Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs Jeep Liberty and Jeep Liberty Diesel Jeep Liberty Power Windows
142 messages, Last post on Nov 21, 2009 at 4:59 AM
You are in the Jeep Liberty and Jeep Liberty Diesel Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
Replying to: spinnakerbaybe (Jan 03, 2008 4:00 pm) Bottom Line: If you are a tax payer, you are now essentially a shareholder of Chrysler and GM. We have just invested in two companies that do not fix problems, but perpetuate them. I want out of this Jeep so bad. And I only hope the company stays around long enough so that the resale value of my POS doesn't fall any more than it already has. This company is an absolute joke! what ever happened to pride in building American vehicles has surely flown the coop with the Chrysler. Every Chrysler employee should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this to happen to what was once a fine representation of American craftsmanship. they all have played a part in allowing this company to do this to the consumers. shame on Chrysler.
|
|
|
Replying to: ena1512 (Dec 28, 2008 9:01 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: caribou1 (Dec 29, 2008 12:01 am) Without knowing too much about how much it actually costs to make a Jeep, or any other vehicle for that matter, common sense would lend me to believe that if making a profit equated only to building products with sub-par parts, that everyone and their uncle would be in the business of making cars with parts of poor quality. There is so much more to making a profit than simple supply chain or procurement principals. I would venture to say that many companies that try to give their profits a shot in the arm by ordering cheaper and poorer quality parts quickly find themselves out of business that is unless a government bails them out. Therefore, "Caribu1", I beg your pardon, whether we would like to admit to it or not, we as taxpaying Americans have just invested in a company that has proven their inability to make a profit time and again, with good parts or bad ones, probably since the Iaccoca days.
|
|
|
Replying to: ena1512 (Dec 30, 2008 2:32 pm) In a world where beauty reigns what you say is true. Inquire a little about "Renault" and "Daimler Benz" during and just after WW2. Later in time, in the 70's, Renault workers were considered as 'civil servants' by the rest of the French population. People had no other choice than pay too much for what I found was crap compared to the north American products I was familiar with. I wish you all a better, objective and profitable New Year 
|
|
|
Replying to: caribou1 (Jan 01, 2009 12:41 pm) good to hear from you again. However, I am not sure I understand your point. I think you are saying that folks in France were forced to pay too much for crappy cars built by Renault at the time, somewhere after WWII. France embraces socialism, and Totalitarianism if I am not mistaken, so having the government prop up companies in France is not uncommon. Not to mention, that in the days and years following WWII, times were much different. Marketing was different. Allegiance to one brand was essentially unheard of, and as your response implies, competition was a force that essentially did not exist, and certainly was not allowed to thrive. Capitalism embraces healthy competition, and competition has a way of weeding out the non-competitive companies. That is of course, if it is left alone, and allowed to work it's magic. The government propping up a company that is clearly building a sub-par product is doing NO one any favors. There is a pretty decent article in the wall street journal a few days ago by one of their economists, Moore is his name. Anyway, in the article, he discusses Ayn Rand, and Atlas Shrugged. I think many of the ideals expressed in the book, as well as in the editorial column support my point. Here is that link if you have some time to research it, it's a pretty good article. link title On a lighter note, and getting back to the point of this thread, my driver's side window broke for the third time last night. Oh the joys of Liberty ownership. Also, my wife spoke to the folks at the dealership, and supposedly they are on revision "J" of the part that is supposed to fix this issue. |
|
|
Replying to: ena1512 (Jan 13, 2009 7:13 am) But we digress.  I can't keep track of all the various make/model issues around here, but is your problem the recurring one with the plastic gizmo that keeps falling off the window track (or does it fall of the motor?), sometimes letting the window drop into the door? Revision J doesn't sound too encouraging.
|
|
|
Replying to: ena1512 (Jan 13, 2009 7:13 am) The article you refer to is exactly, word to word, the substance of EU public debates. Industry is fine, it's the bankers that have 'cold feet'. We now have public mediators to negotiate credit lines for companies that already have their production potential fully committed. If I buy a Jeep Liberty Sport CRD today with a tag of 33,000 Euros, in addition I am penalized by more than 2000 Euros simply for CO2 tax. Many people have money to buy cars but the government discourages us from buying and thus puts the automobile industry in front of a dilemma: who do you want to keep? civil servants or industry workers? I think revision "J" stands for "junk"
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 13, 2009 8:27 am) Yeah, it's the recurring issue whereby the window mysteriously falls into the door. sometimes when the car isn't moving, and other times when your rolling down the highway, at a safe speed of course. But, according to Jeep, this isn't a safety concern, so it won't be recalled. Pretty interesting though. As for the article, that was very interesting indeed. Although, one could certainly argue that the idea of Objectivism that Ayn was referring to, was never allowed to flourish. One of the fundamentals of her theory is the complete separation of politics and economics. Alan Greenspan's intervention throughout his term essentially put the kibosh on this part of the theory, at least I tend to think so. Not to mention we have special interest groups that are allowed to "sway" the "beliefs" of our elected politicians. I think this is one of the most detrimental aspects of our current political landscape. Essentially, we have made public office a mockery and have allowed ourselves to be ruled by folks that do not necessarily have anything further than their bank accounts in their best interests. Now, I digress . I appreciate the discourse Steve. Have a good one, and perhaps one day we will all be able to get rid of the cars that we probably paid too much for in the beginning  anyway. 
|
|
|
Replying to: caribou1 (Jan 13, 2009 9:02 am) BTW, i just read your profile, and I am also an avid photographer. Not a good one by any means, but definitely a serious hobbyist.
|
|
|
Replying to: ena1512 (Jan 15, 2009 7:56 pm) We had an automobile tax proportional to the size of the engine; it was meant to assist elderly people. This tax was removed at the time life expectancy increased significantly Perhaps removing the CO2 tax and helping people to upgrade their vehicles to use an equivalent to 'Blue-tech' (urea) technology could be a viable option. Our Jeeps could then run with their windows open (LOL) |
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Jeep Liberty and Jeep Liberty Diesel Jeep Liberty Power Windows
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Jeep Liberty
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
