backtop


Print 108 comment(s) - last by jconan.. on Jun 17 at 9:38 PM

The Chinese plan to increase the brand's international presence

DailyTech reported yesterday on GM's announcement that it had found a buyer for the Hummer brand of heavy utility vehicles.  The mystery buyer promised to take on the brand and help expand its international presence.  In the process it saved a number of jobs at Hummer plants and helped GM complete a major step toward moving out of bankruptcy.

Now the identity of the mystery buyer has been revealed.  Sichuan Tengzhong Heavy Industrial Machinery Company Ltd., a Chinese industrial firm, will be purchasing the brand and attempting to revive it.

States Yang Yi, chief executive of Tengzhong, "We plan to ... allow Hummer to innovate and grow in exciting new ways under the leadership and continuity of its current management team."

He did, however, hint at changes stating that the deal "will allow Hummer to better meet demand for new products such as more fuel-efficient vehicles in the U.S."

The companies hope to have the deal finalized by September.  The deal does not concern the military Hummer technology owned by defense contractor AM General, which licensed the brand name to GM for civilian vehicle purposes.  AM General will now, in turn, license the name to Sichuan Tengzhong, which will continue the civilian Hummer development.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Sad.
By HotFoot on 6/3/2009 1:48:31 PM , Rating: 2
The reason the flat tax doesn't work out in the end is because no one is ever paid exactly what they're worth. Everyone who does a job must submit a portion of the value of their work to the owners of the business. In this way, wealth naturally concentrates to owners. Maybe this system would work if all owners were moderate owners, like the middle-class Joe who's smart about his savings and investments. However, the system naturally filters money to the top.

In the end, your choice is between an increasingly impoverished poorer portion of society and ever-increasing police/security budgets to contain them, or a taxation system that places a larger burden on the richest than it does on the poorest. Neither way seems great to me, but one seems far worse than the other.

The important function here is balance. Too steep of a graduation system in taxes removes the motivation - the whole socialism problem. None at all and the mechanism of wealth concentration will lead to massive disenfranchisement.

I agree with many points about the government being too involved in areas of my life. The social security business... well I think I would do a better job investing that on my own and my money belonging to me. At the same time, I don't believe in free handouts, and I think if we're going to, as a society through our governments, provide a security net to catch those in unfortunate circumstances (even talented folks lose their jobs from time to time), then it shouldn't just be a handout. It should be something where folks can be put to work to do something of use for society and get paid for it. The last I would add to that is that the pay through this program shouldn't be great. It should be very desirable to get out of that system and back into the private market.


RE: Sad.
By mdogs444 on 6/3/2009 2:01:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
In the end, your choice is between an increasingly impoverished poorer portion of society and ever-increasing police/security budgets to contain them

I believe something else would happen. I believe our workforce would grow, and less people would be poor because they would realize the only way to a sustainable lifestyle is themselves. I think their motivation and outlook would change drastically.
quote:
The last I would add to that is that the pay through this program shouldn't be great. It should be very desirable to get out of that system and back into the private market.

I agree. That's supposed to be how our entitlement programs are. But when you take someone who dropped out of college, went and had a kid with some girl who also dropped out, have no valuable skills....its easier and better for them personally to take welfare, food stamps, govt housing. And the more babies they have, the more money each month they get! I don't get it - not sure how this provides motivation to get up and get a job. Especially when the non skilled people on welfare have a better lifestyle and more money on welfare than they would getting a minimum wage job starting at the bottom and working their way up.

The democrats have succeeded in this method of securing votes by making people defendant on them. I find it so funny that this past election, how many bumper stickers I saw that said "Too poor to vote republican". Hmm, I wonder if these people ever stopped to think that they just might be poor because they keep voting in democrats? lol.


"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki