tvashtarkatena

Running with Scissors?

Never Cry Wolf?

Two different 'they's.

I'm waiting for the rappers, so the bastards kin git down.

Now now, none of that. Be fair and sincere. I argued out of the starting gate for a high gas tax...and real CAFE standards. Both. Not either/or. BOTH. That means the one and the other. Together. And manipulating the sales price of vehicles??? I believe that would still be the decision of the manufacturer.

I remember gas rationing. Huge lines at the pump, and a really, really pissed off voting population. Plus, an expensive and complicated program to administer. It didn't last long.

Just wait til the mortgage mushroom cloud fully develops.

Good observations on the effect of higher fuel prices - whether brought about by taxes or the market. If commercial users were exempted, and the poorer you were the more of the gas-tax you got back, I think that you could avoid most of the problems associated with the tax that you brought up - at least in theory. Like a true blue Republican, you're already gutting the primary intent of the regulation, which is to reduce consumption and emissions. Given that commercial transportation emissions exceed residential, why bother? Keep it simple. Everybody pays at the pump.

Note bold text. Cough. Make a law that revenues gained by the fuel tax will be offset by reductions in income taxes and I think that the political resistance to the idea would diminish, especially if the taxes were phased in over the course of several years. I'm not sure what your coughing is all about. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that, when gas hits $10 a gallon or whatever the magic number is, people will do anything to avoid driving. Brilliant. Your idea sounds good in theory...pure theory, given our deficit. Thanks to the administration you and yours voted in, I wouldn't expect a reduction in any form of federal taxation, even if it involves a straight trade, that has a remote chance of reducing revenues (and there would be that risk due to undcertainty with your plan) for the rest of your life.

One of the reasons no one asks the mpg of a used vehicle is because they already know the answer; that information is readily available and most folks, including myself, take it into account in choosing what type of vehicle to buy before they ever talk to a seller. If fuel taxes were high enough, CAFE standards would not be necessary. They would have to be very high, however. Politically, that's not going to happen any time soon. CAFE standards, from a political standpoint, are an already relatively popular and therefore much more feasible way to reduce consumption and emissions. A combination of CAFE standards without loopholes, carbon taxes, and elimination of subsidies for gas guzzlers are the most feasible near term solution, politically speaking, to the problem.

Ski in from Holden. Long way.

KKKevbone is born.

Hey there, girlfriend.

I've come over to your point of view. I think we should continue to exempt the most gas guzzling half of domestic fleets from any CAFE standards at all, essentially neutering the regulation wholesale. Regulation that actuall worsens the problem (average mpg has gone down since the early 90's). Perfectly fair, perfectly rational, and, above all, sincere.

So, in KKK's tiny reptilian brain, a government policy which was written purposefully to be circumvented by industry produced a bad result, so a never enacted government policy designed to actually do what it's supposed to is to blame solely because it goes under the same moniker? What, do you design software for toasters, or would that involve too much logic?

Thanks for the supporting data! FYI: trucks have been the most popular vehicles for decades. Truck sales would even worse if it weren't for the massive tax subsidies businesses receive on the larger models.

Not since gas prices skyrocketed. That was then, this is now. The auto makers milked that cow a little too long.

The European experiment (and our own history) proves that it's more effective to do both. Nope. JayB tired technique # 3: putting words into the opponents mouth. Since you mentioned it, however...Larger vehicles, in general, do require more energy and resources to produce, so vehicle size, even if they do sit in the driveway, is still an issue. Yes, I know the Prius supposedly requires a lot of embodied energy, so save it. I'm not a Prius ad. For those how still need a fucking battle tank under their fat asses, however, not to worry. CAFE standards are fleetwide, leaving the auto makers a choice on individual model specs: you can still buy that Battlestar Galactica (and probably pay more for it) and leave it safely parked next to your organic vegetable garden. Furthermore, your Battlestar will probably get higher gas mileage than it does now. Gas prices are slated to go up much faster than auto makers, who require 4 to 5 years to bring a new model to market, can move. In addition, global warming is similarly accelerating at a pace the market clearly has not been effectively react to. Long term, foreward thinking government policy is the solution to this kind of disconnect. Allowing auto makers navigate these times on their own...well, their stellar performance speaks for itself. Read ANY reputable, independent (ie, not paid for by the oil/auto industry) report recommending policy solutions for energy independence and greenhouse gas reductions, and they all strongly recommend stricter CAFE standards as well as energy and/or emissions taxes. Again, for the third time, we need both.

