BMW should pay someone to go around and remove their logo's from these pos's.

My wife speaks German and went there recently. Mug. I have bought and sold telescopes to a man in Germany. Mug. Love BMW. Mug.

Not all Porsche drivers are douches, but douches do love a Porsche ("Porsche" can also be swapped with "BMW")

Although it is a formula race car, it's not formula 1. It's actually a Formula BMW race car used at the Nurburgring (Nürburgring Formel Super Racing). Here are the specs from the website:

Formula BMW
Engine: 4 cylinder, 1,200 cc
Maximum rev: 8,200 rpm /
Chassis: Carbon monocoque
Power: 103 kW, 140 hp
Weight: 465 kg
Transmission: Hewland sequential 6-speed

Still, a very cool video.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

Do you believe that the demand for cars would have decreased if the big 3 went under? If so, please explain how and why.
I think, if the big 3 tanked, people who would have bought those cars would still need cars and would have bought cars from other manufacturers. That means increased business for those other manufacturers which means they place more demand on the material manufacturers, the parts suppliers, etc. Some of that demand would have manifested overseas, but I believe much of it would have gone to the same businesses that Ford, Chrysler and GM use. After all, as I said above, there's lots of other manufacturers that do assembly here and it's easier and cheaper to have your suppliers nearby.
No, like you say it's mostly a supply-driven story, not demand-driven. My point is that dismantling the Detroit-centered auto manufacturing infrastructure would be a huge shock to the American economy.

Like you say, eventually the economy would readjust, but even in a good economy it'd take a long time for it to adjust to a shock of that size. In a time where the financial markets had just gone into a crisis of historic proportions, it might've taken more than a decade.

A decade in which that circular flow is moving more slowly, dragged down by all the human and industrial capital that we leave idle as workers in Detroit look for new jobs, and while we wait for the prices of Toyotas and Hondas and BMW's to rise in response to the decline in supply, then wait for those price increases to build up as excess capital to the point where those companies decide to invest in opening new factories to meet the demand.

In the long run, the circular flow of our economy would eventually get back up to the rate it was at before, but in the long run we are all dead.

Or instead we could spot 'em 50 billion and avoid taking that kind of hit. Unless of course, you think there are inherent insurmountable problems with Chrysler and GM that can't be fixed with new management and some debt forgiveness?
>> ^xxovercastxx:

All the independent analyses that I read back in 2008 concluded that the cost of the bailouts vs letting the big 3 tank was close to a wash.

I'm not sure if the analyses you looked at were talking about the overall macroeconomic effects, but I bet not. I bet they just looked at "will it increase the government's debt load?" That's all most investor analyses do in situations like this.

The analysis I'm talking about would be comparing GDP forecasts with the bailout vs. without.
>> ^xxovercastxx:
There's also a cost to other businesses that comes with these sorts of bailouts that is rarely mentioned. I used to work at a small property insurance company. When the economy got rough, they played things smart. They minimized their risk, invested heavily and were one of the only companies of their kind to maintain a profit through the whole debacle. AIG, on the other hand, bet on high risk business and lost fortunes. They got a government care package and put themselves back together and now, as a result, are destroying the insurance market. My old company is struggling to stay in business (next year is their 100th anniversary) and AIG is swimming in ill gotten money.

The smartass in me wants to say "what's the cost?" After all, both companies made a profit. What's wrong with that?

But seriously, you're talking about "moral hazard". Believe me, that's not some topic nobody talks about, it's what right-wing economists and business journalists scream as loud as they can whenever there's talk about government stepping in to stave off major disruptions in the economy.

The my answer is that bailouts shouldn't be no strings attached, like the bailout of AIG was. The management of the companies that get rescued should lose their jobs, and be stripped of all their personal wealth. Depending on their actions, maybe tossed in jail too.

That way the value of company itself is preserved (and not liquidated), while there's a strong disincentive for the management to make a business plan that centers on expectations of being bailed out if the shit hits the fan.
>> ^xxovercastxx:

So the question I pose (and I know we can only speculate on the answer) is what effect have the bailouts had on Toyota, Honda, etc? Or do we not care because they don't employ as many Americans as the domestics?


Since this comment is approaching an epic length already, I'm just gonna say that it wasn't really about foreign vs. domestic ownership, but about minimizing the number of years we stay below trend in GDP during a severe recession. If you want to view it as a region vs. region dispute, it was also about keeping the perfectly good Detroit manufacturing cluster from being needlessly dismantled and rebuilt elsewhere.

You mean the car is ONLY FOLLOWING ORDERS? Oh Nein! Where have we heard THIS before?

>> ^dahauns:

>> ^nock:
Also, this car sounds like a boyscout (travels center of the lane, never passes on the right) whereas google's car is programmed to drive more like a human would when necessary.

You do realize that it's only following german regulations (e.g. no overtaking on the right allowed)?

>> ^nock:
Also, this car sounds like a boyscout (travels center of the lane, never passes on the right) whereas google's car is programmed to drive more like a human would when necessary.


You do realize that it's only following german regulations (e.g. no overtaking on the right allowed)?

All right, I'll say it. Romney's right. I am envious of millionaires. I would venture to say that most of my peers are "jealous" too... but for one reason, and one reason only:

If I had that much wealth (or a sufficient salary to reach that much in, say, 5 years of full-time work), I could rest a LOT easier and lead a far more relaxed life. I wouldn't have to worry about mortgage payments. I wouldn't have to worry about a medical emergency. I wouldn't have to worry about putting food on the table. I wouldn't have to worry about a child's college education. I wouldn't have to worry about retirement. Although not every one of those points apply to me (yet), there exist plenty of lower- and middle-income families for which all of those and more do.

That's it. There's nothing else. There were 3.1 million millionaires in the US at last count and obviously I don't and can't know all of them personally. It is patently illogical for me to begrudge and envy all of them in any way other than the element of financial security. I don't envy their boat; I don't enjoy that kind of recreation or the upkeep associated with it. I don't envy their second house; I only need one. I don't need a 60" plasma TV (or any TV at all for that matter, why, I have Videosift! <3). I don't need a Ferrari; the speed limit is 65 everywhere. And so on. It bears mentioning that most millionaires live very frugal lives themselves, anyhow.

What I do need are the basic essentials for living, enough that I can rest easy at night. And the bigger the safety net, the more comfortable I am.

Romney seems to think this envy is on the level of revolution and "class warfare." No. I don't give a single fuck about what millionaires do with their money. The problem is this: if you raise taxes 5% on the middle and lower classes, that could mean the difference between rice and beans vs. 3 square meals a day. Raise taxes 5% on the wealthy and the difference is keeping their BMW and Benz for 1 more year as opposed to trading up to the latest and greatest model.

TL;DR - Romney's right, but for the wrong reasons.

Would you like me to change the title or description to fit your personal projection? I did not tell you anything other than a video description. But as a loving Jehovah witness I would love to change everything about the videos educational wording to suit you.

In reply to this comment by Enzoblue:
This is one way someone makes pistons. You can't tell me BMW makes them this way. Too much human involved and at 4-8 cylinders per every car you see on the road, way too slow a process.

This is one way someone makes pistons. You can't tell me BMW makes them this way. Too much human involved and at 4-8 cylinders per every car you see on the road, way too slow a process.

It was a great series, as was Long Way Down, where they ride from John'O Groats, Scotland, to Cape Town. I was surprised that they persisted with the loaded-up BMWs in the second series, though. The bikes were totally unsuitable for sandy/muddy conditions-way too heavy.

didn't mythbusters show that a 300+ HP BMW M3 actually was more fuel efficient on a track than a Prius?

I don't think my car even reaches 120mph, and if it does, I certainly wouldn't feel safe driving it at that speed. I already had a car ride with a "friend" a few years ago, and he took it up to 155mph in a BMW he owned. Never again.

I ran over the back left side of a 80s BMW with a 3 tonne truck, left a note. Boss covered it up by spreading the payments out over a couple months, 5 thousand dollars damage, I didnt have to loose my job, everyone was happy. I left a note for being the smashing person I am, and the fact I had dragged the car a foot and people noticed it.

I have family members that are Chinese. I like and respect them a lot and don't in general have any issues with Chinese or the culture. I've lived in Vancouver BC (otherwise known as Hong-couver). It is a major immigration destination for the Chinese in Canada. In Vancouver, white people seem to be a minority.

Things I know for fact:
1). Older(often first-gen) Chinese people are racist and don't like white people - We've often been kicked out of stores for being white (not just once, but so many times I lost count.) I know of MANY younger Chinese who have dated or married Caucasian and been disowned from their families.
2). Chinese people are some of the rudest people I know. But only if they don't know you. They are very hospitable to you if they know you. Go to a mall full of Chinese people you don't know and you will see what it's like to be black in the southern US.
3). Yes, the Western Chinese culture DOES gloats over it's wealth.
3a). I know families where the grandparents go without food so the teenage grandkids can have their BMWs and Jags so that everyone thinks they are rich even if they aren't. It's all about impressions. They go out of their way to flaunt wealth.
3b). the most prestigious area in the Vancouver area is Richmond because it translates to RichMan in Chinese. The town itself is below sea-level and exists only because of the dikes holding back the Pacific Ocean. It now has some of the most over-priced land in Canada.
4). Go to a Chinese home for dinner, as a guest, and you will be served chicken, beef, pork and fish often at the same meal. Serving meat to guests shows their wealth. in China they often can't afford meat. Serving as much meat as possible in one meal shows they they are wealthy. It also honors the guest by showing offering a wealth of variety. They generally don't eat a lot of meat as a normal diet but mainly when guests are present.

I have many stories on Chinese culture experiences. The culture is VERY different from ours. I don't want to sound racist towards Chinese or Asian cultures because I'm not. Most of negative things that can be pointed out originates from the older family members and is filtered down. Most 2nd & 3rd generation Chinese are very Westernized and mix easily with our culture. Age has nothing to do with it, as young immigrants bring with them unwarranted arrogance and racism. It's not the people I blame but the culture they bring with them that is both fascinating and frustrating at the same time.

*Yes, I know you can't paint everyone with the same brush. there are some very forward thinking people immigrating to Canada and are here to experience the Western way of life but there are many traditional, often wealthy families that come here to raise themselves up and don't want anything to do with western culture or the people that live here.

I also believe it is mostly these first-generation immigrants, young and old, that give Chinese and Asian people a bad name. They are not aware of western customs and the friendliness/respect that is offered amongst Canadians. They bring with them age old customs that are distasteful and outdated without even knowing they are doing it. I must also mention that at the rate of current immigration, into the Vancouver area, they no longer need to mix with cultures other than their own and few ever need to learn English. In fact, it has gone so far as to encourage them to hold on to the customs and reject western culture all together, which seems to defeat the reason they immigrated here in the first place. This is unfortunate because we all have things to learn from other cultures. I wish more of them would share more of their culture with us and we could let the better practices of both cultures sift to the top.

Things like Shark-Fin Soup and Bear-Poaching could be eliminated in Chinese culture while I'm sure they have many fixes for our errors.

>> ^dannym3141:


Ok, speaking as someone who has very recently been to china for an extendad stay, and i've met and had extensive experience with young and middle aged chinese;
How did you get the impression they were horrible people? Every single person i met in china was generous and selfless and went a long way out of their way to make sure i had a good time and to make sure i was completely taken care of. Their culture almost DEMANDS them to be respectful and polite to strangers. Self centred is a word which i could not apply to a single one of the several hundred chinese people that i've met.
Show off their wealth? Do you realise that the chinese people are extremely poor? The government may be fucking rich but the people certainly aren't. They work their fucking arse off in a shit job they get given and they get paid pennies, PENNIES, and they work fucking hard at it and fucking long hours because guess what they'd get if they didn't? Fuck all. I have never met a more humble and polite people, the chinese people seem to me like the british were 60 years ago (of which i am proud and sad we're not like that anymore).