Why did the White House apologize for telling the truth?

Question

The White House apologized for recommending fuel-efficient cars because none of them were made by American manufacturers.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070920/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/fuel_economy_apology;_ylt=AtVgUlK1UdmQ_dexrlmsTXsjzKIX

Even if you go to www.fueleconomy.gov, the government lists the most fuel efficient cars by class and except for one, they are all foreign.

Why would the White House play politics with the truth? Why don't they just call out Detroit for making crap cars?

Clansman, then why is the market share of US manufacturers declining if they know what the public wants?

Clansman, you are almost correct. I was being a bit strong with that statement about crap cars. But in the context of fuel-efficiency, the White House should not given Detroit a pass on fuel-efficiency when that was the key point of the memo.

Clansman, you are being apologetic for Detroit. Are you saying that foreign companies are better at gauging what American buyers want? Detroit had the same information that the other car dealers had but chose to build big SUV's. And don't forget that the foreign companies did the same because of the profit margin, but on the other segments they made fuel-efficient cars because they saw the writing on the wall. Toyota/Lexus even make hybrid large SUV's.

In business, if you can't keep up with the competition, you are doomed. Detroit needs to figure out how to keep up. Foreign companies can do it, why can't Detroit. And don't say because of development time, how long have gas prices been high? How long has the Middle East been at unrest? How long have China and India been expanding? It doesn't take much to see that gas prices will continue to rise.

And the playing field is level, Detroit just hasn't delivered.

Clansman, sorry to hear you are leaving the discussion.

In 1997 Mazda reported they had cut development time to 18 months and in 1998 GM reported they had cut it to less than 20 months. (Quick internet search got these results from Automotive News.)

I love this country. It's lame to throw out some weak insult and then leave. Just because I'm willing to call us out doesn't mean I'm not a real American. Sometimes you have to point out the faults so they can get fixed.

Clansman, thank for the discussion.

i don't mean to irritate you. (Having been in similar discussions, I understand.)

I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

Also, I do appreciate that you do know how to engage in discussion. All to often things degenerate on a forum like this.

Thanks for your comments.

Answer 1

Because no politician dares offend the Amerucan car industry, which has large numbers of workers and contributes a lot of cash.

But the Democrats deserve every bit as much condemnation. They backed off on even modestly improved fuel efficiency standards, which haven't been raised in many years.

Answer 2

Well you see the White House made the mistake of being honest for once, and recommending that people buy a fuel efficient car. Since the American auto companies have so far been almost incapable of designing fuel efficient cars, this recommendation undermined our auto industry, so they had to apologize.

This is simply another sign that the US car companies need to wake up and build some better cars. GM is starting to do that with the Chevy Volt, but they need to make a greater effort.

Answer 3

Come on not very many parts on American cars are made in Detroit or in the states as far as that goes

Answer 4

well if they're so worried about gas running out they should have mentioned that long time ago. i know for sure my next car wont be an american car..

Answer 5

"Why would the White House play politics..." LOL That is what politicians do.

Answer 6

incease it got someone upset

Answer 7

Why did the White House apologize for recommending that the the Americans buy fuel-efficient cars, not made by American manufacturers? Hmmm, isn't it a bad thing when your own government recommends you buy foreign products? Doesn't this hurt your pride, even a little? Even if you over look the fact that they most likely insulted a lot of Americans, there are other reasons. The more money Americans spend on American products, is more money going back into our economy. This can only be a good thing. Besides, Detroit auto manufactures do make fuel efficient cars, but they are not on par with their foreign made counterparts, yet. This will never happen either, if Americans don't continue to invest in American cars. How can any auto manufacturer develop more fuel efficient vehicles, with out revenue? Unless you are someone that has absolutely no pride in our country, I cannot see how you think the government apologizing was a bad thing? Just because foreign auto makers manufacture more fuel efficient cars, doesn't mean that we, as American citizens, should buy them. The government did make a mistake in recommending them and should have apologized. You then say why don't they just call out Detroit for making crap cars. Detroit doesn't make crap cars. They make what the public wants. How could they stay in business doing otherwise? The majority of people in America, are not looking to by a small compact fuel efficient vehicles. If they were, don't you think Detroit would be focused on that? It is only a small percentage of America, at the moment, who are looking for these types of vehicles. As the general consensus about vehicles changes, so will Detroit's line up of autos. I hope this has explained this a bit for you.

EDIT:

You say, "Clansman, then why is the market share of US manufacturers declining if they know what the public wants?" Within the last 1-2 years, the global warming hype has really gained momentum, and this is partially the reason for the market share declining. The market is changing unbelievably fast when you look at it from an auto manufacturers standpoint. When have you ever seen mpg ratings on auto's ever increase as fast as they are being expected to today? Honestly, I don't think anyone could have predicted how fast it all would snowball into the major concern that it is today. Detroit was caught unaware. Until a short while ago, demand was for gas guzzling SUVs. It takes time to develop cars which are on par, when comparing fuel economy, with foreign auto makers. Foreign auto manufacturers have been focusing on compact, fuel efficient cars for years, so they have a hell of a head start on the market. Given time Dodge, Chevrolet and Ford will produce cars that are every bit as economical as cars produced by Toyota, Mitsubishi or Nissan or they will go out of business. My point is that they cannot just instantly put out cars on par with foreign auto makers in 1-2 years time. This is all I was trying to say.
Then you said, "But in the context of fuel-efficiency, the White House should not given Detroit a pass on fuel-efficiency when that was the key point of the memo." How do you see the White House as giving Detroit a pass? The point of the memo was to encourage people to buy fuel efficient cars, not to encourage people to buy foreign. Detroit makes a few fuel efficient cars, they are just not on par with the foreign ones. Including American cars in the memo wouldn't have been giving Detroit a pass, it would only been putting them on even ground. You cannot hold Detroit at fault for not knowing the market was going to change as fast as it did. They are changing and developing better cars. It just takes time, and they shouldn't be punished for that. I hope this has clarified what I was trying to say.
Edit:
You say, "Clansman, you are being apologetic for Detroit. Are you saying that foreign companies are better at gaging what American buyers want?" No, that is not what I am saying at all. Foreign auto makers, have always been making small fuel efficient compact cars. The turn in the market, just worked in their favor. Don't blame Detroit for being behind on the game, when up until recently, Americans were looking to mainly buy SUV's. Auto making is a business, and businesses are looking to make money. If the market would have been great for the small fuel efficient car, don't you think Detroit auto makers would have been taking advantage of that? They are greedy, just like any other business and only want to make money, so of course they would have. You make it out to sound like they are this big business that just does whatever it wants whenever it wants when this is not the case. They can only do as they please, when sales stay up. The market will force them to change, like it or not. Foreign auto makers didn't see the writing on the wall. In their home country, the need was for those small economic cars, this is why they had the jump on the market. You then go on to say, "In business, if you can't keep up with the competition, you are doomed. Detroit needs to figure out how to keep up. Foreign companies can do it, why can't Detroit. And don't say because of development time, how long have gas prices been high? How long has the Middle East been at unrest? How long have China and India been expanding? It doesn't take much to see that gas prices will continue to rise. You would be surprised at how long research and development takes. They cannot just copy the design of the foreign auto makers. It is illegal if they do. They must come up with their own original concepts. There is so much that goes into it, I cannot even begin to explain it to you. If you think it is something that happens in 1-2 years, you are sadly mistaken. Have you ever looked into research and development time for companies or is it just easier to condemn the American car makers? You cite all these examples of why Americans should want want small efficient cars from Detroit, but the truth of it is, that until recently, as within the last 1-3 years, Americans were buying SUV's. Look at Detroit's upcoming line of cars for the new year and then tell me they are not trying to keep up with the market. They are not stupid. I am not going to reply again, as I have tried to explain the situation clearly to you. If you are one of those people who hate America and everything about it, I surely am not going to change your mind. You have been feed too much propaganda, for me to make a dent, but the bottom line is that what the White House did by recommending Americans buy foreign products was wrong and that is why they apologized.

Edit
First, I would like to tell you that I have a head cold. That is the main reason I do not feel like arguing the point, but I find it hard to stay away when I have not gotten my point across. When you say, "GM reported they had cut it to less than 20 months." you are reporting the minimum time that they have ever produced a new auto based on previously tested and proven technology. The average is closer to 36 months. Here is a link showing that it took 40 months to produce this vehicle in 2002.
http://www.autosite.com/content/research/index.cfm/action/showarticle/AID/137129
This is when they are producing an auto based off of previously researched and developed technology. When they have to come up with a completely brand new concept, as they have to do when creating a economical and environmentally friendly vehicle like a hybrid or vehicle that runs off of an alternative fuel, it takes much longer. If they want to be competitive at least. Here is a link, reporting that it takes an average of 10 - 15 years. Scroll down to the section labeled Better Combustion and it tells us this in the last paragraph.
http://www.casc.org/papers/paper12.html
Do you understand that when Detroit is producing a vehicle that stands a chance at being competitive, it must start from scratch. They don't take a car they have and modify it. They start from scratch. This is very time intensive, taking much longer than the average 3 years, and cost a lot of money. You have said to me in previous comments, "In business, if you can't keep up with the competition, you are doomed." Do you think the Detroit auto makers don't also know this? But the whole point to your question, was to ask why the White House didn't call Detroit out on it's auto making. It's not the White House's place to call them out. They are like any other American business, in that they are free to do or not do what ever they want, and they do that based on sales. Trust me, when I say that they do not want to run the auto industry into the ground. Do you think they hate making millions? They are changing, but it takes time. From your point of view, it should have been done and those cars should be on the market, when it is impossible.
Calling them out is one thing, but holding onto a dogmatic belief is another. This is why I made the comment, "If you are one of those people who hate America and everything about it, I surely am not going to change your mind. You have been feed too much propaganda, for me to make a dent." You refuse to give them the benefit of the doubt. Besides, it isn't lame to make an observation and then comment on it. This time I am serious when I say that I am done arguing the point. I gain nothing more by continuing to argue with you, other than becoming irritated. We will have to wait and see what the upcoming domestic auto market looks like, before you will see that you are mistaken, at least concerning this point of our debate.