Connect with us

Published

on

Just like Fords “Edsel” model in the 1950s, Trump administration economist Steve Moore cautioned that electric vehicles (EVs) may be the auto market’s “next big flop.”

“Henry Ford’s son was named Edsel, and this was going to be the great car, all of the executives said, ‘This is the car everybody’s going to want to buy.’ Ford made 500,000 of these new sedan cars, but guess what?” Moore said on “Varney & Co.” Monday. “Nobody bothered to ask consumers whether they wanted the car.” 

“And of course, the Edsel was one of the great flops of all time,” the economist continued. “I’m here to tell you, if these trends continue, we’re going to see the EV market become the next big flop because car buyers don’t want them.”

Moores comments come as the EV push at Ford and General Motors hit a speed bump thats cutting into the automakers profits and causing them to reevaluate their electric plans amid a price war and supply chain challenges.

Ford noted in its earnings report released last week that its EV unit posted a quarterly loss before interest and taxes (EBIT) of $1.33 billion an acceleration after a loss of $1.08 billion in the prior quarter. It added that its cutting production of its Mustang Mach-E while scaling back about $12 billion in planned investments in the EV segment, including delaying its second battery plant in Kentucky.

General Motors saw its quarterly profit reduced by about $1.5 billion because of higher costs and the impact of selling more EVs, though it doesnt break out losses from its EV unit in the same way Ford does.

GM CFO Paul Jacobson said that it would abandon an interim goal of building 400,000 EVs from 2022 through mid-2024, instead focusing on a goal of “getting to 1 million EVs of production by the end of 2025 alongside hitting our margin targets.”

“Given the huge losses that these companies like Ford are suffering because of the EV mania, I saw a statistic this morning that Ford is losing something like between $40,000 and $60,000 per car,” Moore reacted. “It’s been a bad bet.”

The economist further argued that auto industry-wide bailouts may be likely amid companies EV losses.

“The federal government is also already offering all of these sweeteners to get people to buy electric vehicles. You get a $7,500, basically, check from the government every time you buy an EV. Let’s not forget that we’re subsidizing the battery companies, all of these things,” Moore noted.

“The taxpayers are paying for these things,” he added. “And yet the most amazing thing is, even with all these sweeteners, Americans are still saying, I don’t want them.”

Speaking to car dealers around the country, Moore reported that their lots “are full of EVs” and only 10% of clients purchase EVs off the lot today.

“I think the car companies would be smart going to hybrids where you can have gas and an electric battery,” the economist and adviser suggested. “But the car companies aren’t making those cars. And the reason they aren’t making them is because the government has increasingly mandate[d] that all cars be EVs.”

FOX Business Eric Revell contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

UK

More than 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote against assisted dying bill

Published

on

By

More than 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote against assisted dying bill

More than 1,000 doctors have written to MPs urging them to vote against the assisted dying bill, calling it a “real threat to both patients and the medical workforce”.

The bill – which is due to be voted on by MPs for a final time on 20 June – would allow terminally ill patients from England and Wales to end their lives “on their own terms”, providing they have a life expectancy of six months or less.

A separate bill is currently passing through the Scottish parliament.

But doctors from across the NHS have written to MPs, warning them of their “serious concerns”.

Notable signatories include Sir John Burn, a geneticist who has led decades of cancer research, Sir Shakeel Qureshi, who was knighted for his work in paediatric cardiology, Professor Aileen Keel, the former deputy chief medical officer for Scotland, and Baroness Finlay, a Welsh doctor, professor of palliative medicine and member of the House of Lords.

The letter is signed by four doctors who hold OBEs, two who have MBEs, and one CBE.

The letter says that while a debate is needed on end of life care, “this bill is not the answer”.

More on Assisted Dying

It raises concerns that not enough evidence has been heard from doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups.

“This bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe,” it goes on to say, calling it a “deeply flawed bill”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

May: Two people given months to live debate assisted dying

Read more:
Why is assisted dying so controversial – and where is it already legal?
Five stories that bring the assisted dying debate home
Two terminally ill patients give opposing views on assisted dying

Professor Colin Rees, a member of the Royal College of Physicians working group on assisted dying, said it was the “single most important piece of healthcare legislation in 50 or 60 years”.

“It will have very profound consequences for the future and many doctors are really concerned that members of parliament are not hearing the views of the medical profession.”

He said many doctors who remain neutral, or who even support the principle of assisted dying, remain concerned about the bill.

“We don’t think it’s a bill that is safe, that protects patients, protects families, and protects the medical workforce.”

What stage are the two assisted dying bills at now?

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill passed the House of Commons with a majority of 55 in November.

Scotland’s Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland Bill) pass with a 14 majority in May.

But the legislation has not been without controversy, with 150 amendments made to get it through the first stage. 

The bill will return to the House of Commons for a third reading this Friday. If voted through by MPs it will then proceed to the House of Lords.

‘No safeguards against coercion’

One of the areas of concern raised by the medics was the inability to properly identify patients at risk of coercive control.

