All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Friday, March 30, 2018

Trump gets out of the car industry's way

Barack Obama was a poseur when it came to the environment. In 2012, he issued an edict requiring cars to double their gas mileage.

In 2025.

Nine years after he left office.

President Trump said to heck with that. His administration will soon roll back the Corporate Average Fuel Economy rules (they call it CAFE for short).

The United States no longer will battle imaginary pollution. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient. We need it in the air to sustain life on this planet.

"I’m sure you've all heard the big news that we’re going to work on the Cafe standards so you can make cars in America again. We want to be the car capital of the world again. We will be, and it won’t be long,"Trump told automobile researchers in Detroit last year.

The New York Times is stark raving mad over this, as it ran a Fake News article, "E.P.A. Prepares to Roll Back Rules Requiring Cars to Be Cleaner and More Efficient."

It is Fake News because carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.

"The move — which undercuts one of President Barack Obama’s signature efforts to fight climate change — would also propel the Trump administration toward a courtroom clash with California, which has vowed to stick with the stricter rules even if Washington rolls back federal standards. That fight could end up creating one set of rules for cars sold in California and the 12 states that follow its lead, and weaker rules for the rest of the states, in effect splitting the nation into two markets," the Times reported.

But we already have that. We have done that for decades. Carmakers make special cars to meet California emissions standards. It's like getting leather seats, or tinted glass. The days of stamping out millions of the same car went out with the Tin Lizzy.

(Why, I hear tell that not every car is a convertible. Shocking. I don't know why that is. Why have a car if you cannot put the top down on a beautiful day? May as well ride the bus.)

"Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, is expected to frame the initiative as eliminating a regulatory burden on automakers that will result in more affordable trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles for buyers, according to people familiar with the plan," the Times said.

And therein lies the real problem for the Marxists. They hate "affordable trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles" because personal transportation is liberating. If you own a car, you don't need to live near a bus stop. The post-war development of suburbia birthed modern Republicanism by freeing people from the Democratic-controlled cities with their pollution, corruption, and congestion.

Just as they oppose private gun ownership, they oppose private transportation.

Trump said to heck with that. We got what we voted for.

19 comments:

  1. The Warmening was invented to create the need for higher taxes, world government and control of industrial policy. It is the solution to the Left's political problem, not an environmental solution.

    Meanwhile, while we're funneling zillions toward #FakePollution, there is a giant field of plastic floating in the Pacific--real, actual pollution. Maybe we could fund that instead of sending money to socialist bureaucrats so they can take two mistresses to the Riviera instead of just one. Or instead of trying to lower the temperature a century from now by a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a degree.

    No More #FakePollution!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'd like to see the ethanol mandate boondoggle ended. It's costing everyone by hidden price increases in almost everything: Food, transportation, regulations, etc. - Elric

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Amen!! Maybe after the 2020 election.

      Delete
    2. Hear, hear!!!!
      --Fred

      Delete
  3. This is right on. Don correctly framed this as town and country. In San Francisco houses are being built with no garage or even a carport. Want to escape the apocalypse? Take a bike to the train!
    Huge subsidies are necessary to maintain cheap transport for servants in the big cities. The global warming fraud is to help provide it. Big cities, even inland, are like the the costal cities the Romans always advised against for those who wanted to keep their culture intact. Pressing people together destroys individuality and patriotism by isolating them from the country at large, makes them selfish frivolous and addicted to convenience, unwilling to sacrifice for others as they are forced to seek even a closet for a brief moment alone away from the telescreens, easier to control by the thin layer of elite they must allow rule over them to keep their addictions satisfied.
    The automobile gave freedom to man in a way never contemplated by the Marxist philosophers. They hate it so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those bus subsidies come from gasoline taxes :)

      Delete
    2. And bicycle paths are funded while our highways are neglected. Bait and switch. Now our betters are borrowing more money to cover up for their malfeasance. - Elric

      Delete
    3. Ahh. Bike paths.

      It's time to start licensing (taxing) bicycles used on public roads.

      Doesn't have to be a lot (maybe five or ten bucks a year, with fines for noncompliance), but we need to have irritating bicyclists incur some of the costs of their subsidies. Would be good to add annual ad valorem tax based on the price/value of the bike, too, just like with cars and boats and trailers.

      Consider, also, a tax on spandex.

      Delete
    4. And with regard to bus travel.

      I'd be more likely to ride the bus if I could catch it closer to my house. Having to walk a mile or more, no matter what the weather, to catch a bus isn't a great selling point.

      Scheduling is also a pain. When my choices are a bus that gets me to work five minutes after I need to be there or one that gets me there an hour early --before the doors are unlocked -- the convenience factor drops (even when I don't have to walk a mile to/from the bus stop).

      Delete
  4. The city corruption depicted in the movies of the 30s, 40s and 50s is the same today. Only now, the entertainment and news industries cover it up (as most big cities are D).

    ReplyDelete
  5. The Beach Boys, man. 'Cause she'll have fun fun fun 'til her Daddy takes her T-Bird away. Proggies don't like fun. That's another reason why Mr. T was elected. Hell, even Springsteen used to like cars: "I got a 69 Chevy with a 396, fuelie heads, and a Hearst on the floor."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now it is “fun fun fun til Uncle Sam takes our freedom away”.

      Delete
  6. It’s absolutely true that killing off the use of personal cars is a goal of all these liberals. Having less cars is a way of limiting income and controlling the population by forcing them to live in cities with public transportation.

    That’s why liberals hate suburbs. The suburbs mean that you have your own transportation to get you there after work. That same method of transportation allows you to look for better jobs because you have the ability to get there. If you’re stuck with public transportation, your employment opportunities are more limited. Owning a car means much greater opportunities for wealth and upward mobility.

    Liberals know it and they’ve tried to regulate cars out of reach for folks with the ridiculous electric versions that cost way more than practical, and are also limited in range. Cafe standards were not about the environment, they’re to make it impossible to manufacture autos. Since cafe standards have been in place, cars are built to reduce their weight and therefore increase their mileage. They are not as safe for withstanding accidents either. Expect to see highway fatalities decrease once cafe standards are repealed.

    ReplyDelete
  7. About time we stopped transferring wealth from the US to shithole countries via dumbass enviro rules.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stop transferring wealth no matter what their dumbass enviro rules are.

      Delete
  8. a) +1 to eliminating ethanol subsidies. In fact, +10.

    b) Here in Washington state we suffer higher than needed gas prices because we get California-formulated gasoline (having no refineries of our own). Yet we don't need it for "air pollution" purposes.

    c) Here in Seattle WA new enormous potholes appear every day on heavily travelled roads and they're rarely fixed. But the intersections have bright green "bike boxes" and the bike paths are nicely painted down each street. You might think that was because the idiot Green agenda is super important here. But that's only part of the answer. It's also because paint is cheaper than asphalt.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Carbon dioxide not a pollutant? I wish the Apollo 13 astronauts would have known that, because then they wouldn't have had to waste valuable time trying to get the carbon-dioxide scrubbers working on their craft.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rockets...planet...rockets....planet.
      Yep. Same thing.

      Delete
    2. Jonny, you're not only "Scrum-half," you're half witty too!

      Therefore I now dub thee, "Jonny Scrum-half Half-wit." Wear your new name proudly!

      Delete