FUTURE_OF_GM

Wow.. The Envoy gets 20s now... Nice!

GM eff-ed up the Colorado Extreme from DAY ONE! It received LITTLE to NO exposure, I saw none of them on lots, the packages offered were ridiculous and unattractive and they were launched TOO late... It's sad that GM screwed up ONE of the FEW offerings they had in which young people weren't ashamed to be seen.

Hey GM, how about actually PROMOTING the Aveo as an alternative to the import bull$h! like Versa/Fit/baby whale... err... I mean Yaris. Hopefully the Aveo 5 will be stylish enough to actually compete with the afore mentioned. Oh well, GM's marketing sucks overall...

Ima go with Impala or something that might've been Impala at one point. That seems like the obvious choice.

If they had any sense and wanted to really justify the "SS" badge, they would. I'm not sure I like this... The nose just looks like a bolted on JC Witney abortion and the wheels are decent but not show stoppers. Can't bitch any about the powertrain though

Time for a new interior.... Hate the new wheels almost as much as I hated the wheels on the convertible pace car.. (See my many rants about GM's inability to design a good looking wheel)

I think it's hella attractive! And if performance is like they promise it'll blow the damn HHR SS out of the water. (Which, BTW looks more cobbled and unnatural than this by far) I've always liked the funky looks of the Caliber, then again, I drive a Focus ZX3 so funky little runabouts hold a special place in my heart. The SRT-4 version looks awesome! It really reminds me of the ORIGINAL Vibe showcar (The yellow one) that actually showed promise before GM f--ed it up into the lame Vibe GT that we know now.

But the beauty of your Buick as well as my Camaros and all other classic cars on the road is that they are not driven daily. A friend of mine keeps asking "So, you ready to get rid of those Camaros yet, fuel must be costing a fortune." To which I reply: "No, my fuel costs are fine since I only drive them one or two weekends a month." My only worry is that the greenie douchebags will try and eliminate classic cars altogether, but collectors have so many lobbyists and allies in Washington (Not to mention they contribute LESS to pollution) that I don't ever see anything drastic happening (I hope, at least)

I guess I could see that. But I come from a very rural area in the Appalachains which was predominantly white and I don't remember kids being picked on for their ethnicities. It just seems like our generation grasps the concept of overt racism very well and tends to avoid it. Even here in college, which is much more diverse, yet MUCH larger as well, the race boundaries aren't that high and everyone seems to get along well. However, my high school was VERY small and everyone knew everyone, so I guess we might've been more 'close knit' than some places. People teased, but it wasn't as horrible as what this guy SUPPOSEDLY received. But nothing is an excuse for what he did and I hope hell is nice and hot while he's there. I mean, we all go through $h!, it's part of life. I've certainly had my fair share of problems that I've had to seek treatment for but to even contemplate taking an innocent life because of it is so 'out there' to me.

It's an awesome car and I'm willing to bet that 80% of people who see it think the same thing whether they know what it is or not. Even yuppie bitches can understand GOOD design when they see it.

This guy just wanted attention IMO.... As for media and violence; does it have an effect? ABSOLUTELY! Now, when we say an effect, it isn't impled that the person watching the violence is going to go out and kill someone but it does have effects. For example, the 'bobo study' where children duplicated violent behavior they had witnessed. The main effects are desensitization though, once people see brutal murder so many times it makes them less repulsed by it because it temporarily disengages the brain in order to fuel adrenaline (Because most of this violence is protrayed in adrenaline fueled situations) Our children know the difference between fantasy and reality, however the question is; do they know the difference between right and wrong? And I agree about guns, it seems that pop culture is trying it's best to convey to kids these days that "carrying a gun is cool" and that being some hard nosed thug is the way to be. It's prevalent in the music, it's prevalent in the new wave of fashion that features weapons and it's prevalent in other forms of entertainment. Guns are easy to acquire as well. It's all about the "culture of fear" carefully cultivated by the media since 9/11 (IMO) I'm not anti-gun at all, but our society cannot afford to have these kids NOT taking guns seriously. But, murder has largely declined (Except for the adolescent age group) in recent history, and people seem to be waking up to the reality of the trash we pass off as media in this country, so there is still hope.

I remember the bull$h! stories a few years ago about how barrels of oil would sky rocket in price. I'll believe it when I see it. Gas prices will increase because of the added refinement for summer gas, but I don't think they'll be outrageous.

I've put a lot of thought into this over the last few days. I have always been taught to fight; (As you can probably tell from my posts here, I have a lot of fight in me) you're supposed to fight your way out of situations like this and not just 'allow' someone to kill you. If you're killed while fighting, then at least you weren't a victim. So it's safe to say that if someone came into my classroom with a gun, I would be one of those people who would have one objective: to kill that asshole who is praying on innocent victims. Just like if I witnessed someone harming or robbing another person on the street. This comes from 1) my upbringing and 2) The fact that I absolutely HATE people who prey on the innocent. However, the reality of the situation is that these people were sitting ducks and probably NEVER in a million years expected anything like this to happen. I mean, I'm quick to react to threats, but if someone came into my classroom and started shooting, the first thing I'd do is panic and run for cover; It's just a natural reaction. Maybe once I got into the right frame of mind and realized what was going on I'd certainly try to do something about the coward with the gun, but by then it might be too late. I dunno, I just don't think it's as cut and dry as 'taking the guy' out. The only exception might be the people in the 2nd and 3rd classrooms because they had a chance to anticipate it. (albeit a very short chance) It's just sad that this coward wanted attention so badly that he felt he had to take 30 other young lives. And BTW, as for the media trash in our society, I'm active on Facebook as well and had joined one of the many condolence grounps for VT. Not 2 hours after the shootings happened, representatives from CNN and Fox were on the page begging for footage or descriptions of the "carnage" (as CNN called it) at Virginia Tech. These poor kids lost their lives and their families didn't even know, yet the media scum found it more important to beg for coverage to line their pockets. It's a sad day in america.

Obviously it was to be taken as an offer then. :AH-HA_wink: As for the morale at Chrysler... Well, it can't be much worse than morale at GM when everyone kept singing the death song last year. They'll be alright.

So you can choose these people indiscretely at random by screening them out with the questions below. That will eliminate bias because they will not know what the experiment is about. (See Below) This is your independent variable with 2 levels (Group A & Group B) The dependent variable will be whether or not the participant chooses the import or domestic. (If I'm interpreting this correctly) This would be the hypothesis which will reinforce your ideology that the brand and manufacturer of the car (Canry) does matter despite equal or better performance by the Aura. This is a suggestion, so take it for what it's worth. I would be a bit more vague with the questions about bias because if the people know exactly what you're trying to measure they can skew the results and throw off your reliability and validity. (What the study TRULY measures and how well the study measures it) So instead of the first question being so straight forward, maybe you could ask something like; what was the brand of your last car purchase? Then the people who answer with a domestic brand could be screened out of the study. The second question (For the import owning participants) would be; did you enjoy the car? For the third question could be something like why did you decide to go with that brand or something similar? (I wouldn't go with the term "japanese" because that will tip them off that something you are measuring has to do with their decision) For the next question, you could ask them to list 5 brands of cars they would consider buying for their next purchase and then screen for the desired responses. Then for the last part you could ask them what positive aspects of those brands they listed prompted them to choose the brands. Next you'll need some way for the participants to numerically rate the vehicles, maybe 1-5 on each characteristic with 1 being Strongly Disagree and 5 being Strongly Agree. For example: "The enigne in this car is smooth and free of vibrations" (Then 1 -5 with the strongly disagree - strongly agree ratings) Group A would serve as a sort of standard or measuring stick... If these people are biased then naturally they will show that bias by rating the Camry superior to the Aura in almost every aspect. Group B is where you'll see your result... If the group rates the Aura higher than the Camry, then your desired result will be the outcome and you could argue that bias exists because the ratings from Group A and Group B contradict each other. But, if Group B rates the Camry higher, then it disproves your hypothesis becuase the two groups concur. I'm sure this is too technical for what your professor wants, but it's what I would do and I figured, what the hell, at least some of it might help you out. BTW, is this a college Social Psychology class?!? If it is I hope you're enjoying it as much as I did. Social Psychology was probably one of the best and most useful classes I've ever taken. (I took two versions of it; a psychology perspective as well as a Sociology perspective) The subject fascinates me to the point that I've thought about specializing in that field. P.S. If you have a library database you could access you might be able to find tons of peer reviewed articles to reference. I've never searched anything like that, but I'm sure there has been studies about it.

