>Top 5: Most Perplexing Things About US Automobiles

>

The Treasury department has recently given a line of credit to the “Big 3” automakers (GM, Ford, and Chrysler) to help them survive the economic downturn. Whether they continue to survive long-term is still an open question. Ultimately, it will be consumers who decide. Will consumers prefer Big 3 products, or other companie’s products? With that in mind, here are some of the most perplexing things I find about the products of the Big 3.

1. GMC: GMC makes products that are almost identical to Chevrolet products. Many of the parts are even interchangeable. So, isn’t it superfluous? Why would GM have a division that mostly competes with another one of its divisions?
2. Heating/AC: Why can a Japanese car company make heating and AC controls that are more intuitive and practical than American car companies? What the heck does “bi-level” mean anyway? And why can’t I have the AC and the lower vent on at the same time in an American automobile?
3. Car Names: Two words, Fiesta and Probe. Why would anyone want to drive something called a Fiesta or a Probe? I don’t think anyone buys a car because they like the name, but I’ll bet there are plenty who wouldn’t buy a car because of the name. There are so many choices out there, it’s easy to cross one off the list because it has funny name.
4. Ford Minivans: Why can’t Ford make a decent minivan? If you already make good trucks and SUVs, is it that much of a stretch to come up with a good minivan? Ford used to make the Windstar, which was awful according to any rating organization you look at. Now, it no longer makes a minivan. I guess it’s accepted defeat.
5. A political scientist can tell what’s wrong, but highly paid auto executives can’t: The US auto companies pay a lot of smart people a lot of money to make good management decisions. So, why do they do so many dumb things? I’m just a political scientist with no auto industry expertise, and yet, many of the problems with US automobiles seem obvious to me. I can only surmise, as an outsider, that there is something wrong with the decision making structure in these bloated, bureaucratic companies. There is a theory in political science that while the public is largely stupid when it comes to political issues, it is collectively quite wise. Maybe in these car companies we are witnessing the opposite—a bunch of smart executives who are collectively quite stupid.

Anything you find perplexing about GM, Ford, or Chrysler products?

>Medicare Finds How Hard It Is to Save Money – New York Times

>This story is a good illustration of how difficult it is to change how bureaucracies do things. With the rising cost of health care, the Medicare program is one bureaucracy that needs to find creative ways to save money. It often finds it difficult to do that, however.
Medicare Finds How Hard It Is to Save Money – New York Times

>47 senators want guns in national parks – Yahoo! News

>Here is an example of how Congress can try to influence the bureaucracy. In this case, it was not a committee hearing, but simply a letter, signed by 47 Senators, to the Interior Secretary asking him to review the rule against carrying firearms in national parks. The Senators want the national parks to abide by state laws. The rule is under review as a result of the letter.

Should citizens be allowed to carry firearms inside national parks, if they are allowed to do so outside the park?

47 senators want guns in national parks – Yahoo! News

>Governors of Both Parties Oppose Medicaid Rules – New York Times

>Since the cost of Medicaid is shared by the federal and state governments, any cuts by the federal government will impact state government’s budgets. Here, you can see that it’s not a partisan issue. Governor’s of both parties are seeking to reduce the impact on their state budgets. But, as we will discuss in class, the cost of Medicare is rising rapidly, so, the federal government, naturally, needs to reduce the cost of the program, or raise taxes. What do you think? Are these rule changes too stringent, or are they a prudent cost-cutting measure?
Governors of Both Parties Oppose Medicaid Rules – New York Times