<VV> LONG "Unsafe At Any Speed"/Group Corvair

[Bill Elliott]

>  No, Nader isn't my favorite 
>person, but I'm glad that someone got the ball rolling on simple design 
>changes that have reduced highway fatalities dramatically over the last 40 years.
>
>  
>
Okay, I'll present the other side of the coin. Yes, cars were not as 
safe as they needed to be. BUT it was the market and not Government 
deciding what was important. Exactly what Constitutional right did the 
Government have to step in and dictate safety standards? If the public 
wanted safer cars, they could have demanded them via the market.

The growing competition of the auto market would have brought with it 
enhanced safety, whether the US Government established safety standards 
or not. The movement that Nader started did LOT more than change auto 
safety... it ushered in the current "nanny state" where the Government, 
under force of law, protects us from ourselves. The end result may be 
desirable, but the process invariably leads to greater and greater 
Government trampling of individual rights. Yes, this is a VV-talk 
subject, but I'll (try to) restrict my comments to the automobile industry.

Overnight (Jan 1, 1968) two entire classes of cars were completed wiped 
out in the US. Small lightweight economy cars and low slung sports cars, 
both of which are arguably better for the environment and the consumer 
than the underpowered land yachts which resulted.  Further, the 
specifications (DOT and EPA) changed so quickly (once the Govt had power 
it used it) that American carmakers could barely survive while the 
imports could more readily design to the new standards vice improving 
existing product (as had been the standard industry practice).

Why did Nader list the Corvair first? 1- it was different and people are 
naturally suspect of different things, but 2- the US auto industry had 
claimed that enhancing safety had to be a gradual process due to the 
ongoing modification of product each year...yet the Corvair was a 
ground-up new design which did not incorporate the level of safety that 
would have been (relatively) easily designed into a "blank sheet" 
design, "proving" to Nader that the US industry had no real interest in 
improving safety. He saw this as the industry being irresponsible; I see 
it as the American public (through their market purchases) not being 
willing to pay for it.. but being forced to.

So, modern day. Cars are safer and cleaner than ever... and MUCH  more 
expensive and heavier than they would otherwise be. Small lightweight 
cars are still outlawed (yet motorcycles are still legal?!!), consumer 
choice is badly limited, and companies cannot sell cars into the US 
without designing specifically to the market, strictly limiting consumer 
choice and driving up prices (and Nader considers himself a "consumer 
advocate?! Hard to be a "consumer advocate" when you don't support 
capitalism...) .

Everyone is looking to hybrids, etc to be ecologically responsible.... 
though hybrids cost more energy to build than they save in their 
lifespan. What the public needs is small, economical transportation... 
but due to the weight required to meet US safety standards, performance 
is so limited with economical engines that the public invariably chooses 
a more powerful (and less economical engines). Consider the improvement 
(both to the pocketbook, the environment, and our dependence on oil) if 
the draconian regulations were lifted for a small lightweight class of 
car... like the Japanese Ka class. These small sub600cc cars get 
excellent mileage, have reasonable performance standards, and are very 
cheap to build, buy, and operate. Give them the same tax credits and HOV 
rights as hybrids and watch folks shed their 12mpg SUV's. But this is 
impossible due to Nader's success.... even though a much more "unsafe" 
1800cc motorcycle is still legal.

Compare this to the car industry in say the UK... choice is much, much 
wider than here and the cars are just as safe and clean. We would have 
eventually ended up with a similar situation here without the 
unconstitutional expansion of the Federal Government into areas where it 
didn't belong. So while few can argue with the "end state" or many of 
Nader's specific points in his book, we can lament the way in which we 
got here and the individual freedoms that were buried along the way to 
protect us from ourselves.

My domain name and website ( http://www.fnader.com/  ) are not just 
Corvair centric...

Bill Elliott


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.1/313 - Release Date: 4/15/2006