backtop


Print 109 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Jul 6 at 7:46 PM


President Obama wants to make gas guzzling vehicles go extinct with tough new CAFE rules.

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder (R) is concerned the bill could cost American jobs.  (Source: Rick Snyder via Flickr)

The standard could also lead to more crash deaths, as automakers say such standards lead to cuts in material density and safety features to save on weight. The resulting cars are more fragile.  (Source: Car Insurance Comparison)
Plan would save on pollution, oil costs, but could increase vehicle costs, job losses, and accident deaths

The debate over the next Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard (set to run from 2017 to 2025) has just begun, and the political posturing appears to be in full effect.  From Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Ray LaHood to Senators and governors, everyone was expressing vocal thoughts about the "rough draft" of standards that United States President Barack Obama's (D) advisors unveiled on Monday.

I. 56 MPG = Lost Jobs?

Given that much of America is still recovering from recession, the topic of job loss is a sensitive one for many Americans, and is a powerful phrase to invoke in rhetoric.

Governor Rick Snyder (R-Michigan), whose state is home to America's three biggest automakers, was among 14 governors who wrote a cautionary letter to the heads of the DOT and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), employing this phrase to its full effect.

They write:

If fuel economy standards are increased too quickly, resulting in more expensive vehicles, many consumers can be expected to hold onto their older vehicles longer and defer buying a new car, which could put auto jobs across the country at risk.

The letter does not specify whether the proposed 56.2 mpg standard counts as increasing fuel economy "too quickly", but the timing certainly make it seem like a criticism of the plan.  Governor Snyder points to estimates that the plan will add between $2,100 USD and $2,600 USD to the cost of a vehicle, on average.  He urges the government to adopt a "sensible" standard, but stopped short at saying what such a standard would be in mpg.

The White House apparently decided to take the letter as a compliment, with spokesman Matt Lehrich writing:

We appreciate the governors' support for a national fuel economy standard that will save American families money at the pump and keep the jobs of the future here in America, and we share their commitment to preserving affordability and consumer choice.

II. Mich. Sen. Levin (D) Expresses Mixed Feelings on Bill

Sen. Carl Levin (D- Michigan) sent a separate letter to the White House demanding information on what data they used to decided on the proposed CAFE numbers.  In an interview he states, "We want to know how they arrived at that starting point. We will get that information one way or another."

The Senator admits, though, that without an agreement on the standard, the solution might be even less appealing.  If an agreement is not put in place, states like California will likely look to enact their own guidelines.  While this might please some state rights advocates, it is something automakers oppose -- they prefer a national standard.  Sen. Levin also opposes such provisions, stating, "[States] should not be given a waiver [to set their own standards]."

But without a binding national agreement, the government may have a tough time stopping states from doing so.  Technically the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, a federal entity, has to approve of states' plans and grant them waivers from national standards.  A 2007 Supreme Court ruling in the case Massachusetts v. EPA, (No. 05-1120) found that it was illegal for the EPA to obstruct states from implementing their own standards by refusing to grant waivers.  The message seems unequivocal -- the EPA must grant waivers if states want them.

Sen. Levin adds that he is "very concerned" about the prospect of lost sales and jobs from the proposal.

III. Ray LaHood Wants Standard to be Finalized by July

Whether or not the final draft of the standard contains compromises, such as a lower mpg target, Secretary LaHood wants it to be delivered to the EPA and DOT by the end of July.

Secretary LaHood was critical in finalizing the current CAFE standard, which will require automakers to reach 34.1 mpg by 2016.  That standard, first set into motion by departing President George W. Bush (R) and finalized by President Obama, is estimated to cost automakers $51.5B USD over its course.

The tricky part about the standards is that while they cost on the vehicle side, they force savings at the pump.  The current standards are estimated to cut 1.8 billion barrels of oil by 2016.  With oil currently at $94.77 USD/barrel, that's a savings of $170.6B USD.  Further, by cutting fossil fuel combustion, the bill reduces emissions of toxic nitrogen and sulfur-containing gases that have been linked conclusively to chronic conditions such as asthma.

On the other hand, the bill may have raised other costs, as it is thought to have made the average vehicle less safe, contributing to automotive fatalities.

More extreme elements of the environmentalist movement have criticized both the previous and the pending CAFE provisions as being too weak.

The DOT Secretary offered cautious optimism that a compromise will be reached, commenting, "Our people are very professional at this. I think we proved that with the last CAFE standard. We got it right because we had every car company standing in the Rose Garden with the president. We want to get it right this time.""





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Car Sales
By btc909 on 6/30/2011 1:04:53 PM , Rating: 5
Dealerships will slowly disappear as the vehicle price goes up overtime & sales slow. AKA lost jobs. Used cars will be very expensive.




RE: Car Sales
By Samus on 6/30/11, Rating: -1
RE: Car Sales
By cknobman on 6/30/11, Rating: -1
RE: Car Sales
By BSMonitor on 6/30/2011 2:10:27 PM , Rating: 5
Right, except a company's first responsibility is to make a profit.

If consumers want trucks and SUVs, these are massive vehicles.

Cannot escape physics. The greater the mass, the more force it takes to move that mass. And right now no electric or hybrid solution can generate enough power for said vehicles.

But if you want to be rich, invent a localized anti-gravity device that can be installed into vehicles.. Make a world of difference.


RE: Car Sales
By quiksilvr on 7/1/11, Rating: -1
RE: Car Sales
By mindless1 on 7/2/2011 2:00:18 PM , Rating: 2
I think you mean out of business considering what the vehicle would cost, virtually eliminating prospective customer base.


RE: Car Sales
By redbone75 on 7/3/2011 2:45:02 PM , Rating: 2
Someone didn't catch the humor bug flying around...


RE: Car Sales
By Baffo on 7/3/2011 7:40:03 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, improvements in gas mileage using even mild hybrid solutions (yes, currently available on large vehicles like Escalade, Tahoe, Silverado, etc.) would have more effect on reducing overall fuel consumption than in smaller, lighter vehicles for the same number made available. So for example, if you use a mild hybrid that simply adds torque/power for the most fuel consuming parts of driving (accelerating from stop, stop engine at idle, accelerating to speed, etc.) even a modest increase of 10mpg to 12mpg will have the effect of saving more gas than a change of 35mpg to 50mpg (the former saves 1.67 gallons over 100 miles, the latter saves .86 gallons).

This is why hybrids have a place in increasing efficiency in nearly every category of vehicle, because current non-electric drivetrains are just not efficient at stopped/slow driving speeds, where electric motors (even just as assist) have the most benefit.

That said, if you have localized antigravity engines, now would be a great time to break them out; I'm tired of driving LA freeways. ;-)


RE: Car Sales
By therealnickdanger on 6/30/2011 2:13:26 PM , Rating: 5
... or just allow automakers to operate freely and build what people want instead of letting the government lobbies dictate. Cut Uncle Sam's umbilical to the auto unions, eliminate MPG requirements, and no more bailouts. Companies will fall or thrive by their own hands. If you want sacrifice, that's the healthiest one I can think of.


RE: Car Sales
By Samus on 7/1/11, Rating: -1
RE: Car Sales
By Richard875yh5 on 7/1/2011 9:20:11 AM , Rating: 2
From what country do you come from that makes you so smart?


RE: Car Sales
By Qapa on 7/1/11, Rating: -1
RE: Car Sales
By MrBungle123 on 7/1/2011 5:47:09 PM , Rating: 5
Maybe...

if the air quality is bad in the city where you live you should move to a smaller one.

if you can't afford gas you should get a better job or consider fuel costs before purchasing a vehicle.

if electrics and hybrids were such good deals they wouldn't need subsidies to sell at the higher than average prices they are at now.

if you knew something about how the economy worked you wouldnt be spouting this nonsense all over the internet.

if you would get of of the city and spend some time around the people that produce all the things the city folks take for granted you would realize its the lefties in the concrete jungles that need to wake the F up!


RE: Car Sales
By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 9:39:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
if the air quality is bad in the city where you live you should move to a smaller one.

How do you know for certain a large city is worse? What if the smaller one is centered or near an oil refinery?

quote:
if electrics and hybrids were such good deals they wouldn't need subsidies to sell at the higher than average prices they are at now.

Such statements show a complete lack of understanding of the basic economic principle called "economies of scale."

But given of your overall list and attitude the most glaring question that needs to be asked is who died and made you king?


RE: Car Sales
By MrBungle123 on 7/1/2011 10:50:32 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Such statements show a complete lack of understanding of the basic economic principle called "economies of scale."


I know, because its only like they've had a decade and a half 3 or 4 product refreshes and millions of units sold to establish themselves in the market. So I can totally see why they should still need subsidies. You're almost as much of an economic genius as Timothy Geithner or Ben Bernanke! I bet if we print enough money everyone can afford a prius!


RE: Car Sales
By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 11:49:03 PM , Rating: 2
And what exactly makes you think that the Prius and the few other models out there completes the hybrid experiment? Please enlighten us all with your infinite wisdom.


RE: Car Sales
By MrBlastman on 6/30/2011 2:13:53 PM , Rating: 5
What if I want to drive around in my sports car, sucking on fuel like crazy while enjoying myself?

This is America. This is the land of freedom. Not the land of dictatorship rule where we have everything shoved down our throats.

Maybe we don't want to sacrifice? Maybe we should focus on better ways to generate petroleum to feed our cars--instead of making us dependent on electric vehicles when we utterly and completely lack the electrical generating capacity to power them all! Couple that with a President who is now shy to stand up for Nuclear Power and who hates Coal power and we have a recipe for a disaster.


RE: Car Sales
By Mitch101 on 6/30/2011 2:46:44 PM , Rating: 2
I saw if you can afford the price of gas in 25 year go for it.

The Corvette managed to double and depending on year triple its horsepower in 25 years yet it gets the same if not slightly better gas mileage today. And we know Carbon Fibre is much stronger than steel and lighter. Mass production should bring down the cost.

But I dont think its unreasonable.

Mercedes-Benz C 250 CDI
http://www.emercedesbenz.com/Sep08/10_001382_World...
0-62 mph in just 7.0 seconds - 45 mpg
Posted September 10, 2008


RE: Car Sales
By michael67 on 7/1/11, Rating: 0
RE: Car Sales
By michael67 on 7/1/2011 6:28:36 AM , Rating: 2
Damn love that Edit button.

One miss click and you all get the rouge version. ^_^


RE: Car Sales
By JediJeb on 7/1/2011 5:00:25 PM , Rating: 3
But what about those of us who can only afford a car that we can get by with making a $250-350/month payment on? Every car you mention owning costs more than I make in a year working as a chemist in a small laboratory and if I even though of buying one of those right now I would have to give up my house and live in a tent.

Sure the government could mandate that tomorrow no vehicle can be sold that gets less than 70mpg or is fully electric, and all other cars must be pulled off the road, but then you would have millions of people having to quit their jobs because they couldn't get to work. That would solve our energy problems for certain, everyone driving super efficient vehicles, if they could afford them and everyone else living without cars, or electricity, or food because they would all be broke, the US energy demand would fall by 90% probably.

This is not something car companies can do overnight, they don't just have blueprints for 60mpg vehicles sitting on the shelves gathering dust. And the ones they might have in concept are not vehicles that will serve the broad base of drivers nation wide, but only those who live in big cities and have a very short commute maybe.

quote:
Don't try to explain it to people like that, they only think of them self, in what they want not why the world is in the shit now, and that new rule's are needed to fix it.


It isn't so much that people only think of themselves, but many do not have the luxury to just go out and buy the new shiny EV or Hybrid every few years. When the car companies can make highly efficient vehicles at reasonable prices, and to me reasonable is in the $16k-$25k price range, then people in mass will begin to shift to those types of vehicles.


RE: Car Sales
By michael67 on 7/2/11, Rating: 0
RE: Car Sales
By dsx724 on 6/30/2011 3:27:04 PM , Rating: 1
How about you pay for the increase in fuel costs associated with your "sucking fuel like crazy" by yourself instead of leaning on the general public to offset your costs? Basic market supply demand principle.

This is the land of freedom and in order to preserve that freedom we need order, laws, and government capable of protecting the public from profiteering and self-indulgent entities that "suck fuel like crazy".

The Arab Oil Embargo caused sky high oil prices and CAFE was introduced to prevent such a thing from happening again. I forgot that as an average American, you have the memory of a goldfish and the ignorance of George Bush.


RE: Car Sales
By Reclaimer77 on 6/30/2011 3:40:17 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
How about you pay for the increase in fuel costs associated with your "sucking fuel like crazy" by yourself instead of leaning on the general public to offset your costs?


He pays more gas taxes, a "gas guzzler" tax, depending on the state he lives in he pays more in "luxury taxes". And on and on it goes.

Fuks sake man, how much more extra do you want him to pay? Don't hand me the line that he's increasing your fuel costs because of his choices, that's complete bullcrap.

Take your collectivists guilt trip and go stuff yourself.


RE: Car Sales
By kfonda on 6/30/2011 4:47:59 PM , Rating: 3
Amen!!!

I'm beginning to think we should just split the country in 2 and let everyone decide up front which half they want to live in (socialist or capitalist). After the initial decision everyone has to stay in the half they chose.


RE: Car Sales
By Breathless on 6/30/2011 8:44:59 PM , Rating: 2
I have been thinking this as well and would LOVE to see something like this. An experiment if you will.... I would be onboard and would pack my things immediately and move if I had to. Bring it on! "Left America" and "Right America" - split it right in two. Left America would have no God, no religion (other than atheism or possibly Islam since they would for some reason make an exception), no social classes (no one would make any more money than anyone else), and certainly no "corrupt corporations". They would legalize whatever drugs they wanted to and abortion would be celebrated - nay encouraged, as would homosexuality and eventually pedophilia (with the child's consent of course - whatever makes both of them 'happy'). Children would be encouraged to have premarital unprotected sex as early as they could be taught how to. Disease would be rampant. There would be no morality other than what the government dictated by its chosen officials. Criminals would have extremely short sentences universally, if they were ever jailed at all. It would only take about 2 or 3 generations for "Left America" to be bankrupt and immigrating back to "Right America" illegally and then subsequently begging for amnesty - all the while preaching the injustices of Right America.


RE: Car Sales
By Reclaimer77 on 6/30/2011 9:44:54 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I have been thinking this as well and would LOVE to see something like this. An experiment if you will....


It's already been done. It's called Canada, and nobody lives there.


RE: Car Sales
By Breathless on 6/30/2011 10:15:30 PM , Rating: 1
well then it needs to happen again, unfortunately. The communist / socialist mindset is overtaking our country faster than it can be controlled. What else can be done? Voting them out doesn't work when they are now becoming the majority - those that want to decimate our constitution and principles that our founders had that made us great and kept us from self destructing...


RE: Car Sales
By FITCamaro on 7/1/11, Rating: 0
RE: Car Sales
By The Raven on 7/1/2011 10:55:41 AM , Rating: 2
Hell, I'm half-Mexican and even I left CA! ;-)

Truth is that we used to have these things called states. Now it is just all controlled by the feds like some huge company like Google buying up the little guys. It makes me want to move to NH for the Free State Project. But MO is nice and is one of the most free states in the US. So I can hang and try to make MO more free.


RE: Car Sales
By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 10:03:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's also called Commifornia.

By whom? Those in states with the lowest literacy rates?


RE: Car Sales
By MrBungle123 on 7/1/2011 10:41:21 PM , Rating: 2
Oh you mean the "stupid" states run by fiscal conservatives that are sooo dumb that they actually believe:

Income - Expenses = Amount of money we can spend?

lol. Yeah thats gotta be the most moronic thing I've ever heard!

Commifornia's Income - Expenses + $19 Billion = Our budget for the year! Totally makes more sense!


RE: Car Sales
By dsx724 on 7/1/2011 10:57:12 PM , Rating: 2
Oh you mean those same conservative states that piggy back off the federal taxes that those liberal states contribute to the federal budget?

http://www.taxfoundation.org/UserFiles/Image/Blog/...

Pay you fair share and stop leaning on California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Washington, Michigan, Connecticut, Delaware. If you actually paid your due instead of using your lobbyists/senators to rip off the "blue states".

Congratulations, your cash positive because you're stealing from someone else. Sorry to break your bubble of ignorance and artificial sense of facts.


RE: Car Sales
By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 11:51:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
lol. Yeah thats gotta be the most moronic thing I've ever heard!

Typical political extremist. You probably say that every time somebody says anything you disagree with. You think you win buy the argument by going all republican jihad on people.


RE: Car Sales
By troysavary on 7/1/2011 9:31:22 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Canada is more conservative than the US now.


RE: Car Sales
By Reclaimer77 on 7/1/2011 12:54:39 PM , Rating: 2
Sigh.. :( Yeah, maybe.


RE: Car Sales
By MrBlastman on 6/30/2011 3:55:03 PM , Rating: 1
Cry me a river. Your sympathetic plea towards making people who want to live free makes me want to puke.

I am the LAST person who "leans on the general public" to offset my costs. In order to drive around a sports car, the first thing you have to have is money. Well, in order to have that money, you have to have a job. In order to keep that job, you have to work hard at that. In order to collect that paycheck, you have to pay taxes--taxes which go into the system to subsidize the people who DO NOT WORK and DO NOT PAY TAXES so they can sit on their asses and complain about people who do work--and it not being fair.

Grow up.

If we work hard in America, we should be able to keep a large part of what we earn and... if we choose, spend it how we please. This is what freedom is about.

I pay for more gas if I use more and in that payment for gas is a tax that is paid into the system. You aren't subsidizing crap.

My whole point is--let the free market work. If someone figures out how to make a more fuel efficient car, have it be cost effective and desireable--along with the power infrastructure to support it (which our shortsighted Government fails to realize), people might buy it and it will set new standards. We don't need the Government breathing down our backs.


RE: Car Sales
By dsx724 on 6/30/2011 5:36:41 PM , Rating: 1
Last time I recall, you can still buy Ferraris, Lambos and Range Rovers. Whats with all the complaints about CAFE when the options are out there?

Those lazy people that do not work and do not pay taxes account for less than 10%. Be the better person and ignore minute amount that comes out of your paycheck.

On an individual scale, your usage isn't reflected but if there were a million people who think like you, the price of gas will increase by 1-2% for entire pool. Thus the extra demand you've created is causing everyone to play more whether they like it or not.

The statistics are out that shows that returns on improved fuel economy have three fold returns in gas saving. For each dollar I'm paying into the American economy for research, I'm saving $3 from going to Saudi Arabia.

The free market has failed and will continue to fail based on externalities. By driving around in your oil guzzling sports car, you are increasing the prices for the pool and polluting the air that I breathe. I would like you see you repair the damage to the road and clean up the smog created per gallon of gas using the 10 cent per gallon tax that is put into gasoline. It simply doesn't work because there's insufficient taxes to cover the cost associated with its consumption.


RE: Car Sales
By acer905 on 6/30/2011 10:52:19 PM , Rating: 4
........... You do realize that a) $0.184 per gallon of gas is the federal tax, with state tax added on to that, and then sales tax added at the end. For states like Connecticut or Minnesota, which have state taxes in the mid $0.20's, that can easily get to 4x your estimate.

http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp

http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/26079.ht...

http://www.api.org/statistics/fueltaxes/upload/GAS...

b) The breakdown of US oil suppliers does not start with any OPEC member. It starts with Canada, supplying nearly twice what Saudi Arabia does. Because Canada actually uses the vast oil that can be found in the Arctic Circle, much like Russia, which happens to be another of the worlds oil suppliers.

ftp://ftp.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_p...

http://www.consumerenergyreport.com/2010/01/25/top...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_industry_in...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/business/global/...

c) Based on the US gasoline usage, 378 million gallons a day, and the average gas tax of $0.495 per gallon, the government rakes in $187.11 million a day from gas sales, or $68.295 billion a year, pure "profit". ExxonMobil, the worlds largest oil refiner in the world, only managed $30.46 billion in net income for worldwide sales in 2010. Thats off of $383.221 billion in revenue. I'd say the Gov is getting their fair share.

http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_Corporatio...

http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/10/10537.html


RE: Car Sales
By dsx724 on 7/1/2011 2:14:25 AM , Rating: 2
a) true, i am wrong on that figure
b) oil futures are global, just because our money isn't going directly to opec member nations doesn't mean opec member nations aren't getting more money because of us. canada could be selling that oil to europe and china and thus reducing the share of their oil imported from middle eastern countries.
c) the US has 4 million miles of roads and 2 million miles of oil/ng pipeline of which a significant portion has lighting, traffic lights, guard rail and sound walls. where is the pure profit when you have to build and maintain all of this and build parking space? for every dollar you spend on gas, the government pays more than a dollar to enable you to drive.
c2) 8% profit after costs are factored in. the government is running a negative balance that must be supplimented by non-gas taxes to break even.


RE: Car Sales
By JediJeb on 7/1/2011 5:14:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Those lazy people that do not work and do not pay taxes account for less than 10%. Be the better person and ignore minute amount that comes out of your paycheck.


Maybe those that pay no taxes at all is at 10%, but the figures show that now for the first time since the Great Depression US households are receiving more money than they are paying in in taxes. I personally know several people working at minimum wage jobs who get more money in their tax returns each year than they actually paid in.


RE: Car Sales
By MrBungle123 on 7/1/2011 5:31:29 PM , Rating: 2
The bottom 50% of wage earners only pay 3% of the taxes... so yeah, the number of "tax payers" that don't pay taxes is enormous.


RE: Car Sales
By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 9:51:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The bottom 50% of wage earners only pay 3% of the taxes...

How many of them are retired people? Or will you remain perfectly satisfied with half truths?


RE: Car Sales
By MrBungle123 on 7/1/2011 10:32:52 PM , Rating: 2
Retired people are not the problem, the welfare kings and queens are the problem. Far too many people are content to work for $8-10 and hour and collect food stamps. They have children and get health insurance plans and tax payer subsidised housing through the state. This group has a negative tax burden because they do not produce enough in the way of tax revenues to make up for their drain on the system. Thats where the problem lies. The same group that votes for socialists like Obama and the rest of the blood suckers in Washington that buy votes with mine and the rest of the working public's money that pulls their weight.

Now I suppose you're going to reply with some drivel that goes on about how I'm because I would rather people work for a living and don't feel sorry for people that would rather smoke weed and drink themselves retarded than learn a skill and add something to society.


RE: Car Sales
By dsx724 on 7/1/2011 11:10:57 PM , Rating: 2
Retired people are the problem. Labor participation after 65 has fallen drastically from historical trends. The same people keep voting Republican thinking that Republicans will make them pay less taxes but little do they know that Republicans are mostly spend whores that will cut services to the elderly and rip apart sustainable money pools created to assist the elderly. These people then have to depend more on government services to get by.

Many elderly people feel that they should not have to pay for education since they no longer have children but what they don't realize is that the same people that the elderly don't want to pay taxes for will in 10 years have to pay taxes to contribute to sustaining the existing retiree services. The only logical conclusion is that democracy is being cyclically undermined by misinformation and lack of education.


RE: Car Sales
By redbone75 on 7/3/2011 3:24:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
the welfare kings and queens are the problem

You mean big oil and other large corporations that constantly look for government subsidies? And then cry foul when it is proposed to remove those subsidies when they are experiencing record profits year over year? You hear the same crap from them, also: "Innovation is being stifled, or prices will go up, or jobs will be lost." Get off that bull$#!&, man. There are actually people that are educated and don't feed into the lies that the right try to spew. Yeah, yeah, I'm going to get voted down by all the right wing morons that would rather just follow the lies their leaders spit (like Rush "The Drug Addict" Limbaugh and Newt "Tiffany's" Gingrich), but try doing a little more research before you start with boring welfare crap.


RE: Car Sales
By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 9:49:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Those lazy people that do not work and do not pay taxes account for less than 10%.

As more and more people retire his kind are really going to freak out.

quote:
Be the better person and ignore minute amount that comes out of your paycheck.

Oh man, you're certainly at the wrong web site. These guys think that a person earning $12-$14/hour can afford to save enough to fund their retirement for 20-30 years and it's totally their fault if they can't succeed, regardless of how much inflation there is on food, energy costs, medical, etc.

quote:
I'm saving $3 from going to Saudi Arabia.

Can't understand why so few people here don't put the Arabs at the top of the screw you list in this manner.


RE: Car Sales
By The0ne on 6/30/11, Rating: 0
RE: Car Sales
By MrBlastman on 6/30/2011 5:21:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why aren't you two pissing on each other?


Sorry man, I didn't know you were into that kind of thing. I think there's a usenet group for that or something...

Something like alt.binaries.goldenshowers ????

Oh and by the way... Early 1900's fuel efficiency would have died off in our free market economy during the 70's gas crisis. Free Market systems really do work.


RE: Car Sales
By Mitch101 on 6/30/2011 2:15:45 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe Im missing something but are the oversees manufacturers complaining or is it just Detroit?

Also if we go to alternative fuels like Algae I believe this would spur a huge number of jobs creating production and refining facilities within our own country.


RE: Car Sales
By Targon on 6/30/2011 11:17:38 PM , Rating: 1
Everyone is complaining, because the government is hurting fuel economy by forcing Ethanol on us while forcing higher and higher mpg figures on the auto makers.

On the flip side, many foreign auto makers don't produce trucks, so it is far easier for THEM to hit fuel economy numbers than the domestic companies that make trucks. People DO use their vehicles for WORK....you know, that thing that keeps the economy going?


RE: Car Sales
By MrBungle123 on 7/1/2011 5:54:38 PM , Rating: 2
People don't need trucks!

Didn't you know that food comes from the grocery store and all of it magically materializes in the back room, no family needs more than 2 kids so anything other than a 4dr civic is a complete waste, all people have access to mass transit, and the snow plows can always keep up in the winter so 4 wheel drive is a waste of gas?!

geeeez man get a clue!

/sarcasm


RE: Car Sales
By Dr of crap on 7/1/2011 8:46:39 AM , Rating: 2
Haven't heard anyone BUT Detroit complain.
You know the ones that needed OUR money to survive!

Hell Audi and VW, I think, have the best collective mpg cars as a whole. And I do not own one if that's what you're thinking.

And why did we bail these aholes out, if they can't figure this one out. Yes they need to make money, and they need to figure out how to do that. If used cars will be in demand, then get in on the used car market! Do they have anyone with any smarts working for them?

I'd like my tax money back now, please. And not some crap accounting payback like we've seen before. A REAL payback!


RE: Car Sales
By Steve1981 on 6/30/2011 2:11:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
start innovating.


Unfortunately, it tends to be a lot easier to demand for innovation than to actually innovate.

quote:
They're giving you 15 years to achieve what is possible in 5.


Automakers aren't saying that it is impossible. It's a question of cost, reduction in safety, and reduction in choice.


RE: Car Sales
By Targon on 6/30/2011 11:24:19 PM , Rating: 1
If a company sells trucks in addition to cars, then it really isn't possible to hit the numbers without excluding the heavier vehicles from the requirements. The government can make demands all it wants, but that won't magically change the laws of physics. If the government were to mandate that in only 5 years, all computer chips must use half the power, then the result would be slower computers and very unhappy people since no one would bother buying a new computer unless their old one DIES on them.

Progress drives sales, and forcing stupid environmental standards will only hurt business in the long run. It is one thing to require emissions standards, and another to make artificial requirements that do NOTHING. If filters could stop all negative emissions, then shouldn't that satisfy the environmental groups and put an end to the forced Ethanol usage and fuel economy requirements?

They want better mpg figures, then outlaw Ethanol!


RE: Car Sales
By Radiomachine on 6/30/2011 1:31:39 PM , Rating: 2
The environmentalists' dream vehicle has already been invented:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rickshaw


RE: Car Sales
By bigdawg1988 on 6/30/2011 1:42:31 PM , Rating: 2
Dealerships will slowly disappear as the vehicle price goes up overtime & sales slow

Isn't that what the industry says every time there is an increase to the CAFE requirements? Just shut up and innovate. You've done it before, you'll do it again. At least Ford is taking the right road on this one. My next car might be a Ford (if they fix that darn computer thing).


RE: Car Sales
By nolisi on 6/30/2011 1:48:57 PM , Rating: 2
If we truly believe the free market solves all problems, then it can solve the problem of hitting a 56 mpg mark.


RE: Car Sales
By ClownPuncher on 6/30/2011 2:30:38 PM , Rating: 2
On it's own, if there is demand.


RE: Car Sales
By M4gery on 6/30/2011 3:00:22 PM , Rating: 1
That's not a problem. That's a government mandate. In other words, its a made-up "problem"

A problem would be gas being so expensive that it would take 56MPG to be affordable. We aren't there yet.

But hey, what do I care, when this shitstorm hits the fan and the economy finally does collapse, I'm plenty prepared.


RE: Car Sales
By 91TTZ on 6/30/2011 3:01:49 PM , Rating: 2
That's really easy. There are already cars that get 56 mpg, and if everyone chose to purchase those vehicles then the average would be 56 mpg. However, many people choose to buy vehicles that get worse gas mileage. That is the consumers' choice, it's not a failing of the automakers.


RE: Car Sales
By Reclaimer77 on 6/30/2011 3:16:37 PM , Rating: 2
That argument doesn't work on him. Because you see, the problem is, they don't think those other cars SHOULD be an option. That's the point of these regulations, after all. To ensure that the cars consumers actually choose to purchase get slowly phased out and we can get on with the business of buying the ones the President thinks we should.


RE: Car Sales
By dsx724 on 6/30/2011 5:50:11 PM , Rating: 1
If you don't meet CAFE, you pay a maximum of $100 per MPG per car you are below CAFE. You are giving off the false pretense that these vehicles will become unavailable which is not true at all. Considering that 1MPG will result in $1000 in addition gas costs (money sent overseas) over the life of a vehicle, I don't think the $100 tax is high enough. But who cares what the numbers are when you ignore the truth to begin with?


RE: Car Sales
By MrBungle123 on 7/1/2011 6:00:38 PM , Rating: 2
Right so lets just tack on and extra $3500+ to the cost of a large vehicle because why? Get a clue, comapact cars are not practical for a large part of the population which is why bigger things sell better.


RE: Car Sales
By dsx724 on 7/1/2011 10:47:35 PM , Rating: 2
Only supercar manufactures with cars costing $100K+ will pay $3500 per car and $3500 won't even cover a brake job on those cars. The mandate is fleet-wide so if the average of the fleet is 5MPG below CAFE, you pay only $70 * 5MPG = $350 per car. But you never bothered to understand CAFE before staunchly opposing it. How is that not ignorance?

