And don't forget the MOPEDS. Everyboby in Europe in the 60's had
one as a daily driver.
Mike
AN510426
----- Original Message -----
From Jeff Boatright <jboatri at emory.edu>
To: paul m <pmetzger@top.monad.net>
Cc: <spridgets@autox.team.net>
Sent: February 26, 2000 8:24 AM
Subject: A real spridget solution; WAS: Great American Gas Out
> I doubt that the organizers (if such exist) have any delusions
that a
> drop in consumption resulting from a gas out would have any
effect,
> even at the very local level. My assumption is that the goal is
press
> coverage. This would have some effect, though an unpredictable
one
> once the affair became political.
>
> Given that my Sprite returns a fairly steady 33 mpg, I think
that our
> best bet at effecting true change is to call for a
constitutional
> amendment requiring all auto manufacturers to build, market, and
sell
> spridgets. They would be allowed to sell other vehicles, but
only
> under penalty. The penalties will be linked to the size and fuel
> consumption of the non-spridget products and other indexes that
I
> choose (since I will be the car czar). Thus, in the US, Ford
would be
> forced to sell 123 Sprites for every Incursion (I mean
Excursion)
> sold. However, they would gain points for every Euro-spec Focus
sold
> in the States. DaimlerChrysler would be forced to sell 138
Midgets
> for every Mercedes-Benz sold in the States. The extra 15
spridget
> penalty is because we're already tired of Daimler's 'Uber All'
> attitude. GM sucks so badly that they will not be allowed to
make or
> sell spridgets. Instead, they will have to take a financial
penalty
> for every boring, rainy-day-in-dreary-old-Pimlico car they sell.
> Since this is all they make anyway, these penalties will force
the
> demise of GM, and none too soon. Happily, the extra effort that
it
> takes to hand-build the spridgets means that all those GM
workers
> will have jobs waiting for them in the Ford and Chrysler plants.
All
> auto workers would then have interesting jobs that require
thinking
> and craftsmanship. Accident rates would drop as people would be
> driving cars that (1) they can handle and (2) they know will not
> protect them if they do hit something. Additionally, injury
rates
> would plummet. We'd all be driving little cars that make going
the
> speed limit fun, so the few accidents that do occur will be
> fender-benders. Finally, our dependence on foreign oil would
truly
> plummet, greenhouse gases production would drop, the hole in the
> ozone would fill again, and spotted owls would roam the earth
looking
> to kick butt on snail darters.
>
> Now, if we'd all just do as I say...
>
> ---
> On 2/26/00, paul m wrote:
> >mike,
> > this kind of activity is a futile effort and probably would
result
> >in a false impression. just consider the stability of oil/fuel
prices
> >that
> >is created by the futures markets in crude oil in 3 and 6 month
> >increments.
> >a 3 day boycott at the retail level would be about as
significant as a
> >pimple would be on the north end of a south-bound elephant.
> >
> >lbc content: adult elephants usually weigh more than a "stock"
> >spridget!
> >(your tonnage may vary)
> >
> >paul m
>
> Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD
> Senior Editor, Molecular Vision
> http://www.molvis.org/molvis
> "Seeing the Future in a Very Tiny Way"
>
|