Teleprompter Wars - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

MS Fowler · #31 02-21-2010, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daveuz

One has to wonder what the GOP talking points would have been then. example Obama lets an American Icon (GM) fail"..blah blah blah....

I wouldn't know about talking points.

But, it seems to me that sticking to ones principles in time of crisis is exactly what one should do. What would be the purpose of "principle" if they are discarded as easily as that?
Allowing GM to fail, and then taken over by another company to be run more efficiently would have been a good thing. The immediate impact on the economy would have been severe, but of shorter duration that what we will now have.
If you remove "risk" from the "risk/reward" equation, you destroy the impetus to succeed.

Jim B. · #32 02-21-2010, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Allowing GM to fail, and then taken over by another company to be run more efficiently would have been a good thing. .

I don't know, are you sure?

Has the stranglehold of the UAW been broken? Has management gotten its act together?

Are they vehicles you'd want to buy?

The sedans have been reported to have terrible unaddressed QC issues and still offer little to nothing in RWD, and are reported to look and feel really "cheap", in the literal and perjorative sense (ESPECIALLY in their interiors) though the wow factor still seems to exist in the pickup trucks, Cadillacs, though I saw my first CRX new stationwagon on the highway near Hollywood CA last week, when I was there, and I almost threw up, it was so ugly.

Whether they would be reliable enough to outlast the payment book is unclear.

I saw a late 80's Chevy Corsica -- anyone remember those? -- on the highway in downtown LA last week, too... A car designed to be thrown away after a few years... this ragged worn out looking one, still kept barely running by someone, yet mint W123 1977-1985 Mercedes Benz 240 and 300 diesels are VERY common down in Los Angeles --- so durable, long lived, and well built and commonly seen plying So Cal roads, as to be unremarkable..

I think stubborn brand loyalty to the pickup trucks is about all that is keeping GM alive but their build quality is STILL not very high...even now.

Though by all accounts it is seen as higher than the passenger cars.

Chas H · #33 02-21-2010, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Allowing GM to fail, and then taken over by another company to be run more efficiently would have been a good thing. The immediate impact on the economy would have been severe, but of shorter duration that what we will now have.

That's your opinion of what should have been done. Others, as principled as you, think otherwise.

Jim B. · #34 02-21-2010, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chas H

That's your opinion of what should have been done. Others, as principled as you, think otherwise.

Would said individuals put their money where their mouths are, and BUY (or even
LEASE) one of them?

Talk is cheap.

Chas H · #35 02-21-2010, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim B.

Would said individuals put their money where their mouths are, and BUY (or even
LEASE) one of them?

Talk is cheap.

I think the g'ment was doing much more than talking when it bailed out GM.

450slcguy · #36 02-21-2010, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim B.

Would said individuals put their money where their mouths are, and BUY (or even
LEASE) one of them?

Talk is cheap.

And trash talk even cheaper.

Yes I bought an 08 Impala. Wonderful car, rides great, handles fine, plenty of power, decent standard equipment, 5 year warranty, and has been very reliable since day one. You're correct about the interior to some degree, the dash is rather bland. But I don't have to spend a small fortune to maintain it as compared to some Euro import. Now I'm sure when compared a $50k Mercedes it's not as nice, but who needs those headaches and expense when the warranty runs out, not me.

MS Fowler · #37 02-21-2010, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Not sure what he plans to do with the waste.

You mean, since he has announced the closure of Yucka (?) mountain?

Face it, NO energy generation system is without draw-backs. Nuclear's drawbacks may be the least problematic. Even solar and wind have draw-backs.

MTUpower · #38 02-21-2010, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTI

Have you read my threads?

I was reading your words, and they don't add up to much.

MTI · #39 02-21-2010, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTUpower

I was reading your words, and they don't add up to much.

Yes, I know the feeling, having read many posts by others here.

cmac2012 · #40 02-22-2010, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

You mean, since he has announced the closure of Yucka (?) mountain?

Face it, NO energy generation system is without draw-backs. Nuclear's drawbacks may be the least problematic. Even solar and wind have draw-backs.

Nobody wants it. No matter where, nobody wants it. Yucca mtn. may not even be that good of a site. Is there a remote corner of Alaska or Texas where it could go w/o major friction from the home state? Wyoming maybe? New Mexico has some wide open spaces. Will they take it? No one will accept it. It will be near war to bury it anywhere except in some despotic, 3rd world country. Which is what some claim the French have been doing for years.

Chas H · #41 02-22-2010, 02:14 PM

There's no reason keep nuclear waste on the planet. After the waste treated to reduce it's volume, which is what the French do, it can be loaded onto a rocket and fired into the sun.
In California, where there is a chronic water shortage, the heat from the reactor and the cold water in the ocean can be brought together to produce fresh water. Right now all the water used in a cooling tower escapes as vapor or condensation clouds.

cmac2012 · #42 02-22-2010, 02:20 PM

That is an attractive solution except for the fact that sooner or later a launch will fail. In the worst circumstance, as happened once with a vessel with a few pounds of plutonium aboard, the craft does a long, broad re-entry, leaving a smoking trail of its contents over a large area.

lutzTD · #43 02-22-2010, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim B.

I don't know, are you sure?

Has the stranglehold of the UAW been broken? Has management gotten its act together?

Are they vehicles you'd want to buy?

The sedans have been reported to have terrible unaddressed QC issues and still offer little to nothing in RWD, and are reported to look and feel really "cheap", in the literal and perjorative sense (ESPECIALLY in their interiors) though the wow factor still seems to exist in the pickup trucks, Cadillacs, though I saw my first CRX new stationwagon on the highway near Hollywood CA last week, when I was there, and I almost threw up, it was so ugly.

Whether they would be reliable enough to outlast the payment book is unclear.

I saw a late 80's Chevy Corsica -- anyone remember those? -- on the highway in downtown LA last week, too... A car designed to be thrown away after a few years... this ragged worn out looking one, still kept barely running by someone, yet mint W123 1977-1985 Mercedes Benz 240 and 300 diesels are VERY common down in Los Angeles --- so durable, long lived, and well built and commonly seen plying So Cal roads, as to be unremarkable..

I think stubborn brand loyalty to the pickup trucks is about all that is keeping GM alive but their build quality is STILL not very high...even now.

Though by all accounts it is seen as higher than the passenger cars.

its not viable to compare a 5k car to 30K car. its like comparing a pickup truck to a semi tractor. while Im not a big fan of GM, they will never be a MB, while MB will never sell to a GM market share at their price point

RichC · #44 02-22-2010, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Nuclear's drawbacks may be the least problematic. Even solar and wind have draw-backs.

How could you possibly think that a nuclear reactor is the least problematic ?

I cannot even fathom what kind of argument you could use to support your assumptions.

Have you seen a windmill melt down and take out an entire city leaving it completely uninhabitable for 2000 years ??

lutzTD · #45 02-22-2010, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichC

How could you possibly think that a nuclear reactor is the least problematic ?

I cannot even fathom what kind of argument you could use to support your assumptions.

Have you seen a windmill melt down and take out an entire city leaving it completely uninhabitable for 2000 years ??

not a big fan of nuclear either. too many ways to get a pissed or incompetent close to the switches for my comfort. unfortunately wind power is only viable in linited areas. I would put one in my backyard but theres just not enough wind for it to work.