Honda Car Forum


 

Go Back   Honda Car Forum - Accord Parts Civic Tuning Acura Racing > Honda Acura > Honda 2

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09 Apr 2007, 06:05 am
kaash
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Missouri Auto workers support Bush's push for fuel-efficient cars

President Bush told a crowd of auto workers on the outskirts of Kansas
City Tuesday that the hybrid vehicles they make are fitting examples
of the fuel-efficient vehicles he hopes to see filling roads in the
future.
Read More
http://9updates.blogspot.com/2007/03...-bushs_21.html

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09 Apr 2007, 10:14 am
Gordon McGrew
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Missouri Auto workers support Bush's push for fuel-efficient cars

On 9 Apr 2007 04:05:01 -0700, "kaash" <kashifraza.tbm@gmail.com>
wrote:

>President Bush told a crowd of auto workers on the outskirts of Kansas
>City Tuesday that the hybrid vehicles they make are fitting examples
>of the fuel-efficient vehicles he hopes to see filling roads in the
>future.
>Read More
>http://9updates.blogspot.com/2007/03...-bushs_21.html


Meanwhile, he is pushing for revisions of the CAFE regulations which
will allow manufacturers to build more monster SUVs without penalty.

Hey George, if you want to do something about fuel efficiency, why
don't you propose incentives for consumers and manufacturers to
purchase and build fuel efficient cars instead of monster trucks.



Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09 Apr 2007, 10:42 am
isquat@gmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Missouri Auto workers support Bush's push for fuel-efficient cars

On Apr 9, 8:14 am, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Hey George, if you want to do something about fuel efficiency, why
> don't you propose incentives for consumers and manufacturers to
> purchase and build fuel efficient cars instead of monster trucks.


People who want them can buy them now. If you don't want that
shitbox there are other choices such as honda civic hybrid
and (a used) insight for you. You have a choice to work for a company
that partially pays for such a shitbox.
You want MORE from the government and the corporate?

I don't want a Toyolet prius thank you very much.
I hope that whoever tightens CAFE standards for cars
any further will fall the victim of the next Timothy James McVeigh
that he creates in that process.
Could not care less about the trucks. Why won't they screw
up the requirement for trucks?

The car drivers are already screwed
with the previous CAFE version and other regulations that apply
to cars but not the trucks.

As if it was not enough there is more regulatory shit in the
form of the mandatory stability control coming my way.

The useless ****s in DOT and NHTSA have too much time on their
hands and their tiny reptilian brains are just uncapable of
processing the corner cases correctly.
What a pitiful bunch.

Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09 Apr 2007, 01:46 pm
Gordon McGrew
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Missouri Auto workers support Bush's push for fuel-efficient cars

On 9 Apr 2007 08:42:42 -0700, isquat@gmail.com wrote:

>On Apr 9, 8:14 am, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> Hey George, if you want to do something about fuel efficiency, why
>> don't you propose incentives for consumers and manufacturers to
>> purchase and build fuel efficient cars instead of monster trucks.

>
>People who want them can buy them now. If you don't want that
>shitbox there are other choices such as honda civic hybrid
>and (a used) insight for you. You have a choice to work for a company
>that partially pays for such a shitbox.


Encouraging people to drive hybrids is meaningless as long as we are
also encouraging others to drive monster SUVs.

>You want MORE from the government and the corporate?


Yes, what's wrong with wanting more?

>I don't want a Toyolet prius thank you very much.
>I hope that whoever tightens CAFE standards for cars
>any further will fall the victim of the next Timothy James McVeigh
>that he creates in that process.


So we shouldn't regulate vehicles because some right-wing nut will
blow up buildings? Anyway, I wouldn't tighten the regs on cars, so
much as modify them to make larger cars viable alternatives to SUVs.

>Could not care less about the trucks. Why won't they screw
>up the requirement for trucks?


Huh?

>The car drivers are already screwed
>with the previous CAFE version and other regulations that apply
>to cars but not the trucks.


CAFE does apply to trucks, but it is a separate calculation with lower
mileage standards. The problem is that the car companies got a very
flexible definition of "truck" which allows them to play games with
the numbers. The reasons why CAFE is so screwed up: 1. car companies
were allowed too much influence to manipulate the rules, and 2. There
has been insufficient political will to modify the rules to close the
loopholes exploited by car companies.

Still, there may be better solutions than CAFE. How about an extra $3
tax on motor vehicle fuels and a $3000 tax credit (claimable even if
it exceeds income tax liability) and a rebate for legitimate business
use of trucks. I bet that if gas went up to $6, we wouldn't need CAFE
to encourage conservation. If family a family drives 24,000 miles per
year in cars that gets 24 mpg, the tax credit would exactly offset the
additional fuel cost. If they want to drive a Hummer, they can pay an
extra $3000 for the privilege. OTOH, if they buy a hybrid and/or
reduce driving they can pocket the savings.

>As if it was not enough there is more regulatory shit in the
>form of the mandatory stability control coming my way.


Irrelevant.

>The useless ****s in DOT and NHTSA have too much time on their
>hands and their tiny reptilian brains are just uncapable of
>processing the corner cases correctly.


What's a corner case?

>What a pitiful bunch.


You apparently don't even have a clue what these agencies do.

Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 10 Apr 2007, 12:23 am
isquat@gmail.com
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Missouri Auto workers support Bush's push for fuel-efficient cars

On Apr 9, 11:46 am, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com>
wrote:
> On 9 Apr 2007 08:42:42 -0700, isq...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Apr 9, 8:14 am, Gordon McGrew <RgEmMcOgVr...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >> Hey George, if you want to do something about fuel efficiency, why
> >> don't you propose incentives for consumers and manufacturers to
> >> purchase and build fuel efficient cars instead of monster trucks.

>
> >People who want them can buy them now. If you don't want that
> >shitbox there are other choices such as honda civic hybrid
> >and (a used) insight for you. You have a choice to work for a company
> >that partially pays for such a shitbox.

>
> Encouraging people to drive hybrids is meaningless as long as we are
> also encouraging others to drive monster SUVs.


Who is encouraging them to buy trucks????

> >You want MORE from the government and the corporate?

>
> Yes, what's wrong with wanting more?


BECAUSE people with stick shift cars would get even
more screwed up gearing.

> >I don't want a Toyolet prius thank you very much.
> >I hope that whoever tightens CAFE standards for cars
> >any further will fall the victim of the next Timothy James McVeigh
> >that he creates in that process.

>
> So we shouldn't regulate vehicles because some right-wing nut will
> blow up buildings? Anyway, I wouldn't tighten the regs on cars,


I hope he'll do a bit of a research and target a DOT or NHTSA think
tank next time instead of blowing a random federal building.

so
> much as modify them to make larger cars viable alternatives to SUVs.
>
> >Could not care less about the trucks. Why won't they screw
> >up the requirement for trucks?

>
> Huh?


CAFE average for the truck category is about 6mpg lower than it
is for cars for example.

> >The car drivers are already screwed
> >with the previous CAFE version and other regulations that apply
> >to cars but not the trucks.

>
> CAFE does apply to trucks, but it is a separate calculation with lower
> mileage standards. The problem is that the car companies got a very
> flexible definition of "truck" which allows them to play games with
> the numbers. The reasons why CAFE is so screwed up: 1. car companies
> were allowed too much influence to manipulate the rules, and 2. There
> has been insufficient political will to modify the rules to close the
> loopholes exploited by car companies.


Maybe that's why there are still some cars that a driveable
and fun on the market today. I gotta thank the lawmarkers
at least for that.

> Still, there may be better solutions than CAFE. How about an extra $3
> tax on motor vehicle fuels and a $3000 tax credit (claimable even if
> it exceeds income tax liability) and a rebate for legitimate business
> use of trucks. I bet that if gas went up to $6, we wouldn't need CAFE
> to encourage conservation. If family a family drives 24,000 miles per
> year in cars that gets 24 mpg, the tax credit would exactly offset the
> additional fuel cost. If they want to drive a Hummer, they can pay an
> extra $3000 for the privilege. OTOH, if they buy a hybrid and/or
> reduce driving they can pocket the savings.


You can move overseas to satisfy your thirst for $6/gallon gas.
UK for one and Japan for another are pretty close to that I think.
You'd get to pay exorbitant prices for the cars, insurance,
registration, etc too. On the flip side those countries
haven't imported as many ugly bastards as US yet. Or so I think.

> >As if it was not enough there is more regulatory shit in the
> >form of the mandatory stability control coming my way.

>
> Irrelevant.


It is? Does your job have anything to do with the actual
product development or you are one of the marketing types
that come up with assorted set of disjoint and otherwise
****ed up specifications?

> >The useless ****s in DOT and NHTSA have too much time on their
> >hands and their tiny reptilian brains are just uncapable of
> >processing the corner cases correctly.

>
> What's a corner case?


Cars with manual transmissions and short gearing.
Once the displacement goes up the gearing gets taller
to accomodate for the averages they have to meet.

> >What a pitiful bunch.

>
> You apparently don't even have a clue what these agencies do.


They set a bunch of regulations that feed the
overblown legal departments at all automakers.
Did I miss anything important here?
Hmm, I don't think I did.

Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 10 Apr 2007, 10:38 am
Robert
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Missouri Auto workers support Bush's push for fuel-efficient cars

Well, everyone else is putting in their two cents, so here goes...

Why does the federal government need to regulate the auto companies at
all? If I want to drive a gas guzzling SUV, I want to be able to
whether the government agrees with it or not. As long as I can afford
the gas, that's all that should matter. I don't see why the government
should have a say in any of that.

Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 10 Apr 2007, 02:44 pm
Lynn McGuire
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Missouri Auto workers support Bush's push for fuel-efficient cars

> Why does the federal government need to regulate the auto companies at
> all? If I want to drive a gas guzzling SUV, I want to be able to
> whether the government agrees with it or not. As long as I can afford
> the gas, that's all that should matter. I don't see why the government
> should have a say in any of that.


Amen ! I drive a 5.4L Ford Expedition and my wife drives a 5 spd
Honda Civic EX. Each to his own even if she does gripe at me
that my Expy uses 2X as much gas as her civic. She sure does
like to travel in the Expy though with the dog, etc...

Lynn

Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 10 Apr 2007, 03:51 pm
Grumpy AuContraire
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Missouri Auto workers support Bush's push for fuel-efficientcars



Robert wrote:
> Well, everyone else is putting in their two cents, so here goes...
>
> Why does the federal government need to regulate the auto companies at
> all? If I want to drive a gas guzzling SUV, I want to be able to
> whether the government agrees with it or not. As long as I can afford
> the gas, that's all that should matter. I don't see why the government
> should have a say in any of that.
>




I'm with you on that. They should stay out of everything except the
basics for safety and function and by that I mean nothing more mandatory
than seat belts and a functioning exhaust to keep you from being
overcome by fumes.

Let the market place and prowess of the consumer dictate what direction
car design takes.

JT
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 10 Apr 2007, 03:53 pm
Grumpy AuContraire
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Missouri Auto workers support Bush's push for fuel-efficientcars



Lynn McGuire wrote:

>> Why does the federal government need to regulate the auto companies at
>> all? If I want to drive a gas guzzling SUV, I want to be able to
>> whether the government agrees with it or not. As long as I can afford
>> the gas, that's all that should matter. I don't see why the government
>> should have a say in any of that.

>
>
> Amen ! I drive a 5.4L Ford Expedition and my wife drives a 5 spd
> Honda Civic EX. Each to his own even if she does gripe at me that my
> Expy uses 2X as much gas as her civic. She sure does like to travel in
> the Expy though with the dog, etc...
>
> Lynn
>



I drive an ancient Honda Civic daily but if it absolutely becomes push
to shove, I'll drive the Studebaker T-Cab and the last word in
dependability and ability to carry a *real* load...

JT

(A slave to nothing!)

Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 10 Apr 2007, 07:09 pm
Gordon McGrew
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Missouri Auto workers support Bush's push for fuel-efficient cars

On 10 Apr 2007 08:38:50 -0700, "Robert" <kraft.fhs@gmail.com> wrote:

>Well, everyone else is putting in their two cents, so here goes...
>
>Why does the federal government need to regulate the auto companies at
>all? If I want to drive a gas guzzling SUV, I want to be able to
>whether the government agrees with it or not. As long as I can afford
>the gas, that's all that should matter. I don't see why the government
>should have a say in any of that.


You know, that wouldn't be a bad idea if the price at the pump
reflected the true cost of the product including:

Past, present and future costs of pollution which invariably result
from the consumption of this product. This includes, but is not
limited to, injury and death of humans from air pollution, damage to
streams and lakes from runoff, general damage to the environment, and
now the prospect of climate catastrophe growing ever more likely to
cost untold trillions of dollars over the next century.

Future costs of squandering our finite resources which will inevitably
drive up the cost faster and sooner than would otherwise be the case.

Past, present and future costs associated with our involvement in the
Middle East and potentially other regions driven by our demand for
oil.

These costs are hard to calculate but they are massive. And they are
not reflected in the price you pay at the pump beyond a few pennies in
tax. (If paid for by a gas tax, Iraq would be about a dollar a
gallon.)
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: efficient hybrid Gosi Honda 2 271 13 Jul 2006 09:44 pm
TL and iPod Support broye Acura 3 16 Jan 2006 09:32 am
Auto Badges, Decal Stickers, Key Ring, Fuel Caps & Racing Cap No. 1 Supplier - Autobahn88 !!! kamking016@yahoo.com Honda 3 1 15 Oct 2005 12:49 pm
Most fuel efficient speed to drive? mvl_groups_user@yahoo.com Honda 2 24 04 Oct 2005 10:39 am
The performance cars like Preludes say on the dash board to use only Premium fuel LovingPerson Honda 3 50 16 Feb 2004 11:01 am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:40 pm.


Attribution:
Honda News | Autoblog
Powered by Yahoo Answers




Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2 © 2011, Crawlability, Inc.
HondaCarForum.com is not affiliated with Honda Motor Company in any way. Honda Motor Company does not sponsor, support, or endorse HondaCarForum.com in any way. Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended or implied.