"jps" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:57:34 -0500, Richard Casady

The Ford F-150 pickup truck has been the best selling vehicle in the
country for about thirty years. Ford didn't make people buy them.

Casady



If they'd have stuck with the F150, Ford would be in fine shape. But
they're not in trouble for building F150's are they?

And you knew that.


Ford's overall sales are in the pits, but so are virtually all the
manufacturer's (except Porsche, surprisingly).

Ford stayed ahead of the curve however, secured private financing and have
made long strides in the development of a new generation of fuel efficient
automobiles. Some are receiving very high scores in terms of fuel economy
and quality standards. I have been impressed with two recent purchases of
2008 models and neither are of the newer class of models. (F-250 truck and
Mustang GT). I have to admit, Ford has come a long way in terms of
quality.

Their stock has also risen over 300 percent in the past few weeks.

Eisboch

"HK" wrote in message
m...


Well, I'm not sure GM, Ford or Chrysler have any business being in the
auto business anymore.



I am happy with Ford.

Loaded up with some of their stock several weeks ago when it was at $1.48
per share.
Just about broke through 6 bucks today.

Eisboch (drives Ford products with a smile)

On Apr 30, 4:16*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:16:42 -0700, jps wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:57:34 -0500, Richard Casady
wrote:

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:42:17 -0700, jps wrote:

They concentrated on SUVs and Trucks until it went bust wihle others
who saw the 1000 point writing on the wall designed more efficient
vehicles.

The Ford F-150 pickup truck has been the best selling vehicle in the
country for about thirty years. Ford didn't make people buy them.

Casady

If they'd have stuck with the F150, Ford would be in fine shape. *But
they're not in trouble for building F150's are they?

And you knew that.

The F150 and E150 are still their bread and butter. They dress up that
chassis to make the luxury SUVs and fancy vans but they are still
F150s when you look under the skin.
This old truck is still doing fine for me (1985)http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Brownie.jpg
We also have a 2000 Explorer but that is an inferior car chassis in a
truck suit.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's a nice truck!

Reginald P. Smithers, IIII, Esq. wrote:
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told NPR’s Michelle Norris yesterday:
“The President has said, and I couldn’t agree more, that what this
country needs is a one single national road map that tells automakers
who are trying to become solvent again what kind of car it is they
need to be designing and building for the American people.” Norris
then asked: “Is that the role of Government though? That doesn’t sound
like free enterprise.” Jackson responded: “Well it is free enterprise
in a way.”

Interesting that a Google search for that quote only shows hits from the
right wing sites, like the Heritage Foundation. NPR didn't show a hit.

I spent way too much time on what appears to be more misleading right
wing out of context quotes.

Let's say it is an actual quote. Is it free enterprise, even a little,
for a private company to ask the government for a bail out?

No, it's not, "even a little bit."

Try a google search for part of the quote and see if you can come up
with a hit other than the usual right wing nut cases.

Jim wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers, IIII, Esq. wrote:
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told NPR’s Michelle Norris yesterday:
“The President has said, and I couldn’t agree more, that what this
country needs is a one single national road map that tells automakers
who are trying to become solvent again what kind of car it is they
need to be designing and building for the American people.” Norris
then asked: “Is that the role of Government though? That doesn’t sound
like free enterprise.” Jackson responded: “Well it is free enterprise
in a way.”

Interesting that a Google search for that quote only shows hits from the
right wing sites, like the Heritage Foundation. NPR didn't show a hit.

I spent way too much time on what appears to be more misleading right
wing out of context quotes.

Let's say it is an actual quote. Is it free enterprise, even a little,
for a private company to ask the government for a bail out?

No, it's not, "even a little bit."

Try a google search for part of the quote and see if you can come up
with a hit other than the usual right wing nut cases.


Free enterprise...that's when corporations fleece the public and pass
the profits onto their execs and shareholders and screw the public and
pass the losses onto the taxpayers.

I was in favor of letting the financial services corporations and
partnerships fail - the banks, the brokerage houses, AIG, whatever. They
should have been allowed to go down the tubes. Obviously it takes
nothing but money to start up a new financial institution, and the
failed institutions would have been replaced by now.

But failed manufacturing companies? Their jobs and products are almost
impossible to replace these days. Manufacturing is important. Paper
shoveling on wall street is not.

HK wrote:
Jim wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers, IIII, Esq. wrote:
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told NPR’s Michelle Norris yesterday:
“The President has said, and I couldn’t agree more, that what this
country needs is a one single national road map that tells automakers
who are trying to become solvent again what kind of car it is they
need to be designing and building for the American people.” Norris
then asked: “Is that the role of Government though? That doesn’t sound
like free enterprise.” Jackson responded: “Well it is free enterprise
in a way.”

Interesting that a Google search for that quote only shows hits from
the right wing sites, like the Heritage Foundation. NPR didn't show a
hit.

I spent way too much time on what appears to be more misleading right
wing out of context quotes.

