|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
khyber
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Compunction Junction
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 4:52 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| Most other people would describe the situation as one in which innovative Japanese car makers quickly gained market share with their high-mileage compacts, and sluggish American manufacturers, taken by surprise, struggled to catch up. |
| Quote: |
| Why is it that the big 3 auto companies refused to make more fuel efficient cars back in the 70's until they started losing market share to Toyota, Honda, and other imports? |
"taken by surprise"....so the thought NEVER EVEN occurred to them to make more fuel efficient cars.
These are the people who have dramitically changed their ideals and are now simply fueling the consumers desires.
For someone who is as condescending as you, your grasp on the information isn't nearly as strong as it should be dude...
You know...
| Quote: |
| Would you argue that car companies force consumers to buy ever-larger SUVs by, i don't know, limiting the availability of new compacts and buying and destroying used ones? Or can you follow facts to the logical conclusion that American consumers are primarily to blame for an enormous amount of wastefulness, for no better reason than status or fashion? |
This reminds me of the gas rate increase:
"How are you going to try to save at the pump?"
"i don't know. Drive less. Maybe take the bus or walk more"
Do you know how many people said, "Buy a more fuel efficient car"?
| Quote: |
| Or can you follow facts to the logical conclusion that American consumers are primarily to blame for an enormous amount of wastefulness, for no better reason than status or fashion? |
One thing this argument presupposes is that car companies have done the research and have the information. Based on that info, they have FOUND that the present state of affairs is the EXACT point between fuel efficiency and economical viability in producing cars.
it CANNOt get better. Nor can it get any more fuel efficient.
unless of course all of the engine factories were overhauled.
Don't think the option isn't there. They're just chicken sheets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 6:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| khyber wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Most other people would describe the situation as one in which innovative Japanese car makers quickly gained market share with their high-mileage compacts, and sluggish American manufacturers, taken by surprise, struggled to catch up. |
| Quote: |
| Why is it that the big 3 auto companies refused to make more fuel efficient cars back in the 70's until they started losing market share to Toyota, Honda, and other imports? |
"taken by surprise"....so the thought NEVER EVEN occurred to them to make more fuel efficient cars |
That's right. They were pretty secure in their dominance of the market and nobody believed that Japanese cars (considered low-quality at the time) would start seizing market share. That changed with the oil shocks, and the Japanese innovations in manufacturing, and American industry had to race to improve.
For those who believe in some arch conspiracy between oil companies and car manufacturers, please explain to me how the European Daimler-Chrysler, the Japanese and Korean megacompanies, and the American Ford and GM control each other's prices. By what mechanism do they conspire to keep hybrids expensive, thereby sacrificing potential profits, when any one of them could make a killing by betraying the trust of the cabal? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
| Who said anything about keeping hybrids expensive? That was referring to electric cars only. |
OK, electric cars. Why would Honda overly inflate the price of the EV1 to benefit Ford and GM? The answer is they wouldn't. They would sell the car for the lowest price they could make a profit, because they want to sell cars. They wouldn't inflate the price to prevent people from buying it.
| Quote: |
| And furthermore, the complaint about that was that car manufacturers didn't allow enough time for consumers to come around. A lot of people were waiting for the price to come down, as is usually the case with new technology. |
Well, that's exactly what I was saying, wasn't it? People said they wanted efficient cars, but it was idle talk, they weren't willing to pay the price. By not buying the cars, they prevented the EV1 from making a profit and drove it off the market.
I understand, you think that car companies should willingly take a loss of a few thousand dollars on each car (pay you to take a car, essentially -- they're made of money, right?) to protect the environment, so that consumers don't have to care about the environment.
| Quote: |
| And lastly, all that anger can't be healthy. Just because we disagree doesn't mean we have to be angry at each other. |
Who's angry? Who's insulting whom? I enjoy talking about business and economics and don't feel flustered because you disagree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm glad that we can agree on some things then.
Why would Honda over inflate the price of their cars?
They wouldn't. But the big 3 in NA would make sure that there were enough tarriffs in place against any import to ensure that it's final price is in range with theirs.
Should car makers take a loss? No of course not. But why were electrics so expensive in the first place?
Back when I was in Canada, there was a guy who designed and built his own electric car. It wasn't overly expensive or difficult to do. He built it in his garage during his spare time and used batteries from golf carts (I believe). I wish I could find the original news report. It was in Saskatchewan in either the late 1990's or 2000.
The point is, if some guy in a little hick town can do it, surely the auto industry could have done it.
As far as insults go, just go back and read some of your posts. I think you'll see what I mean. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khyber
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Compunction Junction
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I understand, you think that car companies should willingly take a loss of a few thousand dollars on each car (pay you to take a car, essentially -- they're made of money, right?) to protect the environment, to that consumers don't have to care about the environment.
|
Do you SERIOUSLY think that it would cost "a few thousand" extra dollars to make an all electric engine?? PER CAR????
Do you have a stat somewhere to prove that it costs more to make these cars (not simply that they're more expensive?)
and by the way; don't start thinking that electic cars are THAT great of an environmental save. The energy STILL comes from the earth. And often times WORSE burning fuels (coal is much worse a pollutant than ethanol) are used to produce electricity than to make gasoline.
Course, if you could plug your car into a solar panel, not only would that be pretty fuckin' cool, but it's the only sure way to create clean burning car.
I've also seen engineers design cars that go 1300km on 40 liters of gas.
Again, it's not like the technology isn't out there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| khyber wrote: |
| Quote: |
I understand, you think that car companies should willingly take a loss of a few thousand dollars on each car (pay you to take a car, essentially -- they're made of money, right?) to protect the environment, to that consumers don't have to care about the environment.
|
Do you SERIOUSLY think that it would cost "a few thousand" extra dollars to make an all electric engine?? PER CAR???? |
It's called economies of scale. The electric cars cost more because they were new and people didn't want to buy them. If Honda could have sold them for the same price of a comparable gasoline car, why didn't they? I know, I know... conspiracy! They just loved the oil companies so much they decided to sabotage their own sales in order to help Exxon sell gasoline.
| Quote: |
| Course, if you could plug your car into a solar panel, not only would that be pretty *beep*' cool, but it's the only sure way to create clean burning car. |
The only way? My friend, you need to get out more. Wind power is much more efficient, widespread, and practical than solar power, and humans have been using hydroelectric for a thousand years. Oh, and geothermal. That's not even to mention some of the newer things being developed, such as tidal generators, ocean current mills, fuel cells that can burn waste hydrogen from other industries. Oh, and let's not forget the ultimate clean power-generation technology, nuclear fission.
Of course there's one other source of power infinitely more cheap, efficient, safe, practical, reliable, healthy, ecologically friendly, and slimming, but I don't think America is ready for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
If not a conspiracy, then this has to be the most poorly researched and marketed product in the history of the automotive industry. In this day and age, I have a hard time believing that they just didn't realize how the price would affect the marketability.
In other words, I don't believe they are that bad at doing product market research. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keepongoing
Joined: 13 Feb 2003
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2005 9:23 pm Post subject: I have a question |
|
|
| There are alternative fuels out there for road vehicles, but are there any possible alternative fuels for jets? Can anything take the place of JP4 and be economical? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 26, 2005 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't know how expensive it would be, but I am sure it's possible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 12:01 am Post subject: Re: I have a question |
|
|
| MASH4077 wrote: |
| There are alternative fuels out there for road vehicles, but are there any possible alternative fuels for jets? Can anything take the place of JP4 and be economical? |
I have no idea. I am excited about the prospects of airships making a comeback, you could easily make one of those with clean energy.
OTOH, we could all start flying zero-emissions space shuttles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
desultude
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: Dangling my toes in the Persian Gulf
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| joe_doufu wrote: |
| some waygug-in wrote: |
| The thing is that big oil companies really don't want stuff like this to catch on, not until they can squeeze every last dollar they can out of an ever increasing oil market. |
This old line again. "Big oil" blah blah blah. The fact is, the car manufacturers enthusiastically marketed electric cars about oh five ten years ago and you and I enthusiastically refused to buy them. Said we, "I want a big SUV to compensate for my inadequacies. And I'll be damned if I'm going to pay extra for a little compact and then plug the darn thing in every night, phooey!" Now they're selling hybrids *and* preparing to sell hydrogen cars, and authors like the ones you linked to are accusing them of trying to block environmentalism. Right. All these former hippies in California are buying even bigger SUV's these days while the government is practically giving itself a hernia trying to maintain stability in the Middle East and struggling over the guilt of drilling in the ANWR, and they say "big oil" is to blame. Ha!
When was the last time you saw a California citizen environmentalist riding a bicycle? Answer me that one and I'll give you a lollipop. |
I'm not a Californian, but I have lived in the States for years with only a bicycle and mass transit. I know lots of hippies and "citizen environmentalists" who do likewise. There happens to be a lot of people who said not just no, but no way in hell, to SUV's. I had long arguments with my sister when she had to have one about five years ago. Now she is really sorry, but then it was a matter of "the business needs, the dogs, groceries, kids . . ".
I suspect the vast majority of environmentalists do not drive SUVs, and the great majority of SUV's are driven by people like the current governor of California, who has a fleet of them- conservatives, and especially businessmen taking advantage of the great tax advantages offered by the federal government.
Oh, by the way, Bill Maher is a Californian and a "citizen environmentalist", and he drives an electric car. He probably also has a bicycle, but you can keep your lolly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Once we get the space elevator up in place we won't need to worry about using rockets to launch most of our satellites. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joe_doufu
Joined: 09 May 2005
Location: Elsewhere
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mithridates wrote: |
| Once we get the space elevator up in place we won't need to worry about using rockets to launch most of our satellites. |
right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mithridates
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And it won't take too long either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
