We often jump to the conclusion that, whenever there's a problem, we need government regulation to fix the "market failure." That's how Ralph Nader became famous, arguing that America's cars (well, at least the Corvair), were Unsafe at Any Speed. (Full disclosure: my dad drove a 1965 Corvair Monza convertible.) 
The result: regulation of auto safety standards.
But firms provide what people want, or else they go out of business. And people don't like to die, or to be injured in car crashes. This graph shows that automobile travel was becoming safer for decades before the federal government got involved. 
So, you're saying that Nader's claim is wrong that seatbelts, airbags, and maybe even cars that get higher miles per gallon wouldn't have happened without govt. regulation? Because why...the markey solves all problems effectively? The govt. tests that are done to rate a car or truck's safety aren't necessary then?
Posted by: Mister Guy | January 25, 2008 at 03:05 AM
Of curse, the market always knows what's best for you, didn't you know that?
Interesting, I suspect that if it wasn't for Nader's book, we'd still have non-colapsible steering columns that impale you on impact (one of the many other things Nader mentioned in that book). Or just maybe, after enough people were killed, that 'market" woulda fixed it.
"People don't like to die in car crashes."
Small consolation if you're one of them, huh? Might influence your future purchases a bit, eh?
The graph doesn't relaly prove anything. Cars had only been in mass production for a little over four decades at that point. Of course the product would improve. The industry fought safety regs every chance they could, especially seat belts.
Posted by: JD Ryan | January 31, 2008 at 03:04 PM