Obama orders new auto fuel standards

[G.T.]

Fuel efficiency effects commerce the same way that roads did, and unfortunately the interstate wasn't going to build itself quickly enough and what Eisenhower did was take action and what do ya know, but it was successful and still is to this day.

I think about fuel standards in the same way. There's a bunch of things the gov't does which manipulates fuel prices, and that's the nature of geo-politics and dealing with other Governments for fuel sources. The best way forward would be to empower the Country with lessening and lessening our dependence on the fuel to begin with, and the fact that the market largely DOESNT DECIDE fuel prices, should lead FREE MARKET advocates to want & hope for action.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Fuel efficiency effects commerce the same way that roads did, and unfortunately the interstate wasn't going to build itself quickly enough and what Eisenhower did was take action and what do ya know, but it was successful and still is to this day.

Baloney.

A project like the interstate highway system is miles afield from dictating to auto companies what kinds of cars they may or may not build.

 

[G.T.]

Fuel efficiency effects commerce the same way that roads did, and unfortunately the interstate wasn't going to build itself quickly enough and what Eisenhower did was take action and what do ya know, but it was successful and still is to this day.

Baloney.

A project like the interstate highway system is miles afield from dictating to auto companies what kinds of cars they may or may not build.

No, it's along those same exact lines - but you'd have to think past the "fuck da gubbamint!" rhetoric inside of your brain to have a decent and level headed conversation about it it looks like.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Fuel efficiency effects commerce the same way that roads did, and unfortunately the interstate wasn't going to build itself quickly enough and what Eisenhower did was take action and what do ya know, but it was successful and still is to this day.

Baloney.

A project like the interstate highway system is miles afield from dictating to auto companies what kinds of cars they may or may not build.

No, it's along those same exact lines - but you'd have to think past the "fuck da gubbamint!" rhetoric inside of your brain to have a decent and level headed conversation about it it looks like.

No, it's not along the same lines.

Building and maintaining roads is a legit function of government. Ordering businesses what to build is not.

 

[G.T.]

Baloney.

A project like the interstate highway system is miles afield from dictating to auto companies what kinds of cars they may or may not build.

No, it's along those same exact lines - but you'd have to think past the "fuck da gubbamint!" rhetoric inside of your brain to have a decent and level headed conversation about it it looks like.

No, it's not along the same lines.

Building and maintaining roads is a legit function of government. Ordering businesses what to build is not.

Right, go make some nuclear warheads then with no license from the Gov't.

Have at it!~

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Apples and submarines.

 

[G.T.]

Apples and submarines.

commerce regulation and commerce regulation

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Wrong again.

National defense isn't civilian interstate commerce.

Also, the government creates specs on the weapons systems they want for themselves. They aren't dictating to civilian companies and consumers what products are, as deemed from on high, as appropriate for them or not.

 

[william the wie]

Fuel efficiency effects commerce the same way that roads did, and unfortunately the interstate wasn't going to build itself quickly enough and what Eisenhower did was take action and what do ya know, but it was successful and still is to this day.

Baloney.

A project like the interstate highway system is miles afield from dictating to auto companies what kinds of cars they may or may not build.

Helen what is stupid about this proposal is that for safety our barge networks need to be dredged to reduce flooding and overpasses are needed to reduce fatalities at rail crossings and the sideeffects would be faster and cheaper rail and barge traffic plus much less truck traffic and less air pollution. This stupid policy makes neither economic nor environmental sense.

 

[G.T.]

Wrong again.

National defense isn't civilian interstate commerce.

Also, the government creates specs on the weapons systems they want for themselves. They aren't dictating to civilian companies and consumers what products are, deemed from on high, as appropriate for them or not.

Nuclear Warheads are under the umbrella of National Defense because it's illegal to make them as a civilian.

But that's just common sense, I was using the absurd to point out the absurd.

Fuel prices most definitely do effect commerce. All of your food & clothing needs, amongst other things, are DIRECTLY linked to it. It's well within the Gov't jurisdiction under the commerce clause. It's only one of the main reasons the clause even exists.

 

[G.T.]

Fuel efficiency effects commerce the same way that roads did, and unfortunately the interstate wasn't going to build itself quickly enough and what Eisenhower did was take action and what do ya know, but it was successful and still is to this day.

Baloney.

A project like the interstate highway system is miles afield from dictating to auto companies what kinds of cars they may or may not build.

Helen what is stupid about this proposal is that for safety our barge networks need to be dredged to reduce flooding and overpasses are needed to reduce fatalities at rail crossings and the sideeffects would be faster and cheaper rail and barge traffic plus much less truck traffic and less air pollution. This stupid policy makes neither economic nor environmental sense.

True!!!

 

[G.T.]

There's a difference between good and bad policy, and illegal policy.

Here, I don't speak the legalese to know if the EPA, which is authorized by congress and congress regulates commerce, makes this a legal move by the President.........

But I know that fuel standards certainly fall under the commerce clause. That's common sense - and to add a further "a-duh" to that would be that fuel prices are not even dictated by the open market to begin with but manipulated by world governments and their affairs with one another(as well as our own government's willingness to drill at home).

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh well, that's it then, might as well give up.

Not at all, but it would be nice to pretend that the government can't wave a magic wand and fix everything, which is why I asked you for details about how Obama expects to double gas mileage in a decade. So far all you have done is pretend I am stupid for not understanding that the government is magic.

No, so far I've pointed out that you're stupid for thinking that just because technology can't achieve something today, it never will.

So far, you haven't done a damned thing except make yourself look like a hack.

I did not say that technology cannot achieve a doubling of gas mileage eventually, I just see no reason to expect that the government can mandate that trucks double their mileage in the next decade when it hasn't happened in the last 4 fucking decades.

In other words, I live in the real world, the one where magic does not exist. You, however, seem to think that the government is magic. I can only assume that because, even when I ask you a specific question about how this will work, all you can do is say I am an idiot.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Based on the Commerce Clause, this is not a really nefarious thing to do should the technology allow for it - but it's up to the Congress not the President.



Has anyone barking about there not being the technology currently actually researched if there will be waivers or extensions should the technology not come to fruition though?

The commerce clause was meant to keep states from erecting barriers to commerce between the several states, not to dictate to businesses what kind of products they will or won't offer.

Yes, and fuel being too expensive for trucking companies, whom according to the article are mostly on board with this, is a barrier between interstate commerce.

Freight companies want to be able to cut their expenses and increase profits? Say it ain't so.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Fuel efficiency effects commerce the same way that roads did, and unfortunately the interstate wasn't going to build itself quickly enough and what Eisenhower did was take action and what do ya know, but it was successful and still is to this day.

I think about fuel standards in the same way. There's a bunch of things the gov't does which manipulates fuel prices, and that's the nature of geo-politics and dealing with other Governments for fuel sources. The best way forward would be to empower the Country with lessening and lessening our dependence on the fuel to begin with, and the fact that the market largely DOESNT DECIDE fuel prices, should lead FREE MARKET advocates to want & hope for action.

Back when they built the interstate the government didn't have the power to pretend that the commerce clause let them build a massive highway system, which is why it was shoehorned into national defense.

 

[idb]

Not at all, but it would be nice to pretend that the government can't wave a magic wand and fix everything, which is why I asked you for details about how Obama expects to double gas mileage in a decade. So far all you have done is pretend I am stupid for not understanding that the government is magic.

No, so far I've pointed out that you're stupid for thinking that just because technology can't achieve something today, it never will.

So far, you haven't done a damned thing except make yourself look like a hack.

I did not say that technology cannot achieve a doubling of gas mileage eventually, I just see no reason to expect that the government can mandate that trucks double their mileage in the next decade when it hasn't happened in the last 4 fucking decades.

In other words, I live in the real world, the one where magic does not exist. You, however, seem to think that the government is magic. I can only assume that because, even when I ask you a specific question about how this will work, all you can do is say I am an idiot.

Why is magic required?

Here's how you achieve it...are you ready?
You get a bunch of clever people with the right resources on the job to figure it out.

As an aside, I think the doubling of mileage in a decade is the average over the passenger vehicle fleet, not heavy vehicles.
I don't think the heavy vehicle policy has been announced yet.

 

[william the wie]

There's a difference between good and bad policy, and illegal policy.

Here, I don't speak the legalese to know if the EPA, which is authorized by congress and congress regulates commerce, makes this a legal move by the President.........

But I know that fuel standards certainly fall under the commerce clause. That's common sense - and to add a further "a-duh" to that would be that fuel prices are not even dictated by the open market to begin with but manipulated by world governments and their affairs with one another(as well as our own government's willingness to drill at home).

This definitely qualifies as stupid policy and not just for the reasons given in my previous post. T. Boone Pickens is lobbying for Natural Gas usage on Semis. Given the effective ban on coal in electrical generation with coal fields being the cheaper source of Natural Gas prices will sink like a rock. Other than dynamite for fracking and using the ventilation shafts as gas wells nothing much is needed to get an effectively unlimited supply of natural gas cheap.

 

[william the wie]

Fuel efficiency effects commerce the same way that roads did, and unfortunately the interstate wasn't going to build itself quickly enough and what Eisenhower did was take action and what do ya know, but it was successful and still is to this day.

I think about fuel standards in the same way. There's a bunch of things the gov't does which manipulates fuel prices, and that's the nature of geo-politics and dealing with other Governments for fuel sources. The best way forward would be to empower the Country with lessening and lessening our dependence on the fuel to begin with, and the fact that the market largely DOESNT DECIDE fuel prices, should lead FREE MARKET advocates to want & hope for action.

Back when they built the interstate the government didn't have the power to pretend that the commerce clause let them build a massive highway system, which is why it was shoehorned into national defense.

Actually it was the result of Ike not making it to front in WWI with his tank unit because of the crappy state of the roads 1917-8. As a result he had a Hell of a time getting past major.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, so far I've pointed out that you're stupid for thinking that just because technology can't achieve something today, it never will.

So far, you haven't done a damned thing except make yourself look like a hack.

I did not say that technology cannot achieve a doubling of gas mileage eventually, I just see no reason to expect that the government can mandate that trucks double their mileage in the next decade when it hasn't happened in the last 4 fucking decades.

In other words, I live in the real world, the one where magic does not exist. You, however, seem to think that the government is magic. I can only assume that because, even when I ask you a specific question about how this will work, all you can do is say I am an idiot.

Why is magic required?

Here's how you achieve it...are you ready?
You get a bunch of clever people with the right resources on the job to figure it out.

As an aside, I think the doubling of mileage in a decade is the average over the passenger vehicle fleet, not heavy vehicles.
I don't think the heavy vehicle policy has been announced yet.

As the central part of this discussion, Obama wants the EPA to mandate a doubling of gas mileage for trucks by 2025. I have video to prove it, and it comes from a place that is not Fox News.

Obama vows to double gas mileage by 2025 - Videos - CBS News

You can blather all day long about it not requiring magic, and yo will still not answer the question.

Stop being a hack, how can the government do something in 10 years that decades of research by people that would make trillions of dollars if it were possible could not?

 

[idb]

So far, you haven't done a damned thing except make yourself look like a hack.

I did not say that technology cannot achieve a doubling of gas mileage eventually, I just see no reason to expect that the government can mandate that trucks double their mileage in the next decade when it hasn't happened in the last 4 fucking decades.

In other words, I live in the real world, the one where magic does not exist. You, however, seem to think that the government is magic. I can only assume that because, even when I ask you a specific question about how this will work, all you can do is say I am an idiot.

Why is magic required?

Here's how you achieve it...are you ready?
You get a bunch of clever people with the right resources on the job to figure it out.

As an aside, I think the doubling of mileage in a decade is the average over the passenger vehicle fleet, not heavy vehicles.
I don't think the heavy vehicle policy has been announced yet.

As the central part of this discussion, Obama wants the EPA to mandate a doubling of gas mileage for trucks by 2025. I have video to prove it, and it comes from a place that is not Fox News.

Obama vows to double gas mileage by 2025 - Videos - CBS News

You can blather all day long about it not requiring magic, and yo will still not answer the question.

Stop being a hack, how can the government do something in 10 years that decades of research by people that would make trillions of dollars if it were possible could not?

By funding people that can do it.
It's amazing what funding can do if it isn't restrained or complicated by commercial imperatives.