Possibility of losing jobs due to CAFE

Status
Not open for further replies.
If I understand this correctly, Nissan wants to keep its made in Mexico Sentra classified as a foreign car, and not re-classified as a domestic car, so that its Japanese import fleet can meet US CAFE regs.

To me, "domestic" means "American made", in this country (USA) anyway. What kind of a B.S. law is this? Cars made in other countries and imported into the U.S. are clearly not "domestic", they are "foreign". This semantics exercise is a typical underhanded political trick.

While this may help Nissan beat the CAFE regs, it may also confuse the car buying public. Another solution would be to do away with CAFE and let market forces (ie gas prices) determine the combined average fuel economy of a given manufacturer's offerings.
 
This is the typical wolf cry from the auto companies anytime they are forced with a mandate to make their products better. Guess what-- the cost of fuel due to our wasteful ways is costing millions of jobs already. These auto jobs are a drop in the bucket. So even if true (which it isn't) better fuel efficiency will create many more jobe. If Nissan can't live with it another company will (and prosper in the process)
 
have had and have both, the swift and the metro and the only thing that was infearior on the metro was the 3cyl that suzuki never offered. THEY WERE AND ARE THE SAME CAR. Under every hood it says SUZUKI on the label, metro & swifts. They don't even make them any more, production stopped with the 2001 model. am on #5 and #7 now, #1 88Sprint 254000 #2 GEO 108000 when the tree fell in front of at 50+mph, #3 GEO got tired of the color after 31000-PURPLE, #4 GEO 240000+(4cyl)and still running(original clutch and rear brakes) #5 SWIFT 59000 so far #6 74000 sold after facing the realty of the 3cyl(relived forgotten memories of the first 3 with 3cyl's) #7 SWIFT 01 42000 saving it for the dimize of #5 hope these Two will last the next 10 years until retirement. Great cars being I'm so cheap and don't exspect much in life these days. They are both paid for and I LOVE IT!! along with the 40+ mpg just got to keep watching out for them fallin trees when the wind blows here in the NW!
 
try this again. AVEO and it's made in Korea by Dawoo, the company that GM bought after their Bankrupcy last year. The new cars that Suzuki is marketing are also made by them. The FORENSA and the VERONA - both made by Dawoo in Korea. At least the Metro/Swifts were made in Canada just across from Detroit in Ingersol, Ontario Canada.
 
CAFE is a good thing. All autos should fall under CAFE. Otherwise we'll have a 2010 vehicles that still can't get 20 mpg. We're still using mildly refined technology from the early century to power these vehicles. Without some artificial incentive ...we'll still be using the same refined stoneage technology until a "natural" insentive is in place (decreasing oil reserves).

Do you wait until your well is dry before looking for another source??? And would you NOT impose rationing (CAFE) even if it cost you jobs ...for the sensible precautionary action to assure that you have more time to find a new sources (new technologies) of water??

Gotta throw that Rubmypalmagain "let's have a party and let the future pay for it" mentality out the door. Even though our nation, aside from our domestic auto industry, has been deindustrialized ...we consume more energy than ever. How can this be???

Sooner or later our romance with the sacred cow (the automobile) is going to enter the "push comes to shove" zone. Why wait until you're forced to act ($$$$$)?
 
A few decades ago the doomsayers were warning that all the oil would be used up by the early 21st century. Today the scientists are saying that there is at least 90 years of oil left, so we will get to 2100 quite easily. In fact, the closer we get, the further away we are as science discovers more reserves and improves extraction methods.

Any time you use up a non renewable resource, no matter how plentiful, it is common sense to conserve. On the other hand, this should be balanced against the costs. Higher mpg flyweight cars generate more highway deaths. The flyweight cars might are not as safe, it's just that simple. The internal combustion engine is not efficient, but it is cheap and reliable and very highly developed.

When the new low sulphur diesel fuels come along in a couple of years, I believe we will see a shift to diesel much as diesel now has more than 50% market share for new cars in the UK for example. This alone will increase the fleet average mpg. Besides, you could run biodiesel which is a renewable resource.

Keep burning up the oil and enjoying cheap transport and get on with your life. I can't predict how much technology will advance in the next 50 years, but I am sure it will. Doomsayers have no imagination and will be proven wrong - again.

Keith.
 
quote:

Originally posted by keith:
. Higher mpg flyweight cars generate more highway deaths. The flyweight cars might are not as safe, it's just that simple. Keith.

The reason for this is two-fold. First they run to the much larger SUV's . If all cars were small the death rate would be lower. The other reason is that inexperienced drivers tend to have the small cars (less cost, higher power ratio)

Again I don't think the problem is fuel running out I think its the quality of the air that will be out of control as the Chinese start (and they already are)using more cars. The all lung related diseases are up exponentially over the last 20 years.
 
quote:

Doomsayers have no imagination and will be proven wrong - again.

On the other hand ...the Titanic was thought to be unsinkable. It and its two twins all sank. It would have been nice for 1200 people IF a doomsdayer/chicken little had screamed "the sky is falling!!" and prepared for the unthinkable.

Here's one thing that most of us never consider. What if we, as a species, reach some "dead end" in terms of technology development? No cold fusion, no warp drive, no other "magic"? We'll find out that the native American was probably the most advanced human on the planet.
 
I can't understand why we have to conserve crude oil. I say let's use it up! Why bother going through the pains of conservation. We're only delaying the inevitable. Once it's used up, we won't have the tension of keeping the Mideast in peace and harmony. Our future will find a way to get around without oil. If it'll be expensive to travel, then so what?... it'll be expensive for everybody and everyone will be on a level playing field. Cities and mass transit will be redefined.
 
Even if SUV's were banned, small cars offer less protection in accidents with solid, fixed objects. You've still created a situation that costs lives compared to the alternative. No way around that.

I'm not saying the interaction between the two types of vehicles doesn't make a difference, just pointing out that there is still a cost involved if you elect to get rid of them.
 
quote:

Originally posted by MNgopher:
Even if SUV's were banned, small cars offer less protection in accidents with solid, fixed objects. You've still created a situation that costs lives compared to the alternative. No way around that.

I'm not saying the interaction between the two types of vehicles doesn't make a difference, just pointing out that there is still a cost involved if you elect to get rid of them.


I've read through hundreds of pages of government statistics and deaths caused by cars hitting fixed objects is at least a magnitude less than vehicle-vehicle interactions. Also, once you get above a 3200 lb vehicle, crumble zones, interior design and integrity, passive restraints will correlate much more to survivability than simply a vehicle that weighs more. (By the way, we already went through that experiment in the 40's and 50's when cars we're built bigger, heavier and stronger but statistics demonstrated the same or higher injuries and fatalities.)

I have no beef with people who have a legitimate use of large vehicles, but I cringe everytime I hear someone state that the only way to be safe in a vehicle is to drive a huge 6000 lb SUV.

It almost seems like Americans feel empty now that we no longer have an arms race with the Soviets. Instead, it's who can drive the biggest heaviest SUV to the grocery store or soccer field.

Oh...and the latest craze, at least where I live, a Suburban or Expedition isn't big enough nowadays, you have to own a 6800 lb Hummer to be King of the Road.
rolleyes.gif
 
Typical most Japaneese companys do not cry wolf loudly like DOmestic companys do. They will usualy say it once then they follow through ! I would be much more nervious about Nissan saying this then I would if it was say Ford!
 
By todays safety standards, little cars are still a **** of alot safer than all cars were just afew years ago. Thats 'few' by my life's standards being 50 years old. My younger years saw the advant of seat belts, shoulder belts(when they were seperate items, what a pain) padded dashs, disc brakes, power brakes/steering, air bags when the thought was you would NEVER have to wear a seat belt again with them, dual master cylinders/anti-lock brakes, colapsable steering colums(prior to them the driver most always died in a headon where now today it's proably one of the safer places to be in a car in one),child seats-not when I was little, it was sit down and stay put, the safeist was when the car was full so there was less space to be tossed around in. Oh and there is also better headlites, side lites, better asfault, wider roads to drive on with reflective lines now showing even the other edge of the road along with better street lites(whens the last time you heard fo someone hitting a bridge enbuttment-you just don't anymore with the newer guard rails being used) and radial tires that last 50+ and than some in milage(if you got 10+ on a bias tire you were doing good in the early years). Do not have enough time or space to go no any further but I could. 1967 saw the big advancement in the putting of safety equipment on cars, **** prior to that you even had to pay extra for a heater, wipers, or carpeting etc. The main thing with all vehicles today is what you hit and how you hit it and this is coming from someone who is on #7 Metro/Swift even after walking away from hitting a fallen tree across the road at 50+MPH and being polevaulted though the air and land nosed into the roadway 57 feet further down the road driving #2 metro(yes it had a slight bend in it after that but no glass broke and as I said I did walk away from it and got a free ride home from the sheriff along with a nite off from work).
 
Kestas. my only guess on consevation is an analogy to healthcare, " Why care, we're all going to die?"

While this is true we are always looking for a bridge (treatment) until the cure is found.
After all, modern medicine is just a stall tactic.

A more appropriate question should be:"Why don't we buy more oil and store it while it's cheap and develop altenative energy at a crisis pace?"
 
What good are the cafe laws anyway when manufacturers (GM) can simply buy a couple RO-RO's full of cheap, stripped-down imports (Suzuki swift), slap their name on it (GEO metro)lower their cafe numbers and call it a day. The GEO metro is inferior to the swift and is poorly supported by GM.
 
quote:

Originally posted by ralan:
What good are the cafe laws anyway when manufacturers (GM) can simply buy a couple RO-RO's full of cheap, stripped-down imports (Suzuki swift), slap their name on it (GEO metro)lower their cafe numbers and call it a day. The GEO metro is inferior to the swift and is poorly supported by GM.

Have you seen the latest small car from Chevrolet for $9,999.
I saw the commercial last night and when they show it sideways I cringed. Almost Zero crumple zone in the rear. Your in the back seat hope you have you insurance paid up if it gets rear ended.
 
quote:

Even if SUV's were banned, small cars offer less protection in accidents with solid, fixed objects. You've still created a situation that costs lives compared to the alternative. No way around that.

And I say, "SO"? Let's all get Kenworths refitted with airbag suspensions and put the fixed objects at risk. To pad the environment with these mobile fortresses is just way too wasteful. I would think that the biggest factor in highway fatalities is the driver(s) and not the vehicle whether the death is from interacion with another ..or with a fixed object.

You would see this love for the big "safe" vehicle errode quickly if a $2-3 tax was added to a gallon of gas. Heck, I truly believe that we have become MORE wasteful in the consumption end of the whole evolution in autos. Sure the econoboxes are more efficient ...but I believe that my 75 350 sbc C20 could do better than its counterpart today.

If I ever buy a full size pickup ..it will be a diesel. I'll gladly pay $3500 more instead of putting $50 a week in the tank.
 
You're actually buying those threats by Nissan, that garbage based on fiction, that CAFE is threatening their fiscal viability? Nissan has had since 1975 to address these CAFE standards, but would rather resort to empty threats. Let 'em. Nissan's been a second rate player struggling to retain their market share for a long time, always in the trail of Toyota and Honda's innovation and quality, and bullying threats won't change this. If this is their vision and roadmap for success, Nissan can jump off a cliff as far as I'm concerned. If Nissan can't compete, let 'em lose market share and fade away, as the market is evidently encouraging in how car buyers are "voting through their wallets."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom