GM Eats Its Children: Cuts Research And Development... to Boost Profits?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 4:19 PM GMT
    Anyone willing to invest in GM? It's usually the idiots who think that boosting short term profits directly results in better returns. But how matters as much as the results.

    Anyone cynical might think this has to do with this coming election this fall and the bailouts that have only pushed the its demise out a few years.

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/05/gm-eats-its-children-cuts-research-and-development/

    If you want to pretty-up the P&L of a car company, there are two quick fixes: You cut marketing expenses, or you cut R&D. A cut of R&D expenses won’t show up negatively for three to five years, when you suddenly lack new cars to sell. In the meantime, you look like a hero. General Motors plans to cut about a quarter of the workers at its R&D facility at the Warren Technical Center in suburban Detroit, Automotive News [sub] says.

    According to the report, GM plans to lay off about one fourth of the roughly 400 R&D personnel at the Warren complex. 90 R&D workers at a GM research facility in India will also receive the pink slip, an Automotive News source said.

    In a statement, GM confirmed a restructuring of its R&D department, but would not confirm the number of layoffs.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 4:36 PM GMT
    I'm sure it has nothing to do with the securities market which has long rewarded short term cost-cutting over long-term investment and growth.

    I sincerely hope that you don't take your own bullshit seriously because you expose yourself as a ideological and pragmatic fraud on nearly a daily basis.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 4:38 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidI'm sure it has nothing to do with the securities market which has long rewarded short term cost-cutting over long-term investment and growth.

    I sincerely hope that you don't take your own bullshit seriously because you expose yourself as a ideological and pragmatic fraud on nearly a daily basis.


    I hope you try your hand in investing - you will get your just reward. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 4:39 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidI'm sure it has nothing to do with the securities market which has long rewarded short term cost-cutting over long-term investment and growth.

    I sincerely hope that you don't take your own bullshit seriously because you expose yourself as a ideological and pragmatic fraud on nearly a daily basis.

    Riddler and the article are on point. You obviously don't have experience in industry. The only bullshit is your response, provided on a minute by minute basis. Not very selective at all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 5:10 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidI'm sure it has nothing to do with the securities market which has long rewarded short term cost-cutting over long-term investment and growth.

    I sincerely hope that you don't take your own bullshit seriously because you expose yourself as a ideological and pragmatic fraud on nearly a daily basis.

    Riddler and the article are on point. You obviously don't have experience in industry. The only bullshit is your response, provided on a minute by minute basis. Not very selective at all.


    It's more indicative of the fact that Christian works in the not for profit sector given his persistent inability to recognize what creates and sustains real value to society and instead relies on the benevolence of others.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 6:27 PM GMT

    *Topic blaming Obama and blah blah blah*

    erm...outsourcing.


    http://www.sourcingnotes.com/content/view/61/74/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 7:08 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    *Topic blaming Obama and blah blah blah*

    erm...outsourcing.


    http://www.sourcingnotes.com/content/view/61/74/


    Um they cut R&D spending. This isn't a topic blaming Obama - it's anyone who supported the government intervention - and it's also just as easy to see you as partisan in defending Obama against anything - particularly when it's so clear how nutty this is.

    They didn't just cut people - ie they're also not outsourcing the R&D (which for the record I think is rather foolish to outsource to somewhere like China for most things)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 7:55 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Christian73 saidI'm sure it has nothing to do with the securities market which has long rewarded short term cost-cutting over long-term investment and growth.

    I sincerely hope that you don't take your own bullshit seriously because you expose yourself as a ideological and pragmatic fraud on nearly a daily basis.

    Riddler and the article are on point. You obviously don't have experience in industry. The only bullshit is your response, provided on a minute by minute basis. Not very selective at all.


    Socal -

    Given the current delusional state of your mind, I think it's best that you refrain from commentary lest the men in the white coats discern your location.

    Riddler -

    Your hypocrisy knows no bounds and whatever tiny bit of credibility you might have had with non-conservaposse members diminishes with every post.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 8:11 PM GMT
    riddler78 saidAnyone willing to invest in GM? It's usually the idiots who think that boosting short term profits directly results in better returns. But how matters as much as the results.

    Anyone cynical might think this has to do with this coming election this fall and the bailouts that have only pushed the its demise out a few years.

