Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: aruanan
If your complaint is that the regulations are contradictory and capricious, I would agree. But having worked for a GM factory dealer in the 1970's, I can tell you that they are necessary, if you want to effect any change. GM would have never done anything on their own.

Partly that's their corporate culture, partly just a rational response to a market: you might remember all the fear over switching from leaded to unleaded gas. Initially it was a tough sell, largely because it was higher cost; but in the end it was a lot of hoohah over nothing. The vehicles work fine.

That's what I mean't about the Ludditism. You can talk till you're blue in the face, tell me that the market should do it, not the government, yadda yadda yadda. And you might be right, but it wasn't going to come out of Detroit. I worked with those fools and there ain't nothin' that they were ever going to do except at the brink of disaster. Detroit in the 1970's was so insular and thick headed you couldn't get anything through their brains - like how hard it was to push their junk.

The Japanese cars built then and since then are quite simply better designed and built. As an engineer, I can say that that is my somewhat informed opinion. As an owner, I can say that the 2000 Accord that sits in my driveway - the second Honda Accord I've owned, and the third Japanese car - is a phenomenonal piece of value. Somedays, I think the damn thing manufactures oil, since it never consumes any.

If you want to point me to a comparable Detroit designed and built vehicle, do so. But millions of people have tried and voted with their wallets, and the verdict is in. And Detroit didn't win.

So that's where the comment came from. Maybe things are different there these days (the designs are certainly a lot better, but the quality on the car side...welll...the trucks are a lot better), but that was only because they were dragged kicking and screaming to the party. I know. I was there. It's one of the reasons I left. Don't like arguing with slow people. "Luddites".

57 posted on 07/03/2002 1:23:14 PM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: Regulator
But having worked for a GM factory dealer in the 1970's, I can tell you that they are necessary, if you want to effect any change. GM would have never done anything on their own.

Again, you're incorrect. The move to more fuel-efficient cars (well, tiny cars) was fueled by apparent (though not real) scarcity of gasoline. Because of this, certain automobile manufacturers were able to take advantage of a public perception and move product without any "help" from the federal government (as another example, the Japanese motorcycle market: these bikes were fuel-efficient, quiet, powerful, fast, and low-vibration; Harley Davidson complained that they were losing market share to unfair competition. Of course, this was simply untrue. They had merely a dwindling share of an overall growing market created by the Japanese motorcycle manufacturers (Honda, Yamaha, Kawasaki, and Suzuki) whose products appealed to those who didn't like riding on noisy, oil-leaking, kidney-pounding, technologically-backward relics)). Remember that the American car manufacturers were whining back in the 70's about Japanese "dumping". No, the Japanese (and earlier the Germans through Volkswagen) just capitalized on a social trend without any help from the U.S. federal government. And, once again, the federal regulations regarding fuel efficiency merely followed an existing market-driven trend. The bad thing was that they sclerosed the situation and made innovation more, not less, difficult by locking into law matters that should have been left to fluctuate according to custom, perception, and taste.
58 posted on 07/03/2002 2:26:55 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson