Another Reason to Despise GM

[guido911]

These dumb@sses snatched up our tax money via bailout, now its CEO wants the government to raise fuel taxes.

Detroit — General Motors Co. CEO Dan Akerson wants the federal gas tax boosted as much as $1 a gallon to nudge consumers toward more fuel-efficient cars, and he's confident the government will soon shed its remaining 26 percent stake in the once-bankrupt automaker.

"I actually think the government will be out this year — within the next 12 months, hopefully within the next six months," Akerson said in a two-hour interview with The Detroit News last week.

He is grateful for the government's rescue of GM — "I have nothing but good things to say about them" — but Akerson said the time for that relationship to end is coming because it's wearing on GM.

"It's kind of like your in-laws: It was a nice long weekend. We didn't say a week," Akerson said with a laugh.

And while he is eager to say goodbye to the government as a part owner of GM, Akerson would like to see it step up to the challenge of setting a higher gas tax, as part of a comprehensive energy policy.

A government-imposed tax hike, Akerson believes, will prompt more people to buy small cars and do more good for the environment than forcing automakers to comply with higher gas-mileage standards.

"There ought to be a discussion on the cost versus the benefits," he said. "What we are going to do is tax production here, and that will cost us jobs."

http://www.detnews.com/article/20110607/AUTO01/106070368/GM-chief-pushing-for-higher-gas-taxes

Screw them.

[Townsend]

Someone should expect a visit from the oil company enforcers anytime.

[Conan71]

I brought this up in another thread, I can't remember which one now.  Problem he fails to realize is that would be a truly regressive tax.  The people who would be pinched the hardest likely could not afford one of the newer more efficient vehicles, or would be forced into buying a car they really cannot afford.

Build cars people want to drive at a competitive price, manage your business wisely, and you wouldn't need the government to be creating taxes to force people into buying cars they don't want.  You also wouldn't need the government to rescue your failed business model in the first place.

[Townsend]

It's a strange thing.  Their margin is much higher on the larger less efficient vehicles.

Unless this is a way to get people to get rid of older less efficient vehicles for shiny new less-less efficient vehicles...

[Gaspar]

I own a GM. 

I had to rent a Ford Edge this week, with SYNC. . .

All I can say is I'm buying a Ford!

The materials and construction are 10 times better than my Equinox!

[Red Arrow]

I own a GM. 

I had to rent a Ford Edge this week, with SYNC. . .

All I can say is I'm buying a Ford!

The materials and construction are 10 times better than my Equinox!

You been talking with Mike (Dirty Jobs) Rowe?

[Red Arrow]

These dumb@sses snatched up our tax money via bailout, now its CEO wants the government to raise fuel taxes.

Big surprise?  The government tells GM to build small, more efficient, boring, white bread with plain bologna cars and now they need a market for them.  (Two notable exceptions, the Vette and Camaro)

[heironymouspasparagus]

Big surprise?  The government tells GM to build small, more efficient, boring, white bread with plain bologna cars and now they need a market for them.  (Two notable exceptions, the Vette and Camaro)

Whew!  The two worst cars in the world.  In the history of cars!


GM has never been known for its social consciousness.  Remember the trolley wars??

Gaspar, I rented a Ford Focus a few weeks ago and I was beyond stunned.  It had plenty of room for my fat backside.  It ran pretty well, and handled nicely.  Could not believe it.  Was not what I expected in that tiny little thing.  It even got about 31-32 mpg.  I was impressed.  Have had several Grand Marquis' and it certainly seems like Ford is starting to pay the same attention to small that they used to pay to large cars.  There may be hope!! ??

[Red Arrow]

Whew!  The two worst cars in the world.  In the history of cars!


GM has never been known for its social consciousness.  Remember the trolley wars??

Gaspar, I rented a Ford Focus a few weeks ago and I was beyond stunned.  It had plenty of room for my fat backside.  It ran pretty well, and handled nicely.  Could not believe it.  Was not what I expected in that tiny little thing.  It even got about 31-32 mpg.  I was impressed.  Have had several Grand Marquis' and it certainly seems like Ford is starting to pay the same attention to small that they used to pay to large cars.  There may be hope!! ??

I would never have bought (or taken for free) a Grand Marquis.  Not my kind of car regardless of your luck with them.  I never particularly wanted a Camaro but they were the base for the IROC series. They could be made to handle reasonably well for that.  Too big for a track like Hallett.  A Vette would be fun but only as as toy. Yes, they are heavy but the later generations are reasonable handlers.

You will have a difficult time convincing me that a Yugo was better than anything GM has made in my lifetime, including the Corvair.

[Hoss]

I would never have bought (or taken for free) a Grand Marquis.  Not my kind of car regardless of your luck with them.  I never particularly wanted a Camaro but they were the base for the IROC series. They could be made to handle reasonably well for that.  Too big for a track like Hallett.  A Vette would be fun but only as as toy. Yes, they are heavy but the later generations are reasonable handlers.

You will have a difficult time convincing me that a Yugo was better than anything GM has made in my lifetime, including the Corvair.

New Camaros, while they might look cool, have zero headroom and make you feel like you're driving an Abrams.  Vettes?  We all know what those are substitutes for.

I'd take any of those two models specifically in the late 60s.

[Red Arrow]

New Camaros, while they might look cool, have zero headroom and make you feel like you're driving an Abrams.  Vettes?  We all know what those are substitutes for.

I'd take any of those two models specifically in the late 60s.

A lot of the new cars have little headroom, the visibility out is terrible, I feel like I'm sitting in a pit with the high belt line (I think that's the term for the bottom of the side windows), and several have such sloping hoods that I can't see anything forward past the windshield wipers.  I'm 5' 10" tall so I don't think I am height challenged in that regard.

No, I don't think the AMC Pacer was a good looking car.

[nathanm]

Few new cars are nice in that regard, Hoss. You can thank IIHS and their side impact ratings for that...

[Hoss]

Few new cars are nice in that regard, Hoss. You can thank IIHS and their side impact ratings for that...

I actually like my car.  For how it appears it has decent leg/headroom all throughout.  I did my homework though before purchasing.  Impulse purchasing I've seen from friends who wind up regretting their purchase after having it about a year.  I'm still happy with mine, after 3.5 years.

[carltonplace]

Why are the new gas efficient, hybrid or electric cars so hideous? The "leaf" is f'ing ugly and its name is stoopid. I bet its momma is fat and its dad is a degenerate gambler.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Red,
I wouldn't have taken one either until about 1989/1990.  That is about the time when GM completely and totally abandoned their customer base.  'Till that point, I had nothing but GM in the larger sizes...well, except for the 1970 Cutlass (still have it) which is a rather small car.

That time is when Gr Marquis became the Olds Delta/Pontiac Bonneville/Buick Wildcat of the world.  There were no other options.

And GM pickups??  Well, through the late '60s they were great.  After that??  Well,....Ford really was the only choice at all until Dodge put a Cummins diesel into their pretty sorry body.