Re: OT: Auto CEO Paychecks

On Nov 20, 3:02 pm, Chuck <cclawso...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 20, 11:36 am, "DGDevin" <dgde...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





Dave wrote:
Much of what you say here is inaccurate.  For example, station wagons
are/were cars.  SUVs are usually built on truck chassis, which is
what has kept them from having to comply with efficiency and certain
safety standards required of passenger vehicles.  Because of their
high stance, they are more dangerous to occupants--due to likelyhood
of rollover--and to other drivers--because of where SUVs impact cars
in a collision.  And, they're tougher on roads.  Minivans and
crossovers are based on car platforms. They're usually significantly
more efficient than SUVs--even compatably-sized SUVs.  And, they
usually hold a lot more stuff than comparably-sized SUVs.

Nothing I said was inaccurate, I merely didn't deal with the additional
issues you have raised.

The hazards presented by SUVs in traffic accidents are irrelevant to a
discussion of environmental impact.  Pickup trucks represent similar
dangers, so do many commercial trucks, yet they aren't singled out despite
their tendency to ride up over lower vehicles in accidents and/or roll over.
For that matter a big old Dodge or whatever is going to mash a Mazda in an
accident, so should we get excited over the dangers older cars present to
those driving smaller vehicles?  The SUV has become a convenient symbol for
those who know what's best for everyone else whether their objections to
these vehicles make sense or not.

And it remains that Subaru drivers don't seem to be on the list of
planet-destroyers despite the poor mileage their vehicles deliver.  Why is
that?  And speaking of inaccurate, what does it matter that an SUV is built
on a light truck chassis if in the end it gets the same mileage that a
Pontiac or Ford station wagon delivered back in the day?  Current smaller
station wagons typically get better mileage than SUVs, but back when wagons
were popular they sure weren't the choice for someone wanting to save money
on gas.  And where do I find these super-efficient minivans you refer to?
Since when is 20mpg in the city something to crow about?

Then you mention the Geo Metro, which is just silly, because nobody is
suggesting we all get sub-compacts.

Why not?  If you're going to create a list of vehicles people don't need to
own, why stop at mid-sized vehicles?  Why should a single person with no
family to haul around be allowed to own a four-door vehicle that seats five?
Doesn't saving the planet demand that everyone drive the smallest and most
fuel-efficient vehicle possible?

Reminds me of an ex-neighbor of
mine...used to drive a VW Cabrio.  Then gets a Ford Expedition.  When
I asked her about it, she justified the piggish Expedition by saying
that she needed a larger vehicle to schlep around the family.  Maybe
so, but did she really need to up-size that much?  The real answer
was that her new job gave her the vehicle to use and paid for gas.

I consider such vehicles absurd, one mom and one kid in a Suburban or
Escalade or whatever is a ridiculous sight.  And I've yet to meet anyone who
owned a Hummer who didn't appear to be compensating for something.  One of
the funniest things I've seen in years was someone having trouble parking a
full-size Hummer.  When he finally got it parked and opened the door it was
a balding, pot-bellied, middle-aged dweeb who clearly had never driven
off-road in his life--exactly what you'd expect.   I don't disagree that
such vehicles are extravagant status symbols, I'm just pointing out that
lumping them and all other SUVs into one category doesn't make sense.

Well *** DG, who's trying to make sense?
I drive a 2000 Passat wagon,mostly for payload for the band- all of my
stuff plus PA fits very well.I  wouldn't mind SUVs if they had some
sort of purpose, but they don't for most people. The damage to
infrastructure caused by a generation of these overweight vehicles,
is, however, inescapable. It's as if the national diet had suddenly
become supersized, extra spicy burritos. Imagine the effect on toilets
and sewer lines nationwide. Part of that is in jest (although my anger
at Detroit is not). Still, statistical pile-ons like this are
entertaining. Years ago, when the phone company here in CO decided to
go to a 10 digit system, we estimated the money saved by (then) US
West just by making their customers dial instead of adapting their
physical and digital switching. The amount was in the skajillions. The
cost to the consumer, measured at 1 second per call, per caller, per
year, was also in the skajillions.You KNOW the corporate bean counters
do the same math, and that's pretty much was has happened to our auto
industry. They've been waiting for someone (meaning us) to do the
dialing for them.
Chuck- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I noticed libs mostly drive foreign cars, yet they sure do like those
UAW votes of members they are throwing in front of the bus by driving
a foreign car.

.

Loading