Do bicycles and cars mix?

Dr Engelbert Buxbaum wrote in message
...
wrote:


Using the same kind of fake and false data, you can show that transit
systems cost $15 a mile to operate.

Just because you don't like them does not mean that data are faked. In
fact, before you accuse scientists of faking data, you should really
have some good evidence. Faking data means the end of the carreer for a
scientist.

In this particular case of course there is no room for faking, as the
relevant data are public knowledge.

Transit systems locally in RTP get back 11 cents on the dollar. No one
denies that.

Dr Engelbert Buxbaum wrote in message
...
wrote:


How often do you go to Home Depot? Once a year? No point in keeping a
car for that, is there?


Three times a week, and when in the mountain home, more often than
that.
You are obviously a very impractical person who relies on others to do
most
of your work for you.


No, I just organise myself properly.

You are a very impractical person who is totally disorganized
intellectually and personally.

On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 19:44:16 -0400, Mitch Haley
wrote:

I quit viewing Mercedes as a serious carmaker when they replaced the W126
S-class chassis with the overweight, underreliable W140 S-class in 1992.

The W124 and W126 were the last cars made before the accountants told
them to stop overdesigning them ;-)

For reliability, I would buy a Honda every time. For longevity I
stick with my old Volvo. But the reason US cars are not well-regarded
outside the USA is nothing to do with reliability, it's the abysmal
fuel economy!

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony.
http://www.chapmancentral.com
New! Improved!! Now with added extra Demon!

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 19:44:16 -0400, Mitch Haley
wrote:

I quit viewing Mercedes as a serious carmaker when they replaced the W126
S-class chassis with the overweight, underreliable W140 S-class in 1992.

The W124 and W126 were the last cars made before the accountants told
them to stop overdesigning them ;-)

For reliability, I would buy a Honda every time. For longevity I
stick with my old Volvo. But the reason US cars are not well-regarded
outside the USA is nothing to do with reliability, it's the abysmal
fuel economy!



It is the import taxes which make it easy to import a car from a foreign
company into the USA, but very hard for us to export anything. I sure hope
my MB 190D was not what an engineer in German called overdesigned. It is a
maintenance hog and is designed so the AC hoses cross the fuse box making it
impossible to replace the fuses unless you break the cover or cut a hose.

wrote:

It is the import taxes which make it easy to import a car from a foreign
company into the USA, but very hard for us to export anything.

You spoke specifically of "import taxes." I'm unaware of a disparity that
would cause such a situation. Not counting sales tax, economy tax, engine
size tax, CO2 tax, or any other fees that would be the same if the car was
local, what taxes are levied on a car sold in, say, the UK or Germany that
do not apply to vehicles produced locally?

There is a significant cost to keep a dealership network in a country as
large as the US. There are regulations regarding the availability of parts
and such for manufacturers here. The cost to recertify a car for the US
that has already been certified elsewhere is the same as if it wasn't
certified anywhere else. Many regulations in the US are not compatible
with any country across the ocean (either direction), requiring separate
parts for the US and other countries for enough pieces to cause significant
cost.

It is much easier to sell cars in small numbers in European countries than
the US.

Ford, Chrysler and GM all sell cars in foreign countries. Where is Pugeot,
Citroen, Fiat, Rover (the cars, not Range Rover), Seat, Skoda?

From what I've seen, it is relatively easy to export to foreign countries.
But if you read reviews of, say, a Jeep Grand Cherokee, you'll see why they
don't bother with too many models. Also, because of engine size and other
things, they don't fit well to the pricing/taxing structure and are often
uncompetitive for reasons other than the product itself. But that doesn't
make it hard to export, only hard to sell competitively (which isn't the
same thing).

If you want to make it easier for the US to export cars, petition the US
government to work with the EU and Japan to standardize emissions, mileage,
lighting, and other requirements (and the necessary back-end
infrastructure, like fuel) and then it will be much easier for the all cars
to be tested once and sold anywhere in the world (well, tested twice for
lighting for cars sold in RHD and LHD versions).

Marc
For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"

On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 16:30:32 -0700, "fbloogyudsr"
wrote:

And which made it easy for the US makers to build the SUV market
without fear of overseas competition, thanks to a tit-for-tat import
tariff imposed back in the mists of time ;-)

There was never an import duty on SUV's. Only on pickups.

AIUI it was "light trucks," and SUVs were / are classed as light
trucks, which is how they also escape CAFE and some passenger car
safety legislation.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony.
http://www.chapmancentral.com
New! Improved!! Now with added extra Demon!

There was never an import duty on SUV's. Only on pickups.

AIUI it was "light trucks," and SUVs were / are classed as light
trucks,

Not for license plates; they get passenger car plates.

Depends on the state. In CA they are not only trucks, they have to be
registered as commercial vehicles. As do pickups.

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 15:42:48 -0400, RJ wrote:

On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:08:47 -0700, John David Galt
wrote:

There was never an import duty on SUV's. Only on pickups.

AIUI it was "light trucks," and SUVs were / are classed as light
trucks,

Not for license plates; they get passenger car plates.

Depends on the state. In CA they are not only trucks, they have to be
registered as commercial vehicles. As do pickups.

Interesting. All the states I've lived in register SUVs as cars, not
trucks.

He's mistaken.

In CA SUVs are registered as cars, don't need commercial plates, and
get passenger car plates.

"Scott in Aztlan" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:08:47 -0700, John David Galt
wrote:

There was never an import duty on SUV's. Only on pickups.

AIUI it was "light trucks," and SUVs were / are classed as light
trucks,

Not for license plates; they get passenger car plates.

Depends on the state. In CA they are not only trucks, they have to be
registered as commercial vehicles. As do pickups.

You're right about pickups having to be registered as commercial vehicles,
but
my Dodge Durango was registered in CA as an ordinary passenger car and
received
a passenger car license plate (as evidenced by the NAAANNN character
pattern on
the plate as well as the lack of an additional licencing fee based on
vehicle
weight).

It may be that the car dealer screwed up, of course, but the way it was
explained to me is that, because an SUV can carry passengers in the back,
it
qulifies as a passenger vehicle; since a pickup truck can only carry cargo
in
the back, that makes it a commercial vehicle.

No need to speculate. All info is on state's website. My CA SUV was never
licensed as a commercial vehicle and I know of many pick-ups that aren't
either.

"JD" wrote in message
m...

"Scott in Aztlan" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 22:08:47 -0700, John David Galt
wrote:

There was never an import duty on SUV's. Only on pickups.

AIUI it was "light trucks," and SUVs were / are classed as light
trucks,

Not for license plates; they get passenger car plates.

Depends on the state. In CA they are not only trucks, they have to be
registered as commercial vehicles. As do pickups.

You're right about pickups having to be registered as commercial
vehicles,
but
my Dodge Durango was registered in CA as an ordinary passenger car and
received
a passenger car license plate (as evidenced by the NAAANNN character
pattern on
the plate as well as the lack of an additional licencing fee based on
vehicle
weight).

It may be that the car dealer screwed up, of course, but the way it was
explained to me is that, because an SUV can carry passengers in the
back,
it
qulifies as a passenger vehicle; since a pickup truck can only carry
cargo
in
the back, that makes it a commercial vehicle.

No need to speculate. All info is on state's website. My CA SUV was never
licensed as a commercial vehicle and I know of many pick-ups that aren't
either.



FActs do not get in the way of a Usent diatribe.