"bhtooefr" (bhtooefr)
04/03/2018 at 06:58 • Filed to: trump, cafe, mpg, global warming, co2, politics, bmw, mini, rolls-royce, fca, Alfa Romeo, chrysler, dodge, fiat, ram, ford, lincoln, gm, buick, cadillac, chevrolet, gmc, jaguar, land rover, mazda, mercedes-benz, smart, mitsubishi, porsche, toyota, lexus, volkswagen, audi, bentley, bugatti, lamborghini, volvo |  2
|  40 |
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
pip bip - choose Corrour
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 07:06 |
|
this is what i see when i click the link.
HondoyotaE38: A Japanese and German Collab...wait a minute
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 07:09 |
|
It was satisfying clicking the title and seeing all those words get underlined.
Under_Score
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 07:10 |
|
Svend
> pip bip - choose Corrour
04/03/2018 at 07:12 |
|
This is what I get.
!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
The Auto Alliance (Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers) is committed to developing and implementing constructive solutions to public policy challenges that promote sustainable mobility and benefit society in the areas of environment, energy and motor vehicle safety.
The Auto Alliance, the leading advocacy group for the auto industry, represents 70% of all car and light truck sales in the United States, including the BMW Group, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, Ford Motor Company, General Motors Company, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz USA, Mitsubishi Motors, Porsche, Toyota, Volkswagen Group of America and Volvo Car USA.Headquartered in Washington, DC, the Alliance also has offices in Sacramento, California and Detroit, Michigan.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
To develop and implement policies that enable the introduction of new technologies needed to support sustainable mobility;
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
To be the trusted source of proactive and positive innovation and public policy benefiting society in areas of environment, energy and motor vehicle safety;
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
To initiate and leverage consensus-oriented dialogue with industry, federal and state governments, and other stakeholders to address shared objectives, domestically and internationally; and,
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
To be the credible resource for technical and science-based analysis enhancing motor vehicle safety, environment and energy issues with a global perspective.
|
bhtooefr
> Under_Score
04/03/2018 at 07:14 |
|
|
pip bip - choose Corrour
> Svend
04/03/2018 at 07:15 |
|
thank you.
|
Svend
> pip bip - choose Corrour
04/03/2018 at 07:16 |
|
No worries.
aquila121
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 07:17 |
|
Yeah, I see this could very quickly turn into a lobbying effort under the Trump administration’s “less regulations = always better” idiocy. Also, another arm of propaganda saying everything’s great in the economy.
Balls. I wish the industry had some more ability/wisdom to plan ahead. God willing, in 2020 this asshole and every member of his goddamn cabinet will be on their way out, and (I’d hope) that a more progressive candidate will take the reigns—one who isn’t actively trying to disband the entire EPA and ever good thing they’ve ever done, for starters.
If Trump gets his ass handed to him, and people actually display an interest in, oh, breathing long-term—or gas goes back up to $4 a gallon, suddenly the automakers are going to whine “Your standards are too strict!” No, assholes, you just celebrated the second someone threw them out the window. And those people behind it are fucking crazy.
random001
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 07:18 |
|
Salty title is salty
|
bhtooefr
> aquila121
04/03/2018 at 07:23 |
|
It hasn’t turned into a lobbying effort, it already was a lobbying effort, and they’re getting what they want: https://jalopnik.com/trump-administration-axes-obama-era-mpg-rules-and-sugge-1824264951
Never mind that... even with crossovers, the automakers should be able to hit 54.5 MPG fleet average if they’re willing to make more hybrids standard, and that’s even without EVs and PHEVs, which help even more:
Worth noting that I expect the RAV4 to be on the 2019 version of this list of cars that meet or exceed 54.5 MPG CAFE without a plug.
vondon302
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 07:24 |
|
Meh if we really wanted to lower emissions we’d have a higher gas tax.
There’s so much to be outraged about now I just can’t even .
|
aquila121
> Under_Score
04/03/2018 at 07:26 |
|
|
bhtooefr
> vondon302
04/03/2018 at 07:26 |
|
Why not both?
CAFE ensures that there’s efficient options in the market even when there’s no demand for them, so lower income buyers aren’t completely fucked when there is demand. It’s something that I feel should exist in addition to a gas tax.
BigBlock440
> aquila121
04/03/2018 at 07:34 |
|
If Trump gets his ass handed to him, and people actually display an interest in, oh, breathing long-term—or gas goes back up to $4 a gallon, suddenly the automakers are going to whine “Your standards are too strict!” No, assholes, you just celebrated the second someone threw them out the window.
Ummm, yes, it is normal to celebrate when standards that are negatively impacting you are thrown out the window.
MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s
> vondon302
04/03/2018 at 07:36 |
|
The only problem is a gas tax is a regressive tax...I’d much rather have mandated fuel economy standards than a gas tax increase
Cé hé sin
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 07:42 |
|
Oh, let’s all relax a bit. If EVs become as popular as their proponents hope the question of reducing CO2 emissions and fuel consumption on ICE vehicles becomes somewhat moot.
|
vondon302
> MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s
04/03/2018 at 07:46 |
|
But that forces manufacture’s to build cars nobody buys. We’ve been arguing about this for decades a little of both is most likely the smartest move.
|
MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s
> vondon302
04/03/2018 at 07:52 |
|
It forces the manufacturers to either create something people will buy that can meet the standards or move to something that doesn’t use gas
|
vondon302
> MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s
04/03/2018 at 08:00 |
|
So manufacture’s make electric cars that meet mandates. Nobody buys it cause gas is cheap. Roads become clogged with Suvs and trucks.
Sound familiar
|
bhtooefr
> Cé hé sin
04/03/2018 at 08:01 |
|
Worth noting that EVs are actually included in CAFE, but the legacy automakers are against them in practice, even though they can massively boost CAFE.
It’s just that there’s only one company, as far as I can tell, that’s actually serious about EVs - and that’s Tesla.
Everyone else makes a lot of noise about being serious about them, and sometimes even makes really good ones, but then turns around and makes big cheap (but expensive) guzzling trucks, and/or lobbies against environmental standards. Volkswagen’s deploying infrastructure - a huge part of EV adoption - in the US, but only because they were forced to, and in Europe they’re already back to touting diesel as the real answer.
|
bhtooefr
> vondon302
04/03/2018 at 08:03 |
|
Note that CAFE can apply on both ends, so the automakers can hold the trucks hostage - “you can’t buy this, because we haven’t sold enough EVs or efficient gas cars”.
This also means that they can raise prices on the trucks to subsidize the low CO2 vehicles, making them more accessible.
|
MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s
> vondon302
04/03/2018 at 08:05 |
|
SUVs really need stricter fuel economy requirements so that they either improve a bunch or become too expensive to buy. Trucks are kind of a grey area for me...most people really don’t need them, but making them really expensive punishes businesses and people who do actually need them. I know it’s not ideal, but nothing is. Maybe there needs to be a much higher gas-guzzler tax at first point of sale, raising the gas tax a bunch just hurts the poorest of us the most.
|
bhtooefr
> MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s
04/03/2018 at 08:09 |
|
I feel like, if something gets exemptions from standards for its work capability (counted in truck efficiency tables, relaxed emissions standards, relaxed safety standards, etc., etc.), it should require a CDL.
Want your truck to be treated as a passenger vehicle? Then you get passenger vehicle regulations, fuck you.
|
MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 08:14 |
|
I wouldn’t be opposed to that...I think we need more restrictive licensing too but that’s another debate
|
BigBlock440
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 09:20 |
|
So, require every contractor, landscaper, general laborer, roofer, mason, illegal alien, etc. to get a CDL just to drive a vehicle that’s not more difficult to drive than a standard passenger car?
|
bhtooefr
> BigBlock440
04/03/2018 at 09:26 |
|
Your average 26,001 lb GVWR box truck isn’t harder to drive than a standard car, either.
But, if you fuck up, the consequences are far more severe, due to the much higher kinetic energy.
So, yes, I’m all for that. (Although people who are in this country illegally aren’t necessarily driving a commercial vehicle. And, if the state that they’re in is willing to give them a driver’s license, what’s wrong with giving them a CDL?)
Joe6pack
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 09:29 |
|
They already do. It’s the profit from all those trucks and SUVs that allow the mfrs. to build and sell (currently) unprofitable EVs.
jimz
> Cé hé sin
04/03/2018 at 09:37 |
|
I like how you’re fighting the good fight over in the TTAC comment thread (assuming you’re Ce he sin over there too) but it’s a waste of time. that place is infested with 60-70 year old Boomer white guys who have driven off anyone else with an opposing viewpoint with their repellent “I’m not alt-right, I just parrot everything the alt-right says” behavior. nothing makes the state of American politics as clear as the moron who says “Trump’s best quality is how well he makes the left lose their minds.” Like that’s what a president is supposed to do. TTAC can crash and burn.
|
Joe6pack
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 09:45 |
|
Put down the Tesla kool-aid. Nissan-Renaul-Mitsubishi outsell Tesla in the EV space by large margins and do so profitably while not being toys for the rich.
I’ve been driving EV since 2012. The revolution is coming because they are just better. But, they can’t just turnover the entire fleet in 6yrs and the technology isn’t quite there. Watch. The next five years are going to be some of the most interesting since the automobile first came to the masses.
|
BigBlock440
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 10:10 |
|
Your average 26,001 lb GVWR box truck isn’t harder to drive than a standard car, either.
Yes, it is. If you’re thinking the cab-over Isuzu box trucks, not one single one requires a CDL or has a GVWR over 26k lbs. Which means every single one of those drivers would need a CDL also. And autozone employees, they need to drive the parts truck.
So, yes, I’m all for that. (Although people who are in this country illegally aren’t necessarily driving a commercial vehicle. And, if the state that they’re in is willing to give them a driver’s license, what’s wrong with giving them a CDL?)
If you’re classifying pickups as commercial vehicles, yes they are. Construction, farm work, etc. And CDLs aren’t given, they’re tested for and cost quite a bit of money. And you use your primary vehicle for the test, so that would allow anyone who shows up for the test in a compact pickup to drive a tri-axle dump truck fully licensed.
And all of this is completely ignoring that CDL requirements are set by the state, not the feds.
|
BigBlock440
> jimz
04/03/2018 at 10:11 |
|
“Trump’s best quality is how well he makes the left lose their minds.”
Out of curiosity, what do you think Trump’s best quality is?
|
jimz
> BigBlock440
04/03/2018 at 10:15 |
|
depends on what your reason for asking is. If this is a setup for “well would you really rather have Hillary” then save it.
DaftRyosuke - So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 10:27 |
|
So, just fuck everyone.
|
bhtooefr
> Joe6pack
04/03/2018 at 10:28 |
|
To be fair, Nissan isn’t part of this lobbying organization (but Mitsubishi is). But, still, I’m not entirely convinced that they’re all-in on EVs, although they’re ahead of most of the other legacy automakers - they’ve divested their battery joint venture, for one thing.
That said, at least from January to September 2017 (so notably, excluding the new LEAF), Tesla was the #1 EV seller, and BAIC was ahead of Nissan as well: https://cleantechnica.com/2017/11/30/tesla-top-global-electric-vehicle-brand-2017-jato-dynamics-study-finds-surprised/
|
bhtooefr
> BigBlock440
04/03/2018 at 10:30 |
|
My point is that not everyone who’s in the country illegally is doing those things.
But, there’s always creating a new class of CDL below Class C, and there’s all of the endorsements that wouldn’t apply if you took your test in an F-150. And, AFAIK, there are some federal standards for this, just implementation’s at the state level.
camarov6rs
> bhtooefr
04/03/2018 at 10:34 |
|
A new class of CDL and require business registration for those class of vehicles so that you can adequately tax those heavy vehicles that do the most damage to our roads.
|
jimz
> BigBlock440
04/03/2018 at 12:03 |
|
and inevitably, when you ask those people how the standards “negatively affected” them, you don’t get a concrete answer. just vague bullshit.
victor
> BigBlock440
04/03/2018 at 12:34 |
|
He’s excellent at being an ineffectual people manager. In my company, we laugh at managers who have shit personnel issues like he does at the WH. A good manager sets the tone and controls the culture.
|
aquila121
> BigBlock440
04/03/2018 at 18:16 |
|
So, don’t tell me you’d be fine with the emissions and fuel economy targets of the 1960s? That can’t honestly be what you’re saying. The types of regulations Trump is now repealing (because he believes all regulation kills business—lol, I’ll get to that—and they were enacted under Obama’s term [read: racist asshole who pushed the birther conspiracy wants to undo everything Obama did on principle]) are part of a trend which forces innovation and engineering to overcome high standards.
Read this recent piece by Torch where he talks about how cats killed the muscle car era, then ask yourself: how do automakers now put out 707hp Hellcat-powered Chargers, Shelby GT350R Mustangs with flat-plane crank V8s, or the also absurdly powerful Corvette ZR1 with the nanny-state pushing ‘negatively impacting standards’ on the auto industry? Answer: they had to put their R&D divisions to work to find new ways to make power while still being cleaner and more fuel-efficient than they were in the past. Also, I’d like to call your attention to this story of Soichiro Honda being a wonderfully spiteful engineering leader. Same point. Keep in mind, these anecdotes resulted BECAUSE THE FEDERALLY MANDATED STANDARDS EXISTED. And we as consumers reap the benefits—those standards are part of the cause for Prii that can get something like 50MPG highway (or more, probably—not my thing). It’s why I’d rather get into a crash at 60 mph in a car with modern safety features than a car from the 50's that looks like a tank, yet would crumple like a soda can.
If the government never raises targets for emissions, fuel economy, safety, etc., and the entire industry collectively says “fuck it,” suddenly the free market (that the conservatives love to tout as the ultimate engine of “survival of the fittest” in the capitalist world) does jack shit for the consumer. Without regulatory pressure from the government, this lobbying alliance bhtooefr is highlighting seems more poised to turn the major auto manufacturers into something similar to the telecom or airline industries, where the end user has no good options—all companies large enough to be competitive in the field have made an unspoken agreement to offer comparably piss-poor products and service such that you’re hosed no matter what. And the consumer can’t say “I’m taking my money elsewhere,” because there’s no better place to go.
TL;DR: Show me how the Obama-era emissions and fuel targets are negatively impacting major automakers. They’ve dealt with these regulations in the past and still managed to turn profits. They’re still making profits now (their own site says they had the 4th-best year ever!), why do they need the regs removed?
|
aquila121
> BigBlock440
04/03/2018 at 20:01 |
|
My God, someone made all the points I was thinking (and more) in a much more eloquent and well-backed article. I’m just going to shut up.
https://jalopnik.com/why-u-s-carmakers-could-end-up-wishing-they-never-aske-1824296840