Brazil Imposes New Safety Standards As Consumers Fork Out More, While VW Gets A Pass

Sorry, Hummer, I respectfully disagree. When people act like bovines, the government sometimes must wear a cowboy hat and prod them along. Don't fool yourself though, the day that cars without airbags were unacceptable was drawing close. The government, or at least part of it, when they started this plan 5 yrs ago, were reacting to this popular demand as makers couldn't be bothered. SOmetimes it is the governments job to intervene in society.

@Marcelo de Vasconcellos To be logically consistent, you will also have to ban existing cars without these features at some point. Perhaps all cars without these features should be baned from the roads once they reach 15 years?

@Marcelo de Vasconcellos Why do they need to e prodded along? The only person who hurts is the person who makes the decision, automakers offered a better option but the buyers of the kombi simply did not care about airbags. Why should these people be required to buy what they don't want? I'm guessing at least 75% of your vehicles have airbags? Is that not sufficient enough choice? Up until 2006 I could buy a passenger vehicle in America that didnt have any airbags nor designated crumple zones. Why is it that it died in 2006? Emissions regulation, not safety concerns. To pretend that this regulation is needed is rediculous, people should be responsible for themselves, if not tough luck. At over $37k for a 60 year design, the Brazilian government should be more concerned with taxes, regulation, tariffs and the economy.

@deanst Some think like that and some even act like that (though the safety angle is just an excuse as most are more worried with the money side). For example, in Japan, the yearly tax increases as the car ages. A huge incentive to get rid of older cars. In Brazil, all cars had to be retrofitted with 3 point seatbelts. In some parts of Europe, cars older than a certain age can't enter certain urban areas. Nah, no ones advocating that (for now). What we're talking about here is an old tech, that can be had cheaply. Makers now sell this to consumers at anything between 1000 and 1500 reais on cheaper cars. The market is almost 4 million. 60% of them already come with this tech. Next year the other 40% must use the equipment. The price can only fall. Hopefully, the increased competition coming from a market that was stagnant this year, would be makers would be hard pressed to pass on the full cost (and attendant mark-up). These are games people are playing. The cheaper cars will now have this. Only the Kombi will not. Small numbers yes, but I think the story here is the hypocrisy of the whole charade. The safety of Brazilian cars improved despite the best efforts of some. The cost on an individual level is relatively small. On a society wide basis it's probably even smaller. The cost will probably be off set by saved hospital bills, more productive and longer lives. I find it very difficult to see too much trouble here. Now if such a plan as you imagine does indeed come to pass, be sure I'll protest as best I can.

@Hummer "At over $37k for a 60 year design, the Brazilian government should be more concerned with taxes, regulation, tariffs and the economy." Oh, I'm with you totally there! But it's much simpler to make people bear the extra cost. It also provides good headlines. And a vote or two. Now, people must be prodded along because in this case, it's a small thing, with a by now small cost. Like I said in the answer above, on a whole, the whole cost will probably even be eliminated due to hospital saving, more productive lives etc. Those guys that would've been killed in an accident, might be save, and with the better protection, will probably stay in the hospital for a shorter time and at less cost. Remember, most people in BRazil are dependent on government health care, and everybody pays for that. There's also a measure of "social justice". Many of the people driving these Kombis around are not people in their own business, making their own decisions, but rather employees for whom many employers have no respect.

@Marcelo de Vasconcellos You have a good point with the employers using these. It irks me however to focus on something that only hurts the economy, when the economy as a whole is hurting. And good lord there's enough of it to go around.