Car Conspiracies Claim Cataclismic Consumer Costs

OK, I said I would talk about the auto-oil conspiracy, here it is.

I am not a general subscriber to conspiracy theories, but some come along and scream, WHY NOT!!! The auto industry and the oil industry both claim that there is no conspiratorial link between them, but I would like to address some basic questions and let you, my readers (oh how few you are) either agree with me or tell me why I should take a flying leap (besides the obvious , that it would be fun :P to you Charlie :D).

Point one. We have had electrical and steam cars almost as long as we have had gas powered, and in the case of steam, longer. OK, so steam didn't work out. You had to have a coal bin and if they had kept it, it would have raise the cost of coal and a conspiracy between THOSE two countries. But the electric car industry had remained relatively stagnate until just recently.

We have batteries that fit in the palms of our hands and can run sophisticated computers for days, yet we can't get batteries to fit into a car and run it for more than a few hundred miles.On the surface and to me this seems illogical. Why don't we have the battery technology to run automobiles longer?

Point Two: The US government had declared, almost 35 years ago, that the automobile industry must increase fuel efficiency. Yet, still, cars get a paltry 30 MPG average. 30 MPG! That is moronic when you stop to consider cars that, in the past, have had better fuel efficiency than this. Far better. The 1990 - 1993 Geo Metro was a 3 cylinder engine that had sufficient acceleration. OK it wasn't 0-60 in 2.3 more like 10.2but who REALLY need higher. Anyway, the metro's fuel efficiency was 50 MPG. Honestly, 50 MPG is worth a lesser acceleration, when you consider how much time the average person sits and waits for a 80 second window to merge into 10 mph traffic.

Then, in about 1993, Chevrolet bought the Metro and put in a 4-cylinder engine. Somehow, doing this reduced the mileage to 31 MPG. That's a HUGE difference. For an "economy" car to get that mileage should be a crime. And yes, it should be considering the "auto industry should increase fuel efficiency" statement of the Carter Administration. But, I'm still trying to wrap my mind around a 19 MPG loss by just adding a cylinder.

Point 3: As the price of gas went higher, MPG went lower and the Auto Industry manufactured a pushed more vehicles that got lower efficiency. I'm talking about those "Marvelously safe" SUVs, that turned out to not be safe at all. The only thing they had going for them was s**tty fuel economy and big price. It has been a curious phenomenon I have been seeing all my life. As the price of oil has climbed, the fuel economy has declined. Every time.

Point 4: Back to electric cars. We now have a wider choice of electric cars, but they are priced prohibitively high. The Auto industry says it's to offset a low demand. What a great excuse. When you price something so high that only the rich can afford it, and market it to the poor (read low class), the only ones who can afford it (read the high class) won't because it's too low brow for them. Regardless of the fact that I have met more high class people in the low income range than I have in the high income range. (I had to put that second "range" in to avoid a dangling participle.)

So, there are my 4 points. Argue among yourselves. Hitting is allowed, but only if you do it hard and don't hit me.

Peace up

Charles

Gott spielt verful nicht mit dem Universum. A.E.