW would have taken a big hit.

Although the first part of your statement about Obama repaying UAW support might be true (UAW got 20 percent of GM common stock, $6.5 billion of preferred shares and a $2.5 billion note from GM as part of 2009 restructuring), how in the world can you say, "The outcome for GM would have been the same without government intervention?" Every independent observer, business professors (U of M, Northwestern, Chicago Booth, etc.) who analysed the deal over the past 3 years have concluded that without the GM restructuring, 1 to 2 million auto and auto-ancillary jobs would have been lost.

Also, as part of the deal, two important things happened which are igniting the US auto industry recovery:

1. The UAW gave up its right to strike GM or Chrysler as part of the government bailouts.

2. Workers would be hired at a second-tier entry level wage of about $15 per hour under the 2007 agreement, much lower than $47 or %52 for the current tier-1 employees.

These two alone are substantial concessions by UAW and now GM and Chrysler are better companies than before. Of course, Bond Holders got sidelined; it is a collateral damage. Imagine what have happened if US auto industry wasn't helped out. US manufacturing and the entire mid-west would be in doldrums. Bailing out auto industry was a better thing to do than bailing out the Wall Street.

Tea Sucks,

I agree with everything until the last statement.

Bailing out auto industry was a better thing to do than bailing out the Wall Street.

Everything you have said about GM is just as relevant in the wall street bailout. Just on a much much bigger scale.

Imagine what have happened if US auto industry wasn't helped out. US manufacturing and the entire mid-west would be in doldrums

Now if wall street wasn't bailed out, imagine Americans not being able to go to their ATM and withdraw their own money.

I am not a fan of bailouts because of the mistakes that were made to make bailouts necessary, however they were necessary.

The worst part is the only lesson that's going to be learned by corporations is if your going top fail, make sure your a huge company.

Booby Jones,

Everything you have said about GM is just as relevant in the wall street bailout. Just on a much much bigger scale.

Now if wall street wasn't bailed out, image no American being able to go to their ATM and withdraw their own money.

Just FYI. I work in Wall Street and I work with Bankers and so I can respond to your notes diligently.

I don't know whether you remember that week in Sept 2008, when Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke had the guts to go in front of the US Congress Joint Committee on Finance and presented a 3-page plea for $700B? It is considered as the most dumbest moments in Business in 2008 by Forbes magazine.

It and the subsequent requests by Feds and Treasury could not provide one iota of evidence to the US Congress as to why the bailout was needed. i.e. what would have happened to the US banking industry if the US Banks and quasi-GSEs were not bailed out by the US Treasury or the Fed Reserve? Ben Bernanke and Paulson could not provide any numbers to prove their point. For example, they could have said, "$5Trillion of capital would flow out of the country". Or "3 million Banking jobs will be would be lost". Or, "50% of the major banks with over 10 Billion in Assets would go bankrupt". They provided absolutely no contra-evidence as to why the Wall Street Bailout was necessary. They kept repeating the same mantra, "If the Banks are not bailed out, the Banking System as we know it, would fail". They could never define what that meant not they put any numbers around what would constitute a US Banking failure.

Not all people are Rick Perry, you know. If they had crunched the numbers (reg scenarios) and provided them to the public, then let the public make the determination whether bailing out Wall Street was indeed necessary.

On the other hand, Obama's ex-car Czar, Steven Rattner, and his deputy Ron Bloom, I believe, did a better job in presenting the need for bailing out GM and Chrysler and they provided clear numbers on who gets what (shareholding, etc.), timeline for government exit, etc. They even provided what would happen under catastrophic scenarios in the mid-west if auto industry wasn't bailed out. You may not like their numbers nor the decision by Obama. But they laid out a clear case. Not so, in case of Wall Street bailout. It's wrong to have bailed out Wall Street, even though Obama supported it. Because the alternatives were not presented and money went to bailing out the foreign banks and CMBS held by the Chinese, in addition to the US Banks.

So none of the money was used to recover losses from credit defaults? It was my understanding that the banks had way more in liabilities than assets plus cash on hand, do to the mortgage swap fiasco.

Pedestrian:

I'll be curious to hear from you regarding your wife's shift hours and overtime pay

There were no changes in pay, hours, working conditions... Nothing, expect a mandatory and automatic seizure from our paycheck to feather the nests of Union Leaders. Oh, they do have a Shop Steward too.

And who are these 12% who are "regularly demonized?" Do you mean people like the powerful teacher's unions, who collaborate to elect members of the School Board, so sympathetic members can help "negotiate" favorable contracts for the teachers, at the expense of the American Taxpayer?

.

Royal...according to independent rating by people qualified to have an opinion, The Toyota Tundra is the best built truck and has been for years.

Ford F-150 FTW.

hs21, the Tundra? I've always liked our 2007 Tundra, and I can see why others would agree. But I think Ford is still the sales leader in trucks.

I guess all those years of Toyota truck frames busting in two must have made it past all those "qualified experts". There are very few older Toyota trucks left up here in the rust belt. Most of them broke in half years ago. Also I guess those same experts must have missed that the Toyota 3.0 v-6 was a big steaming pile of crap.

royalstar05 hs321 Eric A-862331: Tell it to those GMC and Chevy owners up ahead, if you can get within earshot of them.

Dodge Ram is the best by FAR.

I own two Ford trucks. One is a 1998 with absolutely no rust and has been out in the elements for many years. It has considerable miles on it and looks great. I also own a 1990 F150, again with no rust, is kept inside, and has had no problems. Both these trucks are farm trucks. Other than replacing brake pads they both have performed well.

My friends next door have 3 awefully new Ford F150s and one has had the engine out already and the other 2 have had the transmissions out on both. Horrible trucks. They are still under warranty but still. Junk. Quality is not job 1 anymore for ford. I'll stick with my Dodges.

President Obama deserves most of the credit for saving the American auto industry, by demanding the auto execs come up with a viable plan before the massive government loan, and then helping the bankruptcy proceed at warp speed. Did I say loan? That's right. This was a loan, not a "bailout" as the right loves to tout. I'm hoping that GM will soon be able to turn over a big fat check to the government soon and pay down a major portion of this loan and demonstrate to the American taxpayer this was the right thing to do for the future of our nation.

There is no such thing as a "Dodge Ram" anymore. That's like calling a vehicle a Chevy Buick. Ram is it's own brand now along with Chrysler, Jeep, and Dodge. I will give them credit for finally making a truck that's worth a look. I've never liked previous gen Rams.

As far as Toyota's, people need to let the rust thing go, seriously. Yes, there was absolutely a problem with a few years of Tacoma and Tundra frames. For which Toyota either replaced the frames(free of charge, of course) or bought back the trucks. Not much else they could do except address those problem trucks and fix the issue going forward with new trucks. Tons of old Toyota trucks around as well with hundreds of thousands of miles on them. My 09 Tacoma has been great, plenty of owners with this generation are already over 200k with no problems. If I were buying a full size truck now, it would likely be an F150.

As for the actual article, good for GM. They're finally making vehicles worth buying that aren't garbage.

I like the looks of the RAM but the F-150 is the best truck on the road.

Dodge by FAR the best. If you are a true Mopar guy, its still Dodge Ram. They are still made by Chrysler Corp so its still a Dodge.

Dodge by FAR the best. If you are a true Mopar guy, its still Dodge Ram. They are still made by Chrysler Corp so its still a Dodge.

Sorry I work on cars and I just know what holds up better over time Chrysler products have always been gas hogs.

Sorry right back at ya, Fords suck. Quality is not job 1 anymore at Ford. Later, got better things to do.

Economykiller, I understand your view, but unfortunately there are too many idiot drivers who can't remember to turn on their headlights. Just think of how many times you have recently seen some dim brained fool driving at night with their lights off. Most are yakking on a phone or texting...

I've seen lots of cars that only have the daytime running lights on at night. And how about when most cars have the full screen digital displays that are showing up? Those are lit all the time so people will think they have their lights on when they really don't.

I agree there are many idiots out there. That is why on other car related articles I have said that taking the written driving exam should be mandatory at license renewal. And if you have accidents or moving violations the driving test should be mandatory at license renewal.

I prefer smarter drivers over smarter cars.

I could not agree with you more. But having daytime headlights on at night is better than none. I think driving is too easy. How many of these distracted drivers can manage a manual transmission? The poor driving habits that I see every day makes me want to commute in a tank...

And your point is? Are you pissed off that an American company has pulled it self out of the crapper and have risen to the top again? Or are you just all pissed off because another one of Obama's moves proved successful!!! Sucks to be a teapublican doesn't it!

If most of the sales are in China, that is good news for the balance of trade deficit. I'm all for selling American made goods to foreign countries. That is how the global economy works and no matter how isolationist some people want to be, that is the reality of how the world works today. If GM can get market share in the most populous country in the world - good for them, and us.

If most of the sales are in China, that is good news for the balance of trade deficit.

You only think that it's good news because you are under the incorrect assumption that GM builds the cars that it sells in China within the US.

You are wrong: GM builds most of its cars sold in Asia through its Shanghai GM partnership, in China.

This does not help the US trade deficit.

Peter, your hate of the President show through.

Are you pissed off that an American company has pulled it self out of the crapper and have risen to the top again?

He's pissed at anything positive under a dem administration, just like Rupert Murdoch and the Koch Bros.

The correct response to his comments are, "Polly want a cracker?"

The issue is whether any government should pick and choose which industries get saved. Democrats are all about what is fair, and so is it fair to bail out one industry and let others die? Isn't one person's job just as important as another?

GM survived because bondholders took it on the chin, wages and benefits were slashed for employees, and the government gave out thousands to auto buyers in the way of a clunker credit. On top of that their foreign competitors suffered due to recalls, justified or not, and calamities not of their own making.

Again, I would point to the price of GM. I would not say that stock price indicates any sort of belief yet.

SallyAnn-4595694: You are right. Many hate our President. I cannot understand why. He is very intelligent, works very hard for the betterment of the country and It's people, in such a quiet and unique way. Generally, He's very restrained with criticisms of those who blame and distort his efforts, and conducts himself with great dignity and humility, yet exudes steely resolve against any and all enemies who would bring harm to our nation. Working to undo the construction of economic oligarchy built by the republicans to the favor and betterment of the poor and middle class is hardly a sign of weakness. It is in fact, a display of greatness required to complete the task. I like this Man. Fact, I take great pride in the fact that He is our President. Now, We need to get rid of that pack of "3ed grade educated republican dolts who make up most of our Congress. Gwad!, with enough smart and caring people populating the Congress, working with President Obama, It wouldn't take us long to reinstate employment security and a thriving economy that would again be the envy of the world. Regards

We've already made money on the deal, sorry if you can't accept that.

Unionized work place now the global sales leader. Kind of ruins ALL your talking points, doesn't it?

You know the U.S. and Canadian Government owns 72% of GM combined, with the U.S. Gov't with the bigger stake, so I'd say the citizens, of both U.S. and Canada, got the short end of that deal.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/one-year-after-the-gm-ipo-how-is-our-50-billion-investment-looking/

PS. I'm an Obama supporter but facts are facts. Live with it Dems.

Yes, owning a stake in the global sales leader is certainly a failure for all of us.

Find a real source, not a Beck rag.

@ Cant Roll - Are you benefiting from GM's new status as the "Global Sales Leader"? Your money did help out with that, so are you receiving any dividends?

Okie doke,

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/05/general-motors-debt/

Sorry, didn't realize Blaze was a Beck thing (I can't stand him) but it appears that the previously posted link WAS accurate.

We're all benefiting from those people working. If you can't see that, you're deranged.

Peter17.... your a f'n idiot.

You know the U.S. and Canadian Government owns 72% of GM combined, with the U.S. Gov't with the bigger stake, so I'd say the citizens, of both U.S. and Canada, got the short end of that deal.

