Sanity Returns, Part XVIII

Then:

GM CEO Mary Barra said in 2021 that the company would exclusively offer EVs by 2035, citing carbon emissions.

“For General Motors, our most significant carbon impact comes from tailpipe emissions of the vehicles that we sell — in our case, it’s 75 percent,” Barra said. “That is why it is so important that we accelerate toward a future in which every vehicle we sell is a zero-emissions vehicle.”

From another GM management dweeb, Dane Parker, former GM chief sustainability officer:

“We feel this is going to be the successful business model of the future,” he said in 2021. “We know there are hurdles, we know there are technology challenges, but we’re confident that with the resources we have and the expertise we have that we’ll overcome those challenges and this will be a business model that we will be able to thrive in the future.”

Yeah, about that:

General Motors has announced plans to expand production of gasoline-powered vehicles and SUVs in Michigan as well as the manufacturing of pickup trucks.

The Detroit-based auto manufacturer said in a statement on Tuesday that it will “begin production of the Cadillac Escalade, as well as the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra light duty pickups at Orion Assembly in early 2027 to help meet continued strong customer demand.”

Yeah, it seems as though not that many people want to buy their, or anybody’s Duracell cars after all — at least, not enough to keep once-mighty General Motors in business.

And now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to borrow Sarah Hoyt’s Shocked Face.

Perfect Sign-Off

It’s a good thing that a) most of the time I worked in Corporate World, there was no email;  and b) I only discovered this gem at Kenny’s yesterday:

There’s no telling how many times I would have used this as a response to 80% of the office memos I got.  (“Only once, Kim.”)

Yeah, but it would have been totally worth it.

Handing Over The Reins

Read this story and see if you don’t get a slow burn, or even an RCOB:

An Australian small business owner says she lost about $50,000 after Instagram suspended her accounts over what she describes as an innocent photo of three dogs.

Rochelle Marinato, managing director at Pilates World Australia, recently received an email from Instagram’s parent company Meta stating her accounts had been suspended because the image breached community guidelines relating to ‘child sexual exploitation, abuse and nudity’.

The photo had been mistakenly flagged by an AI moderator which confused the image of the dogs with those of children.

She appealed the decision and sent 22 emails to Meta, but received no assistance from the global tech giant, which owns Instagram, Facebook, Threads, Messenger and WhatsApp.

Ms Marinato claimed her story was just one of many and that the problem was widespread.

She also said it was impossible to talk to a human at Meta to explain her situation.

‘I couldn’t get a human to look at it. Clearly any human that looks at this photo is going to know it’s completely innocent,’ she said. 

‘You can’t contact a human at Meta. There’s no phone number, there’s no email, there’s nothing and you’re literally left in the dark.’ 

To paraphrase Insty:  And Skynet smirks.

Here We Go Again

In another one of those “Custer Having Difficulties With The Sioux” headlines, we have this nonsense from the Truly Ignorant:

Supermarket bosses are under fire for charging higher prices in shops serving the UK’s poorer communities while customers in leafy suburbs pay less. An investigation by MPs found food can be up to 38% more expensive in smaller “local” or “express” stores, which typically serve lower-income customers, than in full-blown supermarkets owned by the same company, often in wealthier areas or accessible to customers with access to transport.

There’s so much foolishness in this article that I even hesitate to talk about it.  But what the heck, here we are so I might as well.

Actually, as I’ve said before, “zone pricing” is not only common, it’s ubiquitous.  That policy is very much driven by market forces — whether it’s a higher incidence of shoplifting, or the higher cost of doing business (compare the rental cost of a city vs. suburban store, for example) — the simple fact remains that in order to maintain profitability (e.g. sales per square foot at x% gross profit), some stores will have to charge more for the same items than others.

Ignore too the wealth envy in the article — “poor people aren’t as mobile as wealthy people, so they’re trapped into paying higher prices” — because it isn’t relevant:  organizations don’t charge more because of profit opportunity unless they’re a monopoly and can afford to do so.

Of course politicians (and journalists) are going to get involved because it’s an easy way for them to garner both publicity and popularity.  The facts of the issue aren’t important as long as they are Seen To Be Doing Something.

