So Chevy is bringing the Cruze hatch stateside, and it actually doesn't look too bad. Most expensive trim comes at about $23,000. Thoughts?
Too bad the German original always looks better than the US bodykit one.
Looks a lot better than this fucked up mess of a front end. First good looking Chebby shitbox in a long while.
I wouldn't mind too much if we didn't have to wait a quarter century before we could import something else ourselves, but the combo of that and not being sold anything actually interesting and not normie-tier cashcow garbage is maddening.
I'd say the front looks better on the Opel, but its c-pillar treatment is 2weird, I like the rear of the Cruze hatch better.
shooped it blue because that orange is grody
so like 20-30 years ago, the rest of the world was poor while america was still fairly affluent with a strong middle class, now the opposite is true where america is poor yet wealthy due to extreme inequalities and the rest of the world is more affluent with strong or growing middle classes.
Looks like a Kia.
I'm from Europe, so there is no reason to pick the Chevy over the Kia unless it has a big v8 'motor' in it
If I can't have more, everyone else should have less. It's the only fair thing to do.
Instead of having a small group of people at the very top, holding a huge amount of wealth, they should be brought down closer to everyone else. That would reduce the gap and bring everyone else closer. Everyone would probably have less overall, but it be more fair. It's not right that a small group of people can hold so much wealth while everyone else gets only a little. You can't say they earned it either, because most of them didn't. They just inherited it or got it through inherent advantages.
>implying a liberal president wouldn't make america even poorer
There is no good solution aside from
Sadly, I highly doubt he can come back into the forefront.
You think rich people care about you? They want to work you to death for pennies. At least Bernie Sanders cares about everyone, and realizes that the super rich people should be pulling their weight instead of loading it onto the backs of others. Not to mention the people who are inherently disadvantaged by institutionalized inequalities, and who have no way of getting out of poverty. Easy enough to blame them and say they're stupid or whatever, but try to imagine living like them.
Life isn't fair because you make it that way. Life can be fair if we take a stand against greedy assholes like Trump who want to deport hardworking people and strip away needed social services. You're literally supporting a billionaire playboy who doesn't give a shit about you. If we just passed laws that said he could only hold so much wealth, and we decided how to disperse the rest of it fairly amongst the people, things would be far better for everyone.
I never suggested I supported trump amigo.
But I do not support bernie either. Do I think he seems like a genuine person? Yes I do. I like him as a person. But I do not agree with his politics by any means.
What we need is not the regulation of society to a further degree.
I don't believe the rich care about me, nor does any half intelligent person I imagine.
But socialism is not the answer to the problems that face america.
What we need is not to divy everything up amongst one another and hope for the best because its "fair".
What we need is a better way of insuring the lower classes can have a safety net. Not welfare or food stamps. But job training classes. Give a man a fish and he eats for a day and all that.
Should there be more regulations on making sure (read: Large, not home businesses) companies can provide all the benefits needed to their employees.
That doesn't mean taking half bill gates money and diving it up amongst all americans.
So basically we should just be taking all of the poor people and forcing them into basic job training programs, and then telling them "you're going to do this job now, we paid for your education so you owe us"?
That's not right at all, people need to have the freedom to choose what they want to do with their lives. If they want to be a plumber, cool, we should help them. But if they want to work at McDonald's and start a family, that's their business too. Doesn't mean we should just turn our backs on them and say "well you have to be poor because you don't want to do the job we offered you!".
If they are happy working there we should ensure they receive a living wage, or at least provide subsidies to bring up their income. No reason someone who serves your food should make less than you, just because you decided you didn't want that job.
And then there's gun control, which Bernie is spot-on about. There is way too much bullshit surrounding gun culture and it needs to stop, people DO NOT need to own automatic rifles or high powered assault weapons. You don't need an AK47 or an AR15 when a basic hunting rifle will do the same job shooting a target. The only reason anyone wants these guns is to kill other people, and if we fix the social problems that lead to crime, they will have absolutely no justification for owning them.
So your analogy, while a classic, doesn't really fit in modern times. Sure, we can teach a man to fish, but he shouldn't be forced to learn if he doesn't want to. Isn't that the essence of freedom and liberty? Some people really like to fish, but others like to eat and do other stuff.
Holy shit lol.
You're fucking crazy dude.
Never once did I say people should be forced to do anything.
What I said is that instead of welfare we should have job training programs.
Sure there are a few people who simply can't work due to disabilities and what not and they should still be "traditionally" supported.
But everyone else shouldn't get a free handout. If they're going to recieve any form of government payment they should at least be able to attend job training classes and hopefully be able to find jobs.
Of course not everyone will immediately find a jobs, nothing is perfect, but it is the best solution out there.
Nowhere did I say that people should be forced into these programs. But they shouldn't expect the government to pay for their cell phones, tv, and internet just because they can't find work.
Those are privileges, not basic human rights.
I thought I made it pretty clear in the last post that everyone, even the lowly fry cook, should receive a livable wage. That ties into the large companies that provide for employees. Now, there should be restrictions, your local mom and pop shop isn't going to be able to pay for the best health insurance coverage or anything like that for all their employees, so make the advantages to working a small job like that more personal, but not forcing small business owners to crumble.
That would only serve the large corporations interests because only they could afford to have the best benefits.
This is already a growing problem whereby the government in the process of trying to provide for lower income workers, has made it more difficult for small business owner to become successful.
About gun control I disagree completely. I do think background checks should absolutely be mandatory. But after that? If you get a clean pass then you should be able to buy a revolver or an AK. Criminals will always find a way to get guns. 1/2 posts
Many of the first world countries with the strictest gun control laws have some of the highest levels of violent crime in the first world. Meanwhile in Switzerland where every citizen is required to own a gun (because they are part of the national militia), violent crime rates are among the lowest in the entire world.
Going back to your referencing my fishing analogy.
No, we don't have to teach a man to fish. It should not be required. But the same man who doesn't want to learn to fish should not be given the catch of other fisherman.
>implying any crime committed with a gun could be anything other than violent
>implying it's a good idea to make the means to commit ANY crime, violent or not, widely available to the general public
military and police need guns, not you
How the fuck am I a racist first of all.
The internet is not a basic human right.
Secondly. While it may be required for certain jobs, those jobs should then provide enough income that the employee can pay for internet.
A regular bum who doesn't want to work, and can, should not receive government funding so he can live on his own and be a NEET.
That is not a fundamental part of a functional society, it is the exact opposite.
Low gun crime rates? Sure.
But not low crime rates.
In addition, the problem would only be made worse in America. The thing about Europe, is that it is extremely densely populated. The amount of people that live per square mile and government infrastructure per mile is much higher then it is in America. Trying to enforce such regulations quite simply wouldn't work here.
And secondly, we border mexico, with plenty of cartels down there.
And unless we resort to Donald Trumps "wall plan" (Which I do not support under any means) there is no way to completely extinguish illegal drug and weapon shipments.
I don't even know who is trolling anymore
>military and police need guns not you
The surest sign of someone who wants to get trampled by those in power who have the ability to influence the federal government.
Enjoy your police state.
I'm done with my argument. At this point you're picking out whatever crap you can to defend your nanny state.
Man you're gettin BTFO here, how do you keep gobbling up my b8?
So can I get it in a diesel with a manual
Someone who likes cars and has done nothing wrong should be able to have any modern vehicle they can build or purchase.
A sewing enthusiast shouldn't be limited to only crochet needles.
And a firearms enthusiast shouldn't be limited to old and outdated models, regardless of if you think they are scary.
It's the "Bill of Rights", not the "Bill of Needs".
I should be able to purchase and own any firearm I desire.
Like cars, guns are mechanical artwork, tributes of steel to the engineers who designed them.
>The only reason anyone wants these guns is to kill other people
The only reason for anyone to own a Mustang is to break the speed limit.
See? That sounds stupid too. We need to focus on mental health, not banning things.
>Except you're not the one doing the design work.
I get to use it. I get to own it for as long as I remain corporeal. There's a difference between looking at a painting in a gallery and actually having it in your possession to admire and study whenever you like. Being the end user means you get to learn, indirectly, from the engineers who built your device.
>You are just a consumerist drone taking pride in the work of others.
To me, that's the same as taking pride in humanity. I'm against blind consumerism, people should really only buy things that represent significant advancement in technology or can improve their quality of life.
I guess a gun doesn't improve anyone's quality of life unless they're an avid hunter or an IPSC competitor, but they still represent advancements in material engineering and mechanical design. Many guns are objectively beautiful from an aesthetic and engineering standpoint, and there should be no reason why individuals cannot own one of humanity's greatest achievements, be that a gun, a car, a computer or whatever.
What we need is for troubled people to get the help they need without being shit on or driven into debt, so they don't decide to use technology for destruction.
I hope Randyman wins the nomination so I can seriously consider the repub candidate if Bern gets too SJW on me.
it actually looks like a decent car, i don't like the headlights tho :(
Trump is more centrist than any republican nominee, hence his views actually being 60-70% "democrat". That test tests you on policy, pro/against life, economics, ect. It doesnt test you on media shitstorm's like if you hate muslims.
Why do Euros always try to claim every GM product is based on a European GM variant? I've heard Germans try to claim the Alpha and K2 platforms were developed by Opel too. The US is getting the Cruze hatch before Europe does and I'm pretty sure the new Cruze and Astra are pretty different. Different wheel bases, different suspension setups, different engines. This thing is actually more Chinese than European considering the Cruze was designed by a joint team from the SAIC in China and GM global in Michigan.