If you want to efficiently reduce fuel consumption, raise the gas tax. People will yell and scream, but you will hit whatever target of fuel consumption you desire -- and far more quickly -- than any CAFE standard you could impose.

And you can use the money to build infrastructure, reduce other taxes, or give every American a rebate.

/Government loves inefficient regulation because then they can say "Oh, it's not a tax, and the completely obvious consequences are not my fault!"

Detroit's major automakers are ready for Round Two in their battle with the Obama administration over fuel economy standards

But Fark Independents™ told me ObaMAO owns Government Motors™ because of socialism. What's to battle about?

They already were.. then they were bailed out.

lennavan: Derp...Derp derp derp derp

Have you Derped today?

Why bother with the standards? When peak oil hits, people will naturally gravitate towards the more efficient models. If anything, the CAFE standards are artificially low compared to what consumers actually want.

lennavan: Detroit's major automakers are ready for Round Two in their battle with the Obama administration over fuel economy standards

But Fark Independents™ told me ObaMAO owns Government Motors™ because of socialism. What's to battle about?

Barack Hussein Hitler Stalin Mussolini ObaMao wants your car to be powered by fetuses and oiled with Christian blood.

I guess we could take lessons from India. They introduce 60mpg cars for $7000 and don't seem to have much of a problem.

Of course it means not driving a tank everywhere and that would make people cry.

Snarfangel: If you want to efficiently reduce fuel consumption, raise the gas tax

All that does is piss everybody off.

You need to reward (or at least not penalize) the people trying to do the right thing and tax the crap out of people who say "This is a free country. I can do anything I want. I'll drive my F-650 to the supermarket and leave it running in the parking lot with the A/C on if I want to. Piss off."

"Whenever we hear a call for XX miles per gallon by 2025, we repeat the mantra 'let the process work!'" said Gloria Bergquist, a spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

You mean the "process" that flooded the market with substandard quality low fuel efficiency SUV's which almost bankrupted the industry? Heaven's forbid they work on making themselve's more competitive in the economy of the future.

I wish my car used Dos Equis instead of gasoline...

Now he's back for more, with plans that could raise standards for cars and light-duty trucks as high as 62 mpg by 2025.


Lol WUT. You cannot mandate scietific progress. The last increase was doable but a doubling down again... aint going to happen.

She means the process that lead to the bailout in the first place. Yes, in a true free market system she'd be saying that on the street, unemployed, and a new company would be giving consumers what they want: fuel economy.

If American automakers could build cars without fuel economy mandates, this is the only thing they'd be offering:

serial_crusher: Infinity miles per gallon. You really think the government should enforce "efficiency" standards that don't include things like "hey fatass, stop carrying 4 tons of needless machinery to work with you every day"?

And as long as we're going back to the 19th century, we can return to beating our clothes on rocks, constructing things without power machinery, and schlepping household water in buckets.

You can only sell battery-electric vehicles.

For every individual internal combustion vehicle sold after June 17th, the Federal government will execute an automotive corporation executive.

You sell a hybrid, we only remove your vocal cords, hands and feet.

If you learn Morse code, we remove your eyelids.

I don't understand why effective government would have to listen to compromise.

Saiga410: Now he's back for more, with plans that could raise standards for cars and light-duty trucks as high as 62 mpg by 2025.


Lol WUT. You cannot mandate scietific progress. The last increase was doable but a doubling down again... aint going to happen.

the point. you missed it. the technology already exists. clean diesels, hybrid electric vehicles, smaller vehicles overseas... we have the capability to make highly fuel efficient vehicles. the scientific progress has already been made

Shaggy_C: Why bother with the standards? When peak oil hits, people will naturally gravitate towards the more efficient models. If anything, the CAFE standards are artificially low compared to what consumers actually want.

What I really want is a full-size SUV that runs on pony farts at 500 mpf. When is GM going to give me that, huh? I'm waiting.

If we really want to save fuel, take away 75% of the Drivers Licenses away from people.

Don't use your turn signal? catch you twice, and sorry, you lose your license for 6 months. Driving down the street with bass that shakes my house? You lose your license for a year. Don't know how to back out of a parking spot by cutting the wheel properly? You have a month to learn. Report to the DMV in a month and pass a test or you will be deemed too incompetent to operate a motor vehicle. Ballsack hanging from your trailer hitch? Death penalty.

limeyfellow: I guess we could take lessons from India. They introduce 60mpg cars for $7000 and don't seem to have much of a problem.

Of course it means not driving a tank everywhere and that would make people cry.

or we can go backwards instead of forward

Link (new window)

Shaggy_C: Why bother with the standards? When peak oil hits, people will naturally gravitate towards the more efficient models. If anything, the CAFE standards are artificially low compared to what consumers actually want.

There's no fun, and no government jobs, in letting markets work. Plus, it's too much like freedom.

Snarfangel: If you want to efficiently reduce fuel consumption, raise the gas tax. People will yell and scream, but you will hit whatever target of fuel consumption you desire -- and far more quickly -- than any CAFE standard you could impose.

And you can use the money to build infrastructure, reduce other taxes, or give every American a rebate.

/Government loves inefficient regulation because then they can say "Oh, it's not a tax, and the completely obvious consequences are not my fault!"

You do realise that consumption based taxes are taxes on the poor right? They will hit people who can't afford the new cars more than people who can. How about a gas tax based on the blue-book value of your vehicle?

Very un-Republican of me.

/sorry

Snarfangel: If you want to efficiently reduce fuel consumption, raise the gas tax. People will yell and scream, but you will hit whatever target of fuel consumption you desire -- and far more quickly -- than any CAFE standard you could impose.

And you can use the money to build infrastructure, reduce other taxes, or give every American a rebate.

/Government loves inefficient regulation because then they can say "Oh, it's not a tax, and the completely obvious consequences are not my fault!"

Gas taxes are a great way to pay for roads and so on - essentially it is an easy to collect usage charge so it gets applied relatively fairly to those that get the most benefit, it further incentivizes efficient use of a limited resource, it isn't an easy commodity for a sizable black market to appear, it encourages building infrastructure that is more future proof, and once people are used to it, it means that changes in the price of oil has less effect on the price (in percentage terms anyway, the absolute change in price is the same of course). As an alternative to most other forms of bringing in the same tax revenue it has quite a lot to recommend it. It is somewhat regressive of course, as are virtually all forms of sales tax that apply to necessities.

Shaggy_C: Why bother with the standards? When peak oil hits

You're serious. LMAO

Snarfangel: If you want to efficiently reduce fuel consumption, raise the gas tax.

Or you could be like Japan, and bracket the vehicle registration fees based on engine displacement*. Of course, that means a lot of cars have their displacement right at the upper limit of a bracket. . . but you also see lots of 660cc minis.

jjorsett: And as long as we're going back to the 19th century, we can return to beating our clothes on rocks, constructing things without power machinery, and schlepping household water in buckets.

That looks like 19th century technology to you? Did they even have aluminum frames back then?

*With a correction for rotary engines, you cheaters

Infinity miles per gallon. You really think the government should enforce "efficiency" standards that don't include things like "hey fatass, stop carrying 4 tons of needless machinery to work with you every day"?

you must be one of those people that puts ice in wine.

Saiga410: Now he's back for more, with plans that could raise standards for cars and light-duty trucks as high as 62 mpg by 2025.


Lol WUT. You cannot mandate scietific progress. The last increase was doable but a doubling down again... aint going to happen.

You can't mandate scientific process? We WENT TO THE MOON on a scientific mandate.

And this isn't even to mention that the sceintific process has already given us 60mpg vehicles.

Saiga410: Now he's back for more, with plans that could raise standards for cars and light-duty trucks as high as 62 mpg by 2025.


Lol WUT. You cannot mandate scietific progress. The last increase was doable but a doubling down again... aint going to happen.

Yeah just like when Kennedy mandated putting a man on the moon by the end of the decade. Didn't happen....amiright?

SuburbanCowboy: Ballsack hanging from your trailer hitch? Death penalty

I was with you until this point. How am I supposed to let people know how much of a man I am? Plastic nutz hanging off my trailer hitch says it loud and proud!

serial_crusher: Infinity miles per gallon. You really think the government should enforce "efficiency" standards that don't include things like "hey fatass, stop carrying 4 tons of needless machinery to work with you every day"?

If I could get a damn shower at work, I'd be on my bike every morning. I used to ride to work when I was up North in the city, but since I moved to the burbs there's a little thing called the West Side of Chicago between me and my office and I'm not big on dying.

serial_crusher: Infinity miles per gallon. You really think the government should enforce "efficiency" standards that don't include things like "hey fatass, stop carrying 4 tons of needless machinery to work with you every day"?

Hear! Hear!

/bicyclist
//fitter
///thriftier
////un-repentant

SuburbanCowboy: If we really want to save fuel, take away 75% of the Drivers Licenses away from people.

Don't use your turn signal? catch you twice, and sorry, you lose your license for 6 months. Driving down the street with bass that shakes my house? You lose your license for a year. Don't know how to back out of a parking spot by cutting the wheel properly? You have a month to learn. Report to the DMV in a month and pass a test or you will be deemed too incompetent to operate a motor vehicle. Ballsack hanging from your trailer hitch? Death penalty.

We have that "no license for you" thing here in California for illegal aliens. They drive anyway. If pulled over, their beater gets impounded and they go out and buy another one for $300 and keep going.

serial_crusher: Infinity miles per gallon. You really think the government should enforce "efficiency" standards that don't include things like "hey fatass, stop carrying 4 tons of needless machinery to work with you every day"?

Ride that 160 kilometres a day in a region with no effective rail or bus service do you?

what is all this bull crap about "what people want". it's not MPG 96% of the time.

The only hybrid that is somewhat profitable is the prius. other hybrids either are sold for cost, or at a slight loss.

When customers walk in to a toyota dealer and have a choice between a hybrid camry, or the regular camry (exterior looks are the same) most selected the regular, lower MPG camry.

vehicles have moved beyond point A to point B.

elffster: Derp...Derp derp derp derp

Are you sad no one is paying attention to you? Or sad because you were a Government Motors Fark Independent™ being made fun of?

dragonchild: jjorsett: And as long as we're going back to the 19th century, we can return to beating our clothes on rocks, constructing things without power machinery, and schlepping household water in buckets.

That looks like 19th century technology to you? Did they even have aluminum frames back then?

Bicycles (and human/animal powered transportation in general) are quite 19th century.

Kuroshin: limeyfellow: I guess we could take lessons from India. They introduce 60mpg cars for $7000 and don't seem to have much of a problem.

Of course it means not driving a tank everywhere and that would make people cry.

There's a reason those cars can hit that many MPG: they don't meet US safety and emissions regs.

Strap on the EGR and catalyst gear, then dip the entire frame in a couple extra mils of steel and you'll come closer to what a US-spec Nano would run.

Don't forget mandatory airbags, ABS and Tire Pressure monitoring. Oh yeah, and the whole "enough structural strength to pass a barrier impact test" bit.

big pig peaches: Shaggy_C: Why bother with the standards? When peak oil hits, people will naturally gravitate towards the more efficient models. If anything, the CAFE standards are artificially low compared to what consumers actually want.

What I really want is a full-size SUV that runs on pony farts at 500 mpf. When is GM going to give me that, huh? I'm waiting.

They're working on it. The problem is that the ponies require the equivalent of 1,000 gallons of ethanol in thier feed and force fed "energy pills" to bring the energy quotient per fart high enough to run a vehicle for 500 miles.

Ella_Minnowpee: serial_crusher: Infinity miles per gallon. You really think the government should enforce "efficiency" standards that don't include things like "hey fatass, stop carrying 4 tons of needless machinery to work with you every day"?

Hear! Hear!

/bicyclist
//fitter
///thriftier
////un-repentant

Unfortunately most of the US do not have jobs within biking distance.

joness0154: Saiga410: Now he's back for more, with plans that could raise standards for cars and light-duty trucks as high as 62 mpg by 2025.


Lol WUT. You cannot mandate scietific progress. The last increase was doable but a doubling down again... aint going to happen.

Yeah just like when Kennedy mandated putting a man on the moon by the end of the decade. Didn't happen....amiright?

That was a challenge.

And yes I will admit that there are a small subsect of small cars that can get 60mpg. Industry average... I am sorry but the american mindset on size and usability will not change drastically enough to have micros take enough of the market to allow for meeting a 62mpg industry average.

limeyfellow: I guess we could take lessons from India. They introduce 60mpg cars for $7000 and don't seem to have much of a problem.

Of course it means not driving a tank everywhere and that would make people cry.

It also means not having 1200 lbs of safety and emissions equipment on the vehicle.

You can buy a 64MPG vehicle that seats four for around $7000 in the US right now. It looks like this: