I've never owned one but can readily understand the seductive allure of cars. So while I know little about the technical components of Barack Obama's Cadillac, I find myself awed by its blend of elegance and attitude.
Of course, I realise that carmakers spend obscene sums on ads designed to dupe us all into believing that we can't live without their latest model. Yet over the last year the industry's biggest act of deception has been aimed at the policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic. They have been convinced that cars should be allowed to guzzle public money almost as greedily as they consume fuel.
ACEA, the European automobile manufacturers' association, has been up to these tricks again this month. After calculating that sales of passenger cars suffered their worst decline in 15 years during 2008, it is eagerly seeking government help to cope with its losses because, as it says, "the current circumstances are extraordinary".
The bail-outs that several EU governments are preparing will probably be presented as one-off measures of an emergency nature. State aid rules viewed as sacred by some officials could also be shunted aside by the European commission so that it can approve the rescue packages.
The truth, however, is that carmakers were already receiving lavish support from the public purse long before the foundations of the world's economy started to wobble. Between 2003 and 2007, the European Investment Bank gave €6.5bn in loans to carmakers, including companies like Jaguar and Land Rover that prize customers with more money than brains.
Then there are those hidden subsidies they receive as part of ideologically driven programmes that favour privately owned vehicles over public transport.
In 2007, the European Environment Agency estimated that €125bn is spent on roads in the EU each year, compared with €73bn on rail. A more recent study by the Copenhagen-based body shows that while passenger car use rose by 18% across 25 EU countries that it examined in the 1995-2004 period, rail and bus travel fell respectively by 49% and 11% in much of central and eastern Europe.
The EEA is formally tasked with advising Brussels officials but I fear that it does not receive a sympathetic hearing. The EU's ruling elite seldom seems to have a problem stumping up the cash for new motorways but the length of the union's railway lines has remained largely unchanged since the 1990s.
As always, job protection is being cited as the primary rationale for the bail-outs. In their valiant efforts to avoid pain now, our governments are not asking themselves how much employment could be generated if the billions they are earmarking could be invested more wisely. Despite being more heavily supported, the 2.3 million people employed directly by the car industry are only about twice the number working for public transport operators. Alas, though, it may not have dawned on the numbskulls advocating the bail-outs that greater support for public transport might bring greater economic benefits in the long run.
That's not to mention the ecological necessity of breaking off our love affair with the car. For every passenger that they carry, buses and trains emit three times less carbon dioxide than cars. And yet the model of economic development favoured by the EU regards it as a sign of progress that grown adults spend hours each day strangling their steering wheels in traffic jams. What will it take for this madness to stop?