“Vulnerable patients are at risk of coercion with women, victims of domestic abuse, and the elderly at particular risk,” the letter says.

It also warned it would widen social inequalities, with patients who do not have the resources for a comfortable death more likely to opt for assisted dying.

“People who struggle to pay for heating or care or wish to preserve their assets for their children are at high risk of choosing to die if the option is available and the alternative is more difficult.”

Data from the Annual Report of Dying With Dignity from Oregon in 2024 found 9.3% of those people who choose assisted deaths do so for financial reasons.

‘Doctors get it wrong 40% of the time’

Concerns have also been raised around the inaccuracies of medical prognosis.

“Research demonstrates that doctors get prognosis wrong around 40% of the time,” the letter says.

“As such, patients may end up choosing an assisted death and losing what could have been happy and fulfilling months or years of life.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

February: Why has the Assisted Dying Bill divided opinions?

The bill is also a risk to families, the letter says, as it does not require doctors to speak with family members.

“A close relative may know nothing until they get a call to arrange collection of their relative’s body,” it says, adding that there is no mechanism for a family member to raise concerns about a request.

The letter also addressed the potential impact on the medical workforce.

Evidence from the Netherlands suggests “doctors feel pressurised when dealing with patient requests for assisted deaths, meaning that doctors may end up having involvement despite it being against their principles, because they want to help their patients”.

Doctors’ letter highlight concerns about the risk to:

Patients

Does not necessitate treatment of depression or other remediable factors; does not protect against risk of coercion, particularly for women and the elderly; does not ensure that the assessment panel must meet the patient; will widen social inequalities, adversely affecting the socioeconomically deprived; does not take account of the inadequacies of assessing medical prognosis.

Families

Does not necessitate any involvement of families. The first they may know is when they are called to come and collect the body; assumes that an assisted death is ‘better’ than a well-managed natural death but there is little or no evidence in the literature for this assertion.

Palliative care

Makes it a legal right for patients to access assisted dying, but does not mandate a comparable right to be able to access other end of life services; means that patients may choose assisted dying because palliative care provision is inadequate • Places palliative care consultants (a speciality in which 80% of doctors are opposed to assisted dying) at the heart of delivering the services; ignores the fact that the UK is currently ranked higher for its palliative care services than any country that delivers assisted dying and the fact that countries that introduce assisted dying almost invariably see a decline in the quality of their palliative care services.

The medical workforce

Does not adequately recognise the risk of harm to doctors from delivering assisted dying; is unclear whether assisted dying should be considered a ‘treatment’.

Provision of adequate care

Proposes a panel which is not a multidisciplinary team and will not know the patient; proposes use of drugs which are not regulated or approved and does not mandate any monitoring of their complications.

Continue Reading

Politics

Illegal crypto mining surges in Malaysia amid unclear policies

Published

on

By

Illegal crypto mining surges in Malaysia amid unclear policies

Illegal crypto mining surges in Malaysia amid unclear policies

Malaysia’s crypto mining market may hit $5.13 billion in 2025, but illegal mining and a lack of regulation could limit its full potential.

Continue Reading

Environment

Several Waymo self-driving I-Pace electric cars set on fire in LA riots

Published

on

By

Several Waymo self-driving I-Pace electric cars set on fire in LA riots

At least 5 Waymo self-driving I-Pace electric cars were set on fire amid protests that turned violent in Los Angeles this weekend.

It could represent as much as 5% of Waymo’s fleet in Los Angeles being destroyed.

The United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) launched several raids in the Los Angeles area last week that triggered large-scale protests across the city over the weekend.

The protests were mostly peaceful and aimed to bring attention to federal agents indiscriminately arresting and detaining people, but in some cases, they were violent clashes with the police.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Things took a turn for the worse with President Trump calling the National Guard.

There have been several instances of rioting, looting, and general property damage.

In a unique case, it appears that one or more rioters purposely called multiple Waymo vehicles to Arcadia and Alameda streets, where they slashed the vehicles’ tires, broke the windows, and wrote anti-ICE messages on them.

At around 5 PM on Sunday, the Waymo vehicles were set on fire:

With the ongoing protests, the fire department couldn’t get access to the vehicles and they eventually completely burned down:

Waymo is believed to be operating a fleet of about 100 self-driving cars in the Los Angeles area. Therefore, a significant percentage of the fleet was burned down today.

The company completes over 120,000 rides per week in California, but it operates a bigger fleet in the Bay Area and covers a big service area than in LA.

Waymo shouldn’t have too many issues replenishing its fleet, considering it recently acquired over 2,000 Jaguar I-Pace electric vehicles to more than double its entire fleet over the next year.

The company currently operates over 1,500 vehicles across San Francisco, Los Angeles, Phoenix, and Austin.

With a high utilization rate, the relatively small fleet has already taken significant market shares of those ride-hailing markets. It is estimated that Waymo accounts for approximately 20% of the ride-hailing market in San Francisco.

The new vehicles are going to enable Waymo to expand into new markets.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending