Number of US Autos Declining

deardancer3

10 kW
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Messages
959
Location
San Diego
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/01/peak-autos-americas-love-affair-with.html
Sunday, January 24, 2010

MISH'S Global Economic Trend Analysis
Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Inquiring minds note that there are 4 Million Fewer Cars on the Road.
It's a sign America's Love Affair with the Automobile May Be Coming to an End.


The U.S. fleet has apparently peaked and started to decline. In 2009, the 14 million cars scrapped exceeded the 10 million new cars sold, shrinking the U.S. fleet by 4 million, or nearly 2 percent in one year. While this is widely associated with the recession, it is in fact caused by several converging forces.

Future U.S. fleet size will be determined by the relationship between two trends: new car sales and cars scrapped. Cars scrapped exceeded new car sales in 2009 for the first time since World War II, shrinking the U.S. vehicle fleet from the all-time high of 250 million to 246 million.

Market saturation may be the dominant contributor to the peaking of the U.S. fleet. The United States now has 246 million registered motor vehicles and 209 million licensed drivers--nearly 5 vehicles for every 4 drivers. When is enough enough?



With four out of five Americans now living in cities, the growth in urban car numbers at some point provides just the opposite: immobility. The Texas Transportation Institute reports that U.S. congestion costs, including fuel wasted and time lost, climbed from $17 billion in 1982 to $87 billion in 2007.

Economic uncertainty makes some consumers reluctant to undertake the long-term debt associated with buying new cars. In tight economic circumstances, families are living with two cars instead of three, or one car instead of two. Some are dispensing with the car altogether. In Washington, D.C., with a well-developed transit system, only 63 percent of households own a car.

Perhaps the most fundamental social trend affecting the future of the automobile is the declining interest in cars among young people. For those who grew up a half-century ago in a country that was still heavily rural, getting a driver's license and a car or a pickup was a rite of passage. Getting other teenagers into a car and driving around was a popular pastime.

In contrast, many of today's young people living in a more urban society learn to live without cars. They socialize on the Internet and on smart phones, not in cars. Many do not even bother to get a driver's license. This helps explain why, despite the largest U.S. teenage population ever, the number of teenagers with licenses, which peaked at 12 million in 1978, is now under 10 million. If this trend continues, the number of potential young car-buyers will continue to decline.

Scrappage rates are easier to project. If we assume an auto life expectancy of 15 years, scrappage rates will lag new sales by 15 years. This means that the cars sold in the earliest of the elevated sales years of 15-17 million vehicles from 1994 through 2007 are just now reaching retirement age. Even though newer cars are more durable than earlier models, and may thus stay on the road somewhat longer on average, scrappage rates seem likely to exceed new car sales through at least 2020. Given a decline of 1-2 percent a year in the fleet from 2009 through 2020, the U.S. fleet could easily shrink by 10 percent (25 million), dropping from the 2008 fleet peak of 250 million to 225 million by 2020.

The United States is entering a new era, evolving from a car-dominated transport system to one that is much more diversified. As noted, this transition is driven by market saturation, economic trends, environmental concerns, and by a cultural shift away from cars that is most pronounced among young people. As this evolution proceeds, it will affect virtually every facet of life.
That is certainly an interesting report and there is a lot more in it that I did not cover. I am particularly interested in the stats on teenage driving and a subject the article did not cover at all, Boomer Demographics.

In regards to teens, parents can no longer afford to buy cars for their kids. And with teenage unemployment at the highest rate in history, kids cannot afford to buy their own cars. That is the dynamic at play, not socializing by text messaging.

What's more important, and something the article did not even address is the massive wave of boomer retirement that is about to hit. Many boomers will go from two cars to one. Or from two new cars to one new car and an "emergency" clunker.

Eventually, upon entering retirement homes, the cars will go altogether.

Let's also not forget about the effect of peak oil.

Finally, cash for clunkers removed a lot of older models from the national fleet. However, it did so at the expense of future demand. Moreover, that future demand is shrinking on account of teenage unemployment, teens living it home, and especially boomer retirement trends.

Peak Autos? You bet.
 
Two factors not yet mentioned. The cost of a car today (adjusted for inflation) in relation to average wages. Car dealers (my wife worked in the office for one) don't like to stock base models, there is very little profit in them. If a car is advertised on TV with a base price of $12K, it will be difficult to find one like that. Dealers order cars with auto trans, A/C, electric windows, etc. The "add ons" and upgrades are very profitable for the dealer and they would rather sell a few cars with upgrades than more cars with some being base models.

The other thing is the cost of insurance (especially for yound adults). I recently moved to Kansas, and the cost of car insurance is shockingly LOW. I can afford to have several old cars that are paid-for just sitting there. Back in So-California there is high theft and frequent insurance fraud (Ow! my neck hurts after that minor fender bender) Juries are sympathetic to "injured" litigants, and court awards are high. The cost is passed on to the millions of car owners in the form of higher insurance premiums. (yes, I know, some victims are actually seriously injured)

On a more positive note...I visited a bike shop next to the local state university, and they stock electric bikes. The owner was a "Giant"-brand dealer (among several other brands), and the Giant-Twist is overpriced, but...A local student got the go-ahead from a parent to pick up one (rather than a used car), so the LBS owner called Giant and was told he'd have to buy 10 of them, then negotiated down to buying 5 up-front. The first student was pre-paid, and a week later two others were sold based on word-of-mouth and test rides.

I originally got into reading about E-bikes when my son lost his license for a year to speeding tickets and wanted to go to a local college.
 
Just like social security right? More retirees then people working. Should decline because the old people(baby boomers) who had mega-retirement funds are dying off. The old people sell their cars, no one buys a new one anymore. Automakes sell less new cars.
 
D-Man said:
Just like social security right? More retirees then people working. Should decline because the old people(baby boomers) who had mega-retirement funds are dying off. The old people sell their cars, no one buys a new one anymore. Automakes sell less new cars.
picking nits:

I think the First Baby boomers started being born in 1946 (till about 1960) and the first are just barely beginning to be eligible for retirement and social security. Most baby boomers got to be guinea pigs for IRA's and 401k's, which are now 201 k's.

many folks dying now are ~74 years old, so they were born about 1936, making them Depression era babies; and yes Those folks did get the nice fixed definition retirement.

Other than Government employees, the good retirement plans escape the Baby boomers.

Back to the impact of decreased number of Autos;

The cost of maintaining the car support infrastructure remains fairly fixed and fairly high, but the government income streams (gasoline tax, car licensing, car sales taxes, and state general fund taxes) is down. So states will HAVE to decrease road services, defer road maintence, AND increase auto taxes and fees.

expect a defection of more auto owners, more creative ways to finance road services, more movement of road expenses over to the general fund.

Winners will be areas with decent public transit? or areas without transit so people have to keep their cars?

D
 
I wonder if the increasing percentage of unibody cars and their ability to sustain damage but still be drivable or fixable has an effect? In other words, are we paying for safety in the form of collapsable/disposable cars?

A good example is the 1978 Buick Electra that I keep as a second car. It was sandwiched front/back and written off by the insurance company. I got a new grill and headlight section from the salvage yard, pounded out some small creases and live with a slightly askew rear bumper. I don't think a newer car would have been drivable after the sandwich this car took.
 
Let's not forget one thing: for the past twenty years, most cars (both foreign and domestic,) with a few notable & expensive exceptions, suck.

Now, when it comes to getting from point A to point B, I'm pretty much a minimalist. I want something reliable, efficient, and fun. Less is more for me. As a sedan driver, the past 20 years have become more and more of a pain in the ass for folks like me, as people traded in their cars for mobile apartments, a trend that has abated, slightly, since the recent gas spikes, but still has a way to go.

Are there any cars that are as efficient and fun as the CRX? Take a look at the specs of the CRZ and try telling me that is progress. Compare the Datsun 240Z to its heir. Yeah, yeah, I know safety standards require heavier body weight, but. Sure, the Prius; that's a great car.

For my dad.

I know Ford's got some promising makes coming out, but really, what has Detroit done in either the realm of design or engineering that is worthy of a 17k-50k rapidly depreciating investment? Releasing warmed-over Mustang/Camaro/Challengers?

My first car was an '84 Camry; while there have been numerous safety, design, and efficiency improvements (primarily being driven outside of N.America) there have been 27 model years since its release. Those improvements have been slight and excrutiatingly marginal.

Compare the design, safety, and efficiency improvements from 1984 to 2010 from the 26 years that preceded 1984. Granted, there were oil shocks and seat belts and huge demographic shifts, but from 1958 to 1984 the industry's products evolved much more significantly. The players in the industry that took chances succeeded in those years, the players that didn't 'failed' and consequently are rewarded with a chunk of my paycheck every April 15th (I have never, and will never, own a GM car for the rest of my days.)

