The government is less trustworthy. Just look at the different incentive structures between the two. The ultimate trump card of the consumer is to take their business elsewhere. You can't easily do that with the Federal government. Unfortunately, while the free market punishes failure, Washington is excels at deflecting blame and turning that into the need for more regulations; one market distortion fails, is blamed on the private sector and used as justification for further market distortions. The current recession is a prime example of this...
Washington's Toyota U-Turn
- Thread starter shagdrum
- Start date
The government is less trustworthy. Just look at the different incentive structures between the two. The ultimate trump card of the consumer is to take their business elsewhere. You can't easily do that with the Federal government. Unfortunately, while the free market punishes failure, Washington is excels at deflecting blame and turning that into the need for more regulations; one market distortion fails, is blamed on the private sector and used as justification for further market distortions. The current recession is a prime example of this...
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Right now, Toyota is handling its mess. Maybe not fast enough for you, but it isn't necessary for the government to interfere - the market has taken care of itself. Nevertheless, Obama as owner of GM and Chrysler is acting the big Thug-in-Chief. It's a conflict of interest and VERY unpresidential.
If he destroys Toyota, we may never recover a decent relationship with Japan and it will be Obama's doing.
That's a cheap shot.
I'm a private industry enterpreneur.
I provide manufacturing jobs right here in America for people who otherwise would be making minimum wage.
Some government regulations have given me the opportunity to become rich but I haven't brought up my wealth since you chastized me over it.
And my personal circumstances may color my opinions but don't change the greater picture.
If .01% of your products failed and a few of those failures resulted in tragedy, how would it be handled?
Lemme cut through the :q:q:q:q here and get to the point. The problem here is much more widespread than anticipated. I had an "unaffected by recall" sienna blast through my carwash tunnel on its on, after sitting idly for over 20 seconds with just a touch from a roller that sends it down the tunnel. This car isn't recalled, yet somehow without driver or human interference left rubber as it jetted along. There is a larger problem, that has yet to be seen and it is becuase it will kill profits, which means another Big Auto company eats some :q:q:q:q. But this time, Uncle Sam won't take a stake so the stakes are higher. Search Toyota Defense and see what you find, quite interesting reads
My products are not vehicles that move at speed and any product failures would not lead to tragedy so in my case it wouldn't be applicable.
Wear and fading would be the extent of my risk.
Any problems we may have had (15 yrs ago) have been promptly fixed and our customers are very satisfied with us and our service.
I am sure they are great products and very reliable. But hypothetically, if .01% of your products failed and a few of those failures resulted in tragedy, how would it be handled? What you make is irrelevant here. How would it be handled?
THEMOJOMAN
Dedicated LVC Member
You're Missing The Whole Point
Someone in BARRY's bunch said not very long ago,,something like,,we never let a tragedy go unused. HEY AMERICA,,SEE WE'RE ON TV,,TCB,,and listening to the OTHER SIDE. JUST A PHOTO OP.
Someone in BARRY's bunch said not very long ago,,something like,,we never let a tragedy go unused. HEY AMERICA,,SEE WE'RE ON TV,,TCB,,and listening to the OTHER SIDE. JUST A PHOTO OP.
You're hung up on this .01%
If .01% of commercial flights failed that would be huge and unacceptable.
To your general question I can only say it would be handled by the product liability portion of your insurance policy and depends on the circumstances and causes of the tragedy.
It also depends on why there was a failure, what the failure was and on who's property.
It depends on the failure.
However, those planes have redundancies and mandatory maintenance and service checks to avoid that because the businesses stand to lose a lot. Maintenance/service checks are at the discretion of the owner. Your comparison is apples and oranges.
I am not saying Toyota is not at fault, but that there seems to be a HUGE overreaction to this that stems, at least in part, from some opportunistic people working for a government who's objectivity is unnecessarily compromised.
When the refs of the game are also part of the opposing team, there is a problem.
EXACTLY! To pass such a harsh judgment when the actual injures and death are only a small percentage of the small fraction of a percentage of cars that have even exhibited the problem is absurd. Those few instances are going to be very much circumstance dependent and not all the facts are now.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Ok, sorry...you're right, that was a cheap shot.
But you're placing too much of the burden on Toyota and winking at the government's heavy handedness. There may be unintended consequences if Obama overdoes this.
This problem originated with Toyota, has been brewing for years, and has now boiled over.