"In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. They often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like underpowered antibiotic, facts make misinformation stronger."


RE: Car Sales
By YashBudini on 7/4/2011 1:56:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like underpowered antibiotic, facts make misinformation stronger.

Sounds like a severe case of plain old stubbornness.


RE: Car Sales
By mindless1 on 7/2/2011 2:14:37 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, no. People who are truly conservation conscious, aren't driving the *average* number of miles in their vehicles, they are making smarter choices such as combining trips, living shorter distances from work, etc.

Indeed, who cares what the numbers are! You imply that people should be *hurt* if they don't agree with what you think is important. How would you like it if those people took an opposing view to your life choices? Since the government makes quite a lot of money on fuel taxation, it seems very logical that any vehicle that gets 1MPH BETTER fuel economy has to incur $100 tax per MPG increase to make up for the lost gas tax revenue.


RE: Car Sales
By Dr of crap on 7/1/2011 9:14:59 AM , Rating: 2
It's based on the car makers fleet.

You can have your Vettes and pickups as long as you also have something that gets into the 60mpg range to offset it.

There will be choices just not the same as we have now.
Not everyone can or will want a small car that gets 60 mpg. There still has to be pickups for the work that needs to be done.

Get off your high, smug horse and see that you "greenies"!!


RE: Car Sales
By Steve1981 on 6/30/2011 3:13:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If we truly believe the free market solves all problems


What about the US auto industry screams "free market" to you? CAFE? Government mandated safety and emissions? The bailouts? Yup, sounds like a free market alright.


RE: Car Sales
By Reclaimer77 on 6/30/2011 2:41:15 PM , Rating: 3
Actually used cars are already more expensive. They rose by an average of 30% since "Cash for Clunkers" was instituted and they have stayed that high.

More proof of the negative results of our Government intervening in markets they were never meant to.

Of course this is all intended. Obama doesn't want cars to be a convenience, he believes they should be a luxury. People who actually do this for a living are trying to tell him the disastrous effects of his agenda, but he doesn't care. The goal is advancing his political and environmental ideology ABOVE the will of the people and their quality of life.


RE: Car Sales
By BZDTemp on 7/1/11, Rating: 0
Freedoms
By Gio6518 on 6/30/2011 1:51:05 PM , Rating: 2
Just another freedom of choice taken away !

Maybe some of us don't want to prance around in a Prius...

Not saying that auto manufacturers dont need to inovate, ford (for example) has made great improvements in fuel economy in the mustang alone...and it's something that men can keep their dignity while driving....




RE: Freedoms
By M4gery on 6/30/2011 3:03:13 PM , Rating: 2
Not really, imo. It's become more of a woman's car over the last couple of decades, imo.


RE: Freedoms
By Gio6518 on 6/30/2011 4:54:04 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Not really, imo. It's become more of a woman's car over the last couple of decades, imo.


Exactly, thats my point, you have your opinion, and are able to make decisions on your opinion.....yours doesn't coincide with mine, so i choose to buy what I want....and the government should not have the right to force me to buy a vehicle that they choose, what would be next warmer states like Florida, Texas, Arizona, can't have black car's because it absorbs heat, making the owner use his air-conditioner wasting fuel...............


RE: Freedoms
By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 9:58:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Just another freedom of choice taken away !

Oh please, if you want to buy a Bentley or a Ferrari you are still free to do so.


RE: Freedoms
By MrBungle123 on 7/1/2011 10:43:17 PM , Rating: 2
Does the fact that regulations limit the types of things that can be produced weather the public wants them or not just completely escape you?


RE: Freedoms
By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 11:55:33 PM , Rating: 2
So please tell us how the government has prevented you from buying a Bentley or a Ferrari. Hell you can drive around in a tractor trailer if you want to, who's stopping you?


RE: Freedoms
By mindless1 on 7/2/2011 2:27:47 PM , Rating: 2
"Prevent" is a nonsensical word. Suppose every time you leave your home, your neighbor beats you half unconscious.

Your neighbor didn't prevent you from leaving home, but it's definitely going to change the way your choices are made, you no longer have the same freedom of choice as you formerly did.

Why doesn't everyone have the nicer cars you mention? Their higher cost is a primary factor. Since cars are sold in luxury and performance tiers even among similar types of vehicles, raising the prices of each does change what the average shopper will purchase.

Who is stopping them? A government that makes everything in their lives more expensive than it ought to be, by burdening the average taxpayer with paying for what benefits the wealthy.

Let's put it another way. The government isn't stopping anyone from choosing to buy a more fuel efficient vehicle if that is what they want, there is no reason why the government needs to mandate fuel economy for those who are fuel economy conscious to pick an economic vehicle and through sales rates, automakers will spend more R&D on increasing fuel economy.

We know that is not what people want, the industry is currently a reflection, a balance of what people want based on what they buy based on 100 years of experience. We can say "oh SUVs used to sell well and now don't so much", but that fact reinforces my argument, that consumers chose on their own to buy something else without any government intervention necessary.

Yes there was cash for clunkers, where many people just bought a newer SUV to replace their old one, not the highest fuel efficient vehicle they could find.


RE: Freedoms
By YashBudini on 7/2/2011 5:57:43 PM , Rating: 2
Every new car lot I pass is loaded with unsold SUVs and other vehicles that get poor mpg. Perhaps you haven't noticed.

quote:
Why doesn't everyone have the nicer cars you mention? Their higher cost is a primary factor.

The people that want these cars buy them. The cost includes a level of exclusiveness for status. Notice how their crappy mpg rating and gas guzzler tax has no impact on the vehicle. People buy want they want, and they sacrfice what they feel like sacrificing, which is why homeless people always have beer, cigarettes, and lotto tickets. What taxes have stopped them?

In the 70's Detroit said the cost of the catalytic converters would hurt car sales. Guess what? The cost of sheet metal changes totally dwarfs the cost of cats, even back then.

quote:
your neighbor beats you half unconscious.

Yeah it's tough living in a country with no guns.


RE: Freedoms
By mindless1 on 7/6/2011 7:46:57 PM , Rating: 2
If the new car lot has lots of SUVs, it is because the dealership orders lots of SUVs because they sell lots of SUVs, although at the same time I would expect the average car lot has plenty of smaller vehicles too, you just wouldn't notice them as much because they are smaller... a little car won't block you from seeing the SUV behind it, but the SUV would block your seeing the car behind it by a higher %.

