<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: GM Encouraged by 24.5% Sales Drop in August</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/</link>
	<description>Citizen Economists is an online economics magazine written by citizen journalists. These ordinary citizens provide reports and commentary on the current events affecting the economics of the fields they work in.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:44:52 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Evelyn Black</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/comment-page-1/#comment-1596</link>
		<dc:creator>Evelyn Black</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:18:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amateureconomists.com/blogs/?p=265#comment-1596</guid>
		<description>Wow! Small world!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow! Small world!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J.D. Seagraves</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/comment-page-1/#comment-1595</link>
		<dc:creator>J.D. Seagraves</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:11:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amateureconomists.com/blogs/?p=265#comment-1595</guid>
		<description>Hey, I live in MI, too (Saginaw). Although, sorry to say, I&#039;m not a fan of Granholm!  As for everything else, I agree with you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, I live in MI, too (Saginaw). Although, sorry to say, I&#8217;m not a fan of Granholm!  As for everything else, I agree with you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Evelyn Black</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/comment-page-1/#comment-1547</link>
		<dc:creator>Evelyn Black</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 17:07:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amateureconomists.com/blogs/?p=265#comment-1547</guid>
		<description>Hi J.D. 

I agree about the banks. I&#039;m really upset about it, and I think whatever is done at this point will likely be nothing but another finger in the dike and down the line it will be another emergency. I live in MI, and I&#039;m a big fan of Governor Granholm,  who is pushing to make MI the place to locate all things innovative and new in the area of clean energy, renewable energy, and hybrid and alternative vehicles. 

I&#039;d like to see some other companies get a chance in regard to building cars. When Chrysler was bailed out, it helped for awhile, and now the company is on the ropes again all over again. I see it as a management problem--lack of vision, unwillingness to stay ahead of the curve, lack of innovation. 

They say that, with regard to the banks, at this point something must be done or we will see something akin to the Great Depression--but I&#039;m struck by how many people say, &quot;Bring it on! At least the guys at the top will go down with us.&quot; I think people are sick to death of banks, and I&#039;m right there too. I think we&#039;ll continue to see bail-outs, but it won&#039;t work in the long run. We have to have something to offer the world instead of debt, inflated pieces of paper and bad cars. Until we do, we&#039;re going to be hurting. 

Thank you for your always welcome thoughts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi J.D. </p>
<p>I agree about the banks. I&#8217;m really upset about it, and I think whatever is done at this point will likely be nothing but another finger in the dike and down the line it will be another emergency. I live in MI, and I&#8217;m a big fan of Governor Granholm,  who is pushing to make MI the place to locate all things innovative and new in the area of clean energy, renewable energy, and hybrid and alternative vehicles. </p>
<p>I&#8217;d like to see some other companies get a chance in regard to building cars. When Chrysler was bailed out, it helped for awhile, and now the company is on the ropes again all over again. I see it as a management problem&#8211;lack of vision, unwillingness to stay ahead of the curve, lack of innovation. </p>
<p>They say that, with regard to the banks, at this point something must be done or we will see something akin to the Great Depression&#8211;but I&#8217;m struck by how many people say, &#8220;Bring it on! At least the guys at the top will go down with us.&#8221; I think people are sick to death of banks, and I&#8217;m right there too. I think we&#8217;ll continue to see bail-outs, but it won&#8217;t work in the long run. We have to have something to offer the world instead of debt, inflated pieces of paper and bad cars. Until we do, we&#8217;re going to be hurting. </p>
<p>Thank you for your always welcome thoughts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J.D. Seagraves</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/comment-page-1/#comment-1545</link>
		<dc:creator>J.D. Seagraves</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Sep 2008 15:17:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amateureconomists.com/blogs/?p=265#comment-1545</guid>
		<description>Let GM fail. 

You know, when Lehman was on the ropes, all of the other banks came together and demanded that government do something.

What do you think Toyota or Honda are going to do if GM fails? They&#039;ll rejoice! In a REAL business, you want your competitors to fail.

Banking, of course, is not a real business, but a government ponzi scheme in which firms fall like dominoes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let GM fail. </p>
<p>You know, when Lehman was on the ropes, all of the other banks came together and demanded that government do something.</p>
<p>What do you think Toyota or Honda are going to do if GM fails? They&#8217;ll rejoice! In a REAL business, you want your competitors to fail.</p>
<p>Banking, of course, is not a real business, but a government ponzi scheme in which firms fall like dominoes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Evelyn Black</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/comment-page-1/#comment-1192</link>
		<dc:creator>Evelyn Black</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 19:59:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amateureconomists.com/blogs/?p=265#comment-1192</guid>
		<description>Thanks Darell, I agree. I wonder how long these bail-outs are going to go on? The budget deficit is at an all-time high even without Fannie &amp; Freddie added in yet, and now we have the auto industry with their hands out, Lehman Brother&#039;s buyers expecting help from the Fed (that can&#039;t go on every time an investment bank goes belly up), and what next? The airlines? At some point aren&#039;t we just throwing bad money at bad money? Thanks for posting your thoughts! As for trolls, I just can&#039;t get used to them. It seems like an illness or something--like that movie &quot;28 Days&quot;--rabid web posters. I&#039;m old, so to me, it&#039;s just so bizarre. But I suspect you are right, best to ignore the lot of them. What a weird hobby that is though!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Darell, I agree. I wonder how long these bail-outs are going to go on? The budget deficit is at an all-time high even without Fannie &amp; Freddie added in yet, and now we have the auto industry with their hands out, Lehman Brother&#8217;s buyers expecting help from the Fed (that can&#8217;t go on every time an investment bank goes belly up), and what next? The airlines? At some point aren&#8217;t we just throwing bad money at bad money? Thanks for posting your thoughts! As for trolls, I just can&#8217;t get used to them. It seems like an illness or something&#8211;like that movie &#8220;28 Days&#8221;&#8211;rabid web posters. I&#8217;m old, so to me, it&#8217;s just so bizarre. But I suspect you are right, best to ignore the lot of them. What a weird hobby that is though!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Darell</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/comment-page-1/#comment-1191</link>
		<dc:creator>Darell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 19:05:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amateureconomists.com/blogs/?p=265#comment-1191</guid>
		<description>Best to just completely ignore &quot;Kerry Bradshaw.&quot; Just one more alias in a long list that is used for similar trolling. Quite sad.

It boggles my mind that the tax payers are being asked to help the auto makers build what we need at this point. We&#039;ve known what was needed for quite some time. And the car makers could have done it if they&#039;d wanted to. They DID do it when they had to. And every time, we let them off the hook, to continue working really, really hard on the H2 cars. :sigh:</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Best to just completely ignore &#8220;Kerry Bradshaw.&#8221; Just one more alias in a long list that is used for similar trolling. Quite sad.</p>
<p>It boggles my mind that the tax payers are being asked to help the auto makers build what we need at this point. We&#8217;ve known what was needed for quite some time. And the car makers could have done it if they&#8217;d wanted to. They DID do it when they had to. And every time, we let them off the hook, to continue working really, really hard on the H2 cars. :sigh:</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Evelyn Black</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/comment-page-1/#comment-1189</link>
		<dc:creator>Evelyn Black</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 10:10:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amateureconomists.com/blogs/?p=265#comment-1189</guid>
		<description>Thank you Kerry and John. It always makes me sad when I see that people in this country are unable to disagree without hate-speech and name-calling. It shows what we are coming to here in the U.S. and it seems to me the press just encourages that kind of ugliness. I&#039;ve always felt that if a person really has something to say, the thing they are saying will stand on its own without the ugly language and invective. If a person has nothing of real content to add though, I guess the ugly language is necessary to promote the illusion of content.  

John, I don&#039;t know about GM selling the battery technology to the oil companies, but it wouldn&#039;t surprise me. Actually battery technology has improved quite a bit as evidenced by the Tesla. We could make the car, if there weren&#039;t corporate interests actively opposing the car. No, it wouldn&#039;t be a solution for everyone, but it would appeal to many. I commute three miles to work and walk everywhere else, so an electric car would be perfect for my needs.

