[Dave]

I was talking post-war. Dunno 'bout those cars.

Note that I mentioned prewar as the period where our cars were the best.

True, and I also mentioned how heavy American cars tend to be. There's a limit, too - you can place a 700HP engine on a 3 ton car, and it still won't behave like a 1-ton car with a 250HP engine, you know? A big, heavy car is still exactly that. American cars remind me more of boats, really.

Indeed, but that's not a function of engine design per se. I should note that the Corvette is lighter than the BMW M3 as well.

That will take more than just money... you need to go to your roots, to be a pioneering nation.

Exactly.

[War Angel]

I should note that the Corvette is lighter than the BMW M3 as well.

Notice how the ZR1 looks far less like a Corvette than its predecessors. The only Corvette-y thing about it, really, are the definitive tail-lights. It's a small, light and powerful car.

[Dave]

Most previous Corvettes were small, light, and powerful. The Corvette has always had a fiberglass body and a small block V8.

[War Angel]

I don't know... I see Corvettes every now and then, and they look like freaking rhapsodies.

[Dave]

Looks can be deceiving, don't you know. The C6 (current generation) is externally quite a bit smaller than the C5 (previous generation), especially visually, but it does not weigh that much less. The C5 was also a light, powerful car.

[War Angel]

Meh. Maybe it's the fact mostly Arsim (a degenerate Israeli sub-culture... think Redneck mixed with 'Gangsta', then add gay clothes and Arab temper and cultural habits) who drive these cars around here, that turn my stomach whenever I see them.

[Thunderhawk]

When determining which offer is most cost effective, does DoD take into account that domestic producers will be taxed, and incorperate that financial return as a price break?

example:
Foreign made part: $100
Domestic made part: $110 and domestic producer will pay $10 in federal income taxs on that $110 sale.

From the federal government PoV both would be equal, no?
(with the added benefit that a domestic producer will likely spend most of the $100 within the USA while the foriegner isnt as likely to spend as much of that $100 in the USA.)


From the DoD view it doesnt recieve 100% of all tax revenue, so if they did take in accout how much of the income tax they would get back, it wouldnt be much. But surely they should consider the income tax on sales of domestic production.



Regarding American cars.
They were land yachts, and many people who drive want land yachts. But they are damn inconvenient in cities, and not good enough for rough terrain. The large amount of paved roads and few drivers that made the land yachts possible and driving enjoyable (and easily accelerating/speeding in muscle cars) are part of the past. Many people arent willing to give up that image and no matter how inventive American car companies are, if they cannot match what the public perception of what a car should be is, then they wont sell as well a companies that can match that perception.

[ThereBeDragons]

If the issue in question is the competitiveness of the American metals industries, why would protectionist policy make them more competitive or otherwise contribute towards it "being the best of all national metals industries"? Wouldn't a guarantee of support by the DoD or the federal government serve to stifle incentives towards improvement?

[Dr House]

The US economy is large enough that marketplace competition can occur internally. The industry can further gain efficiency from increasing economies of scale alone, but indeed more fundamental change than mere protectionism is needed.

The problem is that regardless of how efficient domestic industry is or is not (and for reasons Dave listed the American industrial sector should be the most efficient in the world), sourcing equipment from domestic manufacturers is a matter of national security. Free trade breaks down in a war, and the last thing you want is to be dependent on it.

[Huntster]

The American auto industry, for example, did not technologically advance at all roughly from the end of the war till the mid-70s. Changes to American cars were purely cosmetic.

True, but much of the technological "advance" in terms of the American auto industry has come as a result of mandates from Washington in the form of safety and fuel efficiency. Some of that has been great, but some of it has been stupid (TPMS comes to mind).

This has caused the cost of new automobiles to shoot through the roof, and is partly why our automobile manufacturing industry is failing.

[Thunderhawk]

The industry can further gain efficiency from increasing economies of scale alone

Bethlaham diseconomy of scale begs to disagree.

[Zerogouki]

Gotta give it to the Germans - whatever they do, they do it well. Cars, weapons, tools, genocide...

blenders...

[Igor Antunov]

Winning wars...oh wait.