Comments on: Fact Checking Auto Industry Claims of Job Losses

By: Shines

Shines — Wed, 25 May 2011 17:34:14 +0000

SpeedRacer the high price technologies are high price partly because more workers are needed to produce them (engineers to develop and assembly to add the “extra” technological components to the vehicles). So although the price demand curve will reduce sales there may be more jobs created/used per unit. The auto industry is constantly developing robotic, software and other technologies to reduce the number of workers needed to create and assemble vehicles, but that has nothing to do with CAFE standards. In the end, anybody claiming that CAFE standards will increase or decrease jobs in the auto indistry is mostly spouting nonsense.

By: SpeedRacer

SpeedRacer — Mon, 23 May 2011 18:22:41 +0000

While I support high CAFE standards to ensure sustainability; to say a 62mpg standard will increase auto jobs is ludicrous. The 62mpg standard will require high price technologies like electric hybrid that will increase consumer costs thousands of dollars at point of sale. Economics 101 will tell you that there is a price-demand curve. Raising the price will reduce sales and therefore jobs. This should be common sense.

By: Yegor

Yegor — Sat, 21 May 2011 00:48:21 +0000

It is just selfish! The standard has to be raised for many reasons - air pollution, national security, recessions created by high oil price.

In my opinion it is highly improbably that auto industry will loose some jobs because there will be more work required to produce green cars.
But even if auto industry may be will loose some jobs so
Auto Alliance does not care about air pollution!
Auto Alliance does not care to jeopardize national security!
Auto Alliance does not care to jeopardize job security of millions of people who lose their jobs because of the recessions created by high oil price!
Shame on you Auto Alliance!

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 20 May 2011 15:11:29 +0000

And if you needed to burn more than 2 gallons a day, say someone using a pickup truck to haul tools and materials for construction or repair, you could exceed your allowance but a surcharge of say 25% would be added to gas in excess of the accumulated allowance, so $4.00 gas (market price) would cost $5.00 if you exceeded the allowance.

All the equipment is already in place, swipe card technology and swipeable driver's licenses. To implement all it would take is programming and political will. Which brings us back to the left loons who talk the talk, but take no action that actually works.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 20 May 2011 15:02:59 +0000

Our dependence on foreign oil represents a clear and present danger to our national security. (Not to mention the security of Israel!) In WWII we had gas rationing and a national speed limit of 45 MPH. We need gas rationing again. Never mind, it would create a "black market" and there would be cheaters. We had all that in WWII. But the gasoline consumption went down.

Today, we could allocate 2 gallons of gas per day per licensed driver. And the plan would include accumulation of unused gas up to 90 gallons so a could burn accumulated gas during a traveling vacation where we travel more than we could go on 2 gallons, even in a Prius PHV.

This would actually lower the price of legal gas because the market price would fall with reduced consumption, and help the economy.

By: Samie

Samie — Fri, 20 May 2011 12:46:11 +0000

Two conclusions you can draw here:
1. 62mpg standard for 2025 by this administration will not happen

2. The job loses claimed by the auto industry are grossly exaggerated

Sure its a weird world of DC politics and leveraging but this is how the game is played.

My opinion is that at some point companies like UPS FedEX and other transportation industries will want government to set higher fuel standards. This could reduce influence from the auto industry.

I would like to see legislation/standards (step-up approach in technology) that rewards auto-manufactures who produce electric vehicles as a way to off-set some tax liabilities or say CAFE standards. I also would like to see some government assistance for helping freight companies move towards more fuel efficient vehicles. This I argue could have greater significance in mass adoption of EVs/hybrids then the consumer based tax rebates we have seen in the past.

By: DC

DC — Fri, 20 May 2011 05:11:05 +0000

Keep in mind, even if the idea put forward that high-MPG trash-bins would boost employment, that is not something the industry wants to hear either. US industry (generally) and the auto sector definately, have been happily shedding jobs to China, Mexico, anywhere that has even laxer employee and enviromental regulations than the United Snakes, for decades. They dont WANT more employees, they want less. Employess in american corporateland, cost money, and cut into profits. Theyve allready mastered the trick of maxing profits while reducing the work force. Last thing they would ever want to actually have to hire even more people(and be forced to provide benefits and other annoyances like that) and pay to make there crappy mobile trash-bins.

By: Van

Van — Thu, 19 May 2011 16:41:50 +0000

A bigger lie is that the “government mandate” results in improvement. In the mid 1980′s government regulators took credit for the mileage improvement and pollution reduction resulting from going from carburetor technology to fuel injection. Now they are posed to take credit from going from all gas to plug-in hybrid. What we really need is something like the NMC lithium battery that doubles the energy storage and does not raise the cost, thus halving the price per kwh. Once we can make those, vast improvement will result in mileage. But we will need to somehow pay for the road infrastructure maintenance and upgrade when we burn half as much gas. But does government include that tax in its mandate, nope. So just more of the same incompetence from the lefty loonies.

By: Capt. Concernicus

Capt. Concernicus — Thu, 19 May 2011 12:59:24 +0000

But why would the auto industry lie? What benefits would they extract from lying to us and the government?

*sarcasm alert*