Slashdot Mirror


World's Cheapest Car Goes On Sale In India

Frankie70 writes "The Tata Nano — the car that caught the world's imagination as the cheapest ever — will finally be rolled out commercially on Monday in Mumbai in a mega event organised by Tata Motors. Ben Oliver, contributing editor, Car Magazine, London test drove the car in December, 08. These were his first impressions. This was his verdict: 'CAR's first ride in the Tata Nano felt far more significant and exciting than a first drive in a Ferrari or Lamborghini, because this car's importance is immeasurably greater. It won't compete on dynamics or quality with European or Japanese city cars, but it doesn't have to. What Tata has achieved at an unprecedented price is astonishing, although we'd guess it will cost Indian consumers closer to £1700 when it finally goes on sale, six months late, in March 2009.'"

571 comments

  1. I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by ActusReus · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... or maybe a Tata Shuffle, with the steering controls obnoxiously embedded in some earbuds?

    1. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Threni · · Score: 5, Funny

      or the `tata clean air - it was nice knowing you'...

    2. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Feminist-Mom · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Seriosly, Indian industry will eventually come out with a tatabook, which might be the price that the negroponte thing was supposed to be.

    3. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      Stop hanging around SlashDot, or you may be waiting forever.

    4. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Well, I'll be waiting for the "Touch Tata" so I can finally say I got to 2nd base!

    5. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Hey! You'd better watch who's Tatas you're Touching!

    6. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by pmarini · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      the world's most polluting country - per capita (meaning based on the population) - is the USA... and once the technological advancements will make it possible for everyone to afford an electrical vehicle with all the bells and whistles that have put them off buying one so far, then the whole climate change argument will take a whole new dimension... and I wouldn't be in a cow's shoes for any price...
      p.s.: I'm not fishing for flames...

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
    7. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by kinnell · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...or maybe a single button in the centre of the dashboard which steers you in a random direction.

      --
      If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
    8. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey! You'd better watch whose pronouns you're abusing!

    9. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 5, Funny
      ... or maybe a Tata Shuffle, with the steering controls obnoxiously embedded in some earbuds?

      Wait 'till your first crash. You'll find your Tata Touch has its steering controls obnoxiously embedded in your chest.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    10. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Supposedly Mork kept his iPod in his Tata.

      Nano Nano!

    11. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by quenda · · Score: 5, Insightful
      US is the most polluting county per capita?

      Parent is deliberately confusing greenhouse emissions with pollution. The US is an awful lot cleaner than India, be it air, water or land.

    12. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want to spend 100x resources that each of us spends, time we balance it out a bit. Maybe you will stop using your 15-20 mpg cars and invest money into mass transport.

      Time :) we get our share of pollution into the atmosphere, and our share of gasoline from Iraq..

    13. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a Tata Touch once. Best night of my life.

    14. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by MrNaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The US is the most polluting country in the world, both in absolute terms and per capita.

      Environmental damage that happens in other countries counts as US caused if it's done by US corporations. E.g., the Union Carbide disaster may have happened in India, but it was a US corporation that caused it.

      Come now, take responsibility for your (collective) actions.

      --
      I hate printers.
    15. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by quenda · · Score: 1

      Bhopal? So now you think the yanks have lower safety standards than India too? Well, Detroit did give us the exploding Pinto and rolling SUVs.

    16. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by shis-ka-bob · · Score: 2, Funny

      The car is named 'tata' and the best you can come up with is a iPod interface? Am I the only one with a gutter mind who is looking forward to a ta-ta interface with left and right control silicone controllers?

      --
      Think global, act loco
    17. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by phulegart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The US is the most polluting country in the world, both in absolute terms and per capita."
      {citation needed}

      Incorrect.
      http://carma.org/dig/show/world+country
      Actually, the US is second to China.... India is ranked third.

      As far as your moralizing goes as well, how can you discount the responsibility of the Indian Government in the Union Carbide disaster? They allowed the plant. They allowed the regulations and standards that the plant was built and maintained by. I am not saying that Union Carbide (which is NOT the US, it is a corporation.) was not responsible. But I am saying that the US was NOT responsible for the pollution caused by that disaster.

      However, the Union Carbide disaster does not contribute to why India is CURRENTLY the third highest polluting nation on the planet. It is not "polluted" it is "Polluting"... meaning generating pollution. One of the things that the Tato Nano is supposed to do, is make a car affordable to most Indians. In a country where streets are already densely packed with walking people, people packed on two wheeled traffic, and older vehicles... do we really need to add a few million MORE internal combustion engines virtually overnight? I would not be surprised to see little India surpass the US in pollution production once this car settles in.

      --
      "I love deadlines. I love the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." -D. Adams
    18. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by fugue · · Score: 5, Interesting
      From Wiktionary:

      Pollution: [...] the contamination of the environment by harmful substances.

      Yup, sounds like CO_2 qualifies. In spades. Sure it's a whole new mechanism for damage--not toxic, not carcinogenic, not a quick dose of nutrients to previously clear water, not ugly, etc--but it's certainly harmful!

      Looks like the USA's per capita emissions of CO_2 are on the order of 10 times higher than China's (source: quick amalgam of Google results).

      Some sources say that the USA leads in other pollutants as well (see http://www.crystalinks.com/pollution.html for a start, but I'm not happy with that page's rigour). That's no surprise given that the USA is a world leader in consumption and disposal of all kinds of goods--sheer volume overcomes good intentions. OTOH, I hear China is investing heavily in coal-fired power plants, which besides helping them to pull ahead in CO_2 will add a nice dose of mercury and some other nasties. Go team! There are lots of causes of pollution, and the USA comes out ahead on many of them.

      Of course, the USA isn't doing too badly (relatively speaking) at controlling pollutants, although we're not doing especially well, either. Far better than China or India, AFAIK, although I'm not happy that my country is "better than the worst"!

      This is an area I know little about. Do you have a better reference than what I found?

      --
      "The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
    19. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by phulegart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh, and a further note...
      "According to CARMA's massive database, which contains information on the carbon emissions of over 50,000 power plants and 4,000 power companies worldwide, Australia is the world's worst polluter per capita, producing five times as much carbon from generating power as China."
      http://www.ibtimes.co.in/articles/20071203/carbon-emission-global-warming-power-plant-pollution-greenhouse-gas-climate-change-kyoto-protocol-ca.htm

      There you go. Nothing like being informed, eh? What a wonderful friend we have in Google.

      --
      "I love deadlines. I love the whooshing sound they make as they fly by." -D. Adams
    20. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Abreu · · Score: 1

      The US is the most polluting country in the world, both in absolute terms and per capita.

      Environmental damage that happens in other countries counts as US caused if it's done by US corporations. E.g., the Union Carbide disaster may have happened in India, but it was a US corporation that caused it.

      Come now, take responsibility for your (collective) actions.

      Maybe someone could make a list of the most polluting multinational corporations in the world... Greenpeace perhap?

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    21. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by theeddie55 · · Score: 1

      ... or maybe a Tata Shuffle, with the steering controls obnoxiously embedded in some earbuds?

      And a single button to speed up or slow down depending on how you press it??

    22. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, at least the US doesn't dump dead people in the river, anyway.

    23. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by argiedot · · Score: 1

      Those figures are very interesting. How come Canada consumes so much energy without producing so much CO2?

    24. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by hesiod · · Score: 1

      It was Americans that set the low safety and environmental standards at the plant.

      Which is because why? Because Indians let the business owners get away with it, as well as owners of businesses from other countries.

    25. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 3, Informative

      Of course, the USA isn't doing too badly (relatively speaking) at controlling pollutants, although we're not doing especially well, either. Far better than China or India, AFAIK, although I'm not happy that my country is "better than the worst"!

      The problem with the USA's and the EU's record on pollutants is that they tend to solve the problem by shipping pollutants to other parts of the world or they just dump them in the ocean. There is a famous plastic patch the size of Texas in the Pacific ocean between California and Hawaii. Plastic is way to overused and totally under-recycled. Is it really necessary for every candy bar to be packaged in a plastic wrapper? Does every pair of cookies in an Oreo package have to be packaged in their own little plastic pouch? What's the deal with single use plastic bottles? I don't remember my candy tasting any worse when I was a kid and that stuff was sold wrapped in paper or the Coca Cola tasting any different when it shipped in glass bottles. Another major pollutant problem is agricultural runoff. It isn't very visible to Joe Sixpack from the porch of his suburban home and it isn't highly publicised but that stuff can cause havoc. The problem with Algae bloom is well known in the Baltic Sea. To cite a US example, agricultural runoff from the Mississippi River creates a dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico which in 2002 measured some 8000 square miles, that's an area bigger than the state of Massachusetts. Keep in mind that this is just due to fertilisers. We haven't even begun to consider the effect of agricultural pesticides on the marine ecosystems and we all know how much faith the agricultural community, goaded on by the chemical industry, places in the lavish application of pesticides. Of course none these problems are unique to the USA, most countries put way to little effort into recycling plastic or putting some money into research into biodegradable plastic substitutes and very few of them are ready to do anything about agricultural runoff.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    26. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those figures are very interesting. How come Canada consumes so much energy without producing so much CO2?

      Because Canada is a land of ice, snow and hockey where Yeti's freeze to death. Also, they produce a metric bigfoot load of hydro power when some of the ice melts in the summer, then send the water and power to the US which uses it to pollute, er, produce goods.

    27. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by fizzding · · Score: 1

      Hydroelectric power accounts for a significant amount of Canada's electric output. It also happens to be very low on emissions.

    28. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by davester666 · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's colder up here, so we can generate more energy from the difference between the ambient temperature and the temperature of our politician's hot air.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    29. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by DreamsAreOkToo · · Score: 1

      "Tata, nice seeing you, have a nice rebirth!"

    30. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by cjb658 · · Score: 1

      The US is the most polluting country in the world, both in absolute terms and per capita.

      Environmental damage that happens in other countries counts as US caused if it's done by US corporations. E.g., the Union Carbide disaster may have happened in India, but it was a US corporation that caused it.

      Come now, take responsibility for your (collective) actions.

      But that company employed many Indian workers.

      It's everyone's problem. Had India required tighter regulation, the disaster may not have happened, or it may have happened somewhere else, where there were fewer regulations.

      As long as it's cheaper to do business in a place that allows you to damage the environment more, it will happen. So we need to work with other countries to control the problem.

    31. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Dark_MadMax666 · · Score: 1

      Because 50% of their energy is Hydro and 11% is nuclear. France is actually most impressive country - with 77% nuclear they have the cleanest energy . The dumbfucks and coal/oil shills responsible for derailing nuclear power should be hanged by the balls in the pipes of coal power plants. Coal power plants are number #1 source of air pollution and leading cause of deaths caused by it .It also throws as much radioactive ash straight in the air as all nuclear power plants combined (who at the very least store they waster underground and at best can reprocess it for even more clean power)

    32. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by TheAmit · · Score: 1

      Well the US refused to let the CEO of Union carbide be tried in an Indian court of law. Maybe bcoz it was indians that died in the accident ?

    33. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by cjb658 · · Score: 1

      Well he said per capita, so you'd have to divide China's numbers by about 4 to get the same scale as the United States.

      Tons of C02 Emissions in 2008:
      China: 3,120,000,000 / 4 = 780,000,000
      US: 2,820,000,000

    34. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by pcolaman · · Score: 1

      Being a slashdot user, he likely has never seen tatas that he didn't have to use google image search to find.

    35. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      The plastic patch is bigger than you think. It currently stretches from about 500 miles off CA to nearly Japan and is nearly twice the size of the US.

    36. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You consume the items.

    37. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by aliquis · · Score: 2, Funny

      Where the fuck do you idiots come from?

      USA.

    38. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Quothz · · Score: 1

      Looks like the USA's per capita emissions of CO_2 are on the order of 10 times higher than China's (source: quick amalgam of Google results).

      "On the order of" is a weasel phrase. Two and 97 are both on the order of ten.

      I took a glance at Google results, myself. They're jammed up with contradictory environmental organizations all trying to scream louder than one another. It's just not a good topic to rely on top-search-result numbers.

      Looking through some of them, I see:

      -Cherry-picking data (Time for Change uses 2002 data in a 2008 release with a footnote saying emissions are up 10-15% since the data were gathered).

      -Unsourced (and contradictory) data in lots of places. Several organizations appear to rely on one another for numbers, with no clues as to where the information came from.

      -Some really bizarro stuff. China announced a few years back that "the west is responsible" for a third of its carbon dioxide emissions. They then released some numbers that appear to pawn off more than half of their CO2 on other nations.

      -Original research. I know this ain't Wikipedia, but when an organization with an agenda relies on its own numbers, take a grain of salt. (I'm looking at you, Greenpeace.)

      The newest neutral data I can dredge up online is from a UN report with 2004 numbers, which shows the States' per-type capita emissions about 3.75 times China's. Qatar at the time had more than three times the emissions per person than the US.

      The EU has 2005 data, but only for Europe, with Luxembourg way ahead of the pack.

      None of this is to say that every industrialized nation can't improve. One very insightful comment I saw in my looksies - and it makes me grind my teeth to say this - is from Greenpeace:

      But to look at carbon dioxide emissions only by country is perhaps too narrow. The same question applies per business or even individual. Someone driving a gas-guzzler of a car is burning more fossil fuels then someone with a more efficient car, for example. Of course nations and businesses must be held accountable, but as individuals we each also make decisions the affect the climate.

      ... And they're right. "Think globally, act locally", and read "locally" as "personally". If you're concerned about carbon-type dioxide emissions, then start using public transit, wearing sweaters in the winter, easing up on hot water use, installing better insulation, voting in favor of reasonable (but tough) local emissions laws, and so on et cetera and all like that.

    39. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're suggesting that indians don't deserve cars? Or that indian car pollution norms are laxer than US norms (they aren't). India follows the euro norms right now, and the nano has been tested to pass these norms.

    40. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by MoonBuggy · · Score: 1

      Is it really necessary for every candy bar to be packaged in a plastic wrapper? Does every pair of cookies in an Oreo package have to be packaged in their own little plastic pouch? What's the deal with single use plastic bottles? I don't remember my candy tasting any worse when I was a kid and that stuff was sold wrapped in paper or the Coca Cola tasting any different when it shipped in glass bottles.

      It's a simple matter of economics, as are so many environmental issues. If plastic wasn't the cheapest acceptable overall solution it wouldn't be used, that's all there is to it. That's taking into account the whole package: cost of the plastic itself, shelf-life and shipping advantages, the potential PR costs of being considered a polluter, money already invested in plastic bottling/wrapping plants, and so on. If any of those factors swung the advantage over to glass, or paper, or whatever it'd be switched in a second - why do you think McDonalds uses cardboard burger boxes now? It's sure as hell not because they care more about the environment than they do about money, even if it is based partly on the hard-to-quantify value of looking like 'the good guy'.

      Hypothetically, but impractically, all we need to do is make every company directly responsible for the clean-up or recycling costs of its products. Those costs would then be passed down every stage of the supply chain, at which point the consumer would decide what presents them with the best value option, polluting, non-polluting or going without altogether. The problem, of course, is getting every company and government to co-operate and enforce this; it'll never happen. The closest that is usually managed is a few token taxes on some causes of pollution, and that's problematic partly because it artificially skews the market and partly because, as with any tax, the money collected is not directly linked to the problem it was supposed to solve, and thus the connection between cost and quantity of pollution is lost.

    41. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by sureshot007 · · Score: 1

      In a country where streets are already densely packed with walking people, people packed on two wheeled traffic, and older vehicles... do we really need to add a few million MORE internal combustion engines virtually overnight? I would not be surprised to see little India surpass the US in pollution production once this car settles in.

      Well, if it allows 4 people to ride on one vehicle instead of riding on 4 moped/motorcycles, then I would say it would work wonderfully.

    42. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Quetzo · · Score: 1

      ayy... I beg to differ. Tony sleeps with the fishes, I made sure of that. Now, where's that canoli?

    43. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by wastedlife · · Score: 1

      According to the same chart, almost 50% of their power production is hydro.

      --
      Said, "It's just like dice but it's got more sides And it tells me who lives and who dies"
    44. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by BikeHelmet · · Score: 1

      We have a lot of green power. For example, BC Hydro (company) generates most of the electricity for BC (province) and several nearby states with hydro-dams. Just look at the link - it says 50% of the power used in Canada comes from Hydro.

      The only pollution there is the land you use up to make the dam work... plus construction materials.

      Alberta (province) is packed with wind turbines. I've also seen them where I live, on Vancouver Island. (in BC)

      There's a new wind farm being built in northern BC. Apparently it'll produce ~144 megawatts.

      We have projects like this all over the place. A huge amount of our power comes from green solutions.

      Unfortunately, we have distance working against us - we all need cars, and we all have to drive them long distances to get places. Cars are probably our biggest source of pollution.

      Even despite our "incredibly dirty oil sands", we're doing better than a lot of other countries. :P We're trying to keep our emissions in check.

    45. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by pmarini · · Score: 1

      Dear 997083,

      what you say is probably FUD, including the "per capita" reference that you provide where a 1st grader could point out that 3.1bln units produced by 1.5bln people in China is much less than the 2.8bln units produced by 350mln people in the USA.

      Citations wanted ? here...

      - Comment 5 on this page (not the main article)
      - This answer
      - waste too

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
    46. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by pmarini · · Score: 1

      the best reference that I can find is a tagline that I saw a while ago here on slashdot along the lines of "to those who don't believe that car emissions are deadly, leave them for a couple of hours in their (indoor) car park with the door shut and the engine running..."
      surely you can easily admit that the USA has had plenty of cars doing 15mpg for decades and this (together with silly things like NASCAR and useful things like Space Shuttles) has made it worse for the rest of the world
      if they cannot give a hair for the others, why the others should stay bald forever ?

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
    47. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're never going to Touch any Tatas.

    48. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      Canada, Australia, and Luxembourg are all up there with US on per capita greenhouse emission. It's a tight race.

    49. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by a+whoabot · · Score: 1

      Those figures are very interesting. How come Canada consumes so much energy without producing so much CO2?

      60.7% of our electricity comes from hydro-electric power and 10.5% comes from nuclear power.

    50. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      Alberta (province) is packed with wind turbines. I've also seen them where I live, on Vancouver Island. (in BC)

      That's awesome news. Are people allowed to go and see the wind turbines on Vancouver Island? Where are they?

    51. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by ColaMan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I love the per-capita stats. Nothing like lies,damned lies and statistics.

      20 million people in Australia.
      1300 million people in China.

      So basically, with the 5x figure, Australia's pollution from 20 million people is equivalent to 100 million Chinese. Never mind the other 1.2 BILLION, eh? Australia is a dirty, dirty country and should hang its head in shame.

      Bad Australia! Be more like the Chinese with just 1/5th the pollution of you! (*cough*per capita*cough*)

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    52. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Or the CO2 freezes out of the air.

    53. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by rusl · · Score: 1

      "that's all there is to it"

      Actually social norms are so infused in the whole equation that only social norms give value to the money that is considered the "bottom line" here.

      I do agree that we need to re-connect responsibility to the actual pollution but I don't think there's any economic incentivised way to get there. It's Jevons paradox. We need different social values that change the meaning of bottom line and we need to change the meaning of globalisation so that anonymous irresponsible behavior (like buying something that is horrible far away to the people that make it but nice and pretty here in the store) should not be encouraged by the system but reduced. There is no good reason that the more we get together the more we lose track of the consequences. There are more people than ever and more ability to solve these problems than ever before but we need to understand complexity better.

      --
      Stupidity is its own reward.
    54. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Now there's an idea. On a cold winter night in Antarctica you could just collect frozen CO2 and bury it under the ice cap.

    55. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      Wow. That was amazing. I read the page that you linked to. I heard about the garbage and wondered about it, but now I know. Thank you for showing us this.

      Personally, the only way that I can think of, to deal with it is to collect it, and burn it at sea.

      Frankly, I think that they should make all plastics compostable, unless there is a reason to not do it. I think that most plastics don't need to last more than a year.

    56. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by XMode · · Score: 1

      Being Australian I can believe this. Apart from the fact that we have significantly less capita to be 'per' of..

      We have a HUGE amount of open desert space, and a fairly large proportion of sunlight, which would make for one of the best regions on the planet for a massive solar farm. But our government still likes to dig things up and burn it for power.

      I have never understood that.

    57. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Environmental damage that happens in other countries counts as US caused if it's done by US corporations. E.g., the Union Carbide disaster may have happened in India, but it was a US corporation that caused it. Come now, take responsibility for your (collective) actions.

      So the 2006 Alaskan oil spill (Prudhoe Bay?) wasn't our fault since it was done by BP (a British Company)? Those damn British!! When are they going to start taking responsibility for their (collective) actions!

    58. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by beav007 · · Score: 1

      He was talking about "total", not "in terms of power production".

    59. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by quarterbuck · · Score: 1

      USA was the most polluting until early this year. And Per Capita, US is till the most polluting ( having 1/3rd as many people as India or China). So giving cars to India may actually be better for the environment. Indians have cars, they buy more gas, gas prices go up -> US drives less. This is effect is better for the environment since Indians drive more fuel efficient cars (47 mpg for Nano vs. 23 for the average US car).
      So on a miles traveled basis, introducing Nano benefits the world!

      --
      http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
    60. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by quarterbuck · · Score: 1

      single button in the centre of the dashboard which steers you in a random direction.
      Perfectly suited for a drive in an Indian metro, then.

      --
      http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
    61. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aah. The locals allowed it, therefore it's their fault, not the Americans that actually did it. So Ameicans are not responsible for anything they do, so long as nobody tells them they're not allowed to do whatever bad thing they're doing.

      You're even dumber than the last guy who posted here.

    62. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sir (or ma'am), you apparently have a soft spot in your heart for the USA, so what I'm about to tell you will make you quite happy: There is a well respected and intelligent gentleman here in the United States of America named Reverend Jeremiah Wright. To quote his wise words, "No no no, not God bless America. God damn America! It's in the Bible!"

      At first I didn't believe that the words "God damn America" were in the Bible, so I checked for myself. Lo and behold, it actually says it:

      In the beginning, God damn America created the Heaven and the Earth. -Genesis 1:1

      Another reference:

      And God damn America spoke unto Abraham, saying, "Go forth from your native land..." - Genesis 12:1

    63. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by MrNaz · · Score: 1

      BP paid a fine of $20m for the spill, and allowed its management to come under the review of Alaskan regulators. They also submitted to future regulation of activities in Prodhoe Bay.

      Union Carbide brought all their staff home and refused to allow them to face charges in India.

      You were saying something?

      --
      I hate printers.
    64. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by syousef · · Score: 1

      ... or maybe a Tata Shuffle, with the steering controls obnoxiously embedded in some earbuds?

      They should make it foot powered...and do a cross licensing deal with Hanna-Barbera.

      Yabba-dabba-doooooo!!!!

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    65. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your deliberate sidestepping of the issues and vomiting up orthogonally relevant facts to muddy the waters lead me to believe you are an industry shill. I would counter these childish attempts to divert attention from the main points, but instead I'll just say this:

      Fuck off.

    66. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by incognito84 · · Score: 1

      The car gets 60mpg. There are hardly, if any, cars on the US market that even come close to this and you're calling it a pollutant? If only Americans would get with the times and drive smaller cars.

    67. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by BikeHelmet · · Score: 1

      I don't know - I've never asked.

      I was out exploring the west coast near Tofino and Ucluelet and saw a strange egg shaped wind turbine on private property.

      That got us talking about it, and then we noticed about 3 more small wind turbines in that area.

      These aren't megawatt producers, but probably are kilowatt producers. It's nice to see people throwing them up individually.

    68. Re:I'm still waiting for the Tata Touch... by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      Cool. I heard that we are allowed to set them up without permission, if they produce less than 10 kilowatts. Have you heard of the 10 Kilowatt Project? I was going to give you a link, but I couldn't find it.

  2. And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The UK and Europe as well as the USA will never EVER see this car.
    And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?

    I could see it if a very low emissions small car was available to the poor to help get the nasty junk off the road...

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?

            No, it's not. So please hand over your car keys.

            (My point being - who the hell are you to decide who gets to drive and who doesn't?)

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by CRCulver · · Score: 1, Interesting

      One reason we wouldn't see it is because few drivers in the West now would stand for a car without power steering.

    3. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Or, more to the point, one without airbags.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by rumith · · Score: 4, Informative

      It will be available in Europe in 2011. Link.

    5. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by oldhack · · Score: 4, Informative

      "And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?"

      I assume you don't own one, yes?

      "I could see it if a very low emissions small car was available to the poor to help get the nasty junk off the road..."

      Nano's emission would be far more benign than 2-cycle autorickshaws, not mention being far more safe.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    6. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by ActusReus · · Score: 1

      Or, more to the point, one that doesn't look "sexy"! (whatever that means)

    7. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by DigiShaman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This car will never see the light of day in the US. You can thank heavy government regulation and lobbying.

      As for enabling more people to drive? Umm, why is it fair to prevent others from enjoying the same quality of life that you or I have? I mean, if people are going to start worrying about the environment, perhaps the solution is to nuke ourselves off this rock for "Urth Mother"?

      Look folks. The rest of the world wants to have the same same standard of living that US and Europe enjoys today. You can't stop or prevent its progression. What you can do however, is develop more efficient ways of achieving that goal.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    8. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      there are also federal (and state) regulations governing automobiles in the US.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    9. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (My point being - who the hell are you to decide who gets to drive and who doesn't?)

      Barak Obama and/or "Algore"

    10. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My point being - who the hell are you to decide who gets to drive and who doesn't?

      He's Lumpy. Get in line soldier. You really need to learn to take your lumps like the rest of us here. ba dum da cha!

    11. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by hobbit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As for enabling more people to drive? Umm, why is it fair to prevent others from enjoying the same quality of life that you or I have?

      Quite. The solution is for you to give up your car, not for them to get one.

      I mean, if people are going to start worrying about the environment, perhaps the solution is to nuke ourselves off this rock for "Urth Mother"?

      You are welcome to commit suicide if you want, but don't presume to make the decision for the rest of us.

      Look folks. The rest of the world wants to have the same same standard of living that US and Europe enjoys today. You can't stop or prevent its progression.

      I may not be able to, but the fact is that the rest of the world simply cannot have the same standard of living that we have. Indeed, in part, we enjoy it because they work for us to have it.

      What you can do however, is develop more efficient ways of achieving that goal.

      That's a good idea, but I'm afraid it's rather too little too late. We're going to have to prepare ourselves for a severe cut in our standards of living.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    12. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by YeeHaW_Jelte · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I'm guessing he's an inhabitant of the country that has been churning out rediculously large gas guzzlers for the last few decades -- so indeed please shut up or trade in your SUV/pickup for a car with reasonable mileage. On the gas saved an Indian could probably drive around all year in one of these without the net world oil consumption going up.

      --

      ---
      "The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
    13. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Quantos · · Score: 1
      From TFA

      There aren't many, but it's far safer than the bicycles and scooters that many Nano buyers will be trading up from. Tata's engineers are working on a series of upgrades, including airbags, anti-lock brakes, power steering, more powerful three-cylinder petrol and diesel engines and five-speed and automatic gearboxes which will allow the Nano to go on sale beyond its home market, and capitalise on the colossal potential created by its base price.

      I think we might be seeing this over here, sooner than some of you think. It would be insufficient for freeways and highways, but it's more than adequate for running around town, well, once the safety features that we expect are in place.

      --
      Some people are only alive because it's against the law for me to hunt them down and kill them.
    14. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Kokuyo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Which country would that be? Germany with BMW, Mercedes and Audi? Or rather a scandinacian one? Volvo comes to mind. And what about all the Japanese SUVs?

      Meanwhile, my 99 Century Buick V6 needs less gas than a Mitsubishi Galant V6 from approximately the same year.

      So what the hell is your point?

    15. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Nano's emission would be far more benign than 2-cycle autorickshaws, not mention being far more safe.

      The irony being if pollution doesn't kill you having an accident in this car will, far more than other vehicles.

    16. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by macshit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?

      Of course not. But it's a sad cycle -- people in very poor countries like this see cars as being status symbols, a sign of wealth. Society (and the government) often treat increase car ownership the same way, as some indicator that they've "made it," and try to emphasize car-oriented development.

      By the time they come to the realization that having every poor schmuck in the city driving to work is a really dumb idea, and not very scalable, it may be too late...

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
    17. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      The rest of the world wants to have the same same standard of living that US and Europe enjoys today. You can't stop or prevent its progression.

      That progression will stop itself, if the whole Earth lived like the US and Europe circa 2000, we (probably all land mammals) would be dead from the pollution within 20 years, if we could even find enough fossil fuel to make "the dream" come true.

    18. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      um, a European version of the car was showcased at the Geneva Motor Show. Basically, a souped version of what is on sale in India. Not sure about the timelines for the EU launch. However TATA's Jaguar Landrover will definitely be leverages to support the EU launch.

    19. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1
      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    20. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where is this Scandinacia you are talking about?

    21. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by AvitarX · · Score: 4, Funny

      Tatas are very sexy though.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    22. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcvos · · Score: 1

      I wonder how the Tata Nano compares to various voiturettes/brommobiels/other tiny car-like vehicles. Those are very popular nowadays, partially for disableds, partially for youths who don't have a driver's license yet.

      I expected them to be not much more expensive than a scooter, and similar in performance to the Tata Nano. Imagine my surprise when I find that they tend to cost $10,000 or more, which is more than some real cars that are fast enough for motorways.

    23. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by pmarini · · Score: 1

      hey, with those two you just waived your rights to free physical exercise while driving and to an excuse that while putting on your make-up you bumped into the car ahead to make-out with the guy driving it... (because I statistically know that slashdot has a huge female fanbase)

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
    24. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh my God! He's right! Quick! Somebody convene a special congress to invent science!

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    25. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by slugstone · · Score: 0

      "I could see it if a very low emissions small car was available to the poor to help get the nasty junk off the road..."

      Why just the poor? I would think anybody could own one.

    26. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No problem. I'd gladly give up my wifes guzzler (29.9mpg) for a smart four-two, I already drive a 50mpg Geo Metro summer and a 38mpg Suzuki sidekick sport 4X4 for the winter.. we only get 84 inches of snow a year here and typically had 1 foot of snowfall per storm so I'm being a pussy for using a 4x4 in the winter..

      I wish I could buy a 50mpg small car here in the states for under $9500.00 but we have large numbers of really dumb people that think owning a canyonero is what you are supposed to do.

      Honestly, I WISH these would come the the states. but they wont because of the ridiculous safety laws designed to keep small cheap cars out of the country.

      But, enabling 29,000,000,000 people to buy a car and drive around is not always a great idea. Everyone is already bitching about how cars are destroying the planet so would enabling more cars be a bad idea? Just going from the eco freaks that complain here. cars still = bad right? or was that last week.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    27. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcvos · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nano's emission would be far more benign than 2-cycle autorickshaws, not mention being far more safe.

      And that's the real point here. Lots of people in countries like Indian and China are transporting themselves and their entire family on old and dangerous motorbikes not suited for that task. The Nano isn't to get more people on the road, it's to get road users to use a safer vehicle, more suited for their needs.

    28. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by furby076 · · Score: 1

      1% of a 1 billion pop country buying this country = a LOT more pollution & much more demand on oil which means higher gas prices.
      Not to forget this car doesn't have many standard safety features.
      Not to forget India driving rules are a lot less restrictive then other countries
      There is also the issue where many people in India got along fine without cars. They didn't "need" it because their life was based on not having it. Now that this vehicle came out things will change and eventually the India population will "need" cars.

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    29. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why not spend that money on decent public transportation? just because USA snobs poo-poo riding a bus or train does not mean the rest of the planet has that stick firmly planted in their rear ends as well...

      The public transportation systems in many places need upgrading. Sounds like a better way to spend money than to enable more cars on the road. India already has a traffic nightmare in all it's major cities.. In Chennai, it's near suicide to step off the curb or to be in a car on those roads... How will this car help that?

      Yes I'm a US citizen that has actually left his country and went to other places. Traffic in India is INSANE (France is even more insane!) and I cant see this car helping.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    30. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are welcome to commit suicide if you want, but don't presume to make the decision for the rest of us.

      then how dare you presume to make the decision for the rest of us that we shouldn't be driving cars!

    31. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "And honestly, is it really a good idea to enable more people to buy cars?"

      "Of course not."

      It is only a bad idea because the parent asked the wrong question. The question should be:

      "Since more people are definitely going to drive cars in the future, should we continue on the current path rather than developing better technologies to reduce emissions and counteract already inflicted environmental damage."

      The answer to that question is indeed of course not . Asking if it is a good idea for more people to have cars is like asking if it is a good idea for humans to procreate. I ask the question myself from time to time, but the answer is moot ;-)

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    32. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by furby076 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree with the sentiment but it is not black and white. Most people in India have lived their entire lives without cars and didn't need it. Their family, work, friends, home were all (for the most part) in relative distances. This car is so cheap they will get it (even if just 1% that's 10 mil more drivers on a 1 billion pop) and eventually need it.

      Gas demand will go up, pollution will go up.

      This is not some miracle of technology -it is worse then good.

      To turn around to countries that have been using cars for years in a major way and say "well give up your car" - rememebr those countries' lifestyles have been based around cars for many years...in the US since the 40's-50's (really before then, but that was an insane boom time). The AVERAGE american commute is 30 minutes by car - not feasible by foot/bike...and 30 minutes by car usually means about 1-1.5 hours by train/bus each direction. Again, it's living standard. If you never had it you didn't build your life around it.

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    33. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Which country would that be? Germany with BMW, Mercedes and Audi? Or rather a scandinacian one? Volvo comes to mind. And what about all the Japanese SUVs?

      Meanwhile, my 99 Century Buick V6 needs less gas than a Mitsubishi Galant V6 from approximately the same year.

      So what the hell is your point?

      Yeah, and where are all the SUVs from those foreign car companies sold? You don't think Toyota started making SUVs to take advantage of the lucrative large-truck-in-Tokyo market, do you?

      Oh sure they do sell in other markets, but the point is that nobody has latched onto the gas-guzzling needlessly-oversized truck and SUV like in America. And therefore nobody from there, including those driving Century Buicks, should be pointing fingers at Indians buying the cheapest car ever and saying "Hey you shouldn't do that!"

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    34. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These cars don't hold women? Sign Me Up!

    35. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But, enabling 29,000,000,000 people to buy a car and drive around is not always a great idea.

            So when Henry Ford rolled out the Model T for under $800 or so, with the intention of selling it to the masses, he was "enabling" the destruction of the environment, etc? After all, before Ford came along, cars were an item only affordable by the 1% richest part of the population.

            So how come Americans can get mass produced cars for "the common man" (with all the environmental destruction involved) and Indians cannot? Suddenly it's a bad idea if Indians and Chinese wish to progress...

            Fundamentally I understand your point - if everyone has a straw sucking up the oil fields, then they will dry up much faster. But I say that you cannot stop the rest of the world from trying to progress - either physically or morally. After all, America showed the world that a life of materialism and luxury is desirable since most of your middle class has (until recently) attained it, and Hollywood keeps exporting and advertising it. Then you want to tell the world - "no, this is for US, it's not for YOU". A word of advice: watch your back.

            However if we don't find a viable, portable and economically feasible source of energy soon, there's going to be one hell of a fight for the last few billion barrels of oil - and I'm not even sure the US would win.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    36. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by furby076 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yes I enjoy such draconic rules as:
      1) You must get car insurance so when you hit me my medical bills and pain and suffering is covered. India does not have this
      2) Your car must meet certain safety standards so you can mitigate the damage you do to yourself and your friends/family when you hit something with your car. This saves on insurance costs, keeping the cost to insurance for other people down. India does not have this.
      3) Your car needs to meet certain emissions standards. Low gas consumption is not the only concern in emissions. India does not have this.
      4) Your car requires you to have a drivers license to drive, annual inspections/emissions. To make sure you have at least some cursory knowledge of the road rules, and to make sure your car's tail-pipe won't fal off in mid drive. India does not have this.
      5) Your way of life was dictated to you before you were born (unless you are about 80-90 years old). People in the US/UK/Germany and other countries where cars have been a dime a dozen for many decades are needed because people built their lives around it (not necessarily by choice). India does not have this (for long).

      Just because something can be done doesn't make it a good idea. Let's see how India enjoys $4/gallon gas prices - which will happen with an extra 10 mil drivers. Let's see how long it will take them to get the necessary rules/regulations to bring their cars up to snuff and then let's see if those cars make it.

      --

      I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
    37. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by wilper · · Score: 1

      Wait.

      Just because we did it does not mean it is a good idea. We used to dig down copper cables to each and every house to get telephone connectivity, back in the old days.

      These days many of the emerging economies build cell phone networks instead, since those are cheaper to build. Most would agree that they are better too.

      Perhaps those economies should do the 'right' thing and invest in better public transportations instead of slavishly following in our footsteps. It has worked well in one area, chances are it will in others.

    38. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Kokuyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Switzerland is overrun with SUVs as well, as is Germany. The trend may have been started in the US but Europe was quick to pick it up and give it momentum.

    39. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I live in the United States. I willfully do not own a car. I carpool 20 miles every day (both ways).

      It would be trivial for me to take money out of my bank account and buy a used car. I think I have firm moral ground to make commentary about vehicle usage around the world. I choose not to, though.

      It's just as unfair of you to paint 300 million people with such a wide paintbrush as it is for the GGP to do the same to people in India.

    40. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To turn around to countries that have been using cars for years in a major way and say "well give up your car" - rememebr those countries' lifestyles have been based around cars for many years...in the US since the 40's-50's (really before then, but that was an insane boom time). The AVERAGE american commute is 30 minutes by car - not feasible by foot/bike...and 30 minutes by car usually means about 1-1.5 hours by train/bus each direction. Again, it's living standard. If you never had it you didn't build your life around it.

            I agree that no one will willingly give up their lifestyle (which is characterized by unparalleled per capita WASTEFULNESS) in America and Europe. The key word here is WILLINGLY. However you need to realize that people in less developed countries will not willingly give up their right to strive for a better standard of living.

            Your argument is basically "we already have it, so you can't" is a non sequitur. Of course it's easy to argue for the position that favors yourself - you've grown comfortable in that position. I'm taking the other side of the argument - first it's not your decision to make - the last barrel of oil will go to the highest bidder. Supply and demand determine this, not pseudo-morality. Second - if you try to enforce a double standard on developing nations (it's ok for us but not for you), be prepared for a fight to the death - since after all a prohibition will be considered "death" by the developing nation anyway, therefore they have nothing to lose.

            Humans will only understand that the oil is gone after the oil is gone. We're not good at forward thinking on a collective basis - if you want examples just look at the US government.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    41. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Ignoring the arrogance of your statement this car will be an environmental plus.
      The people who would buy this car would have probably bought a motorcycle instead.
      Lets compare.
      Tata, third world motorcycle
      60mpg, 50mpg
      4 seats, 2 seats

      Guess which one is more environmentally friendly, especially if you car pool. Now I can only hope the parts are cheap and its easy to repair, otherwise people will be throwing away their tata instead of getting it fixed which would make it the loser in this competition.

    42. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are obviously NOT from Scandiniceia.

    43. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by obarthelemy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The "I got it first ! now you DIE" argument.

      Or maybe, after taking care of the supply side by invading Iraq, the US should start taking care of the demand side by invading India and regressing them to the stone age ?

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    44. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by patro · · Score: 1

      Look folks. The rest of the world wants to have the same same standard of living that US and Europe enjoys today. You can't stop or prevent its progression.

      The problem is everyone cannot have the same standard of living, because Earth cannot support it.

      So if lots of people want to live significantly better there it means people here must give up parts of their standard of living.

      Are you ready to give up your car keys and your other stuff, so they can live better there? You had your fun, now it's their turn.

    45. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by tompeach · · Score: 1

      4) Your car requires you to have a drivers license to drive, annual inspections/emissions. To make sure you have at least some cursory knowledge of the road rules, and to make sure your car's tail-pipe won't fal off in mid drive. India does not have this.

      Not so: http://www.indiandrivingschools.com/driving-license-in-india.html
      I suspect 2) and 3) are inaccurate too.

    46. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      rememebr those countries' lifestyles have been based around cars for many years...in the US since the 40's-50's (really before then, but that was an insane boom time). The AVERAGE american commute is 30 minutes by car - not feasible by foot/bike...and 30 minutes by car usually means about 1-1.5 hours by train/bus each direction. Again, it's living standard. If you never had it you didn't build your life around it.

      Yes, and why shouldn't they pursue a higher standard of living even if a higher standard of living means that you base your lifestyle around having a car? Maybe they too would like to have better jobs and usually better jobs are only possible when they're concentrated in certain locations - such as office buildings. Perhaps you can suggest an alternative lifestyle that enables a higher standard of living but doesn't require car ownership (so that you despite that can choose a nice place to live and have a good job) . Remember that we have public transportation and despite efforts to improve it, people want to own cars.

    47. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who are you to pollute other people's air?

    48. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by master811 · · Score: 1

      Except the UK and Europe will see it.
       
      It's called the Tata Europa, granted it will also cost about 3-4 times the price due to all the extra safety features required.

    49. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by codecracker007 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      1) car insurance is compulsory in India, covers the car, not the driver. Takes care of damages to the car as well as to the victims.
      2) Safety standards exist, albeit for the typical India roads where the speed limits rarely exceed 50 km/hr [convert this to m/hr yourself , please].
      3) Nano is compliant with Euro 4, the present European emission standards.
      4) Gross mis-information, smacks of ignorance at best and racism at worst.
      5) ....thus spoke the western overlord..go back to your bullock cart...you deserve not what you hath not?

      and well the price of petrol [gasoline] has been hovering around the $4/gallon mark for last 4 years in India.

      --
      7-8-9-10-0
    50. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US has zero population growth due to native births. India does not.

    51. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your argument is basically "we already have it, so you can't" is a non sequitur.

      But that's not his argument. His argument is, here in north america, we made the huge mistake of designing communities such that a vehicle was a requirement for living. In particular, the suburban and ex-urban phenomenon has left your average American completely incapable of living without personal long-distance transportation. And this phenomenon is coupled with a truly massive underfunding of public transportation, meaning that even those within a reasonable distance of their place of work have no option but to drive.

      And so, the solution isn't to give Indians more cars, thus encouraging the very lifestyle north america has mistakenly committed themselves to. The solution is to build communities where cars *aren't necessary in the first place*. Not because "we already have it, so you can't", but because "we already have it, and trust me, you really don't want it".

    52. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who are you to pollute other people's air?

            An argument which can be applied to yourself, also. But hey, maybe I pollute even less than you. In fact since my father and I planted over 500,000 trees on land deforested by our farm's previous owner, I think my personal carbon debt is at least marginally less than yours.

    53. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason they (China/India) cannot is because it's too late. Globalization has already started to impose much stricter regulations and guidelines for pollution emissions.

      You are basically asking why, in 2009, is it not ok to kick-start Industrial Era style pollution? The answer is because as a global community we've decided against that.

    54. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by neolateral · · Score: 2, Informative
      Most of the claims you make are incorrect. Please see http://www.bangaloretrafficpolice.gov.in/traffic_provisions.htm

      Section 158: Any person driving a motor vehicle in any public place, shall, on being required by a Police Officer in uniform, produce:
      1. certificate of Insurance
      2. certificate of registration
      3. driving license
      4. in case of transport vehicles, also the certificate of fitness and the permit

      I think, certificate of fitness includes emission certificate which you need to get every 6 months.
      India's emission standards - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_standard#Republic_of_India

    55. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by dragonjujotu · · Score: 1

      Actually if you read the original article posted here (I'm too lazy to look), it mentioned that many people were traveling on mopeds and motorbikes with multiple passengers including young children. This is not an attempt to bring transportation to the country; it's an attempt to bring "safer" transportation. As always, it's relative.

      --
      Yes, I am obsessed with ellipses.
    56. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      '99 Buick Century? Hi, Grandma!

    57. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm the guy who dumps my garbage in your yard. I assume that's okay with you since I'm breathing the air pollution from your car (I don't have a car, BTW).

    58. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      1 - why you too damn cheap to buy the insurance on yourself? Oh wait it's a you must pay for me attitude.

      2 - Sorry but cars made in the 70's and 80's WITHOUT that "tech" are as safe as the latest safety car. Seatbelts, an item that costs near nothing today gives more to your safety than the last 10 innovations put together.

      3 - I agree with this, Cant have two cycle oil belchers running the road.

      4 - Drivers license, American drivers license requirements are a utter joke. Most of those morons on the roads cant drive and thay have licenses.

      5 - All of the "auto giants" lobbied hard to stifle public transportation growth in america. Today it really is ragingly stupid that a programmer or office worker has to drive to the office building to work. It's the lack of education in management that perpetuates the sillyness of actually going to work to sit and do the same thing you can do at home or elsewhere.

      That said, Most of American car safety standard were designed to keep cheap cars out of the united states to protect domestic car makers. They did not realize that Forign car makes would come here and kick their asses on US soil. Cars like Hyundai are better built and cheaper than GM and ford offerings and people are noticing. Plus they dont have to pay a guy $28.50 an hour to turn one bolt on every car.

      Do not be fooled, most of our "regulations" are for protecting a domestic economy and not for your safety.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    59. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by kwashburn · · Score: 1

      In a way, India and China were ahead of the US by not relying on cars for everyone to make their economies work. The US is not the ultimate role model to follow. Just because Americans all drive cars doesn't mean it constitutes some new minimum standard of living. America screwed itself over by becoming so oil-dependent. Why would China and India want that just as they are rising economically?

    60. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by TheAmit · · Score: 1

      No we havent decided that as a global community. Maybe the western world has decided we enjoyed its benefits now lets deny it to the developing countries

    61. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      This car will never see the light of day in the US. You can thank heavy government regulation and lobbying.

      Plus it doesn't create jobs like those US built cars where you need a lot more mechanic time and a large spare part industry to keep them going.

    62. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, it gets about 40 mpg (Summer usually 39-45, winter usually 36-42) and lasts (obviously with repairs) for 15 years?

      Indeed it will likely top the above car, it's estimated at 51/61mpg as opposed to the 36/39 of the car above. However, the 40 or so mpg is city driving, so we'll see if it does better or worse in actual driving.

      These may get more, but to characterize all inhabitants of the country you mean, but aren't willing to say, as those who drive SUVs is wrong at best.

      How many mpg or L/1000km does your car get?

    63. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3) Your car needs to meet certain emissions standards. Low gas consumption is not the only concern in emissions. India does not have this.

      Look up the Bharat I, II and II emission norms. Compare them to the European ones.

      (Let me make it easier for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_standard#Republic_of_India )

      4) Your car requires you to have a drivers license to drive, annual inspections/emissions. To make sure you have at least some cursory knowledge of the road rules, and to make sure your car's tail-pipe won't fal off in mid drive. India does not have this.

      Look up PUC Checks. This time, I'll leave you to do the searching.

      5) Your way of life was dictated to you before you were born (unless you are about 80-90 years old). People in the US/UK/Germany and other countries where cars have been a dime a dozen for many decades are needed because people built their lives around it (not necessarily by choice). India does not have this (for long).

      Are you saying people and places don't change? If you haven't lived in India in the last ten years you would not appreciate the changes that have taken place.

      Just because something can be done doesn't make it a good idea. Let's see how India enjoys $4/gallon gas prices - which will happen with an extra 10 mil drivers. Let's see how long it will take them to get the necessary rules/regulations to bring their cars up to snuff and then let's see if those cars make it.

      Currently, prices in the metros are at 3.8 USD/Gal. This is after dropping down from those insane oil prices a year ago. Things were chugging along just fine.

    64. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcguiver · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just because it is the path that America went down doesn't mean that it is the best path for other nations to follow. We can now see the problems that have occurred because of our dependence on oil, both in terms of foreign wars and environmental impact. I think that the argument against giving them gas-powered cars is valid. With all of the environmental clean-up efforts going on that would be the complete opposite of helpful. However, that said, there are other technologies that would be useful to them. I think that India would be a perfect market for electric cars. Electric cars are not big in America because the average American's commute exceeds the range and speed requirements for the average electric car currently in production. However, in a country like India where most of the population hasn't had cars, electric cars could provide a good standard of living increase while still meeting all of their needs and not using more of the worlds oil and while not contributing to CO2 production.

    65. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcgrew · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That's a good idea, but I'm afraid it's rather too little too late. We're going to have to prepare ourselves for a severe cut in our standards of living.

      Back in 1976 I took an economics class that had three professors, all of whom were about as smart as a house cat. These bozos were trying to say that the US was going to have to lower its standard of living, too, just like you are now.

      I'd just gotten back from Thailand a couple of years earlier when I had been in the USAF, and at the time it was a 3rd world couuntry. No paved roads, no electricity, no natural gas; very little infrastructure.

      But I had rented a bungalow for $35 a month. I could feed myself and three Thai hookers at a nice restaraunt for a dollar, and get change back. A taxi ride to the base was a dollar, a bhat bus ride cost a nickle. Twenty sticks of fine Thail bud was four dollars.

      You can't compere the economy of a 3rd world country to a 1st world country. You hear "they can live on a thousand dollars a year, why can't you?" like I heard from the idiot economists teaching that class, but they can't see that if prices were a 50th as high as ours, we could live on a 50th of the paycheck.

      I called them idiots, marched out of the class (with half the other students following me), went straight to enrollment and cancelled that class. History has shown those economic "experts" wrong, and me right.

      History always shows economists wrong. I have no idea why anyone would listen to ANYTHING an economist would say.

      Ronald Reagan used to say "a high tide lifts all boats," but if the boat is moored with a short rope the high tide will sink it.

    66. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      before Ford came along, cars were an item only affordable by the 1% richest part of the population.

      Before Ford came along there was an abundance of horse shit filling up city streets. From my experience in India, the only creatures shitting in the streets where dogs and humans.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    67. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      But that's not his argument. His argument is, here in north america, we made the huge mistake of designing communities such that a vehicle was a requirement for living.

      then correct your mistake. you can't make others learn without them making the same mistake themselves.
      since the american people have for decades and continue to lead a life that has inherent wastefulness, they cannot advise others not to make the same mistake. you must correct yourself first, only then will you have a say in the matter.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    68. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      Does your existence have a point? ;)

    69. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      29.9mpg is a guzzler?

      My truck gets 10mpg in the city and 17mpg on the highway, yet I would never get rid of it, I don't want to drive a death trap of a Geo Metro and I like to be able to easily get in and out of my vehicles.

    70. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by khanyisa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You have to remember motorbikes and auto-rickshaws which are another common form of transport. Cheap low-emissions cars could well replace those, reducing the net pollution per person transported...

    71. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by kj_kabaje · · Score: 1

      According to NPR this morning, it is a low emissions car. About the same as a Prius hybrid.

    72. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2, Informative

      i wouldn't call it "overrun". there are certainly many more suvs out there than 10 years ago and there are by all means too many of them (even one of them is one too many) but they are still a minority and they aren't as large as american ones.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    73. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      typical american with *zero* knowledge of world outside his backyard, eh? As an Indian, let me enlighten you a bit.

      1) You must get car insurance so when you hit me my medical bills and pain and suffering is covered. India does not have this

      >>> oh really? have you owned a car in india?

      2) Your car must meet certain safety standards so you can mitigate the damage you do to yourself and your friends/family when you hit something with your car. This saves on insurance costs, keeping the cost to insurance for other people down. India does not have this.

      >> ditto as above. The standards are different, because the average speed is also lower.

      3) Your car needs to meet certain emissions standards. Low gas consumption is not the only concern in emissions. India does not have this.

      >> oh really? how come my father has to have yearly (or bi-yearly) emisson inspections for his car in India?

      4) Your car requires you to have a drivers license to drive, annual inspections/emissions. To make sure you have at least some cursory knowledge of the road rules, and to make sure your car's tail-pipe won't fal off in mid drive. India does not have this.

      >> oh really? So why was it that I had to take an exam (failed once) when I was 18 for my driving license in India?

      5) Your way of life was dictated to you before you were born (unless you are about 80-90 years old). People in the US/UK/Germany and other countries where cars have been a dime a dozen for many decades are needed because people built their lives around it (not necessarily by choice). India does not have this (for long).

      >> what this junk? looks like too much fox network. India is not dependent on cars. People have options. We have a huge rail network and enough public/hirable transportation to make it possible for oneto go to a different city and get around without having o drive or hire a car, in far cheaper manner. And we are okay with it.

      The nano is for a family that has overgrown their two-wheeler.

      and as for you, just travel a bit in the world. the rest of the world has many different ways of making things work.

    74. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      1) You must get car insurance so when you hit me my medical bills and pain and suffering is covered. India does not have this 3) Your car needs to meet certain emissions standards. Low gas consumption is not the only concern in emissions. India does not have this. 4) Your car requires you to have a drivers license to drive, annual inspections/emissions. To make sure you have at least some cursory knowledge of the road rules, and to make sure your car's tail-pipe won't fal off in mid drive. India does not have this.

      tell me, are you just mad or do you intentionally refuse to pull you head out of your ass?
      i don't know about anywhere else, but what i know about india is:
      1. a third party insurance is mandatory in india. you can expect a month's prison term if you are caught driving without insurance.
      2. ditto for emission standards. euro 5 standards are mandatory here and has to be checked every three months.
      3. how in hell did you even think there is no driving license required in india? i won't even bother to explain.
      so next time, just try to collect some facts and some knowledge about what you talk about.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    75. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) You must get car insurance so when you hit me my medical bills and pain and suffering is covered.

      In the USA and Canada, some states/provinces have "no fault" insurance requirements so that each person pays for their own pain and suffering - regardless of fault.

      As a practical matter, a lot of accidents are hit-and-run so, even in states that require you to carry insurance for other people, other people will not, in many cases, be paying your expenses.

      Your car must meet certain safety standards so you can mitigate the damage you do to yourself and your friends/family when you hit something with your car.

      But you can still drive around in a massive SUV and crush other people - even when the accident is entirely your fault. Comprehensive traffic safety is hardly a big priority in the USA.

      Having had my own car crushed by a reckless SUV driver in a hit-and-run on an LA freeway, I'm not seeing that cheap little cars are really all that much worse than the current situation in the USA.

    76. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by oldhack · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Dude, at least give up one of your cars before whining about allowing others to have just one - typical Indian families have far more to go before catching up anywhere near your level of consumption.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    77. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      then correct your mistake. you can't make others learn without them making the same mistake themselves.

      Well that's simply ridiculous. You're saying an addict can't tell their child that drugs are bad? Or a heart patient can't tell their relatives to eat healthy?

      Should the US try and fix it's problems? Yes, of course. But that doesn't mean it can't speak from authority when it says that a culture dependent on cheap gas and personal transportation is a really *bad* idea.

    78. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing he's an inhabitant of the country that has been churning out rediculously large gas guzzlers for the last few decades

      Hi. I know you weren't talking about me, but I am an inhabitant of such a country with loads of over-sized cars. Therefore, I think my voice should be heard, too.

      -- so indeed please shut up or trade in your SUV/pickup for a car with reasonable mileage.

      I'll do neither. First, I think it is a very bad idea to make private cars affordable to more people. In fact, I think prices should go up, maybe $10 per liter? Or $50? (As a tax for private cars, not for public transportation, of course.)

      That would help the environment a lot.

      Second, I'll not hand in my car or my car keys. Nope. Never. Because I don't own a car, yes, I don't even have a driver's license, no need for that. What I do have is good public transportation in my city; I think more countries and more cities should invest in public transportation. Really, there's no need for your own car if you don't live in the outback.

    79. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mooglez · · Score: 1

      The UK and Europe as well as the USA will never EVER see this car.

      Really? I just read today on magazine that the Tata NANO already has an european release date. the price has gone up a bit tho, as Europe has stricter safety requirements that they need to implement.

    80. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by houghi · · Score: 1

      To me that sounds pretty black and white. People who have one can keep it. People who do not can't get one.

      Perhaps it would be better to find incentives to reduce your commute time just like you had incentives to increase them. Perhaps higher prices will be that incentive.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    81. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mm heavy government regulation and lobbying like, the fact that the car does not have power steering or air conditioning?

    82. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anubis350 · · Score: 1

      However if we don't find a viable, portable and economically feasible source of energy soon, there's going to be one hell of a fight for the last few billion barrels of oil - and I'm not even sure the US would win.

      remember, the largest oil fields in the world are actually in the US not to mention the currently economically-unfeasible-to-tap shale in the US, the US is only in such a bad state oil-wise because of how much we consume, but we'd still be better off than most in the situation you paint

      --
      "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    83. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Toyota's first vehicle was the Land Cruiser BJ Series in 1951. Built for the Korean war. Still remains a vehicle of superb quality and endurance. That's why it's still around.

    84. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      Far more so than on a motorcycle? Because that's the target market it'd be replacing, you know.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    85. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if everyone has a straw sucking up the oil fields, then they will dry up much faster

      SSLLLLURRRRPRP! I DRINK IT UP!!

    86. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, What's a 10 year old Maruti 800 going for? Isn't it about half the price of this car? Sure RS80000 is dirt cheap for a brand new car, but if price is the barrier to most Indian people, they already have millions of cheaper used cars to buy.

      Who buys cars in this price range in India? Will they replace a smoking jalopie with one of these, or will they keep on driving a 20 year old, but servicable, Honda Civic?

    87. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by vigmeister · · Score: 1

      Are you ready to give up your car keys and your other stuff, so they can live better there? You had your fun, now it's their turn.

      Nobody gives up anything. Those who can live better will and the world will reach an equilibrium. You aren't worried about competing with Indians, are you?

      I thought it was the USA who were proponents of freedom and capitalism. I didn't know that some of those who lived here thought it only applied to the contiguous states.

      --
      Atheist: Buddhist in a Prius
    88. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Idiomatick · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ahahaha. Japanese SUVs are designed for the US. Go to japan or most countries in europe. The average car is half the size of what you see in the US. Coming back from Italy and Japan on my return I thought I entered a land of giant novelty sized vehicles. Japan also doesn't really use vehicles in the first place. I was on the road twice compared to the numerous times I was on trains, shinkansen and buses.

    89. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Every time we see an article about economic development in China or technology coming to India, we get these discussions about whether the developments are right or prudent. Invariably people start arguing that it is only fair and just for people in the undeveloped world to go through the same industrial revolution that the developed world did. This is silly.

      I don't want cars to become as pervasive in India as they are in the US, but it is not because I want the oil fields to last longer or because I want to be the only cool kid with a car*. I am hoping that India will not follow in the US's footsteps, not because I want to exclude them from the developed world, but rather because I want them to learn from our mistakes.

      I am sick of people apologizing for horrible working conditions or extreme environmental degradation in India or China by saying it is just an essential part of progress. Why can't the developed and undeveloped worlds learn from the mistakes of the industrial revolution and bring India, China, et al to the developed world in a better way? Is it obvious how to do it? No, but we should still try. And we certainly cannot justify 100,000,000 new polluting cars in India with "But the US has lots of cars too! It's not fair!"

      P.S. Perhaps it isn't fair, but in that case perhaps our response should be to remove cars from the US rather than to add them to India.

      *I don't actually have a car, so maybe I am just jealous.

    90. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by RunsWithMatches · · Score: 2, Funny

      ...My point being - who the hell are you to decide who gets to drive and who doesn't?

      Obama's car czar, of course.

    91. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by patro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I thought it was the USA who were proponents of freedom and capitalism.

      Don't believe everything they say on TV. :)

      The USA is a proponent of free trade only as long as it serves its own interests.

    92. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      But, enabling 29,000,000,000 people to buy a car and drive around is not always a great idea.

      29 billion is ahelluvalot. Where did you get the numbers? ;)

    93. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhh... it's not like he can actually drive both vehicles at the same time.

      Although, that would be quite a trick.

    94. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by YeeHaW_Jelte · · Score: 1

      My point is that your buick still only does 21 mpg, which would be considered a very very poor mileage for any car sold in Europe or Japan.

      And yes, there are SUV made by every brand nowadays, but the american ones are still bigger, more powerfull and thus more gas consuming that the European and Japanese. Also the relative percentage of these big cars to more reasonably sized cars is much higher in the states than in either Europe or Japan.

      I'm not saying Europe or Japan aren't too blame, it's just that the States have been very late to admit to the enviromental impact they're making and later still to actually start reducing it.

      Y'all are still using roughly twice as much resource per capita as Europeans or Japanese, guys. Wake up and smell the coffee.

      And why do you need a V6 anyway?

      http://www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/noframes/15079.shtml

      --

      ---
      "The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
    95. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Okay the USA isn't mostly city, like people who never leave LA and NYC tend to think.

      USA is mostly open country, and large portions are well outside "city limits". Even here in Nor Cal, we are surrounded by mountains and such.

      SUVs are nothing but enclosed 4x4 trucks. They are big, heavy and get through all sorts of mud, snow and streams that I wouldn't dare take a subcompact even near.

      The problem is that do-good city liberals think that their one size fits all rules should apply to everyone everywhere, even when it is clear that it doesn't work in most places (if at all).

      So quit harping on SUVs, they aren't the problem. The problem is that not everyone fits in a Mini Cooper or even a midsize car. And if SUVs didn't exist, you'd be harping on people driving Crown Vics. And if it isn't one thing, it is another. Motorcycle drivers would complain about any car, and bicycle riders would be complaining about motorcycles. And pedestrians would complain about Bicycles.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    96. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Ian+Alexander · · Score: 1

      And therefore nobody from there, including those driving Century Buicks, should be pointing fingers at Indians buying the cheapest car ever and saying "Hey you shouldn't do that!"

      Not even Americans who choose to rely on public transit? We exist, I assure you.

    97. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by blitzkrieg3 · · Score: 1
      I don't own a car. For all of you that are talking about how you can't give up your cars, I'm proof that it can happen.

      But that's not his argument. His argument is, here in north america, we made the huge mistake of designing communities such that a vehicle was a requirement for living. In particular, the suburban and ex-urban phenomenon has left your average American completely incapable of living without personal long-distance transportation. And this phenomenon is coupled with a truly massive underfunding of public transportation, meaning that even those within a reasonable distance of their place of work have no option but to drive.

      And so, the solution isn't to give Indians more cars, thus encouraging the very lifestyle north america has mistakenly committed themselves to. The solution is to build communities where cars *aren't necessary in the first place*. Not because "we already have it, so you can't", but because "we already have it, and trust me, you really don't want it".

      Then I expect you and GP to give up your moderately sized house, your car, and move to a metropolitan area or some other planned community where you have everything you need within walking distance.

      Despite all of the associated problems, personal mobility represents a huge increase in the standard of living. I think you're in a tiny minority of Americans that "don't want" to have a larger house for less money, don't want to have a larger choice in vacation destinations, don't want to have the pleasure of carrying you're groceries all the way from the store to your house, and don't want to forgo the hassle and expense of renting a truck or arranging delivery every time a piece of furniture is bought.

    98. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No... I think the global community really has. A majority of them, anyway. And, more importantly, if they haven't yet, they quickly will if such a thing comes to pass.

      The pollution and environmental devastation of the Industrial Revolution was enormous, intense, and, in many places, catastrophic. It's important to remember that this was done on the scale of only millions of people and it was bad enough. Now do the same thing on the scale of billions of people. That's not a pretty picture.

      If any society tries to implement such a thing, I think the backlash from their own populace will be stronger than international pressure.

      No, we won't be seeing anything like that again.

    99. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Just because it is the path that America went down doesn't mean that it is the best path for other nations to follow.

      Yes, and if India decides that they should follow a different path, then more power to them.

      I think that the argument against giving them gas-powered cars is valid.

      We aren't giving them anything, and thus it is not our choice to not give them. We are not the Greek gods, and Tata Motors is not Prometheus, okay?

      It's the whole attitude here that pisses me off. I'd have no problem if people were saying "Hey India, look at what heavy adoption of cars at the expense of public transportation did to our country. You might want to think before making the same mistake we did." Instead, all I hear is this air of superior judgement, all "India shouldn't be given cars because they're going to fuck up the environment". It's the combination of the hypocrisy of ignoring or downplaying our own effect as polluter, with the sense of superiority where of course nobody can tell us what to do but we can decide whether India should be allowed to have cars that just reeks of hypocrisy and arrogance.

      India already has the gift of fire-in-a-cylinder-with-a-piston. That djinni has been out of the bottle for a long time. And I don't see much to complain about with this particular incarnation. Compared to the fuel economy and emissions of the top gas and hybrid cars, it's competitive on fuel economy and emissions. Compared to the average car in the North American fleet, it's very good. Compared to the two-stroke engines running scooters and auto-rickshaws in the cities of India already, and which the Nano is priced to compete against, it is insanely great on emissions.

      I think that India would be a perfect market for electric cars. I think that India would be a perfect market for electric cars. Electric cars are not big in America because the average American's commute exceeds the range and speed requirements for the average electric car currently in production.

      Except an electric with enough juice for even a short commute is going to cost a hell of a lot more than the Nano. Yes, ICEs are not the ideal solution going forward. In the meantime, electrics serve some few needs, and hopefully will serve more in the future. In the meantime, if they want to improve their standard of living in a way that will be both affordable and get them halfway across the city and back or to the next town and back, and which will actually reduce emissions when it replaces the currently highly emissive vehicles that clog New Delhi, then who are you or I to say no? It's not like we're setting a better example, now are we? There's nothing wrong with discussing the issues, there is something wrong with riding a high horse while doing so.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    100. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by N1AK · · Score: 1

      But that doesn't mean it can't speak from authority when it says that a culture dependent on cheap gas and personal transportation is a really *bad* idea.

      Actually, it does mean American can't speak with authority. Firstly because it seems to have done just fine doing exactly that, and secondly because it hasn't put any real effort into practicing what you want to preach.

      To use your own drug metaphor: How seriously should a child take a parents instructions not to do drugs if that parent is still hitting up a couple of times a day while working as a CEO in the worlds largest company?

    101. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by YeeHaW_Jelte · · Score: 1

      Oh please, SUV's being big and heavy isn't helping them any getting through terrain, even if we do assume that most americans driving these things use them for off terrain driving more than once a year or ever.

      It's perfectly possible to make a small 4x4 that'll do rough terrain with reasonable mileage.

      --

      ---
      "The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
    102. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by blitzkrieg3 · · Score: 1

      Well that's simply ridiculous. You're saying an addict can't tell their child that drugs are bad? Or a heart patient can't tell their relatives to eat healthy?

      If a father tells his kids that drugs are bad right before doing a line of coke to "get him through the night" so he can finish that big presentation, or a heart patient tells his kids to eat their vegetables after finishing a cheeseburger and french fry dinner, then...

      Yes, I am saying that you can't do this and expect the child to have an iota of respect for you.

    103. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes! I could finally buy a car, if only the car related taxes and other payments at the first year weren't a 30-50% of the selling price (after the 22% value added tax) of the car. It's so nice to be a poor European..snif.

    104. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by YeeHaW_Jelte · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah and it's not like driving a car is the only way it polutes.

      It costs energy and resources to make a car, you know.

      --

      ---
      "The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
    105. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Stewie241 · · Score: 1

      I think the key word that he used is you can't **make** others learn without them making the same mistake themselves.

      Sure, an addict can tell their child drugs are bad. Will they really learn? Sometimes. Sometimes not.

    106. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Cars are bad for the US due to pollution and congestion -- there's no doubt about that.

      However, they're a necessary evil for many of us, given that the US does not have the population density to support a nationwide public-transit system. Many of the areas that do have that sort of density were not built with public transport in mind.

      India has 10 times the US's population density. The Indian National Railways is currently the world's largest employer, and operates one of the largest rail networks on the planet.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    107. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      No, the real question we should be asking, is "how can we arrange our cities such that people don't want cars in the future, in order to provide the same convenience and standard of living without all the harmful side effects?" America, having designed all its infrastructure for automobiles for the past 50 years, is screwed. India isn't... yet.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    108. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      It likely cannot meet our emissions and safety standards at that price. But US and Europe doesn't really have the need for it because poverty is less of a problem there. Generally people who have a job make enough money for bus fare or used car in a western economy. The economics for people in India appears to be far different.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    109. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not even Americans who choose to rely on public transit? We exist, I assure you.

      Lucky you that you can, and good for you that you do. Point your finger at your neighbor in the Century Buick, or the Escalade, and convince them to change their ways before pointing your finger halfway around the world at a developing country making a cheap and really quite efficient vehicle. Because otherwise you still sound like a hypocrite.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    110. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      So please hand over your car keys.

      I'd love to. Tell you what, I'll trade you my car keys for a decent mass transit system.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    111. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      I don't own a car. For all of you that are talking about how you can't give up your cars, I'm proof that it can happen.

      No, you're an outlier. Congratulations, and welcome to the club.

      Then I expect you and GP to give up your moderately sized house, your car, and move to a metropolitan area or some other planned community where you have everything you need within walking distance.

      Umm... I already live in such an area. I own a small house (~1400 sq feet). I don't drive a car. I take public transportation to work. And the necessary amenities (groceries, etc), are indeed within walking distance (although, when the whether is good, I prefer cycling as my primary mode of transportation). And I consider my standard of living very high indeed.

      What was your point, again?

      Despite all of the associated problems, personal mobility represents a huge increase in the standard of living.

      Bullshit. First, a) Manhattanites (which, for the record, I am not) have an excellent standard of living and also represent a community that's highly centralized and *extremely* energy efficient. And b) personal mobility doesn't necessary equate to commuter culture.

      US culture has taught people that standard of living == quarter acre in the middle of nowhere. And that's crap. Standard of living means having some space to live, easy access to food and other amenities, relatively low crime and poverty, etc. All of these things can be achieved in the city. But white flight has convinced your average American suburbanite that cities are wretched ghettos that are intolerable to live in. It's a counterproductive cultural phenomenon and it's resulted in a country where it's considered normal to commute multiple hours *each way* to/from work.

      Why any other nation would want to adopt such a culture, I have no idea.

    112. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      I wish I could buy a 50mpg small car here in the states for under $9500

      It may not be a 50 mpg car, but you can certainly get a very fuel efficient used Honda Civic (~40mpg) for considerably less than $9500.

    113. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1
      Absolutely. Lets forget all of this "green ecology" pussyfooting around and just solve the damn cold fusion problem already! ROTFLMAO.

      "America, having designed all its infrastructure for automobiles for the past 50 years, is screwed. India isn't... yet."

      I agree. They should definitely design things around jet packs and teleportation. Here is the word of the day for you.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    114. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 3, Informative

      Most people in India have lived their entire lives without cars and didn't need it

      The target market for this car is not people who have never had transportation. The target market is people who run their families around on scooters and mopeds, like this: http://images.quickblogcast.com/8849-8518/family_scooter.JPG

    115. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by TheAmit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Now i dont like to repeat myself but i posted this somewhere else. There is a cost of giving up gasoline. A cost which will mean it will take longer for these countries to get their people out of poverty if they use anything but proven technologies. The developed world has built up its infrastructure and its standard of living by accessing this cheap and readily accessible fuel. The developing has just reached a point where they have mastered the technology to use this fuel and they are being asked to cease and desist. The kyoto protocol which seeks to equalize this has been effectively blocked by the US and maybe their reasons make sense for the US but then stop talking about doing good for the world

    116. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Firstly because it seems to have done just fine doing exactly that

      Sure, you might believe that. If you're completely blind to the security threats, both economic and geopolitical, created by a deep *deep* dependence on foreign oil.

      secondly because it hasn't put any real effort into practicing what you want to preach.

      Well, naturally, yes. If the US were, today, to engage the Indians and say "don't allow your populace to become dependent upon cheap oil" while continuing to promote exactly that amongst its own population, of course, it would be deeply hypocritical and rightly ignored by the various developing nations.

      If, however, the US were perceived to be attempting to change it's ways, then I think it would have every right to speak out against the spreading of the US suburban culture to the rest of the world.

      Of course, we both know that'd never happen. US politicians aren't going to attack their own people for living a lavish, unsustainable lifestyle. But that doesn't mean people, such as the OP in this little thread, can't speak out against it, and bemoan other nations for following down the same path.

    117. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by ghoul · · Score: 1

      But oh thats OK . We will keep sending the excess off to America. After all its pretty much empty (most of the land is owned by the Federal department of Interior) and smart people are needed in America all the time. So everyone benefits. India keeps its population almost constant till it reaches the level of development where people stop having a lot of kids an the population starts falling . Meanwhile America gets a lot of smart people to keep their economy running.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    118. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      These bozos were trying to say that the US was going to have to lower its standard of living, too, just like you are now.

      I suppose it depends how you define "standard of living." If it means live in a smaller house, drive a smaller, more fuel-efficient car, have fewer 50" flat-panel TVs, then I'd say yes, the USA is going to have to do that. It won't be a socialist imposition or anything like that - It will just be market economics. Large houses are going to become too expensive to heat and cool; large cars and going to become too expensive to drive and lack of free credit means people will have to live more within their means. That's the invisible hand at work.

    119. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Draek · · Score: 1

      then correct your mistake. you can't make others learn without them making the same mistake themselves.

      Sweet then. India shall throw a couple of nuclear bombs at the US just to see how does it feel to annihilate thousands of people with the press of a single button. Then China will nuke India, of course, and just to complete the circle, Japan will be nuking China shortly after that.

      I agree that the US should correct their mistake and restructure their society so that cars aren't a necessity, specially since they're just setting themselves up for disaster once oil runs out, but that's no reason for other countries to do the same stupidity.

      Ohh and if you care, I'm not a US citizen, I walk pretty much everywhere, and I'm certainly not an environazi left-wing nutjob. It's simply an obvious fact that relying on a non-renewable resource in short supply is idiotic at a personal, national or global scale.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    120. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      It's possible to do a lot of incredible things. One man used regular materials on a civic to make it extremely aerodynamic and ended up getting 80MPG.

      The problem is, they don't do any of these things. There are a million big and little ideas that would add very little cost to a vehicle but would greatly increase the comfort and utility. For some reason, vehicle manufacturers locked into a certain vision of what makes a car, and refuse to consider anything else.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    121. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is that he's someone who cares about the environment and the effect that millions of cars has on it.

      And my guess is that you're a self-centered, short-sighted fool who doesn't care about anything but your own pleasures.

    122. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever visited China? I have. Make no mistake about it, the Chinese are industrializing at pace that rivals the US industrial ramp-up during WWII.

      Consensus or not, the "global community" has yet to impose its will upon countries (like China or India) who are gearing up for massive industrialization. Is anyone really going to stop them? China (now the #1 carbon producer) puts a new coal-fired powerplant online at the rate of ONE PER WEEK! Anyone stopping them? Didn't think so.

      The world has a poor track record of standing up to rogue nations of any sort, over any issue. Industrialization is especially tough, since many countries are thoroughly industrialized already. Consider nuclear proliferation. As it stands today, North Korea and Iran go largely unchallenged. Meanwhile, is it plausible to expect India and China to voluntarily forego industrialization because it will save the environment? Ha!

      George Bush was right on Kyoto. China, Russia, and India continue to do nothing, and the treaty was crafted so that it would be OK. It was directed purely against the US, with the end game consisting of redistributing US industrial activities to poorer countries. The goal was redistribution of wealth, not environmental benefit.

    123. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by ghoul · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And hippies!! Dont forget the hippies!! Before Ford came along America was basically an Agricultural nation with most of the population living on farms. Now most of the population lives in cities and thank god for that. Rural areas are the cess pit of the human condition and the faster India can get its people into cities the better and if it takes cheap cars to do it fine (though I would prefer mass transit) At least if we get the air polluted enough the hippies will stop backpacking here to shit on our streets !

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    124. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by TheSync · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Back in 1976 I took an economics class that had three professors, all of whom were about as smart as a house cat. These bozos were trying to say that the US was going to have to lower its standard of living, too, just like you are now.

      That's odd, because most economists predict continual upward global economic growth (with the occasional brief hiccup). You must have had some socialist economics professors. After the fall of the USSR, the ideas of Freidman, Hayek, and Mises became more popular.

    125. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Okay the USA isn't mostly city, like people who never leave LA and NYC tend to think.

      USA is mostly open country, and large portions are well outside "city limits". Even here in Nor Cal, we are surrounded by mountains and such.

      LOL, yeah, cus stuck in Texas I had no idea that the US was mostly open country. Hey when crossing that open country I think having a fuel efficient vehicle is even more important, but what do I know? I only drive my subcompact across the country, through the mountains, and through the snow.

      SUVs are nothing but enclosed 4x4 trucks. They are big, heavy and get through all sorts of mud, snow and streams that I wouldn't dare take a subcompact even near.

      So quit harping on SUVs, they aren't the problem.

      Pfft. They used to be, but these days most of them are based on car chassis not truck chassis. Subcompacts are fine with most snow on roads. If you're driving through mud and streams all the time, or literally live in the mountains away from the highways where a steep snowy road can be dangerous without 4wd, then more power to you. Don't for a second pretend that this is the typical usage of SUVs. You're talking about people who actually require a certain class of vehicle, I'm talking about all the work-and-grocery-store commuters in sub-20mpg "trucks" that have never been off road or been used for an honest day's work and never will be. Guess who is talking about the common case? So yeah I will keep harping on SUVs for as long as I'm surrounded by far more than could possibly be needed.

      The problem is that not everyone fits in a Mini Cooper or even a midsize car. And if SUVs didn't exist, you'd be harping on people driving Crown Vics.

      You don't hear me harping on dump trucks, bulldozers, and semis do you? No. Unless 90% of them were used when absolutely not necessary, and then you would. Get it?

      "SUVs" existed for the people who needed them long before the term "SUV" existed, and they still will when the SUV problem -- and it sure as hell is a problem -- goes away.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    126. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Nah if it came down to a fight for oil who do you think can field a larger army a nation of 1 billion or a nation of 300 million. And in a world where wars are being fought over oil forget using machines to even the advantage- Infantry rules!!!

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    127. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by eth1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But, enabling 29,000,000,000 people to buy a car and drive around is not always a great idea. Everyone is already bitching about how cars are destroying the planet so would enabling more cars be a bad idea? Just going from the eco freaks that complain here. cars still = bad right? or was that last week.

      I think the whole point is that these enable "the masses" to afford these *instead of* the pollution-belching death traps that have been their only option to this point.

    128. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by ghoul · · Score: 1

      NoNoNo The purpose of Kyoto and all other environmental treaties is to get a good image before the world wakes up to the fact of who has done most of the pollution and decides to impose a Morgenthau Plan on the US. For those who dont know about Morgenthau he was the US Secretary of treasury during WW2 who proposed Germany be punished for the holocaust by being changed into a agriculture only nation by dismantling and destroying all German industry. Fortunately the Truman administration realized if they did that given Germany's high population density millions would starve to death (Germany cant grow enough food to feed its people and needs to export industrial goods to import food)However America does grow enough food to feed its people and has already polluted more than all other nations combined. The nations of the world may get fed up and decide to impose a Morgenthau Plan on America. As long as America keeps paying lip service to the Environment the other nations keep quite.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    129. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Draek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The thing is, it has to be one of the following:

      - Cars don't improve the standards of living (in which case, WTF are you doing arguing about this?)
      - Worldwide supply of oil is perfectly stable (and I've got a bridge to sell you...)
      - Salaries in the US and other, car-dependant nations will rise at least as much as the price of oil does. (The bridge is still on sale...)
      - The US *will* have to reduce its standard of living.

      You hear "they can live on a thousand dollars a year, why can't you?" like I heard from the idiot economists teaching that class, but they can't see that if prices were a 50th as high as ours, we could live on a 50th of the paycheck.

      Y'know, maybe that was his point. That both prices and salaries should be lowered to "third world" standards, so that currency is a bit more standardized at a global level to diminish the inequalities you pointed out. I'm not an economist so dunno if that'd be a sustainable position, but in my experience 99% of the time when a student calls a professor an idiot, its because the student didn't even understand what the professor was saying, let alone his reasons to do so.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    130. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      There are fairly small Jeeps which you can buy straight from the dealer that do exactly what the GP was talking about. So it's not like some hypothetical or rare and exotic thing.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    131. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by anup_at_mac · · Score: 0

      I could feed myself and three Thai hookers at a nice restaraunt for a dollar

      Is the food in exchange for services rendered or is that going to cost me more? I'm intrigued. >br>

    132. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by BeanThere · · Score: 1

      Most people in India have lived their entire lives without cars and didn't need it.

      If they don't need it, they won't buy it. Your argument is self-defeating. Especially as the price may be cheap by first-world standards, but not for the average Indian. They'll buy it because it improves their lives.

      and eventually need it.

      Oh, so they will need it? Which is it?

    133. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Actual jeeps get horrible mileage. My 23 year old Bronco II gets better mileage than a jeep TJ. With proper body design, they could get good fuel economy on the highway, but the majority of the SUV market is image-based, rather than practicality-based.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    134. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Those Jeeps typically carry at most 2 people. SUVs can carry an entire family. They are not the same things.

      And Jeeps are heavy for their size (two seaters). Not to mention that most people using Jeeps to go offroad have "enhanced" them.

      Granted, having a Hummer in LA is silly. About as silly as a Civic in the mountains in winter.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    135. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by argiedot · · Score: 1

      If you look at craigslist for Los Angeles, you will see that a lot (most, the last time I checked) of the cars being bought and sold there are SUVs. If you're from that city you don't need to worry about "mud, snow and streams". Yet people buy them anyway.

    136. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Europe is gonna see this car in a year or two.. Tata has plans for that.. with added safety features, ABS brakes, etc

    137. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by reckless_waltz · · Score: 1

      Actually if you read the original article posted here (I'm too lazy to look), it mentioned that many people were traveling on mopeds and motorbikes with multiple passengers including young children. This is not an attempt to bring transportation to the country; it's an attempt to bring "safer" transportation. As always, it's relative.

      Good point

    138. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nano's emission would be far more benign than 2-cycle autorickshaws, not mention being far more safe.

      The irony being if pollution doesn't kill you having an accident in this car will, far more than other vehicles.

      Obviously you haven't seen the 'other vehicles' they're driving now. Ever seen a husband riding a motorcycle along a highway with his wife on the pillion seat sitting sideways holding onto a child and not a single helmet between them? I'm not kidding. This thing will be a huge improvement over the death traps people are using right now.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    139. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by lymond01 · · Score: 1

      No, it's not. So please hand over your car keys.

      I might suggest people get on their city planning boards and discuss what it would take to make new development more people-friendly and less car-friendly. It isn't necessarily the choice of the people to drive everywhere, but so many American towns and cities are developed assuming that people will drive.

      Change that assumption -- assume they'll walk, and design your city around that. Build up, have more neighborhood markets rather than centralized supermarkets, more lighted walking paths rather than 4 lane roads. Spend some money on parks and pools rather than on parking lots.

      I've lived in NYC which you can do essentially carless. I currently work in one of the most-bikeable cities in the U.S, but I live in one of the least bikeable cities. I bike to lunch, bike 20 minutes to appointments, mostly on bike paths and small streets. When I go home, I'm afraid to cross the street without getting in my car.

    140. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by reckless_waltz · · Score: 1

      India has 10 times the US's population density. The Indian National Railways is currently the world's largest employer, and operates one of the largest rail networks on the planet.

      If you had actually used any of India's "Public Transportation", you wouldn't be support it like this.

    141. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how would the other nations impose such a thing on the US? Germany was in the position of having lost a war and being occupied. They couldn't have fought back. However, had Truman okay-ed the plan, I have a feeling plenty of other people would have protested.

      Now, suppose the rest of the world becomes entirely fed up with the US. There is no way they could implement such a plan on the US, even if they were all in agreement (which is unlikely). If they forced the issue there would be war. I suppose you could argue that the resulting world wide devastation (assuming a NON-nuclear war) would be good for the environment since world wide industrial output would decline substantially.

      Anyway, there's no way this could come to pass in present circumstances or any in the foreseeable future, so it's really a moot point.

    142. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by debiansid · · Score: 1

      I agree with the sentiment but it is not black and white. Most people in India have lived their entire lives without cars and didn't need it. Their family, work, friends, home were all (for the most part) in relative distances. This car is so cheap they will get it (even if just 1% that's 10 mil more drivers on a 1 billion pop) and eventually need it.

      The Nano is actually competition to two wheelers, which is the most popular mode of transport among the lower and middle classes in India. There is a very dangerous practice here in India, of families of 3 and 4 travelling by a scooter/motorcycle, which is what prompted Ratan Tata to conceptualize this car.

    143. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by EspressoFreak · · Score: 1

      The UK and Europe as well as the USA will never EVER see this car.
      Why wouldn't it if it sells? Car is one of the first things people tend to buy after saving enough money. If this car allows them to achieve that goal quicker, then it probably has a market.

    144. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by CmdrShekar · · Score: 1

      Excellent analysis. Let me also point out that one of the fundamental requirements of an Electric Vehicle, is a constant 24x7 power supply. Which only the major cities have the previlege of having. There are many instances when the previous statement isn't true either.

    145. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But, enabling 29,000,000,000 people to buy a car and drive around is not always a great idea.

                  So when Henry Ford rolled out the Model T for under $800 or so,

      Yes, that was hmmm well 101 years ago, and the US population was approximately 85 million not 29 billion. So right off the bat I would like to point out that we're talking about a difference in potential cars of a factor of 10 greater.

      with the intention of selling it to the masses, he was "enabling" the destruction of the environment, etc?

      Yes, he was.
      Ford was also an asshole (and a racist), but the common attitude was that the environment could take care of itself. (Or rather, that GOD would never allow humans to ruin it, etc.)
      While he has a place in history due to his industrial achievements, he is hardly a person to model your actions from.

      So how come Americans can get mass produced cars for "the common man" (with all the environmental destruction involved)

      Don't put the Americans in some isolated bubble. Europe, Canada, Russia, Japan, and well, the rest of the industrialized world are/were just as guilty of industrial & environmental abuses.

      and Indians cannot? Suddenly it's a bad idea if Indians and Chinese wish to progress... [...] But I say that you cannot stop the rest of the world from trying to progress - either physically or morally.

      Who says anyone is trying to stop them from "progressing"? It is the methods that are being used that are the issue, not progress. Progress also includes industrial development with environmental concerns in mind. Simply developing industry using 19th & 20th century methods is NOT progressing, it's the exact opposite, throwing away ALL the progress that has been made in the interim.

      Much of the world has paid a steep price for short-term industrial gain, and it's not just America, and it's not just in the last couple hundred years.

      Your entire post pretty much is summed up by this line:

      So how come Americans can get mass produced cars for "the common man" (with all the environmental destruction involved) and Indians cannot?

      You seem to have a problem with American industry, and ignore the rest of the world. You also seem to think that we still allow factories to pollute at will the same way they did at the end of the 19th century, which is completely idiotic. We DON'T get anything made "with all the environmental destruction" that occured during Ford's time.

      But quite frankly, if the Indian people really want to piss in their drinking water and shit on their dinner, more power to them. They will suffer the same type of problems we did, but on a much larger & more permanent scale. If they are too stupid to learn from the mistakes of others, they deserve what they get.

    146. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'The AVERAGE american commute is 30 minutes by car - not feasible by foot/bike...'

      That makes America's per-capita fuel consumption much much higher than India's.

    147. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course. You know better so you feel it's ok to tell the nice little Indians what they can and cannot have. It's easy to understand why you would rather do that than deal with your own transportation problems, because hey, that would be a costly inconvenience for you. Can't have that.

    148. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Q: So when Henry Ford rolled out the Model T for under $800 or so, with the intention of selling it to the masses, he was "enabling" the destruction of the environment, etc?

      A: Correct

      Q: So how come Americans can get mass produced cars for "the common man" (with all the environmental destruction involved) and Indians cannot?

      A: Neither should.

      Any more questions?

    149. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by gsslay · · Score: 1

      You can't compere the economy of a 3rd world country to a 1st world country. You hear "they can live on a thousand dollars a year, why can't you?" like I heard from the idiot economists teaching that class, but they can't see that if prices were a 50th as high as ours, we could live on a 50th of the paycheck.

      It's a pity you didn't hang around in that class, you might have learned something. What do you think exchange rates are, if not a comparison of a 3rd world economy to a 1st world? The exchange rate is not some fixed figure that bears no relation to prices and paychecks in the two countries. If they were a 50th as high in America, then the exchange rate would reflect that and the question would still be the same, just with different amounts. You'd would live on a thousand dollar pay check, but they're now living off 20 dollars a year. The point remains the same.

      I called them idiots,

      Under your breath I hope, otherwise you'd look pretty dumb.

      marched out of the class (with half the other students following me),

      Are you sure the class wasn't finishing at that point?

      went straight to enrollment and cancelled that class. History has shown those economic "experts" wrong, and me right.

      Sure has, in bizarro world.

    150. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by TheAmit · · Score: 1

      So you want people to give up benefits of cheap fuel because the US after polluting for more than half a century now thinks it has had enuf and the world shud follow. What kyoto tries to do is give the developing countries an incentive to follow a higher cost path to development. They have problems of ensuring survival of their populations right now and dont have the time or resources to think about what would happen 500 years down the road. If the a chosen few want to live the best of lifestyle while condemning millions to lower lifestyles they might as well not care about what happens later their life aint improving much anyway

    151. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Shome · · Score: 1

      errr.... how many classes did you attend in total? did you walk out of the first class that you attended. in that case, may be.... hmm... never mind

      --

      ~Once you have your choices narrowed down, the rest will fall into place.
    152. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ABS brakes is NOT a safety feature.

      Get a clue to what a niceity and a safety feature is.

    153. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm.. you are quoting Ronald Reagan to support your argument???? Was that from the movie with the chimpanzee?

    154. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      We can all have flying cars and robotic dogs, if we can ever get cold fusion or (insert favorite non polluting free energy source here) working.

    155. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      That's fine, fact is that size has little to do with off-road capability. There have been off-road vehicles for both the individual and the family who have an actual need for such since forever. 90% of the SUV market has nothing to do with them, and their bloated size has nothing to do with being useful off-road, since most of em aren't.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    156. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by hurfy · · Score: 1

      I actually walk to work....however...

      The nearest store for electronics is many miles away. Ditto for Wal-mart, etc. There is a grocery store within walking distance, not sure how to carry the 12 bags they use to bag my $60 of groceries but it is there. However if one wants clothes or electronics or anything else it would be hours by bus each way or a $50 cab ride each way and probably hour plus waits (cab service here sucks hard). Friends would take all day to go visit...kinda interferes with that job thing :( I could not play Laserquest or go bowling or much else without an expensive cab ride because noone needs a bus after 10pm :/

      Kinda stuck with my car even without the commute :( Unless one of those greenies is gonna spend all day doing my shopping that takes an hour or two with a car.....I am not going to willingly give up my only free day to get my groceries.

      Also not getting a greener car. My SUV gets terrible mileage but at under 2500 miles per year and paid off and new car would pay for itself about the time the sun goes out :(

      Anyways, car-free is a lot easier if all the stores aren't grouped together on the very edge of town already.

    157. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yeah, and where are all the SUVs from those foreign car companies sold?

      As I look out of my apartment window in Belgium, I count 24 cars. 9 of those are SUVs and one is a light truck.

    158. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You might want to read a little history there buddy.

      Infantry is just cannon fodder unless supported by oil burning machines. If you are betting on the elephant corps being the new armor I'll just wish you luck.

      Besides if it got that ugly we know India would be busy fighting with ALL her neighbors. Hopefully India and Pakistan in particular can get on with growing up politically and as cultures (the threat of nuclear annihilation is a great motivator). Just as the USA, the USSR, England and China were forced to during their long standoff (not France though, they learned nothing).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    159. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      People are not going spend money on something that they do not feel enriches their lives.

      So if you are correct, that Indian families do not need cars and that their money will be better spent on other things, then the majority of Indian families will not go out and buy a vehicle and the companies that are investing money in satisfying a market that doesn't exist will go out of business.

      That's the beauty of the market economy. People vote with their wallets and thus determine where investments are made that improve the lives of the majority of people. A company can not stay in business if it does not produce something that enriches the lives of a great number of people (*cough* unless they can persuade the government to give them public money *cough* :p ). We can talk for days on end about the harmful side-effects of certain products (pollution and health), but in the end people will always put their money into areas that they feel make their lives better.

    160. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by JonBuck · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, Reagan was quoting JFK.

      "Rising tide lifts all boats". 10/15/60, 8/17/62 (In Pueblo, Colorado following approval of the Frying Pan-Arkansas Project), 5/18/63 and 6/25/63

    161. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      After the fall of the USSR, the ideas of Freidman, Hayek, and Mises became more popular.

      And after the recent crash, sorry "hiccup", in the modern financial systems, I wonder who will be popular in the next twenty years...

    162. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big fan of Infantry, you can't take and occupy territory without them, but I don't follow your logic. So far, machines have proven very effective at evening the odds in wars over oil and everything else. Are you assuming parity in technological capability?

    163. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by ericlondaits · · Score: 1

      There is a grocery store within walking distance, not sure how to carry the 12 bags they use to bag my $60 of groceries but it is there.

      It seems you say it as it isn't possible without a car. I live in Buenos Aires, Argentina, which is a very big city with decent and cheap public transportation and expensive cars.

      I'll tell you the different ways in which I cope with carrying 12 grocery bags home from my supermarket of choice, which is an 18 minute walk:

      - I take my wife along and we split the bags.

      - I make a smaller purchase I can carry by myself and leave the heavy bulky stuff (e.g. mineral water, fruit, etc.) to shops which are closer to my house.

      - Supermarkets in Argentina can deliver your groceries. Usually within 2-5 hours from buying them in the store.

      - A couple of years ago I bought most groceries on-line to save time and avoid carrying them.

      - Since mineral water was the worst offender, I ended up buying a water filter. This made it enormously easier to shop for groceries and saves me quite a bit of money. ... When you have the need, there's obviously a way, if not many.

      --
      As a Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of an analogy involving cars approaches one.
    164. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Zoxed · · Score: 1

      > Of course not. But it's a sad cycle -- people in very poor countries like this see cars as being status symbols, a sign of wealth. Society (and the government) often treat increase car ownership the same way, as some indicator that they've "made it," and try to emphasize car-oriented development.

      I have lived in both England and Germany: what you state is true, but it also applies to "wealthy" countries (how often have I heard that you-poor-cyclist refrain ? or for-the-price-of-that-bike-you-could-buy-a-car ?) (FWIW I could easily afford a shine new car, but choose not to)

    165. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by level_headed_midwest · · Score: 2, Informative

      Talk about stupid- you do know that seven-passenger minivans weigh about as much as some seven-passenger SUVs and get about the same mileage, don't you? Or that full-sized vans are *bigger* than current SUVs and get even worse mileage?

      Oh, sorry, we can't let facts get in the way of America-bashing, can we?

      --
      Just "gittin-r-done," day after day.
    166. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1
      It's a bit like being on a wooden ship. Some of the crew have used part of the ship's wood to build themselves nice cabins - be it out of ignorance or carelessness. As they use more and more of the wood it becomes clear that this is not sustainable. Now other members of the crew notice these nice cabins and say - "hey we want that too". It doesn't matter whether that's fair or not - if the rest of the crew builds cabins too, they are going to sink.

      Want to sink? Well if you don't then you can't build more cabins. Fairness is a consideration, but it's not as important as not sinking.

      Back to the real world: no matter how "fair" the distribution of pollution is - neither China nor India would have been able to advance technologically so rapidly, if they hadn't been able to learn from the west for many decades. So that puts the fairness aspect in context.

    167. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      "Fundamentally I understand your point - if everyone has a straw sucking up the oil fields, then they will dry up much faster."

      I don't see that as a problem.

      If and when the supply of oil dries up, gas prices will get high enough that people will do some very basic accounting in their heads and come to the conclusion that the cost of driving is no longer in line with their subjective valuations as to what driving is "worth".

      Monetary prices are a reflection of subjective use-value. They are the only invention that humans have ever developed to measure subjective use-value. Everybody knows the theory of supply vs. demand. Yet people seem to forget the simple fact when talking about environmental causes.

      If oil dries up to the point where the costs of driving exceed what people value driving at, then prices will reach a point where cheap, fuel efficient vehicles are worth more than expensive gas guzzlers (we already saw that in action during the spring/summer of 2008 when gas prices soared to record numbers) and companies will invest more in fuel efficient vehicles to meet the increased demand, which will lower their prices. Having fewer people driving and having a greater ratio of fuel efficient vehicles on the road will create less demand for fossil fuel and will help to keep it's price down, though it will still rise at a slower rate since we are still depleting the supply. As time goes on and gas prices continue to rise, vehicles using alternative energy will start to look more affordable. Increased demand for those vehicles will prompt more investment by entrepreneurs into those markets, new and better technologies in that area will be developed, the supply of those vehicles will be increased to meet demand and prices will come down. Only racing and antique enthusiasts will continue to spend money on fuel combustion vehicles and even they will drive something else on a day to day basis since fossil fuel (and now fuel combustion vehicles, since no one is buying them) is so expensive.

      If it turns out that we simply do not possess any possible means of developing an affordable vehicle that does not consume fossil fuel (I *highly* doubt that, but let's assume that it turns out to be the case), then people will simply stop driving. If people can't afford to drive they will have no choice. Pure and simple. We don't need any kind of intervention to get companies to invest in "green" technologies. If we are at risk of consuming all of our fossil fuel then simple economics will take care of the problem naturally.

      Heck, going along even further with this argument, it may actually be favourable for the "green cause" in the long run if India and China starts driving fuel combustion vehicles en masse. Since increased demand for fossil fuel will raise gas prices and cause people to switch to greener vehicles faster :)

    168. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      I hate to reply to myself but this one point was worded very poorly and I need to clarify:

      "Only racing and antique enthusiasts will continue to spend money on fuel combustion vehicles and even they will drive something else on a day to day basis since fossil fuel (and now fuel combustion vehicles, since no one is buying them) is so expensive."

      If no one is buying fuel efficient vehicles, the costs of current vehicles will plummet to near-nothingness. Yet once those vehicles are sold to enthusiasts and the rest sent to the junk yard for scraps very few new fuel combustion vehicles will be produced. Limited supply will keep their prices very high.

    169. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      There is a grocery store within walking distance, not sure how to carry the 12 bags they use to bag my $60 of groceries but it is there.

      A bike and a trailer are the best solution for this. Heck, I built my trailer from EMT, plywood, some tires scavenged from an old bike, and various random parts, for something like 40-50 bucks, and can easily transport a dozen bags of groceries home without difficulty.

      'course, the alternative is much simpler: if you're within walking distance, just buy less at a time and go on more grocery trips. You're not wasting gas doing it, your fresh food will stay fresher, and you'll get more exercise, too.

      However if one wants clothes or electronics or anything else it would be hours by bus each way or a $50 cab ride each way and probably hour plus waits (cab service here sucks hard).

      And how often do you need to make such a trip, really? And note, I'm not saying you must be able to live completely and utterly without a car. But going from driving every single day because you have no other choice to driving once every couple weeks is an *enormous* difference. The problem is, US sub/ex-urban culture makes that kind of living impossible.

      Similarly, I'd hate to see India (or any developing nation) move to a culture that precludes a lifestyle that deemphasizes cars. Are such vehicles useful from time to time? Of course they are. But cities shouldn't be designed such that an individual simply can't live without a car. And, unfortunately, inexpensive vehicles make it all too easy for city planners to cop out and assume high levels of car ownership when designing urban areas (hell, how many US suburbs have no frickin' sidewalks?? Way to discourage the most basic of human transportation: our own feet).

    170. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I'm just talking about competent urban planning, jackass! Things like zoning to put homes, jobs, and stores close together; using a grid street pattern with small blocks instead of a dendritic one so that people don't have to drive 5 miles out onto main roads just to get to the shopping center that their backyard backs up to; putting in normal public transportation (buses and subways); etc. Shit that places like New York City, London, and Tokyo had figured out 100 years ago, before the planners started wanking over superhighways and suburbs. See also new urbanism.

      It's not that fucking hard, as long as you don't suddenly get a million Tata-owning assholes whining about traffic in New Delhi like the SUV-owning assholes do in Los Angeles!

      Now, go take your defeatist hyperbole and kindly fuck off. Thanks.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    171. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Switzerland is overrun with SUVs as well, as is Germany. The trend may have been started in the US but Europe was quick to pick it up and give it momentum.

      I'm pretty sure that a bunch of fat Americans in oversized SUVs already had quite a bit of momentum.

    172. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by hobbit · · Score: 1

      What does money have to do with anything I said? You seem to have completely missed the fact that I'm talking about resources.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    173. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by hobbit · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying you shouldn't be driving cars. I'm saying that everyone in the world driving cars is not possible.

      I'm not moralising. I'm pointing out that resources are finite.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    174. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ABS brakes will save your life in the event of an emergency brake since you can still steer the car while braking.

    175. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Quetzo · · Score: 1

      Delhi went all CNG for public vehicles a long time ago. Smog is no longer a big issue in inner delhi.

      Mumbai and Pune are in the process of converting all public vehicles to CNG. Many private taxi operators have already converted.

      While elecric energy is a nice solution for city vehicles, I think this is merely shifting the pollution from cities to places where coal or furnace oil is burnt to produce electricity. I know that this can be state controlled etc, but with more and more electricity being supplied to vehicular needs, what's to stop us from getting into a situation where a power plant is "too big to fail"...

      I believe that CNG is a nice compromise in that, there is still plenty of it around, it's just as easy to store, transport, distribute and consume as oil and burns more cleanly. New Delhi is a fine example of the positive impact of predominantly CNG burning vehicles. I wonder why we haven't seen some real effort behind pushing CNG vehicles here in the US. In fact, current petrol vehicles can be converted to burn CNG with a minor one-time modification.

    176. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by hobbit · · Score: 1

      Bingo. I would go a step further and point out that one's personal vehicular transport is just the tip of the iceberg. When the effects of peak oil start being felt, petrochemical fertilisers, import/export, and all sorts of other ways in which we rely on oil will make themselves starkly apparent.

      When we can't buy stuff cheaply any more even though it's made by peasants in a third world country, because the haulage starts to form the largest part of the cost, we will cease to be as rich. Our purchasing power will be worth less. The pay cut will sort itself out.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    177. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Stevecrox · · Score: 1

      SUV's and cars in general are no where near as large as SUV's in America. In a recent business trip to Australia I worked with Americans and Australians and rented what I thought were some massive solon cars (everyone was larger than a Ford Mondeo). I spent much of my time mocking the Australians for having such large poor handling with large engines but underpowered. The Americans kept asking why cars like the Toyota Camry, Ford Explorer were so much smaller in Australia.

      Those cars weren't bad on fuel consumption getting between 30 to 35 MPG, but considering the Australian road system (65MPH speed limit and heavy inforcement in Victoria at least) having a 3 litre V8 engine (which couldn't pull the skin of a rice pudding) seemed a massive waste. Things like the smaller Focus's, Fiesta's and Astra's should have been a lot more popular.

    178. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      So how come Americans can get mass produced cars for "the common man" (with all the environmental destruction involved) and Indians cannot? Suddenly it's a bad idea if Indians and Chinese wish to progress...

      Let's make this clear. If a rich self-made asshole tells you how to make money, or how not to make money, you listen. Why? Because just because he's an asshole, it doesn't mean he's wrong, and chances are that he knows what he's talking about.

      You may consider the US and the West to be a group of overfed jerks who stuck it to the little guy. Fair enough. That doesn't mean that they are wrong to point out something that is 100% true. Ignoring good advice, even if its from an asshole, doesn't make you a spunky underdog, it makes you a prideful, perhaps even a spiteful fool.

      The West didn't learn these lessons entirely for free or entirely on the backs of foreigners. There's a lot of people in those very countries, not entirely unlike the poor people in these other countries, that paid the price to learn from their mistakes. And in the end, to ignore their sacrifice is probably the biggest asshattery of all, because the rich in powerful in the West could at least pretend that they had no idea what was going to happen, China and India have no excuse at all.

      And if you think that these wonderful up and coming countries are run any better than the bad old West, you're seriously deluding yourself. There are only two types of people in the world: those being stepped on and those doing the stepping on, and no country has a monopoly on either sort.

      Someone in China and India is getting rich, *willfully* making the same mistakes that the West did, and I can tell you, it isn't the workers and peasants that are the beneficiaries.

    179. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by brkello · · Score: 1

      Um, so the standard of living has been improving lately for the majority of people in the U.S.? Have you not been paying attention? I am sure history shows some economists right. I think you need to work on your ego issues.

      --
      Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
    180. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The rest of the world wants to have the same same standard of living that US and Europe enjoys today."
      - Today? Never.
      "government lobbying"
      - perhaps the only threat are the Chinese trying to sell cheaper cars to the US.

      Cars like these I believe are the only ones which which will keep you on 4 wheels for some time to come.

    181. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well that's simply ridiculous. You're saying an addict can't tell their child that drugs are bad? Or a heart patient can't tell their relatives to eat healthy?

      If the child doesn't see the parent changing his life style then the words will have no meaning!

      If you do not strive to change your lifestyle then why should I believe your sincerity?

    182. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by TheSync · · Score: 1

      And after the recent crash, sorry "hiccup", in the modern financial systems, I wonder who will be popular in the next twenty years...

      The IMF forecasts 2009 world GDP down 0.5-1.5 pct, with a gradual recovery to 1-2 pct growth in 2010.

      If there isn't a recovery in world GDP by 2011, where do you go from there? We know planned economies really don't work (North Korea, Cuba, former USSR), even the slightly more socialist countries of Western Europe are hurting badly, so where do you go from there?

      Keynes has made a recent comeback (although as a distortion of his actual writings), but I suspect as in Japan's Lost Decade that "Keynesian stimulus" will be shown ineffective.

      Will bailout of banks, car makers, and other zombie companies too big to fail work? I suspect the people who don't believe that government should own the "Commanding Heights" of the economy such as Friedman will be shown to be correct.

      We'll just have to see...

    183. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      What's more important, to be fair or to be right? The damage in the USA has already been done. It's a fucked up scenario. Admonishing the Indians for moving towards a more resource hungry society might be hypocritical, but to dismiss a message because it was delivered by a hypocrite is just ad hominem.

    184. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      False dilemma. You forgot the option:
      - Mr. Fusion

    185. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by atari2600 · · Score: 1

      There is also "Practise what you preach". Sure the US can tell the world how to fix their problems but only after they've come clean and fixed their own shit first. Sending in troops can only do so much.

      If you didn't get it, a drug addict would sound more convincing and more likely to succeed in having their kids off drugs if they are clean in the first place.

    186. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by rusl · · Score: 1

      "who the hell are you to decide who gets to drive and who doesn't"

      This is exactly why we have so many problems with cars taking over. We view this collective problem as the responsibility of the individual. Some people even think driving is a human right!

      This is in part due to how cars are marketed, what ideologies are ascendant in our culture (free-market individualism) and the nature of the technology itself.

      Cars can seem very atomistic, you feel totally independent when you are behind the wheel and there is an open road. But, unlike a bicycle, you are not really self propelled. There is a lot of realisation taking place these days about the tremendous interconnected web that fuel oil consumption requires in order to drive a car. And some realisation about the global nature of our atmosphere. But there is still little recognition of the "train-tracks" under these "cars" that are required to make the system go, the space taken up and layout of all our cities, or the tremedous discipline required to keep all people, animals and everything else in cities off the public streets sequestered on sidewalks.

      Open roads are pretty rare where people use cars a lot.

      We need to take collective action to remove cars from our cities. We need to decide who gets to use cars. That should be ambulances and some other special uses. Otherwise we need thriving car-free cities. It's a great way to save money and build jobs. But right now we lack the imagination to move forward with the idea of a city that is build around people and not cars.

      --
      Stupidity is its own reward.
    187. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by rusl · · Score: 1

      I love bike trailers but recently I've fallen in love with a Dutch export called a Bakfiets.Cargo Bike. (The proper "Box-Bike" in the Netherlands is actually a bigger Cargo Tricycle)

      It's super convenient. My wife and I would have been miserable with our new baby if we didn't use this every second day. The only problem is cost, because it is imported from so far away. I'm thinking about making one myself though later this yearrusl.ca because we really need more of them around. (In Vancouver, bc)

      --
      Stupidity is its own reward.
    188. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People have been pointing out that resources are finite, and predicting their end, for hundreds of years.

      The fact is that when the cost of oil starts to become more expensive than the cost of $ALTERNATIVE_ENERGY_SOURCE, people will change over, automatically, very quickly, and without any kind of regulations needed by the government.

      So then the government regulation lovers start to talk about carbon dioxide, when there isn't any evidence that the minute increases in CO2 are causing any effect on this planet whatsoever.

      http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/co2_data_mlo.html is just one observation point but it shows CO2 has increased from about 315ppm to about 385 ppm in the last 50 years. that may sound a lot when you take it as a percentage of carbon dioxide, but when you realise that ppm means parts per million, you realise how tiny that is. 0.0315% of our atmosphere gone up to 0.0385% MY GOD EVERYBODY IS GOING TO DIE!

      There is no statistically significant warming occuring on the planet, that was not either part of a trend, or measured in urban areas. Measurements taken away from urban areas show no significant warming. how odd.

    189. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by hobbit · · Score: 1

      The fact is that when the cost of oil starts to become more expensive than the cost of $ALTERNATIVE_ENERGY_SOURCE, people will change over, automatically, very quickly, and without any kind of regulations needed by the government.

      Change over to what? Our entire infrastructure relies on cheap oil.

      but when you realise that ppm means parts per million, you realise how tiny that is.

      "Small things can't hurt me!" I suggest you take a dose of ricin and get back to me about that.

      Measurements taken away from urban areas show no significant warming.

      The Arctic begs to differ.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    190. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by triffid_98 · · Score: 1
      Ah yes, the SUV. Ever hear of CAFE? It's the reason we have them..well, so many of them. Which is rather ironic since CAFE was written to help improve fuel economy.

      The trick is, CAFE defines two fleet mileage standards, one for 'cars', and one for 'trucks'. A Minivan or an SUV is considered a truck. Any sized car would be..a car. Therefore the land yachts (large sedans and wagons) went away and people who needed to seat 5 adults comfortably had their choice of two kinds of 'trucks'.

      http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/ern/03aug/overview.php

      That's fine, fact is that size has little to do with off-road capability. There have been off-road vehicles for both the individual and the family who have an actual need for such since forever. 90% of the SUV market has nothing to do with them, and their bloated size has nothing to do with being useful off-road, since most of em aren't.

    191. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mgblst · · Score: 1

      The fact is that what people do in other countries effects the whole world, especially when it comes to pollution.

      I don't drive a car, I ride a bicycle, and I wish everyone here and there would stop driving a car. You are all destroying my planet because you are lazy, and want to live far from work. I don't, but I am suffering from your decisions. That is how it becomes my problem, and I have the right to talk.

    192. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Change over to what? Our entire infrastructure relies on cheap oil.

      And 150 years ago our entire infrastructure relied on horses. There was a huge worry, supported by scientists, that in 20-30 years our streets would be piled 20 feet high with horse dung.
      Horses very quickly went out of fashion. Do not underestimate the power of capitalism to produce efficiency.

      "Small things can't hurt me!" I suggest you take a dose of ricin and get back to me about that.

      I didn't say small things can't hurt me, just CO2 can't hurt me. CO2 levels have fluctuated throughout the ages. the earth has shown it's capability to deal with that.

      The Arctic begs to differ.

      * Danmarkshavn, Greenland - 2007 annual temperature was lower than it was in 1957 (measurements started in 1951)
              * Bjornoya, Norway - 2007 annual temperature was lower than it was in 1954 (measurements started in 1949)
              * Vardo, Norway - 2007 annual temperature within 2/100's of a degree with 1937 (2008 is shaping up to be much colder)
              * Tromo, Norway - 2007 annual temperature was lower than it was in 1930
              * Jan Mayen, Norway - 2007 annual temperature was lower than it was in 1930
              * Karesuando, Sweden - 2007 annual temperature was lower than it was in 1959 (measurements started in 1951)
              * Murmansk, Russia - 2007 annual temperature was lower than it was in 1920 (measurements started in 1919)
              * Bodo Vi, Norway - 2007 annual temperature was lower than it was in 1930
              * Sodankyla, Finland - 2007 annual temperature was lower than it was in 1920
              * Kanin Nos, Russia - 2007 annual temperature was lower than it was in 1937

      taken from: http://www.climatechangefraud.com/content/view/2306/203/

    193. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Passman · · Score: 1

      The "I got it first ! now you DIE" argument.

      Or maybe, after taking care of the supply side by invading Iraq, the US should start taking care of the demand side by invading India and regressing them to the stone age ?

      Well we do have all these nukes just lying around taking up space and draining coffers with maintenance.

      If we just had some place to dump (or drop) them our military could save billions of dollars every year. Add to that the millions of US jobs that have been shipped to India over the last 15 years would need to be replaced, we could fix our unemployment crisis and nip this depression right in the bud.

      Definitely a win-win situation.

      --
      Minne-snow-da: Winter is comming...
    194. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by quarterbuck · · Score: 1

      Gas demand will go up, pollution will go up.
      Actually the other way around. There is a limited amount of Gas in the earth. So Gas demand goes up, Americans will drive less and since American cars are less efficient, pollution goes down!

      --
      http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
    195. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So when Henry Ford rolled out the Model T for under $800 or so, with the intention of selling it to the masses, he was "enabling" the destruction of the environment, etc?

      Yes, of course, how else could you possibly look at it. If he didn't do that (and nobody else did), and we still had great public transport in this country, we wouldn't have the problem with global warming and pollution that we do now. We would have a much greater society, with all the production and effort gone into something else more worthy (well, possibly more worthy, it could have been worse!)

    196. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by hobbit · · Score: 1

      Do not underestimate the power of capitalism to produce efficiency.

      I don't think you understand the scope of the problem. Oil is basically solar energy collected over millions of years. The only thing that could come close to producing comparable energy in a similar timescale is nuclear fission, which brings with it a whole host of problems such as waste, potential for terrorist attack, etc.

      I didn't say small things can't hurt me

      Yes, you did. You said that the relative rise was meaningless because the absolute proportion is still tiny. I say again: the absolute proportion of ricin to blood in your body can be even smaller and still kill you.

      * Danmarkshavn, Greenland - 2007 annual temperature was lower than it was in 1957 (measurements started in 1951)
      [and similar meaningless statistics]

      Statistical anomalies are all very interesting, but you need to look at trends. Anyway, why did you start talking about climate change? We were talking about resources.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    197. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mgblst · · Score: 1

      It is not safer, though is it. We have more fatalities in this country than they do over there with there larger populations, exactly for the reason you think will decrease this, because of "safer" cars. When everyone rides a bike/motorcycle, they are more careful, and less dangerous when they do crash.

    198. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mgblst · · Score: 1

      What idiotic self-serving pampering. I wouldn't trust your memory to recall your name properly.

      This populist bullshit may work well on Fox, so go peddle your shit there.

    199. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by dasunt · · Score: 1

      - Cars don't improve the standards of living (in which case, WTF are you doing arguing about this?)
      - Worldwide supply of oil is perfectly stable (and I've got a bridge to sell you...)
      - Salaries in the US and other, car-dependant nations will rise at least as much as the price of oil does. (The bridge is still on sale...)
      - The US *will* have to reduce its standard of living.

      - The existance of non-fossil hydrocarbon fuels.

      Personally, I'd like more mass transit and so called "livable" communities.

      But I'm not stupid enough to think that if oil ran out tomorrow, we wouldn't have an electric vehicle or an artifical hydrocarbon production infrastructure very quickly.

      Admittedly, that's just another energy source to use up, but humanity does use just a mere fraction of the available energy in this solar system. It may seem crazy to talk about the possibilities today, but it probably is less crazy than trying to explain pumping muddy tar out of the ground from thousands of feet below to travel miles and miles in mere minutes to someone a few centuries ago.

    200. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Switzerland is overrun with SUVs as well, as is Germany. The trend may have been started in the US but Europe was quick to pick it up and give it momentum.

      Same in Australia, and these tossers were the first to complain about petrol when it hit A$1.40 a litre and kept rising.

      Since the boom has ended, the sales of motorcycles (for arguments sake that's anything with two wheels and a motor) has increased whilst car sales have fallen through the floor so those same tossers are stuck with a car loan they cant afford and a car they cant sell.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    201. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by pbhj · · Score: 1

      But that doesn't mean it can't speak from authority when it says that a culture dependent on cheap gas and personal transportation is a really *bad* idea.

      You're right his logic is off, but I think the point is that the US can't speak /persuasively/ unless it at least appears to be attempting to solve the problem at home as well as projecting solutions on other nations.

      In the same way that telling your child not to go out and get inebriated is less persuasive if they see you doing that exact thing you're counselling against.

    202. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      Seriously, having moved from Australia to the US, I look at things like the Lincoln Navigator. WTF? TWELVE MPG. Over 2 metres wide, 80 inches. Nearly 5.5 metres long, 207 inches. A 30+ gallon tank that costs at today's rates approximately US$100+ to fill. Think about that, $100 to move 350 miles. Probably unsurprising, since the thing weighs the best part of THREE TONS. And for what, it's not actually like it's any use off the road with around 8" road clearance. It's not even really built to tow anything, under four tons towing capacity, barely enough to tow a car, let alone a caravan. No, its primary design seems tailored to, rightly or wrongly "making a soccer mom feel like she's capable of squashing anything on the road that might threaten her children"

    203. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mjwx · · Score: 1

      But, enabling 29,000,000,000 people to buy a car and drive around is not always a great idea.

      29 Billion? I think you've confused your orders of magnitude, please see this XKCD I think that Traffic congestion would be a bigger issue. If you've travelled in any major city in SE Asia you'd find that traffic becomes terrible during peak hours and Indian cites are pretty much the same, putting another 500,000 cars onto any single city would overwhelm the infrastructure I'd think.

      But this wont put that many new cars onto the road. The cost is E1,700 (US$2,300, A$3,200) makes it a bit prohibitive for many Indians, especially seeing that a 125 CC motorcycle that is already on the market for about A$1300 (E670, US$920) is beyond the budget of many Indians. What is really needed to make a difference for India and SE Asia is a 125 CC motorcycle for under US$500 new. Having been to several places in SE Asia I was surprised at the number of practical modifications that can be made to a simple motorcycle.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    204. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Ian+Alexander · · Score: 1

      Good point. I'm actually not about to go criticizing Indians for buying a cheap and efficient car because I've been to India and I've seen some of the vehicles on the road there. If it's cheaper and puts out less emissions than vehicles on the road in Delhi today (which is in no way hard) I'm all for it.

    205. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by incognito84 · · Score: 1

      If Toyota only made vehicles for Japan then they'd only make cars that looked like the Nano. That's about the size of the average car I saw in Tokyo. Just another example of another country's business model centred around sucking America's...

    206. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In particular, the suburban and ex-urban phenomenon has left your average American completely incapable of living without personal long-distance transportation.

      Anecdote time! My uncle went over to the US on business recently, stayed in a suburban area, and asked how to get to the local shops. The person on the checkin said he could drive, but that was the only way. He pointed out that he didnt have a car, to which the dumbstruck receptionist said "Well then... I guess there's no way to get there!".

      He looked at the map the guy had given him, and started walking. Took him 10 minutes.

      The problem isn't that Americans need cars. It's that they THINK they do, because they have no concept of NOT DRIVING. First remove the log in your own eye, etc etc.

    207. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by ghoul · · Score: 1

      NO I am assuming that if we are fighting wars over oil , oil by definition is more valuable than human life so why would we waste oil on machines when we can just use human wave attacks. After all politicians in the US dont care about the little people making up the army. So the machines will be parked in their sheds to conserve oil and fighting will be on foot on both sides. And elephants are a damn lot intimidating than cavalry. Of course both can be scared off by loud noises so it comes down to hand to hand fighting and believe me anyone who has riden a public bus in India is much better at hand to hand fighting than any pussy SEAL or DELTA

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    208. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by ghoul · · Score: 1

      Well yes a war would be needed. Of course such a war will never happen unless the entire world gets disgusted with the US. Thats when they will all agree together so in order to prevent the rest of the world from coming to such a consensus some lip service to the environment is needed hence Kyoto.

      --
      **Life is too short to be serious**
    209. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by r00t · · Score: 1

      People are not going spend money on something that they do not feel enriches their lives.

      The key being "feel".

      Thus gambling, smoking, perfect lawns, random wasteful junk (52" TV set, home pool table...) to impress others, etc.

    210. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcvos · · Score: 1

      That's true. People can afford to drive more recklessly due to all the safety measures in their car.

      I once heard a proposal to change that, by replacing the airbag in the steering wheel with a sharp steel spike.

    211. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Um, so the standard of living has been improving lately for the majority of people in the U.S.?

      No, not lately. From what I see, the uber-rich have been doing very well while the rest of us have a declining standard of living. These guys weren't talking about a timespan of decades, it was in their view imminent, before 1980 was to come about.

      They were wrong, plain and simple.

      As to the ego, these were the only professors I had that didn't have a lot to teach me (or anyone else). The rest of the faculty were knowledgable and intelligent and taught me a lot. But take any 100 people and at least one of them is going to be a genius, and another will be an idiot.

    212. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by TheAmit · · Score: 1

      So the people who have those wooden cabins should be willing to share those cabins. If i m floating on a plank already half in the water and i suffer so ppl in the cabins can enjoy their lives mite as well let the ship sink trying to build my own cabin.

    213. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Save your Morganthau plan for the NUMBER ONE CO2 emitter: China

      Lotsa luck with that, BTW.

      But let's have a little more fun with this. Supposed we somehow "Morganthau'd" China and survived the fallout. What then? How would you ensure that the same industrial production doesn't just migrate somewhere else?

      Ironically, China blames the western world for its CO2 emissions. Ultimately, this is their "Declaration of do-nothingness", as allowed under Kyoto.

      One more thing: The concept of forcibly disarming Germany had already been attempted with the Treaty of Versailles ending WW I. Unintended consequences of that treaty gave rise to Hitler and helped start WWII. Morganthau would have been simply Versailles part II, leading up to WW III. Thank God Obama wasn't President back then!!!

    214. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Is the food in exchange for services rendered or is that going to cost me more? I'm intrigued.

      These girls had become friends. At the time, a hooker that looked as good as any actress in a Jackie Chan movie cost $5 for an entire night.

      The Thais' culture is (was?) completely different from my (American) culture in just about every aspect. There, prostitutes are not scorned and looked down on, they are respected and held in high esteem for their contribution to society.

      As to their being friends, if my car breaks down and I have a friend who is a mechanic, I'll give the friend my business.

    215. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with most of what you say, but it will take some convincing before other countries see it that way.

      Like it or not, the US sets the world standards for personal aspirations. Thanks to the one export that still works (Hollywood movies), the rest of the world gets a steady stream of the automotive lifestyle. I have visited enough countries to know what I'm talking about.

      Bear in mind that you need a fairly high population density before the alternative to the car (public transportation) becomes a viable option. Works great in Tokyo, Hong Kong, and NYC, not so well in less populated areas.

      Nobody wants the developing world to be overrun with cheap cars, but alternatives that make economic sense are harder to deploy than you might think. People who promote public transportation spend way too much time trying to tax the use of cars (and redirect the money) vs the time they SHOULD spend to get self sustaining cost-effective options that people WANT to use.

    216. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It's a pity you didn't hang around in that class, you might have learned something

      You can't learn from the ignorant. I was well aware of exchange rates; I'd dealt with them. At the time, a bhat was 1/20th of an American dollar. Thailand was incredibly primitive; no electricity, natural gas, or plumbing. Water came from cisterns on a building's roof.

      Are you sure the class wasn't finishing at that point?

      It was 1/2 hour into a two hour class.

      History has shown those economic "experts" wrong, and me right. Sure has, in bizarro world.

      We had an inflationary recession for the next five years, and the inflation eased, and finally the recession eased. Our standard of living didn't drop at all until Bush II's time. Were you even alive then?

    217. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      It is by European standards, where 40-60 MPG is standard.

    218. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Y'know, maybe that was his point. That both prices and salaries should be lowered to "third world" standards

      If it was, he was doing a damned poor job of communicating. While making his point he spoke of people living under bridges, about someone he knew who was living on $n dollars whose home was paid for, etc.

      An earlier poster said he sounded like a Marxist, I'm not sure, but he certainly was divorced from reality. Ten years later the US standard of living was better than it was in 1976, ten years after that it was FAR better.

      in my experience 99% of the time when a student calls a professor an idiot, its because the student didn't even understand what the professor was saying, let alone his reasons to do so.

      That has been my experience also, but if the student is paying attention and doesn't have this problem with his other professors, it's a pretty good bet that the student is right. It has also been my experience that you can get a PhD with average intelligence if you work hard, and even lower intelligence if you work REALLY hard. And these guys may have only had Masters anyway, it was an undergrad course.

    219. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      This populist bullshit may work well on Fox, so go peddle your shit there.

      I don't think I would be well recieved at Fox. I'm more of a social libertarian, and by no means hold to the "trickle down theory" of economics. Wealth doesn't trickle down, it flows up. The wealthy do not create wealth, they control and aggregate it. Wealth is created on the factory floor, the fry cook's stove, the programmer's cubicle.

      These are NOT Rupert Murdoch's views. I am a card carrying union member, and Murdoch would probably rather see me on a gallows than on one of his Nazi TV shows.

    220. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1
      The opening line from the first post from you:

      "No, the real question we should be asking, is "how can we arrange our cities such that people don't want cars in the future"

      Now:

      "I'm just talking about competent urban planning, jackass! "

      So no, you were not just speaking of urban planning. You didn't say " ... consider how to greatly reduce the need ...", you want to eliminate them. In fact your problem is worse than cold fusion, because at least cold fusion may be solvable. Allow me to offer you a Clue:

      I like my car. There ain't no stinkin' way you can rearrange a city, or do anything else, that will make me glad I don't "have" to drive it. Cars are fun. You may as well have the goal of making people not want to have sex by rearranging the furniture.

      Valiant effort on the attempted change up though. I almost didn't catch it. If only there was some kind of "Threaded Persistent Forum" where people could easily see what everyone else is posting, it would be obvious when someone wrote one thing, and then claimed to have written another after someone exposed the foolishness of the post! We could call is "DashDot". No wait, I've got it. Let's pick a really hard to communicate name that sounds like it might be an invalid URL !!!: "h t t p : / / / . . org/"

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    221. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      What are you, stupid? "Arrange our cities" refers to "urban planning." There's nothing else it can mean!

      You didn't say " ... consider how to greatly reduce the need ...", you want to eliminate them.

      Damn you have shitty reading comprehension skills! Where did I say anything about "eliminat[ing]" cars? Nowhere! Obviously, even in cities like New York there will still be some people who drive. But the key is that most people won't have to, and that's good enough. (And don't you dare start spouting BS claiming that I said "all" people, because I didn't!)

      I like my car.

      Well good for you. And you know what? I like mine too! But surely even you can't be so moronic that you can't see the difference between driving along a clear mountain road and sitting in gridlock for two hours to get a block and a half!

      There ain't no stinkin' way you can rearrange a city, or do anything else, that will make me glad I don't "have" to drive it.

      Bullshit. Go ask residents of, say, Manhattan. Between the facts that everything's so close together, that the subway system is actually decent, and that parking is exorbitantly expensive -- if it's available at all -- you'll find that they actually, genuinely, don't want to drive!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    222. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      When we can't buy stuff cheaply any more even though it's made by peasants in a third world country, because the haulage starts to form the largest part of the cost, we will cease to be as rich.

      When the peasants lose thir jobs to automation the prices will go down. When haulage doesn't depend on fossil fuels the prices will go down.

      When automation reaches the level of a Star Trek replicator, we will see social upheaval like has never been seen in history.

    223. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "Damn you have shitty reading comprehension skills! Where did I say anything about "eliminat[ing]" cars? "

      I see. You want to make it so nobody wants cars, but they are still around unwanted and taking up space! You have an interesting view of Utpoia! ROTFLMAO.

      I read some of the rest of your post, but it showed an equal amount of weaseling combined with a concerted effort to remain clueless. I'm not even going to waste my time. Off you go ...

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    224. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      If you read it again you'll see that I was disagreeing with Reagan.

    225. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I suppose it depends how you define "standard of living." If it means live in a smaller house, drive a smaller, more fuel-efficient car, have fewer 50" flat-panel TVs, then I'd say yes, the USA is going to have to do that.

      That's not how I would define it, but at any rate this was 1976; there were no "McMansions", everybody was buying smaller, more fuel efficient cars because of the Arab Oil Embargo of 1974 (and my four cylinder Vega only got 19 mpg on the highway), and there were no 50" TVs at all, let alone flat screen ones.

      Larger houses' heating and cooling costs are immaterial to a rich man, as is fuel efficiency. We are not becoming poorer as a nation, the gap between rich and poor has just widened.

    226. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by hobbit · · Score: 1

      And how does that help us for the coming resource crisis? Is the replicator arriving shortly after the flying car?

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    227. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Efficiency is overrated and/or moot.

      According to the information on one of Ford's websites the 2008 Ford Focus gets 100kms (hwy) for every 5.9 liters of fuel used.

      My 2003 F-350 Superduty (Crewcab, longbox) with about 2000 pounds of aftermarket gear bolted onto it gets 100kms (hwy) for every 7.1 liters of fuel used.

      Why do people make such a fuss about these supposed big gas (or diesel) guzzling SUVs and trucks? I get better fuel economy in an oversized overpowered truck with an engine that weighs more then your car. Fact is most of these people running out the buy the latest "fuel-saving" mini car are nothing more then pigs to the slaughterhouse.

    228. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by force_n · · Score: 1

      Tata's are a VERY successful business group. There automotive division has proved it's reliability in the Indian market for long. They are just about sound to take on new challenges. They know the shit they are making and how to position it. The Car can carry the load of an A/C along with the passengers, and that's enough assessment of a 'cheap' engine I presume. It's always a joy to see such incremental jumps in technology, whether it works or not is an entirely different question. You don't think they are using the technology used 20yrs back to make the the heavy fuel guzzling cars, do you?? lol. Just because a cheap car appears people aren't going to jump into purchasing it.. there are a bazillion other factors (Time it takes to take the Road, Parking space, Fuel costs, need!) All and all nothing BIG changes; atleast the pollution, the car denisty doesn't change an iota; Take my word on it, I have spent my life here in India -- except that the Tata's may prove there mettle in the Auto segment... or it might just go down as an experiment. No one is jumping into getting this car just because it's cheap. The price difference between the next priced car and this one isn't too much either! It's just a big market!!! Toyota, Ford, Honda, Skoda -- all are there on the roads... and in huge numbers. You talk about vehicle density and shit... huh! Some people seem presumably afraid of a developing nation suddenly "getting it"! That's not cool man!

    229. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by force_n · · Score: 1

      Tata's are a VERY successful business group. There automotive division has proved it's reliability in the Indian market for long. They are just about sound to take on new challenges. They know the shit they are making and how to position it. The Car can carry the load of an A/C along with the passengers, and that's enough assessment of a 'cheap' engine I presume. It's always a joy to see such incremental jumps in technology, whether it works or not is an entirely different question. You don't think they are using the technology used 20yrs back to make the the heavy fuel guzzling cars, do you?? lol.

      Just because a cheap car appears people aren't going to jump into purchasing it.. there are a bazillion other factors (Time it takes to take the Road, Parking space, Fuel costs, need!)

      All and all nothing BIG changes; atleast the pollution, the car denisty doesn't change an iota;
      Take my word on it, I have spent my life here in India -- except that the Tata's may prove there mettle in the Auto segment... or it might just go down as an experiment.
      No one is jumping into getting this car just because it's cheap. The price difference between the next priced car and this one isn't too much either!

      It's just a big market people!!! Toyota, Ford, Honda, Skoda -- all are there on the roads... and in huge numbers. You talk about vehicle density and shit... huh!
      You seem presumably afraid of a developing nation suddenly "getting it"! That's not cool man!

    230. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      What does the coming resource crisis (that they've been talking about since the Arab Oil Embargo of 1974) have to do with peasant workers taking your job?

    231. Re:And will be unavailable anyplace else.... by hobbit · · Score: 1

      Nothing whatsoever. Take a look back at the whole of this discussion, and you'll find it's only you who's concerned about peasants taking your job. The rest of us are talking about resources.

      And if you think an embargo is anything like a crisis, boy, you're in for a serious shock. We're not talking about people deciding whether or not to buy and sell oil here. We're talking about the end of the oil age.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
  3. Hyperbole much? by Speare · · Score: 1, Funny

    CAR's first ride in the Tata Nano felt far more significant and exciting than a first drive in a Ferrari or Lamborghini

    Wow, that's some hyperbole. A tuktuk is a sort of moped with a roof, and this Nano is a tuktuk with doors. Maybe he's talking about his first ride in a cardboard box in the "exciting" traffic flows in India - go ahead and search for that in YouTube.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
    1. Re:Hyperbole much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      CAR's first ride in the Tata Nano felt far more significant and exciting than a first drive in a Ferrari or Lamborghini

      Wow, that's some hyperbole.

      That's not hyperbole. It's entirely plausible that the reviewer was more excited and saw more signicance in this particular test ride than in others of a sort that he does frequently. It doesn't say much at all. If he'd said something like "this car has more significance for the human race than the splitting of the atom" then that would be hyperbole. What he actually said was very little.

    2. Re:Hyperbole much? by tecnico.hitos · · Score: 1

      Wow, that's some hyperbole. A tuktuk is a sort of moped with a roof, and this Nano is a tuktuk with doors. Maybe he's talking about his first ride in a cardboard box in the "exciting" traffic flows in India - go ahead and search for that in YouTube.

      I was just looking at it and I suddenly got this urge to get inside. No, not just an urge - more than that. It was my destiny to be here.

      --
      The good, the evil and the vacuum tubes.
    3. Re:Hyperbole much? by dreixel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Maybe he's talking about his first ride in a cardboard box in the "exciting" traffic flows in India - go ahead and search for that in YouTube.

      Rather impressive indeed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsPbLC8ppoU

    4. Re:Hyperbole much? by sjames · · Score: 1

      A Ferrari or Lamborghini looks like fun, but how significant are they sociologically? The only thing they enable is a speeding ticket or looking really cool. They only enable that for a tiny percentage of the population.

      A Tata IS much more significant in that sense because people who would otherwise be pedestrians are now driving (and so can go further to find work, for example).

      In the west, they could represent the idea that transportation need not consume a big chunk of the money you make going to work in that transportation. Some people pay as much monthly for their SUV as my parents did for their house.

    5. Re:Hyperbole much? by Deathlizard · · Score: 1

      Hmm. I was thinking the same way.

      Significant and Exciting like "I'm gonna die on this rickety wooden roller-coaster!!" instead of Significant and Exciting like "Wow! I'm in one of the finest automobiles ever conceived!"

  4. Cheap car already tried and failed! by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Those of us old enough to remember the 1980s remember the Yugo, which was touted then as the cheapest car ever: $3990 when they debuted in the U.S. in 1987 (bear in mind that the U.S. has much tougher safety and emissions standards than India).

    It was tried here and failed miserably, especially after the general consensus among the consumer rags, especially Consumer Reports, was that you were better of with a used car than a new Yugo.

    1. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Ritchie70 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A lot of the Yugo failure was quality.

      I was in the auto repair business through much of the 90's and we never saw one, despite a pretty decent number of them being sold locally. I don't think they made it out of the 80's still running.

      One of my store managers had been working at an import auto parts store while the Yugo was on sale as a new car.

      I recall him saying that the Yugo dealer bought a lot of starters from them - for new cars before they sold them. Fortunately for the dealer, a new Yugo was mostly just a old Fiat.

      Try to get your mind around that total lack of quality - the dealer replacing an OEM, brand new, factory part with an aftermarket part to get one that would work.

      Wow, talk about crappy.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    2. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Oh, I agree totally. And I also think that that at $2500 in 2009 dollars (that $3995 Yugo in 1987 dollars would be ~$7200 today, give or take) there is no way in hell they are going to get much better quality than the Yugo. (Wrap your mind around that!)

    3. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those of us old enough to remember the 1920s remember the Model T. It was a cheaply produced car for the masses. It was sort of a success...

    4. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Model T's debut price in 1909 was $850 -- about $20,000 in today's dollars. Its lowest price in 1915, $440, is equivalent to ~$9,000 today.

      Accounting for inflation, the Model T was far more expensive than the Yugo, and nearly 4 times the cost of the Tata.

    5. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Don't know. What makes the cost of a modern car or why haven't cars done the same things as PC's? I am currently the proud owner of an Acer Aspire One. 269 euro and that includes the very high dutch taxes.

      What do I have for that? A more then capable laptop with build in Wifi, 3G, a SSD, 2x SD expansion slots. A very decent screen etc etc all powered by a DUAL core Atom and 1g of memory.

      No, it doesn't compete with a top of the line desktop, but just get your head around the fact that for about 250 euro, I got a highly decent laptop easily powerful enough to run anything I throw at it INCLUDING displaying hi-res movie rips. Not so long ago a desktop PC struggled with that.

      And it is not like cars are all that high-tech. The car industry doesn't re-invent the engine every couple of year, so why do we pay a premium on decades old technology? It would be the same as if blue led's still cost 10 bucks per item.

      How much of the 10.000 euro price ticket of a car (and Hyundi already delivers good cars for 7000 euro (including the insane dutch taxes)) is Apple/Coca-Cola style markup (you will pay for the logo) and how many thousands do you pay for that iPod connector?

      If this car comes with a basic engine (it does) no airbags, no powersteering, no abs then it is basically old (read no license fees, no R&D) produced with modern techonology and cheap labour subsidised by a country that wants to do to korea what japan did to the US what the US did to europe. If you are old you remember the days that japanese cars were thought of as crap on wheels and if you are of a civilized country you know that cheapo american sportscars could never compete with proper race cars from europe.

      Wrap your mind around this. Things change. If you had said just a few decades ago that a top of the line luxury car would be from japan, you would have been laughed at. Yet that is the truth, japan competes with mercedes. Who is to say Tata won't be the next Hyunadi or Toyota?

    6. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by spisska · · Score: 4, Insightful

      there is no way in hell they are going to get much better quality than the Yugo. (Wrap your mind around that!)

      Remember though that the Yugo was essentially Warsaw Pact manufacturing quality with Fiat parts. The Tata was engineered from the ground up.

      Remember also that the Yugo was designed for Western markets, the Tata is not.

      I'm not sure about all the concern around this thing selling in the US or EU. It's a car designed for Asian cities, and that in itself means a much larger potential market than the US.

    7. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      They can get better quality for $2500, if they have a labor pool that doesn't cost $100K/year/head for a bunch of lazy slugs.

      India is a kind of scary place, they have the potential for greatness and a dirt cheap economy, but I have yet to see those two come together with the kind of results you get out of China.

    8. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      The Model T's debut price in 1909 was $850 -- about $20,000 in today's dollars. Its lowest price in 1915, $440, is equivalent to ~$9,000 today.

      Accounting for inflation, the Model T was far more expensive than the Yugo, and nearly 4 times the cost of the Tata.

      I would hope that the world has learned a little about efficiency in the last 100 years. If nothing else, the basic supply chains that provide sheet metal, rubber, glass, etc. should be much more efficient today than they were in 1909.

    9. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by u38cg · · Score: 1

      Heh. My dad managed to keep one running through the mid 90s. We called it Hugo, and it even once managed to tow a caravan. It was great as a kid, because you often got to stop in interesting places while the AA brought out various bits and pieces to make it go again (including, on one mermorable occasion, a complete new engine).

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    10. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by mcvos · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Failed?

      The Yugo sold quite a lot of cars, and according to the wikipedia article you link to, they're still being sold. Not in the US, but the Tata Nano isn't aimed at the US either. Lots of stuff isn't. Just because something won't succeed in the US, that doesn't automatically make it a failure.

    11. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the Yugo wasn't made in the Warsaw Pact. You're thinking of FSO-Polonez and VAZ-Lada (Warsaw Pact manufacturing with FIAT parts).

      The Yugo was mostly just FIAT parts. And oh yeah, the version for the US market was much better than the one for the domestic market. Everyone back in Yugoslavia buying a Yugo wanted the "American" one but those were only for export. So they'd pay someone at the factory to declare a US-bound Yugo as defective and they'd buy it off the factory as damaged goods.

    12. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by dbIII · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Also we've learned since then that people don't really want an exhaust pipe that will survive for twenty years if they have to clean the thing out. People also don't care if they can't change from top gear directly into reverse. There were a lot of things that got the cost down, mainly deciding what was important - for instance a lighter weight exhaust system that doesn't last as long and a lighter and cheaper transmission. As roads improved you didn't need something as tough as a 4x4 either.

      The model T was a pretty amazing bit of technology even though it was the cheapest car. Even a Hummer would come close to being a better vehicle now but for the time it was quite spectacular.

    13. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by sorak · · Score: 2, Funny

      Failed?

      The Yugo sold quite a lot of cars, and according to the wikipedia article you link to, they're still being sold. Not in the US, but the Tata Nano isn't aimed at the US either. Lots of stuff isn't. Just because something won't succeed in the US, that doesn't automatically make it a failure.

      Yes. Look at David Hasselhoff!

    14. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by frist · · Score: 1

      Because they are lazy and don't have government forced labor.

    15. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Digital+Vomit · · Score: 1

      My cousin is a mechanic and he used to drive a Yugo. He actually owned two because, invariably, one was always in need of repair.

      --
      Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
    16. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by TheWingThing · · Score: 2, Informative

      (bear in mind that the U.S. has much tougher safety and emissions standards than India).

      Untrue. Did you pull that claim out of a hat? India has poorer safety standards than the US, but stricter emission standards than the US. Indian emission standards are modeled after the Euro emission standards, which are a lot stricter (PDF, see page 26) than the US emission standards.

    17. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A man walked into a car parts shop and said "I need a new rear-view mirror for my Yugo."

      The manager thought it over and said "OK, that's a fair trade."

    18. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yugo was never built in the Warsaw pact, you insensitive clod. Yugoslavia was a member of the unaligned movement, together with India and Iraq.

      The Yugo was designed for the Yugoslavian market but then someone got the idea that it's price/performance was good enough to sell in the US.

    19. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      David Hasselhoff's singing career!

    20. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the US had _any_ emissions standards in 1987 then they would not be in this mess now.

    21. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Part of the reason that electronics are able to scale so well in price performance characteristics is that the expensive parts get cheaper per transistor and the bulk of the PC is cheap in material and labor costs. More transistors get crammed into the same space and larger silicon wafers become economical to fabricate. So CPUs, Memory, motherboards, etc... drop in price relative to what they can do and now you can buy a modest note/netbook that exceeds the power of yesteryear's desktop and at half the price.

      But the price of a mainstream steel ATX enclosure has doubled to tripled since 2001. A PSU for a current desktop costs a little more per watt and needs to supply a lot more watts if you want to use all those extra transistors in your chips. None of the necessary peripherals (keyboards, computer desks, office chairs) have changed much in price. And the cost of an Automobile has more to do with the price of this kind of manufacture than it does with the cost of chips.

      Then on top of that, you have minimum standards by law that you have to meet with a car. Once you've found that equilbrium of lowest possible worker salary vs a car built well enough to be worth buying it becomes an issue of material value. Then, by law, you have to squeeze out more mileage and make the vehicle safer a couple of years later. Your manufacturing process costs may be the same, but you have to pay for R&D, and material costs are higher as well.

      The Japanese can sell "Luxury" vehicles on par with BMW because the cars are just as nice. A few decades ago you would have been laughed at, because they weren't. Tata could become the new Hyundai (they had a rather miserable rep not so long ago) in the US if they want to. They just have to produce good, economical cars, that meet standards. They aren't going to sell for much less than a Versa though.

    22. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      My cousin is a mechanic and he used to drive a Yugo. He actually owned two because, invariably, one was always in need of repair.

      Somehow your story doesn't exactly seem like vote of confidence for the quality of the Yugo...

    23. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Ertman · · Score: 1

      But cheap cars can succeed. Just look at the Hyundai Pony. It was the best selling car in Canada the year it was released.

    24. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Try to get your mind around that total lack of quality - the dealer replacing an OEM, brand new, factory part with an aftermarket part to get one that would work.

      I have a Nippon-Denso upgraded starter on my diesel 1992 F250. This one was just installed by the previous owner, which saves me a lot of trouble, because you go through the OEM-spec alternator rapidly on these trucks.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    25. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember when the 1970 Ford Maverick was selling for a base price of $1995. When I see all those car commercials spouting off about their $2k, $3k or even $5K rebates, I always think of the rebates in their equivalent in "Mavericks".

    26. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure about all the concern around this thing selling in the US or EU. It's a car designed for Asian cities, and that in itself means a much larger potential market than the US.

      As the Smart line of microcars is a success in europe, I do believe that any concert regarding a lack of popularity is groundless, specially when considering the announced target price.

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    27. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I car pooled with a gal in the 80s that bought one of these... The dealer wanted $90 for a radiator hose and for her to wait a month! Pulled the old one off... Took it in to local auto part store and "cut to fit" a hose that had similar bends... Fixed "now" for $12...

    28. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by leenks · · Score: 1

      "Production of the car has officially ended.[11] The last Yugo (No.794,428) was made on November 11, 2008."

      From that wikipedia page :-)

    29. Re:Cheap car already tried and failed! by PhotoGuy · · Score: 1

      I saw one at a car show in Toronto many years back. I barely touched the side mirror, and it fell off in my hand. I've heard the rest of the vehicle was made with the same level of quality...

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
  5. Safety.... by Ritchie70 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There aren't many, [safety features] but it's far safer than the bicycles and scooters that many Nano buyers will be trading up from. Tata's engineers are working on a series of upgrades, including airbags, anti-lock brakes, power steering, more powerful three-cylinder petrol and diesel engines and five-speed and automatic gearboxes which will allow the Nano to go on sale beyond its home market, and capitalise on the colossal potential created by its base price.

    So basically it's "safe enough for India" but you couldn't sell it as-is anywhere that has vehicle safety standards.

    Of course, you probably couldn't sell a Geo Metro or a Honda CRX (two 1980's high mileage cars) as a new car in the US today either for the same reasons.

    I'm not convinced that changing the vehicular population makeup of India from bicycles and scooters to have a higher volume of these actually raises the overall safety of the traveling population - and it surely doesn't improve the fuel economy.

    For those of us who are used to dollars, according to Google, the base price of 1700 pounds in the article is about $2500.

    --
    The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    1. Re:Safety.... by bytta · · Score: 5, Informative
      I live in India an I'm kind of scared...

      The driving exam is a joke here. If you correctly answer 6 out of 10 multiple choice questions (mostly "guess the taffic sign" ones) you get a learners licence. Curiously, 9 out of 36 failed that in my class. 1 month later you get the full licence, provided that you can drive 100m without incident.

      The traffic here is very chaotic already, but it's mostly motorbikes and 3-wheelers. Add more cars to the mix and you're asking for trouble. On the other hand the Tata Nano seems to be a scaled-up rickshaw rather than a scaled-down car.

      TFA is 4 months old, and the price is way off. The base price is 100.000 rupees, or about $2000/£1350. You can still get 2 high-end scooters for that price, not one for £1700 like the article says.

    2. Re:Safety.... by jbb1003 · · Score: 1

      On the safety count, those of from the UK think that the US driving test is a joke too...

      Regarding the environmental issue - yes, 10 million cars being bought in India will increase global pollution. We can solve this in two ways. Either prevent the Nano from being sold anywhere, or ban the sale of cars which achieve less than 40mpg (the Nano gets 60, so I'm giving the US a break here).

    3. Re:Safety.... by Digital+Vomit · · Score: 1

      1 month later you get the full licence, provided that you can drive 100m without incident

      Is it such an accomplishment to be able to drive 100 meters in India without having some sort of collision?

      --
      Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
    4. Re:Safety.... by argiedot · · Score: 1
      No, you don't understand! My test was like this:
      1. Start the car.
      2. Accelerate, shifting through the gears from neutral to 3rd and then decelerate, shifting downwards. (
      3. Stop the car.
      4. Wait 5 hours.
      5. Take licence.

      And if it's going to be the motorcyclists driving these cars, I fear for us all. Motorcyclists are notorious in India for trying to squeeze through non-existent spaces and getting killed. Of course part of the problem is the lack of proper lane regulations.

    5. Re:Safety.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      India is crowded.

    6. Re:Safety.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How much does a used car go for in India? Seems like they'd be aiming at the "sick of my old clunker" market.

      When the Yugo came out, it failed here because a used car of the same price (say a 5 year old VW Rabbit) was smarter buy. In the US $2000 will still get you a decent old econobox with worn out appolstery and a lack of prestige, but nothing really wrong with it mechanically and 35MPG.

    7. Re:Safety.... by bugs2squash · · Score: 1
      I've been in a car in india (a chauffered "Ambassador" from the hotel fleet) and the sight of entire families balanced on a scooter is terrifying.

      So what's going to happen during the transition phase, when "scooter family" has not yet got their new Tata and there are millions of new cars on the road. It's one thing when two scooter families collide, quite another when it is scooter vs Nano

      It seems to me that in the short term at least, "scooter family" is going to be far less safe. I wonder what safety features were put in for people outside the car (like soft fenders)

      --
      Nullius in verba
    8. Re:Safety.... by bytta · · Score: 1

      Is it such an accomplishment to be able to drive 100 meters in India without having some sort of collision?

      The License issuing officials will ask you to drive a "8" shaped or "S" shaped track without making mistakes. It's not in traffic, and it's not hard if you've ever spent 30 minutes on a motorbike.

  6. Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by RNLockwood · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Great, a more affordable vehicle hits the roads so that more people can increase their carbon footprints and increase oil consumption. A few gas guzzlers or many more efficient vehicles. The result's the same.

    --
    Nate
    1. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by ActusReus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The developed world has had DECADES to build up moral authority on this issue, and utterly blew it. Now, efforts on our part to shame the developing world for pollution or inefficient energy use sound spiteful and hypocritical.

      You may be right... but you're also wrong.

    2. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by American+Terrorist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      OTOH, it's good if this drives up oil prices, then other people will drive fewer gas guzzlers. It will also increase the demand for renewable energy and possibly force the US's uberconsumers to reduce their lavish lifestyles.

      It's also good for Indian people who want cheap taxis and are sick of riding on top of buses to get around.

    3. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by TheAmit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't understad why do drivers in the US who majorly drive big Ford trucks talk down to the developing world for driving small cars. Remember India with almost 4 times the population has a smaller carbon footprint than the US. Stop driving your gas guzzlers for the next 20 years before you get a right to talk about carbon footprints. After enjoying the economic benefits of gasoline you want the developing world to give it all up and stay poor is it ?

    4. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by ZarathustraDK · · Score: 1

      Just because someone else does it doesn't make it ok.

      --
      If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
    5. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by hobbit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's no point being defeatist about it. Until fusion is sorted out (hopefully soon?) the rest of the world simply cannot enjoy such a high standard of living as the west has indulged itself in these past few decades. I mean "cannot" in a physical rather than a moral sense. The time for crying hypocrite is over. We all have to work together now.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    6. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right! You tell those brown people how it is, whitey! How dare they try to advance their civilization and enjoy a fraction of the prosperity you've been able to!!! Now go pay your carbon indulgences to Pope Gore, you self-righteous douche bag.

    7. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no point being defeatist about it. Until fusion is sorted out (hopefully soon?) the rest of the world simply cannot enjoy such a high standard of living as the west has indulged itself in these past few decades. I mean "cannot" in a physical rather than a moral sense. The time for crying hypocrite is over. We all have to work together now.

      Now if that's not really damn handy, I don't know what is.
      Ok mister rich American dude, let's work together. Let's all start using bicycles to go to work from now on ...
      Or better yet ... you can use bicycles. Now it's our turn do drive fossil fuel powered vehicles for the next six decades.
      Whether you like it or not, it's only human nature to want more out of life. I just want to get to work in half an hour. I'm tired of spending three hours each day going to work (although i live in the city).
      Although this post is a troll, the bottom line is this: You cannot demand sacrifices from other people (people who are already less fortunate than you) without doing some sacrifices yourself.

    8. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by RNLockwood · · Score: 1

      In the US the population is dispersed in suburbs making personal vehicles mandatory and public transportation impractical. At the Federal level we are passing laws that do nothing to reduce the number of vehicles on the road (it would hurt the economy, you see) and have stupidly mandated the production and use of bio-fuels that cost more or about as much petroleum to manufacture than they produce. Never mind the consequences to the world food supply.

      At some point gas prices will rise to prohibitive levels and our economy will wither or crash IMHO.

      So over the years the US has done it wrong but some of us know that and want to sound a warning both at home and abroad.

      --
      Nate
    9. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by hobbit · · Score: 1

      Ok mister rich American dude, let's work together. Let's all start using bicycles to go to work from now on ...

      I'm a European, I do not have a car, and I work from home. Your assumptions are unwarranted.

      Whether you like it or not, it's only human nature to want more out of life.

      Whether you like it or not, it is simply impossible for everyone to live like Americans and Europeans currently do. Increasingly, it's not even possible for Americans and Europeans to live like that. Again: this is not a moral argument, it's an observation of supply and demand in a world of finite resources.

      Although this post is a troll, the bottom line is this: You cannot demand sacrifices from other people (people who are already less fortunate than you) without doing some sacrifices yourself.

      What in my post gave you the impression that I do not expect to make sacrifices myself? I'll say it again in case you missed it first time: we all have to work together now.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    10. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If gasoline was a tax, it would be a highly regressive tax. Higher gas prices don't affect the "uberconsumers" because even if gas goes to double digits per gallon, it will still be a trivial percentage of their income.

      Gas prices affect the people who are priced out of the core of cities and into suburbs the most, the people who can least afford some unknown expenses.

      To boot, gas prices don't just affect who drives. They affect everyone. Though someone may bicycle to work, they pay for the higher oil/gas with higher grocery prices, upped rent, higher sales taxes, and so on.

      Please, be wise what you wish for. Trust me, if gas in the US went to $10.00 a gallon on average, you will be feeling the hurt as a wave of price increases runs through the whole supply chain.

    11. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Because we are Americans you over-sensitive clod!

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    12. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by laejoh · · Score: 1

      See this for an explanation!

    13. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by TheAmit · · Score: 1

      I understand people in US need cars still dont understand the logic of single person riding in Ford F150. I live in the US and drive a small car I completely understand your warning as well but remember giving up gas today comes with a price these countries cannot afford. By asking them to give up on gas you are asking them to give up on an opportunity to improve their lives. The kyoto protocol addresses a lot of these problems but the US refuses to ratify it :(

    14. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      In the US the population is dispersed in suburbs making personal vehicles mandatory and public transportation impractical

      How on Earth does having people living in suburbs make public transport impractical ? All you need to do is build subways, metros and trams into the suburbs. If Americans wanted to have first class public transport it would be easy to supply but really they don't they're perfectly happy with their cars and their "I'm all right Jack" selfishness.

    15. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by ricegf · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Although you're speaking facetiously, I'll answer your question honestly.
      1. Americans have experienced the severe negative effects of air pollution. It would be unkind not to warn the world's largest democracy to avoid our mistake.
      2. Technology molds society. After 70 years, American society cannot simply "stop driving". It will take a generation or more to transform American society into something compatible with less personal transportation - like, say, virtual living.
      3. Not everyone in this forum has "talked down" to the developing world. Of those who have, not all "drive big Ford trucks". I drive a small Ford economy car, and power my house with 100% wind energy. So do I have your permission to warn Indians of the risk they are facing, and how they might avoid the worst effects?

      I understand the point you are intending, but consider whether your bashing 300,000,000 people with such a broad bat isn't the moral equivalent of those who "talk down" to the developing world.

    16. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by cduffy · · Score: 1

      Ok mister rich American dude, let's work together. Let's all start using bicycles to go to work from now on ...

      Funny you mention it -- this particular rich American dude is doing just that.

    17. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love how the GP believes that my having an F-150 negates my right to use mathematics and physics.

    18. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by TheAmit · · Score: 1

      No it negates your right to preach other people about clean air pollution and carbon footprints You can use all the math and physics you want as long as you apply it to your life as well

    19. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember India with almost 4 times the population has a smaller carbon footprint than the US.

      Uh, yeah, and being an undeveloped 3rd third world country has no part in that. Most of that population in India are essentially dirt farmers living in shacks made of sticks. Same with China.

    20. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by koiransuklaa · · Score: 1

      Gas prices affect the people who are priced out of the core of cities and into suburbs the most, the people who can least afford some unknown expenses.

      This is mostly just a punishment for the insane city planning you guys have done in the states... Building cities with working public transport is not that difficult (and I'm not saying you don't have examples of that in the US, just that it's not the norm).

    21. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      I don't understad why do drivers in the US who majorly drive big Ford trucks talk down to the developing world for driving small cars. Remember India with almost 4 times the population has a much smaller carbon footprint than the US. Stop driving your gas guzzlers for the next 20 years before you get a right to talk about carbon footprints. After enjoying the economic benefits of gasoline you want the developing world to give it all up and stay poor is it ?

      fixed.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    22. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How on Earth does having people living in suburbs make public transport impractical ?

      Perhaps you do not grasp what North American suburbs are like. It is two and a half kilometers from my house to the nearest bus stop. Further than that to the nearest "corner store". It is more than 10 minutes by car to my daughter's school; 15 minutes to the nearest grocery store or post office.

      The density in North American suburbs is too low for it to be profitable for a retailer to be within walking distance, or even bicycling distance.

      With the density as it is, any form of public transit has to make too make stops along the way, at each stop picking up only one or two people. The result is that public transit is too slow. My morning commute by car is 30-35 minutes, including a five minute walk across campus. My afternoon commute is slightly longer. If I were to take the bus, I would have to walk two and a half kilometers, leaving enough time to be sure not to miss the bus, take a 35-40 minute bus ride, wait more than ten minutes for a connecting bus, take a 15-20 minute bus ride, and then walk five minutes across campus. If I were to take public transit, my work day would go from 9.5 hours to 12.5 hours. That's 15 hours a week lost; two working days a week lost to commuting.

    23. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      hehehe. I always love that argument. We have had about a DECADE on this. The reason is that until about mid 90's, it was not accepted that there was an issue. To call the west hypocritical over that is a joke. Now, most of us know better. What is needed is to change directions, but which way? We know that having India, China, and Brazil follow our path is absolutely the WRONG answer. So, you are just plain wrong.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    24. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Big+Boss · · Score: 1

      That single person in the F150 probably needs its capabilities a fair bit of the time. Towing, hauling large loads, etc.. Given current prices for vehicles and registration, insurance, etc., it's likely cheaper to use the truck as a personal vehicle as well than to buy and maintain another vehicle.

      I own a Prius and a Montero Sport. My wife and I can carpool, so the Prius gets a lot of miles on it. When I do use the SUV, I'm usually towing or have more in it than would fit in the surprisingly large cargo space of the Prius. There is often just one of us in the Montero, but we are usually either doing something that requires its abilities or are on our way to do so. Occasionally, we just need 2 cars. Not everyone can afford to do that. Hell, we probably shouldn't be doing it. In such a case, it makes sense to have the more capable vehicle.

      Yeah, sometimes the driver just likes the truck. But everyone I know that owns one uses it as a truck, even if they do commute in it.

      Kyoto has a number of problems that make it undesirable for the US. There are good reasons not to ratify it. I do think it would be good for us to do something like it, but I'm not satisfied with Kyoto as written.

      Simply allowing those that can to work from home or locations closer to home would do far more for the environment and oil consumption than restricting people's vehicle choices. Good luck with that though. It requires managers that know what they are doing, and those are quite rare.

    25. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Big+Boss · · Score: 1

      I don't think that first class public transport would be "easy to supply" it would take a decade or more to build out along with the various holdups due to lawsuits from NIMBYs. Yes, I do think it would be nice to have. But it's not something we can have tomorrow. However, if we don't start building it, we can never have it.

      Hell, locally we have the transit company attempting to build out commuter rail. A city on the route blew a gasket when they wanted to build a station in their city. How retarded is that? Something to make it easy to use public transit and they try to block it. They were concerned about noise or something. They have obviously never been near one of the trains, they are electric and damn near silent. If I had a station close to home, I would use it now. But it would take me as long to drive to a station as it would to just drive to work, so what do you think I do?

    26. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by argiedot · · Score: 1

      In Bombay, taxis use CNG (Compressed Natural Gas). Prices are incredibly low.

    27. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      I think it's wrong to say our use is "inefficient." The US produces more wealth-per-carbon-use than any country. That's the opposite of inefficient.

      The question is whether we should be producing less wealth.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    28. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by SpinyNorman · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's interesting to note that the Smart Car, which is driven in the US (just saw one at work yesterday in the parking lot) is smaller than the Tata Nano (in fact considerably smaller - about 2 feet shorter!) :

      Tana Nano

      L 3.29m = 10.79'
      W 1.58m = 5.18'
      H 1.6m = 5.24'

      Smart Car

      L 8' 2.5"
      W 5'
      H 5'

      http://auto.howstuffworks.com/smart-car.htm

      Of course the Smart Car costs about 10x the price of the Nano and has considerably worse gas comsumption, so there's less reason for Auto/Oil industry lobbyists to try to regulate it to death.

    29. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by tjonnyc999 · · Score: 1

      It's a "Catch-22" situation, an infinite loop.

      On one hand, if efficient mass-transit systems are put into place in major American cities, including the suburbs, many people won't need cars anymore.

      On the other hand, nobody is going to invest billions of dollars into new infrastructure when everybody has a car already.

      The amount of traffic in major US cities is ridiculous. And what is truly tragic is that, in most cases, it's a case of "Point A to Point B" traffic, such as the 100,000 cars/day moving between Manhattan and New Jersey's Hudson and Bergen counties. One "bedroom community" contributes hundreds of thousands of cars to the road - having an excellent public transportation system would remove the vast majority of those cars, significantly reducing emissions, saving commuters a ton of money, and improving quality of life.

      However, despite the traffic problem having been extant for some decades, nothing has been done. The current mass-transit systems in major US cities range from "moderately crappy" to "outright shitty", and many Americans refuse to use them, preferring the comfort of their own cars (environmental impact be damned). And having seen the subway systems in London (best damn design anywhere, love the timing displays), Paris (almost 100% coverage, and excellent artwork), Moscow (unfuckingbelievable architecture + amazing timing & speed), Oslo, and Helsinki - and then comparing them to the pathetic run-down crap that has to be tolerated by NYC MTA, SEPTA, and BART riders, I honestly cannot blame them.

      It's not likely that any major renovations/expansions of US mass-transit will be done, not until a much greater pressure (oil supply cut-off, draconian environmental laws [goodluckwiththat], etc) outright forces the development of a viable (and reliable) mass-transit system.

      Until that day, US city and state governments will be perfectly happy profiting from tolls, a corrupt insurance system, traffic tickets, and many other sources of income. And let's not forget the political influence of the various unions involved in highway construction & maintenance.

      Yes, an effective, well-designed, comfortable, and reliable mass-transit would be the solution to the urban-suburban transportation needs of America, and carbon footprint reduction.

      But, for reasons outlined above (and a few more), it's not going to happen anytime soon.

    30. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In all likelihood the F150 owner talked himself into buying a big manly truck or SUV that he WANTED by rationalizing that he might 'need' the bed space a few times a year to haul something.

    31. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Americans have experienced the severe negative effects of air pollution. It would be unkind not to warn the world's largest democracy to avoid our mistake.

      'Warning India about air pollution' is like warning Saudi Arabia about sand and heat.

    32. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by TheAmit · · Score: 1

      The tone of most comments doesnt seem to be a warning here. We should not let them have it hardly looks like a warning. And sorry for paiting 300 million ppl with the same brush but america as a country has little authority to tell any other country about carbon emissions. Borrowing from another post its like a cokehead telling a kid not to do drugs while snorting up one more line

    33. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by TheAmit · · Score: 1

      Again if i see contractors have big trucks around here i understand its a part of their business and they need those but i work as a software engineer where most people haul nothing but their ass to work everyday in big trucks. If u are going to need that truck once a year isnt it easier to rent ?

    34. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by maxume · · Score: 1

      Kyoto is toothless economic suicide for the U.S. Take out the free pass for China and India (if you want to subsidize their development, that's fine, but there is no good reason to tie the subsidy to what is ostensibly an environmental treaty) and it might get signed. With the free passes, no freaking way.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    35. Re:Oh, Joy, Joy, more oil comsumers by mgblst · · Score: 1

      Most of the people who drive big Ford trucks no NOT GIVE A SHIT about what anyone else does in the rest of the world. You do realise there are whole cities in the US where most people DO NOT HAVE a car at all (eg. New York). And most cities in Europe are like this, it is quite rare to own a car, because they have a great public transport system. So stop talking utter bollocks.

  7. Infrastructure will not handle this by Laxitive · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think Indian infrastructure is going to have a hard time coping with this.

    Tried getting anywhere in New Delhi recently? A 10km ride can take HOURS. I'm not exaggerating or kidding. You will literally stand in one spot for half an hour. Nobody obeys traffic rules and gridlock is the norm.

    The Indian middle class is looking to copy the west, and they want their SUVs and their tall lattes too.

    In late afternoon in New Delhi (about 6:00pm or so), you can STARE AT THE SUN without feeling any queasiness in your eyes. That's how bad the pollution is.

    Instead of looking to other cultures and trying to NOT make the same mistakes, India is eager to copycat them. Heh... you think Americans go a little bit overboard with the bling and the super-size-me? Just wait.. just wait.

    -Laxitive

    1. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by American+Terrorist · · Score: 1

      I think Indian infrastructure is going to have a hard time coping with this

      Yes, they need more ways of getting around and fewer people. They should be investing massively in their infrastructure like China did, but they're not.

      Ideally the big cities of the present and future would have massive high tech subway systems, buses going from everywhere to everywhere, tight regulation of car numbers (like HK, Singapore, and London) and (my personal favorite) skyways with bike paths.

      The only people with enough money to pay for these things are the ones who print it though. So good luck to everyone out there waiting for the invisible hand to rescue them from their commute.

    2. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by (H)elix1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Heh. My first visit to New Delhi, I wondered if India followed 'British' driving rules (drive on the left side of the road) vs the right side lane driving seen in many other countries. A couple hours each way, several days in a row, I was unable to call it based on the driving observed.

      These guys would make the Brazilian or Italian drivers blush... It is a wonder we don't see more of them on the race track.

    3. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      America is still having trouble with the "keeping up with the Joneses" concept... I think it's basic human (and animal) nature - monkey see, monkey want.

    4. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "Yes, they need more ways of getting around and fewer people."

      Well they missed their window of opportunity then, didn't they? They should have taken advantage of the opportunities available during the 2001-2008 time frame.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    5. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by Orome · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm not sure what the plan is now, but when the Nano was first unveiled Ratan Tata (the CEO) said that they would be focusing on selling the car in smaller cities.

      The larger cities like Delhi and Mumbai have good public transport systems, and most people are pragmatic enough to realize that a train will get them to work faster (and cheaper) than driving in a car. I worked in Mumbai for two years, and I was earning more than enough money to own a regular car (and pay a driver!) but I still used public transport on a daily basis. The same is true for almost all of my peers.

      I don't think there will be too many people buying this thing as a status symbol. I see it being primarily bought by lower-to-middle income families in the smaller cities, or in villages which are well connected to neighboring cities. If you ever visited India, you'd see some of these people taking their whole family on a single motorcycle which is dangerous.

    6. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by American+Terrorist · · Score: 1

      Well they missed their window of opportunity then, didn't they? They should have taken advantage of the opportunities available during the 2001-2008 time frame.

      Yes, because there were no good opportunities for Indians prior to 2001 and there will be none after 2008. How can they improve their infrastructure if Bush isn't president of the US?

    7. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "America is still having trouble with the "keeping up with the Joneses" concept."

      Some people, including some Americans, are still having trouble with the "keeping up with the Joneses" concept...

      (Fixed it for you)

      "I think it's basic human (and animal) nature"

      I like candy and chocolate bars. (Hint: Humans are animals. Seriously. This missing link might go a long way to helping you come to terms with the similarity "between" humans and animals ;-)

      monkey see, monkey want.

      It is a good thing you aren't president Obama, or you'd have some splainin' to do to the Indians (Aside: BTW Indians are not the same as Native Americans, whom are also both humans and animals, though they are purportedly sometimes a different animal from time to time ;-)

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    8. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      WOOOOSSSHHH

      Ironically, your SlashID should have made you a shoe-in to get the (albeit quite crude) joke. Think of other countries that begin with the letter I that experienced a loss of populace and an increase in transportation vehicles within its perimeter during the 2001 and 2008 time frame.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    9. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      It is a good thing you aren't president Obama, or you'd have some splainin' to do to the Indians.

      I would never want that job... I can see how people might have been hurt by his remark, but taken in context (Jay Leno Show, hello?) it was really not offensive.

      As for my monkey comment, it's not just directed at Indians, it applies to everyone - especially those who put themselves in a bad situation just so they could get something that doesn't actually help them.

    10. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by MadKeithV · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the driving I observed in the Ukraine. Traffic lights? Mere guidelines. The opposing lane (separated with a hard shoulder)? That's where you pass the slower cars around you!
      The right way 'round a roundabout? Why, the shortest distance across!
      Doing 250km/h weaving in and out between heavy trucks doing about 60km/h for 20km until you get to the airport to go back home: gratitute for survival!

    11. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by Laxitive · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So the smaller cities will become like Delhi or Mumbai, with pollution, dirt, and garbage piling up everywhere.

      If you don't think there will be too many people buying this thing as a status symbol, then you don't know Indians. If there's one thing I know about Indians, Northern and Southern, Rich and Poor, High Caste and Low Caste.. it's that status is everything, wealth is status, and cars are wealth. Sure, so is jewelry, and being able to pay for ridiculously overpriced weddings, and a whole bunch of other things.. but the car as a status symbol in India is across the board.

      Tata is lying. This is all about making money on top of the Indian desire to keep up with the joneses.

      Now, I'm not saying that's a bad desire. Ambition is good. Wanting to have a better life with better conveniences is a good thing. It's what makes India so vibrant and exciting a place. But there is always a cost for this kind of progress, and in a place like India where we really haven't gotten our largest problems sorted out, where we haven't, as a culture, figured out that throwing our garbage onto the streets and shitting in our own water supply is not sustainable in the long term, where we haven't learned that it is unwise spending your entire family fortune on lavish and gaudy weddings and jewellry when it could have been invested in the young couple's livelyhood to far better effect.. I don't think the country as a whole knows what it is getting into.

      India may well be careening at breakneck pace towards a brick wall if it doesn't fix the more fundamental issues it faces. And no, cheap cars are not one of those fundamental issues.

    12. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by SFA_AOK · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of a joke one of my Indian colleagues told me: "In the UK, you drive on the left; in India, we drive on what's left."

    13. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by Steneub · · Score: 0

      If you ever visited India, you'd see some of these people taking their whole family on a single motorcycle which is dangerous.

      Thank goodness you told me it was dangerous, otherwise I wouldn't have known!

    14. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you ever visited India, you'd see some of these people taking their whole family on a single motorcycle which is dangerous.

      Dude, I've seen that in Italy. Dad driving, mom on the back, junior standing between Dad's knees and the family dog in front of junior. This was on a scooter.

    15. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by reckless_waltz · · Score: 1

      I think Indian infrastructure is going to have a hard time coping with this.

      Tried getting anywhere in New Delhi recently? A 10km ride can take HOURS. I'm not exaggerating or kidding. You will literally stand in one spot for half an hour. Nobody obeys traffic rules and gridlock is the norm.

      The Indian middle class is looking to copy the west, and they want their SUVs and their tall lattes too.

      In late afternoon in New Delhi (about 6:00pm or so), you can STARE AT THE SUN without feeling any queasiness in your eyes. That's how bad the pollution is.

      Instead of looking to other cultures and trying to NOT make the same mistakes, India is eager to copycat them. Heh... you think Americans go a little bit overboard with the bling and the super-size-me? Just wait.. just wait.

      -Laxitive

      So true!

    16. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dont worry we know, we have seen Bollywood movies!

    17. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by sluser20009 · · Score: 1

      welcome to India! The only traffic rule: There are no rules!

    18. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's that status is everything, wealth is status, and cars are wealth.

      True. But if I wanted to enhance my status, I wouldn't buy a Tata Nano! That's cheap stuff. I would probably buy a Toyota Corolla or a Honda Civic... Now those are status symbols (in India, that is).

      --Indian Guy looking to buy a car.

    19. Re:Infrastructure will not handle this by craagz · · Score: 1

      India being as highly populated as it is, needs several modes of transport. Most large cities are now going in for a Metro Rail.

      Apart from this a lot of luxury cars are coming in like VW, BMW, M-B which are really big and occupy a lot of space and are bought by Richie Riches.

      The Tata Nano will be bought by lower-middle class families with children or will be the second stop-gap car for the higher class for their maid or teenage child.

      From my experience on Indian roads, I know for a fact that tough times are ahead, especially for users other than the Cars.

      Indians are very emotional beings. Just a mild scrape on the paint can lead to the drivers abandoning cars to sort it out right where the action happened, don't even mention getting the vehicles to the side. A lot of rubber-necking and crowd gathering. Remember India is full of people.

      Driver Licenses are indeed a joke. and traffic regulations are hilarious. Many people haven't mentioned it, but parking is going to be a bitch now. Most buildings will have to figure out ways to accommodate Nanos.

      I have made a vow not to buy a Nano.

  8. News? by harris+s+newman · · Score: 1

    So am I to believe that before this car there was no "cheepest car" in the world?

    1. Re:News? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      No, you are supposed to believe that imagining "the cheapest {insert item here}" requires a vast pool of imagination drawn from the far corners of the earth ;-)

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    2. Re:News? by Andy_R · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's news because it's not just a little bit cheaper than any other car, it's much, much cheaper than any other comparable family car. At less than half the price of any of it's competitors, it's definitely newsworthy.

      --
      A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
  9. Judgement already! by bogaboga · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It won't compete on dynamics or quality with European or Japanese city cars, but it doesn't have to.

    That is precisely how the Japanese "came from behind" in the late seventies and ended up capturing the American mindset when it comes to quality.

    I know what I am talking about because I was around at that time. No body would even think of touching a Japanese front wheel drive car! Guess what! It is second nature to most auto manufacturers now.

    I guess it's the time for the Indians this time round. Let's just watch out after all, Tata's direction on quality can only be up.

    1. Re:Judgement already! by American+Terrorist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see where you're coming from, but Toyota didn't do what they did overnight. Sure, they were crappy at first, but they kept gaining market share due to their ever-improving quality.

    2. Re:Judgement already! by Logical+Zebra · · Score: 1
      --
      I have a bad feeling about this...
    3. Re:Judgement already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tata's direction on quality can only be up.

      You aren't very familiar with Tata are you?
      Anybody who has ever dealt with outsourcing to them knows that quality is not exactly their forte

    4. Re:Judgement already! by koiransuklaa · · Score: 1

      In Finland Toyota is the most reliable car brand year after year (meaning most km per fault). People do not really seem to view Toyota as a quality car here either but the statistics tell a clear story. I don't have access to US Consumer Reports data but from their "used car reliability" summary I noticed that the most reliable 5 year old model is Toyota Echo...

      If you had some actual, comparable statistics to support your case I'd take your complaints seriously -- the consumer reports data would be awesome.

    5. Re:Judgement already! by koiransuklaa · · Score: 1

      I'm starting to sound like a Toyota fanboy but I found something worth linking in the end: CR best and worst used cars.

      Summary: Toyota is well represented in all "best used" categories. More interestingly the "worst used" list includes:

      • 21 american models
      • 10 European models
      • 1 japanese model

      Logical Zebra, I rest my case. Please respond with some statistics if you want to continue this discussion.

    6. Re:Judgement already! by rytier · · Score: 1

      (apologizing to moderators for not keeping on topic of Nano...)

      Your reply seems to be "a bit" biased.

      In the first link, they're buying back cars that are beyond warranty, partly because trying to make up for bad paint job in American factory. Pure PR job to improve their image.

      In the second link, they have problems notifying customers - nothing special that other manufacturers couldn't possibly experience (how can anyone be sure of not having been missed in some other recall?)

      In the third link, the data is only for 2008, method is unclear (probably total number of sold units of recalled models) and the site seems to be Chrysler-centric. I would like to see merged data for last 5 or 10 years to see something interesting.

      --
      --- Naive inside, foolish outside...:)
    7. Re:Judgement already! by asdfghjklqwertyuiop · · Score: 1

      A toyota truck becomes scrap in 8-13 years and they buy it back for 150% of its value? Damn, that's awesome. I wish I had bought one of those. That's a way better deal than what I got with the 3 american cars I've had till they died, which died in 7-10 years (one of them with a known manufacturing defect) and I got $0 back from the manufacturer.

    8. Re:Judgement already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Er hang on, I was there too. You're slightly off. The Japanese got quality right in the /early/ seventies, first with the Corolla and the 210, and then with the Civic. That bought them an established reputation and dealership system just in time for the 1973 energy crisis, and they captialized on it through the mid seventies along with Volkwagen's new Rabbit.

      That's quite different from "nobody would touch". People argued, but they sold well, and better every year. They hadn't been flat-out strange since 72. This /does/ vary where you are, which may be our difference here. When my 74 Corolla blew a gasket in rural NY in 82, the local mechanic didn't even have metric tools.

      The only Japanese front wheel drive was Honda and one failed model of Datsun. I loved the little Civic but it was too small for most folks. Volkwagen got the 'small but useful' FWD hatchback right with the Rabbit, and the Japanese and then everyone else finally started to follow at the end of the decade. I believe the 78 Trecel was the first Toyota FWD. I'm not sure about Datsun/Nissan. May not have been till 82 with the Micra.

      I don't see how you can extrapolate Tata potential from all that though. The history of microcars is largely a history of failure.

    9. Re:Judgement already! by chrisG23 · · Score: 1

      This mirrors what koiransukiaa posted in reply to you and is also off topic but I feel compelled to reply. You link to an article on a website http://www.allpar.com/news/index.php/2009/01/chrysler-has-fewest-recalls-among-big-six-automakers/ in order to back up your claim that Chrysler has great quality because it has the least amount of recalls. I went to the site, and it is very enlightening. It is not a statistical study spread out over a long period of time. It is the number of recalls by manufacturer in the last year, 2008. That is not a very good foundation for an argument using numbers. Also, if you read the article carefully (which is not hard, it is only about as long as this post) you will see that while Chrysler had 360,000 in the year 2008, making it the best of the auto manufacturers listed in terms of total recalls (not recalls as a percentage of how many vehicles sold or vehicles being driven mind you) it also states that Chrysler had 2.2 million in 2007, making it 5th in 2007. Please review your sources more carefully, and learn how to read deeper before making blanket statements. Oh wait, this is Slashdot.

  10. Top gear by simonwalton · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can't wait to see The Stig powersliding this baby around the Top Gear test track.

    1. Re:Top gear by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      You know, a model specific racing program using these would be competitive, cheap, and likely safe (due to the relatively low speeds.)

      Would be more entertaining to watch than go-kart racing, more rollover potential!

    2. Re:Top gear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember that the original Mini Cooper was very often used as a rally car.

    3. Re:Top gear by neomunk · · Score: 2, Funny

      Like real life Penny Racers! Brilliant!

    4. Re:Top gear by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      Looks like it might "power roll" rather than power slide.

      --
      Nullius in verba
    5. Re:Top gear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But how will it get up enough speed to powerslide? It will only go from zero to 60 in 5.2 tries!

    6. Re:Top gear by craagz · · Score: 1

      with you on this!

      The Indian version of Nano switches off fuel supply if the car does over 106 kmph. Must be a safety feature.

      I just hope Top Gear doesn't start another Nano Hate Club on the lines of the Caravan Hate Club they already have!

  11. Other Models by INeededALogin · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Did anyone else notice Tata Motor's other models. They are all fricking rip-offs of other manufacturers cars. They all look like Toyotas. It seems like a copy-me company got too good at manufacturing and decided to do something innovative.

    1. Re:Other Models by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmmm... Why Flamebait. It was bringing into the question the type of company that this is. Similar to how HTC was once just a manufacturing shop for cell phone companies and decided that they could market their own stuff.

      The whole point of the post was to state the obvious... that their models look the same as everyone else... that they try to win on pricepoint. Reviewing my post... I shouldn't have said that they were innovative.... Their is no innovation in this company... just cheap.

    2. Re:Other Models by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because ripping into a company for being innovative makes you an asshat.

      Toyota started out by copying what they saw, and they moved beyond. A lot of businesses start out that way, when you think about it. What exactly is the problem here?

    3. Re:Other Models by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that is especially true of their jaguars :-) they look exactly like toyotas...

  12. This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by gurps_npc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    India's carbon footprint will be going up no matter what we do. The Nano has a good MPG rating. Better than many hybrids. It's a good thing, not a pollution machine.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    1. Re:This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      55MPG. (TFW says 23.6km/l)

      For the record, that's about half of what the motorscooters that most of these will be replacing got. My Bajaj (stock) easily got 100MPG, and with just a little bit of gentle acceleration, it could be coaxed to yield 130+MPG.

      After the performance upgrades, it's down to 90MPG or so.

      It's really hard to say "55MPG is good fuel economy" when this is meant to be an alternative to motorbikes which are in the 100-150MPG range.

      Yes, motorbikes don't have doors or roofs, but speaking as an all-weather motorbike rider (hail is fun!), this is not a deal breaker.

    2. Re:This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by gurps_npc · · Score: 1
      First, you are making false assumptions. No, you don't get to decide that people will be buying a motorscooter if they don't get a nano. That may be what the people USED to buy, but so what? India is developing. But even if you were right, the rest of your information is BAD.

      Second, comparing motorscooters to cars is incredibally hard to do. Cars carry more, among other things. While it is true that 130 mpg is out there, some scooters get as little as 30 mpg. 130 needs a heavy performance upgrade designed to get that. The average US motorscooter mpg is about 75, not 90. If two people get in it, it plummets to below 50. Why? Because the weight being pushed goes from 500 lbs to 650 lbs. The car however doesn't change significantly whether it has one or two people, as the weight change goes from 1,500 pounds to 1,650 pounds.

      Thirdly, scooters tend to be incredibally polluting. How do they get that nice mileage? They use a ONE STROKE engine, which pollutes more. As in 5 - 25 times more polluting. In the US, scooters are legally allowed to give off 5.7 times more CO than cars and nearly 24 times more unburned hydrocarbons, because the law recognizes the difficulty in making a clean one stroke engine. The Nano uses a two stroke engine, like all cars. It may use a bit more gas, but the pollution given off is MUCH MUCH less. Not the same as gas mileage, but your scooter no longer looks like a clear winner

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    3. Re:This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No new car is a good thing, they are all pollution machines, including hybrids.

      Better town planning and efficient transport alternatives is the only way to avoid a serious pollution problem. Encouraging more people to drive is a terrible development.

    4. Re:This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by GameMaster · · Score: 1

      Not sure what India is like, but most people here in the US wouldn't be willing/able to deal with weather like that on a motor scooter. It's pretty narcassistic to think that just because it works for you it should be pushed onto everyone else or that people that can't handle it shouldn't have the mobility of a vehicle. How does someone with limited mobility (senior citizens, the physically disabled, etc.) drive a scooter in the first place much less in rain/hail. If you happen to have a spouse and one, or more, babies how are you supposed to get them all onto one scooter, become a circus performer? Not to mention, the increased risk to a small baby while riding on a two wheeled vehicle in either good or bad weather. It' a similar attitude as seen in hard-core bike riders here in the US. They think that because they're able/willing to ride a bike 10+ miles a day to work, no mattre what the weather, that everyone else should have to as well.

      Some people just need a slightly larger vehicle with an enclosed cabin. Of course, it goes the other way too. Very few people atually need an SUV. Most of the people that think they do could probably get by with an all-wheel drive station wagon but that's a whole other issue. We're not talking about an SUV here, we're talking about a tiny car that gets extremely good milage for what it can hold. Sure, the vehicles it is replacing got better, but then they couldn't do the same thing. Honestly, it would be better to replace both vehicles with public transportation, but it's hard to do with countries as large and spread out as India and the US.

      --

      Rules of Conduct:
      #1 - The DM is always right.
      #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
    5. Re:This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      One stroke? How does that work then?

    6. Re:This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by reckless_waltz · · Score: 1

      You must actually be comparing it to a car. An average car in India gives only around 14 kmpl.

    7. Re:This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      Let's address some of your assumptions.

      The Nano does not carry appreciably more than the tried-and-true Bajaj (like a Chetak or a Legend) - at least not in comfort. Bajaj scooters are often overloaded with 4 passengers, plus groceries, maybe a few chickens, and a 20 pound propane cylinder. In theory, I stipulate that the Nano could be similarly overloaded, for a potential improvement in cargo capacity.

      The price point of the Nano is just about twice that of a scooter. If someone is trying to decide between the Nano and something else in the same price class, that something else is going to be a scooter or a motorcycle... or possibly a 3 wheeler.

      I'll assume you meant TWO STROKE engine. Most of the scooters and motorcycles currently available are 4 stroke. (I believe that LML may still produce 2 stroke (sold in USA as a Stella), but Hero Honda and Bajaj should both be producing nothing but 4T's.) The Nano uses a FOUR STROKE engine, like most other modern gasoline type vehicles.

      That engine size is about 4 times larger than a typical 2 wheeler, or 3 times larger than a similarly capable 3 wheeler. A 3 wheeler (which would provide comforts like a roof) should be getting 50% better fuel economy than the Nano (around 75-80 MPG).

      The four stroke Bajaj scooter I have actually has just about the lowest emissions available. Two stroke scooters, in my experience, get lower fuel economy than four strokes of similar engine displacement, because they fire the spark plug twice as often (2000 RPM = 2000 sparks in 2T, 1000 sparks in 4T) and have to run rich (unburned fuel) to keep the piston from melting.

      Yes, cars carry more, but the average consumer that will consider the purchase of a Nano isn't saying "Gee, I'd like to replace my Ford V8 with a Nano", they're saying "Gee, Now that this has come out, I might be able to afford a car instead of a scooter".

      I'm not saying that people shouldn't have the freedom of choice to purchase a car, I'm saying that people should try to remember that this car is going to use more fuel than the scooter they used to have.

    8. Re:This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's rocket powered.

    9. Re:This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A one stroke engine wouldnt get you very far!

    10. Re:This is a good thing for the carbon footprint by egcagrac0 · · Score: 1

      Let's address assumptions.

      In that price category, the other options are motorscooters, motorcycles, and 3 wheelers.

      I'll assume you made an honest mistake in terminology (1 stroke/2 stroke vs 2 stroke/4 stroke), so I'll try not to beat you up on that. Most modern motorscooters and motorcycles use a 4 stroke engine. I believe LML is still making 2 strokes, and yes, 2 stroke engines don't fully burn the fuel and often burn the lubricant, throwing off carbon.

      The scooter I'm comparing to is a Bajaj Chetak 150cc 4 stroke - certainly not an uncommon configuration. The emissions look pretty good. I admit that model is no longer in production, but a few other models are quite similar in price/power/emissions (Wave 125, etc).

      In my experience, 2 stroke engines get lower fuel economy than a similar displacement 4 stroke. They also get about twice the horsepower.

      You don't get to decide that people will have more money available than the price of the Nano, allowing them to choose between that tiny car and something bigger.

      130 MPG is not crazy numbers - it is readily achievable on a manual transmission small displacement motorbike. Hypermiling techniques push this higher. (100 km/L = 235 MPG)

  13. Taxation without Representation... by geekmux · · Score: 1

    there are also federal (and state) regulations governing automobiles in the US.

    there are also federal and state regulations and taxes governing damn near everything and anything in the US.

    There, fixed that for ya.

  14. shopping cart, anyone? by v1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Seriously, look at it. 12" wheels, and how tall and narrow it is!

    But looking at what it's designed for, it appears to be very well thought-out. Anyone that's driven in europe can understand why you need a narrow car because of the streets. And anything that gets your side mirror another half inch away from oncoming traffic's mirrors is a good thing, and then of course there's parking. (no mention of how well it turns to squeeze into a tight spot?) For an in-town car in a big city, it looks to be ideally suited. 60mpg? Heck I could use that right now.

    It said it accomodates "six footers". I'm 6'2, I wonder if I'll be cracking my head on the roof?

    Considering the next-to-nonexistent trunk, it's NOT a family trip car, unless you're a family of two. The back seat really IS the trunk, and the trunk is the glovebox.

    But I wouldn't mind trying one. I wonder what it's top speed is, they only tested it to 60mph and it took 17 sec to get there, i wonder if it can do 70? I have to take an interstate to work here and it's 70 in places.

    I'd also be interested to know its range. At 60mpg though, I wonder what speed that's at? Most larger cars, that's measured at highway speed (55?) and is lower for in-town. This car is targeted almost exclusively for in-town so that's not the number I want to hear. It's not a hybrid so it lacks the regenerative breaking bonus for in-town driving. (unless the thing's got a flywheel? heh) I'm picturing it getting more like 40mph in-town, and guessing at a 5gal tank, so that'd be about a 200 mile in-town range, which I could certainly live with. My exploder gets 300 miles on the highway, 240 in town. It'd shave 70% off my total at the pump too which would be wonderful.

    The review was ok but missed a lot, I'd like to have seen 7 pages, not 2. Airbags I hope? looks to be manual only. (can you smell my clutch yet?) And it doesn't look like they let him drive it, which worries me a little.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by eln · · Score: 1

      Regarding city driving, yah the size helps, but the lack of power steering sure doesn't. I lived in an urban area without power steering before, and it can get annoying trying to parallel park without it. On the bright side, my arm strength increased quite a bit during that time.

      My impression regarding any ability to get this in the US is that the company has taken advantage of the fact that India has lax (nonexistent?) safety and emissions standards in order to keep the price low. Making one of these that would actually be street legal in the US would probably cost thousands more.

    2. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering the next-to-nonexistent trunk, it's NOT a family trip car, unless you're a family of two. The back seat really IS the trunk, and the trunk is the glovebox.

      Are you kidding? That sucker will hold a family of 8 almost anywhere in Asia, Africa, or South America. http://www.vtwinmama.com/images/Loaded_Bike_6.bmp

    3. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by JohnnyBGod · · Score: 1

      I really don't understand the 'smell my clutch' comment.

      I have a '94 Peugeot 106 1.0, which had 51 hp when it was new. It weighs around 800 kg, and it can handle starting even in steep hills quite nicely (possibly with the handbrake's help). Of course, I'm not talking about any offroad antics, or even snow, which there isn't around here.

      But maybe you're cracking a joke about the general American public being unable to drive stick. Since stick is the norm around here, I wouldn't know.

    4. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by v1 · · Score: 1

      I really don't understand the 'smell my clutch' comment.

      Never ridden with someone that's just learning to drive a clutch eh?

      Though I am proud of a few accomplishments with the clutch. A friend was trying to teach me in his escort, and unbeknownst to either of us he tried to start me in third. uphill. Felt like someone was beating the back bumper with a semiautomatic sledgehammer but I actually was able to get it moving.

      "OK now shift down into two." "It won't go down past middle." "oh, you're in THIRD!"

      So I think I'd prefer an automatic. But for the savings in MPG I'd be willing to properly learn a manual.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    5. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      >Most larger cars, that's measured at highway speed (55?) and is lower for in-town.

      Here's a weird thing about engines, and note that I'm not an engine designer so my explanation might not be that great.
      Engines are designed to work at their maximum efficiency -- most power delivered per unit of fuel burnt -- at close to their maximum power delivery. If they're operating at less than nearly full power, they're quite wasteful. In part, the drop in efficiency in city driving is because of all the stopping: you accelerate the car, using energy, and then brake, dumping all that energy you just used right into heat. But in part it's just because you're operating the engine at off-peak efficiency.
      As such, a tiny engine (as the Tata has) operating nearly flat-out (which it'd be doing at 60) will probably be at or near its best efficiency: that's likely to be where it'll get its 60mpg.
      Note that many carburetted engines tend to have issues with operating at full-throttle and burning a lot more gas than at 90% throttle for not much gain in power, meaning a big drop in efficiency in that last bit of throttle. I don't know if this is carburetted or FI, or if it is in fact operating at its design peak efficiency at 100kph. But I'm betting, based on other designs I've looked at, that it'll be pretty close to its best efficiency near its top speed.

      Also, manual clutches have significantly better efficiency than automatic ones if driven by someone who is good at using them, which presumably the test drivers for Tata are. If the people who buy them aren't, that's not really Tata's concern, as much as advertising the car's efficiency is.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    6. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by JohnnyBGod · · Score: 1

      Ridden with someone? Just from reading my post, you can deduct that I _have been_ someone learning to drive a manual. But really, it's not that hard. In 2-10 hours, I'll bet most people can become competent at it.

    7. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      The Tata is so small and light, power steering is unnecessary. You don't need power steering on a motor scooter, and a Tata is more comparable to a motor scooter than to any car that's legal in the USA. I base this on my experience with my first car, which was a beat up 1960 VW with a 36 hp engine.

      Other posts talk about the Tata adding to pollution by enabling more people to drive. That is a silly argument. The Tata is aimed at the emerging Indian middle class, who are going to be buying cars no matter what. Providing a car that is designed to perform well in India's urban areas, AND has a low carbon footprint, is a better thing for all of us than any of the alternatives.

    8. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw buried in TFA (or a link off of TFA) that it will go about 43mph. Clearly meant for dense cities.

    9. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by SpinyNorman · · Score: 1

      But looking at what it's designed for, it appears to be very well thought-out. Anyone that's driven in europe can understand why you need a narrow car because of the streets.

      Presumably you're American, hence geographically impaired, but FYI India is in Asia, not Europe.

    10. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by argiedot · · Score: 1

      I have an old MPFI Maruthi 800. It gives me 20-21 km/l when I drive it carefully and let it cruise at 45-50 km/h. I have driven this car at 120 km/h on a bypass expressway and fuel mileage drops off very fast above 70 km/h (this is the 4-speed model). That's with an 800 cc engine.

    11. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      The problem in the US is that by the time someone decides to drive a manual-transmission car, they've been driving auto for years. Before I could even get my girl to move the vehicle I had to spend an hour explaining just exactly what a clutch does and why you can't fully stop the car without it.

      Hell, a lot of cars in the US don't even have a tachometer - most USians only know to push the right pedal harder to go faster and left pedal to go slower. No cognizance of gears or engine speed to wheel speed ratios. I've always called a stick shift a "standard" car. Go to any US car lot and try to find a stick shift. It's no longer standard, it's an option that's not always available. My old '95 T-Bird 4.6l could not be purchased with a manual transmission, even though the body is equipped with bolt taps and punch-outs for a clutch pedal and master cylinder, and Ford makes two or three different manual transmissions that not only fit the motor, but the chassis too without modification. But you can't buy it!

    12. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by Insipid+Trunculance · · Score: 1

      India has lax (nonexistent?) safety and emissions standards

      Dunno about safety but the emission standards are certainly higher than the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_standard#Republic_of_India

      --
      Wanted : A Signature.
    13. Re:shopping cart, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The average speed in a city in India is about 30kmph (~20mph). You won't be travelling much above 40kmph ever.

  15. Re:I thought the British Empire was dead. by grodzix · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Man, I hope you're not being serious right now. You can see that it's co.uk web site so it is designed for British population. It kinda makes sense to put price in pounds rather than in rupees as most of British people (or at least many of them) don't know how much rupee is, right?

    --
    My Windows is NOT slow, it's special!
  16. Fundamentals by Migraineman · · Score: 1

    There are a handful of things fundamental to this existence, regardless of where you live. On the "basic survival" end of the spectrum, you've got shelter, water, and food.

    If you seek something more than just basic subsistence, the list expands to include energy, communications, and transportation.

    If you believe that a modern society is beneficial, then providing more accessible transportation is a good thing. If you believe we should all be subsistence farmers, then the Tata Nano is a plague upon the land.

  17. The year of cheap stuff. by oftenwrongsoong · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is the year of the netbook, the cheap car, and next thing you know, they'll be selling houses made out of cardboard for dirt cheap, too.

    1. Re:The year of cheap stuff. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but the price of dirt is going to go through the roof!

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:The year of cheap stuff. by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 1

      ...next thing you know, they'll be selling houses made out of cardboard ...

      They already live in cardboard 'houses'.

  18. Jevon's paradox by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    There won't be more oil consumed, because we have already hit peak oil. What will happen instead is that the price of oil will go up and make it uneconomic for the bottom end of US economy to use their cars. This will cause another recession and the US will respond by hyperinflating their currency, until people in America are no wealthier than people in India or China.

    You are seeing the rise of the new empires and the fall of the old, corrupt one. Unless of course the US government manage to persuade Saudi to continue to sell oil only in US paper.
     

    --
    Deleted
  19. Re:WHAT!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A Lamborghini or Ferrari is essentially an irrelevent car because it is prohibitively expensive and impractical as a means of transportation. I think what they are trying to say is that this is like India's "Model T" - the car that most people can afford and will actually buy.

  20. 60mpg really 50 mpg by nightsweat · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's a British rag, so the gallons they refer to in the article are imperial gallons. In US terms, it gets 50mpg, not 60.

    --

    the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
    1. Re:60mpg really 50 mpg by houghi · · Score: 1

      If only there was a way to have the who world use the same measurements.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:60mpg really 50 mpg by bytta · · Score: 1

      It's a British rag, so the gallons they refer to in the article are imperial gallons. In US terms, it gets 50mpg, not 60.

      Actually the official numbers are 25 km/l, which is 58.8 mpg(US).
      The real-world numbers are thought to be closer to 20-21 km/l, or 47-49.4 mpg(US), but that's a different story.

  21. Re:WHAT!?!?! by WoRLoKKeD · · Score: 1

    $4 per gallon? I really don't understand how Americans can complain about that. Those of us living in the land of tea-drinking and monarchy would frankly kill for it.

    --
    Immolation is the sincerest form of flattery.
  22. Unthinking racism by Kupfernigk · · Score: 3, Interesting
    That's what we're getting here. Kudos to all the people who are asking "if Indians having cars is a bad thing, are you going to give up yours?". I'm English, I can take a nuanced view. If it's wrong for one of our former colonies to have little cars that do 60mpg, presumably it is even more wrong for another former colony to have big cars that do 15mpg.

    Someone also mocks the Ferrari/Lamborghini comparison. Wrong. To an engineer - that's a real, chartered engineer, not just a jumped up mechanic - Ferraris and Lamborghinis are not very interesting. An example. Evolutionary biologists point out that horses are interesting, not because they are a successful design, but because they are a bit of a failed one. Very few of the world's species are horse based, whereas the beetle design, the bat design, and even the primate design have been wildly successful. (Or look at the dog design, which has proved amazingly flexible, scaling well to a wide range of sizes.) In the same way, few people are motivated to buy Ferraris, whereas the European small hatchback design has proven wildly successful and is the basis of most of the cars on the world's roads, scaling all the way from the Smart car to the "people carrier". The Tata design is interesting because it is likely to be the precursor of what most of the world's drivers are using in 20 years time.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:Unthinking racism by GameMaster · · Score: 1

      I haven't read many of the comments you're responding to, but there may not be as much racism as you think involved. There are many people that support the idea that even the western countries shouldn't have all the cars they do and that, yes, it's absurd for us Americans to have so many 15mpg vehicles. I'm, quite, such not a hard-line environmentalist like that, but I can see the need for concern as countries like India and China emulate our bad example. This is especially true as, in the rush to produce the cheapest car, chances are that emisions and fuel efficiency will be two of the things that fall by the way-side (I'm sure that, with such a small engine, this new car has a high mpg/low emmisions but how does it fare in mpg per pound of cargo? In the end, is it better or worse overall?).

      --

      Rules of Conduct:
      #1 - The DM is always right.
      #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
    2. Re:Unthinking racism by retchdog · · Score: 1

      If it's wrong for one of our former colonies to have little cars that do 60mpg, presumably it is even more wrong for another former colony to have big cars that do 15mpg.

      That's one of the funniest things I've ever read on slashdot. Thanks.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    3. Re:Unthinking racism by blitzkrieg3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Careful in your use of the r-word. "Unthinking hubris" would be more apt. I don't think these people are acting out of a "we know what we're talking about because we're white, the white race is smarter than the inferior Indian race" mindset. More like, "we know what we're talking about because we're the developed world, and we've been doing this for awhile and we know what's best for you."

      Perhaps just as demeaning, but not founded in the mistaken belief that whites are inherently better than others.

    4. Re:Unthinking racism by Samschnooks · · Score: 1

      In the same way, few people are motivated to buy Ferraris...

      There's a very strong correlation between penis size at least two standard deviations below average and the folks who buy the Ferraris.

      Ferrari himself thought it was ridiculous that his race cars were driven on the road.

    5. Re:Unthinking racism by Zackbass · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm a Real Engineer with a good bit of auto industry experience (though not a Chartered Engineer or PE as we tend to call them in the US, that's more for the civil engineering types), and I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that engineers aren't just 'jumped up mechanics'. Most of the best engineers I've worked with are captivated with experimentation, elegant design, and high performance applications. The best mechanics work with the same drive. The best engineers I know ARE jumped up mechanics. Just because someone learned how to analyze stresses and work with Navier-Stokes doesn't make them some zombie with a calculator.

      As an engineer I'm not amazed by the fact that someone spent a year trying to find the cheapest plastic to mold a barely adequate oil pan from. We have a pretty good idea of what is cheap and what works. Tata worked with a different set of specifications than automotive designers in other countries and something different came out. I'm not ready to make a judgment whether the specs are wise or not, we'll see that over the next few years.

      --
      You gotta find first gear in your giant robot car
    6. Re:Unthinking racism by Zoxed · · Score: 1

      > ...point out that horses are interesting, not because they are a successful design...

      Horses were not "designed" : your Slashdot membership is hereby revoked :-)

    7. Re:Unthinking racism by schauhan · · Score: 1
      Good you raised the point on design.

      Right now focus is on the size and cost of Nano.

      To reduce the cost of the Nano Tata's engineers have virtually re-invented *how* a car is made.

      So if the Nano is successful it's going to change the assembly line that was invented by Americans and perfected by the Japanese. From an engineering perspective this may have huge impact on auto industry in coming years.

  23. Nano = Population Control by Logical+Zebra · · Score: 2, Funny

    Seriously. That thing is a death trap.

    --
    I have a bad feeling about this...
    1. Re:Nano = Population Control by GameMaster · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it's not the safest vehicle in the world, but it's not meant to be used on the American highway system either. If you read the article, it mentions it can barely reach 60mph. Assuming that the average speeds are lower, average speed of other tracffic might be lower, and average mass of other traffic might be lower (fewer SUVs) then an average accident is likely to be much less severe.

      --

      Rules of Conduct:
      #1 - The DM is always right.
      #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
  24. No Airbags by AlfredZhang · · Score: 1

    Did anybody care to read the whole article and found that the $2000 car does NOT have power steering, ABS and airbags?

    1. Re:No Airbags by tekrat · · Score: 1

      You know, for a long time, people drove cars without those things. What the heck would a 600 pound car with 10-inch wheels need power steering? And does a car that's going to go 40mph most of it's life need airbags and ABS?

      Wait, let me check my Volkswagen Beetle... Power Steering... No, Airbags, NO, ABS.. NO. And my beetle will go much faster than a Nano, and has more than double the engine, and probably weighs twice as much...

      Now, get off my lawn...

      --
      If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    2. Re:No Airbags by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Power steering is not needed on a small car. Likewise, ABS is really only good for mixed conditions (i.e. snow, ice, regular roads). India does not get snow through most of it. Airbags probably would be good, but belts will do the trick.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:No Airbags by Brianwa · · Score: 1

      So?

  25. Re:Obama Bankrupting the USA Tsarkon Reports by Wovel · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Worth the offtopic..So the chief aid to the guy your are trying to portray as a Muslim is a Zionist. I guess you have not fully thought through the meaning of your bigotry.

  26. why? by KiwiCanuck · · Score: 1

    Why would you want a car in such a densely populated country? Where is everyone going to park? The tube/metro/subway and train systems in Europe work very well. Granted its overcrowded during peak time. But this is the system to follow. Why on Earth would you wan to followed the flawed North American system? How much oil would the country need to import to keep people on the road? Yikes!

  27. Drywall? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think Cardboard would be a step up from American houses which are made of paper and chalk (yeah thats what drywall is)

  28. Pollution in India by MobyDisk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Fuel consumption will be around 60mpg, and emissions around 100g/km;

    I've been to India, and big cities like Delhi are so polluted it smells like you have your mouth around the back of a Mack truck. I went for a wedding, and the groom had to wear a face mask because his lungs couldn't handle it. Our flight out of Rajasthan was delayed because of "fog" - but this is desert. By "fog" they meant low-lying pollution.

    I'm not sure if this will lead to more cars in India: But this car is much cleaner than the 20+ year old dilapidated taxis that are mainstream in india now. Those things blow visible smoke out of the back, so this might actually help the pollution problem.

  29. Lower food prices not car prices. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think what is needed in India is cheaper food prices, have you noticed the costs of grocery in India ? It has increased 3 times every year over the last 10yrs. If TATA wants to be philanthropist he should figure out a way to lower food & grain prices.

    1. Re:Lower food prices not car prices. by mma1709 · · Score: 1

      Have you been to india lately? There is no place to walk in cities, let alone drive a car and find parking? you have better chances of marrying a supermodel. I don't think it will serve any purpose other than satisfy 'I have to have a car before I die' desires.

    2. Re:Lower food prices not car prices. by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

      Good idea, cheap food does not lead to more overpopulation, bring it on!

    3. Re:Lower food prices not car prices. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tata isn't diversifying into food atm. Reliance is.

  30. Idiot by ghoul · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Who's the idiot who modded parent insightful. The inbred redneck does not even know that telling lies is not the same as being Insightful Rush Limbaugh notwithstanding. Indian pollution standards are stricter than America's and California's.They match European standards and the Nano meets the future Euro V standard which even Europe has not shifted to yet. Car insurance is compulsory and everyone has at least 3rd party insurance. Every car has to go through a pollution check after every year and cars older than 15 years are mandatorily junked. Seat belts are compulsory. Air Bags are not as most Indian traffic is inside cities and at lower speed collisions Air bags cause more injuries than they prevent. People who plan to do cross country drives buy larger more expensive cars with air bags. The so called American way of life is just 80 years old and based on cheap Texas and Alaska oil and industrial farming on empty farmland(grabbed through genocide). I dont see Americans as any superior/innovative/industrious than the Sheikhs who traded in their camels for BMWs when they found oil. The American century has been built on a resource boom. Whatever innovation has happened has been done by first generation immigrants. Now that the cheap resources are running out , the smart people will stop immigrating and the center of the world is bound to shift back to India-China which have for 99% of history been the biggest economies of the world. As for gas prices India already has high gas taxes to encourage fuel conservation. Gas costs around 5 dollar a gallon currently and people drive accordingly with no wasted trips.

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
  31. VVVLV by eBayDoug · · Score: 0

    Very Very Very Light Vehicles are the wave of the future. They are cute, affordable, get great gas mileage or run on electric. Buy a moped or VVVLV and get a tax break. That's the ticket.

    --
    Learn About Outsourcing. http://www.pioutsource.com
    1. Re:VVVLV by RoyalCheese · · Score: 1

      I just saw someone else post something about the Peel 50. http://microcarmuseum.com/video/p50.html The car for the future that originates from the past. I LOVE it!!!!

  32. Re:WHAT!?!?! by tekrat · · Score: 1

    Wait a minute... Are you saying the Indians should NOT have cars because it might cause YOU to pay more per gallon so you can fill up your stinking Hummer?

    That somehow, you, by virtue of being an American, DESERVE the gasoline more than someone else (and at the ridiculously cheap price of ONLY $4 a gallon, a price the rest of the world would frankly kill for), so you can drive anyplace you like in luxury while the rest of the world can go kiss off??

    And you wonder why the rest of the world hates Americans?

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  33. MillionBilllion by ghoul · · Score: 1

    Count the zeroes. You said 29 billion and not 29 million. Even the entire worlds population including babies and children is still 6 billion :) Granted reading everyday about the govt doing billion dollar bailouts, trillion dollar stimuluses and million dollar bonuses people cant really be blamed for mixing up their millions with their billions.

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
  34. I'm very excited by this by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 1

    It seems that India has finally started to address their population issue. This will speed up the death rate through both fatal collisions, and increased pollution.

    Congratulations India, you're on track to zero population growth within a decade.
    Believe me, I think it's long overdue.

    Now, if you could just adopt some basic sanitation, your country might actually become pleasant ------ in about 100 years.

    1. Re:I'm very excited by this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For "onesmartfellow" you are incredibly racist and bigoted. Of course that goes hand in hand with arrogance.

      You are also pig ignorant and have obviously never visited India if you think this will "speed up the death rate" compared to what they already have - 3, 4, 5+ people perched on top of a motorcycle with no helmets between them. This entire article seems to have brought out some very disgusting sentiment from slashdot users, so you're in plentiful company I suppose.

      What I would like you to tell me though is what motivated you to write such drivel - I mean you took time out of your day to post that utterly wrong, ignorant bile? Have you just lost your job and feel the need to rail against some Indian H1B or other?

      What a pathetic excuse for a man you are.

    2. Re:I'm very excited by this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please tell me that was some sort of failed, Michael Richards-esque attempt at humour? Surely you really aren't that racist and dumb?

    3. Re:I'm very excited by this by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 1

      Actually, I have indeed visited India, and travelled around quite extensively. My opinion of India is shared by almost every rational person I have ever met who has also travelled there. In fact it's a topic of conversation far more frequently than you may expect. Once people learn that I have been to Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Kanpur, Jaipur, or some of the other smaller places, they always lower their voices and say words to the effect of, "Wasn't it absolutely filthy", to which I always respond, "disgusting, I'd never go back".

      I stand by my statement that these vehicle will accelerate the death rate. I agree that the current standard of transport safety is appalling, all I'm saying is that these vehicles will merely add to the problem. They will also add to an already chronic air pollution problem.

      To address your concerns about my mental health, I can assure you I'm quite fine, although perhaps a little cynical when it comes to reading about a disposable automobile. I guess when you treat your own countrymen as disposable, you'd only expect that they drive in such vehicles. I'm sure you won't see any politicians, or successfull businessmen driving such things, they prefer safer modes of transport.

      After India has addressed the issues of its huge impoverished population, its amazingly polluting industry, it's sanitation, and birth control problems, perhaps the world will have a better opinion about it. Until then It will remain, despite what you may think, a shit-hole.

    4. Re:I'm very excited by this by OneSmartFellow · · Score: 1

      P.S. You might be interested in reading a little about India and its endemic problems before you start spouting off about issues you either know nothing about, or simply refuse to acknowledge.
      I've left off several very good Wikipedia articles, since I anticipate your (misguided) objections to its use as a source.

      Here are a few links:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_India
      http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11751397
      http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSDEL218894
      http://www.gits4u.com/envo/envo4.htm#The%20most%20polluted%20places%20in%20India

  35. Electric! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually there's a feature length documentary that explains in detail that actually an electric automobile is viable for roughly 95% of drivers.

    They travel at a reasonable speed (50 to 120mph) and get excellent mileage (roughly 300mpg about $1 to "fill the tank")

    When charged using solar or renewable resources, they are zero emissions.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5871495968130273402

    Roughly 90 minutes on google video... watch it.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489037/ (imdb)
    http://www.whokilledtheelectriccar.com/ official site.

    Why didn't General Motors go forward with electric vehicles? They didn't break down often enough.

  36. Oh we tried the race track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But since we kept pushing other drivers off the road and going the wrong way... we were thrown out

  37. Re:Buy One as H1B by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Moderation 0
        50% Troll
        50% Insightful

    My post about buying one of these cars in the US was no "troll": it was factual and logical. If these trollmods disagree, they can do so. Instead, they anonymously try to hide the comment. Because it's correct, and that scares them.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  38. It's a car, cut out your bigotry please by nietsch · · Score: 1

    It is a car, with four wheels etc. They did their best to make it as cheap as possible (to produce?) but that does not mean that your preconceived ideas about it are all true. It is designed as an alternative to a real moped/motorcycle and as such it is much safer. Yes your smalldick SUV would be safer too, but a bus would be safer still.

    --
    This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
  39. Most of the world apart from USA? by fantomas · · Score: 1

    Which countries are predominantly automatic-driving places? USA, famous for it. I think quite a lot of folk in Turkey drive automatics. But I'd be interested to know what the breakdown is across the rest of the world. My impression is "driving with a clutch" is more common than "driving with automatic only".

    Here in the UK it's the norm to drive with a clutch driven car. People are generally encouraged to learn to drive with a clutch driven car because the UK manual licence lets you drive an automatic, but not vice versa.

    My experience was the opposite to yours - when a friend got married in the USA a few years ago I had to grab hold of him as we walked towards the rental place at the airport and ask "dude, how do I drive an automatic car? I've never driven one before". A couple of hours on the Miami freeways at rush hour taught me how to drive a US automatic (plus remembering everything is on the other side of the road) pretty fast... :-)

  40. Air Car by jshackney · · Score: 1

    What about a car powered by air? Personally, if the cost were right, I'd get this one.

  41. Re:WHAT!?!?! by furby076 · · Score: 1

    Take your current price, double it. Prices are relative. I didn't comment on UK prices because I didn't know what they were. What were your prices last summer? What are they now? What do you think they will be?

    --

    I do not support "The Man". I also do not support your irrational stupidity
  42. India has a reputation by Chameleon+Man · · Score: 0

    This is interesting considering that India has participated in the ongoing battle to make things cheap.

  43. I see where they saved in production costs by desinc · · Score: 1

    I imagine the cars are cheap because they saved on web server costs?

  44. Too cheap...? by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, there is a reason we make it expensive, only few people should have a car...
    if we all had cars, it would be 1 billion in India helping the pollution problem along.
    Do these cars run on electricity atleast??? That would be worth the while, as well, by having such a big volume of sales helps push the price of the car even lower, thereby making the electric car technology that much cheaper....but unfortunately I am sure this is a gas car as well.

  45. Nano Europa by Frankie70 · · Score: 1

    The UK and Europe as well as the USA will never EVER see this car.

    Actually there are going to be versions for the European marker
    - here.

  46. In "unrelated" news by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

    In "unrelated" news: World's unsafest car was also launched today.

    I mean look at that thing, it looks like you would die in it at in a 10 mph collision.

  47. I live in India too.. by reckless_waltz · · Score: 1

    The driving exam is a joke here. If you correctly answer 6 out of 10 multiple choice questions (mostly "guess the taffic sign" ones) you get a learners licence.

    Questions about traffic signs? whats wrong with that? what else do you want them to ask? Algebra? Management theory? Remember, its only for the "learners" license.

    1 month later you get the full licence, provided that you can drive 100m without incident.

    The License issuing officials will ask you to drive a "8" shaped or "S" shaped track without making mistakes. Thats not easy for most beginners, and i think there are similar tests in other countries as well.

    On the other hand the Tata Nano seems to be a scaled-up rickshaw rather than a scaled-down car.

    Scaled up rickshaw? what was that supposed to mean? A rickshaw doesn't even have an engine!

    1. Re:I live in India too.. by bytta · · Score: 1

      The driving exam is a joke here. If you correctly answer 6 out of 10 multiple choice questions (mostly "guess the taffic sign" ones) you get a learners licence.

      Questions about traffic signs? whats wrong with that? what else do you want them to ask? Algebra? Management theory? Remember, its only for the "learners" license.

      There's a bunch of other things drivers should know. Compare these to the Indian one, and then tell me if it's a joke or not. 1 wrong answer out 15 in the first half of my exam (Europe) could be enough to fail.

      1 month later you get the full licence, provided that you can drive 100m without incident.

      The License issuing officials will ask you to drive a "8" shaped or "S" shaped track without making mistakes. Thats not easy for most beginners, and i think there are similar tests in other countries as well.

      I neglected to mention that the 100m are inside a figure-8 track, for dramatic reasons. In Europe/US you must drive around in traffic for a full hour with the examiner, which is considerably harder.

      On the other hand the Tata Nano seems to be a scaled-up rickshaw rather than a scaled-down car.

      Scaled up rickshaw? what was that supposed to mean? A rickshaw doesn't even have an engine!

      Autorickshaw, not a bicycle one. Take a 6 Seater Autorickshaw, add the fourth weel, doors and car seats and you have a clunky Tata Nano. Same engine/luggage configuration, same tiny wheels, same-same.

    2. Re:I live in India too.. by TheAmit · · Score: 1

      Did u pull the drive 1 hr in traffic test out of your ass ? I got a US licence by driving exactly 2 blocks Massachusets needs me to answer 14 out 20 rite for the learner permit ?

  48. Re:Safety.... Different in my state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    @bytta : Don't know which state you are from, in mine, it is different (Kerala) [http://www.keralamvd.gov.in/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=89] There is a CBE exam with some 20 questions, you need to pass at least 12 to go for the ''test'', later you have to take an ''H'' in front of an officer. Then you have to show then that you can drive in the road.. Now they are going to install cameras to make sure everyone is given licenses only after passing the test via ''proper'' means. India is a big country, so everything here, you can see the quality being rated from all values from the left to right of the number line. (Negative to Positive)

  49. Per capita comparisons to China are BS. by Shivetya · · Score: 1

    Why not compare the US to Africa ... you would get the same result.

    Look. China loves these comparisons because it makes them look good. Why not compare numbers when only using people with X miles of a metropolitan area. That would make more sense.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Per capita comparisons to China are BS. by fugue · · Score: 1

      Why would your metric make more sense?

      I assume you're trying for some metric of "people who have a certain lifestyle level" or something? That's not unreasonable, except that it seems to me that the definition is almost the same as the definition of waste. Is "X miles of metropolitan area" better than "Income exceeds Y" or "Family owns a car" or "House has electricity" or any of a million other metrics that highly correlates with what you're trying to measure?

      Of course, "China" is a rather arbitrary concept. It's a completely fictional line in the sand, just like any political border is. But since everyone within that line is told what to do by the same group of people, it's reasonable to treat it as a whole for some purposes.

      Another valid metric might be "Fraction of industrial and post-consumer waste (plastics, agricultural runoff, freon, CO_2, mercury, pesticides, paper, trash.....) that is reclaimed/recycled/disposed of safely/etc." Again, not exactly the number that's needed (that being "Are we going to survive the next century?") but nonetheless perhaps useful for keeping score and placing blame.

      --
      "The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
    2. Re:Per capita comparisons to China are BS. by pmarini · · Score: 1

      fair enough...
      - USA has 80% of urban dwellers, so that 300mln becomes 240mln;
      - China has (my estimate of) 33% of them (given a 42% average for Asia), so that 1300mln becomes 430mln;
      therefore
      - 3120mln units by USA gives 13 units per person;
      - 2802mln units by China gives 6.5 units per person;

      any further comments now, on the proportions ??

      --
      Can I put a spell on those who can't spell?
      Your wheels are loose and they're losing their grip, good you're there.
  50. Don't "need" it? by managerialslime · · Score: 1

    . . .Most people in India have lived their entire lives without cars and didn't need it. . . .

    According to a recent National Public Radio author interview, 40% of the population of India still has no access to plumbing much less money to purchase toilet paper.

    Cars are used by the populace for access to better paying jobs and increased standard of living.

    It is true that during the industrial revolution of the 1800's that many major US cities (like Pittsburgh) has blackened skies and lung diseases for decades on end.

    It is also true that in the 1900's, some major US (and US/Candian) waterways were so polluted that THEY CAUGHT FIRE.

    But in the end, this industrialization led to longer life expectancies and higher standards of living. (And later, much LESS polluting industries.)

    While I don't want to breath ANY air pollution, I want even more that everyone around the world be given the economic opportunities given to me by the fact that I happened to be born in the US.

    So in the end I commend Tata for bringing this vehicle to market. If a less polluting yet equally performing and cost-effective exists, I trust India to eventually find and promote it.

    --
    Live Long and Prosper - Thanks Leonard. You are missed.
  51. Bad for India by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Being an Indian... I can say for a fact that these cars could be really bad for India.

    1. Increase traffic, which is already bad.
    2. Increase air pollution. In a lot of locations fuel is adulterated.
    3. Leads to increase in traffic accident deaths. Buses and trucks drive like they own the road, and with no safety features, chances of survival are minimal.

  52. photos by t3chn0n3rd · · Score: 1

    does anyone have photos of the automobile?

  53. The Peel 50 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd love to see the return of the Peel 50, with an contemporary engine, but otherwise as raw, cute and unsophisticated as it was when last in production on the Isle of Man.

    Stick a modern scooter engine and CVT in a lightweight chassis and composite body shell and I'll be salivating for it!

    http://microcarmuseum.com/video/p50.html

    1. Re:The Peel 50 by RoyalCheese · · Score: 1

      Aweswome! I love the way the driver got out and patted his car. An electric one could be good too!

  54. Re:WHAT!?!?! by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

    It's actually back down to about $2/gallon. I've been driving around in second gear for the past week just to be a dirty, filthy, CO2-emitting American.

  55. I'm still waiting... by zaivala · · Score: 1

    ... for the chance to walk into a car dealership and say, "Show me your Tatas!" They would do well to hire all women salespersons... I would point out that they already have Tata dealerships in the US -- that is to say, Tata Motors bought Jaguar and Landrover/RangeRover from Ford last year.

  56. I sure hope there's no radio... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  57. It sounds cheap until... by rodney+dill · · Score: 1

    ... you hear that I sold my '72 Gremlin for $50.00

    --

    Use your head, can't you, use your head,
    You're on earth, there's no cure for that
    - S. Beckett
  58. What racist, condescending drivel! by dfenstrate · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Environmental damage that happens in other countries counts as US caused if it's done by US corporations. E.g., the Union Carbide disaster may have happened in India, but it was a US corporation that caused it.

    Come now, take responsibility for your (collective) actions.

    Got it. Only white people have free will, and control their own destinies and everyone else's destiny at the same time. The democratically elected government of India has nothing to do with what they allow in their country. /sarcasm off.

    The problem with blaming everything on Whitey and/or the United States is it essentially reduces everyone else in the world to a pile of simple neurons that only react to what We do. It's the most racist, condescending attitude one could possibly have.

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
    1. Re:What racist, condescending drivel! by rusl · · Score: 1

      Nice mindfuck there dfenstrate, but you are the one bringing up race here (Is the US really all "white"?)

      Your excuse doesn't work. Yes, the Indian government is very much implicated in the Bhopal disaster. However, the shareholders (making money so they can retire and kick back) and company management are the ones who OWN and MANAGE the catastrophe. To excuse US owners and profiteers from responsibility due to their race certainly would be racism.

      Furthurmore the heart of racism is the US vs. THEM mentality, biology or geography have always been a convenient mask on top of that. No, WE are not always to "blame" for everything, "THEY" are us. WE should take responsibility for what we do own.

      India and Europe to have a long close history and you are correct that portraying colonialism of the past few centuries as totally seperate, totally black and white victimisation, is indeed an ignorant perspective that can lead to racist thinking. (the White Man's Burden...)

      --
      Stupidity is its own reward.
  59. Re:I thought the British Empire was dead. by dangitman · · Score: 1

    For dog's sake, why would anyone think I was being serious? My comment was clearly in jest. What the fuck is wrong with people?

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  60. Still too expensive by bigredradio · · Score: 1

    These days, everyone's talking about the Tata Nano. Nice car, if you've got $2,000 or $3,000 to throw around. But, for those of us whose name doesn't happen to be Rockefeller, finally there's some good news - a car with a sticker price of $179. That's right, $179. The name of the car?

    Adobe. The sassy new Mexican import that's made out of clay. German engineering and Mexican know-how helped create the first car to break the $200 barrier. At this price, you might not expect more than reliable transportation - but, brother, you get it! Extra features: like the custom contour seats, or the beverage-gripping dash. And the money you save isn't exactly small change!

  61. Reality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The high grounds and moral preaching of some people nonwithstanding, there is some truth in concerns about pollution. Many indians say the same thing themselves. Although most people overestate it.

    I have lived, owned and driven a car in Mumbai and I now I live in a small US city & drive a gas guzzling SUV. I have known both sides of the coin well.

    While the worry of increased pollution by few more million cars may be understandable, the prospect of such a thing happening very rapidly because of this car are slim. Reason : using a car is a very frustrating experience in many major indian cities. I owned a Hyundai Santro- somewhat similar in size to a Toyota Yaris - but preferred using a shared vehicle (similar to van pooling) for daily work commute; to avoid traffic/parking space problems. To most people living in Indian cities who can afford spending 2000-3000 dollars on car, already there are plenty of options in 5000-8000 range and credit available. Many people in this segment actually do not own a car out of choice. These people are not suddenly going to be tempted to buy a car just because one's available for a couple thousand dollars less.

    Another typical use of cars in American cities : long distance from city to city . Not many Indians - even those who own a car - take this route. The condition of roads outside major cities as well as fuel prices are not favorable to do that; and affordtable/comfortable public (or hired like Greyhound) transport options are available.

    So who will buy this car ? A lot of people living in suburbs away from the city centers / smaller towns. To these people, the road conditions are good enough to use a car regularly and the price is sweet. As you can guess, they don't need something to haul lot of stuff, or drive between cities. For smaller commutes on decent roads, this car will be perfect. But to think that there will be 100 million of such people is laughable.

    As to safety, this car is definitely much better than riding a bike in Indian cities. I personally know four cases where someone nearly died in a bike crash.

    Personally, I'd buy this car a heartbeat , right here in US. Safety? Yes, I know this car has fewer safety features. But for a short commute through a not too big city, and being a safe driver myself, I'm more than willing to buy one for the price tag.

  62. Will this car come to the USA? by wethead · · Score: 1

    I could use a new car for 2k for sure, In fact I I don't even have a car now because of funds !

  63. Question by Locke2005 · · Score: 1
    What phrase is utterly all the time at strip clubs, but never at an Indian auto dealership?

    "Nice tatas!"

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  64. GM executives need the nano by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many GM execs are lining up for this? Very soon they would require this to keep their houses. Sad but true.

  65. Re:I thought the British Empire was dead. by grodzix · · Score: 1

    You forgot tags [:

    --
    My Windows is NOT slow, it's special!
  66. Re:I thought the British Empire was dead. by grodzix · · Score: 1

    Ah crap, forgot that /. parses tags :b Supposed to be.

    You forgot <irony></irony> tags [:

    --
    My Windows is NOT slow, it's special!
  67. talking of India's role in petroleum consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    have you heard of a chap called Bush?
    and his buddies in Saudi and investment banking and futures?
    and an agency called the CIA?

    And of course the local bastards - the BJP?

    Ramar Pillai was ridiculed by the western media and US auto makers are now in effect doing just that - making part of the fuel from plants.

    Dow, Union Carbide, Enron and such other corps rape all countries they operate in.

    Both govts share the blame, directly.

  68. Canadirty by rusl · · Score: 1

    We are blessed with lots of Hydro but that proportion of power production/consumption is getting worse not better. In Vancouver now most of the power is from fuel burning. BC Hydro doesn't advertise this image much.

    Damn Dams destroy huge areas and the CO2 from the rotting underwater vegetation is not insignifigant.

    Actually Canada isn't doing as much as most other countries. We are clean by virtue of having fewer people and lots of nature to soak it up. per-capity we are worse than the USA in many areas.

    And no, we don't "need" cars, we just, as the rest of the world, are too dense to choose the sensible alternatives. (because they cost more and require more cooperation at the start but less over the long term)

    Distance is more of a major factor with Hydro. Something like 50% of electricity generated is lost to long distance transmission lines.

    --
    Stupidity is its own reward.
  69. Re:Obama Bankrupting the USA Tsarkon Reports by a+whoabot · · Score: 1

    I'll take the offtopic too, and... ...I'll have to admit I read the post, and I didn't see where he said Obama was a Muslim; I think you misread it.

  70. lifestyles have been based around cars by rusl · · Score: 1

    Our only hope is that, with the long time it takes to "pave the way" and reconfigure a country around the private automobile (India, China) That those of us in the rest of the world will start wising up and stop building our cities around cars.

    Otherwise we're all doomed:
    Open Library: The Endless Pavement

    --
    Stupidity is its own reward.
  71. trust me, you really don't want it... by rusl · · Score: 1

    Or perhaps a more positive spin: You really have it better there without cars.

    People WILL give up cars willingly. Many do now. Bicycles are infinitely superior in most cities, all it takes is some geekiness to figure out how to do it.

    We need a mind shift and we need people to be able to imagine Car-Free cities as thriving. It shouldn't be hard, Car-Free areas thrive even when they are put in to replace car-areas in cities that have become built around cars. But it's a massive undertaking and there are opponents to this change with really deep pockets (The auto and oil industries are connected pretty solidly to the military industries too)

    The US is a hard place to change due to a long history of privatising public spaces (the essence of car space culture) but look at places like Portland and Davis, CA, what it takes is willpower most of all.

    --
    Stupidity is its own reward.
  72. forgo the hassle by rusl · · Score: 1

    forgo the hassle of a car!

    You're right things are designed around cars and furniture, groceries and jobs... everything is part of it.

    But the benefits are greater. People NEED to belong to community more than they need a certain particular thing or habit. Everyone who does it is happy afterwards. But it can't be done alone or as an individual because you just have to give up. On the other hand a little support (like helping a friend fix a flat bicycle tire and going riding together to share good routes, or just talking to your neighbours in the local park) helps much more than the effort put in.

    --
    Stupidity is its own reward.
  73. Thought on inequality, consumption and pollution by a+whoabot · · Score: 1

    Imagine the whole world was a sphere of eternally edible cheese along with an atmosphere. In the beginning there are two beings on the world who divide up the world into equal halves, 'A' and 'B'. When they eat the cheese they produce and release CO2 pollution into the atmosphere. They reproduce asexually. 'A' has two kids and then dies, leaving half of the world for them. 'B' has 10 kids and then dies and these 10 share half the world of cheese. The As live in luxury and eat a lot and produce a lot of pollution per capita. The Bs live less luxuriously and cannot eat a lot because they have to share and so produce less pollution per capita. Is the A society really at fault here where the B society is somehow victimised by A for not making room for them to consume more per capita? I don't think so, if the Bs are victimised, they are victimised by their parent, not by As.

    This is not actually how the world is. I'm just trying to point out that it's not ipso facto a sign of moral decadence in one group of people that they consume a lot. It could just be that, in the past, members of that society foresaw that a high level of consumption would be desirable for future generations and so acted accordingly to make room for that. Obviously in the real world this happened not just through lower birthrates (and even just also technological development), but also through exploitation, etc. But there's no reason to automatically assume that a society should be given as much room as they need ("each according to her needs") to reach a certain standard of living, as this does nothing to stymie the very real threat of expansionism through unsustainable reproduction.

    So really, I guess the standard for comparison I'm advocating is, in contrast to "level of consumption or level of pollution per capita", is "level of consumption or level of pollution per unit of land or unit of property justly gained".* Now we just have to sort out what justice is. I'm sure that will go quickly...

    * Maybe there's some better characterisation of this.

  74. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I won't lie, I love big Tatas. This world's-smallest-tatas thing doesn't sit well with me.

  75. owners of Jaguar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and not to forget TATA are also the current owners of the luxury car brand, Jaguar

  76. volkswagen by johnrpenner · · Score: 1

    if you'd consider the original mission -- it looks like its the new old VW Volkswagen...

  77. Re:Obama Bankrupting the USA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama Policies Will Bankrupt the USA Tsarkon Reports

    - President Barak "The Teleprompter" Obama is deeply connected to corruption, Rahm Emanuel (Radical authoritarian Statist whose father was part of the Murderous Civilian Killing Israeli Terrorist Organization known as IRGUN), Connected to Rod Blagojevich (Rahm inherited Rod's federal-congress seat), Connected to Ayers, a man who promotes the concept that civilian collateral damage is ok in a war against freedom, Preacher Jeremiah Wright, who is himself a black-elitist who wants all the people who largely "pay the freight" to suffer, 31 million on food stamps, more blacks are in prison and on food-stamps per capita than anyone else. The problem with Wright is simply this: the facts are "racist."
    - Obama: Racist, AIPAC-bootlicker, Corrupted to the bone Chicago style and a Traitor to the US Constitution and a Liar who can't even produce a valid birth certificate (which is not a certificate of live birth)
    - Raytheon lobbyist in Pentagon, lots lobbyists getting exemptions even though he promised not to have them.
    - Goldman Sachs insider second in command at Treasury. Bumbling tax cheat idiot in "command" of Treasury with 17 positions unfilled as of late March 2009.
    - Cabinet has had several nominees and appointees with multiple tax fraud issues.
    - Lied about having a new degree of accountability and a SUNSHINE period of new laws, he has signed bills with little or no review at whitehouse.gov as promised.
    - Appointed a second amendment violating Rich-pardoning treasonist Eric Holder as AG, the top cop of the USA, a man who helped a fugitive evade justice.
    - Has not put a dime in for a single new nuclear power plant but wants to help bridges and roads to promote more driving.
    - Obama, Blagojevich and Rahm Emanuel have a LOT to hide. They literally lived next to each other, Rahm had (until being Chairman Obama's Chief of staff) Blagojevich's old federal congressional seat. Blagojevich helped Chairman "The Teleprompter" Obama cheat his way to the Illinois senate by getting other candidates thrown off the ballot in Illinois. Why do you think Blagojevich was so mad? Obama DID owe him, big time. Rahm and Obama are using Blagojevich and trying to cut his head off to keep him away.
    - Tony Rezko, Iraqi Arms Dealer Nahdmi Auchi, and of course Aiham Alsammarae. Chairman "The Teleprompter" Hussein Obama is so corrupted its a joke.
    - Fools and "useful idiots" twist the pie charts by leaving welfare, workfare, interest on debt, social security, Medicare and Medicaid out and focusing only on non-whole "discretionary" pie charts.
    2007 high level pie chart, Federal Budget, USA
    2009 Pie chart, detailed, Federal Budget, USA
    - Chairman Obama is drastically increasing spending and creating more entitlements that will make the US less competitive (especially against China, India, East Europe/Russia). This will be a huge disaster and change you can believe in will strap you and your grandkids with more debt. No taxation without representation? Obama is spending money for the next two-three generations and they can't even vote yet, or even have been born.
    - An alternative to the dollar and a forex and a reserve currency came up at the last G20 meeting. The world will not take faith in Obama's liar-socialist spending and welfare state, why should the taxpayers (plebian citizen-slaves of a police state).
    - The spending going on now vastly eclipses all previous spending. In fact, the massive trillion plus debts is a thing of the 80's onwards. Congress signs the checks, remember that Year after year, as egregious as the pentagon spending is, that the social spending is completely a waste of money and it is unfunded over the long term. Eisenhower built the interstates, the US could build a new power infrastructure with this money but instead is being pissed into crea

  78. I think it's way cool by QuincyDurant · · Score: 0
    I drive a $1,000 (50,000 rupee) car that I got on Craiglist three years ago. It gets 35 mpg, but I have to say 67mpg sounds better.

    Competition, whether on price or quality, is a beautiful thing, and the idea that a 67mpg car is bad for the environment is too complex for me to follow.

    They can't get those little Indian buggers over here fast enough for me. I want to buy a used one for, what?, $150?

  79. Stupid Asians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wonderful. By the time India builds out its petroleum-based transportation infrastructure we will have no oil and emerging will become submerging.

    Just because the U.S. did something does not mean its a good idea to follow.

  80. Re:Obama Bankrupting the USA Tsarkon Reports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RON PAUL FTW!

  81. Re:I thought the British Empire was dead. by slack_prad · · Score: 1

    I lol'd

    --
    Sent from my desktop computer
  82. Lezz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am with ricgf on this one.... Its wise to listen from someone who has done a mistake and decide not to go on the same path... cheers to TATA's thou.. its a wonderful car.

  83. Supercharge it with a Weed whacker. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how one of these demi-cars would behave if given the hot rod treatment with a tiny turbo or something.

    Maybe this is one of those few times where you can effectively increase horsepower with those retarded electric superchargers the rice boys were putting on their Civics a few years back.

    Not a bad idea with such a tiny engine. Hit the motor when you're accelerating and the alternator is putting out more juice than your charging system is equipped to deal with.

    Maybe you could go zero to sixty in "Yes."?

  84. oooh, that'd be good for status/image! by r00t · · Score: 1

    You don't hear me harping on dump trucks, bulldozers, and semis do you? No. Unless 90% of them were used when absolutely not necessary, and then you would. Get it?

    The whole point of an SUV is to intimidate the other drivers (so they let you go first) and let you look down/over them.

    I like the way you think, particularly regarding the bulldozer. That'll be my next ride. I especially like those up-armored ones that are designed for removing Palestinian houses. Even the Lincoln Navigator and Chevy Suburban drivers will cower in fear, allowing me to visit Starbucks in safety and security.

  85. it is meant as... by zogger · · Score: 1

    ..a motorcycle or scooter replacement, those folks are already motorized. You have whole families there trying to ride plus carry their stuff on some (I mean one, single) small scooter, so which is safer again? And the scooters by and large actually produce more tailpipe emissions, being 2 strokes in a lot of cases.

  86. Americans do this for a reason by r00t · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    His argument is, here in north america, we made the huge mistake of designing communities such that a vehicle was a requirement for living. In particular, the suburban and ex-urban phenomenon has left your average American completely incapable of living without personal long-distance transportation.

    Yep. The ugly truth is that this was triggered by desegregation. Once you could no longer enforce a little island within the city, anybody with the means to live elsewhere did exactly that.

    And this phenomenon is coupled with a truly massive underfunding of public transportation [...] The solution is to build communities where cars *aren't necessary in the first place*.

    Uh, well, bus stops devalue your property. This is because they make it possible for people without cars to live in your community. People who can't afford cars are people who make a community less desirable. You'll get more littering, muggings, graffiti, prostitution, meth labs... You want to raise children in a place like that?

    This is related to some of the reasons we don't even like to ride busses. We might have to sit next to a smelly bum, a pedophile, or worse. Remember that guy in Canada who chopped of the head of the guy sitting next to him. We want isolation from that class of people.

  87. planned communities are the problem by r00t · · Score: 1

    move to a metropolitan area or some other planned community where you have everything you need within walking distance

    Planned communities are much of the problem. I know a city that is 100% home owner association for housing by city ordinance/bylaw/whatever. All non-housing stuff (which is very little indeed) is deliberately forced to be far away from the housing. Most everyone must commute to other cities to work.

    The people there could move out, sure, but then other people would move in. The city has been built. There is no remotely realistic way to fix that city, even if the residents were to decide that it should be fixed. (and of course they love their city exactly the way it is) Properties are tied up in draconian deed restrictions. Fixing such a city would probably require heavy-handed measures involving eminent domain and bulldozers.

  88. lot size by r00t · · Score: 1

    US culture has taught people that standard of living == quarter acre in the middle of nowhere. And that's crap.

    That's definitely crap. If your neighbor has a McMansion on a lot that small, there won't be room enough to have forest between the houses.

    Your neighbor can listen in on you. You'd better hope you **never** have an argument with your spouse or kids.

    You will listen in on him, like it or not. You get to hear him cranking Britney Spears to 11. Your kids get to hear him swear, in graphic detail. You wake to the sound of his Harley or H2.

    You might smell his barbeque, pool, cigar, fertilizer, or dog shit. You could get hit by his fireworks. His cat will poop in your child's sandbox.

    Maybe you can even see the ugly bastard sometimes, or at least his house.

  89. and Americans are screwed by r00t · · Score: 1

    We built our cities with the assumption that transportation would be cheap.

    If fuel prices rise, everybody else wins relative to America. They can tolerate high prices. Americans can't. High prices collapse the American economy for good.

  90. Cocktail parties by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 1

    CAR's first ride in the Tata Nano felt far more significant and exciting than a first drive in a Ferrari or Lamborghini

    Emphasis mine.

    I have never driven Ferrari or a Lamborghini but I can tell the writer is an utter moron. I'm fine with pushing compares to make a point but this is ridiculous. Compare the car with a high quality compact car which costs 10 times more and whose customers will shy away from an ugly little piece of shit like the Nano.

    Imagine this guy at a cocktail party making a point for the stone age.

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
  91. they can't publicly be honest by r00t · · Score: 1

    They don't want public transit because a car-based community is a way to discourage the lower classes from moving into the community. With them would come crime, a drop in property value, and so on.

    While this issue is often looked upon in a racial light, economic discrimination is actually a far more accurate filter. Few would object to living near people like Clarence Thomas, Prince, or (once retired) Obama.

  92. Most polluting per capita by kieran · · Score: 1

    I'm actually in favour of China's way of viewing these numbers: Pollution caused by production should be added to the consuming country's score, not where they've outsourced their production to.

    That would put the US right back on top, and by a healthy margin.

  93. big fat wedding in small small car by Sadahari · · Score: 1

    Its really not gonna be any surprise when bollywood stars, celebrities and fame will come to award nights or any socio-entertain event to market nano and to spread a word to the world about keeping low profile in oppose those fronts like driving big-cars and changing batteries frequently. people are really need to know how much that costs to enviroment. I was very surpised to see bullock-carts still active in India, china, still on other hand they have moon missions. this is really a great balance these countries do have.