Comments on: Financial Help for Detroit?

By: Bonny

Bonny — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:34:56 +0000

Is this Peter Ehiman real with these loans of his?

By: Mr peter

Mr peter — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:54:49 +0000

I am Mr.Peter Ehimen a Legitimate And a Reputable money Lender. We are a dynamic company with financial assistance.We loan funds out to individuals in need of financial assistance, that have a bad credit or in need of money to pay bills,to invest on business.I want to use this medium to inform you that we render reliable and beneficiary assistance as be glad to offer you a loan.
Services Rendered include;

Refinance,Home Improvement,Investment Loan,Auto Loans,Debt Consolidation,Line of Credit,Second Mortgage,Business Loans, Personal Loans,Car Loan,Auto Loan. Please write back if interested.

Upon Response, you are to fill the Loan application form to enable us process our interested client loan,Below are loan application form.

FULL NAME.........
HOME ADDRESS......
TELL NO..............
SEX.................
AGE...........
MARITAL STATUS........
COUNTRY..........
STATE..........
MONTHLY INCOME.........
OCCUPATION.....
DATE OF BIRTH.....
AMOUNT OF LOAN.........
PURPOSE OF LOAN........
DURATION OF LOAN........

(No social security and no credit check, 100% Guaranteed!) I Look forward to doing business with you.After sending the above requirement.You will be given the loan terms and condition which will serve as an agreement between the borrower and the lender ok?

Best Regards,
Mr Peter Ehimen.

By: Doug Kozlay

Doug Kozlay — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 22:21:05 +0000

During the Clinton/Gore administration in 1993, about $1B was divided among the “big three” automakers to fund the “Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles” (PNGV) to develop and productize cars in the 100 mpg range. Three hybrids resulted — slated for 2004 production: GM built the Precept, Ford built the Prodigy, and Chrysler built the ESX. The GM Precept, building on EV1 technology, was the most spectacular diesel-electric hybrid design that got 105 mpg in concept-vehicle tests and was to become an 80 mpg production vehicle in 2004. It proved that GM, and by example American engineering, could take the lead. Unfortunately, CEO Smith was bumped aside and G. Richard Wagoner, Jr. took over and in 2001 appointed Robert Lutz as vice-chairman of product development. Lutz did not believe in hybrids and killed the program, after presenting one to the government to fulfill the contract. The company re-committed to short-term profitable SUV’s and missed the opportunity to lead the hybrid and plug automotive market into the 21st century. The funding came a little too early on the cusp of an administration change in Washington that initially saw hybrid and electric cars as a threat to the oil industry. The Precept is described at: http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=112

By: jay

jay — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:43:08 +0000

It’s the tortoise and hare all over again.In this case,a stitch in time could have saved ” the big three” instead of nine.The big three knew what was coming along in the 1960′s and especially in 1973.They sought a quick buck and got it.So,too, did the U.A.W.You can only transfuse so much blood into a cadaver before you realise it’s time to quit.Toyota won.Honda will be in the race.So will Korea adn Europe.The big three blew it.Let ‘em land in their golden parachutes!

By: Old Man Crowder

Old Man Crowder — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:32:53 +0000

"Efficiency or Bust!"

Looks like they're choosing "bust".

How sad.

By: eeee

eeee — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 14:48:19 +0000

Daniel has it all wrong. NO tax money was ever given to Chrysler in the 70′s. Guarantees were extended to Chrysler in obtaining loans and ALL of the loaned funds were paid back IN FULL at NO cost to the tax payers. Funny how some ignorance goes on and never dies.

By: Max Reid

Max Reid — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:07:52 +0000

Sean "Its a meaningful post on the Toilets"

Seems 67 million vehicles were sold last year Worldwide. Thats probably 4 % compared to previous year, whereas Oil production increased only 0.4 %. No wonder, gas prices will continue to go up.

Parallely, the Sales of Vehicles thru YTD-2007 have taken a knock in USA.
Pickups -4 %
Vans -17 %
Truck based SUVs -7%

and this trend will continue.
So Big-3 should be better prepared to make smaller vehicles.

By: sean

sean — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 23:43:52 +0000

I can't believe the excuses put up by the big three defending not to increase CAFE standard: losing jobs, losing safety, losing competitiveness. And now it's clear that thsoe are what they are losing when sticking with the out-of-date CAFE stds. Look, even the humble toilet cistern has improved over time. It used to use roughly 20 litres of water for a flush (no dual flush in the past), then 6/12 litre, then 4.5/9 litre and even 3/6 litre dual flush. What are the guys from the big three are thinking? *sign*

By: Max Reid

Max Reid — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 22:37:29 +0000

Of late, Gasolene have become more expensive than Diesel since Light Crude which yields more Gasolene is running out.

Atleast the Trucks can switchover to Diesel, even Accord & Altima are coming with Diesel version in 2009.

GM & Ford do have good Diesel tech, but in Europe. They can bring it here.

By: AP

AP — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:39:27 +0000

Point 1: Japanese and European get better fuel economy because their consumers demand it: they pay $6/gallon or so, most of which is taxes. Their government created the market for fuel-efficient cars, the opposite of here.

Point 2: The Japanese can build small cars profitably in the US because they have no retirees to support and few older workers to provide medical care for. They can import small cars cheaply into the US because of the weak yen. The Japanese government may not hand money to their automakers, but they have taxed their citizens more heavily to buy our Treasury bills and drive down the yen. Europeans have trouble here because of the strong Euro (VW makes much of its US product in Mexico).

Other major industrial countries actively support their auto industries and create demand for fuel-efficiency. We try to provide temporary tax incentives that are selective and quick fixes, with no long-lasting push to conserve.

Many American cars leads their class in fuel economy. If American fuel were $6/gallon, I don't think American car companies would question the value of fuel-efficient vehicles.