Why do I get the feeling you don't know what you are talking about? Maybe you should explain better. Why do regulations stifle innovation? Without regulations, would manufacturers make more efficient cars???
Why do I get the feeling you don't know what you are talking about? Maybe you should explain better. Why do regulations stifle innovation? Without regulations, would manufacturers make more efficient cars???
Yes, they would. Oil companies have BILLIONS invested in certain formulations of fuels. Do you think for one moment that government will not protect those interests? Only a incremental change will take place. If ANYONE were to make a truely fuel efficient car or truck, it would NEVER make it to market! Why you ask? GOVERNMENT REGULATION! It stifles innovation by design.
The moment one of the big 3 figure out how to make 50MPG SUV that costs no more than a 15MPG suv, there is nothing big oil could do about it.
Joe Schmoe pays for the SUV. Joe Schmoe pays for the gas he uses in the SUV. Joe Schmoe says go hug a tree.
Maybe we should charge people by the amount they drive?
Maybe we should charge people by the amount they drive?
I'm sorry but you guys have no idea what it takes to build a car, fuel efficient or otherwise. NO ONE WILL BUY A POS SUV THAT GETS 50 MPG! It would be a POS! No towing capacity! We've got 5 mph bumpers that a 10mph crash will TOTAL a 4 year old car! This can only get worse.
Government regulation causes death and stifles the competition that would provide fuel efficiency and truely safe roads. It is EASY to get a license and blame the Auto Makers on your inability to drive. You then demand safer cars while YOU drive like an idiot and complain when you get a ticket. You drive your damn econoboxes like they were Grand Prix cars and barely exceed the mpg I get with a full size sedan with a V8 in it! And THEN have the GAUL to demand the Government regulate fuel milage standards. You hit me, you get killed. I hit you, you get killed.
Or are you willing to sacrifice lives just to conserve what we already know is an almost inexhaustible supply! Cleaner exhaust? I can go with that, but you STILL have offered no credible argument why MPG is in the National Interest!
Oil provides JOBS, INCOME, TAX MONEY! There is an abundance of the stuff.
Originally posted by: Shuxclams
Bush is a MORON...................[q/]
You just need the post count or what?
Originally posted by: Tominator
Originally posted by: Shuxclams
Bush is a MORON...................
You just need the post count or what?
He was just stating the facts.
You are being short sited here. Current manufacturing techniques will limit MPG. Future manufacturing techniques will not. What if carbon fiber became inexpensive to use and weight of vehicles was dropped to a 1/3 of current weight without losing any strength? Or fuel cells that worked without platinum as a catalyst?
Maybe a converstion to dielsel electric(the rail roads did it). We dont know what future inventions are going to change how cars are made.
Railroads are exempt from road tax AND exhaust standards.
Fuel cells will NEVER be mainstream without a substitute for plutonium.
Carbon fibre will be part of the solution, but not because Government Regulation made it cheaper to use, only because Government Regulation leaves no alternative!
Market forces make things cheaper, NOT Government Regulation!
Fuel cells will NEVER be mainstream without a substitute for plutonium.
Carbon fibre will be part of the solution, but not because Government Regulation made it cheaper to use, only because Government Regulation leaves no alternative!
Market forces make things cheaper, NOT Government Regulation!
And they still use Diesel electric because it is the most cost effective solution for powering a train. One has to ask if there similar results can be had with autos.
Fuel cells dont use plutonium.
I will disagree. MPG is a selling feature on car and if cars can be made lighter, without losing strength or costing more you have a major selling point. This will have nothing to do with regulation and everything to do with marketing.
I am usually of the opinion that market forces are best, but sometimes a little regulation is needed.
Without any regulation there is anarchy.
You know I meant platinum, but as usual in this type of argument, you will split hairs as you have no other argument.
Are you willing to say that there will be no other technoligical innovations that drive car manufacturing? That seems to be your premise. I am saying there will be and the history of invention is quite on my side.
