Going Down the Road (to Detroit) Feeling Bad

The automobile industry of America is once again on the brink of collapse. Since the Bush Administration is in the final days of its rampage of the wealth of the American public, Detroit has decided to get in line. Why not ask for a little of that bailout cash?

The plea from the Big Three is that there will be too much disruption to the economy if they are allowed to fail. Sound familiar?

Politicians are focusing on the loss of jobs and the ripple effect through the already damaged economy. Apparently, it's all about the worker.

Yet, Bush has already blamed worker compensation as the culprit in the problems of Detroit. To be fair, some, such as Barney Frank, have focused on executive compensation, but by and large, the reporting of the issue has focused on the financial burden of pension plans and health care as well as union contracts.

Leaving Bush, the anti-barometer of appropriate action, aside, it is absolutely off point to blame the assembly line workers for the fall of the U.S. auto industry. The workers at the factory level seem to be the only people in the industry who are actually good at their jobs and worth their salaries. Union busting will not save Detroit.

If the Big Three auto makers want to find the solution to their business problems they should look at their lousy product. Building cars around a marketing strategy designed to maximize per unit profits is short-sighted. There is no effort to build a better car, just a better selling car. Just last night I saw a pickup truck marketed towards young working class males. When I checked the price and specs at the website I discovered that the truck cost around $40,000 and got 12 miles to the gallon. Is this really the best vehicle that can be produced for a person starting out in life?

What passes for innovation in the auto industry includes things like digital displays, increased headroom, individual zone climate controls, leather interior and market tested cup holder placement. While these things may be nice, none of them lead to a better driving car that has a lower impact on the environment. Form is emphasized over function, and sleek looks are more important than an efficient engine. The cars look like the Jetsons, but drive like the Flintstones.

If Detroit were paying attention to what customers want rather than trying to manipulate them into buying what they are offering, then they would cease the fight against CAFE standards and safety advances. Both of these are fought on the grounds that they would increase the cost of cars a few hundred dollars. Manual transmissions, which increase mileage, are increasingly difficult to find.

Give me a car that gets 100 mpg and has a roll cage, a la race cars, for enhanced safety and I will gladly pay more. Give me just those two things and it can look like a turnip. I suspect that many others would agree.

This is not at all out of reach. I owned a Geo Metro in the early '90's and that car got 60 miles to the gallon. And that was before I had even heard of hypermiling. Of course, the wreck that totaled it is the reason I'm such a proponent of roll cages.

So why isn't Detroit building a better car? Why did Detroit kill the electric car? Why have there been no significant advances in mileage since the Geo and its clones. If the major auto makers were told they could not sell another car until they developed one that got 100 mpg and was environmentally friendly, I have no doubt that it could be done.

What's wrong with the U.S. automobile industry will not be fixed be a short term infusion of cash so that they can continue to develop such absurditites as "hybrid-SUV's" whose owners slam on breaks at a speed bump, and see the monstrosity as a status symbol. Even though the price of oil has momentarily dropped, it must be recognized that continuing to waste petroleum is no longer a viable business model. OIL IS OVER!

Maybe we should let Big Oil bail out the Big Three.*




*thanks to Ashton Kucher for this idea.