|
Carmakers don't do what is best for anyone else. They do not make the best cars for the environment, people's finances, or to minimize road congestion. Manufacturers and dealership only want to make as much money as possible. Do they attempt to accomplish this by selling $13,000 lunchboxes with manual transmissions, windows, seats, and an AM radio? No, they hardly stock their cheapest cars. You tell yourself that you want one and you are going to save money, gas, and space. Shucks! They are all out! Well, the next-smallest is only a couple thousand more, is only a little bigger, and gets almost the same fuel economy!
Then the salesman convinces you that you need the luxury package and perhaps upgrade to an even larger vehicle, which is only a little more expensive, and a little less fuel efficient.
If the dealership does have the $13,000 car in stock, hardly anyone will want it, it is not designed to attract buyers, but they can say they offered a small, inexpensive, and fuel-efficient car, but nobody wanted it.
Yes, in the United States people generally want larger things than people in other countries. People here are taller than in many countries, so to a point it is reasonable. I always figured that people in Afghanistan were small and short was because they could not afford enough food. They also drove thirty year-old Corollas because it was all they could afford.
People in the U.S. have Affluenza, or just more available credit than sense. Purchase a vehicle they can afford with cash? [Excuses] They purchase the most expensive thing they can finance.
Then they will trade it in before it is paid off.
A while ago we compared a Camry and some Toyota SUV. I forget which. The two vehicles were comparable in every way, except you can wear your giant sombrero for Cinco de Mayo.
Sold!
Why doesn't the Camry get significantly better fuel economy than the SUV? The only math that adds up is that they have a larger profit margin in the larger vehicle and are successfully convincing customers to go that way.
|