False about "the people who want these cars buy them". While it is true that the people who buy these cars want them, the opposite is not true, there are lots of things in life that people want but cannot afford or in the case of vehicles, they don't have the extra garage, driveway or other space to store everything they'd "like" to own.

Homeless people always have these things? I suppose you watch too much TV and stereotype well, but there is a reason why homeless people tend to continue smoking and drinking, because that is a minor expense relative to things like making a house payment, nice clothes to wear to work, providing for a family, the car to go places, etc etc. Plus, statistically speaking mental illness is a large contributing factor to homelessness (at least before the recession in the US it was) and mentally ill people tend to drink and smoke more, IF they can manage to.

You wrote "what taxes have stopped them", while failing to grasp that ideally they would not be doing without all the things they do. Think about it, if you could survey all of them do you feel the consensus would be that they have everything they want? Your example is extremely self defeating in that they have almost nothing and you wanted to argue as though taxes must not stop them because they want not for anything, which is clearly not the case.

Sheet metal changes are a necessity to update a design, improve safety, etc. You can't argue away that cost as a reason to ignore cost of other things, but I fail to see how this fits into your argument because today a catalytic converter can be bought aftermarket for $100, a far cry from the total cost of all the mandates to push vehicle attributes beyond what the public wants.

Guns are not an answer to my example, rather that just escalates the situation until one person is dead and the other goes to prison. If you wield a gun and the neighbor backs down you can't (reasonably assume to) get away with shooting him, so he leaves and being the thug that was hassling you already, he comes back with a gun, waiting in hiding knowing that you are inside but you not knowing if or when he is outside.


Simple Solution
By tayb on 6/30/2011 8:08:16 PM , Rating: 1
Stop making massive gas guzzling SUVs and trucks that get 15 MPG. It's really easy.

Getting a fleet to average 56MPG with the huge tanks that get 20 is what is making this ridiculously expensive.

Make an exemption for companies and jobs that actually require these huge vehicles. Single moms don't qualify for the exemption.

Done.

Sorry gas guzzlers but I don't respect your right to raise my costs of living by being an idiot.




RE: Simple Solution
By Targon on 6/30/2011 11:26:24 PM , Rating: 2
I don't respect the idiots in politics who associate fuel economy with the environment. All those batteries that go into hybrids have a LOT of pollution that gets generated in the manufacturing process, but it doesn't count since the pollution is in China, right?


RE: Simple Solution
By Philippine Mango on 7/1/2011 6:47:15 AM , Rating: 2
Batteries get recycled and it's a pittance compared to the nickle that goes into making a gas guzzler like the hummer H2 or whatever stupid vehicle. The way I look at the nickel mining is that since china will be reducing exports of their rare earth metals, we mind as well import them while we still can. Toyota keeps a bounty on its batteries so if you don't recycle them, it's your loss...of $250.


RE: Simple Solution
By Dr of crap on 7/1/2011 9:20:52 AM , Rating: 2
Everyone SEES his side of the story. There is waste and environmental costs with ANY CAR MADE.

Some have blinders on for the EVs made and some do not.

ALL cars made have costs - costs to make and costs to the environment. You can't have it both ways.


RE: Simple Solution
By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 9:56:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There is waste and environmental costs with ANY CAR MADE.

That's addressed in economics 101. The efficiency of something should be considered from cradle to grave, ie from manufacturing to disposal, not just mpg. That's where the real savings is.


Some of us need larger vehicles
By troysavary on 7/1/2011 7:17:11 AM , Rating: 1
I have 4 kids, no econobox will fit me, my wife and the kids, much less have any room for cargo as well. Last winter, we were getting a snowstorm just about every week, so don't tell me that a 4wd SUV is not beneficial to me. Also, most of my adult life, I have worked in forestry or road building, so I need a pickup as well, also 4wd since I am off-road a lot.

Not all of us a Manhattan liberal faggots who will not transports anything heavier than their MacBook and a latte while going to hang out with their life partner.




RE: Some of us need larger vehicles
By BZDTemp on 7/1/2011 9:07:35 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not all of us a Manhattan liberal faggots who will not transports anything heavier than their MacBook and a latte while going to hang out with their life partner.


My respect for your argument went out the window right there. If you want to be taken serious then stop disrespecting people that have chosen a different life.

With your way of communicating people may just as well say you'd better get a snip for that pecker of yours and than it's unlikely you're a good parent so your transport problems will be solved when you're kids are taken away. Of course that is all BS but no more BS than your rant about those liberals. In other words stick to the subject instead of being a troll.


RE: Some of us need larger vehicles
By troysavary on 7/1/2011 9:28:10 AM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't care how they choose to live their life if they would stop trying to get laws passed that interfere with mine. How many people in the replies to this thread were claiming that no one needs a truck or SUV?

Generally, it is city dwelling liberals who are so insulated from life outside their bubble that they cannot conceive that anyone would have needs different than their own.


RE: Some of us need larger vehicles
By superstition on 7/4/2011 2:38:45 AM , Rating: 2
We don't need to read your knuckle-dragging heterosexist BS.


By YashBudini on 7/4/2011 1:49:03 PM , Rating: 2
Really? How long ago was it YEEHAW!!!! was one of our international diplomacy policies?


for the sake of our country...
By M4gery on 6/30/2011 3:02:00 PM , Rating: 2
I sincerely hope the illegal immigrant vote isnt enough to put this sorry SOB and his cronies in office for a second term. You think this one is bad? Just wait and see what he does when re-election is no longer at stake.




RE: for the sake of our country...
By Targon on 6/30/11, Rating: 0
RE: for the sake of our country...
By aguilpa1 on 7/1/2011 11:51:13 AM , Rating: 2
And just how many illegal immigrants do you know have voting rights in US? Or do you consider anyone who is not Anglo an immigrant, in which case only the Native American would have the right to vote. Stop posting crap Einstein.


By YashBudini on 7/4/2011 2:12:20 PM , Rating: 2
You never see the border states up in arms over the people who hire illegals. And why is that?


