Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
"hooking" ford or not isn't the point. It was not the stated purpose to "hook ford." I assume the law was intended to reduce fuel consumption. Consider this allegory:
5 years ago at Florida Coastal LS, Sebby was a senior with a 2.8 GPA. adder was finishing up his first year with a first semester 1.9 AND midterms had not gone well. Sebby had this problem, he had just been served a Ketel 1 vodka drink and didn't think he could swill back the Mohawk any longer BUT he had little money. adder had his own problem: FCLS had a minimum 2.0 GPa at the end of the year or you weren't allowed to register for next year.
Adder offered Sebby $1000 for some GPA "credit." sebby jumped at it- free money! Adder took it to the FCLS administration as a proposal- Admins said no:
The purpose of the minimum 2.0 was to ensure that the public wasn't subject to some lawyer with a FCLS diploma on his wall and who couldn't even get a 2.0. they pointed out that Sebby already had a 2.8 so the accomadation didn't raise any average GPA, it just would let Adder be below the minimum. And for that matter it would probably lower GPA average for 2 reasons: first it took away Adder's incentive to do better and get his GPA up. Just as bad, it ensures Adder's below minimum ass was around next keeping everything low when the standard is intended to weed him out. Adder got it together and maintained good status. Why let ford do it?
You say it makes tons of unsellable focuses to meet the standard. I doubt that is true, especially with it's current cuts.
what might be true is that the realities of the market are catching up to the big 3. I think the % of sales for GM/DCX/Ford that are pickups or SUVs relative to cars is probably higher now than it was 5 years ago. I'm sure the Mack truck is allowed higher MPg standards than is Toyota, so maybe there should be some distinction for bigger vehicles (maybe there is already) but I would rather a different standard for bigger vehicles than telling companies they can but their way out of any minimum.
See all that the law is asking for is MINIMUM COMPLIANCE. some companies have done what is hoped by such a law, exceeded the minimum. Why would we throw away the benefit of some company actually growing. Letting Ford do bad isn't raising any average. Would FCLS be better off if Sebby had graduated with a 2.7?
|
Your analogy sucks. TO be apt, CAFE would require *every* car to have a certain MPG. It does not. It requires a corporate average. Ford can still sell cars that get 10mpg (a 1.9 GPA).
This is not some morality-based law. Corporations are amoral. They're a collection through statutory contract of investor capital. It's not like paying someone else to use their grades. It's not even like little Hank paying little Henrietta to clean up his room. Nor is it like the rich kids in school having their parents buy them out of some community service obligation.
Rather, the law is intended to make sure that on average all cars sold in the U.S. will have a certain fuel economy. Why make it more expensive to achieve that?