I guess Tom disagrees with the government putting regulations on the meat packing industry. I mean, if people wanted cleaner, less diseased meat, market demand would have taken care of it.
ultimatebob
Lifer
- Jul 1, 2001
- 25,134
- 2,450
- 126
Yeah, and while we're at it, lets get rid of all these pesky new securities and accounting regulations as well. I mean, if people really WANTED Enron and MCI-WorldCom to keep honest accounting records, market demand would have taken care of that too, right?
OS
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 15,581
- 1
- 76
Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Yeah, and while we're at it, lets get rid of all these pesky new securities and accounting regulations as well. I mean, if people really WANTED Enron and MCI-WorldCom to keep honest accounting records, market demand would have taken care of that too, right?
LOL, seriously, let's disband the FDA and SEC while we're at it. I mean if people die from from bad food and drugs, the market will take care of it right??
If you've seen enough of Tom's posts in these types of threads, you'll realize his rants aren't worth responding to. Half the time, he's bashing some liberal conspiracy against America instead of even arguing on topic. Now even if you gave him EVERY benefit of the doubt in every case, most reasonable people here would agree that in some instances, regulation is not only desirable but necessary to ensure a market operates efficiently and also without widespread public harm.Originally posted by: OS
Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Yeah, and while we're at it, lets get rid of all these pesky new securities and accounting regulations as well. I mean, if people really WANTED Enron and MCI-WorldCom to keep honest accounting records, market demand would have taken care of that too, right?
LOL, seriously, let's disband the FDA and SEC while we're at it. I mean if people die from from bad food and drugs, the market will take care of it right??
The funny part is this time, he tried to flame charrison, who's appeared to be a pretty staunch free-market advocate firmly in the GOP camp.
OS
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 15,581
- 1
- 76
As per the original topic, I'm impressed that GWB took this initiative, considering the previously stagnant situation. IMO, a 1.5 mpg over 3 years is definitely doable with current manufacturing, engineering and product development cycles, without additional consumer cost.
Pliablemoose
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 25,195
- 0
- 56
Man, CAFE got you-all riled up, maybe you should switch to DECAFE, your blood b=pressure will go down.
Seriously though, current engines are approaching maximum thermodynamic efficiency, my wife's VW diesel (40 mpg thank you) puts out very little heat when idling, so honestly with current technology we pretty much have what we're gonna have.
However
Auto manufacturers are putting research dollars into HP wars, not fuel efficiency in the current generation of autos. If they turned their attention to fuel efficiency rather than HP/Torque ratings (which really sells vehicles in the US market), they can easily meet the higher CAFE standards.
Also, the US market is nuts, Toyota had a real problem even being considered as a full size truck alternative because of their reluctance to pop a V8 into the Tundra, honestly, just a few trucks per hundred need a V8, much less a V10.
Pliablemoose now gets ready to hide behind his 400 cubic inch V8 diesel G20 Chevy Van (I'm not immune either from the HP/torque argument either, but my van gets 19 mpg in mixed driving) so the flames won't reach him...
Seriously though, current engines are approaching maximum thermodynamic efficiency, my wife's VW diesel (40 mpg thank you) puts out very little heat when idling, so honestly with current technology we pretty much have what we're gonna have.
However
Auto manufacturers are putting research dollars into HP wars, not fuel efficiency in the current generation of autos. If they turned their attention to fuel efficiency rather than HP/Torque ratings (which really sells vehicles in the US market), they can easily meet the higher CAFE standards.
Also, the US market is nuts, Toyota had a real problem even being considered as a full size truck alternative because of their reluctance to pop a V8 into the Tundra, honestly, just a few trucks per hundred need a V8, much less a V10.
Pliablemoose now gets ready to hide behind his 400 cubic inch V8 diesel G20 Chevy Van (I'm not immune either from the HP/torque argument either, but my van gets 19 mpg in mixed driving) so the flames won't reach him...
Originally posted by: Shuxclams
Originally posted by: Tominator
Originally posted by: Shuxclams
Bush is a MORON...................
You just need the post count or what?
Bush is still a moron.......... [/b]
SHUX
Thanks for inciteful addition to the this thread. I am not sure how we would have survived without it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter