Re: President Obama Plans To Can Bush's CAFE Standards! But Why Wasn't CAFE Part Of The Auto Makers' Bailout Agreements?

"Michael Pardee" wrote in news:uLydnXsYIdpXsRzUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@sedona.net:

.. > > 1. kinda dumb to impose large increases to federal gas taxes right > now, don't you think? > > 2. I said higher gas taxes were on the way after the economy recovers. > > CAFE is pretty lame but that's the tool at hand. $1500 on new cars is > far more reasonable than taxing gas so it returns to $4/gal. right > now. Of course, Republicans would love to see Obama raise fuel taxes > as the Dems would take a huge hit during the next election. But that > didn't occur to you, I'm sure. > > >================================================ > > Why you presume to read my mind (and you do it so poorly) baffles me. > As an American Republican, I don't see the benefit in further damaging > the US economy with taxes regardless who gets the blame. Do you want > to see the economy damaged? I oppose additional taxes and CAFE for the > same reasons; they are stupid ways to bleed our economy. > > The problem with CAFE is that it is not merely worthless, it is > damaging because it saps money from the economy to no advantage.You > would not use a hammer on a fuel injector because it is the tool at > hand. Look at the US petroleum consumption curve at >
formatting link
and tell me by examining> the curve when CAFE was enacted. (Hint - it is not visible within the> sharp downturn already produced by market forces.) You will notice the> accompanying text does not mention the effect of CAFE at all.> > Mike > > >

the chart you cite doesn't mean anything because after CAFE was enacted,the LOOPHOLE excluding SUV's/light trucks enabled vehicle buyers to keep on driving gas hogs,by shifting to those tanks.

Reply to
Jim Yanik
Loading thread data ...

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.