Built like a Mercedes (?)

Do a web search on biodiesel, and decide for yourself. I'll say this, its
definitely going to be profitable to someone, not to mention burning cleaner
than mineral based fuels.

--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)

 

?mottob ot pot morf skoob daer uoy oD



*************************
Dave

 

Show how it is non renewable. I assume that is what you meant.

*************************
Dave

 

Cite?

Like you kick the asses of those Arabs I suppose?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4649066.stm

Huw

 

None of those are British and none are actually inferior. GM has just had

Fiat was owned by the Italian governement, likewise Renault by the French.
Using either as an example of free market business is moot. I do have
experience with these cars in the States. Fiat was generally not able to
take the pounding of distance driving, Renault was impossible to fix due to
propriatary and (French) governmental restrictions on parts, and Peugot
simply weren't numerous enough to bother with.

False. Both Fiat and Renault were owned at some point by the governemnts of
their respective origin.

Not at all. I am very pleased with the position in which DC has placed
itself, particularly the Chrysler division. It is notable that DC and
Chrysler in particular are well off financially, doing more business than
previous years, and having a better balanced line of product. This is not a
coincidence. Further, I am not complaining about free market economy, nor am
I complaining about "foreign" vehicles cruising our highways. Indeed, I
believe competition makes for a better vehicle.

However, as I stated in my original reply, the OP wasn't worried about
company profit or quality, but the fact that DC vehicles were heavy, and
thus less efficient than other brands. Somehow, even though I pointed it
out, you missed that in the original post.

No argument here. However their reply isn't particularly about the
companies, but the welfare of the nation as a whole.

The problem is obviously on your end, where you think that such jobs would
render someone unable to see through your inept reply.

--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)

 

Agreed, but DC isn't just a German company. Decisions made in Stuttgart
affect manufacturing plants here. Thus, no matter who makes the decisions,
it is a pleasant change to see that inefficient management is being cut,
just as inefficient labor normally is.

--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)

 

Agreed, but DC isn't just a German company. Decisions made in Stuttgart
affect manufacturing plants here. Thus, no matter who makes the decisions,
it is a pleasant change to see that inefficient management is being cut,
just as inefficient labor normally is.

--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)

 

It is interesting that in my field (pharmaceutical process machinery) that
there are some very nicely-designed Italian machines but I have heard some
negative comments about the quality. Also in one case, the technology is
rather peculiar for the purpose (and they don't sell many, even in Italy).

On the other hand, certain lock and automatic gates mechanisms are dominated
by Italian companies, and good they are, too. I am thinking of CISA and
FAAC (or whatever it's called).

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

[...]

[...]

 

.....and, e.g., Netherlands. (OK, small, but still.) Of course we are
talking per capita.

DAS
--
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

[...]

[...]

 

Fiat is owned by the Agnelli family and it is almost bigger than the Italian
state. It owns many mutinational brands like CaseNewHolland [CNH] which have
a big US presence.



likewise Renault by the

The French government have no more than a 16% shareholding in Renault while
Renault has a substantial holding in Nissan.



Using either as an example of free market business is moot. I

Very few US cars can cut it in Europe either. Only Chrysler/Jeep really have
any presence here. Others have tried and failed due to poor quality and
dynamics. Chrysler is controlled by German Daimler anyhow.
Oh yes and BMW X5 and Mercedes M are American built and sell in considerable
numbers here but they are hardly representative of the rest of the crap
produced. In any case the build quality of my MClass was appaling and worse
than any European car I have had since a Ford Fiesta of 1977.
Actually my particular M was assembled in Austria and was better built than
most of the petrol American built ones. Apparently the new models are much
improved in all respects.

Well that is a symptom of a socialist phase that Europe went through. It is
a historical anachronism which has not been true for many years. Fiat has
recently been in financial trouble but nothing like the problems at Ford and
GM. In fact GM had a contract to buy Fiat which they had to buy themselves
out of last year. It is part of the reason GM are in the pickle they are in.
There is much cross polination between the brands and Fiat supply many
diesel engines to GM Europe while they now build a small car to be branded
as a Ford as well as a Fiat.
Fiat also build cars and supply engines for Suzuki of Japan.

Most cars are built heavier due to the equipment fitted and improved safety
standards. The Mercedes brand has always made heavier cars than BMW for
instance but it is all relitive. Their small cars are lighter than their big
cars while a variety of engines are available for each model. If lightness
is your thing, they produce the Smart car which is as small and light as
anyone could wish.

The welfare of the nation is tied absolutely to the profitability, success
and expansion of its companies. Not of a particular company but of all the
companies that employ the population that makes a nation.

Then it is an indictment of your promotion system that you may have or have
not got higher up the ladder I believe. Or it may be an indictment of the
effort you put into your job. Any way it does not look good.

Huw

 

Inefficient management is usually the reason that a labour force is
inefficient.

Huw

 

Because of subsidies? If so, that's not real economics - that's
politics - and someone is losing money/paying for it (i.e., the taxpayer).

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

You are barking mad !

Graham

 

"theguy" is on target, maybe its your keyboard.

--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)

 

Correction of top posting idiocy attempted...

Don't like it, don't read it.

--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)

 

Inefficient management is usually the reason that a labour force is

Debatable at best. While management is a factor, its one of many that have
an effect on the process.

--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)

 

No. The carriages of a train are much heavier in relation to payload
compared to a five seater family car and a fully occupied family car will be
more economical per passenger mile. Even with tax rebated fuel and a massive
government subsidy on top it is cheaper for five people to travel by car
than by train.

There are other issues that come into play with intercity travel though such
as congestion of the roads which may make the train more practical and
timely but for most who travel outside London the train is almost
irrellevant and a 19th century anachronism. That is why most non commuter
train lines shut down many moons ago. Their route is even less flexible than
a service bus.

Huw

 

All factors have to be managed. The job of a manager is to manage and labour
efficiency needs to be managed. Costs have to be managed. The whole company
needs to be managed. If it is not managed efficiently to overcome problems
and to innovate and sell at a profit then it will succumb.

Huw

 

perfectly stupid answer dave, to go along with a perfectly stupid
thread. at any rate, what the **** are you talking about? over.

 

Well that is a symptom of a socialist phase that Europe went through. It

My point remains, and is substanciated by your statement. Your examples are
poor representation of free market philosophy.

Well, once again, you've missed the point of the original post. This was one
of efficiency, and the effect on oil consumption.

Not entirely true. There are many other factors, including employment rate
(related to how much is imported instead of manufactured here), inflation
(cost of living versus income), and management of the companies. One of the
factors that makes a company more succesful and able to expand is to raise
its market share. Cuting imports is one thing that would allow for that.
Thus, eliminating that possibility, as you suggest, means one advantage is
stripped from the manufacturer. We can debate the merits ad infinitum, but
to regard it as wholly a negative action forgets the overall picture. In
DC's case, such a move might be positive, as Mercedes isn't that big a
market share, while Chrysler is, thus, Chrysler would profit from such a
move, while Mercedes would not be substancially harmed. Result: DC makes
more money.

False. It reeks of your inability to understand that such jobs may be held
by people of intellegence who have to start somewhere on the ladder of
success. Where better than the bottom to understand completely what makes a
business tick? Of course, if you prefer the "Peter Principle", that would
explain your attitude and lack of respect for those working "beneath" you.


--
Max

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)