Not anymore, remember the stock offering last year. Before the IPO the U.S. government owened about 27% and Canada owned about 12%.

John-2046868: John, Peter really isn't an idiot. He is though, a humper for laissez-faire economics, an absence of corporate taxes, and the reinstatement of slavery. He's the epitome of the greedy hedge fund thug. Otherwise, He's a pretty good guy.

JTM-890765, maybe if you didn't use a source that wasn't 9 months old. LOL They stock has risen since that report which was actually compiled in April so it was really 10 months ago.

It was offeredat $35 a share as of right now it's trading at $24.90. The offering was way to high. Considering Ford which did not participate in the TARP funding was trading around $15 a share at the time. The valuations were way off.

The result so far has been a bad investment.

We've already made money on the deal, sorry if you can't accept that.

We "Taxpayers" lost $14 Billion on the deal. That's why I said we "taxpayers" got the short end of the deal. GM was smart with the bailout money, while the Gov't got stock that should have been, at that time, considered junk stock. Out of the $50 Billion, GM got a $6.7 Billion loan, stock and an escrow account at $13.4 Billion. GM payed back that $6.7 Billion from that escrow account. Now GM is back on top of the world at the taxpayers expense and bad investing by the Gov't.

That's not actually true.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/one-year-after-the-gm-ipo-how-is-our-50-billion-investment-looking/

WRONG!!!

I beg to differ, when you add up the taxes from the millions of Jobs that was saved, then yes we made money off of the deal. It was a win win for the govt! Instead of the GOP's plan of watching it crash and burn!

Pissedoffperson: You're right. It's true. Thanks for pointing that out.

I am also a Ford guy, but I am glad to see another American corporation making a profit and keeping more AMERICANS employed!

BUY AMERICAN MADE!

They're like hamsters, teabaggers eat their young.

Crawl out from under the rock and get a clue. The government has MADE money from the bailout of GM.

they already have.

Joe, how about finding all those pallets of money Bush lost in Iraq? How many billions was that?

Joe, Bush paid for our war with loans from China. Bush fought for unfunded tax cuts. Bush increased the Debt Ceiling FIVE times in his Decidership. Bush - a mess...total mess. Thank you Republicans - that Grand Old Party!

I know it cost less than the useless war in Iraq and no one died.

Actually Anita you are wrong. When GM and Chrysler were bailed out thousands and thousands of lawsuits over their faulty cars and trucks that maimed, and yes killed, people were just thrown out like trash with the bankruptcy. Look it up.

Mean Girl, your post is completely illogical. The money spent on "bailing out" Chrysler and GM did not result in deaths just as Anita posted. You confirm it when you point out that lawsuits filed for PAST events were thrown out. None of those claims are for post bankruptcy product claims, are they?

Tell me you would buy a car with no radio, no air conditioning, no power steering and no power brakes today? Tell me that the value of the car would be high when it came time to trade it in. Sure, some would buy stripped down models, but I would hazard a guess that most would want those "options" that are being "forced" on people.

It would actually cost more to produce a stripped down model(manual windows, manual seats, no a/c, no power brakes etc.) than one with standard features on today's production lines.

And Old Paul remember there is nothing free in this world you pay for it one way or another.

And, there it is in a nutshell, Gina: the right eagerly supports real, kid-killing socialism economically in the name of higher profits- all while waging a war of words against a populism that wants nothing more than and end to the overweening arrogance and greed of the richest.

The Malibu is one of the most popular cars they have. My dad has his second, I had one and we both think they are good cars.

Why the heck are you comparing a Malibu ($20,000) to a Volvo ($30,000 - ???) anyway?

JTM-890765...you are correct.

JTM,

Drive a Volvo, and you'll understand. Why the heck to compare? Because they are more or less same size cars, same manufacture year, and roughly same feature set. Yes, the quality comes at a price.

Good point!

Nice- a collection of unrelated facts "supporting" an unsubstantiated conclusion.

