Sterilization can be a tool of eugenics, but not necessarily. Notice how I didn't mention any examples of sterilization based on physical attributes. Sterilization can be used for population control without preference for any group.
It never works that way, though. If you started doing it on an economic basis today, it would be unfair along racial boundaries because of the prevailing inequity in society.
What you're talking about really varies. Here's an example that illustrates how we can both be right. If you get a 1993 Ford 7.3 IDI with the upgraded turbine housing, you'll get the same power as a stock 1995 Ford 7.3 DI. Either one is cheaper to deal with than a Ford with a 6.0, which is a more powerful truck than either one... but which needs a whole mess of the same stuff the 7.3 needs to be reliable, plus some other magical stuff related to the fact that the 6.0 has a true head-up-ass design. However, if the 1995 goes south on you, you're looking at enough money to buy the 1993 in parts alone. It takes a whole bunch of research to even figure this stuff out.
Further, you're forgetting the cost of dealing with a used car. If you need to get to work and the car won't get you there, that can conceivably cost you a job. That's more expensive than buying a better car.
Anyway, I've never bought a new car and I buy everything without credit, but I still think you've grossly oversimplified the situation in a way that blames the victims. Sure, there's people going into debt for status symbols, they're their own worst enemies. But I've also seen what trying to save money on a car can do to you when you're not a mechanic. You'd better think about buying two of those older used vehicles...
Ah, but the MR2 was an X1/9 copy and was then just made curvy, the Supra was overpriced for its mediocre handling compared to the 240SX at the low end and the 300ZX at the high end. I only hear good things about the FJ. You might also mention the Toyota 4x4 pickup, which is one of the most popular rock crawlers around; it has room for a real engine, from someone like Chevrolet, but it weighs next to nothing. Unfortunately they got it right for about two more seconds with the T100, and then blew it with the taco which is scrawny in all the wrong places.
I want an EV, and when I can buy one affordably used I'll probably get one, but I've had many regular gas cars that I would regularly put the hammer all the way down in. All of them had dinky little engines, like a 20R or an EJ18 or a KA24E. If you didn't open up their throats, then nothing would happen. L4s sound like half a V8, they sound OK but something is missing. H4s sound glorious. Now I'm driving a car with an OM617.951, which also sounds magical if you're into machine noises, like a motorized hummingbird gargling cetane. Now, if you have some American crap-can with a heavily detuned V6 with a TBI yeah, that's going to sound like it wants to die. I've had my share of those, too.
I think the Volt's biggest weakness is that they promised a series hybrid and then gave us a car with a geared powertrain. I remember slashdotters excited about the Volt because it would eliminate the gearbox. Then they didn't eliminate it at all, just changed it around. It's clever, but not as clever as doing away with it.
I wasn't aware Nissan as even trying to make a Tesla rival.
I'll bet you a dollar they're at least working on a sports car concept, if not actually something they're planning on putting into production. They'd be daft not to, there's clearly a demand. Nissan sports cars have traditionally been a little heavier and slower (in stock form) than the competition, but with impeccable handling and great range and mileage... well, except the Z32.
Of course, if more companies start mass manufacturing EVs it will be a less likely option, as few service stations are going to want to bother with carrying the 50 different types of proprietary setups that we both know will be the case ('Oh, sorry, we don't carry the packs for a GM, we only have Ford stuff.')
There is no reason why EVs should "fill up" at the petroleum product filling station. They need a connection to a substation, not deliveries from fuel trucks. They can reasonably be located elsewhere, and then the EV drivers don't even have to huff fumes.
Gasoline can be legally transported in any proper can, you know the ones. It cannot legally be transported in anything else. You cannot legally gravity feed it.
Diesel fuel, however, can be transported in any non-hazardous vessel. You can use anything viable as a fuel tank. You can gravity feed it. If you want to be toting around fuel in questionable conditions, you want it to be diesel fuel. Not just for legal reasons, but for actual safety reasons. It's seriously hard to ignite diesel.
The question is how this is even possible. Why weren't they using off the shelf components like you normally would for a project like this? Granted, they'd be off some unusual shelves, probably picking parts from the racing catalog and so on in order to get low-weight parts, but the only stuff that they might really get into a position of having to repair would be the electronics. That can reasonably be contracted out to another party.
The reason GM didn't want the EV-1s on the road is that they weren't ready to sell EVs, that's it. They didn't know how to handle the repercussions of cars that didn't require engine and transmission service. If you've owned Chevys you know that they will do eventually. I'm just surprised GM is able to make an EV go at all, GMs seem especially prone to electrical problems. Stupid screw-in battery connections.
How much more efficient would it be to integrate the generator into the engine, and to eliminate the drivetrain entirely and cut it down to just a motor and differential, or better yet, a pair of motors?
Of course, it would really make the most sense with a turbine engine, which can even more reasonably be integrated with a generator. I know there were some Ford prototypes with Capstone turbines, but I guess they never really turned out or we'd have heard more about them.
The Volt uses the gas engine to power the electric motors which actually drive the car - kind of like a diesel locomotive.
It was supposed to be just a series hybrid. But the engine is directly coupled to the wheels at some points, and it's coupled through one of the electric motors at others. Unfortunately, most of the appeal of a series hybrid is elimination of the drivetrain.
The Volt could be turned into an EV rather easily since removing the engine would provide lots of room for batteries. The economics of it just don't make much sense yet.
People are buying Leafs, so I'm seriously surprised there's no Volt EV.
The Cube and PT Cruiser are purposely ugly. I think they were actually trying with the Aztec. It's accidental ugly. Even the Buick version couldn't hide how ugly the car was.
They were trying with the Aztek, alright. Having the audacity to release that design upon the world is about as trying as you can get. It looks like the collision bounding box for another vehicle... which would also be among the world's ugliest. A PT Cruiser, perhaps.
The Gallardo, and pretty much all Lambos look like a Transformers Happy Meal toy that got left in the drive way and run over by the family sedan. You can clearly tell they were bought by Germans.
The car they really became ubiquitously known for, the Countach, is the most goofy and angular thing that ever rolled, and they stopped making that before the Germans even bought them.
If you're not a mechanic, you can't afford a cheap car. Etc. You really are proposing that everyone be a renaissance [wo]man with supportive parents. I agree that it's best to buy everything with cash, but that's just not realistic for everyone.
Of the people I know who still play the game, most of them only do so to sell items for cash.
Apparently that's something they'd like to change.
Usually the goal is to bring in more players, not get rid of a group of paying customers...
What's so wrong with sterilization?
Well, I'm not really against eugenics per se. I know that makes me a bad person or something, but I say it with the understanding that I would be sterilized. My genes aren't particularly great, as far as I can tell. Not that bad, not that good. But the standard argument goes like this: you can stack the deck against people you'd like to see fade away, and then they do.
Also, humanity is evolving. Hundred years ago the job those car manufacturers are doing would be considered high-tech skilled labour. Maybe hundred years from now the mechanics of today will be the code monkeys, and anybody who manages to get further will be in research.
Sadly, there's no evidence that humanity as a whole is getting any smarter.
I think technological advancement alone is beneficial for most of the time. The problems usually arise when the development of technology becomes faster than the development of society. We are pushing our boundaries further and further, but have little idea how to live without them.
Well, there's the rub. We've reached a point of unparalleled technological development. And for several generations now, there's been massive changes within normal human lifespans. This is a new thing!
FORTRAN is not a flower but a weed -- it is hardy, occasionally blooms, and grows in every computer. -- A.J. Perlis
