Gashole Movie

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by bennelson

The movie also does point out the fact that manufacturers "only build what the public wants", and yet also heavily advertises those particular heavier vehicles, which causes the public to want them.

Why is it suprising that a manufacturer wants to sell more of their vehicles that they have a greater profit margin on?

[Arminius]

Ford has traditionally sold the Focus at a $250 loss. American car manufacturers have been unable to sell small cars at a profit. They have continued to sell them to meet government quotas. Hopefully that will change with higher gas prices. There are no monsters hiding in dark corners. Ignorant, near-sighted manufacturers? Certainly. But no monsters.

[Duffman]

Exactly Arminius,
Even before CAFE, the entry level models were loss leaders to get custormers into the showrooms where hopefully salesmen could steer them to higher more profitable models.

[LostCause]

How is it that Ford has always done poorly with small cars, yet the Japanese have (historically...) done well. The problem is that domestic car manufacturers are too conservative. They build what will guarantee a profit today without putting any though into innovation.

Ford made a killing with the Tin Lizzy until they built the same damn car for 30 years. Did they really think the Model T would be successful forever? When the Big 3 do put "thought" into a project (e.g. outsourcing the design of the EV1 to Aerovironment), they don't have the nerve to back it.

As far as Oil companies, the issue isn't them making a ton of cash...it is them making all the cash. It's great when 1% of the population owns the vast majority of the wealth...when you are in that 1%. I think we went wrong when America became involved in the cold war.

Commie bad...Money good. oogah oogah.

The haves are wondering why the have nots are complaining. Gee, I don't know.

- Lost Cause

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by LostCause

The haves are wondering why the have nots are complaining.

Err... No, not this former have-not, anyway. What I wonder is why so many have-nots seem to work overtime at avoiding anything that might get them into the haves. If you can't avoid school altogther, at least spend your time partying instead of learning something geeky like computer engineering or (gawd forbid!) physics. Spend all the money you do earn on consumer junk, racking up car payments & credit card bills instead of saving & investing. When housing prices go up, take out the biggest home equity line you can, and use it to finance your lifestyle...

[Arminius]

Originally Posted by LostCause

How is it that Ford has always done poorly with small cars, yet the Japanese have (historically...) done well. The problem is that domestic car manufacturers are too conservative. They build what will guarantee a profit today without putting any though into innovation.

They haven't made much on the cars either. They have made money, but not much.

As far as Oil companies, the issue isn't them making a ton of cash...it is them making all the cash. It's great when 1% of the population owns the vast majority of the wealth...when you are in that 1%. I think we went wrong when America became involved in the cold war.

That is a misconception. Oil companies do not own themselves. They are owned by common people, most of whom own them through their retirement accounts. In addition, most oil outside the US is produced by government-owned oil companies. China, for example, is the biggest oil producer. There are relatively few true oil companies, and the biggest, Exxon, only produces 2% of the world's oil production.

[LostCause]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Err... No, not this former have-not, anyway...

I do not condone stupidity or irresponsiblity. I just think that the haves are not made up of PhD's. The haves are made up of land developers, business owners, and financiers. An upper middle class American pares in comparison to the fortunes of the wealthy. People live comfortably today, but the income gap grows every year. The natural order of society seems to be stratification...

Originally Posted by Arminius

That is a misconception. Oil companies do not own themselves...

I don't have an issue with someone saving up for retirement through investments, but it irks me when owners fill their Hummers from oil company dividends. It is one thing to save for retirement, it is another to save for a lavish lifestyle caravaning around the nation in a $500,000 RV.

As far as government owned oil, I think you are right to an extent. My understanding is that Royal Dutch Shell essentially owns the infrastructure of the Nigerian oil industry and is sucking the nation dry. If I was a Nigerian and saw a leech, I'd want to get rid of the thing too.

Globalization means foreign companies own the land. I wouldn't be surprised to learn of Chinese-owned farms coming the U.S. in the near future. They already own half the country via debt...

Swedish citizens average some of the highest per capita income rates in the world, yet their society is much more egalitarian than ours. We've mistakenly taken Social Darwinism as truth and show pride in our choice as we rationalize our existence through it.

"I deserve more because I am better!"

No, you deserve to give back more because you are better! The United States is one of the most fundamentalist and devout religious nations on Earth yet it can't seem to realize that Jesus was not a wealthy king. I'm not religious, but even I can see the message...

Sorry for getting off topic, but I imagine this is the kind of dialogue that the movie is trying to create anyways...

- LostCause

[Arminius]

Ummm....

1. Sweden's per capita income is about 2/3 that of the US, after adjusting for the weak dollar.

2. 1/3 of the people work for the government.

3. 1/4 of their workforce has not worked in the past 3 years.

4. No new jobs have been created in the private sector since 1950.

5. None of the top 50 companies in their stock exchange were started after 1970.

6.It is one of the lowest in GDP in Europe (ranked 14th).

[LostCause]

1.) Sweden's nominal GDP per capita is higher than the United States. ($49,655 vs. $45,845)

Sweden's GDP (PPP) per capita is lower (~2/3) because the cost of living is much higher. ($36,494 vs. $45,845). Sweden is a welfare state.

2.) Sweden has a heavily mixed economy, what do you expect?

3.) Sweden had a severe economic downturn during the 1990's. It is not immune from economics, but policy changes have seen strong growth and low inflation in recent years.

Sweden's consideration of unemployment is also much more broad than the U.S. The "unemployed" (including the sick, housewives, military servicemen, students, etc.) account for ~20%. Unemployment as we consider it hovers around 4%.

4.) I highly doubt that.

5.) I can't speak of that, but it is irrelevant as Sweden has modernized its industry successfully.

6.) It also isn't swarming with people like France...

Ofcourse Sweden is not perfect, but they are definately a more progressive country than the United States. The U.S. will have cars getting 35mpg by 2012, Sweden will be well on its way in going Oil-Free.

The use of Sweden as the "model country" is irrelevant. America doesn't "suck" because Sweden is "better." America is dying because of the very nature of its design. Infinite growth is unsustainable. A select few are cashing out now to the burden of the masses, both of the present and future.

Marx claimed religion was the opiate of the masses. In our growingly secular society, money is the opiate of the masses. America won't be rich forever. What happens to the junkie when the goods dry up?

- LostCause

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by LostCause

I just think that the haves are not made up of PhD's. The haves are made up of land developers, business owners, and financiers.

Humm... Check your Forbes 500. Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, and all the rest, not a whole lot of land developers & financiers in that lot. Business owners, yes, but would they have had the idea that they started the business on if they hadn't gotten the technical education first?

Of course there are other ways to make money, if you have the aptitude, but the surest way to go from being a have-not to having at least modest prosperity is a technical education.