Featured California to boycott Toyota products

Good on them, I love it!

When you have hand, use it wisely

 

I am unsure I feel this is bad news.

Actions have consequences. I feel both sides are about to learn this.

 

I think the main goal should be kept the main goal.
And ostensibly the main goal here is to promote fuel efficiency and cleaner emissions.

So to NOT allow Toyota products, which are industry leading in their hybrid options to be part of this answer, because of what IMO should be a separate disagreement about Toyota's stance against California's standards, seems actually misguided.
Punitive measures against Toyota become counter to what the ultimate goal is suppose to be, which is cleaner air and less fuel usage.

The fight against the current administrations stance, should be kept a separate fight.

 

not if all the cars being sold in cali have to meet the higher standards

 

California has unique, microclimate challenges (actually the West coast) that demands CARB regulation.

Bob Wilson

 

Maybe take off your Toyota fan boy hat and realize that by Toyota taking Trump's side on this, despite Toyota being a part of auto-makers agreement with California, they are directly opposing the main goal...

Of course if you can't take that hat off you'll think punitive measures are misguided, but they're not. And Toyota is no longer an industry leader when it comes to fuel economy in anything other than their history, not in their future... VW ditching gas engines entirely, Hyundai-Kia offering lifetime warranty on battery packs, Tesla selling almost 1/2 milion electric cars a year, that's what's industry leading.

Toyota is no longer industry leading of anything when they're teaming up with sewer sludge to use litigation to eliminate fuel efficiency standards, which turns predictability of the market place for auto makers into a dumpster fire.

 

No I think you have to look at what the basis of the Boycott is.
Toyota isn't being boycotted because their vehicles don't meet the higher standards of California. If that was the case there wouldn't be a major automaker that wasn't being boycotted.

The suggested boycott is being advanced as a punitive measure, not as any connection to air quality or product standard but specifically because Toyota isn't remaining silent and/or simply outwardly backing California's agenda. '

If you're OK with California's boycott of Toyota, believing it is based on all cars having to meet the same higher standards, then California should be boycotting Ford, GM, Chrysler, Dodge, Volkswagen,Hyundai, KIA...you get the idea.
They aren't.
Which defines this to me as taking a ecological and environmental standard, and using it as an excuse for separate punitive action which is clearly NOT being applied to all car makers and all products.

I'll change my opinion if California becomes a state where you can only purchase a Tesla or 3-4 other "pure" brands that meet the states standards. But until then?

This isn't idealism in action, it's a punitive move, in a political battle. Which IMO has lost site of what the end goal is suppose to be.
Cleaner emissions and less fuel usage and dependency.

 

To be clear, by joining the fake president's side of the lawsuit, Toyota is suing the state of California for an agreement that Toyota participated in creating and agreeing to. If you file a lawsuit against someone in that context, do you really expect them to continue to treat you like a partner? Toyota is attacking California in court and California is defending itself.

 

You'll notice I never invoke the magic word "Trump" in my presentation of opinion.
Because when doing so? IMO you prove my point.
It isn't about the cars being built, or offering more vehicles that DO meet higher standards, it becomes a political battle. Which I'm NOT saying isn't valid, but I am saying should be kept separate from Toyota's ability to sell vehicles in California without fear of punitive boycotts.

As far as whether you want to argue that Toyota is industry leading?
I still think The Prius is an amazing product. One of the best mass produced and available vehicles that offers both lower emissions and excellent fuel economy.
I think Toyota has the best track record of not only producing hybrids, but supporting them in the marketplace. With the Hybrid Rav 4, the Corolla Hybrid, and Prius and Prius Prime, I'm going to say Toyota is still industry leading in this venue.

And as a supporter myself of Prius, and vehicles alternatives across the board that create lower emissions and less dependency on fossil fuel, I have to be against anything that makes selling and advancing these vehicles more difficult.
'Especially if a I feel that "anything" is more of a political disagreement than a tangible issue with the vehicles and company as a whole.

 

Prius WAS, as in past tense... But now that every major automaker is investing heavily in all electric cars that require far fewer parts and an entirely different investment portfolio Toyota has decided to resist progress and get greedy and thwart regulations that are supporting emerging markets. The amount of uncertainty this untoward behavior creates for the development of future cars is huge. All of sudden auotmakers have to plan out three investment trajectories: 1) California wins 2) Criminal fossil fool industry corrupting the federal government regulations wins, or most likely 3) both win a little bit and after years of uncertainty there's a settlement.

 

Not sure I agree.
Toyota is clearly still on the Hybrid bridge. And I think maybe wisely so.
But at this point, electric cars still haven't come close to reaching the accepted mainstream success of Prius alone.

Toyota has decided to not compete directly with Tesla and others right now with a full electric vehicle. I have posted my opinion on this matter in other threads. But in general, I don't think this represents Toyota "resisting progress" or getting greedy.

I think it's much more Toyota being what Toyota is, which is one of the largest world wide automakers. They DO have to sell to the masses and they do NOT have to have a full electric offering at this point.

And I think it would be a unwise assumption to believe Toyota isn't investing time and effort into electric vehicles. The truth is, as large and successful as Toyota is? If and when they decide they want to offer a full electric, they can offer a product quickly.

I recently watched Ford v Ferrari. And I kind of think of it the same way. When Ford's attempt to buy Ferrari, as a direct inroads to racing and a racing brand failed. Ford very quickly built to success by simply using their clout, size. money and resources to build their own racing division.

When Toyota decides it's time for them to offer a full electric product, I'm sure they will. And they will have some of the best designers, builders, parts infrastructure, factories at their command to do so.
I don't hold it against Toyota that they feel it's unnecessary or not time for them to enter this race, nor do I assume in the future or near future it's going to be much of a disadvantage that they haven't.

 

This article is bogus. Number one, it's not California rules. What are we up to now, something like 14 or more CARB States? Just because the first state started it doesn't mean they stand alone.
If coal rolling type states want to have something different, they are free to try to legislate it. But manufacturers can either build vehicles for the majority of car owners that comprise the 14, or they can build for different markets. Thing is, building for the 14 is less expensive than having different standards.
Not that I agree with everything carb, but maybe they need to do like the Chinese have done to Toyota. "You do what we say, or we won't let you sell your products to us" . Watch how fast they (&others) roll over then. This is why Toyota is glad to build electric cars for the Chinese market. They were given an ultimatum.
.

 

Geez, you're so out of touch!!! The entire basis of this conversation is NOT what's going on in the market right now, but what auto makers are investing in / placing their bets on for a 3-5 years from now. Toyota is playing a lousy hand in this card game and isn't even looking for new cards to improve it's hand, but thinking it can just play out it's existing hand and then file lawsuits and bluff that it has a better hand / hang out with MAGAts to sabotage rapid progress towards innovation and they're gonna lose big time for this incredibly short-sighted obstinance. Of course your Toyota fan boy hat is so big you can't even see where everyone else is going.

 

i wish i hadn't ever convinced anyone to modify their Plug-in or electric to make them better, or any other efficient thing. No - I wish I would have come some 1½ decades ago to listen to insults from such people with superior - name calling outlooks. Thank you so much, & maybe some day i can be just like you .... superior .... not just in persona, but winning over multitudes with such a spirit of grace & affirmation.
yea - THAT's true helping.
.

 

If you want to have a conversation that looks back into the past then you have alot to offer and we have solid facts to discuss. But if you want to have a conversation that speculates on what's going to happen in the future you have to look at it in a much different way and predict what's next. You're essentially bringing an old hybrid knife to a future gunfight where everyone is figuring out which weapons to invest in and Toyota is telling you your old hybrid knife will have no problem winning in a gun fight.

 

15 manufacturers are being boycotted because they are happy se see relaxed emmisions standards and will make higher profits on their vehicles.
4 manufacturers actuallyshow interest in climate change reduction, and have sided with california

 

toyota will never sell an fcev if they dont back down. this could really stunt the future of transport in japn. i'll say one thing, it's entertaining!

 

What other manufacturers?
I'd like to see a list.
And are the other manufacturers taking the same heat as Toyota seems to be taking for NOT siding with California's standards?

 

yes. just google it. my first hit was the LA times