[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
>What is wrong with "dumping" a bunch of fuel efficient econo cars into >the marketplace? If someone values that ability to get 40 mpg or maybe >can't afford to drive something with more power and "features", what is >the problem with that?
The idea is we are way behind the curve, simply moving the ends further apart from the middle and keeping a balance isn't enough. I'm not a tree hugger, I pay attention to what I see and read. We need to get much better at this or the children of your six childrens children will have deep problems.
Also, what if they *could* afford the upsell, but decide not to for some other reason? Imagine that! Maybe the car guys would then start to cater to that "demographic"!
>Total emmisions are total emmisions so why interfere with someone's >personal choice of transportation when you don't have to?
Yes, the traditional rights and privleges argument vs. duties and responsibilites. I saw Lou Holtz and he was asked, "what is the difference between players now and the ones you coached 20 years ago?". He replied that before players talked about their "duties and responsibilities to the team", whereas now players talk about their "rights and responsibilities" for themselves.
Actually your personal choice has had restrictions on it from the beginning. Starting with a drivers license, which requires training. Different vehicles require different licenses, training, and insurance. Also, in most states when towing a trailer you are supposed to keep to the right most two through lanes, truck/car/commercial vehicle with a trailer all the same. You do wear your seatbelt, don't you? That's been a law in many states too. We are imposing our will on you because we don't want to have to pay for your hospitalization. Motorcycle drivers in many states must wear a helmet. Why? Because it has been shown that the cost to the *rest of us* is lessened when riders wear helmets. That law passed not because we are trying to save the guy with a personal choices life, just trying to keep the costs for the rest of us from putting us all in the poor house. And, for the record, I ride & raced motorcycles. Not wearing a helmet was just not right.
>If you want to improve fuel economy why not tighten CAFE standards at the >macro level and leave the individual unrestriced choice? Does the simple >existance of someone driving a large SUV bother you that much that you >feel the need to impose your will upon others?
So are you saying you want to get poor milage with your large SUV? I hope you are smarter than that. Studies have shown that the increase in large vehicles that can't be seen through/around/or over cause slower traffic (due to the nature of acceleration and deccelleration of the vehicle) and because following drivers can't see around them. Now you can poo poo this study, and that is your "right", correct? If only half of the car drivers decided to drive the new Dodge Sprinter do you think it might have an impact on you? Imposing will upon others? Look at it another way, just like we all did with smoking laws.
>Both emissions and freedom of choice are valuable and it isn't necessary >to sacrifice one for the other.
I'd suggest you re-read your answer. If you excercise your "freedom of choice" and pick a car with lower emissions/size/cost of ownership and I instead pick a large VAN with higher emissions/size/cost of ownership don't *I* impact you? Think before you answer, higher demand causes higher prices, not to mention the effects that my vehicle will put upon the place you and I live. Think about your health insurance. Costs are increasing because more people are using more services. High BP, Cholesterol, Heart issues, smoking issues, HIV, unintentional pregnacy, and many if not most of these are caused by personal choice. (please note that I didn't say cancer - just end products from lack of excersize, unprotected sex, smoking) But these are all my "right" to a personal choice, and guess what happens to you, even while making a choice to refrain from the above? Your health insurance goes up. Very similar to your car insurance going up.
>If I have 2 children, adopt 4 more, and need to drive a full size van to >church on Sunday should I be taxed extra? Or maybe you think full size >vans shouldn't exist? Maybe you could create a Board of Approval for me >to appear-before and issue me a special gas guzzler permit?
If If If. Do you have two childern? If so congratulations. My wife grew up in a family with four kids, and I in a family with five kids. We have one kid, decided we could keep up with one. My sibs have between one and two. Her sibs between zero and three.
If you re-read my statement I hope you see that it's the 90%er single occupant that I'm ranting about. Get another car for commuting, don't always supersize by default. Again, think what it would/will be like when we all have vehicles 2x-3x the size they are now. How many of those bad boys will get through the intersection before the light turns red?
The family station wagons did the job very well for us growing up. The profile of the vehicle, it's drive train, features and all of the rest were *almost identicle* to the sedan from the same company. Imagine that! Gee, I *think* you can still get station wagons now too. Wonder why the SUVs are being sold so much? Advertising, profit, and the result of advertising - status. It used to be the BMW and Mercedes and Lexus sedan crowd. Now we build taller vehicles because drivers "feel safer" (we tell them that) and they can "see over" the other vehicles. Unless, of course we continue at the rate of adoption of SUV/large Truck/Large other vehicle and then, surprise, you can't "see over" me. Maybe another camera system ala the one for backing up sold now on a periscope or something? Radar? Sonar? A wing walker for parking?
And, what is a full size van anyway? You mean the 15 passenger one? The E-350? There a plenty of vans that are, let's call them petite, and can easily take you and your six kids to church. 2 + 3 + 3 seating all with shoulder harnesses for your safety. And about the same size as a Ford F150 in height and width. But the car manufacturers want to upsell you on the larger units. More money. Not now, but later. Hopefully you (all) do know that the money to be made is on the *maintenance* of the car in later years, not the sale. Ask Mike Lynch, he'll tell you. Parts, Labor, Accessories, that's where the car dealers are making money.
so, I'm not for "imposing" anything on anyone. I am for educating people to see why one choice is better (and why!) than another. And maybe making it easier to make the better choice. See anything wrong with that? After all that's what the government did for the truck industry. Lessor requirements in safety, emissions, and other metrics. Cost the manufactures less to make a four door truck so they made more money selling them. that is business and I can't fault them for taking what was offered. Let's just change what is offered...
Do you think everyone should have car insurance, just in case they get into an accident and happen to hit *you*. Hope you want them to...
Would that be imposing your will on them? ;)
-soneway
, Thu, 9 Mar 2006 09:27:57
, Fri, 10 Mar 2006 01:05:33, Fri, 10 Mar 2006 01:07:39, Sat, 11 Mar 2006 01:57:09
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.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
