We should jabe just gone with Nader’s idea of placing an 8", hunting knife sticking out of the middle of the sterring wheel
Republicans will design a car that rapes children to fix this
What the fuck is with this title? This has zero to do with being “too safe” and everything to do with cost. Inflammatory title.
That said, I highly doubt any cost that’s saved on the car makers side will be passed down to the consumer.
Obviously not. They don’t want to bring prices down, they want to bring profits up. Representatives and senitors don’t give a shit about your safety in a car, but do care a lot about the big three car manufacturers stock buyback options. We’re less than worthless. We’re annoying voters they don’t need anymore, compated to a stock but back you’re a nuisance.
while yes, it is an inflammatory title, it’s kind of the reverse of what the republicans are doing, which is phrasing that cars are too expensive in order to gut safety regs that cost car manufacturers money rather than make them money.
Ah yes, it’s safety that makes newer cars expensive you see. Not the wireless key-fobs, power seats, built in ipad to replace the perfectly fine knobs and buttons, autonomous driving features…
From what I’ve heard the lack of buttons is actually a cost saving measure, if you put in an infotainment system anyway
Thank god EU is starting to get involved in the matter.
For now it is only that cars only get a 5 star safety rating when they include buttons for a few things form 2026.
I hope there will be laws that follow after.
Yeah, good buttons are ridiculously expensive
That’s a whole extra half cent per car.
You’re vastly underestimating prices of car parts, even for manufacturers, even bought in bulk.
yeah i worked at a vehicle manufacturer a while ago as they were expanding into a new market with a budget model, and getting rid of all the non-critical buttons was very high priority for cost. not only do you save on materials directly, you can remodel the entire driving area which means you can redesign the safety features. less shit in the dashboard means less debris that needs to be crash-tested.
I didn’t even think about the crash testing angle that makes a lot of sense
That might be true as I haven’t looked into it in detail. Though even then, if the goal is to make cars more affordable, there’s lots of other features you can cut down on that has nothing to do with safety
And nobody is selling the basic no frills subcompact cars in the US anymore
Ted Cruz is blaming life-saving car safety regulations for the rising cost of cars
This is correct. They will be cheaper. The question is not how much money is spent, but it is what you get for that money.
I’m sure if we get rid of all food safety laws there will be cheaper food available as well. It will make manufacturing much easier.
Likewise, if we eliminate the EPA and the huge amount of environmental protection laws we have, manufacturing will be much cheaper and feasible to do in the USA.
Chesterton’s Fence remains in effect, as ever. Fiddle with these rules at your own risk. Consequences don’t care about your feelings and the universe will make sure to pay you back.
But the prices won’t go down. Reductions in production costs are only reflected in sale prices when there’s a market force driving the costs down. Right now, people have to own cars, and the barriers to entry into the matlrket are too high for new competitors. There’s no reason for the auto manufacturers to lower prices if their costs go down. They can just pocket the difference.
They’ll get rid of the safety mechanisms to make the cars cheaper… to produce.
But you and me will still pay the same prices.
Because its corporate profits they are concerned about, not personal savings.
They may be cheaper, but they won’t be THAT much cheaper to make.
Republicans wake up in the morning trying to write down that idea in their dream where they hurt people and made money.
For the passenger? Very safe.
For the pedestrians that get hit? Ha! They’re literally death machines. At this point, I’m surprised we’re not putting spikes on the front of the car Mad Max style to ensure the pedestrians’ death.
Y’all can buy these right now.
Saw these idiotic rims on a smol penis indicator the other day.
I like to call them “Plus Sized” they get much more annoyed than calling them small pp mobiles
Dead cyclists and pedestrians less likely to sue.
Those look like they’re far more likely to destroy your rims when they tangle up a branch or bundle of fencing wire on the road than ever do you an ounce of good.
These certainly do have a use on freight trucks but not your urban crawler tho. They help identify loose and rotating lugs and give you a little means to know when you’re too close to a curb. Plus as you drive you can shred other people’s tires.
Edit: these being the silver spikes not the ghetto push on hubcaps
Give credit where credit is due. Death race 2000 came out 4 years before mad max.
Ah yes, it’s definitely the regulations that are making those costs go up, not tariffs or CEO paychecks.
Won’t anyone think of the shareholders?!
Qhy are cars more expensive?
I mean last I checked they fall under the category of “everything”.
The average Lemmy user seems to want more dead car owners.
Also, this thread has a lot of people voicing their opinions about what they want in a car. I too would prefer a much more basic auto for a cheaper price. But what do normal people actually want? They want all the bullshit. Auto makers also make great money on the bullshit, so they want to sell it to us. They also make great money when the bullshit breaks so they make more money on the back end.
Just had a bit of a realization on this one. The point of this is for them to do nothing, isn’t it? Specifically blame it one something people will push back on (safety features), so they can throw up their hands and say, “we tried, but they won’t let us bring down the cost of cars!”
Shareholders are the primary reason!
They just want their goons to be able to break their victims windows out easier
Furthering that they are indeed not the “Pro-Life” party but instead the “Pro-Birth” party.
Agree but starting to even wonder about that. I’ve never seen them do anything that benefits births let alone even celebrate it. Seems to be “Pro-Misery especially at others expense”.
That’s where the “the cruelty is the point” expression comes from
“Forced-birth” party
“Brood-mares for more mine yearners” party
deleted by creator
Remember, their cars are the gaint Yukons with a convoy of body guards aren’t safe enough. But your car. It could literally be a gascan strapped to tricycle for all they care.
It could literally be a gascan strapped to tricycle for all they care.
Time to mandate every car’s steering column has a 1.5ft razor sharp spike sticking out of it.
Takata did nothing wrong.
This is kinda misleading, the complaint is that cars are too expensive. They’re not saying cars should be less safe, just that the extra safety isn’t worth the financial cost.
(Still not a good position to take in my opinion)
You’re assuming what they’re saying is true. Many other countries have those same safety features without their cars costing nearly as much
Yeah. Right wing positions are wrong enough without the constant, panicky extremification of them that goes on. It’s not really persuasive to anyone when we distort these positions and then crow about how bad they are. It’s all just part of the outrage-engagement complex that is rapidly rotting all our brains.
it’s not misleading, it’s pointing out the GOPs actual position, which is to reduce costs that the manufacturer can’t avoid to save them money. If safety regs are gutted, manufacturers get to keep the prices the same, but make more money. If instead more regulations are put in that necessitate reducing costs in other areas it will just cost the manufacturers money.
That’s par for the course for Republicans. Are things too expensive? Let them be shittier so they are cheaper.
And the act all surprised when they just get shittiee, but not cheaper.
Then it becomes shittier but the price stays the same while the manufacturer pockets the difference.
and then they buy tacky, gaudy expensive things.
Yeah, and the thing is I’d be a lot more receptive to that argument if they were willing to support funding the sort of road and transit infrastructure that actually make cars less dangerous.
Its not misleading. They could cut costs in multiple areas, but specifically chose safety.
I’d have to argue that cars are less safe when there is a giant tablet bolted to the dash and every setting is buried in menus.
See Tesla front end crash stats.
Swipe…swipe…submenu, press…swipe…crash.
I think we’re finally past the peak of tablet-ification of car dashboards. A lot of manufacturers have finally realized people hate it and newer models are putting all crucial functions on buttons and only putting infotainment stuff on the tablet.
Have they considered moving to a place with better public transportation?
Safety is basically self-certified in the US. What evidence is there that the extra cost is related to safety?
I understand that Republicans are often prohibited by their own belief systems to look at the profit margins of the things they occasionally pretend to want to make affordable, but in the US that’s exactly where a lot of the problem lies.
You can argue with the evidence if you want to but it is offered right there, at the top of the article.
NHTSA says have saved 860,000 lives since 1968.
The amount of lives saved isn’t what I was interested in. I was interested in the purportedly added cost. US car safety regulations are toothless compared to the EU. That’s partially why our roads are filled with monster truck sized pedestrian flatteners.
I see - so you’re arguing with the Republican premise that safety features add cost. It seems obvious that more features will add some cost, but how much is the question. The number of lives saved is also pretty important to understanding that cost, I would add.
Naturally the GOP are trying to deflect general economic outrage at Democrats and “nanny state” regulators any way they can.
Yeah I question it especially because they tend to state shit like this sans evidence, and people just believe them because they are the “small government, fiscal responsibility” themed party.
You’re actually right though that lives saved would be part of the economic calculation if they were doing it, which they are not.
