Good article by Tom Friedman

[Biscokid]

A Quick Fix For The Gas Addicts

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN


Is there a company more dangerous to America's future than General Motors? Surely, the sooner this company gets taken over by Toyota, the better off our country will be.

Why? Like a crack dealer looking to keep his addicts on a tight leash, G.M. announced its ''fuel price protection program'' on May 23. If you live in Florida or California and buy certain G.M. vehicles by July 5, the company will guarantee you gasoline at a cap price of $1.99 a gallon for one year -- with no limit on mileage. Guzzle away.

As The Associated Press explained the program, each month for one year, G.M. will give customers who buy these cars ''a credit on a prepaid card based on their estimated fuel usage. Fuel usage will be calculated by the miles they drive, as recorded by OnStar, and the vehicle's fuel economy rating. G.M. will credit drivers the difference between the average price per gallon in their state and the $1.99 cap.'' Consumers won't get any credits if gas prices fall below $1.99.

''This program gives consumers an opportunity to experience the highly fuel-efficient vehicles G.M. has to offer in the mid-size segment,'' Dave Borchelt, G.M.'s Southeast general manager, said in the company's official statement. Oh, really?

Eligible vehicles in California include the 2006 and 2007 Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban (half-ton models only), Impala and Monte Carlo sedans, G.M.C. Yukon and Yukon XL S.U.V.'s (half-ton models only), Hummer H2 and H3 S.U.V.'s, the Cadillac SRX S.U.V., and the Pontiac Grand Prix and Buick Lucerne sedans. Eligible vehicles in Florida include the 2006 and 2007 Chevrolet Impala and Monte Carlo, Pontiac Grand Prix and Buick LaCrosse.

Let's see, the 6,400-pound Hummer H2 averages around nine miles per gallon. It really is great that G.M. is giving more Americans the opportunity to experience nine-miles-per-gallon driving. And the hulking Chevy Suburban gets around 15 miles per gallon. It will be wonderful if more Americans can experience that too -- with G.M.-subsidized gas.

Our military is in a war on terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan with an enemy who is fueled by our gasoline purchases. So we are financing both sides in the war on terror. And what are we doing about that? Not only is GM subsidizing its gas-guzzlers, but not a single member of Congress, liberal or conservative, will stand up and demand what most of them know: that we must have some kind of gasoline tax to compel Americans to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles and to compel Detroit to make them.

Where are the presidential aspirants on this issue? I have yet to hear John McCain, Mitt Romney, George Allen, Al Gore or Hillary Clinton support at least a $3.50 floor price for gasoline, so that it will never fall below that level and the alternatives can really flower and spread.

But if you go to G.M.'s Web site, here's what you will see: an ad with a young African-American boy saluting an American flag, above the following offer for U.S. military personnel: ''In appreciation of your commitment to our country, G.M. extends a $500 exclusive offer to active duty military and reserves when you purchase or lease select 2005, 2006 or 2007 G.M. cars, trucks and S.U.V.'s -- just show your military ID!''

That's really touching. First G.M. offers a gasoline subsidy so more Americans can get hooked on nine-mile-per-gallon Hummers, and then it offers a discount to the soldiers who have to protect the oil lines to keep G.M.'s gas guzzlers guzzling. Here's a rule of thumb: The more Hummers we have on the road in America, the more military Humvees we will need in the Middle East.

You want to do something patriotic, G.M., Ford and Daimler-Chrysler? Why don't you stop using your diminishing pools of cash to buy votes so Congress will never impose improved mileage standards? That kind of strategy is why Toyota today is worth $198.9 billion and G.M. $15.8 billion. G.M. is worth just slightly more than Harley-Davidson, the motorcycle company ($13.6 billion).

President Bush remarked the other day how agonizingly tough it is for a president to send young Americans to war. Yet, he's ready to do that, but he's not ready to look Detroit or Congress in the eye and demand that we put in place the fuel-efficiency legislation that will weaken the forces of theocracy and autocracy that are killing our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan -- because it might cost Republicans votes or campaign contributions.

This whole thing is a travesty. We can't keep asking young Americans to make the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan if we as a society are not ready to make even the most minimal sacrifice to help them.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

Im very familiar with Friedman, and he's a socialist who has no clue about the inner workings of the world around him. The same can be said for all socialists. I guess that's why socialist nations are so prosperous.

 

[Biscokid]

good point

good analysis old wise one. You make very well thoughtout points. Also if he is a socialist what does that have to do with the article? How does that effect his comments on GM?
If you think he if a socialist then I am sure he would call you a fascist.

 

[mustang_steve]

I think these fuel-discounts are ridiculous to begin with...it's called either scale back uneeded driving, or get a more efficient vehicle.

And such vehicles ARE in existstance, just not marketed to the US. I have seen all kinds of diesels that would have made large trucks SO much cheaper to afford....then we have the clean burning diesel fuel that should be showing up within the next year or two.

There are also cars that are half-truck half car, similar to the old Ford Ranchero of Chevy ElCamino, which are availible in australia/New Zealand area. A blend of truck versatility, and car economy.

I also think the station wagon needs to make a big comeback...I got great mileage on the land yacht of a wagon I drove in highschool....given 24mpg highway is great when you have a 5.0l under the hood....but that still knocks the socks off of an H2, and my wagon was big enough that I could almost fit a honda CRX in there if I removed the wheels and gutted some of my interior (we tried...it was about a foot too long )

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

good analysis old wise one. You make very well thoughtout points. Also if he is a socialist what does that have to do with the article? How does that effect his comments on GM?

His socialist viewpoints have everything to do with his comments on GM. Didnt you read it??

 

[Biscokid]

What is socialist about him thinking that GM pushing inefficent cars is bad for the country?
Here is a definition of socialism so you can refer to it.
Definitions of Socialism on the Web:

A system based on public ownership of the means of production and distribution of wealth.
www.bl.uk/services/learning/curriculum/voices/refglos.html

a system or theory of social organization in which the producers possess both political power and the means of production and distribution
www.opb.org/education/coldwar/berlincrisis/glossary/

An "economic, social and political doctrine which expresses the struggle for the equal distribution of wealth by eliminating private property and the exploitative ruling class. In practice, such a distribution of wealth is achieved by social ownership of the means of production, exchange and diffusion." (7)
www.ilstu.edu/class/hist127/terms.html

Now please tell me how him saying we should use less oil because we are in a war over it makes this veiw socialist? Or you could just say "because he is" and not bak it up. Showing once again you have nothing to back up your statement. Firedman is a patriot and has very good ideas that fall both on the left and right. Sometimes the truth hurts

 

[billy p]

Im very familiar with Friedman, and he's a socialist who has no clue about the inner workings of the world around him. The same can be said for all socialists.
* I guess that's why socialist nations are so prosperous*.

Now that's a broad statement, have you been to europe lately.Lots of socialism in power. Thats why in N.A. we feel our model is best because we have no social issues

 

[j_garcia]

So what are we supposed to be talking about? Socialism or the whole gas thing?

Ford countered by offering $1000 in gas credit with the purchase of certain vehicles.

 

[sploo]

Whilst 9mpg is pretty appalling, I don't think upping the cost of fuel is the solution. Here in the UK (if my math is correct) the equivalent of a US gallon (we buy in litres) has just about hit 7USD.

So, do people here stop using their cars? Nope, we just complain about the price of fuel!

I do care about the environment, but the reality is that people will do what's convenient for them. I recycle cans/paper/glass etc, because where I live - it's easy. I could throw the car away and go everywhere by bicycle and bus, but it would be incredibly impractical - and I like my car.

So, upping the cost of fuel is probably unlikely to make a huge difference to ownership of polluting cars.

The only solution I can think of is to pump money into new technologies, in order to get a truly 'green' car. As long as it doesn't feel any different to the average buyer (and doesn't inconvenience them) they'll buy it.

Basically, it's up to science to give us all the things we use today, but versions that don't harm the planet. Sure it's a lazy attitude, but, unlike many rabid environmentalists, it's realistic.

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

Gas rationing is the way to do it. The world "needs" full sized trucks, vans, airplanes, and buses. But if individuals are only allowed to purchase X-gallons of gas every month, then you can guarantee people will start developing more sensible driving habits, plus, as a plan, it doesn't call for a ban on recreational vehicles (motorcycles, boats, 4-wheelers, snowmobiles, RV campers, etc etc) which tend to get badmouthed by everyone for "wasting gas". You can continue your Motocross adventures, you just have to be prepared to sacrifice your total petrol allowance to do it.

And a world powered by bicycles will eventually lead to rickshaw ambulances. And I don't want to be bleeding to death because ther EMT didn't eat his wheaties that morning and can't get to the hospital.

 

[HookedOnSound]

...

And a world powered by bicycles will eventually lead to rickshaw ambulances. And I don't want to be bleeding to death because ther EMT didn't eat his wheaties that morning and can't get to the hospital.

ROTFL

I think GM is taking the whole "coupon" thing to a whole new level, don't you think?

IMHO, there are trying to buy some time to develop more efficient motors/technology until the next roll-over of vehicle models.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

The socialists on the left have an answer, and it's a big fat gas tax. Friedman went so far as to call it a 'miracle tax' while while cheerleading for the tax while being interviewed by Tim Russert last weekend.

You see...... Tim Russert and Tom Friedman don't think we're paying enough at the gas pump, in fact they seemed downright excited about the prospect of increasing the gas tax as a way to end America's "oil" addiction.
LOL

After years of "Pain at the Pump" stories running as major news stories depicting working class people hocking wedding rings at pawn shops to pay for gas, and democrats flailing their arms in outrage over high oil prices and how the POOR WORKING CLASS is suffering. I find it quite humerous that that very same bunch will be the first in line to vote for a big fat gas tax which will hurt those very same 'working class' indiduals the most.

So which is it????

Are they really concerned about the working class and their suffering, or do they want the punitive tax that will drive prices even higher?? Ohhhh... the hypocrisy of it all!!!

Lucky for us, the liberals were voted out of power and they dont have a leg to stand on.
LOL

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

What is socialist about him thinking that GM pushing inefficent cars is bad for the country?
Here is a definition of socialism so you can refer to it.
Definitions of Socialism on the Web:

A system based on public ownership of the means of production and distribution of wealth.
www.bl.uk/services/learning/curriculum/voices/refglos.html

a system or theory of social organization in which the producers possess both political power and the means of production and distribution
www.opb.org/education/coldwar/berlincrisis/glossary/

An "economic, social and political doctrine which expresses the struggle for the equal distribution of wealth by eliminating private property and the exploitative ruling class. In practice, such a distribution of wealth is achieved by social ownership of the means of production, exchange and diffusion." (7)
www.ilstu.edu/class/hist127/terms.html

Now please tell me how him saying we should use less oil because we are in a war over it makes this veiw socialist? Or you could just say "because he is" and not bak it up. Showing once again you have nothing to back up your statement. Firedman is a patriot and has very good ideas that fall both on the left and right. Sometimes the truth hurts

You're looking pretty naive there kiddo. Most Democratic economic & social positions are anti-capitalistic, and involve redistribution of wealth. If you cant see socialist rhetoric when it's right in front of your face, then I guess you'll have to live in the dark because I'm not going to explain it to you. Please stop, because you're embarrassing yourself.

 

[sploo]

And a world powered by bicycles will eventually lead to rickshaw ambulances. And I don't want to be bleeding to death because ther EMT didn't eat his wheaties that morning and can't get to the hospital.

*LOL* Excellent.

The problem however with rationing, is that I don't do that many miles a month. Hence I'm going to sell you the fuel I don't use - voila: one huge black market in 'second hand' petrol!

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

I don't do that many miles a month. Hence I'm going to sell you the fuel I don't use - voila: one huge black market in 'second hand' petrol!

well you'd be selling your alotment of unpurchased gasoline, not the gas itself, so it probably wouldn't go for very much.

 

[sploo]

well you'd be selling your alotment of unpurchased gasoline, not the gas itself, so it probably wouldn't go for very much.

Surely I'd just purchase it, and then sell it 'cause I've not used it

I suppose that, overall, it makes no difference who uses the fuel, as it would be about reducing the overall level of mileage for the population. I just know that a ready market in 'leftover' fuel would appear - ration anything that people want, and someone will be out to make a fast buck!