Ok, you had me until there... I agree and disagree here.... I agree that far too many people "depend" on the system that have no reason to. But, as of now, I am trying to apply for Medicaid because I can no longer afford insurance. I work very hard (Usually full time while being a full time student) but I have school and school expense. I was recently hospitalized and have a few thousand dollars in expense that I cannot pay, so what else am I supposed to do?All I'm saying is that I used to agree entirely, with what you said here. But now, after being on the flipside of the coin, I'm not so sure that some of these programs are a completely bad thing. Depends on the capitalism.... Corporate capitalism, as in where oligopolies like the oil companies price set and control the market, then ABSOLUTELY NOT. Consumer capitalism, where the market is highly competitive and serves (basically) the need of the public instead of making a few fat white guys richer, then yes, ABSOLUTELY. Because that kind of capitalism is a catalyst for innovation. I am VERY anti-liberalism. BUT not all of the ideas behind liberalism are bad. I think we need a blend of conservativism and liberalism. This country SORELY NEEDS leaders who are moderate and who have the best interests of the PEOPLE in mind as opposed to the best interests of the P.A.C.T.s and party affiliation in mind. They can sit on the hill and piss and moan republican/democrat all they want, but in the long run, having this constant bickering isn't helping ANYONE.

An original part of the plan was to allow imported makes acquired "credits" for fuel mileage over the years. I was posting on that basis, which I guess might've changed now? (Which I'm happy if it did) Either way, it's not good for the domestics simply because they cannot make small efficient cars in this country and turn anything close to a decent profit.

FACT: The reason the government seeks to regulate gas is the "fear culture" that has been built around it. It started with the "foreign oil supports terroism" rhetoric, then it moved to the "Oh my god, gas prices will be the death of us all" spiel and now it's "the inconvenient truth" What has happened is that ourt capitalist media is selling the SENSATION of the story. That combined with the overall cultural effects of 9/11 and promoted by the media after it (Trust no one/terrorism affects everyone/get prepared to be attacked) has prompted scared politicians into action. The scared politicians who are feeding off of the SENSATIONAL story portrayed by the media as opposed to the actual facts seek to gain the support of the rapidly conforming public (prompted by media/pop culture) in order to get votes, because we all know MORE VOTES=MORE $$$ Unfortunately, it's the story of america these days... Everything revolves around money, not facts. This society is VERY similar to the last days of the Roman Empire... It's cynical, dark, corrupt and apathetic. Just like the Roman Empire, this society will fall, except it will not be through traditional warfare. MY OPINION It will instead be through economics as many believe that China and other emerging superpowers have already declared "financial" war on america by buying our currency and assets. Our own ignorance as a nation only makes it worse as we 1) run up the debt and 2) create a HUGE trade imbalance. So now we're faced with our eventual downfall one way or the other... Either we can regulate the F**K out of gasoline now and prompt a recession because our economy is petroleum based, or we can simply rot until were bought and surpassed by emerging superpowers such as China and India

And right there is the problem... The market will LITERALLY be handed to the imports. Hell, no need to worry about the competition anymore. Detroit looks poised to get screwed by their own country. And who's to say that isn't one of the goals anyway? We all know how the liberal greenies hate Detroit made automobiles. If this passes, kiss Pontiac and Buick goodbye.

What worries me is copycat shooters. Unfortunately, I'm sure it'll happen.

I didn't think this would count with CAFE. Doesn't the car have to manufactured here for it to help GMs numbers?

WOW! They even maintained the traditional red/white/blue Buick shields... I wish that were the case here, oh, wait. Nevermind, I forgot that our culture has been brainwashed to think that cheap ass looking 1980s all chrome 'dime-a-dozen' emblems on the imports = premium, so now we have to follow suit.

LOL... And all this time I thought it would be an EPIC battle where team Toyota & Co. would triumph over Detroit and subsequently kill our automotive industry. Never did I imagine the yuppie bastards that drive and hump Toyotas would ACTUALLY put Detroit out of business instead. Who needs enemies when we have a media, consumers and officials like this. P.S. And just to clarify, I'm all about better efficiency and saving the environment. But we need to make POSITIVE decisions focused around technology and innovation. Not NEGATIVE decisions that regress our freedom of choice and freedom of commerce. (Which is exactly what a higher gas tax would do---in addition to crashing our PETROLEUM BASED economy)

+1.... I think the "Insiders" are obligated to come to the rescue for Toyota though... It's what they're hired to do.

Looks like Japan Inc. has eveyone snowed.