[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
"but when the standard is higher, the net effect will be reduced fuel/oil consumption and less pollution"
That theory is contrary to the real life experience with the last round of CAFE exercise during the past 30+ years. The CAFE standard produced minivan and SUV's, which consume more fuel and produce more pollution than car-based wagons. Fuel consumption was on the way down anyway everytime the dollar was debased (oil price going up along with most commodities). CAFE standards only introduced a legal requirement to go through hoops and make a class of less satisfactory vehicles that consume more fuel than straight forward large wagons would have. After over two deccades, finally the market place found the solution: car-based midsize SUV's with reasonable fuel consumption and the size that Americans want for their cars, during the latest round of dollar debasement (high oil price) thereby having a vehicle consuming almost as a wagon yet at the same time satisfy CAFE requirement . . . well, guess what, the government is proposing to move the goal post, threatening another decade or two of legally mandated irrationality.
"I would say that most people don't do what's best for them in the long run. Examples are overeating, not exercising, credit card debt, buying more than they can afford, starting smoking..."
Then you are proposing slavery and fascist police state. Most people do not engage in over-eating or smoking; both are types of addiction. Credit card debt and buying more than they can afford are rational behavior under our fiat money system where the government continuously debase the currency: the government literally robs the savers to subsidize debtors, of which the government itself is the biggest one. If you consider overspending a dumb behavior, then how can you ascribe any wisdom or sagacity to the biggest over-spender and debtor of them all: the government itself. If the government is not wise and sagacious, then how can it be given the power to tell people how to run their lives?
"What would you propose? More drilling? More military conflicts? Let people use as much resources as they can without regard to the planet, energy independence or other countries' needs? "
Leave the people the heck alone. There is no need to subsidize drilling or subsidize military occupation (it costs more money to have a US marine standing there watching over an Iraqi oil wellhead than letting the Iraqis producing oil on their own and selling it to us), and most certainly no need to subsidize more bureaucratic planet minders. The planet minding bureaucrats would have their own family to cart around in giant black SUV's along with security details, and humongous pools to heat. Cut them off, and humanity will actually consumes less oil overall.
"And the new CAFE regs will not lead to more poor people dying in car accidents. They won't be buying the newer lighter cars. Safety regulations will not be relaxed. The cars will become more expensive, but they will be safe"
The last CAFE standards led to people dying in CAFE-compliant tincans. In case you did not realize, cars get safer not because of safety regulations, but primarily because manufacturers coming up with better safety technology and consumers buy them. Safety regulations only mandates a minimum requirement, derived from devices and technology that have been in the market place for decades. For example, NHTSA is finally mandating vehicle stability control now, that's a decade and a half after vehicle stability control became available first in the mid-1990's. Laws making new cars more expensive by themselves make safer and more fuel efficient cars less accessible to the public: cars are getting safer and more fuel efficient (for the same feature/functionality) all the time.
" Regarding the auto manufacturers' marketing as making people buy what they don't need, it's universal and part of marketing for all industries. There are many things we buy that we really don't need, but we like them and make ourselves feel like we need them. The advertising just bolsters this. In the end it's our own purchase decision. Regulations like CAFE can steer us in the right direction because we don't do it ourselves and auto manufacturers don't do it for us either."
Do you live in a pigeon-hole sized apartment, and eat mystery paste with vitamin supplements instead of real food everyday? After all, that's sufficient to keep you alive; anything else is beyond what you really "need." You know what else? The production of the government sanctioned paste and government-mobile won't be efficient due to inevitable corruption and interest groups in the monopolistic regulation process. CAFE standards steered people into SUV's and Minivans instead of family wagons. I wouldn't call that "the right direction." Sure, there are people who buy gas guzzling sportscars and convertibles motivated by advertisement, but these are relatively small numbers and if they can afford it more power to them; if anything, government easy money policy (including the financing of bureaucrats) probably promoted those "impratical" purchases, but it's not really my place to judge what people buy with their money, even if that money is looted from other people throug the government guns. However, wholesale distortions like moving people from wagons into SUV's and Minivans that consumed more gas could only have been done with government intervention like it did.
posted by 76.118.39...
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.