I don't think that is absolutely true. I recall that Ford tried to
advocate seat belts in the 50s and that effort was a resounding
failure. It was perceived (or maybe counter advertised) to mean that
the Fords were unsafe. Then there is the Chrysler Airflow in the 30s
that would have reduced drag and produced better gas mileage. BTW it
is rumored that photos of the Airflow lead to the development of the
VW Beetle back in Germany. Still, another failure. Some of the
mandated weight adding gizmos such as energy absorbing bumpers were
not really safety issues but still added more weight to the
cars. Thanks to all the government mandated designs vehicles today
probably weigh at least 500 lbs more than similarly sized vehicles of
the 50s and 60s.
This doesn't take away from the greediness and poor business acumen
of the auto industry's executives, but to say that they resisted all
change is perhaps not quite accurate. They should have been using
some of that money from golden parachutes and benefits for the
incredibly overinflated number of top execs for continuing development.
In addition, the American public was only too happy to buy big gas
guzzlers when gas was cheap. The Europeans and Japanese had already
been paying exorbitant gas prices due to taxation and were thus
decades ahead of the US in regard to small/efficient car engineering
and quite easily slipped in when the demand was there.
Bill Huff
At 11/17/200811:18 AM, Anthony C. Boatman wrote:
For decades the Big Three dug in their heels and fought against any
type of change to make their cars better or safer. They fought
against seat belts, stronger bumpers, collapse zones, better mpg,
you name it. Now they are reaping the results.
Best thing would be for them to go bankrupt and reorganize under
that protection with a commitment to start building better cars more
suitable to the realities of the 21st century.
If government need has a role in this at all, it should be to prop
up the pension plans and benefits for retired workers, so they don't
get clobbered in the process. But I'm something of a socialist at
heart, so I'm worried about the little guy, not the top execs.
Tony Boatman
Boise, Idaho
57 Dodge CRL
65 Corvair Monza
-----Original Message-----
From: Forward Look Mopar Discussion List
[mailto:L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ray Jones
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 9:07 AM
To: L-FORWARDLOOK@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [FWDLK] Where is everyone?
It used to be "Made in USA", then Congress changed the law so that
"Made in America" was OK. the dumb american public thought that was the
same. Years ago, Chebby big cars were made in Canada, railed to
Janesville, WI and had final assembly point: "Janesville, WI" on the
MFG plate. What they did there was have guys go down the line of cars
and install the right hand rear view mirror.
Honda built their US plant in Maryville, OH, and started building cars
eventually with 95% US content. The US top execs would come down for
tours to see how they were building so efficiently, with no union, and
took home nothing. Can't teach them.
Honda tried to join the AAMA (Big three assoc.) and were told no,
"You're foreign". This while most US cars were built in Canada and
Mexico. Now we're down to 2 1/2 US mfg.. and they may go. Can't teach
them! Let it happen, maybe Honda, Toyota and others will buy them up
and make them successful.
Which ever way it goes, the top 4 levels of execs should be fired on
the spot, with no exit packages and no bonuses. Same for anything else
the Gov. takes over, walk in, excort the execs out, and replace with
qualified people responsible to the Feds.
Ray
On Nov 17, 2008, at 7:41 AM, Greg Robertson wrote:
It's not just political correctness, it's also about manufacturing
reality. BMW, Mercedes, Subaru, Nissan, Toyota, and others all build
cars here while our big three have shut plants here and opened more and
more plants overseas. I love my PT Cruiser, but it was built in Mexico
while a cousin of mine's Subaru was built in Indiana by Americans,
using a lot of American-made parts. So what does "buy American" mean
any more?
Maybe it just means buy and keep more ForwardLook cars. Nothing more
American than that.
Greg Robertson
'55 Savoy
On Nov 17, 2008, at 5:29 AM, JRawa@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
> stop importing and buy american....good idea.... but then we'd be a
> pro-american country and economy... and thats not politically correct
> in the modern world...
>
>
>
> Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!
>
>
> *************************************************************
>
> To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
> http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1
|
|
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network