English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

We were first to fly an Airplane. We were first to make the BOMB. We put the first man on the moon. Why the hell can't we make a better car? (When I say "better", I mean a car that can get 60 mpg and last more than 10 years).... 10 POINTS TO THE BEST ANSWER!!!

2007-09-25 03:18:59 · 8 answers · asked by Monica Sardonica 6 in News & Events Current Events

Interesting that nobody thinks it's unions that impede this... The unions sap some of the Auto Industry's profits that could be used to improve the product, no? Surely this is part of the problem...

2007-09-25 03:47:09 · update #1

8 answers

Most, above, seem to see the answer.

Oil and cars are part of a vertical set of corporations; they all try to assure each other's profits, and the progress that would have people using less gas, which is to say improved mileage, would arise out of better manufacturing standards and more sensible designs in the cars --this progress cuts into short-term profits... so the oil component of this hegemony tells the car component to sell gas guzzlers.

Car companies listen so much to the oil companies that they frequently produce products that turn out not to be in their interest... as happened a couple of years ago when the public suddenly became clearly interested in mileage and smaller vehicles, but the car companies, in lock step with the oil companies, produced to their detriment too many SUV's, and they started to pile up unsold, which brought their prices down. It was OK for the SUV buyers as it made them more affordable.

By the time the car manufacturers realizes their strategy was flawed, they had entered a mindset which killed any creative thought, so instead of really doing the right thing, the only way they seemed able to react was to create the 'small sized SUV'... no real advancement there, just a repackaging of existing design.

__________

Meanwhile, in the real world beyond these interlocking interests, other ideas languish lacking capital to get them over to the public. Electrics were actually released, and then taken off the market before the supportive infrastructure could develop.

Your question is excellent, as it goes to the heart of so many of America's problems. We have the engineering ingenuity,
but the greed bottleneck subverts progress. And the public, ever in the dark, makes the absurd mistake of supporting oil men as leaders, who make the situation worse by creating legislation that preserves the oil interests stranglehold on the nation.

Oil is the root problem of most of America's current difficulties. It's running out, it's causing wars, it leads to dynamic and unending inflation of all goods and services.

We need to let the best minds loose and find the answer that does not entail just more concessions to the oil lobbies.

2007-09-25 03:34:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

The technology exists to make an automobile that gets 100 miles per gallon, or runs on alternative fuels, and lasts for twenty years.
In 1909, an automobile called the 'Stanley Steamer' ran on water.
In 1948, a man named Tucker produced about fifty prototypes of a car that exceeded all safety standards. The "Big Three" automakers promptly put him out of business.
In the early 1930's an engineer at the Bowser Pump Co. in Fort Wayne, Indiana allegedly invented an automobile engine capable of going 100 miles or more on a gallon of gas. The legend goes that when the "Big Three" automakers found out about it, they bought the patent rights and 'shelved' it.
Just as American politics are dominated by the "Republicrats", the American automobile industry (including all those 'foreign' nameplates) dominates the auto market. As long as they can sell gullible Americans vehicles that squander gasoline and wear out quickly, their corporate avarice will overcome their common sense. American cars aren't built for pure function or utility; they're built to satisfy the lust of the American motorist. And, they're designed only to last until the motorists' love affair with his new car flounders. "Planned obsolescence" forces many motorists to trade in their 'new' car for another one as soon as the ashtrays are full.
If the American automobile industry built a car that lasted twenty years and got 100 mpg, the automobile manufacturing industry and "big oil" would be downsized to ten percent of what they are now. There is no interest in serving the public best interests: only in selling the public more vehicles. If they could, Ford, Chrysler and GM would pass a law requiring motorists to buy a new car every year. If they could, "Big Oil" would pass a law requiring all motorists to drive gas-guzzling SUVs. The sad speculation is that those two industries' lobbyists are probably hard at work trying to get those laws implemented!
"Big Oil" doesn't want you driving a fuel-efficient car; the "big three" automakers don't want you driving the same car for two decades. It would dramatically impede their greed. -RKO- 09/25/07

2007-09-25 04:05:09 · answer #2 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 1 0

I honestly think it is complacency. We think "We're America, The Greatest Country Ever" and loose sight of the technological, and industrial advances/changes in foreign auto industries. This complacency combined with what is obviously a marriage between the auto and oil industry are impeding progress for the American auto industry.

Edit: The Union builds the cars and are not decision makers. They have families to feed. The executives make the decisions and are not helping the American auto industry, let alone the economy of Michigan.

2007-09-25 03:30:24 · answer #3 · answered by Yahoo Sucks 5 · 0 0

Because we can't make one to those specifications and keep it inexpensive enough for someone to buy. Nobody else makes such a car, either.

Moreover, the technological achievements you've mentioned were very closely-defined and very well-funded, and both were done largely within military and quasi-military establishments. An automobile that must be sold on the open market in competition with many others is another story altogether. There's no conspiracy; it's just a very difficult job.

2007-09-25 03:30:17 · answer #4 · answered by 2n2222 6 · 1 1

Well gee, then we wouldn't be able to rely on foreign oil to run the damn things which would put the damn President in a quagmire because then what would he do with his time and how would he be able to start wars in other countries if we didn't need to rely on them anymore? I'm sure American car companies feel the squeeze of just how far they can go when trying to devise an energy efficient, gas saving vehicle, especially if it has to be passed thru legilature that this car would not run on gas. It seems to me that right now, whatever cars have been devised may be terrific on gas mileage, but crap out after a few years because they just can't be built properly. I'm sure one day some genious will figure it out and they better do it soon, because with gas prices on the rise on a daily basis, people are going to be forced to leave their cars at home and start using mass transit or buy a bicycle.

2007-09-25 03:30:07 · answer #5 · answered by kikio 6 · 0 2

the auto manufacturers and oil companies are too strong and dictate what kind of products can be released to the general public.

2007-09-25 03:26:54 · answer #6 · answered by Tanked 5 · 1 1

how can you say that?
America made
Mustang GT
Dodge Viper???
all the dodge SRT
but most brands build for families and consumer friendly vehicles. besides persons who have the money will mostly chose an European brand, for status symbol...
but of course the technology is there, only the marketing not.

2007-09-25 03:29:55 · answer #7 · answered by GreenEyes 7 · 0 3

cause the oil co and the manufacturers are in cahoots

2007-09-25 03:23:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers