fox 8 news car crash image
feeddaneed
The Indian car company Tata unveiled a four-seat automobile that will sell for just $2,500 yesterday. The Nano should be available later this year, and is aimed at people who might otherwise purchase a motorcycle. Can I buy one in the U.S.?
Answer
TATA NANO is intended for the Indian market and in the future, the developing countries. It is not aimed at N America or EU.
Therefore, TATA will not be marketing it in the USA.
Regarding Pollution:
TATA NANO adheres to Euro IV norms, and as a matter of fact, emission norms in India are far stricter than in the USA. That is why Harley-Davidson cannot enter India.
Regarding Safety:
Although not ideal for highway speeding, this car does pass the Indian frontal crash tests and has side impact resistant features and body-bonded rear window. TATA said, that with some modifications, it could be made to conform to US safety standards. They also said that air-bags cab be installed, but that will hike the price of the car.
The real reason why it will NOT be available to Americans is:
The powerful oil companies' lobby will not allow this car in the USA, because if people started trading their gas guzzling 8-cylinder SUVs for this car, the oil price will drop, and so will their profits.
If allowed in all fairness, this car will dominate the US market, and that is what is feared by the Detroit 3. They don't want this car in USA.
What US carmakers do:
Make a product and artificially create the need.
What Indian carmakers do:
Study the need and create the product.
It is however refreshing to see many Americans today are less gullible to be brainwashed into buying a gas-guzzling Hummer or a truck-sized sedan.
So, finally, the answer to your question is, it will not be sold in the USA.
IM me if you need more details.
Edit:
Carissa and sukbunny - are you two even aware that TATA NANO is Euro IV compliant? From where did you learnt that they do not meet US emission standards? Fox News?
Indian emission standards are far stricter than US emission standards - I hope this is loud and clear! The only area where it might lag behind is the air-bag thing!
TATA NANO is intended for the Indian market and in the future, the developing countries. It is not aimed at N America or EU.
Therefore, TATA will not be marketing it in the USA.
Regarding Pollution:
TATA NANO adheres to Euro IV norms, and as a matter of fact, emission norms in India are far stricter than in the USA. That is why Harley-Davidson cannot enter India.
Regarding Safety:
Although not ideal for highway speeding, this car does pass the Indian frontal crash tests and has side impact resistant features and body-bonded rear window. TATA said, that with some modifications, it could be made to conform to US safety standards. They also said that air-bags cab be installed, but that will hike the price of the car.
The real reason why it will NOT be available to Americans is:
The powerful oil companies' lobby will not allow this car in the USA, because if people started trading their gas guzzling 8-cylinder SUVs for this car, the oil price will drop, and so will their profits.
If allowed in all fairness, this car will dominate the US market, and that is what is feared by the Detroit 3. They don't want this car in USA.
What US carmakers do:
Make a product and artificially create the need.
What Indian carmakers do:
Study the need and create the product.
It is however refreshing to see many Americans today are less gullible to be brainwashed into buying a gas-guzzling Hummer or a truck-sized sedan.
So, finally, the answer to your question is, it will not be sold in the USA.
IM me if you need more details.
Edit:
Carissa and sukbunny - are you two even aware that TATA NANO is Euro IV compliant? From where did you learnt that they do not meet US emission standards? Fox News?
Indian emission standards are far stricter than US emission standards - I hope this is loud and clear! The only area where it might lag behind is the air-bag thing!
WIll it soon be too dangeous to walk our dogs??
King Tooti
Very sad story in Portland. What can be done about this growing pit bull problem where we cant even take our dogs out for a walk anymore??
POSTED: 8:11 am PST February 18, 2007
UPDATED: 4:25 pm PST February 18, 2007
A Portland woman said a wayward pit bull is to blame for the death of her dog.
Ursula Foxâs Schit-Tzu, named Decaf, was killed Friday night on Northeast 47th Street. Fox said she was walking Decaf around 9 p.m. when several dogs came running up behind her with a man yelling at them.
âAll of a sudden, I went to pick her up and these dogs got her right here on the ground,â said Fox.
Fox claimed a pit bull tackled Decaf to the ground and snapped her neck, killing the small dog instantly.
âHe ran down and said, âOh noâ and he tried to stop his dog and I started screaming and he says, 'Oh, Iâm so sorry,' and that was it,â said Fox.
Fox called police, but said the pit bullâs owner was never cited and the dog was not taken away.
FOX 12 t
sorry: rest of article
FOX 12 tried to talk with the owner of the pit bulls, but there was no answer at the door.
Portland law states all dogs must be on a leash and under their ownersâ control while outside of their own yards.
The law also stated owners are liable for any damage caused by their dog; and an off-leash dog that kills another pet is to be considered a dangerous dog.
The Fox family said they planned to contact animal control Tuesday morning.
http://www.kptv.com/news/11047700/detail.html
Answer
This has nothing to do with pit bulls, but about unleashed and badly behaved dogs. I believe owners should be more responsible, and owners of dogs prone to violence even more careful than that, but I don't believe that this happened because of a pit bull, but rather because of a badly mannered badly educated and extremely ignorant pitbull owner.
Yes, some breeds have been bred to fight, or guard or things like that. But the upbringing, not the breeding, is the main problem here. Ignorant people who want a tough dog buy pitbulls, not people who know how to handle and properly train dogs. That is not to say there are no good pitbull owners out there, but rather that they are not the majority. People get dogs for the wrong reasons, are unable to control them, and then don't even properly restrain them.
I'm not denying that pitbulls have the potential to kill. They're powerful dogs and maybe they have a predator instinct somewhere in their gene pool. But if the owner had the dog properly trained and leashed, would this have heppened? I think we need to exterminate the bad pitbull owners, rather than the unfortunate dogs forced to live in these homes.
Red cars have higher insurance costs because these cars are proportionately likely to get into more crashes a year. This is not because red cars are less safe to drive (they are as safe as any other color of the same make and model), but that the drivers who pick them tend to drive less safely. Getting rid of pitbulls is as absurd as saying that companies should be outlawed from producing red vehicles. If this happened, the same dangerous "drivers" would be just as dangerous with another car (or dog).
I have met some very well mannered pit bulls, as well as some incredibly evil ones. Please, don't judge a breed by one dog who got on the front page of the news.
This has nothing to do with pit bulls, but about unleashed and badly behaved dogs. I believe owners should be more responsible, and owners of dogs prone to violence even more careful than that, but I don't believe that this happened because of a pit bull, but rather because of a badly mannered badly educated and extremely ignorant pitbull owner.
Yes, some breeds have been bred to fight, or guard or things like that. But the upbringing, not the breeding, is the main problem here. Ignorant people who want a tough dog buy pitbulls, not people who know how to handle and properly train dogs. That is not to say there are no good pitbull owners out there, but rather that they are not the majority. People get dogs for the wrong reasons, are unable to control them, and then don't even properly restrain them.
I'm not denying that pitbulls have the potential to kill. They're powerful dogs and maybe they have a predator instinct somewhere in their gene pool. But if the owner had the dog properly trained and leashed, would this have heppened? I think we need to exterminate the bad pitbull owners, rather than the unfortunate dogs forced to live in these homes.
Red cars have higher insurance costs because these cars are proportionately likely to get into more crashes a year. This is not because red cars are less safe to drive (they are as safe as any other color of the same make and model), but that the drivers who pick them tend to drive less safely. Getting rid of pitbulls is as absurd as saying that companies should be outlawed from producing red vehicles. If this happened, the same dangerous "drivers" would be just as dangerous with another car (or dog).
I have met some very well mannered pit bulls, as well as some incredibly evil ones. Please, don't judge a breed by one dog who got on the front page of the news.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment