RSS
Home
Auto-Tech Rant: 4 bad ideas for jump-starting the auto business
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
In reference to FastCompany.com’s article about “25 Way to Jump-Start the Auto Business,” I feel compelled to respond; especially toward those proposals that dismiss the many technology solutions by the auto industry that are already in play or about to be played.
First, I think the site’s attempt to get more than 60 people with some connection to the broader automotive economy for their best ideas is noble to say the least. Nevertheless, the following short and long-term solutions to the auto crisis are just plain dumb, in my opinion.
After 39 years of association with the industry, I think I've earned the right to throw in my two cents. So, here it goes:
Examining the "$4 gallon" solution
The first one I must challenge came from Giorgio Rizzoni, director, Ohio State University's Center for Automotive Research. He was quoted in the article as saying, "Impose a floor on gas prices, a flexible tax that keeps the price at the pump at least $4 a gallon.
In his wisdom, the strategy has been proven to lead consumers to purchase fuel-efficient vehicles, and let automakers plan for the long term. Really? You mean like Europe? In the meantime, you and I will suffer immense financial pain. What does he care? He has a job and a nice salary to afford it.
His approach shows a total lack of outgoing concern for real people; it stifles auto production and limits, not supports, the profits needed to advance the needed technologies. Besides, we are a mobile society, because we have the technology to make it so.
Furthermore, many Americans like the freedom that cars provide; and they deserve the right to use it without a fuel penalty; and, in latent liberal speak, that's another tax.
Examining the “Pay by the mile for auto insurance” scheme
Jason Bordoff, policy director, the Brookings Institution was quoted as saying, "Let's change fixed-rate auto insurance to per-mile pricing. With no limit on driving, people tend to drive more. We estimate an 8% reduction in overall miles driven. It would take about a dollar-per-gallon tax increase on fuel to produce the same result. Two-thirds of households would save money, and it would make it easier to buy a second or third car."
Let’s see, the goal is to reduce driving? Then out the other end of his mouth, he wants the savings to buy a second or third car. Make sense. We’re already restricted by gasoline costs, reduced jobs, and lease mileage.
I agree my auto insurance is a burden on my living. Truth is my rates are based more on where I live and park my car than how much I drive. Park in downtown Detroit or Chicago and see how much your rates go up.
Examining the "urban outfitters" approach
I have to criticize the Fast Company staff directly for this one, as it is their favorite vision of the future. They quoted Sharon Roerty's, director of the National Center for Bicycling and Walking for saying, "Imagine a young professional driving her GM car from her suburban home to a well-maintained train station, taking her GM collapsible bike from the trunk, boarding the GM train to the city, unfolding the bike in 15 seconds, and riding to work."
Let’s see, drive a car, then take a train and use your bike. Three forms of transportation to make a single trip seems a bit eclectic and inefficient to me. That’s great in warm climates, but not a great idea in northern cities.
Examining the "Sell Your Car" approach
Is it surprising that Jane Holtz Kay, author of “Asphalt Nation: How the Automobile Took Over America and How We Can Take it Back” wants us to just rid ourselves of cars all together? She says, "I sold my car when I wrote Asphalt Nation, so for me, saving the auto industry is not a high priority. I'm more interested in promoting cleaner, friendlier mobility, like bikes and public transportation."
I guess what’s good for Jane Holtz has to be good for the nation.
Final examiner comments
Many of the 25 ideas of the FastCompany article are indeed reasonable; especially the one from the Dirty Job guy that displays true respect for work. However, the four that I chose to challenge are tainted; and that's how I define bad.
Notice how many of these bad ideas and those that bordered on it came from academics or people with axes to grind against Detroit. No surprise there. In my opinion, academics couldn’t design a car let alone run an auto company. I especially doubt their ability to lead the industry or country with policy.
Furthermore, their ideas appear to be aligned more with socialism and big-government politics than auto industry solutions. The point is they lean more on touchy-feely than technical approaches. Not every problem can be solved socially.
Also notice how each of these so-called solutions for the auto industry came from people who have self interests in conflict with the industry. All are political, socialistic or just plain discriminatory against the older generation who cannot bike or have trouble walking. Besides, haven't they noticed even China is moving away from bicycles?
Also keep in mind, folks, the elderly still have to get to the trains and the busses; and they're not capable of hauling their bike let alone riding one. Point: Personal mobility and true freedom requires many forms.
This is America for crying out loud! We have the multiplicity of technology to make personal mobility happen without destroying an entire auto industry, not to mention the lives associated with it. The automobile is, after all, the most convenient of the entire transportation industry arsenal; and that convenience is the essence of mobility and our personal freedoms.
The issue should not be over getting rid of the automobile and replacing it with bikes and trains, but making it energy efficient, cost effective and just plain fun again. That's right. Taking a joy ride is great therapy in this world. Why do we have to give it up?
Author's Note: Technology changes faster than you or I can peruse the net. So, I intend to do more than just reheat what you can already learn on your own through a simple Google search. I’m an examiner; and that means I perform research and/or autopsies on technical ideas and gadgets pertinent to the automobile to gain insight on feasibility and practicality based on my 39 years in the auto industry. Hope you enjoy! You may contact me at my personal site, AuthorFrank.com
More About:
Detroit ·
electric vehicle ·
gas mileage ·
Noteworthy People ·
Innovations ·
Auto and Transporation Industry
Related Articles:
Comments
Why is “New-GM” always surprised these days? Do the two failed-sales deals for Saturn and Saab imply an out-of-touch leadership or just …
There is a time to write and a time to read. There is a time to ask and a time to refrain from asking. This week, it's time to publish merely with the …
