GM's Cars Killed People, So Why Won't We Stop Buying Them?

General Motors has been suffering a spectacular recall debacle for months, warning customers about cars that spontaneously shut down and airbags that don't deploy. But people just can't seem to stop buying GM vehicles.

"I would buy another GM car. I love my car," said Melanie Conover, a married mother of three in northern New Jersey.

In May, Conover's 2013 Chevrolet Traverse was recalled by GM over concerns that the airbags could fail in a crash. A few days before the company contacted her about the recall, Conover said, her car had almost been hit when a teenager ran a stop sign. Her three children, including an infant daughter, were in the car with her when it happened.

But although the near-accident was scary, and although she complains that GM was too slow when it came to repairing her car's defective airbag wiring, Conover remains loyal to the company.

"There are always safety concerns when I'm driving with my kids. But GM makes good cars," she told The Huffington Post. "I've owned three Hondas, a Cadillac and this car in my lifetime. And mine and my hubby's faves were the Caddy and this car." (Cadillac is also made by GM.)

Melanie Conover's 2013 Chevy Traverse, which was recalled in May by GM over concerns that the airbags could malfunction. Conover says she loves her car and would buy another GM in the future despite the company's ongoing crisis.

While it may seem irrational to remain loyal to an automaker that repeatedly warns of serious safety concerns, GM fans like Conover are not uncommon. Although GM has issued 44 recalls in North America this year, stemming from problems that have been tied to 50 crashes and 13 deaths, the company recently said its sales for the month of May were up 13 percent from the month before, the biggest May gain in seven years.

The company's total sales this year from January to May are also up 3 percent from the same period last year. About half of GM's customers are repeat buyers, GM spokesman James Cain told HuffPost in an email.

Such customer loyalty and brand resilience may be a sign that people just don't care about scary recalls as much as they used to, crisis-management strategist Gene Grabowski told HuffPost.

"Five or 10 years ago, companies in crisis were remarkable," Grabowski said. "Now, it's become so common it's no longer remarkable. Accidents are expected. Recalls are expected."

This unconcerned attitude is reflected in the number of drivers who actually get their cars fixed during recalls. Experts say about one-third of people with a vehicle affected by automaker recalls never bring their car in for repair.

This may be because the news just doesn't penetrate.

"Many times, people don't read mail, they don't watch commercials on TV, they don't look at things like this," said Rep. Tim Murphy (R-Penn.) on Wednesday during a congressional hearing on GM's handling of the ongoing recall crisis. "It isn't until it gets on a comedy network or something that people pay attention."

People may also remain loyal to the GM brand because many of the GM models affected by the recalls are no longer made, which might in turn be giving customers the impression that GM's safety problems went away with the discontinued cars.

Finally, patriotism might also be a factor in consumer loyalty to GM, Grabowski said.

"I think people feel a bond and a kinship with the GM brand," he said. "And I think it's because GM did come out of the 2008 bankruptcy. They paid back the government money. The president himself has praised GM. I think that resonates, not with everyone, but with a lot of people."

A 2005 Chevy Cobalt is parked outside a dealership in Alexandria, Va., in April. GM recalled all Chevy Cobalts from 2005 to 2010 over fears the cars would suddenly shut off while in motion, disabling power steering and airbags. (AP Photo/Molly Riley)

Michigan resident Kristin Barger brought in her 2006 Chevy Cobalt for repairs in April after GM recalled the vehicle for issues with its ignition switch. GM said the ignition switch problem was causing cars, including the '06 Cobalt, to turn off while in motion, causing the loss of power steering and disabling the airbags.

Though Barger said she still has frequent problems with her ignition jamming while her car is parked, she also said she would buy another GM product the next time she needs a new car.

"GM runs deep in my family," she told HuffPost, noting that her father worked at the company for more than 30 years. Barger said she doesn't totally "trust the safety" of her car, but said she "loves it" nevertheless, and she has faith the company "will turn this around and build a better product" in the future.

Many consumers, like Barger, will stick with certain brands even when other products on the market are safer because they have a sentimental attachment to a company, said Tulin Erdem, a professor of marketing at NYU who studies consumer behavior.

"There are emotional reasons for why [customers] are loyal, in spite of new information that there might be safety issues," Erdem said. "For example, these people may have memories of GM cars. They may remember things growing up with their families in a GM car."

"It's not rational," Erdem said.

Alexander C. Kaufman contributed reporting.

Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz: Obamacare Is A 'Net Positive'

Despite its disastrous rollout, Obamacare has been a good thing overall, according to Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz.

“I think it’s a net positive,” Schultz said Tuesday of President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act. “Millions of Americans have health insurance today. Companies that did not pay for health insurance are now doing it.”

Last year, Schultz expressed concern that the botched rollout of the HealthCare.gov website would overshadow what he believed were the law’s good intentions. At the height of the problem in October, Schultz told CNBC, “Unfortunately, in this kind of situation, execution trumps strategy. It might be a great strategy, but the execution is really flawed. It’s off the rails.”

But now that officials have fixed the site and more than 8 million Americans have signed up for insurance, he said, the program's benefits outweigh its issues.

“No plan would have been perfect,” he said. “It'll be refined, improved.”

Schultz spoke with HuffPost reporters and editors as part of a media tour promoting a new Starbucks program that offers workers the chance to get a college degree at an extreme discount.

Unlike many corporate chiefs and franchisees, Schultz said he has no plans to cut benefits as a result of the law. Business owners have periodically made waves by suggesting Obamacare would push them to cut their employees’ hours so they wouldn’t have to cover them. Obamacare requires that businesses with 50 or more full-time employees provide health insurance to anyone working at least 30 hours a week.

Schultz noted that Starbucks’ plan was always more generous than the new law requires, offering coverage to employees working 20 hours or more per week. He said that “the first question we got from shareholders” about the law was whether Starbucks would bump up its threshold to 30 hours to save money.

“That’s millions of dollars and we wouldn’t do it,” Schultz said.

Still, it’s possible that kicking part-time employees off the company’s plan could actually result in a better deal for them if they buy insurance through the Obamacare exchanges instead. In many cases, part-time workers may make so little that they would qualify for subsidies under the law, but they aren’t eligible if their company offers an affordable plan that meets Obamacare’s standards. If the employees qualify for Medicaid, they're still eligible even if their employer offers an affordable plan.

Trader Joe’s announced last year that it would stop offering health insurance to its part-time workforce, much to those workers' chagrin. But several months later, some employees told HuffPost that the decision actually worked out in their favor.

That's because by providing affordable insurance, Obamacare frees up some workers staying at their jobs only for health benefits to leave and pursue other opportunities, like finding more fulfilling jobs that don’t offer insurance, starting a business, taking care of their kids or retiring.

Koch Brothers Plan $300 Million Spending Spree In 2014

The billionaire Koch brothers and their political network are planning to spend almost $300 million during the 2014 election cycle, some of which will go toward a renewed effort to combat unprecedented carbon regulations unveiled by the Obama administration last month.

According to The Daily Beast, industrialists Charles and David Koch will advance a new energy initiative this weekend at a California resort featuring Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and libertarian political scientist Charles Murray. While its scope isn't clear yet, the group will be spearheaded by the Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, a 200-member organization that has funneled millions of dollars to various nonprofits in the Koch network.

The new push comes in the wake of proposed EPA regulations that would cut carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by 30 percent. It also follows a February announcement from billionaire liberal investor Tom Steyer, a major advocate against the Keystone XL pipeline, that he will be undertaking his own $100 million initiative to make climate change a key issue in 2014.

Americans for Prosperity, the main political arm of the Kochs, is already planning a $125 million spending spree on other political projects across the country, according to Politico.

Politically oriented nonprofits aren't the only beneficiaries of Koch money. The United Negro College Fund, which supports historically black colleges and universities, announced a $25 million grant last month from Koch Industries, Inc.

The billionaire brothers are also a frequent topic of conversation in the Senate, where Democrats are calling for a constitutional amendment to restore Congress' power to regulate campaign finance after the Supreme Court struck down several fundraising restrictions. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) clashed on the matter during a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

Lululemon To Collect Customer Data, After Years Of Avoiding It

Lululemon will soon be learning a lot more about you.

The purveyor of stretchy yoga pants is going to start collecting customer data after years of avoiding it, chief executive Laurent Potdevin said on Thursday.

"We’ve actually never used a lot of data in the history of Lululemon, and we are shifting that as quickly as possible," Potdevin said on a conference call with analysts. "We've got a very loyal guest, and we should learn a lot more about him or her."

So Lululemon is building a system to take it "into the future," he said.

Unlike most retailers, Lululemon does not have a lot of customer data, Potdevin admitted. Most large retailers use computer programs to track buying habits so they can tailor marketing to certain shoppers and try to predict what customers are going to buy, among other goals.

Potdevin's predecessor Christine Day, who left the company last December and now runs Canadian health food company Luvo, shunned such tactics. She once said that mass data collection gives companies a "false sense of security."

Instead, according to a 2012 Wall Street Journal report, Day used low-tech tactics to learn about customers: Workers were trained to eavesdrop on customer complaints, and shoppers were invited to leave suggestions on chalkboards in stores.

The privacy policy on Lululemon's website, which was last updated in January 2013, says the retailer "may collect personal information in connection with your use or purchase of Lululemon's products and services."

The policy goes on to say: "The personal information that Lululemon may collect may include your name, username, password, email address, age, date of birth, gender, address, telephone number, credit card and debit card numbers (with expiration dates), personal preferences, and any other personal information that you choose to include in your profile, your submissions of your goals to Lululemon, or in other communications to Lululemon."

Potdevin did not specify the types of data Lululemon will collect, nor when this collection might begin. Lululemon did not respond to a request for additional comment.

Verizon Sends Cease-And-Desist Letter Over Netflix's Public Jab

Verizon isn't going to take an insult from Netflix sitting down.

The broadband company sent a cease-and-desist letter to Netflix on Thursday about a message Netflix has been showing some customers that blames congestion on Verizon's network for slow network speeds, according to a CNBC report.

Netflix subscribers have begun noticing that when videos stop streaming properly, a message appears on the screen indicating that congestion on an Internet service provider's network is to blame for the interruption. Vox Media designer and Verizon customer Yuri Victor was one of the first to notice the passive-aggressive dig: "The Verizon network is crowded now. Adjusting video for smoother playback..." AT&T subscribers spotted a similar message as well.

Someone Left A Loaded Gun In The Toy Aisle Of Target

A Target employee found a loaded handgun in the toy aisle of a South Carolina store last week, just days before activists began petitioning the retailer to ban firearms from its stores.

The gun, loaded with live ammunition, was found sitting atop a superhero Playskool toy box at a Myrtle Beach store last Friday, WMBF News reported Thursday morning.

"We take these matters very seriously and we are partnering with local law enforcement on this incident," Molly Snyder, a Target spokeswoman, said in a statement to The Huffington Post. "Because this matter is under investigation, we are unable to share additional information."

Nobody Knows, Cares Whether Your Clothes Are Made In Deadly Factories

You probably don't know who makes your clothes. The scary thing is, the retailer that sold them to you may not know, either.

A yearlong study of factories in Bangladesh by New York University's Center for Business and Human Rights found that many retailers can't be sure which factories make the products they sell, often in immaculate shops half a world away. That's because manufacturers sometimes farm out work to local factories that aren't registered with trade associations or the local government and that operate away from the eyes of regulators, the study found.