|
|
|---|
|
American Politics Journal Atrios Barry Crimmins Betty Bowers Buzzflash Consortium News Daily Howler Daily Kos Democatic Underground Disinfotainment Today Evil GOP Bastards Faux News Channel Greg Palast The Hollywood Liberal Internet Weekly Jesus General Joe Conason Josh Marshall Liberal Oasis Make Them Accountable Mark Morford Mike Malloy Political Humor - About.com Political Wire Randi Rhodes Rude Pundit Smirking Chimp Take Back the Media Whitehouse.org More Links |
Subject: Electric cars
Hey, Bart:
I wanted to follow your suggestion and create
a commentary in MP3 format,
but it will take me a while to figure out how
to do that, so I am writing!
The comments by Marc Perkel, you, and reader 'Dave
in Joisey' are misguided, and need to be addressed.
For the sake of disclosure, I am employed in
the auto industry in Detroit, although not for one of the automakers.
I work directly within almost every automaker
doing business in the US.
In Vol 2247, Marc Perkel stated that the Detroit
automakers worked to kill electric cars, and fought against
raising gas mileage, safety regulations, and
clean air regulations. They did NOT work to kill electric cars, and
are
working to introduce new ones now, just as several
foreign automakers are. The battery technology was not
available to produce a safe, reliable car that
could travel as far as people expect. (Notice how NO automakers
have introduced reliable electric cars in the
past? People expect to be able to travel more than an hour before
recharging). There are no conspiracies
against electric cars, but that falsehood has become accepted as 'fact'.
Disclosure:
I know nothing about the science involved - but
I disagree.
Fifty years ago I had a footlong toy car that
ran on solar energy.
Hell, it ran on flashlight energy - in 1960-
so where are we today?
As far as batteries, have you every played a round
of golf?
Surely 80% of all car trips are 20 miles or less.
Are you trying to tell me Detroit can't come
up with a 20 mile battery?
Sure they can/have - so where are we today?
Sure, the first thing they say is, "You
can't get from Seattle to Miami on batteries,"
but they ignore that you can get
from Seattle to Tacoma on batteries, so where are we today?.
The science is there - or at least it was 50 years
ago.
Are you asking me to believe that they forgot
how to make solar/battery cars?
The oil bastards are making $15,000
profit per minute and
you
want me to believe that there's no conspiracy
to be sure that keeps happening?
I'm not angry with you and I'm not
saying you're lying, but you'd have to be some
golden tongued devil to get me to believe the
lack of progress isn't caused by oil greed.
And the Detroit automakers have agreed to increased
mileage standards and emissions regulations,
as long as there is a national standard, and
not state-by-state variances. The position of the Big3 is
the exact same as Toyota in these matters, and
Toyota has joined them in asking the government to
develop one cohesive standard. It is easy
to toss these charges at the domestic manufacturers
without facts, and the media does it daily.
So why build a perfectly good electric car that
was loved by everyone who drove it, and then
yank it off the market so we can remain addicted
to fossil fuels that killed 4200 soldiers lately?
We're not talking about electric car theory -
we're after the fact.
And Perkel wrote:: 'When you see a car with the
paint falling off - That's an American made car'.
When the automakers changed to water-based paints
in the late 80's (part of their environmental
compliance), there were some development problems
with the paint, and the adhesion problems
were addressed by the automakers and paint suppliers.
If you think other cars of that era did not
suffer the same paint problems, you are fooling
yourself. But think about the age of the cars you
see with peeling paint - You see a lot more Oldsmobiles,
Pontiacs, and Chryslers from that era
than you do Toyota or Hyundai cars, for example.
Why? Because the cars lasted. Do you see
newer American cars with peeling paint?
Absolutely not.
One of my perks at the car lot was that I didn't
need to own a car. They didn't let me drive
a nice car, so I always got the car that
looked like crap but would still get me to work.
The last car I had was a white 1995 Pontiac Grand
Prix with peeling paint.
And why do the 1995 Hondas still have their paint?
Reader 'Dave in Joisey' (Vol 2448) goes on to
say that GM has '...refused to proficiently develop
any alternate fuel technologies'. Objection
- Assumes facts not in evidence!
ha ha
I see you've been reading a while :)
Perhaps he could explain just which alternate
fuel technologies that GM does not have available,
and he can buy from other manufacturers?
