19/27 for a largish car is not a problem to be solved by removing such cars from the mass market domain and putting it in the nomenklatura one.
Build the landwhale right, and efficiency still can be built in. Take away the regulations like CAFE, and such cars can be made available to mere mortals. Without block-and-transmission-killing [turbo|super]chargers, or other cheats around the proper solution of displacement.
The first thing I'd do to an EcoBoost car is rip out the drivetrain and replace it with one that isn't as environmentally impaired. That's if it's not a Eurotrash platform that has no provision for something larger than an I4.
I value mine enough to put plenty of Detroit metal between me and the next person - and have enough engine to not need to use it. If anything, it's the austerity-minded compact that's likely to become a coffin - whether it gets blown off a bridge by a strong breeze or compacted by collision.
US automakers, set to their own devices, produced SUVs and muscle cars, and pretty much crap otherwise.
That says US automakers specialize in large cars meant for the mass market - and should be allowed to make them as such without environmental restrictions. That's why they're not doing so well - they're being forced by regulation to do something that is not part of Detroit's DNA.
It'd just be fine if one did not have to raid the luxury tier just to get anything greater than 4+turbo. I'm not asking for an exotic V10 or V12.
As for what I have, it's a 215HP Short North V6 on a 3600lb body. No turbocharger present - it'd do more harm than good on the already-underpowered 4T65-E that it is mated to.
All I'm wanting to see is that US-sized/powered vehicles remain available to the masses, not something reserved for the nomenklatura.
Might be grating for your ears to hear that, Anonymous Coward, but if someone is willing to rig a car to blow up, the car isn't something that has any value to it. This usually means you have cars like those made from Japanese, Korean and austerity-minded European designs. Who's going to miss that golfcart when there are tons of others just as bad?
On the other hand, US cars don't have such affliction for having some actual quality and attention to detail not given to cars for developing nation markets.
Japan had its chance in the 1980's to overtake the US in large-car production. Once it went in the keicar/speed-limiter-by-gentleman's-agreement direction, it was forever lost.
Korea just chops up whatever designs are trendy and puts them in a legally-friendly-but-blatant copy of a package.
What is supposedly gained in the part sharing is lost in the cars becoming bland and un-American - where you get told that you are not worthy of a car from your own country.
It'd be fine if you could just order a foreign market car, while the US keeps its home market vehicles large, US-sized, powered and priced for the masses.
Versus Europe and Asia, you get more car in the US, and it is built for the wide open spaces that frustrate golfcarts.
What is it with Europe and their hate on ordinary people having Detroit-like power under the hood, up to the point where people let V8 behemoths rot in garages for fear of taxes?
US cars are hardly inelegant or antiquated - they just weren't built with austerity, but built with pride. You don't see General Motors/Chrysler/Ford cars being blown up by terrorists; you see them use cheap-as-shit Toyotas, Hyundais, Mitsubishis, Peugeots, and other non-US cars that are made with no attention to quality or design.
The US made the mistake of allowing transplants in the door during the days of import quotas in the 1980's. That, and we haven't protected our manufacturers enough to keep US cars that are truly built with only a US audience in mind.
It won't stop the Al Gores from driving even more offensive vehicles which have the proper-sized engine blocks. It reduces choice for the rest of us that live with environmentalists' overkill demands.
If only Ford didn't go all Eurotrash and eviscerate anything American from their lineup, favoring globalized-to-hell golfcarts with fancy electronics as the mass market option.
It's a nice feature and all, but it seems to be more of a distraction from the lack of a proper, US-sized engine block under the hood than anything else.
Or how about making them in the US - in factories located north of the Mason-Dixon line and east of the Mississippi River? Keep your $50 increase and they'd still make a profit.
The problem also is that it'd not only be profitable common sense, but that it goes against two other, incorrect orthodoxies:
1) If you manufacture in the US, that is the region you avoid.
2) Manufacturing in the US makes any product's price jump into the stratosphere.
The things that person fails to account for would be currency manipulation, government ownership of business, lack of freedom for those who do that manufacturing work, and less-than-honest accounting that is prevalent in China. Correct for those, then one can cut through the author's bullshit that they call "fact"
One of my favorite facts of this past year was the proof that China makes almost nothing out of assembling Apple's iPads and iPhones. From the article: 'If you want lots of jobs and lots of high paying jobs then youâ(TM)re not going to find them in manufacturing. Theyâ(TM)re where the money is, in the design, the software and the retailing of the products, not the physical making of them.
Sounds like someone that justifies few jobs versus the large amount of jobless.
The things that person fails to account for would be currency manipulation, government ownership of business, lack of freedom for those who do that manufacturing work, and less-than-honest accounting that is prevalent in China. Correct for those, then one can cut through the author's
If you want lots of high-paying jobs in the US and EU, kill every single guest worker program (fraud-ridden at any level), get rid of the ability to use length of unemployment (or employment) as a direct or indirect means of discriminating against the unemployed, and get rid of the tax and benefit dodges with second-class forms of labor (e.g. contractors, consultants). Finally, make it harder to not hire US citizens, within the US by making any tax cut follow the worker and is dependent on the length of time.
So you expect the flames? You do realise that there is a legitimate moderation of flamebait that suits your message perfectly. You can hardly complain if people mod you down when you tell them the reason that they should do so.
With any article concerning China, there seems to be an even greater consistency of criticism being attacked with high volume. I only wish to pre-empt such activity.
How do they hide the clouds of black smoke that used to be visible from the fields around town as stated in the article. If they have perfected a system to remove the plumes of smoke then I think we can consider that to be good enough.
They don't. The process is just harmful in a different way(read: chemical burns & exposure).
If anything, the Chinese (and like-minded Third World countries) make a point to detect inspections early enough to clean up things. Whether it'd be forwarding the information that an inspector has come in the country to the factory (and thus clean out evidence) or just showing the good parts of an operation like this, it only shows a good face - and no real improvement. When a business is able to control a government in such a manner, it won't matter how much of a surprise you attempt.
(Awaiting modbombing and overwhelming "you don't understand"'s from the 50 Cent Party)
Being with the company directly has the direct benefits and support of the company - versus a disposable contractor that is sought more for easier separation from the company than any merit.
Slashdot Mirror
19/27 for a largish car is not a problem to be solved by removing such cars from the mass market domain and putting it in the nomenklatura one.
Build the landwhale right, and efficiency still can be built in. Take away the regulations like CAFE, and such cars can be made available to mere mortals. Without block-and-transmission-killing [turbo|super]chargers, or other cheats around the proper solution of displacement.
The first thing I'd do to an EcoBoost car is rip out the drivetrain and replace it with one that isn't as environmentally impaired. That's if it's not a Eurotrash platform that has no provision for something larger than an I4.
I value mine enough to put plenty of Detroit metal between me and the next person - and have enough engine to not need to use it. If anything, it's the austerity-minded compact that's likely to become a coffin - whether it gets blown off a bridge by a strong breeze or compacted by collision.
US automakers, set to their own devices, produced SUVs and muscle cars, and pretty much crap otherwise.
That says US automakers specialize in large cars meant for the mass market - and should be allowed to make them as such without environmental restrictions. That's why they're not doing so well - they're being forced by regulation to do something that is not part of Detroit's DNA.
It'd just be fine if one did not have to raid the luxury tier just to get anything greater than 4+turbo. I'm not asking for an exotic V10 or V12.
As for what I have, it's a 215HP Short North V6 on a 3600lb body. No turbocharger present - it'd do more harm than good on the already-underpowered 4T65-E that it is mated to.
All I'm wanting to see is that US-sized/powered vehicles remain available to the masses, not something reserved for the nomenklatura.
Might be grating for your ears to hear that, Anonymous Coward, but if someone is willing to rig a car to blow up, the car isn't something that has any value to it. This usually means you have cars like those made from Japanese, Korean and austerity-minded European designs. Who's going to miss that golfcart when there are tons of others just as bad?
On the other hand, US cars don't have such affliction for having some actual quality and attention to detail not given to cars for developing nation markets.
Japan had its chance in the 1980's to overtake the US in large-car production. Once it went in the keicar/speed-limiter-by-gentleman's-agreement direction, it was forever lost.
Korea just chops up whatever designs are trendy and puts them in a legally-friendly-but-blatant copy of a package.
China just takes your designs.
Buick has been hollowed out and made into something un-American.
What is supposedly gained in the part sharing is lost in the cars becoming bland and un-American - where you get told that you are not worthy of a car from your own country.
It'd be fine if you could just order a foreign market car, while the US keeps its home market vehicles large, US-sized, powered and priced for the masses.
Versus Europe and Asia, you get more car in the US, and it is built for the wide open spaces that frustrate golfcarts.
What is it with Europe and their hate on ordinary people having Detroit-like power under the hood, up to the point where people let V8 behemoths rot in garages for fear of taxes?
US cars are hardly inelegant or antiquated - they just weren't built with austerity, but built with pride. You don't see General Motors/Chrysler/Ford cars being blown up by terrorists; you see them use cheap-as-shit Toyotas, Hyundais, Mitsubishis, Peugeots, and other non-US cars that are made with no attention to quality or design.
The US made the mistake of allowing transplants in the door during the days of import quotas in the 1980's. That, and we haven't protected our manufacturers enough to keep US cars that are truly built with only a US audience in mind.
It won't stop the Al Gores from driving even more offensive vehicles which have the proper-sized engine blocks. It reduces choice for the rest of us that live with environmentalists' overkill demands.
If only Ford didn't go all Eurotrash and eviscerate anything American from their lineup, favoring globalized-to-hell golfcarts with fancy electronics as the mass market option.
It's a nice feature and all, but it seems to be more of a distraction from the lack of a proper, US-sized engine block under the hood than anything else.
Or how about making them in the US - in factories located north of the Mason-Dixon line and east of the Mississippi River? Keep your $50 increase and they'd still make a profit.
The problem also is that it'd not only be profitable common sense, but that it goes against two other, incorrect orthodoxies:
1) If you manufacture in the US, that is the region you avoid.
2) Manufacturing in the US makes any product's price jump into the stratosphere.
Why else would China give freedom for multinationals, but not give it to regular, unconnected individuals?
Oops, meant:
The things that person fails to account for would be currency manipulation, government ownership of business, lack of freedom for those who do that manufacturing work, and less-than-honest accounting that is prevalent in China. Correct for those, then one can cut through the author's bullshit that they call "fact"
One of my favorite facts of this past year was the proof that China makes almost nothing out of assembling Apple's iPads and iPhones. From the article: 'If you want lots of jobs and lots of high paying jobs then youâ(TM)re not going to find them in manufacturing. Theyâ(TM)re where the money is, in the design, the software and the retailing of the products, not the physical making of them.
Sounds like someone that justifies few jobs versus the large amount of jobless.
The things that person fails to account for would be currency manipulation, government ownership of business, lack of freedom for those who do that manufacturing work, and less-than-honest accounting that is prevalent in China. Correct for those, then one can cut through the author's
If you want lots of high-paying jobs in the US and EU, kill every single guest worker program (fraud-ridden at any level), get rid of the ability to use length of unemployment (or employment) as a direct or indirect means of discriminating against the unemployed, and get rid of the tax and benefit dodges with second-class forms of labor (e.g. contractors, consultants). Finally, make it harder to not hire US citizens, within the US by making any tax cut follow the worker and is dependent on the length of time.
Execution vans. Clean, quiet, and could probably print out the bill for the family.
So you expect the flames? You do realise that there is a legitimate moderation of flamebait that suits your message perfectly. You can hardly complain if people mod you down when you tell them the reason that they should do so.
With any article concerning China, there seems to be an even greater consistency of criticism being attacked with high volume. I only wish to pre-empt such activity.
China's "50 Cent Party" - paid commentators to guide opinion.
For the country that usually is known for its robots, that sure seems to be an embarrassment.
How do they hide the clouds of black smoke that used to be visible from the fields around town as stated in the article. If they have perfected a system to remove the plumes of smoke then I think we can consider that to be good enough.
They don't. The process is just harmful in a different way(read: chemical burns & exposure).
They do the same with executions.
If anything, the Chinese (and like-minded Third World countries) make a point to detect inspections early enough to clean up things. Whether it'd be forwarding the information that an inspector has come in the country to the factory (and thus clean out evidence) or just showing the good parts of an operation like this, it only shows a good face - and no real improvement. When a business is able to control a government in such a manner, it won't matter how much of a surprise you attempt.
(Awaiting modbombing and overwhelming "you don't understand"'s from the 50 Cent Party)
...even if you've had your meat.
(apologies to Pink Floyd)
Perhaps they want something onboard that makes Carrier IQ look tame.
Search for or have anything deemed subversive on the device, it reports you silently.
Unless there is an effort to actively block the porting of 4.0 to these devices, there is likely to be an unofficial port.
Being with the company directly has the direct benefits and support of the company - versus a disposable contractor that is sought more for easier separation from the company than any merit.
Then you know very few people. The revised topic says it all.
You're more or less disposable, not flexible.
But you get to deal with NSAT&T.