Source: Detroit News
quote: And you base that on what? Your expertise in automotive design?
quote: But I'm sure you don't care that families might not be able to afford vehicles for their families at the far higher costs these regulations will force these vehicles to go to.
quote: Maybe its because many care around the world already meet or exceed these figures? That's right - actual cars being sold in healthy numbers around the world, today.
quote: If families can't afford to buy a new car, surely they can buy second hand? Or just save up longer until they can afford it, like sensible people do? Or not buy a car at all, and ride a bike instead, with all the benefits that brings?
quote: Okay well thanks for confirming you're a Socialist moron. Wrong on so many levels.
quote: If families can't afford to buy a new car, surely they can buy second hand?
quote: Or not buy a car at all, and ride a bike instead, with all the benefits that brings?
quote: that is an odd statement, you want more fuel efficient cars, yet are quite happy if they are out of reach financially to a large group.. ensuring those old fuel guzzlers stay on the road in second hand form. interesting.
quote: The process followed by Obama administration officials to develop these standards was politicized, not rooted in sound science and was a political end run around seasoned experts who are required by law to lead the process
quote: The vehicle received emission-related repairs that meet or exceed the Repair Waiver minimum amount of $819.http://www.cleanairforce.com/motorists/repairwaive...
quote: 2. Global warming: imagine some breakthrough research comes out in 5 years and there are almost no more skeptics? Some people say we should do MUCH more, some people say we should do a little LESS, but does anyone say we should do NOTHING? These regulations don't seem overly draconian to me...If we struck down these standards, isn't that getting a little close to doing nothing?
quote: Getting all up & arms over THIS seems overly dramatic when their are far worthier causes to get worked up about.
quote: Even if "Global Warming" was real. Who actually believes it will be stopped because the United States increased their mileage requirements on SOME vehicles?
quote: Here's what will ACTUALLY happen. We hit the 2025 CAFE requirements, car prices go up, mpg goes down, another 1 million or so people get permanently dropped out of the car market. We reduce CO2 and the price of everything goes up (including our food exports which BTW other countries are ALREADY complaining about).
quote: 2) If prices on new cars go up then that drops a large segment of the population out of the car market (i.e. your 1 million or so). Therefore, fewer people per capita would be driving vehicles, and thereby using less gasoline because you are artificially restricting the demand of gasoline.
quote: 3) If fewer people per capita are driving and we are using less gas relative to our population, then shouldn't food prices go down?
quote: I have found three inconsistencies with your statement.
quote: You're nuts. People can't just NOT drive vehicles because you say so. If they have to, they'll just buy older cars. Which, ironically, get lower MPG and sometimes put out more pollution.
quote: As such, they will be completely forced out of the market and there is one less car on the road.
quote: Not to mention the fact that China is likely to reduce CO2 emissions from cars shortly after we do.
quote: By the way the price of gas is already driving low to middle income people out of large SUV's.
quote: Thats not true, there will still be inexpensive cars on the market
quote: You know...instead of lining their own pockets that's already bulging at the seams.
quote: Sure, but society requires compromises that reduce the individual's freedom of action,
quote: I guess you were taking a nap during the Bush Presidency when he was pumping up new CAFE standards...? Or...?
quote: So then 50% of America hates America?
quote: So now that the evidence is clearly out there, why do the hoodwinked continue to get him close to 50% in the polling if not for the fact, that they ALSO HATE AMERICA?
quote: My definition of "Anti-American" is likely a lot narrower than yours. For me, I save it for actual, you know, enemies of America that you know, would like to start a war with America, kill Americans or otherwise treat America like an Evil Bogeyman at the root of all world issues.
quote: It's kind of a strange spectacle to witness, and a source of much mockery among me and my Canadian friends when we discuss how messed up you guys are: "its like they can't even have a conversation anymore about anything!!"
quote: 50% of Americans are ignorant enough to vote for the party that promises to give them "free" things or that says a bunch of stuff that sounds good in a sound bite but is horrible when actually implemented.
quote: Far more than 50% are ignorant of our political system though. More like 90%. Why? Because they aren't taught it in school and they don't bother to learn it on their own.
quote: I wouldn't - for instance - ask Janine Garafolo why people vote Republican. All i'd get is a simplistic caricature.
quote: Have I paraphrased correctly? "Clearly this country is ignorant and if people were just better educated then they would agree with me."
quote: Again you insist on using moral relativism as your talking point. Getting a bit stale. Everything isn't grey, there are rights and wrongs.
quote: Well you're trying to make the Dems and Reps appear to be the same. This is a often used excuse people make to explain away the absolute embarrassing disaster the Obama Administration has been.
quote: Republican's, especially Conservatives, are NOT about limiting individual freedom. Liberals/Democrats however are ALL about that. They just go about it in more sinister and convoluted ways.
quote: Ever heard of the Patriot Act?
quote: Warrantless wiretapping bills?
quote: Sodomy laws?
quote: Drinking age laws?