Chicken Little is at it again.
By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 9:33:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The standard could also lead to more crash deaths, as automakers say such standards lead to cuts in material density and safety features to save on weight. The resulting cars are more fragile.


Oh please, I heard this foolish nonsense at the first round of CAFE standards. The result? Safer and heavier cars. Of all they predicted back then essentially none of it happened. Why? Because they couldn't see any technological breakthroughs in the future. Does anyone recall the individual in the early 20th century who proclaim that the US Patent Office should be closed because there was nothing left to invent, that we had already thought of everything? Probably an ancestor of the Chicken Little's whining today.

The premise of their scare tactics is that the ICE can't get a whole lot more efficient. And we know this for certain, how? Who's to say if in 5 years electronically controlling valve duration and lift won't make ICE capable of 2HP/CI on a NA engine? How do we know if battery technology won't allow huge reductions in weight for the same or better capacity? Do you think the crybabies have even heard of this?
http://www.dailytech.com/New+Disc+Gas+Engine+Looks...

Detroit probably put more effort into delaying tactics when the catalytic converter was suppose to be on cars in 1975 than it did working on converter technology in the first place. Frankly they made fools of themselves, "It can't be done." At the very same time Honda said "We're ready" and they were.

What Detroit wants to do is to move in baby steps and milk every dollar possible before moving to the next step. This is the old Intel way of doing business. If Intel had their way they'd still be charging $500 for the average desktop CPU.

As for losing jobs:
1. How many people are employed making catalytic converters?
2.Fuel injection parts including electronics?
3.Who's designing and implementing the OS that runs your car?
4.The air bag and all of its parts?

Perhaps a thriving industry around carbon fiber parts will show the world the US can once again be a technological force, but that certainly won't happen with the typical Detroit mentality.




RE: Chicken Little is at it again.
By dsx724 on 7/1/2011 11:24:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
typical Detroit mentality

Typical American Mentality. Sadly, the average intelligence in this country has regressed while ego and ignorance shot through the roof. I think that a lot of people lost hope when Reagan was voted in over Carter.


By YashBudini on 7/1/2011 11:45:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Typical American Mentality

Hardly. While it's a niche market American designer and manufacturers of high end audio dominate.

Plenty of "organic" athletes excel. Most people? At what point is the does the attitude become, "Why bother when I can lose my job at the drop of a hat?" "My parent's tried to get ahead, died trying, never enjoyed themselves." And if you never believed it before after 2008 it was clearly, "Rat race is over, rats won."

quote:
I think that a lot of people lost hope when Reagan was voted in over Carter.

Perhaps it was a knee-jerk reaction much like the 2008 election. It's not like people had a real choice. All they got was a different flavor of pro-corporate omnivore.


czzcx
By fafafafa on 7/4/2011 10:56:14 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.benzlogo.com/

I tide fashion Good-looking, not expensive Free transport




RE: czzcx
By YashBudini on 7/5/2011 12:50:51 AM , Rating: 2
The post so nice he posted it thrice.

</Sigh>


????
By RedemptionAD on 6/30/2011 1:06:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"Our people are very professional at this. I think we proved that with the last CAFE standard. We got it right because we had every car company standing in the Rose Garden with the president. We want to get it right this time."


That is called ettiquette and it still doesn't mean that you know what you're doing. The KKK has a parade every year, it may be pretty, but it still doesn't put out a good message.




BS
By Rogeraususa on 6/30/2011 3:34:53 PM , Rating: 1
This is industry (and their lobbyists) resisting to improve their products because it affects their bottom line. Fact is, the US should have done this in the late 1970's and early 1980's after the oil crisis. We can't keep kicking the can down the road ... the US of A *needs* to get off oil and chart a new course to keep money out of the hands of terrorists and other oil-rich hostile foreign entities.

Man-up USA and get off fossil fuels. We can make the tech of tomorrow if we want to!




RE: BS
By Schrag4 on 6/30/2011 4:40:41 PM , Rating: 1
If you're so concerned about it, and if it's as easy as you say, you should start your own car company. If you can pull off an affordable, realistically useable car that doesn't rely on oil in the next 5 years you'll be the richest man on earth. Why wouldn't I buy your car if it costs the same (or less), has the same cargo space (or more), the same performance (or better), can refuel in a couple of minutes (or shorter), same range before refueling (or longer), and fuel cost the same (or cheaper) per mile driven? This should be easy for you. Go ahead and get started! I look forward to buying your car.


Let's translate his comment another way
By FXi on 6/30/2011 10:34:10 PM , Rating: 2
I like this translation:
"the reason we keep building poor, short lasting cars, compared to the competition is to make sure you don't keep that car too long and are sure to HAVE to come back to us to buy a new one in a short period of time"

In other words the durability (or lack thereof) in American cars is something they "plan on" to insure they keep having jobs and costing customers continuously more money.

Oh no! That might change! People might keep their cars longer! We might not fill trash heaps unnecessarily!

Truly it's raining fire. Cat's and dogs living together, whatever will be next.




Technically
By FITCamaro on 7/1/2011 12:02:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Technically the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, a federal entity, has to approve of states' plans and grant them waivers from national standards. A 2007 Supreme Court ruling in the case Massachusetts v. EPA, (No. 05-1120) found that it was illegal for the EPA to obstruct states from implementing their own standards by refusing to grant waivers. The message seems unequivocal -- the EPA must grant waivers if states want them.


Technically, the EPA has no power because the federal government doesn't have the authority to tell states what to do.




Self-Correcting Problem?
By The Raven on 7/1/2011 10:59:21 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Plan would save on pollution, oil costs, but could increase vehicle costs, job losses , and accident deaths

</dark humor>




Americans Stupid
By Gooberitup on 7/1/2011 11:24:13 PM , Rating: 2
I take exception to the comments that Americans are stupid. Why do you feel the need to berate someone just because they don't agree with you? To me that says your weak and your position can't stand the scrutiny. If anything most Americans are negligent for not speaking out. The president/EPA/DOT is being unrealistic.




fafa
By fafafafa on 7/4/2011 10:54:43 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.benzlogo.com/

I tide fashion Good-looking, not expensive Free transport




fdsa
By fafafafa on 7/4/2011 10:55:37 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.benzlogo.com/

I tide fashion Good-looking, not expensive Free transport




"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki