http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/ Autoblog Comments for http://www.autoblog.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.autoblog.com en-us Copyright 2008 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/
Actually, that's pretty much only true in the US these days. In Europe - where, it will amaze some Autoblog readers to find out, they also have large families, plumbers, boats, horses, and all the other stuff that we have to deal with - high mileage cars and trucks are the norm, and people don't get excited until you're looking in the 60+ MPG range.

Just check out the story 3 spots down the page about the 44MPG Audi TT (0-60 in 7 seconds, while not spectacular, is still pretty fun...) Or check out the 70MPG Mini D. Or the more efficient work trucks and vans (and yes, they might have to downshift to go up a hill at speed when fully loaded, but that's what transmissions are for).

There's really no good excuse to be down where we are as far as national fuel economy goes.]]>Feb 27th 2008 8:20AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/Feb 27th 2008 8:27AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/
35 MPG in US gallons is 42 MPG in Imperial gallons, right off the bat.

Secondly, as we all know, fuel economy is high in europe because gas is expensive, and it's actually worthwhile for a consumer to buy a fuel efficient vehicle.

Which leads me to this, and this is an open question, Can anyone explain the thought process behind legislating fuel economy?

Rather than force the automakers to build cars that no one actually wants, why are we not re-pricing gasoline through taxation to make a 35 MPG appealing to consumers? It's like going into a flower shop and telling the owners they can't sell roses for Valentine's day anymore, that they have to sell dandelions. Nevermind that no one wants ugly dandelions. Dandelions have never gotten anyone laid, for the record.

I always thought the US was founded on capitalist, free-market economics. CAFE is the clearest evidence that the US has become too willing to intervene in the mechanics of the Market. even more frightening, it might be more likely that no one in power who knows anything about how the economy actually works, or how to foster a prosperous nation.

Oh wait.... isn't there a recession coming?

It's enough to make you want to hole up in the 'ole cellar with canned goods and bottled water. ]]>Feb 27th 2008 8:40AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/Feb 27th 2008 10:07AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/
High MPG cars will be more expensive, but will save money in the long run by sipping fuel. Conversely low MPG cars would be less expensive but you'll be paying out the wazoo in the long run on gas.

Personally i would rather see a mandate on fuel economy. My reason being that people with low income generally can't afford new cars but can afford a used car. They pick up an old Civic (which gets fine MPG) and pay less at the pump than they would if we taxed the hell out of fuels and they can continue with their lives. The reverse makes that much harder.
]]>Feb 27th 2008 9:54AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/
If it was not for Europe the U.S. would not exist as we know it. Socialized medicine is big in EVERY idustrialized country on planet earth except the U.S. Why? Because you pay less and get more. That's about as debatable as arguing the world is flat (yes, I know). Instead of spewing someone elses FUD do some research and draw _your own_ conclusion.

Thinking that you do everything right and everyone else does everything wrong is just a sign of ignorance. ]]>Feb 27th 2008 12:42PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/27/california-regulators-shooting-for-40-mpg-by-2020-needs-image/
"Socialized medicine is big in EVERY idustrialized country on planet earth except the U.S. Why? Because you pay less and get more. That's about as debatable as arguing the world is flat (yes, I know)."

Even though you try to avoid the debate brining up front "flat world" statement - I'll tell you a real story. My boss's wife was diagnosed with cancer here in Canada which has Big Socialized medicine. True, they paid nothing for getting the initial diagnose, but then she is put on a waiting list that is many months long, close to a year. It's ovarian cancer - she might be long dead before her turn for surgery comes. So, they mortgaged their house and paid $150K to the US hospital to do the treatment before it is late. This is the story. And it's not something exceptional, it happens to a lot of people who, while healthy, are paying ENORMOUS taxes (up to 50% !!) and live with the ILLUSION of free medicine. What makes it worse – companies here do not provide any medical plans - just a cheap stuff like upgrade from semi-private to a private room. So, when you're facing serious health problem, you're on your own. This is your Socialism in Action. There is no free breakfast – someone has to pay. Your Socialized medicine is an expensive ineffective illusion.
]]>Feb 27th 2008 3:32PM