HYDROGEN IS THE FUTURE!

Apparently, they do hate profits, given their horrible financial performance of late. American auto companies have proven, by their financial lack of performance, that they cannot look forward. Despite your religiousity on the subject, government can help them in this department. Had the Bush administration not derailed the diesel hybrid project, the Big Three might very well not be in the sorry position they are in now. So far I'm still waiting for an anti-CAFE argument that might just convince a 4 year old...if he were a bit slow.

Um...wut???? Yeah, there is a huge pent up demand for being stuck in traffic in this country. Ask anyone. The one thing Americans consistently scream for is more time in their cars. I'm sure if fleet mileage went from 20 to 40 mpg, people would suddenly and inexplicably start driving 30,000 instead 15,000 miles per year. Oh, and there is that small experiment that several hundred million people in Europe did with fuel efficient cars that contradicts your prediction. Expand your thinking. It's not either/or, it's both. I'm in favor of strict CAFE standars AND high fuel taxes, you know, like I recommended several posts ago.

This is getting better with every post. So what has prevented the Big Three from reaping the gains that they'd realize by selling these wonder-vehicles when, per your claims - the single most important factor driving consumer preferences now and off into infinity is fuel efficiency? Presumably the costs to develop the said wonder-vehicles were greater than zero, so you that if nothing else they'd want to sell a few of them to help offset the R&D costs, or license the technology to all of the other automobile companies around the world that would be willing to pay for such advances, since the only reason the wonder-cars didn't appear on the US market is because of our woeful failure implement mileage standards that are consistent with global norms. Hell - it's not like the Big Three don't have operations in Europe, where fuel costs are at or above your desired threshold? Why haven't they unleashed the secret wondercars on the market there? Actually, during the Clinton years, the Feds paid most of the development of those concept cars, Einstein. It was a government/private sector partnership. Guess who cancelled the project upon taking office? That would be your guy; the fucking cretin you and yours voted into office. Instead, now we have the 'Hydrogen Economy'. OMFG, Please. So much for your 'cost of development' argument. Way to go for supporting all this shit, genius. Your philosophies, put into practice, have really put this country back on its feet.

The people who pay the most for this will be your friends in the UAW. More dodge and weave, JayB style. Or would that be duck and cover? This is not a discussion about unions. It's not a discussion about home insulation, which is (no shit, Sherlock) a good idea. It's a discussion about CAFE standards, and why they are a very, very good idea. So far, you've got nothing on topic in the rebuttal department. Why? Because, basically, you're a one note song. The market is good, government is bad. Why, then, don't we have privatized armed forces (OK, I mean ALL our armed forces). Or fire/police? Or roads? Water supplies? Or any one of many VITAL services that are too important to hand over to the private sector?

Again, JayB's signature technique of zeroing on only one aspect of an argument to the exclusion of the larger issue is hauled out of its worn scabbard. It's no secret to anyone at this point that high mileage vehicles, including (but not exclusive to) hybrids are rising, and SUV sales are flagging. That's the primary reason why ALL THREE American auto companies are on the financial ropes right now; lack of demand for what they produce the most of, and that would be larger, lower mileage vehicles. So I'll spell it out for you: We could have had 80 mpg cars in mass production by now. The Big Three produced working diesel hybrid concept cars prior to the introduction of the Prius that met that performance criteria. We do not, solely because of a failure of government to enforce real CAFE standards. The price as been a financial collapse of our auto industry, which is also our biggest (and last remaining manufacturing sector of any size), accelerated global warming, and an abysmally expensive and failed war for oil. An unfettered free market focuses almost exclusively on quarterly results. This produces the kind of disaster we now face, because it's not a quarter by quarter kind of world. Long term thinking and planning, for the environment, economy, and greater welfare is exactly what government is better at doing...when it doesn't have it's head up its ass, that is. Now, look at what the GOP, the party of inaction, reaction and denial, now offers for model year 2008: Rudy? Mitt "Gosh, I love America!" Romney? H-h-h-huckabee? Can you not offer anyone who isn't at face value a complete joke? You fuckers should march on Washington in disgust.