This is pretty short-sighted, in my opinion. If anything, smaller-sized cars seem likely to become more popular globally, not less. A walk through any chinese city will reveal any number of hand carts and jury-rigged bicycles just begging to be replaced by space- and fuel-efficient microvehicles.
As the world moves to cities, cars get smaller. Japan should be capitalising on this trend, trying to spread the culture overseas, not trying to smother it!
I agree. Smaller cars are not only more affordable (both in terms of original price and fuel efficiency) than normal-sized, let alone 'big' cars, but they're also significantly more practical in crowded conditions, with regards to manoeuvring and parking. They don't even necessarily offer less utility than larger cars; they are simply more compact. For these reasons, I think it is likely that smaller vehicles will be adapted in urban centres of developing nations in great number, and they may even gain popularity in developed nations due to their environmental and financial efficiency.
If the article in question reports anything even close to the truth, then auto-manufacturers in Japan are making a mistake: they are abandoning their practice precisely when they are really getting their chance to make significant global impact.
I don't own my own car, I share one at the moment. But if I bought my own, I used to want a Nissan Cube. It's a hilarious looking car and the overall shape just looks so efficient. I never realised they make even smaller more efficient cars (and I have visited Japan).
If you don't want to sell these in Japan, send them over to Australia please.
>But industry and government officials are increasingly worried that these microvehicles have become a distraction for the nation’s automakers — still bastions of the Japanese economy — and are moving to wean drivers off them. In April the government took what its critics charged was a hard-line route. Kei drivers were hit with a triple whammy of a higher sales tax, higher gasoline tax and higher kei car tax, the last of which the government raised by 50 percent, sharply narrowing their tax difference with regular-size vehicles.
I feel like there's more going on than the article is saying. "industry and government officials are increasingly worried that these microvehicles have become a distraction for the nation’s automakers" sounds like lobbyists for full-size cars feeding politicians what to say. I don't buy that a bunch of politicians decided it was the for the greater good of the country to increase taxes on a cheap, fuel efficient vehicle.
> I don't buy that a bunch of politicians decided it was the for the greater good of the country to increase taxes on a cheap, fuel efficient vehicle.
You are right, politicians in Japan are mostly influenced by industry lobbies. They went to devaluated the Yen not too long ago just so that Toyota and a few other major manufacturers could sell more products overseas. And now everything is more expensive in Japan (petrol price increased so all manufacturing goods and anything that needs to be moved around has increased significantly in price).
…just so that Toyota and a few other major manufacturers could sell more products overseas
The strong yen was hurting any and all export industries in Japan, not just a few companies. The ability to export at competitive prices is extremely important to the Japanese economy. A devalued yen does drive up the price of imported goods (like fuel) but it also drives demand for jobs. The price of locally produced goods are largely unaffected.
Do you go shopping? Because i have seen most of my bills go up. Including food. And not just a little.
EDIT: I have been in companies making products in Japan for years and I can tell you the petrol price impacts everything and a weak yen is very detrimental to your product cost structure. If you dont see the prices move much its because the companies are taking the hit as they do not want to raise prices too much and therefore keep prices more or less the same but reduce quantities, or remove ingredients or parts of the products to make it cheaper to produce. But do not kid yourself into believing increased petrol prices because of a weaker yen have no effect on the economy or prices. They clearly do.You basically get less for your money as a consumer.
Yeah, I readily admit rising fuel costs drive up the prices of most consumable goods. It's likely that the closing of nuclear plans was a significant contributor to that as well.
My point was that given the situation, it is better to have prices rise across the board due to fuel costs than to have whole industries and major employers collapse due to lack of export competitiveness. If the price rise was due to fuel costs, then it will even drive efficiency gains.
I don't think you can fairly cast it as favoritism to industry lobbies on behalf of a few major companies. I think at the time, all of Japan was at risk of losing competitiveness and once you lose an industry, it's quite hard to get it back.
> My point was that given the situation, it is better to have prices rise across the board due to fuel costs than to have whole industries and major employers collapse due to lack of export competitiveness. If the price rise was due to fuel costs, then it will even drive efficiency gains.
There's tons of companies in Japan who only deal with the Japanese market and do not export anything outside. Because they can survive and proper on the Japanese market size. So effectively for these companies the rising fuel costs are making things harder from them every single day.
Major employers only employ a small amount of people in Japan, everything considered, and therefore it's clearly the work of powerful industrial lobbies which fail to see that rising fuel costs are going to kick them back in the ass in the next coming year and bring things back to normal again. With the depreciation of the Yen they just achieved some gains for a few quarters but in the end it will even out no matter what.
Japan has lost competitiveness a long time ago and even when the yen was weak back in 2006-2007, so the yen getting stronger was actually quite positive for the Japanese consumer as a whole: prices were stable and even decreasing for several commodities post 2008-crash.
What you see here is just Abe doing his magic trick, trying to look like Harry Potter while he's just a clown from a local fair who understands nothing of Economics. Hey, that's why they invented the word Abenomics, because it does make any sense for anyone else.
I tend to believe the government's version, just because all big Japanese automakers have strong kei sales. Extra tax won't help them. It may help the government collect a bit extra but that's that.
What I didn't quite get from the article is how do taxes compare. Looks like they simply got a more similar treatment to standard cars.
These cars would be much cheaper to maintain even with the same tax regime as regular cars. IMO all sales tax should be regular tax, and road tax/car taxes should just go away. They tax fuel enough to cover for all that and it makes sense to tax on usage.
> IMO all sales tax should be regular tax, and road tax/car taxes should just go away. They tax fuel enough to cover for all that and it makes sense to tax on usage.
Government giving up on any tax opportunity? I wish, but not in the world I know...
> What I didn't quite get from the article is how do taxes compare. Looks like they simply got a more similar treatment to standard cars.
They seem to be removing the 50 years lasting subsidy, which makes sense to be honest - at some point it has to finish.
> These cars would be much cheaper to maintain even with the same tax regime as regular cars.
Exactly my thoughts, if these cars are so popular, efficient, and budget saving - they shall do OK without getting government involved.
> Government giving up on any tax opportunity? I wish, but not in the world I know...
Interestingly, the state of Georgia dropped the normal annual ad valorem tax on cars. Now, any new car purchase is covered by its sales tax (which was being paid before) for the life of the vehicle for that owner (when they sell it the new owner will owe some smaller amount, I assume, but haven't had to deal with yet). I still haven't figured out how they expect to make up that revenue, unless other taxes are just bringing in enough revenue to make up for it. Or it may have been expected/hoped that the reduced cost of ownership would encourage the purchase of newer cars.
Gasoline and automobile infrastructure are a historically massive, ongoing expense, and cars have enormous externalities. I doubt any government in the world taxes cars highly enough relative to other goods.
Kei cars are (were) cheap, economical, Eco friendly, favourably taxed and actually quite fun to drive. Now they are "too popular" and the government wants everyone to buy larger, less fuel efficient cars - I know someone personally who bought a larger car simply because of the new penalty taxes on Keis. Abe really has lost it.
Just speculation, maybe this is a result of US pressure in the recent trade talks (trans-Pacific partnership?) It looks like Japan's domestic auto market is a key issue in TPP:
"When American automakers expressed their opposition against Japan
joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations due to its closed
market, the U.S. makers also pressed Tokyo to end special tax
treatment for the country’s unique “kei” super-minivehicle segment."
"The outside pressure to end the low taxation for one of Japan’s most
popular car segments has jolted the industry, which has protected the
smaller end of the domestic car market for half a century."
"Some industry observers point out that reviewing the tax rules for
the super-mini segment would hit Japanese automakers hard. But others
say a review would be a good thing because kei cars have received
favorable treatment for too long."
Reading those two articles, I think it's credible that US negotiators got a concession from Abe on kei taxes, and we're seeing the result of that. As I understand, this kind of deal would be made in secret (like many aspects of TPP), so we wouldn't be aware of it at this point.
"Japan also agreed the United States could phase out its auto tariffs, which are 2.5 percent on cars and 25 percent on trucks, over the longest period possible in the future TPP deal.
Levin criticized the commitment in that area, saying any phase-out of the U.S. tariffs should be linked to measurable improvement in sales of U.S. cars in Japan."
It's all highly suggestive that it's a concession in part of a broader strategy. I'm sure there's a complex interplay of interests going on with the TPP as a whole, US auto, and Japanese auto. US auto seems like it's getting the raw end and may be trying to grab at whatever they can and perhaps the Japanese may be making a large concession in another area(not auto related) to get more automotive foothold in the US.
^complete speculation; I don't know jack about politics/economics/current events.
>When American automakers expressed their opposition against Japan joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations due to its closed market, the U.S. makers also pressed Tokyo to end special tax treatment for the country’s unique “kei” super-minivehicle segment.
"Meanwhile, the US government budget continues to be a primary source of revenue, for General Motors Corporation."
Or U.S. automakers could simply enter the segment. Kei cars aren't much different in size from a Smart car or a Fiat 500 (and yes, both are Euro designs). They're smaller than a Ford Ka, which is the smallest U.S. derived car I'm aware of that's in regular production (coincidentally made in Fiat factories).
They aren't rocket science, but they do stress elements of interior design efficiency that American car makers aren't great at.
TBH, I'd love to have a vibrant Kei car market in the states. Especially in and around big cities with lots of traffic.
Which is easier, innovating out of your comfort zone or using your contacts to have another country's laws changed without the informed consent of their electorate? Oh.
I lived and worked in Japan for 6 years, returning to my native Scotland almost 2 years ago, after struggling for the few years after the M9 quake (lived in Koriyama, Fukushima prefecture and lost my job after the quake).
We bought a new Suzuki Wagon R Limited back then, and I loved that car. Its apparently small outward appearance is deceptive; inside, there was loads of space - a high roof height, and when you folded down the rear seats you could comfortably fit items such as chests of drawers, fridges, and the like.
The engine; 0.6 litre - but that was augmented by a turbo, so there was plenty of power available, plus it sipped fuel. The automatic gearbox provided 4WD in first gear, which was awesome during winter - we lived in rural parts of Fukushima and the roads frequently iced over. Once during winter we went for a drive up a mountain road covered in about 3 inches of fresh snow and made it to the top of the Katasoniyama mountain because of the 4WD+studless tyres. Our Wagon R Limited also had niceties such as aircon, electric windows, and a minidisc(!)/radio.
All in all, a fantastic vehicle, and I wish we had sent it over to Scotland when we moved as the equivalent Wagon R's available here are made in Europe and just aren't the same standard of equipment and features, sadly.
The silly thing about the move by the Japanese government is that these Kei cars are an ideal solution to crowded cities as they require less space on roads and for parking, as well as being (or were) an extremely economical choice.
As others here have commented, I suspect there has been lobbying by the makers of large gas-guzzlers to make Kei cars less desirable. I think this decision by Abe's government will inevitably impact Japan's struggling economy - crony politics is notorious in Japan, something which contributed to the design and layout flaws of the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant.
>>All in all, a fantastic vehicle, and I wish we had sent it over to Scotland when we moved as the equivalent Wagon R's available here are made in Europe and just aren't the same standard of equipment and features, sadly.
Well, I am glad you enjoyed it in Japan, but I am very happy that cars which do not meet basic NCAP safety standards are not allowed to be sold in the EU.
Because you need the government to decide what is safe for you or not?
I've never understood safety standards for consumer goods. If you want to drive around in a horrible death trap of a car... why should the government stop you?
(Admittedly I guess you don't want driving time bombs, but the majority of NCAP standards are related to occupancy safety).
Because as a EU citizen I want to know for certain that something that is on the market here is not dangerous to drive around.
The same as you can trust that the carrots sold at a local supermarket do not contain arsenic - there are regulations against that. But according to your logic, it would be better if there were no regulations, surely a producer of arsenic-containing carrots will naturally go out of market after sufficient number of people die, because no one will buy their carrots anymore,right?
I believe that a car with a cabin that folds like origami in a crash should not be allowed to be sold in the EU(or in fact, anywhere).
You can't buy a knife that would be dangerous to use by being badly made, or which material would contaminate food. So for example,a knife containing phthalates would not be allowed to be sold in stores. This is my logic - I do not want equipment which is unsafe to use to be sold in the EU - a car that has a cabin which folds like origami in a crash[1] should NOT be allowed on the market.
Guess what happens to the passengers of this car? I imagine their consistency is somewhere between peanut butter and freshly squeezed orange juice:
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRU__x5UAo0
Now if only those "safe" cars were as fuel-efficient as the kei cars, no one would have to pick one vs the other.
I feel Tesla is the only trailblazer doing the right thing in terms of evolving cars further. Granted, they are astronomically priced and hence designed to appeal to the "looks"-concisous buyers who want not just a no-emission vehicle, but also a status symbol of sorts. Eventually, the advances in technology ("fuel" efficiency) and material science (safety) pioneered by Tesla's high-priced cars today, will result in consumer-grade, common-as-mud, family schlepping four wheels, to be accessible to a much larger swath of the population. Then, this discussion will be moot!
There are cars which are safe and offer very similar fuel-efficiency. For example - VW Polo with a 1.2TDi Bluemotion engine. One of the safest cars around, and in real-life tests the fuel consumption stays above 80mpg(that's UK gallons). I honestly doubt that those Kei cars can do better than 80mpg.
The problem here, I imagine, is price - a new Polo will cost a lot more than a Kei car.
Can you cite somewhere that mentions that Wagon R Limited doesn't meet NCAP safety standards? I'd be interested in reading that.
I forgot to mention my car also had driver and passenger airbags fitted as standard - not that those would prevent death in the event the vehicle accordianed in a head-on collision, I admit. But I'd be interested in reading something which confirmed your assertion.
Hmmm there is plenty of links on google saying that the Wagon R is not sold anymore in the EU due to the failed NCAP tests, but I can't find a link to the actual test...which is weird.
"However, the original Wagon R+ was still offered in Europe after December 2000, but made by Magyar Suzuki in Esztergom, Hungary. This was because it was too difficult for either the Wagon R-Solio or Solio to meet with Euro NCAP crash safety ratings. As a result, the Wagon R+ continued in Europe until late 2008, when replaced by the Splash."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Wagon_R
Hmmm, I thought in this day and age, where a lot of people are hyper-ventilating about the environment, that usage of such vehicles would be encouraged, and that would be at least one practical reason for the tax benefit.
If you were doing that, you would base the tax on miles per gallon, or CO2 per mile, rather than on engine capacity, which is a poor indicator of environmental concerns.
This reminds me of Happoshu[1]: beer was expensive in Japan because malt content was taxed[2]. Brewers introduced fizzy beer-like beverages with lower malt content ("happoshu"). Beer tax revenues consequently dropped, so the tax on most happoshu was raised to parity with beer. Brewers responded by putting even less malt in their fizzy alcohol drinks.
2. As I have been led to understand, this was intended to dissuade rice-growing land being switched to barley: Japan seeks to preserve self-sufficiency in rice production.
Shouldn't it be up to the private automaker to make decisions about the economy of scale of its products or what is better for the private company's future? Why would the government get involved in securing the future of its automakers by taxing a class of products? The only legitimate argument for taxes might be reduced safety features. Does the US government do something like this? Imagine it adding a tax on Apple products or even American cars because of a sales demographic issue?
Kei cars make perfect sense in Japan- the density in city areas, the lower speed limits (compared to the US), smaller house driveways which could probably fit two kei cars but not two "regular" cars. At some point I saw a house (in either Okazaki or Kanazaa, I forget) that had a Ford Excursion in the driveway, and it stuck halfway into the road- that was a very rare sighting. Most people speak pretty positively of their K-car experiences. Instead of trying to pressure people in Japan into buying larger cars, wouldn't it make more sense to try to reduce the preconceptions about them and develop an export market? It sounds like this attempt will only result in more people ditching cars for scooters again, or dropping down to one car when they previously had two. Cars- of any kind- are already rather expensive to own there.
They've already had to replace most of their nuclear power with fossil fuel based sources. Pressuring people into buying less efficient cars seems like a giant backward step for a country that's generally considered to be fairly eco-conscious (when you ignore the past destruction of ecosystems for building, and the effects of concreting all the riverbeds). It's much easier to breathe in Tokyo than Beijing, it would be great if it stayed that way!
As an aside, I think Japan's regulation on diesel exhaust for large hauler trucks is actually less strict than the US. I was in Okinawa last year, and there was constant traffic from large construction trucks that were always billowing black exhaust that smelled horrific- it seemed much worse than 18 wheelers here. I also noticed it when I tried backpack from Nagoya to Osaka on a rural road in 2010- the truck exhaust seemed to hang in the air longer and felt more choking than modern truck exhaust in the US (familiar with this from doing distance runs on roadsides).
I'd buy one of these ... most of my driving is in town and the Kei would be perfect for that type of driving. (Note that our primary car is an eight passenger Sienna with just above half the city fuel economy claimed by the NT100.
Curses...and here I was excited that many of the best Keis are finally hitting the 25 year mark and becoming eligible for import into the US. I had my hopes high that they would catch on and actually encourage Japanese brands to bring over some of the cooler Keis.
52 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 107 ms ] threadAs the world moves to cities, cars get smaller. Japan should be capitalising on this trend, trying to spread the culture overseas, not trying to smother it!
If the article in question reports anything even close to the truth, then auto-manufacturers in Japan are making a mistake: they are abandoning their practice precisely when they are really getting their chance to make significant global impact.
If you don't want to sell these in Japan, send them over to Australia please.
I feel like there's more going on than the article is saying. "industry and government officials are increasingly worried that these microvehicles have become a distraction for the nation’s automakers" sounds like lobbyists for full-size cars feeding politicians what to say. I don't buy that a bunch of politicians decided it was the for the greater good of the country to increase taxes on a cheap, fuel efficient vehicle.
You are right, politicians in Japan are mostly influenced by industry lobbies. They went to devaluated the Yen not too long ago just so that Toyota and a few other major manufacturers could sell more products overseas. And now everything is more expensive in Japan (petrol price increased so all manufacturing goods and anything that needs to be moved around has increased significantly in price).
The strong yen was hurting any and all export industries in Japan, not just a few companies. The ability to export at competitive prices is extremely important to the Japanese economy. A devalued yen does drive up the price of imported goods (like fuel) but it also drives demand for jobs. The price of locally produced goods are largely unaffected.
EDIT: I have been in companies making products in Japan for years and I can tell you the petrol price impacts everything and a weak yen is very detrimental to your product cost structure. If you dont see the prices move much its because the companies are taking the hit as they do not want to raise prices too much and therefore keep prices more or less the same but reduce quantities, or remove ingredients or parts of the products to make it cheaper to produce. But do not kid yourself into believing increased petrol prices because of a weaker yen have no effect on the economy or prices. They clearly do.You basically get less for your money as a consumer.
My point was that given the situation, it is better to have prices rise across the board due to fuel costs than to have whole industries and major employers collapse due to lack of export competitiveness. If the price rise was due to fuel costs, then it will even drive efficiency gains.
I don't think you can fairly cast it as favoritism to industry lobbies on behalf of a few major companies. I think at the time, all of Japan was at risk of losing competitiveness and once you lose an industry, it's quite hard to get it back.
There's tons of companies in Japan who only deal with the Japanese market and do not export anything outside. Because they can survive and proper on the Japanese market size. So effectively for these companies the rising fuel costs are making things harder from them every single day.
Major employers only employ a small amount of people in Japan, everything considered, and therefore it's clearly the work of powerful industrial lobbies which fail to see that rising fuel costs are going to kick them back in the ass in the next coming year and bring things back to normal again. With the depreciation of the Yen they just achieved some gains for a few quarters but in the end it will even out no matter what.
Japan has lost competitiveness a long time ago and even when the yen was weak back in 2006-2007, so the yen getting stronger was actually quite positive for the Japanese consumer as a whole: prices were stable and even decreasing for several commodities post 2008-crash.
What you see here is just Abe doing his magic trick, trying to look like Harry Potter while he's just a clown from a local fair who understands nothing of Economics. Hey, that's why they invented the word Abenomics, because it does make any sense for anyone else.
What I didn't quite get from the article is how do taxes compare. Looks like they simply got a more similar treatment to standard cars.
These cars would be much cheaper to maintain even with the same tax regime as regular cars. IMO all sales tax should be regular tax, and road tax/car taxes should just go away. They tax fuel enough to cover for all that and it makes sense to tax on usage.
Government giving up on any tax opportunity? I wish, but not in the world I know...
> What I didn't quite get from the article is how do taxes compare. Looks like they simply got a more similar treatment to standard cars.
They seem to be removing the 50 years lasting subsidy, which makes sense to be honest - at some point it has to finish.
> These cars would be much cheaper to maintain even with the same tax regime as regular cars.
Exactly my thoughts, if these cars are so popular, efficient, and budget saving - they shall do OK without getting government involved.
Interestingly, the state of Georgia dropped the normal annual ad valorem tax on cars. Now, any new car purchase is covered by its sales tax (which was being paid before) for the life of the vehicle for that owner (when they sell it the new owner will owe some smaller amount, I assume, but haven't had to deal with yet). I still haven't figured out how they expect to make up that revenue, unless other taxes are just bringing in enough revenue to make up for it. Or it may have been expected/hoped that the reduced cost of ownership would encourage the purchase of newer cars.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/12/us-trade-asiapacif...
(edit): Here's a whole article about US TPP pressure against kei cars:
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2012/01/27/business/lower-t...
Reading those two articles, I think it's credible that US negotiators got a concession from Abe on kei taxes, and we're seeing the result of that. As I understand, this kind of deal would be made in secret (like many aspects of TPP), so we wouldn't be aware of it at this point.Levin criticized the commitment in that area, saying any phase-out of the U.S. tariffs should be linked to measurable improvement in sales of U.S. cars in Japan."
It's all highly suggestive that it's a concession in part of a broader strategy. I'm sure there's a complex interplay of interests going on with the TPP as a whole, US auto, and Japanese auto. US auto seems like it's getting the raw end and may be trying to grab at whatever they can and perhaps the Japanese may be making a large concession in another area(not auto related) to get more automotive foothold in the US.
^complete speculation; I don't know jack about politics/economics/current events.
"Meanwhile, the US government budget continues to be a primary source of revenue, for General Motors Corporation."
They aren't rocket science, but they do stress elements of interior design efficiency that American car makers aren't great at.
TBH, I'd love to have a vibrant Kei car market in the states. Especially in and around big cities with lots of traffic.
Why would you like your car companies to be like GM or Ford and fail at the first sign of bad economic times.
Everyone is trying to make cars more eco friendly the Japanese seem to be ahead in that regard and now their going to opposite way.
I lived and worked in Japan for 6 years, returning to my native Scotland almost 2 years ago, after struggling for the few years after the M9 quake (lived in Koriyama, Fukushima prefecture and lost my job after the quake).
We bought a new Suzuki Wagon R Limited back then, and I loved that car. Its apparently small outward appearance is deceptive; inside, there was loads of space - a high roof height, and when you folded down the rear seats you could comfortably fit items such as chests of drawers, fridges, and the like.
The engine; 0.6 litre - but that was augmented by a turbo, so there was plenty of power available, plus it sipped fuel. The automatic gearbox provided 4WD in first gear, which was awesome during winter - we lived in rural parts of Fukushima and the roads frequently iced over. Once during winter we went for a drive up a mountain road covered in about 3 inches of fresh snow and made it to the top of the Katasoniyama mountain because of the 4WD+studless tyres. Our Wagon R Limited also had niceties such as aircon, electric windows, and a minidisc(!)/radio.
All in all, a fantastic vehicle, and I wish we had sent it over to Scotland when we moved as the equivalent Wagon R's available here are made in Europe and just aren't the same standard of equipment and features, sadly.
The silly thing about the move by the Japanese government is that these Kei cars are an ideal solution to crowded cities as they require less space on roads and for parking, as well as being (or were) an extremely economical choice.
As others here have commented, I suspect there has been lobbying by the makers of large gas-guzzlers to make Kei cars less desirable. I think this decision by Abe's government will inevitably impact Japan's struggling economy - crony politics is notorious in Japan, something which contributed to the design and layout flaws of the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant.
Well, I am glad you enjoyed it in Japan, but I am very happy that cars which do not meet basic NCAP safety standards are not allowed to be sold in the EU.
I've never understood safety standards for consumer goods. If you want to drive around in a horrible death trap of a car... why should the government stop you?
(Admittedly I guess you don't want driving time bombs, but the majority of NCAP standards are related to occupancy safety).
Realistically, you'd have thought the insurance on them ought to be huge due to the huge decrease in safety features.
The same as you can trust that the carrots sold at a local supermarket do not contain arsenic - there are regulations against that. But according to your logic, it would be better if there were no regulations, surely a producer of arsenic-containing carrots will naturally go out of market after sufficient number of people die, because no one will buy their carrots anymore,right?
I believe that a car with a cabin that folds like origami in a crash should not be allowed to be sold in the EU(or in fact, anywhere).
Guess what happens to the passengers of this car? I imagine their consistency is somewhere between peanut butter and freshly squeezed orange juice: [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRU__x5UAo0
I feel Tesla is the only trailblazer doing the right thing in terms of evolving cars further. Granted, they are astronomically priced and hence designed to appeal to the "looks"-concisous buyers who want not just a no-emission vehicle, but also a status symbol of sorts. Eventually, the advances in technology ("fuel" efficiency) and material science (safety) pioneered by Tesla's high-priced cars today, will result in consumer-grade, common-as-mud, family schlepping four wheels, to be accessible to a much larger swath of the population. Then, this discussion will be moot!
The problem here, I imagine, is price - a new Polo will cost a lot more than a Kei car.
I forgot to mention my car also had driver and passenger airbags fitted as standard - not that those would prevent death in the event the vehicle accordianed in a head-on collision, I admit. But I'd be interested in reading something which confirmed your assertion.
"However, the original Wagon R+ was still offered in Europe after December 2000, but made by Magyar Suzuki in Esztergom, Hungary. This was because it was too difficult for either the Wagon R-Solio or Solio to meet with Euro NCAP crash safety ratings. As a result, the Wagon R+ continued in Europe until late 2008, when replaced by the Splash." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Wagon_R
I am fairly certain that Ford's smallest car is the Ka[1], not Fiesta.
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ka
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happoshu
2. As I have been led to understand, this was intended to dissuade rice-growing land being switched to barley: Japan seeks to preserve self-sufficiency in rice production.
They've already had to replace most of their nuclear power with fossil fuel based sources. Pressuring people into buying less efficient cars seems like a giant backward step for a country that's generally considered to be fairly eco-conscious (when you ignore the past destruction of ecosystems for building, and the effects of concreting all the riverbeds). It's much easier to breathe in Tokyo than Beijing, it would be great if it stayed that way!
As an aside, I think Japan's regulation on diesel exhaust for large hauler trucks is actually less strict than the US. I was in Okinawa last year, and there was constant traffic from large construction trucks that were always billowing black exhaust that smelled horrific- it seemed much worse than 18 wheelers here. I also noticed it when I tried backpack from Nagoya to Osaka on a rural road in 2010- the truck exhaust seemed to hang in the air longer and felt more choking than modern truck exhaust in the US (familiar with this from doing distance runs on roadsides).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squelch