Other than the threat of criminal charges I haven't seen anything more heavyhanded in the treatment of Toyota vs say the Ford and Firestone SUV Explorer (Exploder?) rollover story.
With all the chatter in the blogosphere the government will pull back the dogs a bit to stem the apperance of Toyota being treated more harshly than others.
Now would be a good time for you guys to buy a Toyota
I'm sure you could get a real deal
How many cases of bad driving and driver error are now going to be attributed to phantom Toyota problems now.
If you check the NHTSA, all of the manufacturers have acceleration complaints. Ford ranks second highest in complaints. Accidents happen, but drivers are notorious for hitting the wrong pedals. The big news this morning is that a '96 Camry owner who was sent to jail for vehicular homicide is now trying to attribute it to this new recall. One most likely associated with the drive by wire throttle.
Exactly.
But now, because of the very strange focus on this story.
And the even more unusual response from the government, noting how they are treating this particularly recall entirely different than others, we're starting to see the ambulance chasing attorney's getting ready to pounce.
All crap drivers who happen to own a Toyota are no longer claiming responsibility. Women, and men, have been hitting the wrong pedal for generations. But now, it's easier to say "I don't know, the car just took off on me," instead of "I'm an asshat driver and I hit the wrong pedal or something..."
I remember the Audi sudden acceleration case when putting the car in gear from the early 90s.
There it was shown as being driver error in hitting the wrong pedal but this was exaserbated by the pedals being designed close together and of similar heights.
So it wasn't foolproof enough.
The pedal spacing was widened and a foot on brake before car can be put in gear interlock was put in and adopted as standard equipment by every vehicle manufacturer since then.
Personally I drive with 2 feet and have never hit the wrong pedal in 34 years of driving.
I can react faster than a single footed driver and don't understand why the 2 foot method is frowned upon.
Just like blindspot mirrors.
All larger trucks have them.
I don't understand why they aren't standard equipment other than car companies having a low regard for the functioning intelligence of the average driver.
The doe heads will say they got confused and blame the car companies so let em crash.
There it was shown as being driver error in hitting the wrong pedal but this was exaserbated by the pedals being designed close together and of similar heights.
So it wasn't foolproof enough.
The pedal spacing was widened and a foot on brake before car can be put in gear interlock was put in and adopted as standard equipment by every vehicle manufacturer since then.
Personally I drive with 2 feet and have never hit the wrong pedal in 34 years of driving.
I can react faster than a single footed driver and don't understand why the 2 foot method is frowned upon.
Just like blindspot mirrors.
All larger trucks have them.
I don't understand why they aren't standard equipment other than car companies having a low regard for the functioning intelligence of the average driver.
The doe heads will say they got confused and blame the car companies so let em crash.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
So as long as the government doesn't actually prefer criminal charges, they can do whatever they want to Toyota, such as sanctions, civil penalties, tax restrictions, higher regulations, public PR smear campaigns?
Well you're paying attention closer to this so what have they done that goes
beyond what say Ford suffered for their Explorer rollover debacle.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
They shouldn't have gotten involved with the Ford thing either. Why do you get to set the standard? It's called moving the goalposts.
I'm not setting any standards.
Your argument was decrying less than evenhanded treatment of Toyota.
Now you've changed it to the opinion that the government shouldn't be involved in this kind of thing.
Is that your whole unfairness argument?
2 footed drivers drive with 2 feet because they lack the needed skills to use one foot. God forbid you get a 5 speed, what will you do then? You can have your 2 feet, and I'll use my one and outperform you anyday
2 footed drivers drive with 2 feet because they lack the needed skills to use one foot. God forbid you get a 5 speed, what will you do then? You can have your 2 feet, and I'll use my one and outperform you anyday
I could say you drive with one foot because you lack the skill and capability to use 2 feet
My other car is a supercharged 383 Camaro 6 speed convertible.
I've had 7 manual cars in my life and have no problem driving a stick.
I seamlessly go from 2 pedals to 3.
I went to driving school when I was 17 and they taught 1 foot driving but I prefer 2 feet.
If you feel you're better with 1 foot then great.
Wouldn't want you to have an accident because you picked the wrong foot.
With 2 feet I can respond .4 second faster on the brake in an automatic car than a 1 foot driver.
I don't ride the brake but my foot is almost always covering it.