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/05/gm-eats-its-children-cuts-research-and-development/

    If you want to pretty-up the P&L of a car company, there are two quick fixes: You cut marketing expenses, or you cut R&D. A cut of R&D expenses won’t show up negatively for three to five years, when you suddenly lack new cars to sell. In the meantime, you look like a hero. General Motors plans to cut about a quarter of the workers at its R&D facility at the Warren Technical Center in suburban Detroit, Automotive News [sub] says.

    According to the report, GM plans to lay off about one fourth of the roughly 400 R&D personnel at the Warren complex. 90 R&D workers at a GM research facility in India will also receive the pink slip, an Automotive News source said.

    In a statement, GM confirmed a restructuring of its R&D department, but would not confirm the number of layoffs.


    Careful with TTAC. Well known GM haters.

    From the comments:

    for FY2011, GM R&D was 5.41% of revenue – Here’s the list:

    Median 2.71%
    Average 4.94%

    Tesla 102.32%
    Audi 5.99%
    Honda 5.45%
    GM 5.41%
    BMW 5.25%
    Renault SA 4.76%
    Chongqing 4.57%
    Nissan 4.55%
    VW 4.52%
    Mazda 4.51%
    Isuzu 4.14%
    Suzuki 3.99%
    Daimler 3.92%
    Ford 3.89%
    Sanyang 3.89%
    Toyota 3.85%
    Kia 3.65%
    Jiangling 3.61%
    Peugeot 3.59%
    Hyundai 3.22%
    FIAT 2.3%
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 9:33 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidRiddler -

    Your hypocrisy knows no bounds and whatever tiny bit of credibility you might have had with non-conservaposse members diminishes with every post.


    Lol - as if a troll like you is remotely credible in that regard. icon_rolleyes.gif

    What makes it more amusing is how obviously you have been projecting in your attacks on others.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 9:35 PM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    riddler78 saidAnyone willing to invest in GM? It's usually the idiots who think that boosting short term profits directly results in better returns. But how matters as much as the results.

    Anyone cynical might think this has to do with this coming election this fall and the bailouts that have only pushed the its demise out a few years.

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/05/gm-eats-its-children-cuts-research-and-development/

    If you want to pretty-up the P&L of a car company, there are two quick fixes: You cut marketing expenses, or you cut R&D. A cut of R&D expenses won’t show up negatively for three to five years, when you suddenly lack new cars to sell. In the meantime, you look like a hero. General Motors plans to cut about a quarter of the workers at its R&D facility at the Warren Technical Center in suburban Detroit, Automotive News [sub] says.

    According to the report, GM plans to lay off about one fourth of the roughly 400 R&D personnel at the Warren complex. 90 R&D workers at a GM research facility in India will also receive the pink slip, an Automotive News source said.

    In a statement, GM confirmed a restructuring of its R&D department, but would not confirm the number of layoffs.


    Careful with TTAC. Well known GM haters.

    From the comments:

    for FY2011, GM R&D was 5.41% of revenue – Here’s the list:

    Median 2.71%
    Average 4.94%

    Tesla 102.32%
    Audi 5.99%
    Honda 5.45%
    GM 5.41%
    BMW 5.25%
    Renault SA 4.76%
    Chongqing 4.57%
    Nissan 4.55%
    VW 4.52%
    Mazda 4.51%
    Isuzu 4.14%
    Suzuki 3.99%
    Daimler 3.92%
    Ford 3.89%
    Sanyang 3.89%
    Toyota 3.85%
    Kia 3.65%
    Jiangling 3.61%
    Peugeot 3.59%
    Hyundai 3.22%
    FIAT 2.3%


    The problem here is that they are cutting 1/4 of their department which is a significant change no matter how you cut it. You can make the argument that they want to be more like Suzuki but ... is that an argument you want to make?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 10:47 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidRiddler -

    Your hypocrisy knows no bounds and whatever tiny bit of credibility you might have had with non-conservaposse members diminishes with every post.


    Lol - as if a troll like you is remotely credible in that regard. icon_rolleyes.gif

    What makes it more amusing is how obviously you have been projecting in your attacks on others.


    Not at all. I'm consistent in my beliefs, views and positions unlike someone living in a socialist country who makes his money via a communist country and spends his time on this website telling everyone what a capitalist he is. icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 11:34 PM GMT
    riddler78 said
    freedomisntfree said
    riddler78 saidAnyone willing to invest in GM? It's usually the idiots who think that boosting short term profits directly results in better returns. But how matters as much as the results.

    Anyone cynical might think this has to do with this coming election this fall and the bailouts that have only pushed the its demise out a few years.

