Car safety stats (risk of death vs risk of killing other drivers)

have you ever been to europe? gas taxes have a *dramatic* effect over there!

you're dead right there.

all detroit has to do is import the smaller more economic vehicles they already make and sell very profitably in europe. the only reason they haven't done it so far is because mercenary jerks like wagoner were trying to get taxpayers to /pay/ him to do it! incredible chutzpah.

only if it's loaded on the heavy thirsty vehicles.

bankruptcy is not liquidation.

but you're dead right - gm should have the plug pulled on their life support. they have all the tools they need - including a full lineup of cheaper more fuel efficient vehicles they make in europe - to get back and survive if we stop giving them handouts.

only thing they seem to lack is willpower. and frankly, you can't really blame them - making money from showing up in washington and whining is a /lot/ easier than having to get up early in the morning and go bash metal for 8 hours a day.

jim beam wrote in news:W4mdnX8MseBxy0rUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@speakeasy.net:

Some ARE liquidations,some are not.(reorganizations)

GM making cars in Europe and Australia to bring into the US isn't going to help them in the US,because GM needs to make cars HERE in the US,employing US workers,who would then have money to buy new cars. No job,no new car,or many other purchases.

At least Honda and other Japanese makers actually make cars here in the US,using(paying) US workers.

liquidation is liquidation, /not/ bankruptcy. admittedly, bankruptcy law has different chapters which includes liquidation, but practitioners don't use the words interchangeably.

that is my point - they /can/ and /should/ make them here. they have all the designs, tooling, labor, r&d, testing EVERYTHING already done for their euro operations. all they need to do is retool domestic operations. all this whining about "oh, it'll take us time and money to redesign" is complete and utter BULLSHIT.

damned right.

yet another reason to pull the plug on detroit. /we/ taught the japanese how to make cars, but apparently we can't be bothered to learn our own lessons because whining in washington gives a much better return on investment. politicians have significant culpability in this debacle

- as long as they respond to lobbying dollars, and lobbying pays back about 1000:1 [which it commonly does - at taxpayer expense] - we'll never wean corporate america off the lobbying welfare teat.

jim beam wrote in news:jc6dnRhLjr1_wErUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@speakeasy.net:

"bankruptcies" DO use the word for both reorgs and liquidations.

See the very recent Ritz Camera bankruptcy;they're -liquidating- 300 of 700 stores inventories. (TODAY,FYI! there's a list of stores online.)

It DOES take money and time to retool/reconfigure a production line. stamping dies are different,castings are different,etc.

I don't disagree with this. (*corporate* lobbying AND "sweetheart deals" like BHOblama got for his wife's job and the property his Chicago house is on.)

IMO,people should be able to group together and lobby Congress;it's part of free speech.

Those SUVs don't maneuver very well and when they try, they tend to roll over.

Shortly after I put the '83 Civic FE on the road, I encountered a situation that it easily dealt with but a full sized car/truck could have had an unfortunate conclusion.

Accident avoidance sure has its advantages.

Uh, I said earlier that only in situations of equal circumstances. If it's gonna happen, give me more iron for protection. (The '55 has shoulder belts).

A circumstance that few want to admit to.

AFAIC, the guv'ment should get out of the business of tightly regulating mileage/safety standards to the point of micromanaging. If I were to buy a new vehicle where choice was available, it would only have seat belts period. Cost to benefit ratio just doesn't work (for me) otherwise.

I'm by nature a defensive driver. While others are chatting, texting, eating and are otherwise pre-occupied, I'm looking down the road a quarter of a mile anticipating potential disaster.

Yes, this country needs an energy program to largely replace fossil fuels not because of "sky is falling" climate change hysteria, but because of economic reasons to end the economic blacmail being imposed on us by every two bit dictatorship internationally.

Of course, if the world had two or three billion less in the way of population, most of today's problems wouldn't exist...

JT

the legal difference for a company is that with a liquidation means the company shuts down and all assets are sold. bankruptcy, chapter 11, means relief from debt and intention to continue in some modified form.

yes, but they've had two years already - they've simply FAILED to make a freakin' decision! and again, they do NOT have to design and test - they already have all the patterns ready to roll.

yeah, any person should be able to show up and make their point. but when money changes hands, that's a fundamental perversion of the point. i know - i've been in on stuff like this. you show up, a "contribution" is made, and you get what you want. freakin' ridiculously easy. and a fantastic system for those with money. but it's freakin' sucky system for those with only principles.

example: elsewhere in the world, auditors have unlimited personal liability for accounts they certify. here, auditors have limited liability. so, at the end of the day, wtf do they care if the accounts they sign and on which shareholders, pension funds, etc., are bullshit? the result is that company accounts are unreliable and opaque. that hurts the nation as we're seeing right now. but have you seen any accountants, apart from madoff's, finding themselves in the spotlight for presiding over what is effectively massive fraud? no, and the reason is that they show up in d.c., hand over a few more dollars, host a few more parties, and quietly lobby for what they want - immunity from having the buck stop on their desk. it's absolute bullshit and we all pay for it. reality is, they are the only people with the expertise to do that job - which is theoretically why auditors exist in the first place - they are very well compensated for it, and the principle is that someone outside a corporation can certify whether accounts are accurate. without that being reliable, corporations may as well certify their own accounts and let's all stop the charade. right now, the charade is that accountant audit is reliable. it isn't because they have no skin in the game. that needs to end. and the politicians that accept auditor dollars for enabling that charade need to be fired too.

insert: "rely"

Most states require brakes on trailers over a certain weight.

-- Ron

I'm beginning to think that lowered heavy but unibody SUV would be the safest vehicle of all. What's the heaviest car-based SUV, by the way?

maybe, but that weight is freakin' HUGE. ridiculously so. there's no reason, other than a few hundred bucks, why /every/ trailer shouldn't have brakes. and thus almost every car be able to pull one.

forget the suv - minivans are the way to go if you want capacity in a safe vehicle.

Grumpy AuContraire wrote in news:l%KBl.522734$ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

The idea is to drive so it doesn't happen.(high energy impacts.)

I agree. I want a car that weighs around 2500 lbs.,no more than 2.5 L,and has ~250 HP. B-) Actually,I want a 2001 Prelude with a turbo motor. ;-)

that's my style,too. Look ahead,think ahead,plan ahead.

We're not going to replace fossil fuels for autos;the alternatives simply don't have the same energy density of petro fuels.We need to open up our DOMESTIC oil production and refining,screw the environuts.

For fixed electric power generation,nuclear is the way to go;Best energy density of all,reliable,clean. I note solar proponents are not mentioning that solar panels only have a 30 yr life before they degrade,and also need WATER to keep them clean.

IMO,it's not the population,but their leaders that are the problem. Too many are kleptocracies,tyrannies,etc that do little or nothing to improve their citizens lives.

Zimbabwe is a fine example;as Rhodesia,it was the breadbasket of Africa,now they must import food. Farms that were productive are now underproducing,if producing at all. Extreme inflation rate,much suffering. But they have great natural resources.

Watch Martin Yan's food show on PBS,and see how many Chinese actually live;very primitive conditions.

jim beam wrote in news:t_qdnWPaoJG7FErUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@speakeasy.net:

SUV's original purpose was mainly off-road. Like the old Army Jeep and Land Rovers.Few people use them for that stuff these days.

and the old Land Rovers were only 4 cylinder! they still hauled a lot.

(just saw a neat PBS "Great Cars" show last week about Land Rovers! Today's was about BMW.)

Thus spake jim beam :

My Fit can drive circles around an F150. I'm more likely to avoid the accident.

this?

>

Somewhere I have some pictures I took during my days as an investigator for the Federal Railroad Administration. One was of a Suburban vs. an SD40. The burb is huge, but it's weight didn't do shit for it.

The claim of "heavy weight = safety" only hold up when you smack the heavy critter into or with a lighter car. Somebody is always heavier than you.

Well, for years the "Toast 3" were winners, touting the "greater safety" of their high margin trucks. Whcih they now can't give away. $12K off a Ram? WTF?!

Thus spake " snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com" :

The center of mass of my Fit is about 14 inches off the deck, two inches left of midline and about 11 inches ahead of the center of the car. My B-i-L's F350 is 44 inches up, about 4 inches left and about

18 inches aft of the front axle. Guess which is more stable.

this?

>

"Effective speed"? I shall peruse some of the SAE journals I have access to for this term.

BTW, why does California require more liability coverage for vehicles with a GVW of greater than 4400 lbs? Because they kill people?

Maxing out domestic oil wouldn't even keep up with demand if it increased at the pace of the last few decades. And it is a finite resource - the faster we use it, the sooner it runs out.

The economics of a pure electric vehicle pretty much limits it to the golf-cart city cars for the foreseeable future. No one I know is going to pay the cost for a highway capable electric car with a range of 100 miles between charges. (Although I did see a Tesla on the expressway the other day.) Hybrids are practical now and will only become more so as the price of oil increases.

Nuclear reactors only have a 30-50 year life and they are a lot bigger problem to dispose of. They also require water to cool them.

That is a great law. In Illinois, liability coverage is the same no matter what vehicle you drive. Hummer is the same as a Civic.

I'll disagree with this. While I am no huge fan of Chevy these days, the Volt has a very good chance of being successful.

40 Miles per charge on pure electric, and a small motor to charge the battery and extend the range to ~ 300 miles. The 40 miles is more than enough for most people. Of course, we'll have to see how it actually performs once released, but it's a nice looking car, and the pricetag will be affordable.

Tesla is working on releasing the model S, a 4-door that does a 45 minute charge for a 300 mile trip. The price is 50 Grand after the Federal tax credit, and the car is good looking, fast and efficient.

So what? Water is fine. And nuclear waste is much smaller than it used to be (ie: efficiency is growing). The disposal of said waste CAN be done in a clean, efficient manner. It is cleaner than the exhaust that is thrown up by coal plants...