CaddyXLR-V

No, it has more to do with what Tim Geithner said than anything else. He came out and said there will be more losses at banks, and they "may" need more help. That scares investers, because if you own shares in a company, and the government injects money into that company, your shares are diluted, and are now worth less. People hear the news, and stocks drop even at stronger banks that wont need any help. And when bank stocks drop, so does the rest of the market. This recession will start, and end, with the financial sector.

I agree. And I think Obama learned that the govt can't loan out the money, and continue to change the terms after the fact. Set the terms at the beginning, and if they don't like the terms, they don't take the money. The sad truth is, GM should have never let itself get into the position it is in now, where is needs govt loans/handouts to stay in business, and is at the mercy of the economy. But when you can't make money in good times, you can't put away money for bad times.

But then again, the reason it is so low is because everyone is in wait and see mode. Some strong companies are trading at very low prices right now.

Some of those you want held to those standard are in no danger of collapsing. They made money in 08, and will make money in 09. They bought the failed banks. To make your statement more accurate, you need to name Citibank, and not pull all other banks in the same category as them. I worked for 2 of them that are making plenty of money, and took over failed banks. They can still pay their bills, and didn't even want the money from the Govt. GM was begging for the money.

Even Hyundai starts at $30,000 for the V6. Would you pay 7,000 to have Hyundai's "better" interior?

Is anyone afraid of what the politicians are going to turn to once cars have zero polution? They will have so much more time to come up with new laws to make us miserable. Like how CA is trying to regulate the temp of peoples houses?

Exactly. You could get a FWD car, without the performance, but with a nice interior, or you can get a Camaro, with the performance, but the interior is not as good. For some like us, performance wins out over the quality of the interior.

Funny, I've had mine for 2 years now and have never heard anyone confuse it with a Cavalier. But I'm sure drivers of Cavaliers always hear comments when about how nice their car is too right? Like when I'm going through a drive though and people say, wow, nice car. Or how people driving in a Nissan Titan tell me about how sweet their GTO was. Or the guy in a 65 Mustang Convertible telling me he has a GTO at home. Just admit it, you have an axe to grind with Holden. That is where your hate for the G8, and GTO stems from. If it was a design by GM Europe and not Holden, you would probably own one. And also, I've heard someone say the new Camaro looks like a Mustang. So just because people say something, doesn't make it true.

From 75 to most of the 90s most cars were pretty crappy. Those were some dark times for the automobile. I think we were just starting to get great cars again, and now it feels like we will be going right back to those dark times.

I'm not saying I don't want them to build better cars. I just understand why their resources went to trucks. I don't think there is any way for them to be profitable long term with their current structure. Either their structure needs to change completely(such as through bankrupty where they will be able to shed some other their debt, workforce, plants, etc) or they need to find a way to get people to pay a premium for their cars compared to competitors products. If they build a Malibu competitive to the Camry, and match it option for option, and even sell it for the same price as the Camry, and they both sell 300k of them, Toyota makes more money. Toyota can then turn around, and add more options to the Camry, and sell it for the same price, or reduce the price, and therefore steal sales from the Malibu. Truck have never operated like that, as people would not even cross shop between the big 3 for trucks, nevermind buying a Toyota truck.

Toyota and Honda also have advantages GM doesn't have, such as not having to pay for heathcare in their home country. They also don't have to pay pensions to twice the amount of current workers they have. They are new in this country, and don't have the cost of doing business here for the past 100 years weighing down on them. How do you compete with a competitor who can do anything you can, but at half the cost? They had the advantage in the truck market, and exploited it for as long as they could. Simple as that.

That's because they didn't have to spend much money on making them nicer inside, there was no competition, they didn't need to offer the newest technologies, and could still charge $30,000 or more for each one. They were selling Tahoes for more than $40,000. What would GM need to put in a car to make it sell for that price? A TV in every headrest with a 15 in Nav screen, soft touch materials that rival an Audi, engines to rival BMW, and they still wouldn't sell 500k a year, let alone the millions of trucks and SUVs that GM could sell, all with the same engines, transmissions, and platforms. Why does no one realize that was GM's ONLY option? They could have poured money into cars, and still had huge losses, or spent 1/4 of that on trucks, and had some ok profits for a while. Until people start buying $30,000 and higher priced cars in mass quantities, GM will not make money.

Not completely true. If it were not for the money GM made on trucks, they would probably have gone bankrupt a long time ago. GM wanted to sell trucks, because of profit, but needed to sell cars because of CAFE. And Porsche is doing pretty good with just sports cars and a truck. Don't they control VW now? I get your point though, because GM is not Porsche. There's not really much GM can do at this point to pay the bills though. They need to get people to buy their cars at higher prices. I think that's the only thing that can save any of the big 3.

The next time I spend a good chunk of money on a car, it will probably be a 2 seater. Those are still coupes right? At least we know they will always have only 2 doors. The sedan has it's purpose, but they are so abundant I can just go get a used sedan for a couple thousand. But if I'm spending big money on a car, it's going to be a coupe.

50% French 25% Portuguese and some mixture of English and Native American, and probably a little bit of others mixed in.

The only production sedan I would rather have over this is an RS4. Other than that, there are no sedans I would take over a G8 GXP. If it came down to it though, I would buy the GXP and keep the $26,000 difference.

If it doesn't sell 500k a year will it be considered a failure by some on this site?

AIG will probably be broken up into pieces. I doubt AIG will resemble a shell of the company it once was.

Maybe all the politicians should work for $1 a year until the federal deficit is gone. Now they voted to approve a tax on AIG's bonuses that they allowed to go through in the first place, except the bill they voted to approve violates the constitution. Not only that, but it's not limited to AIG. They are trying to tax bonuses from banks who did not ask for, nor want money from the government, but were forced to take it so the weaker banks wouldn't look weaker. Those banks also had to put up with rules put in place after they were forced to take the money, such as not being able to sponsor sporting events, or hearing outcry from politicians for company rewards meetings. Those banks even made a profit for the year last year, and will most likely make a profit for the year this year as well. What is America coming to?

California, and the people in it, need to stop thinking they are more important than everyone else. This is not the United States of California.

Regardless, I don't think the outside color of a car makes much of a difference. It's all about the windows.

But that's no fun. I was just disputing the fact that it would be scrap metal anyway.

Well maybe they shouldn't have such strict window tinting laws then. My brother has been pulled over in CA for his tint being too dark on his Charger, when it was the factory tint from when he bought it in AZ. Darker tint would make a much bigger difference than making everyone drive a white car, since windows actually magnify the effect of the light coming into the car. What next, no black interiors? And sorry, I haven't noticed much of a difference between my dark cars, and lighter cars, and I live in a desert with 115 degree temperatures. The hottest car I had was very light green, but with un-tinted windows, and tan leather interior.

Sounds pretty simple to get around. Just run direct power around the device. It would hardly be thousands of pounds of scrap metal.

Your logic applied towards Cadillac.