Reality: the average service life exceeds 200,000 miles now- and at the nadir of GM's moronic management policies, you would have been lucky to get half that.

Sending an entrenched solipsist management into exile and replacing them with new blood made more difference than any of the changes you cite above.

The biggest problems with American managers can be summarized with a few lethal memes, and GM's leadership exemplified all of them.

• Authority starts at the top, responsibility starts at the bottom.
• You don't need to know anything about a job to manage the people doing it.
• The people at the bottom make less money, so their ideas and their contributions to the welfare and profitability of the corporation must be worth less- i.e. worthless.
• The people at the top should be paid the highest possible wage to insure the attraction of the best talent.
• Doing "more with less"- i.e. stripping your staffing down to a Dachauesque parody of what is actually required- has no impact on quality, morale, customer loyalty, or the long term survival of a corporation.

James Taylor unintentionally described the resulting collapse of GM, caused by a management team that probably still can't understand why it failed so abysmally: "I used to think that I was cool, running around on fossil fuel- Until I saw what I was doing, was driving down the road to ruin."

Fact check: there was a six-month supply of Japanese cars that weren't selling already here when the tsunami hit.

There is still no Japanese failure to meet demand- there is a failure to compete with a restructured GM.

What part of these realities did you fail to grasp?

Boohoo, someone call a waaambulance.

Who's crying? I'm dancing- on the grave of Republican efforts to destroy what's left of the middle class.

LOL, I was kinda wondering what the RW response would be to make sure our President received no credit. LOL....so it was thanks to Nature, in spite of Pres Obama.

Just like Bin-Laden finally allowed himself to be caught for fear of all the pressure Bush previously applied.

Thse RW loons aren't evn Americans. Go move to Somalia ya dop-e. They have no Government at all.

Fact check: Japanese autos were selling well with less than a 45 days supply of vehicles when the earthquake and tsunami hit. Toyota was on a record pace. The only failure to compete with a restructured GM was the failure of inventory available. THe Japanese inventories have still not returned to normal, and won't for another two or three months due to the late 2011 flooding in Thiland. Let's make a bet: If mother nature, and the U.S. government will leave Toyota and Honda alone this year, let's see which cars sell, and which makes consumers really preffer.

marc ensign : Yep. Tsunamis and Earthquakes are destructive. They can kill, maime and destroy. Strangely though, neither ever seems to have any effect on, or cause redistribution of "bullsh^t. Toyota is already in trouble again with their infamous "unintended accelaration". Lying about it again too. To hear them tell it, the only stupid drivers are those who drive their vehicles. Keep hanging their accelarators on the vehicles floor carpet? Lying won't fix a faulty ECM. Consumers will dodge them like the plague.

Dumb comment Dave. I have owned GM most of my life, and have always had very serviceable and good cars. I had a 2000 Camaro that I drove nearly 160,000 with only maintenance items replaced, would be driving it today if I hadn't been rear ended by an idiot ona cell phone. I have a Corvette now with 60,000 miles runs wonderful. Collectively, over the year I haveput well over a million miles on GM cars, and will continue to prefer them over others. To paraphrase a popular quote, "cars don't fall apart, people make cars fall apart!"

I'm with ya Dave. Our last GM was a 2007 Silverado. Steering shaft had to be replaced at 8,300 miles and the windshield had an annoying air leak. Thank GOD we were only leasing and got rid of it in 2010.

How long ago did you have a GM product, Dave? Are you certain that your singular vehicle is representative of ALL American made vehicles? Really?

Dave - must say - the very worst jump car I have EVER owned was a Honda Accord. Factual Piece of Shiit. Junk - crap. Swore if I EVER won the lotto, I'd paint that damn mess yellow and ship to Japan. NEVER would I own a Honda again. There was not a single system that didn't go bad - not a single system from the engine mounts to the electrical - no radio when the headlights were turned on.

Best I've ever owned? Chrysler 300 Limited. Hands down. 2004 and that baby purrs. Just purrs like a kitten. Adore that silly thing.

am with you Flapjac...now you are talkin....