quote: Nearly every sitting Democrat voted for the Patriot Act
quote: Ditto, Democrat's had a HUGE majority in Congress when these bills were passed. Check the date of your link, hello?
quote: I love when you guys use laws that are 200 years old as your evidence. Give me a break! Please guide me to where "sodomy laws" were ever a Congressional issue that was passed on by a majority on Republicans and signed by a Republican president in modern history. Wtf are you talking about? Do you even understand the difference between FEDERAL power and STATES rights? Half of those things on your list are local/State issues. There's no national Republican "marriage" ban. There's no abortion bans either. Wtf are you on about?
quote: Wait this is a "freedom"? You can drink at ANY age in this country, in your own home. The issue was at what age do we allow people to PURCHASE alcohol in this country and consume it in public, where they can then get in a car and drive and go kill someone.
quote: It was a simple fake argument you ascribed to him and set up and knocked over.
quote: I was totally in "foe" mode! ;)
quote: Oh I see what's going on here. So unless Republicans become total ANARCHISTS, nobody can criticize Democrats for anything. Is that the argument? Well that's just brilliant...
quote: AHAHAAH dude, when has ANYONE been breathalyzed in their own home for that? Wtf are you even talking about.And by the way, do MORE "research". MIP's and MIC's were NOT mandated in the national drinking age bill. I'm sure you'll now say MIP and MIC's were invented by Republicans! HAHAhahAH.
quote: I live in Texas and this is illegal. What does it matter if it is not a federal law?
quote: Also you keep calling things "rights", I'm not sure you know what that word means in this context.
quote: It matters a great deal! And until you can understand that, you will not understand the argument.
quote: Sigh, 4 years later and you people are STILL running against George Bush in some bizarre mental election. Let it go already Tayb.
quote: Bush proposed higher standards, key word, proposed. However they looked at the arguments and data, and decided to not move forward with it. It was a bad idea and they realized it. And it's just as bad today as it was a few years ago.
quote: Now, 4 years later, Obama does something similar and it's fascism anti-American
quote: For the record, I've already voiced my opinion on the subject of CAFE, which can be seen at the bottom of this page.
quote: You're either against me or with me Tayb. If you argue with me, you are arguing FOR Obama. That's how it is, deal.
quote: When I disagree with you it doesn't mean that I agree with something else.
quote: Sigh, 4 years later and you people are STILL running against George Bush in some bizarre mental election. Let it go already Tayb
quote: Without liberals, 50 people and their "noble" families in this country would own everything and the rest of us would be working for 50 cents a day in lethal work environments, poluted and smog infested housing complexes, etc.. etc..
quote: Weird, what country does that sound like??
quote: Without liberals, 50 people and their "noble" families in this country would own everything and the rest of us would be working for 50 cents a day in lethal work environments, poluted and smog infested housing complexes, etc.. etc.. Weird, what country does that sound like??
quote: Finally, I will agree that the fallacy of the golden mean (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderatio... can be pernicious, and inflicts our media coverage a lot (here's the view from the right and the left and the right answer is the position in between). However I do not think I was saying what you think I was saying. I was not saying "both sides are bad so its a wash", I was saying there are distinct threats to individual liberty from the right AND the left, and that the only place that protects individual liberty from all sides is the libertarian position - which is typically seen as a right-wing place to be, not some mushy middle!
quote: Alright then, fair enough.
quote: Praktik, you said it exactly right, each side wants to control us, just in different areas.
quote: Today, it is possible to build actual working cars that get 3000 mpg.
quote: I dont understand why its so hard though? 35 mpg really isn't that much, even when you account for US > UK conversion.
quote: The problem with American cars is that, for the most part the US build massive, inefficient truck-things like the F series that no one else in the world wants to buy, and it has been this way for some time.
quote: Rest of world = I want to buy a car that is inefficient and pollutes, and I'm free to do so, but it costs more due to higher tax. This makes sense as pollution creates externalities that burden everyone.
quote: In the US, gasoline has Federal Taxes and State Taxes. In some states, the combined tax burden is as high as .55 USD/USgallon. In many states, these taxes pay not just road maintainence fees, but also subsidize other projects like mass transit. On top of this, low MPG vehicles pay upfront taxes, and automakers pay fines if consumers don't choose enough high MPG cars from thier fleets. Furthermore, many states have registration fees that takes mass of vehicle into account in assesing fees. Typically these funds are diverted to non-car related transportation projects as well.
quote: That way, people can still drive their cool sports cars/trucks or whatever, but have to pay for the privilege.
quote: In the UK, motorists pay an annual tax that is based on how much pollution the vehicle produces, measured as mg of CO2/100km or something.
quote: If I buy a Ferrari Enzo, it's going to be a garage queen. It *might* get driven 100 miles a year. Is it polluting more than a Honda Civic that's driven 12,000 miles a year?
quote: You guys make me sick. You're all about punishing people through taxation for doing absolutely nothing wrong.
quote: Well that's horrible. Simply horrible. Move to the UK if you think this is a good idea. I'll have none of it here!