I agree with Thomas Friedman that what we need to do now  is to support hundreds of new ideas, as many as we can find, so that the two or three that will stick get a chance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you Kerry and John. It always makes me sad when I see that people in this country are unable to disagree without hate-speech and name-calling. It shows what we are coming to here in the U.S. and it seems to me the press just encourages that kind of ugliness. I&#8217;ve always felt that if a person really has something to say, the thing they are saying will stand on its own without the ugly language and invective. If a person has nothing of real content to add though, I guess the ugly language is necessary to promote the illusion of content.  </p>
<p>John, I don&#8217;t know about GM selling the battery technology to the oil companies, but it wouldn&#8217;t surprise me. Actually battery technology has improved quite a bit as evidenced by the Tesla. We could make the car, if there weren&#8217;t corporate interests actively opposing the car. No, it wouldn&#8217;t be a solution for everyone, but it would appeal to many. I commute three miles to work and walk everywhere else, so an electric car would be perfect for my needs.</p>
<p>I agree with Thomas Friedman that what we need to do now  is to support hundreds of new ideas, as many as we can find, so that the two or three that will stick get a chance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kerry bradshaw</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/comment-page-1/#comment-1184</link>
		<dc:creator>kerry bradshaw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:14:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amateureconomists.com/blogs/?p=265#comment-1184</guid>
		<description>Boy oh boy, is Evelyn one EV-ignorant 
soul, repeating that pack of silly lies 
from perhaps the most fictitious 
crockumentary since those produced by the 
NAzis during the 1930&#039;s. The EV-1 was hardly
&quot;loved wildly by the masses&quot; - they never 
managed to have more than 3/4 of the paltry 
1100 EV-1s under lease at any one time, despite 
soliciting 5,000 GM customers who had responded 
to their survey who indicated they might be interested
in an electric car. 50 of those folks were actualy
dumb enough to lease what a panel of auto experts 
recently named as one of the worst cars ever built.
The idea that the automakers are deependent upon the 
oil companies might have been  Chris Paine&#039;s dumbest
 theory of all. A real gem. Perhaps he might explain 
why Gm would ever pay attention to an oil company. 
The oil companies depend upon the automakers, moron, 
not the other way around. And how come Toyota and 
Honda&#039;s cancellation of their electric car programs
(Honda after a few months!) would eve lead anyone to 
claim that GM killed anything. The elctric car was DOA.
Nobody needed to kill it. Nor did Roger Smith attempt to 
show that an electric car &quot;couldn&#039;t be built.&quot; They had 
been build before WWI. Unfortunately, electric cars hadn&#039;t advanced one iota during the 90 years since then - they still didn&#039;t have a practical battery. The EV-1 battery pack weighed 1250 pounds (!!!), cost over $20,000, and leasted about 5 years, making battery costs about $4,000 per year, or 4 times the cost of gasoline in those days. The car had
a driving range (round trip) that couldn&#039;t reach destinations a mere 45 miles away. Oh, yeah, that piece of crap was REAL popular. I was around during those days and NO ONE I knew had the slightest interest in driving a stupid battery-only 
electric car. They made zero sense. Then a California chemist determined that the Honda Insight was actually much friendlier to the environment than the EV-1. Just a few of the thousands of facts that were covered up by Hanks, begley andPaine, the 
Three Stooges of documentaries. They are pure liars.
  I might add that putting 5 million electric cars on the road will reduce gasoline consumption aby 1% and emissions by a  much smaller amount. Obama&#039;s con that a million plug-ins by  2015 will accomplish anything is pure con. or ignorance. With 
him it&#039;s always a toss up as to why he tells so many lies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Boy oh boy, is Evelyn one EV-ignorant<br />
soul, repeating that pack of silly lies<br />
from perhaps the most fictitious<br />
crockumentary since those produced by the<br />
NAzis during the 1930&#8217;s. The EV-1 was hardly<br />
&#8220;loved wildly by the masses&#8221; &#8211; they never<br />
managed to have more than 3/4 of the paltry<br />
1100 EV-1s under lease at any one time, despite<br />
soliciting 5,000 GM customers who had responded<br />
to their survey who indicated they might be interested<br />
in an electric car. 50 of those folks were actualy<br />
dumb enough to lease what a panel of auto experts<br />
recently named as one of the worst cars ever built.<br />
The idea that the automakers are deependent upon the<br />
oil companies might have been  Chris Paine&#8217;s dumbest<br />
 theory of all. A real gem. Perhaps he might explain<br />
why Gm would ever pay attention to an oil company.<br />
The oil companies depend upon the automakers, moron,<br />
not the other way around. And how come Toyota and<br />
Honda&#8217;s cancellation of their electric car programs<br />
(Honda after a few months!) would eve lead anyone to<br />
claim that GM killed anything. The elctric car was DOA.<br />
Nobody needed to kill it. Nor did Roger Smith attempt to<br />
show that an electric car &#8220;couldn&#8217;t be built.&#8221; They had<br />
been build before WWI. Unfortunately, electric cars hadn&#8217;t advanced one iota during the 90 years since then &#8211; they still didn&#8217;t have a practical battery. The EV-1 battery pack weighed 1250 pounds (!!!), cost over $20,000, and leasted about 5 years, making battery costs about $4,000 per year, or 4 times the cost of gasoline in those days. The car had<br />
a driving range (round trip) that couldn&#8217;t reach destinations a mere 45 miles away. Oh, yeah, that piece of crap was REAL popular. I was around during those days and NO ONE I knew had the slightest interest in driving a stupid battery-only<br />
electric car. They made zero sense. Then a California chemist determined that the Honda Insight was actually much friendlier to the environment than the EV-1. Just a few of the thousands of facts that were covered up by Hanks, begley andPaine, the<br />
Three Stooges of documentaries. They are pure liars.<br />
  I might add that putting 5 million electric cars on the road will reduce gasoline consumption aby 1% and emissions by a  much smaller amount. Obama&#8217;s con that a million plug-ins by  2015 will accomplish anything is pure con. or ignorance. With<br />
him it&#8217;s always a toss up as to why he tells so many lies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/comment-page-1/#comment-1183</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:09:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amateureconomists.com/blogs/?p=265#comment-1183</guid>
		<description>The battery technology and the vehicle technology was sold to an oil comglomerate, for what I am thinking is a huge dollar amount. Contractually binded, GM had to destroy the technology. The battery technology and patents is owned by, I believe Texaco, until 2014. This is what killed the electric car, but if it were more profitable to GM to keep the electric car then the oil company was willing to pay out, then you would still see EV1&#039;s on the road today. 

One could speculate that GM went on this venture with the premeditated intention to sell the technology to the oil companies after proving that it would seriously effect the oil companies interest. What do you think?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The battery technology and the vehicle technology was sold to an oil comglomerate, for what I am thinking is a huge dollar amount. Contractually binded, GM had to destroy the technology. The battery technology and patents is owned by, I believe Texaco, until 2014. This is what killed the electric car, but if it were more profitable to GM to keep the electric car then the oil company was willing to pay out, then you would still see EV1&#8217;s on the road today. </p>
<p>One could speculate that GM went on this venture with the premeditated intention to sell the technology to the oil companies after proving that it would seriously effect the oil companies interest. What do you think?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Evelyn Black</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2008/09/11/gm-encouraged-by-245-sales-drop-in-august/comment-page-1/#comment-1172</link>
		<dc:creator>Evelyn Black</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 21:15:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amateureconomists.com/blogs/?p=265#comment-1172</guid>
		<description>Doug, I can&#039;t argue with any of what you say. I&#039;m losing no sleep over their predicament, but I do feel for the workers. It is corporate mismanagement plain and simple IMO and lots of it, for many, many years. Let&#039;s hope something better happens for our kids. Thanks for your comments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doug, I can&#8217;t argue with any of what you say. I&#8217;m losing no sleep over their predicament, but I do feel for the workers. It is corporate mismanagement plain and simple IMO and lots of it, for many, many years. Let&#8217;s hope something better happens for our kids. Thanks for your comments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

