ute Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 FYI everyone... free vinyl decals from Argent International... They look like this: They are a "removable vinyl" so they peel off a surface real easy... Thought I'd share the link http://www.argent-international.com/ or try this... http://www.argent-international.com/...er#contactForm I have nothing to do with Argent, just ran across this on another forum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 The low interest Government loans from the Energy Department are from our tax dollars. It should say "Built Without a Bailout." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captainp4 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Have you ordered any? I assume they're free to get your information and to start pestering you with junk mail, phone calls, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 I just went to the site and ordered one.....I spelled my first name differently so I can then track how many pieces of junk mail come to my house with my name spelled that way.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Essentially you could "print" that image on sticker paper, and accomplish the same...thats what I usually do. I have a "sticker' for each political cause I must attend. Old-guard loves those details when you go speak to them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 The low interest Government loans from the Energy Department are from our tax dollars. It should say "Built Without a Bailout." The point is the same. You'd be hard pressed to find any large corporation that does business in America that hasn't taken some sort of loan, grant, or other incentive from the federal government at one point or another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 The low interest Government loans from the Energy Department are from our tax dollars. It should say "Built Without a Bailout." Yep, the new Focus is coming off a retooled line built with government loans with below market interest terms. Ditto with new Escape coming off retooled lines at LAP next year. I don't blame Ford for taking the money that was offered by Congress. And I don't blame GM and Chrysler for doing what they had to do since the alternative was probably liquidation and the end of the supplier base Ford and others needed to stay in business. The blame goes to the financial crisis that could have been much worse than it ended up being which was bad enough and still affecting the economy to this day. At least we still have some semblance of an auto base left in this country that is homegrown. So I rejoice that Ford, GM, and Chrysler are still around and paying bonuses that do help this still struggling, fragile economy. It should be a happy day for all no matter what your political persuasions are. And if you are upset over their survival because "government" money was used, you need therapy. Get over it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Pretty sure that this isn't a licensed use of the Ford trademark. And posting this on a site frequented by Ford's lawyers is probably going to result in a rather short run of these stickers......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 The low interest Government loans from the Energy Department are from our tax dollars. It should say "Built Without a Bailout." or built without bankruptcy. never forget ford stood next to GM and Chrysler when they appealed to congress for a bailout. I don't think ford could have through the 1Q of 2009 if GM and Chrysler were not bailed out. It looks like every dime of our money will be paid back with interest. this whole I am against bailout shit needs to be grounded in the reality that without it we would have lost another 300,000 jobs, in a very short period of time. It was not worth it, the autoindustry was in a historic decline in sales, there were things that could have been done that weren't done. if ford did not secure lines of credit before the finacial crisis, it would have been bailed out as well. ford wasn't just smart Ford was lucky. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 The blame goes to the financial crisis that could have been much worse than it ended up being which was bad enough and still affecting the economy to this day. At least we still have some semblance of an auto base left in this country that is homegrown. So I rejoice that Ford, GM, and Chrysler are still around and paying bonuses that do help this still struggling, fragile economy. It should be a happy day for all no matter what your political persuasions are. And if you are upset over their survival because "government" money was used, you need therapy. Get over it. How about putting the blame where it belongs - on GM and Chrysler for waiting too long to change their business. Why is it that no other mfrs were in the same shape? Ford bit the bullett and it paid off. GM and Chrysler were lazy and/or ignorant and they took the bullet for it. If someone gets hurt due to their own negligence do you feel sorry for them or do you say that they shouldn't have put themselves in that position to begin with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 If someone gets hurt due to their own negligence do you feel sorry for them or do you say that they shouldn't have put themselves in that position to begin with? If it was only the decision-makers who would have paid the price, that's fine. It wasn't the rank-and-file's fault that their management was shafting the company that employed them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 If it was only the decision-makers who would have paid the price, that's fine. It wasn't the rank-and-file's fault that their management was shafting the company that employed them. I wasn't suggesting that anyone should have been shafted. I was only saying that we should put the blame for GM and Chrysler's failure squarely on their shoulders and not on the financial crisis. The financial crisis was simply the catalyst. And if Ford had not acted quickly and decisively they would have been in the same boat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4d4evr-1 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 or built without bankruptcy. never forget ford stood next to GM and Chrysler when they appealed to congress for a bailout. I don't think ford could have through the 1Q of 2009 if GM and Chrysler were not bailed out. It looks like every dime of our money will be paid back with interest. this whole I am against bailout shit needs to be grounded in the reality that without it we would have lost another 300,000 jobs, in a very short period of time. It was not worth it, the autoindustry was in a historic decline in sales, there were things that could have been done that weren't done. if ford did not secure lines of credit before the finacial crisis, it would have been bailed out as well. ford wasn't just smart Ford was lucky. You might want to check the numbers, the money given to GM by Bush and Obama before the BK are not included in the percentage of the stock owned by the government. We will never get that back plus we are not sure to get the $$$ in ownership unless the stock price goes up over $50 which is not certain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 You might want to check the numbers, the money given to GM by Bush and Obama before the BK are not included in the percentage of the stock owned by the government. We will never get that back plus we are not sure to get the $$ in ownership unless the stock price goes up over $50 which is not certain. I believe they will be paid back, in time. GM first then Chrysler. It was more than bad practices that got them into trouble. the bottom fell out of the market, and they could not get credit to pay their bills. That is the reason they needed a bailout, is because the Credit markets froze up. Ford was lucky to secure lines of credit before the markets froze up, if they did not ford would have suffered the same fate as GM, and Chrysler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 GM was offered the same deal that Ford got, from the bankers. They laughed in the bankers faces, and told them that they are GM, and needed nothing from them (even when presented with the evidence that an economic downturn was coming). Fast forward to 2008, when GM is begging for money, but still being arrogant and horrible. Telling the bankers that they WILL give them the money, because they are GM. We know how that turned out. Fast forward a couple of more months, when GM is trying to tie in with Ford, because their financial situation is getting dire (a financial situation that to this day, they do not know correct numbers to, and have admitted as much). I can put up with the bailouts for the employees and all of those who would have lost the most. I have less than ZERO respect for GM the corporation, and all of their stupid moves and musical chairs to this day, have not changed that one iota. Ford changed from the inside out. GM hasn't gotten close to that. What they have done, is been given the gift of a second chance, but only because they were too big to fail............... and they KNEW THAT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 Ford changed from the inside out. GM hasn't gotten close to that. What they have done, is been given the gift of a second chance, but only because they were too big to fail............... and they KNEW THAT. No way! GM is an entirely different company! :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 Ford was lucky I get so tired of hearing this. Ford--unlike GM and Chrysler--wasn't living in denial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 It was more than bad practices that got them into trouble. the bottom fell out of the market, and they could not get credit to pay their bills. That is the reason they needed a bailout, is because the Credit markets froze up. Why didn't Honda go belly up? Why didn't Toyota go belly up? Why didn't BMW, Mercedes, VW, Nissan, Hyundai, etc. go belly up? Why is it that only GM and Chrysler went BK? Why didn't GM kill Pontiac and Saturn before the BK? Why didn't Chrysler make the new 300 or Grand Cherokee before the BK? Because they were screwed up and the economic crisis was just the last straw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 ....Why didn't GM kill Pontiac and Saturn before the BK?..... Because bankruptcy allowed them to bow out of dealership agreements without the huge expense ala Oldsmobile..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F250 Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 Why didn't Honda go belly up? Why didn't Toyota go belly up? Why didn't BMW, Mercedes, VW, Nissan, Hyundai, etc. go belly up? Why is it that only GM and Chrysler went BK? Do some research on those companies. Most are so supported and protected by their home country governments they may as well be on the payroll. Hell Hyundai is practically a branch of the Korean government. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 Not an original idea. October 2010 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 Do some research on those companies. Most are so supported and protected by their home country governments they may as well be on the payroll. Hell Hyundai is practically a branch of the Korean government. Has nothing to do with the fact that the other companies had their costs under control and were making products people wanted to buy and that's how they survived the economic downturn. Had Ford hired Mulally 2 years earlier they would have been in a similar state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F250 Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 Has nothing to do with the fact that the other companies had their costs under control and were making products people wanted to buy and that's how they survived the economic downturn. Had Ford hired Mulally 2 years earlier they would have been in a similar state. It aint hard when those foreign companies get protected home markets, constant financial support (cash) and anything they need from their home governments. While dumb ass Americans buy foreign cars and hate their home auto industry without knowing the facts...which foreign companies hide very well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 hate their home auto industry That's a myth. Don't confuse hatred with disgust. I'll give you 30 years (1976 to 2006), you name me 12 cars from GM, Ford, and Chrysler that were reliable, well built, and technologically advanced (SUVs and trucks don't count). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F250 Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 That's a myth. Don't confuse hatred with disgust. I'll give you 30 years (1976 to 2006), you name me 12 cars from GM, Ford, and Chrysler that were reliable, well built, and technologically advanced (SUVs and trucks don't count). Oooh a famous Richard bait question designed to set up the no-win scenario, I'm honored. I'll cut to the chase...any cars I nominate (and I can think of 12 easy) will be countered with "well I know of a guy who's second cousin bought one of those and had to have a ball joint replaced so they were not reliable." Or, you think an '86 Turbo v6 Buick Grand National or '84 intercooled turbo Mustang SVO were advanced! NO Way! those had solid rear axles (and beat the hell out of anything slithering across the Pacific) so they couldnt be considered advanced. Humm..a Buick v6 that can outpower V8s while saving fuel...sounds like an idea Ford is revisiting 25 years later...Anyway, my family has never owned a foreign car, we keep them a long time and have never had a lemon that made us swear we would never buy another one. Which is really what your question was asking...my opinion. Or were you refering to opinions from rags like Consumer Reports? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.