[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Manufacturer's Profits at Buyer's Expense

To: MG List <>
Subject: Re: Manufacturer's Profits at Buyer's Expense
From: Max Heim <>
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 12:20:23 -0800
on 12/6/02 11:33 AM, David Breneman at wrote:

> Max Heim SEZ -
> (With deletions...)
>> Essentially, the whole SUV phenomenon is an aberration, created not by
>> customer choice but by the inevitable workings of an ill-conceived, lopsided
>> regulatory structure. The failure of the government to correct this obvious
>> loophole, which defies both reason and the public interest, in the face of
>> (understandable, if self-interested) industry resistance is a sad commentary
>> on the current state of our political system.
> If it defies reason and public interest, then why is the public
> voting, with their pocketbooks, against such regulated vehicles,
> and for SUVs?  If there's anything sad here, it's government's
> insistance on over-regulating the automotive industry to the point
> that innovative, small companies like MG can't afford to enter
> the US market.

RE Reason: why is the government essentially subsidizing one class of
vehicles versus another? This is not the purpose of regulation in a rational

Unlike you, I do not dispute the value of appropriate regulations in the
public interest. There is no such thing as an unregulated free market, and
if you look at US history, you will see that the growth of federal
regulations has (not coincidentally) paralleled the general expansion of the
economy and the improvement of individual health and safety. The current
reactionary mania for deregulation is both unsound in principle and proven
detrimental in practice (see Enron, Andersen, Worldcom, etc., ad nauseam),
although admittedly highly profitable to a few influential individuals.

RE Public Interest: furthermore, why is the government subsidizing a class
of vehicles that use more diminishing resources (for access which to we are
apparently prepared to go to war), and that contribute disproportionately to
pollution and other detrimental environmental effects, as well as
endangering other motorists both by being involved in a disproportionate
number of accidents, and by causing more damage per accident? Not to mention
increasing congestion...

Individual vehicle purchasers are looking at their short-term interests,
including up-front costs, available financing, and perceived value; plus
acting under the influence of peer pressure and marketing hype. The fact is
that all these factors are skewed in one direction in the US market. Compare
European markets if you don't believe me.

Also, it is absurd to claim that minimal safety and fuel economy
regulations, which are basically the same in all advanced industrial
countries, are the reason for MG not entering the US market. The real reason
more likely is lack of capital.


Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires

///  or try
///  Archives at

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>