Originally posted by pwillie: I passed by the Chrysler plant out side of Chicago back in 1974,most all the cars of the employees were some foreign make,now theres loyalty....bankruptcy followed......


No surprise there.


A guy I work with just bought a new Honda. I told him to make sure his five kids know how to say "You want fries with that?"

 

The guy said he wanted a trail machine and the ranger is way to big for that and is more of a workhorse. I tend to focus more on how a product is being used, and he liked his grizzly. Did you want me to tell him buy a ranger, and after he posts a thread "that darn ranger wont fit down the trail" As far as that goes I guess im too honest, heaven forbid the truth to come out. I was going to buy a ranger but got a deal on my prowler, and never once cared what my coworkers thought. I even asked the foreman to race me.

 

You can buy what ever you like. It's just that you claim to work for Company A (Polaris). Yet you own not one, but two of the same products that your company produces from Company B (AC). Personally I feel Company B makes a great product but, if I worked for Company A I would buy that product simply because I would feel like a hypocrite if I didn't. I also recognize simple economics; if people are not buying my product I won't have a job, and people won't buy what I produce if I won't even buy it myself. You may feel you are poking a stick in the eye of your foreman, supervisor or whomever, but you are really shooting yourself in the foot by coming on an international website and showing to the world where you put your money.

 

As for the world we live in today:"Loyalty is past tense" I always buy American if I can........I bought a Rhino,because it was the only vehicle that would do what I needed.If Polaris are whom ever makes a ride that will work for me,then I would buy one.............

 

Originally posted by pwillie: "Loyalty is past tense"


You are speaking for yourself there.

 

Marine! Drop down an give me ten!!!!! You didn't read me right! What I meant was,there isn't any loyalty any more with the younger troops!!!!!!!!! I have people that I been doing business with since I got home from Viet NAm in 1968.....

 

I had my 400 way before I started working there and have never actually owned a polaris product. I Like my arctic cat dealer better than the dealer I would of gotten my ranger from, and would rather stick to what I like, and can get better service if I need it. As I stated I tried to buy a ranger but got a better deal on my prowler. I would have bought one if I could and still might. You can never have to many. I live buy the rule buy what you like or youll never be happy

 

Originally posted by pwillie: there isn't any loyalty any more with the younger troops!!!!!!!!!


You could not possible be more wrong. The people that are joining today are some of the very finest the country has to offer. Unlike Vietnam, today?s military is made up of volunteers, not conscripts. They are joining because of war, not in spite of it. Liberals would have you believe that only poor, uneducated minorities are joining, but nothing could be further from the truth. I can personally testify that the people joining today are smarter, better educated, and more dedicated then the people that where joining 25 years ago. There are far more "Pat Tilman"s today than you will ever know - guys that join simply out of loyalty.

 

Dawg,your reading my post wrong!..When I said troops, I didn't mean the Military! I meant the guys working in the factories........they would never volunteer for anything.... I did,and viet nam has fifty thousand dead that would call you up for your statement about who is a better troop. I knew guys that were conscripts that were as good a soldier as it gets,they had no high tech laser guided missles to take out the enemy,they did it hand to hand...you been watching to many John Wayne movies......there was no sand on Iwo Jima, ask Ira Hayes if he was living.... There are many Pat Tillmans...my uncle was on the bridge at Remagen,silver plate in his head,he was a conscript.....The reason we arn't winning the war in Iraq,is because we don't have any conscripts.....the National Guard is just what it says... not the International Guard....a troop in his mid fifties is no match for an Iraqi in his teens,who has led a life of fighting since he was born.......and yes, he is a conscript.....

 

The word "troops" is used exclusively for the military, not some yahoo working the line at a factory. The average conscript in Vietnam was not as good as the average troop today, and you will never convince anyone in the military that I am wrong. A conscripted military will never be as good as an all volunteer force. I?ve been to Iwo, and there is sand there. You are also wrong in saying we are not winning in Iraq; we are winning. Not that the liberal media will ever let you know that, but we are in fact winning. Much like Vietnam, militarily we are not losing. It's only the media and liberals that is supporting the enemy.