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/05/gm-eats-its-children-cuts-research-and-development/

    If you want to pretty-up the P&L of a car company, there are two quick fixes: You cut marketing expenses, or you cut R&D. A cut of R&D expenses won’t show up negatively for three to five years, when you suddenly lack new cars to sell. In the meantime, you look like a hero. General Motors plans to cut about a quarter of the workers at its R&D facility at the Warren Technical Center in suburban Detroit, Automotive News [sub] says.

    According to the report, GM plans to lay off about one fourth of the roughly 400 R&D personnel at the Warren complex. 90 R&D workers at a GM research facility in India will also receive the pink slip, an Automotive News source said.

    In a statement, GM confirmed a restructuring of its R&D department, but would not confirm the number of layoffs.


    Careful with TTAC. Well known GM haters.

    From the comments:

    for FY2011, GM R&D was 5.41% of revenue – Here’s the list:

    Median 2.71%
    Average 4.94%

    Tesla 102.32%
    Audi 5.99%
    Honda 5.45%
    GM 5.41%
    BMW 5.25%
    Renault SA 4.76%
    Chongqing 4.57%
    Nissan 4.55%
    VW 4.52%
    Mazda 4.51%
    Isuzu 4.14%
    Suzuki 3.99%
    Daimler 3.92%
    Ford 3.89%
    Sanyang 3.89%
    Toyota 3.85%
    Kia 3.65%
    Jiangling 3.61%
    Peugeot 3.59%
    Hyundai 3.22%
    FIAT 2.3%


    The problem here is that they are cutting 1/4 of their department which is a significant change no matter how you cut it. You can make the argument that they want to be more like Suzuki but ... is that an argument you want to make?


    Or more like Ford or Daimler?

    Why would you insist on making everything an argument?

    I have much confidence in my friends at GM. I hope my confidence is not misplaced.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 11:53 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidRiddler -

    Your hypocrisy knows no bounds and whatever tiny bit of credibility you might have had with non-conservaposse members diminishes with every post.


    Lol - as if a troll like you is remotely credible in that regard. icon_rolleyes.gif

    What makes it more amusing is how obviously you have been projecting in your attacks on others.


    Not at all. I'm consistent in my beliefs, views and positions unlike someone living in a socialist country who makes his money via a communist country and spends his time on this website telling everyone what a capitalist he is. icon_lol.gif


    Only you would think you're consistent in your views. I should note that Canada now has a lower corporate tax rate than the US and lower taxes in general. So which country is more socialist?

    As for my work to facilitate trade with China, I'm pretty proud of my record of helping companies thrive, while bringing more people out of poverty than you ever will. That being said, that isn't entirely how I make my money. But I mean how could you possibly understand or help others out of poverty with your remarkably poor understanding of what it is that creates value and your record of profiting off the benevolence of others?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 04, 2012 11:56 PM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    riddler78 said
    freedomisntfree said
    riddler78 saidAnyone willing to invest in GM? It's usually the idiots who think that boosting short term profits directly results in better returns. But how matters as much as the results.

    Anyone cynical might think this has to do with this coming election this fall and the bailouts that have only pushed the its demise out a few years.

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/05/gm-eats-its-children-cuts-research-and-development/

    If you want to pretty-up the P&L of a car company, there are two quick fixes: You cut marketing expenses, or you cut R&D. A cut of R&D expenses won’t show up negatively for three to five years, when you suddenly lack new cars to sell. In the meantime, you look like a hero. General Motors plans to cut about a quarter of the workers at its R&D facility at the Warren Technical Center in suburban Detroit, Automotive News [sub] says.

    According to the report, GM plans to lay off about one fourth of the roughly 400 R&D personnel at the Warren complex. 90 R&D workers at a GM research facility in India will also receive the pink slip, an Automotive News source said.

    In a statement, GM confirmed a restructuring of its R&D department, but would not confirm the number of layoffs.


    Careful with TTAC. Well known GM haters.

    From the comments:

    for FY2011, GM R&D was 5.41% of revenue – Here’s the list:

    Median 2.71%
    Average 4.94%

    Tesla 102.32%
    Audi 5.99%
    Honda 5.45%
    GM 5.41%
    BMW 5.25%
    Renault SA 4.76%
    Chongqing 4.57%
    Nissan 4.55%
    VW 4.52%
    Mazda 4.51%
    Isuzu 4.14%
    Suzuki 3.99%
    Daimler 3.92%
    Ford 3.89%
    Sanyang 3.89%
    Toyota 3.85%
    Kia 3.65%
    Jiangling 3.61%
    Peugeot 3.59%
    Hyundai 3.22%
    FIAT 2.3%


    The problem here is that they are cutting 1/4 of their department which is a significant change no matter how you cut it. You can make the argument that they want to be more like Suzuki but ... is that an argument you want to make?


    Or more like Ford or Daimler?

    Why would you insist on making everything an argument?

    I have much confidence in my friends at GM. I hope my confidence is not misplaced.


    The timing is suspect. I use phrase argument in the colloquial sense - I mean you can believe that GM will thrive... I doubt it will - and its history and record suggests I'm probably going to be right here. But the easiest way to bet is to buy or short the stock.

    It seems particularly unwise however to cut back on R&D especially as we are about to see likely massive changes in transportation in the coming years - so it doesn't seem either unlikely or suspect to wonder if there are other reasons for the cutbacks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 12:11 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidRiddler -

    Your hypocrisy knows no bounds and whatever tiny bit of credibility you might have had with non-conservaposse members diminishes with every post.


    Lol - as if a troll like you is remotely credible in that regard. icon_rolleyes.gif

    What makes it more amusing is how obviously you have been projecting in your attacks on others.


    Not at all. I'm consistent in my beliefs, views and positions unlike someone living in a socialist country who makes his money via a communist country and spends his time on this website telling everyone what a capitalist he is. icon_lol.gif


    Only you would think you're consistent in your views. I should note that Canada now has a lower corporate tax rate than the US and lower taxes in general. So which country is more socialist?

    As for my work to facilitate trade with China, I'm pretty proud of my record of helping companies thrive, while bringing more people out of poverty than you ever will. That being said, that isn't entirely how I make my money. But I mean how could you possibly understand or help others out of poverty with your remarkably poor understanding of what it is that creates value and your record of profiting off the benevolence of others?


    Your replies are just sad...

    Corporate tax rates have nothing to do with socialism - one way of the other - so that red herring is just going to be left flopping on the deck.

    And as for "facilitating trade with China", I think it's safe to assume that you're record of creating "value" and bringing "people out of poverty" is quite similar to Romney's, which is to say a complete fabrication.

    And I don't profit of the benevolence of others. I actually facilitate social investment which allows donors of all incomes to act on their values and help actual poor people.

    But since you cannot conceived of a motivation outside of money, you're incapable of understanding that. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 12:14 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidRiddler -

    Your hypocrisy knows no bounds and whatever tiny bit of credibility you might have had with non-conservaposse members diminishes with every post.


    Lol - as if a troll like you is remotely credible in that regard. icon_rolleyes.gif

    What makes it more amusing is how obviously you have been projecting in your attacks on others.


    Not at all. I'm consistent in my beliefs, views and positions unlike someone living in a socialist country who makes his money via a communist country and spends his time on this website telling everyone what a capitalist he is. icon_lol.gif


    Only you would think you're consistent in your views. I should note that Canada now has a lower corporate tax rate than the US and lower taxes in general. So which country is more socialist?

    As for my work to facilitate trade with China, I'm pretty proud of my record of helping companies thrive, while bringing more people out of poverty than you ever will. That being said, that isn't entirely how I make my money. But I mean how could you possibly understand or help others out of poverty with your remarkably poor understanding of what it is that creates value and your record of profiting off the benevolence of others?


    Your replies are just sad...

    Corporate tax rates have nothing to do with socialism - one way of the other - so that red herring is just going to be left flopping on the deck.

    And as for "facilitating trade with China", I think it's safe to assume that you're record of creating "value" and bringing "people out of poverty" is quite similar to Romney's, which is to say a complete fabrication.

    And I don't profit of the benevolence of others. I actually facilitate social investment which allows donors of all incomes to act on their values and help actual poor people.

    But since you cannot conceived of a motivation outside of money, you're incapable of understanding that. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Government spending and taxation absolutely has everything to do with socialism. Red herring? That would be most of your arguments.

    Lol - by "social investment" you mean spending? or value destruction no doubt, when it comes to you. Unfortunately for you I have that basic grasp of economics that understands that it isn't about money but what it represents. Of course, that would require you to have some grasp of economics to understand.

    As for facilitating trade with China - China's economic growth is singlehandedly responsible for the massive reduction in global poverty but also has allowed entrepreneurs globally to leverage their manufacturing capabilities. Of course to you it would seem trade is an anathema despite the fact that it is through trade that comparative advantage is achieved... so we're back to that "value" thing that you simply couldn't possibly understand.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    May 05, 2012 12:46 AM GMT
    GM is not a sound investment and likely never will be a sound investment. The current crop of cars are built on platforms that were developed in Europe and Australia. When GM brought the Opel designed and built Buick Regal to Canada for production, they substituted metals and changed key dimensions within the "body in white." Doesn't take much brain power to figure out why that happened.

    I would not call these platforms "state-of-the-art." GM will fall off the development curve by pulling back on R&D and engineering design. No surprise. One makes more money at GM screwing on lug nuts than one does as a mechanical engineer holding a PE.

    GM won't be missed when a strong leader decides not to bail it out in its' next period of dire circumstances.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 12:47 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    freedomisntfree said
    riddler78 said
    freedomisntfree said
    riddler78 saidAnyone willing to invest in GM? It's usually the idiots who think that boosting short term profits directly results in better returns. But how matters as much as the results.

    Anyone cynical might think this has to do with this coming election this fall and the bailouts that have only pushed the its demise out a few years.

    http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/05/gm-eats-its-children-cuts-research-and-development/

    If you want to pretty-up the P&L of a car company, there are two quick fixes: You cut marketing expenses, or you cut R&D. A cut of R&D expenses won’t show up negatively for three to five years, when you suddenly lack new cars to sell. In the meantime, you look like a hero. General Motors plans to cut about a quarter of the workers at its R&D facility at the Warren Technical Center in suburban Detroit, Automotive News [sub] says.

    According to the report, GM plans to lay off about one fourth of the roughly 400 R&D personnel at the Warren complex. 90 R&D workers at a GM research facility in India will also receive the pink slip, an Automotive News source said.

    In a statement, GM confirmed a restructuring of its R&D department, but would not confirm the number of layoffs.


    Careful with TTAC. Well known GM haters.

    From the comments:

    for FY2011, GM R&D was 5.41% of revenue – Here’s the list:

    Median 2.71%
    Average 4.94%

    Tesla 102.32%
    Audi 5.99%
    Honda 5.45%
    GM 5.41%
    BMW 5.25%
    Renault SA 4.76%
    Chongqing 4.57%
    Nissan 4.55%
    VW 4.52%
    Mazda 4.51%
    Isuzu 4.14%
    Suzuki 3.99%
    Daimler 3.92%
    Ford 3.89%
    Sanyang 3.89%
    Toyota 3.85%
    Kia 3.65%
    Jiangling 3.61%
    Peugeot 3.59%
    Hyundai 3.22%
    FIAT 2.3%


    The problem here is that they are cutting 1/4 of their department which is a significant change no matter how you cut it. You can make the argument that they want to be more like Suzuki but ... is that an argument you want to make?


    Or more like Ford or Daimler?

    Why would you insist on making everything an argument?

    I have much confidence in my friends at GM. I hope my confidence is not misplaced.


    The timing is suspect. I use phrase argument in the colloquial sense - I mean you can believe that GM will thrive... I doubt it will - and its history and record suggests I'm probably going to be right here. But the easiest way to bet is to buy or short the stock.

    It seems particularly unwise however to cut back on R&D especially as we are about to see likely massive changes in transportation in the coming years - so it doesn't seem either unlikely or suspect to wonder if there are other reasons for the cutbacks.


    Understand.

    What year does your definition of history begin? I'm old enough that I remember much better days. I am concerned, but other than Lt dan who I have little confidence in, that isn't true of the rest of my friends at GM. I hope they know what they are doing.

    The Gen V V8 is in the can, so I very hope that won't be affected along with C7 and the Gen 6 f-body and the omega platform. Yeah I'm concerned that there's gonna be an impact on the fun products.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 12:56 AM GMT
    conservativejock saidGM is not a sound investment and likely never will be a sound investment. The current crop of cars are built on platforms that were developed in Europe and Australia. When GM brought the Opel designed and built Buick Regal to Canada for production, they substituted metals and changed key dimensions within the "body in white." Doesn't take much brain power to figure out why that happened.

    I would not call these platforms "state-of-the-art." GM will fall off the development curve by pulling back on R&D and engineering design. No surprise. One makes more money at GM screwing on lug nuts than one does as a mechanical engineer holding a PE.

    GM won't be missed when a strong leader decides not to bail it out in its' next period of dire circumstances.


    You're SO full of shit you faux rich blowhard. What did they change concerning dimensions on the swb EPII?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 12:58 AM GMT
    And suspension tuning for all seasons is not a change in dimensions.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    May 05, 2012 1:01 AM GMT
    freedomisntfree saidAnd suspension tuning for all seasons is not a change in dimensions.


    Alloy and sheet thickness dimension were both changed. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 1:05 AM GMT
    conservativejock said
    freedomisntfree saidAnd suspension tuning for all seasons is not a change in dimensions.


    Alloy and sheet thickness dimension were both changed. icon_wink.gif



    Alloy where?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 2:44 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 said
    riddler78 said
    Christian73 saidRiddler -

    Your hypocrisy knows no bounds and whatever tiny bit of credibility you might have had with non-conservaposse members diminishes with every post.


    Lol - as if a troll like you is remotely credible in that regard. icon_rolleyes.gif

    What makes it more amusing is how obviously you have been projecting in your attacks on others.


    Not at all. I'm consistent in my beliefs, views and positions unlike someone living in a socialist country who makes his money via a communist country and spends his time on this website telling everyone what a capitalist he is. icon_lol.gif


    Only you would think you're consistent in your views. I should note that Canada now has a lower corporate tax rate than the US and lower taxes in general. So which country is more socialist?

    As for my work to facilitate trade with China, I'm pretty proud of my record of helping companies thrive, while bringing more people out of poverty than you ever will. That being said, that isn't entirely how I make my money. But I mean how could you possibly understand or help others out of poverty with your remarkably poor understanding of what it is that creates value and your record of profiting off the benevolence of others?


    Your replies are just sad...

    Corporate tax rates have nothing to do with socialism - one way of the other - so that red herring is just going to be left flopping on the deck.

    And as for "facilitating trade with China", I think it's safe to assume that you're record of creating "value" and bringing "people out of poverty" is quite similar to Romney's, which is to say a complete fabrication.

    And I don't profit of the benevolence of others. I actually facilitate social investment which allows donors of all incomes to act on their values and help actual poor people.

    But since you cannot conceived of a motivation outside of money, you're incapable of understanding that. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Government spending and taxation absolutely has everything to do with socialism. Red herring? That would be most of your arguments.

    Lol - by "social investment" you mean spending? or value destruction no doubt, when it comes to you. Unfortunately for you I have that basic grasp of economics that understands that it isn't about money but what it represents. Of course, that would require you to have some grasp of economics to understand.

    As for facilitating trade with China - China's economic growth is singlehandedly responsible for the massive reduction in global poverty but also has allowed entrepreneurs globally to leverage their manufacturing capabilities. Of course to you it would seem trade is an anathema despite the fact that it is through trade that comparative advantage is achieved... so we're back to that "value" thing that you simply couldn't possibly understand.


    Another red herring. You have a limited knowledge of a very ideological school of economics the implementation of which has destroyed nearly every country it's been thrust upon and is currently destroying England, Spain and Greece.

    In terms of China, of course so-called entrepreneurs flock to it's "manufacturing" facilities - which are basically slave gulags - in order not to have to pay for Western labor costs and pesky things like human rights being enforced.

    A tradeoff between Maoist repression and corporatist repression is not a gain for the Chinese people.

    My work lifts people up and treats them as human, not chattel.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 05, 2012 3:43 AM GMT
    conservativejock saidGM is not a sound investment and likely never will be a sound investment. The current crop of cars are built on platforms that were developed in Europe and Australia. When GM brought the Opel designed and built Buick Regal to Canada for production, they substituted metals and changed key dimensions within the "body in white." Doesn't take much brain power to figure out why that happened.

    I would not call these platforms "state-of-the-art." GM will fall off the development curve by pulling back on R&D and engineering design. No surprise. One makes more money at GM screwing on lug nuts than one does as a mechanical engineer holding a PE.

    GM won't be missed when a strong leader decides not to bail it out in its' next period of dire circumstances.


    Ok, now I gave you plenty of time to research this crap you laid out there. Now your breaking news is pretty cool, but it’s about six years out of date. Sheet metal thickness changes are not changes in “key dimensions” And you know at least that. If we talking automotive parlance, changes in “key dimensions” means hard points and that’s not true, at least not on EP II. It was true however on the EP I. From the A pillar back the Vauxhall / Opel Vectra was a different car than the Aura so it was true back in 2006. And true the Holden Cruze has slightly thicker sheet metal than the domestic USA market Cruze.

    See when you try to bullshit a forum of 335,000 folks, chance are you’re going to run into to someone knowledgeable on every conceivable topic. Like your claim that your blog was getting 31,000 hits per days when in reality it was 300 plus or minus per month. So play it straight with us rich boi.