Let's say it is an actual quote. Is it free enterprise, even a
little, for a private company to ask the government for a bail out?

No, it's not, "even a little bit."

Try a google search for part of the quote and see if you can come up
with a hit other than the usual right wing nut cases.


Free enterprise...that's when corporations fleece the public and pass
the profits onto their execs and shareholders and screw the public and
pass the losses onto the taxpayers.

I was in favor of letting the financial services corporations and
partnerships fail - the banks, the brokerage houses, AIG, whatever. They
should have been allowed to go down the tubes. Obviously it takes
nothing but money to start up a new financial institution, and the
failed institutions would have been replaced by now.

But failed manufacturing companies? Their jobs and products are almost
impossible to replace these days. Manufacturing is important. Paper
shoveling on wall street is not.


I once questioned someone with a supposed quote on one of Obama's
policies, asking for a source. He stated that it was no different than
my complaining that a book in the fiction section wasn't true.

It seems to be a tactic to do some creative writing, then wait for that
quote to turn up on a heavily partisan site, and it makes it's way into
a lot of people's minds as fact.

Manufacturing is important, so let's see Detroit do some, and stop
trying to selling us cars made in Mexico, but parked next to a big
American flag (as they did with the last Camaro.)

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:16:42 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:57:34 -0500, Richard Casady
wrote:

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:42:17 -0700, jps wrote:

They concentrated on SUVs and Trucks until it went bust wihle others
who saw the 1000 point writing on the wall designed more efficient
vehicles.

The Ford F-150 pickup truck has been the best selling vehicle in the
country for about thirty years. Ford didn't make people buy them.

Casady

If they'd have stuck with the F150, Ford would be in fine shape. But
they're not in trouble for building F150's are they?

And you knew that.

The F150 and E150 are still their bread and butter. They dress up that
chassis to make the luxury SUVs and fancy vans but they are still
F150s when you look under the skin.
This old truck is still doing fine for me (1985)
http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Brownie.jpg

It's amazing how many of the F-150s of that era are still on the road and
run well.
Cars of that vintage didn't, due to all the emission control stuff, but
trucks were exempt and as a result run well and long.

Eisboch

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:14:31 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:16:42 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:57:34 -0500, Richard Casady
wrote:

On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:42:17 -0700, jps wrote:

They concentrated on SUVs and Trucks until it went bust wihle others
who saw the 1000 point writing on the wall designed more efficient
vehicles.

The Ford F-150 pickup truck has been the best selling vehicle in the
country for about thirty years. Ford didn't make people buy them.

Casady

If they'd have stuck with the F150, Ford would be in fine shape. But
they're not in trouble for building F150's are they?

And you knew that.

The F150 and E150 are still their bread and butter. They dress up that
chassis to make the luxury SUVs and fancy vans but they are still
F150s when you look under the skin.
This old truck is still doing fine for me (1985)
http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Brownie.jpg

It's amazing how many of the F-150s of that era are still on the road and
run well.
Cars of that vintage didn't, due to all the emission control stuff, but
trucks were exempt and as a result run well and long.

Eisboch

F150s are half ton, you had to be over a ton to get the exemption.
This has the air pump and the cat converter.
Emission control really became a non-issue in the 80s when they
started using electronic fuel and spark management systems. The bad
reputation came from the 70s vehicles that were just adding emission
control devices to old technology engines.

Your right. I am a decade off.
I used to have a '87 Ford F-150 with the 300ci six. It was a great truck
and very reliable.

Eisboch

wrote:
On Apr 30, 8:11 am, Tim wrote:
On Apr 30, 5:49 am, "Reginald P. Smithers, IIII, Esq."

wrote:
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson told NPR’s Michelle Norris yesterday:
“The President has said, and I couldn’t agree more, that what this
country needs is a one single national road map that tells automakers
who are trying to become solvent again what kind of car it is they
need to be designing and building for the American people.” Norris
then asked: “Is that the role of Government though? That doesn’t sound
like free enterprise.” Jackson responded: “Well it is free enterprise
in a way.”
when the government decides to build a car it will remind me of this:

http://people.westminstercollege.edu...l/history2.htm

At least last night Obama said straight up that he doesn't have any
desire for the U.S. to be in the automobile manufacturing business.
He's doing what he thinks is necessary.

Bull****. Obama is taking away property form their lawful owners and
giving it to who he believes should posses that property.

I see some lawsuits in the near future. The 4th Amendment comes to mind.

Richard Casady wrote:
On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:42:17 -0700, jps wrote:

They concentrated on SUVs and Trucks until it went bust wihle others
who saw the 1000 point writing on the wall designed more efficient
vehicles.

The Ford F-150 pickup truck has been the best selling vehicle in the
country for about thirty years. Ford didn't make people buy them.

We buy them because we like them. When you get in a crash in them you
survive, unlike a Mini-Cooper, Honda Fit, Chevy Volt or other tiny econo
box.

Overheard at the wake...
....he got great mileage up until the day that semi ran him over.