And once more we've come full circle with the exact same arguments being endlessly made. None of these arguments are all that noteworthy, because there is no such thing a clear answer for any of the topics being discussed. If you buy a Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Ford, Chrysler, or GM, the products being bought could have been made by Americans, Japanese, Canadians, or a combination of numerous nationalities, and are typically produced with parts made globally. The people who make those parts are people with jobs to feed their families. American workers who make cars for Toyota are American workers, and so too are those who make cars for American brands. No difference.
Lastly, sorry but Toyota does make good cars, and the fact that their brands are still routinely at or near the top of that list. It's also true that the Big 3 have also made some remarkable progress, and many of their products are as good as those made by Toyota and Honda. It's a far cry from what they used to make.
In the end, the real winners are consumers. Because Toyota and Honda in particular pushed the quality bar so high, the other automakers had to also improve, and in turn that means better products for buyers to own. Good for us.
It's pretty scary to think that there are actually people out there who rooted for the failure of massive numbers of U.S. companies, millions of lost jobs and a massive depression.
So, does anyone else have anything to contribute to the REVIEW of the CHEVROLET CRUZE itself?
Or has this thread simply become a political debate (of which, as everyone knows, will have heated discussions on both sides of the fence) that has NOTHING to do with the car???
What's really scary is people supporting government propped up failed businesses, and thinking they are patriotic in doing so. You are doing more damage than you'll ever know... until it is too late that is.
The sad truth is that people have to defend purchasing cars like the Cruze with political arguments about saving the US and its workers. If you buy a Toyota, you buy the car not the company, and there is no politics involved. Same holds true with Honda, Subaru, Nissan, and any of the other various imports out there. Even Ford escapes much of the politics, because they aren't owned by the government in any way, shape or form.
I would be nice to leave the politics at the door and just rate cars. Seems that many just won't drop it and learn that they aren't swaying people's opinions about their favorite brands of cars by spewing out their political rants time and again. Domestic cars are pretty much non existent anyhow, as the parts that there are made up of are pretty heavy on the import side.
Creating 70,000 new jobs and generating $100,000,000 in new tax revenue is "harming" us? Please tell us just HOW that is harming us. USA Today just carried an editorial yesterday about the huge SUCCESS of the GM loan program. And they initially OPPOSED the loans in 2009. Success is very hard to argue with rationally.
The fact that both the Cobalt & the Cruze have what you call "starting fits" points to operator error more than anything actually being wrong with the car. You're just another one of those to jump on the Japanese car band wagon. Each car manufacturer has its share of problems, just look at the "fallen" Toyota company, who now has to work harder than ever to try to put a shine on their tarnished reputation. Face it, there are no perfect cars, and everybody gets a bad car every once in a while.
You've made this "argument" for years on here now. You just won't ever get the negative effects the bailouts have REALLY had on this country. You look at ONE thing and focus on it so much that you fail to see what the country you live in every day has become. I'm sure you are voting for Obama as well, as you probably fail to see just how bad he has been for the country as well.
Yep, blame the owner once again for the low quality of the vehicle they are driving. The "fallen" Toyota's I have owned never seem to have starting problems... or any other problems actually.
Saving GM saved the U.S. from a depression greater than that of 1929. I'd vote for that any day. Why do people oppose American businesses?
It seems like every Yota buff blames the declining quality of those vehicles on its owner too... the way that is!
No need to see how Obama has "failed" in running the country, since the job he has been doing and continues to do is admirable.
The topic seems to have really gone off the rails. The topic should be about the Chevy Cruze, and yet it's turned into another import/domestic debate. Perhaps there is something to be said about how the Big 3 handled their business and products for the past few decades, but the Cruze all in all is a decent car. It was sold in Asia and Europe first for starters, and is built on a global platform. But the car is a pretty good product, regardless of who or where it was made.
You have to remember that Toyota has spent years building a false image of high quality. The ad hype and billions spent manipulating the minds of the American car buyer has paid off for them. They were never any better than a domestic, and certainly aren't now. My family has owned Toyotas over the years. They were OK, but by no means any more reliable than our Fords or Chevys.
What is this about hype? Sorry, but when a car company makes cars and trucks that are reliable, give their owners years and years of trouble-free service, and basically do the job they're supposed to do, then of course people will give them high marks. Toyota does and did what all companies should do - which is to let the product speak for itself: Make something GOOD and people will continue to buy them.
Thus the takeaway from all of this is simple. Build a good car and people will buy them. Plain and simple.
Totally off topic here... but as we transition to a Socialist country and third world status, we'll see how much of a great job you think Obama has done then... I guess if you support companies like GM, you don't see the down side of propping up businesses. Should we just print out more money and hand it out to the poor as well? That would be about as realistic as GM's success right now.
Ah yes... the good ole' Socialist argument.
But in regards to bailouts, well first of all I am a Toyota fan and driver myself. But the bailout of the US car makers was absolutely necessary and critical. We're talking about one of the largest industries in the US. Had they been allowed to go bankrupt, it would have cost millions of jobs in the process. If you read about the procedures taken in order to find alternative solutions, by the committee setup to deal with the car companies, all means had been exhausted, and thus a bailout was the only option left.
But let's look at it another way. Sure - people complain that we gave money to save those car makers from going under. The argument is that it cost us money. But the same and likely worse would have been true had we let them fail. Why? All those laid-off workers would have suddenly been on unemployment paychecks. Who pays for that? We do. They probably would have been laid of for a very long time as well, therefore the cost of having millions of workers on unemployment would have been likely far more costly in the end.
But ultimately, it worked and now those automakers are making profits and repaying their debts.. On top of that, they're actually making better products. Had the bailout not worked, perhaps it would be a different story and those arguing against the bailout would have more clout. But it worked, thus I'm not sure what the problem really is here. Also, you would be hard pressed to find one single country with an auto industry that has not at one time or another been either helped, subsidized, or otherwise had some involvement from the government.
Next page of comments >
Copyright 1997 - 2013 CSDO Media Limited Advertise on this site