backtop


Print 39 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Jul 26 at 10:00 PM


Automakers want less stringent standards on work trucks
Michigan still says proposed CAFE standards will cost jobs

Talks between the automotive industry and Washington continue as both sides try to come to an agreement that sees the environmentalists in Washington and the Obama administration happy with the CAFE standards over the coming years. The automakers are fighting for what they consider a more realistic level of improvement in fuel economy they need to build into cars each year.

Delegations from Michigan where much of the automotive industry calls home have raised concerns about the Obama administration's efforts to come to an agreement. The delegation from Michigan wrote a letter to Washington claiming that the proposed fuel economy standards aren't feasible. Automakers fear that the costs of implementing the fuel economy increases will add enough to vehicle prices to decrease sales and thereby force job cuts in the automotive industry.

The letter written by the Michigan delegation said, "With the Michigan unemployment rate standing at 10.5 percent, we are unanimous in our concern about the consequences of an excessive proposal, and we urge you to continue to work closely with U.S. manufacturers who have the most at stake." The letter continued, "[Congress has urged the White House to] sit down promptly and at one time with all three domestic auto manufacturers and the United Auto Workers to work through an acceptable solution."

So far, there has been no agreement between the two parties. The proposed fleet standard for 2025 is 56.2 mpg working out to about a 5% increase in fuel economy each year from now until 2025. The Obama administration figures that the cost of the tech needed to reach that kind of fuel economy will add about $2,100 to the cost of each new vehicle. That number has been greatly contested.

Washington already took a step back from the new fuel economy standards and the increase of 5% in fuel economy each year on light trucks by agreeing to hold trucks and SUVs to only 3.5% increase each year from 2017 to 2021. Washington and automakers are also trying to hammer out a deal on work trucks that would see less stringent standards.



Comments     Threshold


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

By Nfarce on 7/25/2011 6:51:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Without the government forcing these companies to innovate, there is less perceived necessity and less invention. Yes, it costs money upfront. Innovation costs money, but in the long run, it saves it.


You take a couple of failures of the US auto industry and attempt to equate that into the Nanny Statist comment that government should mandate ALL of what auto manufacturers make. Yeah that makes sense.

quote:
Diesel-electric hybrid powertrains are part of our more efficient future, blending the virtues of electric with combustion, for excellent city and highway mileage. There are buses in Europe that are already on this.


Good for Europe. We have natural gas powered public transportation buses and state owned utility vehicles here in the States.

quote:
Our infrastructure is crumbling and more money has been spent coddling the parasitic finance sector and unnecessary wars than has been spent on environmental innovation.


You call the finance sector parasitic? How about the government dependent parasites out there? Specifically, the record number of food stamp recipients the US has now? Further, the "wars" are categorized as separate spending than domestic entitlement spending.

And how about the $860 billion "stimulus" bill that was passed two and a half years ago by Democrats to keep US unemployment from going above 8%, right? (It hasn't been at or below 8% since Bush was in office). And how about that $150 billion that is still unspent there, huh? Talk about failure of government.

quote:
It's time to bring the top tax rate back to where it was under Eisenhower and start investing in this country's future. But, good luck with that, since the government is pretty much a corporate mouthpiece.


We keep "investing" more and more in government public run education, but yet continue to get diminishing returns. We have "invested" in Obamacare only to have companies big and small be too spooked to hire due to it's costs, let alone worried about tax hikes. We have "invested" as stated earlier nearly a TRILLION in a so-called stimulus bill two and a half years ago which has done ZERO for the economy, only to have the liberal Left say "things would have been worse" which NOBODY has ever been able to provide a metric of.

quote:
Civilization is about people coming together to work together, depending upon each other's contributions to improve standard of living for all. That's a simple fact, one that's consistently obfuscated with fraudulent rhetoric about "socialism" and "freedom".


Yep, you are a neo-Marxists collectivist. There is no doubt about that. We live in a free America where you are free to succeed, or free to fail. And more often than not, you will see FAILURE on those who are dependent on government for their well being instead of learning to provide for themselves. That's of course nothing new. America was founded and grown on freedom and independence from government.


By Reclaimer77 on 7/25/2011 7:41:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You take a couple of failures of the US auto industry and attempt to equate that into the Nanny Statist comment that government should mandate ALL of what auto manufacturers make. Yeah that makes sense.


Well you gotta remember, the Government never fails. Ever...


By superstition on 7/25/2011 10:24:07 PM , Rating: 2
Another straw man. It does help to read what I actually wrote:

"Our infrastructure is crumbling and more money has been spent coddling the parasitic finance sector and unnecessary wars than has been spent on environmental innovation. We need new sewer systems, better bridges, more efficient road systems, and more efficient vehicles.

It's time to bring the top tax rate back to where it was under Eisenhower and start investing in this country's future. But, good luck with that, since the government is pretty much a corporate mouthpiece. Citizens United says that not only are corporations individual human beings (which is logically absurd), they have unlimited spending power to influence elections. The problems with this are many and grave. The only solution is for each of us to become more vocal and involved, not falling for fake grassroots movements organized by billionaires like the Koch brothers, but by putting real constructive pressure on this government to start working for the public again and not merely for the rich."


By Nfarce on 7/26/2011 12:14:19 AM , Rating: 2
Tell ya what, super: you start your own nation, company, and military, and then get back with us on your rant. Otherwise, sit down, shut up, and take it up the backside by "the man" that you so hate.

The rest of us will get on with our lives.


By superstition on 7/25/2011 10:31:59 PM , Rating: 2
"Yep, you are a neo-Marxists collectivist. There is no doubt about that. We live in a free America where you are free to succeed, or free to fail."

So, the virtual of starvation -- a society in which people are "free" by not being able to meet their potential, to grow, learn, and work. Sorry, Timmy, your parents were "free" to fail and so you're doomed to inadequate education, nutrition, housing, and health care. Too bad for you, but your suffering makes America stronger!

You can put whatever name you like on me, but it won't change the fact that civilization is not supposed to be a shell game for exploitation. It's a cooperative collective thing by its very definition. Freedom comes from the work of all of its members. We derive a greater standard of living because others help us, like specialists. Is someone without a willingness to cooperate "freer" because they don't have access to treatment from a doctor and have to pave their own roads?

If you think freedom is individuals going about randomly without concern for their fellows, then why be in a civilization in the first place? Why not live in a cave? You'll find that cave dwelling is less free. Remember the scene where Tom Hanks yanked his tooth out? That's your "freedom".

Success and failure is not things that are separate from the basic definition of civilization, of society -- as long as you're part of a civilization.


By superstition on 7/25/2011 10:33:47 PM , Rating: 2
typo: virtue, not virtual


By Nfarce on 7/26/2011 12:02:24 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can put whatever name you like on me, but it won't change the fact that civilization is not supposed to be a shell game for exploitation. It's a cooperative collective thing by its very definition.


Uhm, that's YOUR definition of modern society, not mine.

And the rest of your rant is not even worth addressing, collectivist.


"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki