WESHOOT2 wrote:From my personal recollection and interpretation of events over 40 years ago, research and education, government regulations may create a market opportunity.
There is no doubt regulations have some effect, but I'm presenting that other factors largely affect consumer choices in America. Regardless of decade, vehicle prices and fuel prices largely drive the popularity of certain vehicles in America. We are literally seeing this again right now. Despite environmental concerns and fuel economy standards, CUVs and SUVs are selling so well in America, a major automaker like Ford has decided to drop all of their sedans and hatchbacks save for the iconic Mustang. This is literally evidence to show the consumer market, not the desires of the government, dictate what kinds of vehicles are sold and end up on the road.
WESHOOT2 wrote:We have a giant country, and we drive giant distances.
Japan and Europe are wee places, and people drive wee distances because the trains are crowded.
Yes, the US is big but isn't the only large nation. China, Russia, India, and Brazil are huge too but people in these countries don't drive quite the massive vehicles we Americans do in such large numbers. Again, consumer-based factors like popularity, economics, fuel prices, etc. dictate the kinds of cars people get in America.
Also, while the US is a large country, it's divided into states. Comparatively, the states are about the size of many other nations in Europe and Asia. Considering that most Americans don't drive out of their state regularly and the average daily commute for over 75% of Americans is under 30 miles, the reality again is that consumers pick the cars they want rather than they need here. I'm not stating that's a negative thing, but I'm countering the argument that government regulations heavily factor in the vehicle choices of Americans.
WESHOOT2 wrote:IMO government intrusion runs rampant, with little accountability.
I absolutely agree but likely in a different regard than most active members of this thread. I'm not too concerned about safety standards my car needs to meet. In terms of government intrusions and accountability, I'm far more concerned about terrible public policies and political ramifications coming about in the form of power-hungry executive orders, appointments of under-qualified individuals, mass resignations, and pathetically, uneducated and factually incorrect tweets on social media. Let's not forget the rampant corruption and scandals and the deliberate interference of a proper judicial process. Yet, I'm supposed to be mad at the government for TPMS?
Ronzuki wrote:That's pretty much the consensus among those of us who have been alive long enough and paying enough attention (read: head not in the sand or up something else) to witness it all unfolding. Experiencing and living the government's ever-increasing intrusion that we have. There's your research and education that far too many deem unworthy. We're also smart enough to see through the BS lies, stories and excuses bombarding us from every direction via every medium which is nothing more than a very effective modern-day form of brain washing IMHO.
Interesting list of mid-term candidates in the paper week before elections providing their bios and backgrounds. Not surprisingly, the majority of the liberal dems running had 'educational and/or social services' type backgrounds (where little to no accountability exists) while the local Repubs were, mainly, from out in the working world (where there exists vast amounts of accountability). Interesting no? Kinda gives a little taste of who exactly is doing the "educating" and what their agenda is, or might be, no? And before I'm accused of being something I'm not, I did not vote straight party ticket.
I'm trying to keep this thread on topic to automobiles, related regulations, TPMS, etc. as much as possible but I see that it's hard to stay out of general politics given political leanings are involved in the opinions of these matters. However, what has happened in the last few posts is that rather than countering my points on topic, it's turned off-topic to generalized anecdotes from age and current politics. I can easily counter every point in your last paragraph to devastating effect but I don't want the thread to become just political bickering. We're getting there and I want to put the brakes on as it turns an otherwise good online forum to an ugly thing.
As for the age vs. education point, let me put it this way: wisdom comes with experience (age is a contributing factor) but understanding comes from knowledge and education. Relying on personal interpretations and experience clouds one from the objectiveness of reality and truth. This is why the scientific method puts zero value on one's own experience or views and requires the objective reproduction by others to validate a claim. Can you imagine the dangers if we just relied on anecdotal evidence to guide all our lives, let alone public policy? You already see it coming around in the form of Flat-Earth believers, Anti-vaxxers, and climate change deniers. Just because one doesn't recall, doesn't observe, or simply doesn't understand the science for themselves isn't a good reason to reject the facts, science, and educated consensus on a matter. In fact, the rejection of science, facts, and research is often a deliberate choice to pursue an agenda. I didn't need to rely on my personal 40 year-ago recollection of how things were in the mid-1970's in terms of automobile sales, regulation, popularity, etc. Instead, I looked up major contributing factors, the data, read up on specific models and why the automaker developed them, researched the laws enacted, and read up on how they were implemented. I also pursued a comparative analysis to portray the vast differences in perceived vs. actual consumer-subjected vehicle regulation policies. Anyone else bother to do research-based argument? Given the responses I got and the changing direction of this thread, I think I know the answer.