backtop


Print 68 comment(s) - last by Spuke.. on Feb 28 at 5:03 PM


Bill Ford Jr.  (Source: idetroitonline.com)
Ford said as the population increases, auto sales will increase, but congested highways will prevent us from traveling/commuting

At the Mobile World Congress (MWC) conference today, Bill Ford Jr. addressed his concern regarding future auto congestion in urban areas, which he says could eventually threaten our freedom to commute.

Bill Ford Jr. is the great-grandson of Henry Ford, who founded Ford Motor Company on June 16, 1903. Before the introduction of the Ford Model T in 1908, many people did not travel more than 25 miles from home. However, having an automobile made further travels possible -- it gave them freedom.

But Bill Ford Jr. said this freedom could be at risk due to increased population, which means increased auto sales and congested highways that could one day limit the number of automobiles that can be sold or used on the roads at a given time.

"What I'm really worried about is the role of the car in the long-term," said Ford. "If we do nothing, it will limit the number of vehicles we can sell. If we can solve this problem of urban mobility, I think there's a great business opportunity for us."

According to LMC Automotive, a consulting firm in Michigan, there are currently 1.2 billion vehicles on the roads globally.

While issues like the environmental impact of vehicles have already been addressed via efforts like the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) proposal that intends to boost fleet wide fuel economy to 54.5 mpg by 2025, Ford is moving on to other issues that are not so close to being addressed. His issue of choice is what to do about future traffic jams once the population increases, and urges the mobile technology industry to take action in developing solutions.

Ford already has a few solutions in mind, and they're all communications-based answers. Some are currently being developed, and some are not. For instance, Ford sees cars having radar-based cruise control and blind-spot monitoring systems in five years that allow vehicles to communicate with one another. These systems are currently being developed, where vehicles can "talk" to each other, offering information like the speed of another vehicle nearby. This could potentially avoid fatal crashes. Toyota is just one automaker that discussed the introduction of smart road technology back in 2010. Others like Ford and General Motors have worked to offer better and smarter safety systems as well, but they're mostly crash-based instead of traffic congestion-based.

Ford envisions a future beyond 2025 where cars will drive themselves as close together as possible to use the maximum amount of space on a highway. Vehicles will also do the same in parking lots to make more room for others. In addition, he imagines automakers building smaller cars that can offer additional space for other drivers.

"Even if the technology is there, there's still going to have to be tremendous thought by urban planners," said Ford. "That [driving] freedom has been threatened unless we redefine what personal mobility can be in a congested urbanized world."

Source: The Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Telecommuting will solve most of the problems
By FITCamaro on 2/27/2012 11:04:03 AM , Rating: 2
No thanks.

I'm all for telecommuting but I do not want to sit in my house each and every day. Nor do I want massive tolls for driving my car.

You Europeans can do things however you want. We'll do things our way.


RE: Telecommuting will solve most of the problems
By Netscorer on 2/27/2012 11:21:30 AM , Rating: 1
First of all, no one forces you to stay at home. You want to come to the office - enjoy, you want to sit in the park or cafe - if it works for you, why not. Telecommuting is about choices. Working in the office Mon-Fri, 9-5 is not.

Secondly, knowing you, you don't like any taxation at all and I am with you in this regard, but somehow city congestion needs to be solved. Everyone living in any large metropolitan area feels the pain not to mention pollution and other hazards that come with millions of cars trying to get in and out of city each day. Next time you drive into the city, say Hi to the kid who has to breath your truck's exhaust gas just because you want your freedom to drive how you like. And if you don't give a sh..t, then government needs to step up to make sure society as a whole does not have to pay for your privilege.

Just providing a Mass Transit option does not work. Americans like their cars too much and in some examples (NYC, San Francisco, etc.) city layouts just do not leave much options as entry points are limited to begin with. In most European cities, companies that require employees to commute to city center compensate for the increased tolls, so if you have to drive, be a guest.

Oh, and on the technical note, I live in US and have to commute 80 miles each day because I don't have Mass Transit option and my company does not give a damn about telecommuting as all head-shots live within 5 miles of the office.


RE: Telecommuting will solve most of the problems
By Reclaimer77 on 2/27/12, Rating: -1
By retrospooty on 2/27/2012 5:35:21 PM , Rating: 1
"Go to hell you retarded liberal ass."

LOL. You are priceless. =)

Funny as hell aside, you are right. No-one forces you to live in one place and work 40 miles away. Its a choice. I am not sure what liberals have to do with it, conservatives commute too. But your point is taken.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/27/2012 7:37:18 PM , Rating: 1
Trust me. Anyone who demonizes someone because they are trying to choke "kids" with smog by driving into a city, is a 100% liberal moron. Anyone who demonizes someone for exercising a right freely to the point that they are made out to sound evil, is using the liberal playbook.

You really need to recognize blatant liberal ideology when you see it man. His post is dripping with it. Listen to what he's saying! It's crazy.

quote:
I am not sure what liberals have to do with it, conservatives commute too.


HUH? What are you even talking about. The commute itself has NOTHING to do with it!

Also, another big liberal trademark, he's admitting his hypocrisy by doing what he attacks others for. So it's okay if HE commutes 80 miles a day and throws pollution everywhere, but if someone else drives into a city, they just want to fill kids lungs up with smog...


By retrospooty on 2/27/2012 8:17:01 PM , Rating: 2
I think we agree on most of what you are saying, its just not a liberal issue to me.

Kind of like with govt. You blame all the overspending on liberals, even though conservatives do it too. I blame all the overspending on our elected officials, rep, dem, lib, con... all of them do it. Its not because they are liberals, its because they are criminally negligent... Or just plain criminals. Call it what you want, it does suck.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/27/2012 8:37:22 PM , Rating: 2
No it's not a Liberal issue. I'm not saying it is. His tone and words is what makes him one, not where he stands on the issue.

quote:
You blame all the overspending on liberals


I don't think that's fair. ALL spending? No. All spending under Obama, most certainly yes.


By retrospooty on 2/27/2012 8:54:47 PM , Rating: 3
Ya, but you use the word liberals like I would use the word "loser" or "dumbass". Its become a bucket for you to throw anything you don't like into. I just think you are losing sight of what Liberal is and putting alot more into it than what is real. Liberals are not what ruined the country. The CRIMINALS we elect and have been electing for decades have ruined our country. They have sold us out. They are reps, dems, libs and cons. They are all of the above, its not just a liberal thing.

I agree with almost all you say, as far as what pisses you off, it pisses me off too... But my point:

"Anyone who demonizes someone for exercising a right freely to the point that they are made out to sound evil, is using the liberal playbook."

No, that isnt in the liberal playbook. That is in the political playbook and its called hypocracy.

"another big liberal trademark, he's admitting his hypocrisy by doing what he attacks others for"

Again, not simply a liberal trait. Reps dems, libs and cons all do this.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/27/2012 9:05:04 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Ya, but you use the word liberals like I would use the word "loser" or "dumbass".


Well of course. Liberal is a 4 letter word :)

quote:
No, that isnt in the liberal playbook. That is in the political playbook and its called hypocracy.


Oh come on now. Not even you can believe that. Don't be intentionally naive bud.

Of course anyone can be a hypocrite, but on the typical ideological scale, liberals score higher at being hypocrites. Big time.

It's really hard to be a rich politician living in Washington flying everywhere in private jets or taking limousines, while at the same time railing against the "rich" and demonizing others for not being environmentally friendly enough, and NOT come off like a hypocrite.

quote:
Again, not simply a liberal trait. Reps dems, libs and cons all do this.


Again, missing the point. Of course Conservatives can be hypocrites at times. But Liberal Democrats have built an entire national platform on HYPOCRISY! "Do as I say, not as I do" is their slogan.

quote:
Liberals are not what ruined the country.


Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion.


By retrospooty on 2/27/2012 9:13:07 PM , Rating: 2
"Well, you're certainly entitled to your opinion."

I think we can at least agree on this... The criminal/hypocrite politicians we elect and continue to elect have ruined us.

You call them liberals, I call them politicians, they are all the same to me.


By Spuke on 2/28/2012 5:03:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You call them liberals, I call them politicians, they are all the same to me.
This is the boat I'm on.


RE: Telecommuting will solve most of the problems
By FITCamaro on 2/27/2012 5:54:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Secondly, knowing you, you don't like any taxation at all


100% false.