If I recall correctly, I got ~30 mpg with that car and it could comfortably seat 4 adults. A '57 Chevy got ~15 mpg. Anyone know of any affordable 2011 models that can comfortably seat 4 that will get ~60 mpg?

Me neither.
 
Cackalacka wrote:
Are there any cars that are as efficient and fun as the CRX?
+1 on that. Owned a 1988 Honda CRX HF from 1988 to 2002. Out of dozens of cars and too many miles to count (I'm almost 70) this car is at the top of the list for efficiency, delivering a consistent 55 MPG at freeway speeds. Plus it's in the top 5 for fun, competing with such things as my '57 T-Birds and the wife's '66 Jag XKE Roadster.

It still makes me mad that there is nothing on the market today as good or better than the CRX. IMO the Smart car is a joke compared to the CRX.
 
The Smart car is a joke, period. A sick one at that.

Do yourself a favor, Rassy, do not google the 2011 CR-Z. The concept car and idea made my heart pound. Seeing the specs and finished product is just another layer of recent disappointments I've got with the late model Hondas. Where did they lose their way?

Seriously, 39 mpg? 0-60 hovers around a Yaris' spec. Grrr.
 
Fact is , cars do last longer now. To me it really got started about 1990. 80's us made cars sucked, and were covered in funky add ons to meet EPA. The toyotas and hondas were the execptions, and US makers had to meet thier quality or go under. So with cars routinely driving 200,000 miles people don't buy a new one so often. Next boom, the numbers will turn around. This time everybody bought too much house, but next time with less easy credit, they'll be looking at cars again.
 
dogman said:
Fact is , cars do last longer now. To me it really got started about 1990. 80's us made cars sucked, and were covered in funky add ons to meet EPA. The toyotas and hondas were the execptions, and US makers had to meet thier quality or go under. So with cars routinely driving 200,000 miles people don't buy a new one so often. Next boom, the numbers will turn around. This time everybody bought too much house, but next time with less easy credit, they'll be looking at cars again.

thats so true. cars these days are all regulated by the computers that they have scanning every which thing that it does to regulate emissions. you try to do one simple little thing, like put aftermarket products on it, and the check engine light will have a meeting with you. thats funny that it says that people in the city are less likely to own a car, if i read correctly. i found that out after i first started driving. the only thing that i found that was great about a car was its convenience factor. mass transit will take you places, but itll be a while, nonetheless it works.

Rassy said:
It still makes me mad that there is nothing on the market today as good or better than the CRX. IMO the Smart car is a joke compared to the CRX.

i agree. ive always wanted to own a crx. i remember finding a 1985 honda crx si for sale for 500 bucks. i regret the fact that i never made that purchase for the fact that i never came across another deal like that again, and that ill never know what i would be missing. its like a street-legal go-cart...lol. cars of today will never be what they used to be.
 
The crx was a great car. A lot of em left the road when they got older because if you didn't change the timing belt on time the engine was toast.
 
dogman said:
The crx was a great car.

Still is a great car! Easy to find them for cheap, at least here it is. Like LFP will tell some of the 1992+ honda hatchback civics have most of the good points of the CRX. And are not quite as old. Sucks that everything has to be so heavy these days.
 
This was one educational and facinating post"Deardancer" 8)
 
recumbent said:
This was one educational and facinating post"Deardancer" 8)

Thanks.

This was the section that caught my interest:

"The United States is entering a new era, evolving from a car-dominated transport system to one that is much more diversified. As noted, this transition is driven by market saturation, economic trends, environmental concerns, and by a cultural shift away from cars that is most pronounced among young people. As this evolution proceeds, it will affect virtually every facet of life"

As with most cultural changes, there is significant conflict betweent the ones staying with the old ways, and the ones moving on. WE see this on the road as more antagonism between drivers and cyclists/pedistrians, and economically as drivers (and auto oriented businesses) lobby governments to subsidize the cost of car and care use thru non-car mechanisms; ie more general sales and income tax to support roads.
Then the 'car-less' lobby for more money on all types of transportation improvements, cycle paths, public transit, better cyclist laws, etc.

AS my nephew put it, "when you guys get real old, I would rather see you in a golf cart (NEV) on a special path beside my car, than bearing down on me in a 3 ton SUV in my rear view mirror."
 
Back
Top