Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

Dawn,
Welcome to capitalism! Capitalism is an economic system which is not pro-Dawn. It is not pro-Don. It is not pro-American. It is, however, a system which rewards profit, and the most profitable vehicles for Detroit, by far, are SUV’s.
This is why government regulation is so important. The US government is the only organization large enough to consciously change the economics. Only a large government has the power to act for its citizens long-term interests. and vehicle fuel-efficiency is a great example.
Shucks, Dawn, who’d a thunk it? I never had you pegged for a Naderite! :-)
Don

Dawn, why are you posting in the Republican column if you think that (a) it’s important for American auto companies make fuel-efficient cars, and (b) that you suspect collusion between the auto and oil industries, and (c) that you think it’s bad for the government and the tax payers to bail them out? You are not going to get any support for any of your opinions from any Republicans, especially not Bush/Cheney.

-Cf

Chris, why are you blindly assigning labels that you think necessarily have to be designated to specific columns. They are just guidelines man. Free your mind sir, think outside the columns, see beyond them.

Just because somebody is posting in the red column doesnt mean they always have to be 100% red. Personally I think that we are intelligent enough to disolve these distructive barriers that neophobes like you have erected, and see through them to the real issues at hand.

Don’t get hung up on the particulars here, you havent helped anybody with your comment. You are just being haughty. Haughty my face off Chris, this comment makes me angry.

I don’t think you understand just how paralyzing your comment was. Good sir you may have ruined this entire miniblog. You have forced me to write in response to this travesty. Thereby causing a whole battle with post volleys back and forth that will completely change the subject away from what Dawn was trying to talk about. That is unless it stops. Let it end here, let us speak of Japan, of oil, and the like.

It is your moral obligation to Fix this discussion. Post an answer to the question instead of crapping your pants becuase somebody doesnt fit into the pre-designated, color-coded system that polarizes people and oversimplifies complex thoughts for people like you.

Over

Over

CF-

I post here because those are the rules.

I have a brain of my own and don’t have to agree with everything any party says.

Profit is great - screwing people to get that profit isn’t.

One of my points was supposed to be…. Why can’t these big companies and their CEO’s realize that they can still make profits without screwing their customers?? Let’s see … lower price - sell more - make profit.

It’s not like they have invented vehicles that will never break down or get old.

It is the American way to always have the newest, coolest car !

I completely agree with your assesment Dawn. But like you said, this is capitalism and Big Business Bush isn’t going to force the change that is needed to cause these car companies to completely rennovate their product lines.

There are countless advantages to fuel effecient cars and none of the technology is out of our reach, and yet we still haven’t made the full transition.

Personally I think it is becaues of us. The Consumers are to blame on this one. As long as people continue to buy unpractical gas guzzling monster trucks , car companies will make them.

Take Ford, the best selling trucks in the world. The thing is, most people who buy the F250 super duty dont need it. People buy more expensive cars for no apparent reason, except that they want to drive around town in thier big honkin super duty monster cab extreme truck. I can assure you that this does not distress ford, and as long as people want it and buy it, they’ll build it!

Dawn,
What you want in gas mileage runs SMACK into the wall of physics. To get more mileage you must reduce weight and use a smaller engine, both of which aint what people want to buy.
All the smog-control poop that gets added takes gas to run, it comes out cleaner, but it takes power and fuel to run it.
Think of it like this ; If it takes a 100,000 btu furnace to heat your home, if you add another another one that runs on the chiminy that adds no heat but cleans exaust, your fuel costs will go up. Telling people to buy a smaller house won’t go over very well.
The myth that the oil companys are buying off the car companys is just that, a myth.

Yes. We want the “big honkin super duty monster cab extreme truck” but they don’t have to change the whole production line to make it more fuel efficient.
It may never get 60 miles to the gallon but I’m sure they can make it do better than 6.

If the whole economy crashes because they refuse to do it on their own or with the government making them … who will buy their cars?

The more people have to pay for gasoline the less they have to spend on a new gas guzzling vehicle.

I just don’t see why the current vehicles aren’t made more fuel efficient while we transition over to vehicles that don’t use gasoline.

More of the profits should be put into new technology and not into their pockets. CEO’s and shareholders alike.

Why is it that the government has to make people do the right thing? It’s sad.

Must Be
> Post an answer to the question instead of
> crapping your pants becuase somebody doesnt
> fit into the pre-designated, color-coded
> system that polarizes people and
> oversimplifies complex thoughts for
> people like you.

Hey, calm down! My post was a rhetorical question, intended to point out that Dawn’s ideas aren’t going to find any support from the GOP or the Bush/Cheney Administration. I was not questioning Dawn’s right to post in this column. I applaud her opinions, I think it’s great that she’s thinking independently and contrary to stereotypical Republican doctrine. I just don’t understand why she self-identifies as a Republican when her beleifs on this issue are diametrically opposed to almost everything the Republican party stands for.

I also want to say that you are new here (I think) and you don’t know me well enough to make the assumptions about me that you have made. I encourage you to read some other WatchBlog threads and get to know my posts - you may be very much surprised.

> change the subject away from what Dawn
> was trying to talk about.

I was addressing the subject head-on. Republican politicians (in particular the Bush/Cheney type of Republican politician) are exactly the reason why the problems Dawn describes exist. If she wants these problems to go away, she is not going to accomplish any results by supporting Republicans. The Democrats and the Greens would be very supportive of Dawn’s views, and in fact have labored hard over many years to regulate the auto and oil industries when the short-term best interests of their shareholders are not in the best interests of the country as a whole, or even for the long-term interests of the company itself.

It is a huge mystery to me why poor and middle-class Americans who realize that corporate motivations dont always coincide with America’s best interests still seem to believe that the Republican party shares their concerns. The reality is that the GOP is on the exact opposite side of these concerns.

Dawn wrote:
> I have a brain of my own and don’t have to
> agree with everything any party says.

Again, I commend your views and your independence. I just wonder why you self-identify as a Republican when you seem to disagree with them on fundamental issues like this one. As I recall, this isn’t the first post you’ve made where your opinion and that of the President are 180 degrees different. I wonder if you consider yourself a Republican because you generally agree with most of the rest of the Republican Party’s positions, or if it’s because you are mistaken about the details about the Republican Party’s platform.

For example, are you aware that your position on automobile fuel economy is 100% the opposite of the position of the Bush/Cheney administration?

-Cf

Beagle,

I understand all the things to do with the weight and the power that effect the gas mileage. Believe it or not I already knew a little about that.

But, you are trying to convince me that all those engineers cannot figure out a way to adjust the fuel injection to get better gas mileage.

Maybe they should be replaced.

If they made the SUV’s out of lighter material maybe they wouldn’t demolish a smaller car the way that they can now. Of course, if they were lighter, people may not be able to keep them on the road in a slight breeze.

Anyway… I have faith in them. They can make our vehicles more fuel efficient if they try harder.

In the past 5 weeks, my wife and I have both bought new cars. In making both decisions, we very much wanted to balance features, economy, and reliability, and in large part we relied on Consumer Reports’ guidance. I wanted a sedan, she wanted a small SUV.

We bought a Hyundai Sonata and a Toyota RAV-4. It really never occurred to us to buy American cars, though we traded in a Saturn and a Ford. In the entry-level sedan category, none of the Consumer Reports “recommended” vehicles are American-made. In the world of small SUVs, we did look at the Ford Escape, along with the Honda CRV, the Hyundai Santa Fe, and the RAV-4 we eventually bought.

Looking at a comparably-equipped Escape and RAV-4, the Escape was about $4000 more and got about 5 fewer MPG on the highway. It was simply not an acceptable choice. Our family finances are such that we both expect to get at least 8 years out of each of these vehicles, and no American car gave us a sense that it could meet that burden.

Given the choice, both of us would gladly have bought American vehicles, ceteris paribus. The big 3 (2?) did everything they could, it seems, to make that impossible.

Full disclosure: I really would have liked a Chrysler 300.

CF-

Let me pretend to be really smart for a minute.

Political Parties need to evolve and if everyone that belongs to a particular party always agrees with everything the party stands for this will not happen.

The Big 2 cannot come right out and tell people that they can’t join if they don’t agree with everything the party stands for.
What they hope for is people who will join and then vote a straight ticket, for whatever reason.

Wouldn’t it be funny if the people with ‘minds of their own’ switched to Independent - say just for the next Presidential Election - and really confused the politicians and the pollsters??? Every time they call, tell them you haven’t made up your mind yet.

It would definitely make things more interesting.

Is ‘graphpaper’ yours?

The Japanese auto firms are just well run. Americans have become much better, but they seem to be playing catch up. Competitive advantage is a complex subject and it tends to remain with particular firms or sectors for a long time despite changing circumstances. Many people have tried to explain it. One thing is that it probably has less to do with government policies than we think. Japanese car makers do well when they set up operations in America and Japan’s specific regulation on the auto industry is not strict compared with others. It is just that everything is expensive in Japan.

As a good capitalist, I bought shares in Toyota a while back. You can believe me when I tell you that I didn’t buy them because I wanted to lose money or thought that the Toyota management would in any way limit or suppress profits. You can be Republican and still want better gas mileage and more efficient industries. These things lead to higher profits. Everybody wins. It is like free trade. I would also point out that much of the Toyota you might drive is actually made in America. (Toyota has a 5,1 billion investment in Kentucky, where they employ more than 7000 Americans who make almost half a millions cars a year.) It is the nature of the multinational industry to mix and match. The Toyota I bought a couple years ago was made in Kentucky. My wife got a Chevy Prism. That one had an engine made by in Japan.

> Let me pretend to be really smart for a minute

If that’s pretending, you did a great job because your post seems pretty damn smart to me! The Republican party is actually quite intriguing to me right now, with so many pro-choice, pro-gay people speaking at the convention, with many of them in doubt about the Administration’s fiscal policies, and with so many Republican senators expressing grave doubts about the Iraq War. Perhaps someday the party will turn into one that I would consider voting for. Parties change over time, and that’s a good thing.

The Democrats were once known as the party of segregation, but they turned that around 180 degrees in a little over a decade. They were also were once known as the party of the handout, another corner that they have turned around on.

Garrison Keillor recently wrote a fascinating article about how today’s Republican party is so dramatically different from the one that our dear old fathers and grandfathers knew. So many older folks I know have, like President Eisenhower’s own son, bolted the GOP because of this shift.

On the other hand, David Brooks has hopes that a new kind of GOP may emerge, one which does not demonize government itself, but that sees government as a good tool when used judiciously. Whether or not this trend exists or if it’s just rhetoric remains to be seen. Newt Gingrich and Grover Norquist, for example, would beg to differ.

> What they hope for is people who will
> join and then vote a straight ticket,
> for whatever reason.

I agree. For many Americans it is a matter of realizing which candidate they just can’t stand and then voting for the other guy. The system is highly polarizing. As someone once said, it’s the worst system ever devised, with the exception of all the other ones.

-Cf

arr-

I didn’t leave Chrysler out for any other reason than I couldn’t spell it. ha ha

I imagine a lot of the price has to do with wages paid and the cost of health benefits.

Aren’t those the reasons unions haven’t been able to take over foreign owned factories in the U.S.? and they are able to keep their prices down? The Unions would press to get higher wages resulting in higher prices for the vehicles. From what I’ve heard the employees are paid well without the help of a union and aren’t asking for one.

Dawn makes a good point about unions, but let’s be sure we state clearly the problem with unions. It is not that they negotiate higher salaries for their workers. The workers often deserve this. The problem with unions is their union rules designed to constrain management and keep employment higher than it needs to be. If these sound like good things, think of the cost. A worker who has not enough to do could be putting his skills to better use elsewhere. Beyond that, he will probably get bored and hostile. It is no fun to work at a place with strict rules, whether imposed by union or management. Management has to have the ability to manage. That might mean moving workers or changing work rules and maybe getting rid of some low performers.

Let me address the low performer point. It is not just or proper to keep someone around who doesn’t do his part for the team. It is weakness and stupidity. You have to be sure to fire the right people. I have never run a large organization, but I have had occasion to fire people in several occasions close up and personal. It was always hard to do and I thought about it a long time. But when I did the deed, I saw it was better. The other workers showed solidarity, but many later said they were happier. One of the guys I fired showed up a year later and thanked me. He was in a rut, he said. He wasn’t doing his best. Getting fired put the fear of God into him. He stopped boozing (which was why I got rid of him) and got a better paying job.

Its true that many japan cars are “assembled” here, but all the tooling is imported and most of the parts,and all the profits are exported…buy american if you can.

> They can make our vehicles more fuel
> efficient if they try harder.

Damn right. In the early 1990’s, the government basically forced the American auto industry to develop hybrid and electric cars. They would not have done so otherwise, and yet the hybrids are a market hit! Anyway, in order to actually develop these advanced new cars and have them be viable, they had to throw a lot of money into investigating new ways to make the new cars a lot more efficient. They developed new materials for the body, new configurations for the drive train and transmission, new designs and materials for the tires and wheels, and new aerodynamic shapes for the body. Each of these advances separately made only a tiny difference, but when all combined they add up to a huge difference.

What I found most interesting about all of these advancements that they came up with in the process of developing electri/hybrid cars is that almost all of them could be applied to regular cars!! Only the pressure from the government got them to actually do this research. We can now all benefit.

-Cf

Beagle, speak for yourself, :-D I want a low weight, small engine, fuel efficient, low cost, hybrid vehicle which gets twice the mileage and half the maintenance costs. And guess what? I am a member of a minority market big enough to make it profitable FOR the Japanese to offer what the big 3 in America won’t, because their sights are on larger per unit profit margins. And that my friend is globonomics 101.

Of course, that is an over simplification of the macro - micro economics of the auto industry. But it would take a book to discuss advertising driven demand, unsafe drivers and lack of law enforcement regarding safe driving habits etc., which drive demand for tanks as passenger vehicles, but, you get the idea.

Well let me admit I drive a 4x4 Jeep Cherokee.

Could I do without it? Yes.

I work in civil engineering and not infrequently I have to drive to construction sites with test equipment. 4x4 sure helps on those muddy sites.

Could I work out of a car? Since I’m mostly in management, sure. But occasionaly I would need a truck.

What drives the American market is cheap gas and the short cycle stock market “what have you done for me lately?” school of ecoomics.

Don’t worry if Bush blows up the middle east we’ll all be driving mopeds.

Dawn, you’re my kind of Republican. You want a higher minimum wage and increased fuel efficiency. I bet you want clean air, water, and food too.

I hope you stay true to your open-minded conservatism and vote for representatives who share your views on those issues and are willing to fight for them - regardless of their party affiliation.

What you want in gas mileage runs SMACK into the wall of physics. To get more mileage you must reduce weight and use a smaller engine, both of which aint what people want to buy.

Beagle, that’s not totally true. Auto makers say they can increase gas mileage significantly without giving up power. But it costs money.

Ford, for example, won’t do it unilaterally. If no one else makes the change, Ford cars would cost more and be less competitive in the marketplace.

“The End of Oil” is a good overview of the energy issue. It’s an evenhanded look at the dangers of our hydrocarbon-based energy usage and the risks and costs involved in drastically reducing our dependence on it.

Thanx AP but I never said I wanted clean water - who would want that?

What you are saying is that the auto companies can make all their vehicles more fuel efficient but it makes the price go up.

The big bosses and the stockholders couldn’t possibly take a cut in order to keep the price down. Even though it would draw more customers to their vehicles and they would sell more in the end. Makes sense to me.

There’s a big meeting going on right now to get the oil producing nations to pump more oil - right? You would think that would show the auto makers that they need to do something. The high cost of fuel has already hurt auto sales - hasn’t it?

Detroit displays the results of unrestrained capitalism and an administration based on oil. The problem is self-correcting over time, of course. But those who can still afford it will be driving foreign cars and whining about it being the fault of the evil, lazy American worker. Pretty funny. If you don’t laugh, you’ll have to cry.

Everyone should drive whatever works well for them. If I lived in a city apartment I’d likely drive small car with a stick shift.
I once owned a 1986 ford escort wgn. that got almost 50 mpg highway (47), great lil car with lots of power for the engine size.
Where I live now I have to have a 4x4 truck, without one you go nowhere in winter.
If someone in a city wants one, buy one, who am I to deside what someone can or can’t drive?

As far as hybred type cars go, if I was going to push something “practical” into the market, it would be a hybred clean-burn diesel. They can be made to run on anything from soybean oil to fuel made from grass clippings, plenty of power for what people want, and no need to change all the gas stations into electric generators or hydrogen bomb storage depots.

As far as other energy goes, dot the ocean front beaches with wind generators, the yuppies can learn to live with the view.

Isn’ that an ocean view shared by Kennedy and Kerry?

I was wondering about the soybean oil - I don’t know how that would be cheaper because I don’t know what they do to process it for cars.

When I go to the store and buy 100% soybean cooking oil it costs nearly $6/gallon ! Yes it can be grown and not siphened out of the earth. I just wonder if it would be cheaper than gasoline.

Kate -

It still makes absolutely NO sense to me why companies, and people for that matter, can’t do the right thing unless the government forces them to.
An auto maker can’t sell cars on the fact that a vehicle gets better gas mileage and is better for the environment without the government forcing them to?

That’s also why I don’t see how everything can be blamed on the government. We don’t want them taking over our lives but we can’t do the right thing unless they force us to.

Look. The reason Auto Companies don’t make Electric Cars or whatever is because NOONE IN AMERICA WILL BUY THEM!!! Unlike Japan who sees a car as simple transportation, an American sees a Car as something more. Cars are symbols in the American mind. Have you ever rode an electric car? It’s like a golf cart. You DO NOT get that ROAR when you hit the gas. You DO NOT feel that tremble of POWER when the engine is idling. You just get a hum and maybe a mild sensation that you are riding a Computer. How can you ever get laid in a thing like that? How can you brag to your friends, “My Car saves Gas.”. Who cares about GAS? I WANT A SUV!!! I want to KNOW that I can hurt you more than you hurt me!!! I want to sit up there and look down on you lesser mortals and KNOW that I am better than YOU!!!!!!!

And that is why Auto Companies won’t make environmental friendly cars.

Aldous.

Down here in Texas your license renewal is scaled to the weight of your vehicle. I think that would be a great start for a national effort, but, by no means sufficient. I would also like to see stepped gas pumps. Up to the first 20 gallons, x tax rate, 20 to 40 gallons 2x tax rate, 40 gallons up on a fillup and 3x taxes. Sure there would be fudgers at first who would gas up 20 gallons here, then another 20 there, but, it wouldn’t last long. Americans value their time and effort far more than the tax amount they would pay for filling up Hum V’s.

Finally, I would like to see an end to all ‘red’ vehicles. They by far constitute the greatest number of aggressively driven colored vehicles on the road. Can’t ban the color? Let the dealer collect a $1000 tax on the red color paint job. Now we are talking…..!!!!

Dave,
The tax idea sounds good at first but what I would do is shut the pump off and start again. Since I still use that old fashioned thing called cash - I wouldn’t end up with 3 receipts.

New York did the same thing with the weight of the vehicle - I don’t know if they still do. I haven’t lived their for a long time.

Indiana bases the license tax on the value of the vehicle. Since SUV’s cost more the tax is higher. Of course a Porsche costs a lot and doesn’t weigh as much. I guess if I could afford an $80,000+ vehicle I wouldn’t think a whole lot about the tax on it.

> I guess if I could afford an $80,000+ vehicle
> I wouldn’t think a whole lot about the tax
> on it.

Dawn, you would love to hang out with us liberals! We think so much alike!

-Cf

David,
This don’t need to be a partisan issue, lets all put our heads together and figure out how to make cars/trucks that Americans want to drive/own, and burn cleaner without forign oil.
I may need something different than you, you may need something else.
Lets try to solve problems that help everyone without telling any group what they should drive.

Please don’t take that as me saying that you are dictating your views on everyone, I’m sure you’re a very reasonable person that can look at ALL the facts.

The big bosses and the stockholders couldn’t possibly take a cut in order to keep the price down.

Dang, girl! Raise the minimum wage, more fuel efficient cars, and now CEO paycuts! Don’t they kick you out of the GOP for that? Next thing you know, you’ll want affordable health insurance. :)

As far as hybred type cars go, if I was going to push something “practical” into the market, it would be a hybred clean-burn diesel.

Beagle, Ford is selling a hybrid 4WD. Just fill it up at the Texaco and go.

Unfortunately US hybrid technology is about a decade behind the Japanese. My wife bought a Honda Civic hybrid last year. We drove it from San Diego to San Francisco on one tank of gas - about $15 at the time. It’s a great car.

Unfortunately US hybrid technology is about a decade behind the Japanese.

BTW, that’s why the car companies are lobbying so hard against higher fuel efficiency regulations. The higher MPG Japanese cars would instantly have Detroit beat while they retool.

Hey guys - long time no comment,
Anyhow, I thought I’d through another idea into the mix. I’m close to Detroit (home of the big 3) and auto stuff is in the newspapers regularly here.

Last week I read something in the Detroit paper about another big reason for buying Japanese over American (in addition to gas milage) is the resale & trade-in value. Japanese cars generally have a much higher resale value (as percentage of original price tag) a few years after purchase because they are still expected to get over 200,000 miles before going to automobile heaven. The expected lifespan of an American vehicle is still much shorter. Another thing to consider…

Christopher,
I like hanging out with my liberal friends also, we may not agree, but we can have a beer and debate issues.
I would much rather discuss issues with someone with a different point of view, than someone that says…yuppers…you’re right.
If you don’t like beer you can have a wine cooler, (notice I didn’t say “whine” cooler.)
After we agree to dissagree, we can both have a double shot of bourbon and go home knowing that people can have different views and still be friends.

peezee, absolutely right. GM service technician told me to dump my cadillac at 70,000 miles or pay through the nose for maintenance and get stuck with no resale value around 100,000 miles. Was he ever right. I still have it, but, keep it as a backup vehicle for our 4 cylinder Mazda with 185,000 miles when it has to go in the shop for something or another, so far, all minor.

Now my 81 Ford pickup truck straight inline 6 F100 has about 245000 miles on it and it is the most reliable, most maintenance free, and low cost vehicle I have ever owned. I doubt I will ever sell it. I could even replace the engine myself if the need comes, because it’s design was simplicity itself. Still gets about 19 miles per gallon.

Planned obsolescence has been built into every mid cost American made passenger car for decades. But markup values in the late 70’s and 80’s plus increased competition in the pickup truck market allowed the Big 3 to produce pickups bypassing the planned obsolescence paradigm. In the 90’s they began moving back to it in the pick up lines as evidenced by the rapid drop in resale values of trucks made from 1986 to present compared to the decade earlier.

The Japanese see America’s planned obsolescence as a marketing opportunity, and capitalizing on it was easy since the Big 3 hates retooling costs for redesigns based on market demand changes that may only be one or two year fads. The Japanese see retooling costs as high quality market investments allowing them to capture interest and sales with each new year’s added features and redesigns.

My next truck will be a fuel efficient Mazda most likely (but, keep the old Ford for heavy hauling) and we definitely want a hybrid for our next passenger vehicle. No idea what model yet, haven’t done the research and the old mazda shows no signs of dying anytime soon.

Beagle said: “This don’t need to be a partisan issue, lets all put our heads together and figure out how to make cars/trucks that Americans want to drive/own, and burn cleaner without forign oil.”

This is funny. No, Beagle, when I said “red” I meant the paint, not party or political feature. I think I just got me leg pulled. I can tell because I am limping over the longer one now.

David,

(laughing my ass off)..I never meant it that way, but its funny now that you pointed it out.

David,
Just a question, now that we’ve cleared up the paint color issue, Would non-red cars get better mileage or burn cleaner ?
I haven’t owned a red car/truck in over 20 years.
That may be the reason I can debate issues with my liberal friends now?
You may be on to something david.
By the way, love your sense of humor.

And America is the most innovative country in the world ???

America is a nation of get the profit at any cost.

Give me an American Party that has the views of the average American -who wants everything better for everyone without compromising basic values -along with letting people be who they want to be without trying to make everyone accept something they may not believe in.

Did that make sense??

I don’t like the parties taking a couple of issues and going with them because they think they are the ones that will get them elected. We basically have to compromise on one thing to get something else.

Being an Independent gets you little more than a phone call asking which way you are leaning.

I was an Independent until the last presidential election in case anyone is curious. (Now I will probably get fired.)
I am registered Republican so I write in this column. I switched in protest. Maybe I should have gone democrat since they vote in protest. At least one of them does from what I hear.

At this time, I have not been convinced that Kerry can make this country or the world safer. My fear of Kerry is that he will talk too much and not take action soon enough. I really don’t think anything he or anyone else says will change my mind about that.
Bush jumped the gun on Iraq but I can understand his reasoning behind why we went there - to the Middle East. I was one who said, “He just better be right about the WMD’s.” I still take the view that there was much more to it.
That is, to me, why I think it is so wrong for the WMD issue to be one of the main reasons to get Bush out. He still isn’t the only one who believed it.
Putting 9/11 squarely on his shoulders is wrong too. Sure it was on his watch but just think about the massive amounts of things that are put before a new president. UBL probably used the opportunity to sneak one by us. After all he had been planning something that our intelligence simply hadn’t put together. He also knew how hijackings were viewed at the time.
The blame covers a lot of years and a lot of mistakes by a number of different people from both parties.

Our country has to be safe so that we can go on discussing why we don’t have more fuel efficient cars.
Bush is still my man for that.

> Our country has to be safe so that we can go
> on discussing why we don’t have more fuel
> efficient cars. Bush is still my man for that.

Has Bush ever advocated more fuel efficient cars?!? I don’t think he’s ever said anything of the sort!

He has, however, consistently fought against rules requiring fuel efficiency in cars. And the Bush Administration has made it easier for auto makers to bend the rules in order to make bigger and more wasteful SUVs.

Bush is not your man for this.

-Cf

Chris,
I think Bush is right on this issue, and most of the big3 auto workers will agree, don’t make mandates untill AMERICAN auto companys, with mostly Dem leaning voters, can meet the standards, without trashing the American auto industry.
Anyone can mandate mileage standards to relate what japan wants, but it don’t mean poop to what Americans want to buy.
American auto companys and workers can compete with anyone in the world, they build what America wants, not what Japan wants.
If you relate what America wants to drive, to tiny lil cars that Japan likes, the big 3 kicks their butt.
The ford f-150 has been the #1 selling mode of transportation in America for 20 years, that covers everything, not just trucks.
You cant try to relate the 4x4 trucks and suv’s that Americans want, to the mileage japans toy cars get.
Japan is trying to break into the market with the toyta tundra but ford and gm are still kicking their butt.

CF …

Rules against requiring more fuel efficient cars ?

Rules?

Like I previously said … Why can’t companies and people do the right thing without the government forcing them to?

I, for one, would prefer that the government didn’t HAVE to stick it’s big nose into everything.

By the way - ‘Bush is still the man for me’ was in reference to being safe. Just to clear that up.

Thanks for the clarifications, Dawn. I think I get your point of view now.

As some others have made clear, the auto industry often puts short-term profits ahead of what is best for themselves and America itself in the long term. Government regulation helps the auto makers progress in a way that helps the industry make money in the long term, helps our country have a better environment, puts more money in consumers’ pockets, reduces our dependence on foreign oil, and enables the auto makers to move forward with important research and development without being afraid of their competitors taking advantage of the opportunity to put them out of business. Such a philosophy is definitely not purely capitalist, but neither is bailing out the auto companies when they go bankrupt, which we’ll have to do if we keep getting killed by the Japanese.

Government rules, regulations, requirements, and direct sponsorship has played a vital role in almost every major technological advancement the USA has ever produced, from nuclear energy, to aerospace, semiconductors, cryptography, the Internet, medicine and pharmaceuticals. Fuel efficiency should be just another one of those important missions for our country. Kerry has suggested that the USA could use a Manhattan Project or Apollo Mission level of effort to make American energy independent. Such a program would probably involve some public dollars and some new rules and mandates for the auto and energy industries. But the long term results would put America way ahead of the world, it would make us stronger. It’s exactly the kind of thing government is good at.

-Cf

> American auto companys and workers can
> compete with anyone in the world, they
> build what America wants, not what
> Japan wants.

Sometimes what America wants is bad for America. In the case of SUVs, they’re bad for the American environment and our health, bad for American traffic safety, bad for American dependence on Arab oil, and bad for the American pocketbook in both the everyday cost of gasoline and the price most SUV owners are paying in long-term debt (as you say, they sell like hotcakes but only because millions of Americans are willing to go into unprecedented levels of long-term debt).

America wants cocaine and heroin too, that doesn’t mean we should just let them have it.

-Cf

Anyone can mandate mileage standards to relate what japan wants, but it don’t mean poop to what Americans want to buy.

Beagle, if US auto makers were offering cars that Americans want to buy, but with better gas mileage, do you think Americans would turn them down?

I own an SUV. If it got another 10-20 MPG, I’d never sell it. As it is, I’ll probably dump it in the next year or so for a car that doesn’t cost me $60/tank of gas.

It is far too involved and I am not well versed on the topic, but, there is a wealth of information out there regarding the intricate ties between the Big 3 and the oil industry. It is a very incestuous relationship between the two industries. One has to begin by following the hats worn by the boards of directors and attorneys of the corporations of both industries. I offer this as a starting point for anyone interested in this topic that has been watched and picked over for more than 3 decades now.

At this time, I have not been convinced that Kerry can make this country or the world safer. My fear of Kerry is that he will talk too much and not take action soon enough.

And my fear of Bush is that he will take the wrong action too soon. Like in Iraq. Or take no action at all until it’s too late, like on 9/11. Or take action for a while and then slack off, like in Afghanistan.

There are plenty of philosophical differences about when to talk and when to act, and they are certainly important. But when it comes down to cases, decisions are (or should be) often driven by the facts of that case as well as philosophy. Whether you decide to talk or act, it’s important to look at the facts, and to be right.

And back to cars - I agree with Dawn. My family car is a Volvo wagon, plenty safe, about 7 years old, seats seven if you use the wayback seat for a couple of kids, or else holds five and an enormous about of crap in the back. Even comes with a stick shift so Daddy can pretend he’s driving a sports car or something. This summer we took a road trip and got close to 30mpg on the hiway, cruising at 75 most of the way. This is a car a lot of people want to buy (and do buy) and there wasn’t anything comparable made by Detroit when we got it.

William, got 73 and 74 Volvo wagons stored on our acerage. They need some minor repairs, and will get them as soon as our house is completed. My only major complaint with Volvo’s is maintenance costs and highly complex engine designs, making even minor servicing and repairs virtually impossible for the owner without a huge investment in tools, equipment and manuals (if you can get a hold of them - Chilton’s and Hayne’s have become inadequate for these complex interactive engine designs.)

Don’t know about the current ones, but, my 73 Volvo has original engine rebuilt once with over 300,000 miles. Great car, lousy gas mileage by today’s standards though, hence the complexity of engine design in newer models, presumeably. Bottom line I hope will be that petrol combustion engines become 20th century and non-petrol combustion engines and non-combustion engines become 21st century. That will likely occur if oil prices stabilize at or above 50$ a barrel which appears to be where we are headed. Look for a lot of resistance however, in the way of oil companies buying up competing patents to hold innovations off the market.

if oil prices stabilize at or above 50$ a barrel

Just FYI, oil prices sustained above $40/barrel are the boogy man for economists. If they stay there for 4-6 months, they predict global recession.

Solution -
Get those oil producing countries to pump more oil while the rest of the world takes their good old time figuring out how to use less.

AP, yes, I am aware of that. See what destabilizing the Middle East even further portends?

I see where France is putting out a compressed air driven vehicle running off batteries, for under $10,000. If it can get 50 miles on a charge and charge in less than 8 hours, my wife would love one for going to and from work, 45 miles each way.

I’m not that big on unions, but it seems like those that are center/left are dumping on American auto companys/ workers.
I’m center/right, not that fond of unions, but those working in the American automotive industry are my friends and neighbors, I’ll buy their products.
I agree , push for more inovation and mileage, but dont take a crap on American companys and workers.
Just my opinion.

Sounds like some of you are more of my inclinations, i.e., as Thinking Independents (for lack of a better name at this juncture[ but not Nader types of independents due to his social spending, etc.].

Same ol’ same’ on topic of autos and oil.
Will only change with the Thinking Independents Grouping (non-govt. employees & non-attorneys) as think Referee party between the other two…

Get those oil producing countries to pump more oil while the rest of the world takes their good old time figuring out how to use less.

Dawn, that’s Bush’s plan(chapter 8): Give oil companies incentives to invest in oil production around the world.

How long do you think we should take “figuring out how to use less”?

• The NEPD Group recommends the President support initiatives by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Algeria, Qatar, the UAE, and other suppliers to open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investment.

The problem is, no one wants to invest hundreds of millions in an unstable region. That’s the other part of Bush’s energy plan: Stabilize our oil sources.

• The NEPD Group recommends that the President make energy security a priority of our trade and foreign policy.

It’s not the reason Bush was so keen to invade Iraq, but it definitely was a reason.

Unfortunately, best case predictions say we hit peak oil production by 2035 (worst case is next year). After that, continuously skyrocketing demand from countries like China, India, and other developing regions deplete what’s left fairly quickly.

AP,

After that, continuously skyrocketing demand from countries like China, India, and other developing regions deplete what’s left fairly quickly.

I am glad someone finally brought this up.

This United States put itself in this situation.

We had the idea to help other regions of the world develop their economies but forgot to think about how that would effect the oil industry around the world.

Now, instead of already having higher fuel mileage demands in place and using alternative fuels, we have to have more oil.

If everyone wants to keep looking back at mistakes —

Why should fuel efficiency and cleaner air be a partisan issue anyway? After all, the truest sense of “conservatism” includes “conserving” what we have. Frivolously burning up nonrenewable resources and making the air unbreathable isn’t conservative at all.

I agree Alejo.

People seem to think problems created over a number of years can be fixed with one swipe of a pen.

Sometimes things need a number of years to repair. The same as it took a number of years to create the problem.

Sometimes even the correct solution doesn’t appear as though it will work at the beginning.

That is why I can’t understand it when people claim the person in office is the only one who ever screws anything up.

What that person does now is a reflection of how things were when they took office and what happens while they are there.

It doesn’t matter which party is in office - the other can always do better and wouldn’t have screwed up to begin with.

Dawn and Alejo, common sense far too often runs against vested profit interests by corporations which have the funds to lobby thus short cutting common sense which by definition is the sense of the common people who DON’T have lobbyists with deep pockets. They have Ralph Nader, but he doesn’t have deep pockets.

David —

And that’s a perfect example of why libertarianism would be the same sort of failure communism was.

David,

Just who is going to stop the situation with the lobbyists? our politicians? HA

I suppose some are for the good of all of us but not usually.

Nadar makes people aware but really can’t do anything. Most all that he is saying this time around is being lost in the battle over Iraq.

I’m ok with Japan producing good cars for us to buy.

Blu-ray Price and Spec. sharp Japanese Products Newest