I have absolutely no problem paying taxes. What I don't like are taxes that are unreasonably high or designed to shape how we live by punishing us for doing certain things and rewarding us for doing others.

People I know personally often hear me arguing how eventually states will need to implement laws that will charge sales tax for online transactions. I have no problem paying sales taxes on online purchases because I know what the point of them are. Schools, roads, police, firefighters, etc. People who complain about these things being underfunded or in disrepair shouldn't complain when they don't want to pay these kinds of taxes. All I ask is that they be collected at the time of sale.


RE: Telecommuting will solve most of the problems
By Netscorer on 2/27/2012 7:02:26 PM , Rating: 2
Please, spare me.
Every tax shapes how society and people operate. Some directly (alcohol, tobacco), some not (investments, property). Sometimes (in US more often then not) it's not the taxes but tax breaks (which is essentially the same thing if you come to think of it as every tax break has to be paid by some other tax). let's take mortgage deduction, for example. It directly influences peoples decision to own property vs rent. I have not heard you complaining about this break, though it penalizes folks who don't want or can't own their property as it essentially puts them at higher tax rate.
Now with your example on retail taxes, or Internet retail taxes. The decision not to tax online purchases was initially implemented with a specific agenda to drive eCommerce. It was government who decided to put moratorium on online taxes and I have not seen you demonstrating in front of White House, demanding that they collect the money you own on your Internet purchases. Now you are saying that you are OK with paying these taxes (eventually). How nice of you! So what benefits you is fine but what does not, you are up in arms, protecting your rights.
Please, spare me.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/27/2012 8:48:16 PM , Rating: 2
Netscorer that was a really bad post. Lotta problems here.

quote:
Every tax shapes how society and people operate.


That's never been the purpose of taxation. EVER. Taxes shouldn't be used to shape society or punish/reward.

quote:
(which is essentially the same thing if you come to think of it as every tax break has to be paid by some other tax)


BIG TIME false statement. Completely false. Taxes don't work this way, sorry. If you get a tax break on something, someone else pays higher offsetting taxes? Since when?

quote:
I have not heard you complaining about this break


Red Herring. You haven't heard him complain about it because it's probably never come up for discussion on DT. Or are you claiming to be psychic?

quote:
The decision not to tax online purchases was initially implemented with a specific agenda to drive eCommerce.


Uhhh this is completely made up. There was never a "decision" to not tax eCommerce. There just isn't a way to enforce this tax. Called a "Use tax" and implemented by most every state for decades now.

The problem is states can't enforce taxation across State lines, but the Constitution prohibits the Government from forcing such policies on the states and individual e Retailers.

quote:
Please, spare me.


And please, spare US. From this ignorant trolling posting of yours utterly bereft of facts, logic, and common sense.


By Paj on 2/28/2012 8:24:33 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
That's never been the purpose of taxation. EVER. Taxes shouldn't be used to shape society or punish/reward.


Er, yes it is. It may smack against your conservative/libertarian leanings, but that's how it is.

It's a pretty basic tenet of economic theory. Governments use taxation to implement policies across the entire spectrum - health, defence, infrastructure, energy, trade.
Domestic industries are encouraged through subsidies and tariffs, which are another form of taxation.

I can understand why you hate the idea though, considering how emblematic it is of big government and reduction of personal liberty and so on. Saying it shouldn't happen is one thing - it's your opinion and your entitled to it if you want it. But saying it DOESN'T happen is something else completely - it's simply not true.


By Rott3nHIppi3 on 2/28/2012 11:56:40 AM , Rating: 2
@ Reclaimer...

I believe taxes do shape the landscape to some extent. The eastern half of PA is a good example. Lots of people live in PA and commute to NJ/NY simply to avoid the huge discrepancy in property taxes. Businesses also move their headquarters to states offering up the best tax incentives (which is why a lot of North East companies moved to NC and SC). Dell Computer and CAT are good examples (I think). But in reality, yes..... no one is stopping anyone from moving closer to their job. Hell, most people commute 80 miles one way to work EVERY DAY just so they can be 10 miles away from mom on the WEEKENDS. I blame babies! LOL! Good thing our other big business is abortions... less future commuters every day!


"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki