|
SlowBloke posted:Taxation has a limited usefulness to curb this kind of excesses, Italy has a "luxury" tax on performance cars or high range SUVs and it does gently caress all to limit sales. Impose stricter weight limits on standard non-commercial driving licenses so people cannot use heavy trucks for personal uses, this will do more good. How do you know that it does gently caress all to limit sales? e: Like I can imagine in principle that a rich person who can afford luxury cars in the first place is probably less influenced by a small additional tax, but what's been done to actually measure the impact? I'm authentically interested QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Apr 2, 2023 |
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 21:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 13:08 |
|
|
SlowBloke posted:Taxation has a limited usefulness to curb this kind of excesses, Italy has a "luxury" tax on performance cars or high range SUVs and it does gently caress all to limit sales. Impose stricter weight limits on standard non-commercial driving licenses so people cannot use heavy trucks for personal uses, this will do more good. Top selling cars in Italy  https://www.statista.com/statistics/417585/italy-leading-car-brand-sales/ Seems to be working  You'll never limit the 0.1% because they'll just drive unregistered Hummers if they want but it absolutely works.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 21:54
|
|
|
I don't have any real data but it seems like people seem perfectly happy buying and leasing cars they can't afford already so I doubt a tax hike is going to change that behavior.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 21:56
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:How do you know that it does gently caress all to limit sales? People willing to shell 200k+ won't be discouraged by a few extra grand of tax. Porsche Cayenne sales didn't decline after the tax introduction for instance. Economic challenges works for mass consumption goods not luxury ones. Edit: from the limited data i can muster, the removal of commercial use loopholes did have a more visible effect in curbing sales. SlowBloke fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Apr 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 22:01
|
|
|
withoutclass posted:I don't have any real data but it seems like people seem perfectly happy buying and leasing cars they can't afford already so I doubt a tax hike is going to change that behavior. Some people, sure, but I don't think they're representative of most people. BTW this train of thought we're following ends at "and since the price of a car is meaningless, we should repeal the EV tax rebates"
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 22:02
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Some people, sure, but I don't think they're representative of most people. Fiscal incentives to move the availability of a semi luxury good into an average mid range good is different from taxation on luxury goods tho. People willing to shell out the cost of a decent home into a Bentayga won't even notice a few extra tens of thousands, on the other hand average people on the fence in buying an hybrid or an electric can be swayed by an incentive since they are more receptive. I wouldn't have purchased an electric car without even that ridiculous low amount of government rebate for instance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 22:08
|
|
|
Write legislation to force insurance companies to account for additional external damage due to weight and additional likelihood of incidents due to reduced visibility. Talking out my rear end, but I'd bet insurance companies lump heavy, low visibility vehicles in with better ones to even out the premiums across their customers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 22:20
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Some people, sure, but I don't think they're representative of most people. The average car payment for a new car in the US in the third quarter of 2022 was $700 which, at least to me, is a bafflingly high amount.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 22:31
|
|
|
withoutclass posted:The average car payment for a new car in the US in the third quarter of 2022 was $700 which, at least to me, is a bafflingly high amount. $40k financed at 6% for 6 years is in that ballpark. According to a Google search I just did, the average car price in the US is around $50k, so that tracks. E- the Ford F150 XLT starts at $41800, so that also tracks. Finger Prince fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Apr 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2023 22:56
|
|
|
Wayne Knight posted:Write legislation to force insurance companies to account for additional external damage due to weight and additional likelihood of incidents due to reduced visibility. Talking out my rear end, but I'd bet insurance companies lump heavy, low visibility vehicles in with better ones to even out the premiums across their customers. Tell insurance companies they can and should make more money by forcing people driving HUMONGOUS TRUCKS to the grocery store pay significantly higher premiums and let the "invisible hand of the free market" do the rest for you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 00:46
|
|
|
Indiana_Krom posted:It would be really hard to lobby "actually being exempt from safety and emissions standards is good" to the general public. Like coal rolling assholes might take personal offense at the emissions standards, but even they will probably be unable to find a mass marketable excuse for exempting it from standards intended to make it less likely to kill them and their children. One party runs explicitly on removing regulations and safety standards in all sorts of arenas and they continue to win a majority of statehouses and often the senate, house and presidency.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
Wayne Knight posted:Write legislation to force insurance companies to account for additional external damage due to weight and additional likelihood of incidents due to reduced visibility. Talking out my rear end, but I'd bet insurance companies lump heavy, low visibility vehicles in with better ones to even out the premiums across their customers. Lol if you think insurance companies don’t already use their actuarial data on accident costs to them to generate premiums or that they would discount a vehicle type that hurts their bottom line. If it costs them money you will pay for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 00:58
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Increasing SUV taxes also seems like it would be the political equivalent of drinking cyanide, at least on its own. The American way would be to instead incentivize smaller cars, somehow. Would this be stupid and inefficient? Yes! But that, too, is the American way. Unless I'm mistaken, the whole reason SUVs are so popular is because of incentives in the 1990s.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 16:15
|
|
|
cruft posted:Unless I'm mistaken, the whole reason SUVs are so popular is because of incentives in the 1990s. Policy matters but America is also just culturally maximalist. Many people just want giant houses and giant cars because consuming ever more space and resources is how you show that you’ve succeeded. Also because Americans are getting fatter and fatter every year and need more room to expand.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 16:28
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:That looks awesome, needs a little bit of an extended cab though, like the Taco upthread, true single cabs are kinda miserable to drive daily. Mavrick. Selling like crazy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 17:13
|
|
|
Depending on whom you ask the Hyundai Santa Cruz is either selling too hot to meet demand or flopping hard, possibly both at once it’s definitely priced about $10k too dear IMO, but it’s not like dealers aren’t marking up the Maverick to similar numbers
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 17:18
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:Policy matters but America is also just culturally maximalist. Many people just want giant houses and giant cars because consuming ever more space and resources is how you show that you’ve succeeded. Also because Americans are getting fatter and fatter every year and need more room to expand.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 17:21
|
|
|
Ok Comboomer posted:Depending on whom you ask the Hyundai Santa Cruz is either selling too hot to meet demand or flopping hard, possibly both at once I bet it is *highly* region specific how much it sells, I see a lot of them in the greater vancouver area, being able to have a trucklet you can throw a mountain bike or two in the back of is a big market around here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 17:28
|
|
|
priznat posted:I bet it is *highly* region specific how much it sells, I see a lot of them in the greater vancouver area, being able to have a trucklet you can throw a mountain bike or two in the back of is a big market around here. For some reason they are popular around the central florida area too. Hell there are 3 or 4 alone at the hospital I work at, some even parked in the doctors lot next to the typical doctor car, it's kinda weird.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 17:40
|
|
|
mattfl posted:For some reason they are popular around the central florida area too. Hell there are 3 or 4 alone at the hospital I work at, some even parked in the doctors lot next to the typical doctor car, it's kinda weird. Hauling manatees?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 17:46
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:Policy matters but America is also just culturally maximalist. Many people just want giant houses and giant cars because consuming ever more space and resources is how you show that you’ve succeeded. Also because Americans are getting fatter and fatter every year and need more room to expand. That's purely because of marketing though, look at how luxury brand laptops and phones need to be forever thinner. Cars could have gone that way, with fuel efficiency being the mark of prestige, but auto manufacturers had profit motivation to push huge SUVs so that's what happened.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 18:01
|
|
|
priznat posted:Hauling manatees? Not that kind of hospital, but I'll allow it
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 18:05
|
|
|
Ah yes, the family of 300 pound behemoths is driving an F-150 instead of a Fiesta purely because of marketing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 18:06
|
|
|
When a single stroller takes up almost the entirety of your rear cargo space it makes it really obvious why people like bigger vehicles
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 18:07
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:Ah yes, the family of 300 pound behemoths don’t post about posters
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 18:07
|
|
|
Policy changes have a lot to do with the popularity of SUVs and pickup trucks. Light duty trucks have no gas guzzler tax, and their emissions/fuel consumption requirements are much more relaxed compared to cars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 18:09
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:That's purely because of marketing though, look at how luxury brand laptops and phones need to be forever thinner. Cars could have gone that way, with fuel efficiency being the mark of prestige, but auto manufacturers had profit motivation to push huge SUVs so that's what happened. It’s not purely marketing. There’s a confluence of policy, consumer desire, and marketing that create these effects. Small cars did exist for a long time but were consistently outsold by larger cars, which in turn were outsold by SUVs. It’s not like Ford and Chevy didn’t try to market the Focus and the Malibu and whatnot, they simply weren’t what people wanted, at least not from those companies. Phones got thinner (but also larger in every other dimension) because thin phones are less cumbersome to carry in pockets and purses and bags, especially as they also got larger in surface area. There was a preference for thin phones which in turn lead to thin phones being developed and because it’s more expensive to make a very thin phone those tended to be luxury items. Large cars have always been a status symbol (sports cars notwithstanding) and been a more luxurious alternative to small cars. It’s not hard to understand why, larger cars provide more room to spread out. There’s a reason people pay more for first class tickets on planes and it’s not because they’ve been tricked by marketing into thinking that more leg and hip room is preferable. In this case the marketing is just following natural contours, flowing in the path of least resistance where there’s already a consumer (and policy) preference.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
It really seems like carseats for young kids have gotten bigger too AND you are expected to keep them in them (and booster seats, often just as large) for longer. You can find slimmer ones but the are usually the fancier high end brands for more $$ (and called “european style”) My current car has rear seat warmers that have never once been used because there will have been a carseat or booster over them for the entire duration I have owned the car, probably
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
we would have better luck legalizing lane filtering and making motorcycles a Thing, than trying to make small cars a Thing again
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 18:52
|
|
|
Even though the light truck and passenger car standards have been going up, it’s zero mystery why SUVs dominate: Their CAFE standards are ~25% lower than for a passenger car, and have been for forty years. Until that loophole closes, there is zero likelihood of things changing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2023 19:50
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:It’s not purely marketing. There’s a confluence of policy, consumer desire, and marketing that create these effects. Small cars did exist for a long time but were consistently outsold by larger cars, which in turn were outsold by SUVs. It’s not like Ford and Chevy didn’t try to market the Focus and the Malibu and whatnot, they simply weren’t what people wanted, at least not from those companies. Consumer preference is driven by marketing. SUVs became way more popular in America than in other countries because American auto manufacturers spent more time and money marketing SUVs. They did this because SUVs were more profitable for them to sell. That's the bottom line imo There were many large vehicles around before SUVs came along. If it was just a matter of people wanting bigger vehicles and more room to spread out then vans would have become more popular sooner.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2023 00:04
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Consumer preference is driven by marketing. SUVs became way more popular in America than in other countries because American auto manufacturers spent more time and money marketing SUVs. They did this because SUVs were more profitable for them to sell. That's the bottom line imo Why are they more profitable to sell? In your own example you say that auto makers started marketing SUVs *because* they are more profitable but if the additional profitability predates the marketing doesn’t that imply that they were already perceived as being better than cars by the general public, and thus worth a higher markup? Marketing generally can’t create demand out of thin air. It’s pernicious but it’s not actual mind control. Otherwise why not just keep selling cars but convince people that actually Vans or Wagons or hatchbacks are super premium and should cost more? Americas car preferences are a reaction to a myriad of factors going all the way back to suburbanization, white flight, and the building of interstates. Trying to isolate it to any one thing is pointless, just like trying to isolate any particular American political illness (guns, health care, police, etc) to one particular cause is pointless. It’s a country that’s hosed up on a lot of levels and not fixable through something simple like “advertising different things.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2023 01:10
|
|
|
They were and likely still are more profitable because they cost less to make than an equivalent vehicle that has to meet the same safety and emissions standards. Efficiency and safety are expensive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2023 01:46
|
|
|
Indiana_Krom posted:They were and likely still are more profitable because they cost less to make than an equivalent vehicle that has to meet the same safety and emissions standards. Efficiency and safety are expensive. Crossovers almost invariably use the same engines and platforms as their car siblings but generally command a substantial price premium. The extra profitability is because they have a higher transaction price despite the actual cost to build the things not actually being that much higher.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2023 01:56
|
|
|
What safety standards are SUVs not meeting?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2023 02:54
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:What safety standards are SUVs not meeting? Pedestrian ones
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2023 05:38
|
|
|
YOLOsubmarine posted:Why are they more profitable to sell? In your own example you say that auto makers started marketing SUVs *because* they are more profitable but if the additional profitability predates the marketing doesn’t that imply that they were already perceived as being better than cars by the general public, and thus worth a higher markup? US fuel economy standards and vehicle taxes implemented in the 1970s and 80s were extremely generous toward light trucks, so manufacturers took advantage of that by inventing the SUV: a passenger vehicle that was classified under the generous light truck standards. And then thanks to decades of regulatory capture US emissions standards continued to be very generous toward SUVs, making it easier for profit margins to be higher for those vehicles than for passenger cars and small vans. e: I want to clarify that we're talking about profitability per vehicle; selling a SUV would bring in more profit than selling a stationwagon, so this set up a situation where manufacturers were eager to increase demand for SUVs throughout the 80s and 90s. Stationwagons and light vans had been very popular up to this point, but they began steadily losing market share as SUV marketing began to grab a larger and larger portion of advertisement budgets. quote:Marketing generally can’t create demand out of thin air. It’s pernicious but it’s not actual mind control. Otherwise why not just keep selling cars but convince people that actually Vans or Wagons or hatchbacks are super premium and should cost more? Because vans and wagons had worse profit margins than light trucks (including SUVs), manufacturers used marketing to try and drive consumer preference away from vans and wagons, toward light trucks. Furthermore, if you can convince people that SUVs are superior to vans and wagons (through marketing) then you won't have to compete as much with foreign manufacturers who were producing a lot of vans and wagons. quote:Americas car preferences are a reaction to a myriad of factors going all the way back to suburbanization, white flight, and the building of interstates. Trying to isolate it to any one thing is pointless, just like trying to isolate any particular American political illness (guns, health care, police, etc) to one particular cause is pointless. It’s a country that’s hosed up on a lot of levels and not fixable through something simple like “advertising different things.” Absolutely yes, marketing is not the sole factor, it's just a massively influential one. QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 07:06 on Apr 4, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2023 06:44
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:What safety standards are SUVs not meeting? Being able to steer and stop
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2023 08:30
|
|
|
bird with big dick posted:What safety standards are SUVs not meeting? Not rolling over when making a gradual turn at 45mph on the interstate
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2023 09:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 13:08 |
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Consumer preference is driven by marketing. SUVs became way more popular in America than in other countries because American auto manufacturers spent more time and money marketing SUVs. They did this because SUVs were more profitable for them to sell. That's the bottom line imo We are focusing on the US market but have you been to Europe recently? At least in Germany it’s basically giant vans and lots of cross overs. Obviously there are still plenty of smaller cars but the market is shifting to larger vehicles as well. The whole overlanding and RV things is huge at the moment there too. I am kind of surprised but you can’t go more than half an hour driving around Hamburg without seeing a ram 1500 driving around. One day I counted 15 different ram trucks driving on the autobahn when I was on my way from Hamburg to Flensburg. Personally a full sized truck on German roads seems like madness. I think blaming all this on CAFE and marketing does not totally explain the phenomenon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2023 18:16
|
|
