Moscow’s new cash-for-clunkers scheme is doing what many people thought was impossible – reviving Russia’s crisis-hit auto market and persuading ordinary Russians to buy Russian cars.
And just like American interventionism into the markets, the results are always failure:
Moscow began offering motorists discounts of up to $1,666 on new cars in early March on condition that they bought Russian-built autos and traded in their clunkers for scrap.
Though success is something hardly involved in the American or European cash for clunkers programs:
Modeled on highly "successful" US and European car trade-in programmes, the scheme has given a jump start to the Russian auto market, ending an 18-month decline in sales.
Everyone's favorite stuck-in-the-Soviet-era Russian car company is making moves to fend off foreign car competition in Russia. In response to foreign car companies rapidly expanding their Russian market Lada plans to try to bring their cars and their company into the modern era.
I'll bet on capitalism and incoming automotive companies over any heavily-subsidized industry or company. Goodbye, Lada.
So, I'm trying with great enthusiasm and time to sort out why drivers around the world are horrible, but those in Russia take the cake. And off all the Russian failures to learn how to drive, why is there one outstanding common feature? I'm talking about the Lada Riva (and some similar models).
This boxy little shitbox is the modern equivalent to the Trabant, a failure in design, execution, and management (let's allow the private market supply goods and services, unencumbered, shall we?). I'd hate to understand why this sort of vehicular failure could happen with such frequency.
So often, there is a Lada or Trabant (if any survived the collapse of paper money) involved in the accident, even if as a witness to the destruction of it's kind. They are either turning left in a right-turn lane, or trying to pass on the sidewalk, all before being involved in the destruction of property and sometimes life. I can't imagine anyone with any other choice would choose one...
I have a theory that these sort cars cost about a day's (heavily subsidized) pay, are worth about that, and those deciding to start driving have zero requirement to actually know how to drive, which many Russians apparently never bothered to learn.
I would have hoped for a world in which these individual examples of the less favorable traits in our species would simply be allowed to reduce them from the genetic equation. What's wrong with letting Darwin prove his theory? If he was wrong, we have Idiocracy to look forward to. If he was right, we'd better sure as hell allow those without the survival ability to fade into our collective past. Just don't piss off any crazy Russians.
For a long time, I've seen seen any midsized sedan from any manufacturers as a cop-out design, very middle-of-the-road. Ford's latest offering is something like a fourth album of cover songs from an established band. Were they so sore about selling one of their jewels that they made a mockery of Aston Martin?
Ford's ambition is for the Fusion to become as wildly popular as the Taurus once was. After all, it's a mid-size sedan with a mid-size price and great gas mileage. (Ford still offers the Taurus, but it hasn't been a big seller for years.) Completely revamped inside and out, the Fusion takes on the other middle-class stalwarts in the field, like the Toyota Corolla (which is as beige as a car that you'll likely to find), the redesigned Honda Accord and the Nissan Altima. Too often mid-size cars are studies in bland design. The Fusion neatly avoids this foible by grafting on the front end of an Aston Martin. No, really. Take a look at the flat-faced, oval grill laced with horizontal lines, and note the uncanny resemblance to models found on Aston Martins, a high-end brand that Ford once owned.
