103
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Freeman@feddit.de to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world

Comparison left vs right for a craftsman who doesnt know which one he should buy:

  • l/r same bed size

  • r lower bed for way easier loading/unloading

  • r less likely to crash

  • r less fuel consumption and costs

  • r less expensive to repair

  • r easy to park

  • r easy to get around in narrow places like crowded construction sites or towns

  • r not participating in road arms race

  • l You get taken serious by your fellow carbrained americans because ""trucks"" are normalized and small handy cars are ridiculed.

So unless you are a fragile piece of human, choose the right one.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] WheeGeetheCat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks for pointing our the real incentives which are always some bullshit about more money and less regulations - basically the reason capitalism sucks at innovation - it doesn't care about whats important and in some cases actively hates it

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

What's important for you specifically is not what is important to the customer base writ large.

You have problems with fellow consumers that you blame on manufacturers.

[-] spiphy@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Given the usage patterns, most people in the US do not need large trucks. They have been convinced that need them because the auto manufacturers make a lot of money selling trucks.

[-] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

That's why the compact trucks are selling like hot cakes. People want trucks, but they don't necessarily want these behemoths. I love my Santa Cruz.

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Even compact trucks are not nearly as small as light trucks from a couple decades ago before regulations encouraged manufacturers to go bigger to avoid penalties.

Basically if you have two trucks with the same engine, but on a smaller wheelbase, the smaller one might be penalized for not being fuel efficient enough while the larger one isn't. Might as well go big to avoid the cost.

[-] WheeGeetheCat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Capitalism does not follow the desires of consumers, it follows the desire of shareholders.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

That doesn't even make sense in the logic you've presented. Shareholders want to maximize value, which means selling more things to consumers, which means selling things consumers want.

If your entire worldview falls apart at the slightest scrutiny, it may be time to re-evaluate said worldview.

[-] WheeGeetheCat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Look up manufactured scarcity. Great way to make money for shareholders without providing more to consumers. You charge them more for less. Notice any of that recently? Notice any record breaking profits in any industries? Notice any shortages of important things like IDK ... housing?!?!

I'll also give you another example of capitalists not giving a fuck about what consumers want: electric cars back in the 1990s. The auto manufacturers realized they would lose their parts and repair businesses, as electric vehicles have fewer moving parts, the oil companies got pissed, so they put some power together and used the federal government to overturn californias electric car act that consumers voted for. The also forcefully recalled electric cars from consumers and crushed them. They did not care if there was demand if they could make more money in the short term by staying the same.

Hell, the very existence of exxon mobile disproves your ideas that companies will innovate in response to demand because they spent their money lying to the public about climate change so they could avoid any innovation at all for as long as possible. So WTF do you mean they care about demand?

Your logic that capitalists only do what consumers want is whats basic and flawed. If thats true, WTF is advertising? You think it's just a fun hobby that doesn't work? If advertising doesn't create false demand, why do it? We have evidence advertising creates demand, therefore advertising works, therefore you need to adjust your worldview to allow for the fact that some amount of the shit that consumers buy is nothing more than light brainwashing. Including you dear.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

The difference is that efficient demand incentivizes h switchover. You're blaming businesses for... Not leading with changes their customers don't want

[-] WheeGeetheCat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

I guess I shouldn't have tried to talk about several concepts at once since your brain skipped past the manufactured scarcity concept, which is far more integral to capitalism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_scarcity

Note that capitalists have been practicing the art of 'just burn the shit I can't sell so no one can have it' since the Dutch East India company burned islands full of spices to make them rarer. O such innovation

[-] Kythtrid@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

When you consider that marketing is intended to manipulate consumers into thinking they want your product, it's more about convincing people that your product has value, and that they need it, rather than selling something that consumers actually need.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You are not the arbiter on what people "need," and people do not only purchase or consume things based on "need." As a hilariously easy example, neither of us "needs" to be here right now having this conversation.

Again, it's time to re-evaluate the entire worldview

[-] Kythtrid@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

I never claimed to be the arbiter of what people need, but im just saying consumers dont have as much freewill as they claim when they're actively being manipulated at every corner. Marketing is literally intended to make you feel like you need a product you didn't previously want.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Consumers absolutely have free will. Do you have free will? You're not unique.

Also that is not the purpose of marketing. Marketing is designed to A) raise awareness of a product and B) show how the product is superior to other products.

Throw out the brain rot my dude.

[-] Kythtrid@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I didn't say they had no freewill, i said.

Consumers do not have as much freewill as they claim

And no, that is exactly the purpose of marketing, as defined in my college marketing classes. Marketing is designed to "Create value" for a product to a consumer. That is to say, make them feel like they want to buy it. And as far as tactics, its all manipulation.

[-] Falmarri@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

This is the most braindead comment I've read in a long time.

this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
103 points (97.2% liked)

Fuck Cars

9591 readers
46 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS