Keith,

I don't totally disagree with your comment, however no amount of safety gizmo can ultimately replace proper driver training and education. These devices are a placebo and makes politicians feel that they have done something other than take free vacations from special interest groups.

The US has done a fine job burdening the auto industry to compensate for not doing the hard work. Anti-lock brakes are pointless if people don’t know how to apply them correctly, stability control matter not if someone panics, seat belts can save you if you don’t have them on and even Volvo’s auto braking system can be circumvented. All the equipment adds cost and weight but in many circumstances are worthless without a properly educated driver that understands the advantages and limitations and then given a safe environment in which to experiment the limits of a car in an emergency situation. [I would be happy if someone trained SUV drivers how to freak’n park or get out of a spot]

At the end of the day, you cannot save everyone no matter what gizmo you place on a car. Just listen to the NY stations on Saturday morning to listen to auto vehicle deaths from Friday night -- it becomes a point of diminishing returns and value unless we have better driver training -- Europe has far less safety equipment required in their car but fewer accidents -- in the US we want to pass the blame or responsibility to someone else -- nobody wants to actually tackle the real solution.

I will admit that even with training you will not save everyone, but good equipment without competent drivers gives you very little except the “perception” of safety of which many will temp the equipments limits and fail in a deadly way.

↓↑report

I can't agree with you, Jason. Automakers anywhere is looking at the bottom line. They will not voluntarily spend extra dollars on safety equipment, unless it's profitable to them. Having their operating costs reduced is only a benefit to them. It wasn't that long ago that the reason for rising sales in the Japanese auto industry, was blamed on low wages. Even so, the cars sell at comparable prices. Actually the trend is for Japanese cars to be higher priced. GM & Ford have the alternative to build cars in Canada where there is health care. Instead they are closing down those factories.

↓↑report

Yea take a massive burden off the shoulders of the Big Three - and put it right on you and me. No thanks. If the 2.8 can't negotiate reasonable health care packages with the union then let them suffer.

The UAW wouldn't even go for nationalized health care. Why would they trade their 100% coverage with 0% deductibles and 0% copay and 0% premium for socialized medicine with it's huge tax increases (right our of your pay check or in the price of everything you buy), long waits for care, and deductibles and copays? And where would the Canadians go to get their healthcare? You would kill the medical economies of Seattle, Detroit, Buffalo, etc.

↓↑report

Frank...I dont know about you but my father is a UAW member (skilled trades/electrician...not an overpaid factory line worker). We don't have 100% coverage. We have to shell out just as much as anyone else for prescriptions and co pays and whatever.

And after talking to some of the guys he works with, some of them would rather take more cuts before they put Ford out of business and they lose their jobs. His local has already taken a ton of concessions.

↓↑report

Back in the 1950s, when the UAW wanted a portable healthcare benefit, the Big Three decided it was cheaper to pay for fringe benefits (healthcare) themselves rather than raise wages. It was, back when the average worker's age was low. Now the Big Three reap what they sowed, and are looking to the government for a fix. They'll probably get it, too, even as they whine about fuel efficiency standards and mandated safety features.

By the way, the idea that safety features are a placebo doesn't square with the stats on driver mortality, which suggest that they are an effective alternative to driver safety programs. Maybe those should be mandatory too. No, wait, that would be coercive.

↓↑report

You think the Big 3 are the only ones whining about fuel efficiency standards? If I am not mistaken, the imports are also whining.

And yes, driver safety courses should be mandatory. Our drivers education programs around this country are a joke.

And in a sense safety features are a placebo. People think that if they have more airbags or whatever, they don't have to be as safe of drivers as they once were. Watch how people drive right after it snows. They are maniacs. There are people out there who have the mentality that it doesn't matter how they drive, they have the airbags and braking systems to help if something arises. Also, if I remember correctly, driving fatalities are up.

↓↑report

Frank "socialized medicine with it's huge tax increases (right our of your pay check or in the price of everything you buy), long waits for care, and deductibles and copays?"

Frank, put your mind where your mouth is. Canadians would scream if Medicare was not provided. The long waiting periods is because any Canadian can receive medical help and a lot do. The USA has shorter waiting periods because few can afford it. The tax burden is a monthly fee of about $48 per person. If you can't afford that, you are still covered.

↓↑report

Barney, you must be smoking something. $48 a month in taxes for helathcare coverage? Come on, most cell phone plans are more expensive than that.

↓↑report

Sweet!

↓↑report

I remember reading an article about how if you factor in inflation, cars are significantly cheaper today than they were in the mid 1950s. If it is true, goes to show how things really aren't all that bad.

Yeah, prices may be going up on cars. But if I am not mistaken, prices for pretty much everything else in this world are going up.

↓↑report

Yep... No constitutional power for saving failing businesses, unless you crank the rack a few more turns and stretch the commerce clause.

Yeah, I know "B-b-b-but the poor workers who would lose their jobs at the factories!"

If your path to personal prosperity is built not on education or a marketable skill, but rather involves joining a band of thugs who strong-arm a corporation into acquiescing to your wide platter of whims (even to the point of pushing for state laws to codify the power of these thugs), the time has arrived for a attitudinal readjustment. Mao's forces will do it all for a nickel and an eggroll.

↓↑report