What’s that in the road ahead?
Tom Friedman in the NYT has some very specific demands of the auto bailout that’s apparently just around the corner:
This money can’t just go to patch up our jalopies. “Remember, this money will not be neutral,” said Andy Karsner, a former U.S. assistant secretary of energy. “We are talking about directing an unprecedented volume of cash at our housing, energy, transportation and infrastructure industries. This cash will either fortify the incumbent players and calcify the energy status quo, or it will facilitate the economic transformation we seek. The stimulus will either be white blood cells that will heal us or malignant cells that will continue to sap our strength.”
Let’s get specific. When it comes to Detroit, my views are clear: I think we should be talking about “bail,” not “bailouts,” regarding the people running the Big Three car companies and the lawmakers who mindlessly protected them for so long. Still, I do not want to see jobs destroyed. But if taxpayers are going to give Detroit money, we must not entrust the spending to people who have run their businesses into the ground.
You want my tax dollars? Then I want to see the precise production plans and timetables for the hybridization of all your cars and trucks within 36 months. I want every bailed-out car company to move to hybrid electric drive trains, because nothing would both improve mileage and emissions more — and also stimulate a whole new 21st-century, job-creating industry: batteries.
It’s awfully nice of Mr. Friedman to take the time to design industrial policy for the US and the 3 automakers with their $400 billion in sales. Perhaps he had his deep thoughts about how the American people should live and conserve energy while strolling the grounds of his considerable estate or while seated at a cozy fire in his 11,000 square foot mansion. Questions: (a) what if producing hybrids does nothing to make the automakers profitable? (b) what if hybrids are a mere sandwich technology and not a long-term solution to anything? (c) what if Americans don’t want hybrids?
December 8th, 2008 at 1:41 am
Mr. Friedman must hold a substantial stake in a battery manufacturer. Why else push an agenda that holds little promise for energy independence and will be a massive waste of capital?
December 8th, 2008 at 2:27 am
Excellent questions (your last 3). While I have no problems with Mr. Friedman owning acres of land or a mansion, I do have a problem with him thrusting his preferences and opinions n what is “best” for the rest of us. Your question (a) may be the crux of the problem – perhaps hybridization of an automobile has little to do with what has driven the industry into the ground as much as management and political factors and factions.
December 8th, 2008 at 2:32 am
I suspect Tom Friedman sees himself as a very smart man who knows what he is talking about. The arrogance here is breath taking and is rarely on display with such insouciance. But perhaps I should not be so negative; we should leverage his brilliance! He could be the ideal person to be the new Automobile Tsar. I suspect that after he fixes the big three and the energy economy, making it green and prosperous in the next 18 months, he will have plenty of energy and advice left over to solve our problems with the Middle East. His wisdom and brilliance are nothing short of astounding. Only those of us who are terribly limited intellectually could possibly find fault with his plans.
December 8th, 2008 at 7:06 am
Can you have a succesful hybrid technology without improving the wear characteristics of specific engine components? 80% of engine wear is the result of engine startup. Hybrid technology multiplies engine starts many, many times. It is reasonable to expect the engines to wear out sooner.
Would you buy a hybrid car if you needed to replace the batteries and engine every 2-4 years?
December 8th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
The moma’s boy has never changed a spark plug in his entire life. Who GAF?
A twirp. A nancy. Where is the Taliban when you need them?
December 9th, 2008 at 2:47 am
Friedman has an opinion. His is worth as much as anybody else’s, which is to say not much.
I have one of those rechargeable cordless drills with one working battery. I can buy a new, better, drill for less money than a replacement battery. I’m not ready to invest in that technology when my (conventional) Honda Civic runs fine, is paid for, and will last another half dozen years. When I buy my next car, I’ll consider asking Friedman for advice.
Actually, I won’t. He never asked me about his columns and I know as much about journalism as he does about cars.