And of course when inner-city stores are forced to close because of government action, the Pore Folx are going to find themselves in a “food desert” that is entirely of their own and their politicians’ making — and I for one will have a simple reaction to this situation:

Stupidity should be punished and not rewarded.

4-Bangers Aus

Yeah, with the demise of EV Duracell cars, it wouldn’t take long for Mercedes to notice that their other pet Green project wasn’t too popular with their client base:

Mercedes-AMG is transitioning away from the four-cylinder plug-in hybrid powertrain and back towards the inline-six and V-8 powertrains more traditionally associated with the brand. That isn’t to say that AMG had a change of heart concerning the merits of the four-cylinder powertrain, but rather that the automaker is responding to customer criticisms. “Technically, the four-cylinder is one of the most advanced drivetrains available in a production car. It’s also right up there on performance. But despite this, it failed to resonate with our traditional customers. We’ve recognized that.” 

“Failed to resonate”, as in WTF do you idiots think you’re doing?”

Yeah, forgive us if Merc fans don’t care about the gee-whiz technology when it replaces the brilliant engines that have served Mercedes since the 1920s.  And the same driver skepticism that accompanied the stupid EV-only diktat  would apply no less to the plug-in hybrids too.

I couldn’t be bothered to look up the numbers, but I bet the technology R&D costs for both Green projects will have run to the billions of dollars:  all wasted.

And just add to that the cost of bringing nuclear power generators back on line after the most un-German-like panic following the Fukushima disaster, which was caused by a tsunami — last time I checked, the likelihood of the same affecting the German nukes was.. what? oh yes, zero — and which took place halfway around the world.

Yeah, that Green eco-thing is really working out well for the Krauts, isn’t it?

New Ideas

Longtime Friend & Reader Weetabix writes:

Given your history with grocery stores, do you have any thoughts on the Mamdani (Commie, Muslim) plan for government-run grocery stores (“public option”) in NYC?

I foresee:
– low prices because subsidized
– private stores and bodegas priced out of business
– “public option” stores lock everything up because of theft/vandalism
– public outrage at people’s unfair treatment due to what they brought on themselves
– “public option” stores close
– wailing and gnashing of teeth at the new “food desert”

…but, of course, I’m a cynic.

I have no thoughts other than Mr. Bix’s well-reasoned points — in fact, many thanks are due for saving me from having to think about the situation.

Every time Commies try this nonsense they encounter what we call “market experience”, and they call “greedy capitalism”.  There are many such (as outlined above) but allow to address but one, that of prices.

You can’t sell anything at “cost” (i.e. what you paid for the merchandise as it arrives at the store, or F.O.B. — free on board — as usually stated).  What that does is make your retail outlet a losing proposition (what’s nowadays referred to as “unsustainable”).  This remains true even if the operating costs of the establishment (rent, utilities, equipment, salaries etc.) are wholly assumed by city government, as this Marxist asshole proposes.  The drain on tax revenue will be horrendous, even for just the six stores — which by the way will also be denied the benefits of non-issued sales taxes under this loony scheme.  And I haven’t even touched on the city’s subsidization of yet-lower prices, which will not only drain revenues but also increase demand.  And speaking of which:

…ummm only six stores to cover the whole five boroughs of NYfC?  Expect long queues and lengthy waits at the registers as the stores struggle to cope with the (unexpectedly) high demand — and high demand there will be in plenty because if they think that only the Pore&Starvin denizens of NYfC will attempt to avail themselves of these lower prices, they don’t know much about New York.  [200 examples from personal experience omitted for reasons of brevity]

To use a not-so-long-ago example from Marxist establishments of, say, Soviet Russia (Moscow Version):

Whether the famously-impatient Noo Yawkers will stay as docile as their Moscow counterparts will be established on Day One of this Glorious Leap Forward — let me get out ahead of the thing by stating that there’ll be riots and rampant looting, you betcha.

But hey:  never let it be said that I stood in the way of stupid people making stupid decisions and trying stupid experiments, especially when the victims of said stupidity actually voted for all that.

I look forward to Comrade Mamdani’s “new” initiatives (and their unexpected! outcomes) with great anticipation, as will Reader Weetabix and the rest of you.

Let the (Hunger) Games begin.