Flex fuel vehicles are available from the Detroit automakers,
as are hybrids. (If he wanted to argue
that US and Japanese automakers should have more diesels
available, I would agree. But American
consumers don't seem to want them). Dave's assertion
about GM producing a 'sub par product' is just
not supported by the facts.
Used car dealers will disagree with you maybe
90% of the time.
Show me a used car lot that specializes in not-too-expensive
used American cars.
I'll give you $5 for each one you find if you'll
give me $1 for each foreign-only used car lot.
Several manufacturers (including Toyota) have
opened facilities here, and they employ quite a few people.
These 'transplant' facilities provide an opportunity
to save on transportation costs, and a way to shield the
companies against currency exchange rates.
But the economy has hurt them, too. Just today, Toyota
announced further cutbacks and employment reduction.
The domestic manufacturers still employ WAY
more people than the transplants, which is why
they are vital to our economy (and tax base).
From my perspective and experience, the media
treat the domestic automakers like they treated Bill Clinton
- Continuous bashing, and taking every wild assertion
and rumor as 'fact'. And they have treated foreign
automakers (particularly Toyota) like they first
treated Bush - 'Ask no questions, and repeat their press releases as fact'.
Dude, I don't disagree, but GM's in trouble because their products won't sell.
You can say that's a shame, but the sales totals
speak for themselves.
The best selling car in America is a Toyota Camry
- it's a great car.
Two weeks ago I rented a 2008 Impala - it was
a terrible excuse for a car..
Note:
There's a big section in
BCR
146 about this - sure to
anger all who read it.
You have to keep in mind - The cars you purchase
today from the 'big player' auto companies are very
similar in terms of engineering, technology,
and quality. The media likes to pretend that is not true, but the
facts speak for themselves, and recent quality
surveys reflect that. Toyota makes some damn fine cars.
And so do GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, and several
others.
So why do Americans refuse to buy cars from Detroit?
Surely people don't buy a fourth and fifth Honda
or Toyota because they heard
from our whore media that Hondas and Toyotas
are better than GM and Ford...
The auto industry is directly or indirectly responsible
for about 1 in 14 jobs in this country.
The economic impact of failure of one (or all)
of the domestics is huge. The data presented to Congress
today states that a collapse of our auto industry
would lead to about 5.5 million lost jobs over a 3-year span
(Don't forget the trickle-down effect of losing
a big chunk of the middle class). Bloomberg news has
reported that elimination of our domestic auto
industry would cost the government up to $200 billion dollars
in lost tax revenue. But they are only
asking for a $25 billion dollar loan...not a gift. The Republicans
fought
hard against the Chrysler loan 30 years ago,
but it was paid back early, with a $500 million profit for the taxpayers.
When you hear my arguments in BCR
146 I'll bet you work extra
hard to get
your mic and MP3s working :).
I'd love to have a radio debate with you on BCR
147
It is easy to dismiss an industry that you don't
feel connected to, and lose sight of the big picture.
If the domestic auto industry really was as backward
as they are portrayed, then there would be little hope.
But they are doing as good a job as anyone in
the world right now, and were hobbled by the economy and
credit crunch, right as their product portfolio
was shifting from trucks to cars. (It wasn't that long ago that
they were being congratulated for providing the
trucks and SUV's that customers wanted).
In BCR 146 I make the case that Republican bribe-taking is killing Detroit.
Taking bribes from Big Pharm and greedmongers
like Bill Frist, the Facsist dogs have ensured that
health care costs stay sky f-ing high and poor
Detroit is doomed as long as they're paying more for
employee health care than they are for steel.
Detroit would be a lot more competitive if they
could drop the prices of their cars by $2000
each.
Sorry for the long-winded explanation, but it
is important that people understand the reality and severity
of the situation. We cannot afford to lose
any of the domestic manufacturers, and a collapse of this industry
would derail any economic plan that President
Obama might produce.
You're either going to really love BCR 146 or you're going to hate it :)
Take care, and keep up the good work.
Isn't it nice to know that some intelligence
is returning to the White House?
I do hope that Hillary is our next Secretary
of State, although I wonder
if she might be a better Senate Majority Leader...
Tom
From your keyboard to Koresh's ears...
Send e-mail
to Bart | Discuss
it on The BartCop Forum | Comment
on it at the BartBlog