New 35mpg CAFE Standard: Will work?

I'm just gonna go ahead and say that it doesn't work very well at all. It pretty much says that the fleet average for all car manufacturers must be 35mpg. Translation: you can still have big SUVs and trucks, but you will also need to build little fuel efficient cars to offset their horrible fuel economy. The bill doesn't even state that customers have to buy any set number of the econoboxes for it to be considered a part of the fleet average. The car's on the roster, it gets great mileage, but few people buy it, unless they're self-conscious about the environment and feel they must do something to make it better. But hey! It's still on the roster, so it counts, regardless of how many people actually buy it! Whoooo!!!

The greenies will still buy their fuel sippers. The majority of the public will still buy their SUVs and Pickups that they don't need (over 52% of the vehicles on our roads today are SUVs and Pickups, wtf?!?!).

Personally, I think some better solutions would be to raise gas prices to $5-$6 dollars a gallon, or have large pick-ups get licensed as only for commercial use. But that's just me. What do you think of it?

What do you mean people don't need them? Trucks and SUV's have a purpose.

they have a purpose but are rarely used for that purpose...purpose not being 'safety' which is bullshit anyway since trucks and suv's flip/roll far more frequently than cars. you dont need a pickup to commute to an office job or an suv because you might have to drive in the snow like 4 times a year.

Originally posted by Schecter
you dont need a pickup to commute to an office job or an suv because you might have to drive in the snow like 4 times a year.

You also can't haul lumber or tow with a fuel efficient Honda Civic, that's why some people own trucks.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
You also can't haul lumber or tow with a fuel efficient Honda Civic, that's why some people own trucks.

yes i thought i clearly implied that in my o.p.
the point was that most people driving pickups are not hauling lumber, dirt, tools, parts, or anything else which requires a flatbed. in fact most seem to have brand spankin new pickups without so much as a blemish on the bed, which seems pretty ghey and poser-ish to me

Oh well, bullshit laws in the name of the environment are still bullshit.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
You also can't haul lumber or tow with a fuel efficient Honda Civic, that's why some people own trucks.

Concerning the idea of pick-ups being commercialized, you could rent one from a Uhaul or something similar. Or you can buy one if your job requires it. Pick-ups and SUVs aren't a necessity for at least 98% (statistic pulled from my ass) of the people that own them.

Prime example: A guy living in a condo in the city, works at a law firm, but drives a Ford F-450 King Ranch edition.

Originally posted by AngryManatee
Pick-ups and SUVs aren't a necessity for at least 98% (statistic pulled from my ass) of the people that own them.

That estimation is way too high.

And renting a U-Haul (which is really expensive) is a waste if you're just driving some lumber from the store to your house.

i find myself wishing cancer on people with hummers

Who the hell do you know hauling lumber?

Originally posted by Schecter
i find myself wishing cancer on people with hummers

I agree; they should've stayed in the military.

Originally posted by Schecter
i find myself wishing cancer on people with hummers

The people too though.

Originally posted by chithappens
Who the hell do you know hauling lumber?

People do it all the time; home projects and so on. Hardware stores sell them for a reason; there's a demand for it.

Someone seems to be suffering from semi colon-itis

Originally posted by AngryManatee
Personally, I think some better solutions would be to raise gas prices to $5-$6 dollars a gallon, or have large pick-ups get licensed as only for commercial use. But that's just me. What do you think of it?

Fuel will be $5.00 in the near future, so it's a moot point. But the price of fuel does directly translate to better mileage cars. If people can't afford to drive 12-15mpg 3 ton SUVs, the car manufacturers won't make them.

Licensing pickups for only certain duties is undemocratic, if some tool whats a Ford F250, just so he can lower it and put on 22's, as to look 'bling" while getting shitty mpg, then he should have the right to do so.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
People do it all the time; home projects and so on. Hardware stores sell them for a reason; there's a demand for it.

And all the big hardware/ appliance/ furniture stores give you the option of having the stuff shipped to you as well.

Originally posted by AngryManatee
And all the big hardware/ appliance/ furniture stores give you the option of having the stuff shipped to you as well.

Yeah, you don't really have the "option" if you don't have a car that could transport it.

Originally posted by Robtard

Licensing pickups for only certain duties is undemocratic, if some tool whats a Ford F250, just so he can lower it and put on 22's, as to look 'bling" while getting shitty mpg, then he should have the right to do so.

Luckily, we don't live in a democracy 😄

Originally posted by AngryManatee
Luckily, we don't live in a democracy 😄

Though Robtard is wrong. It might very well be democratic. It's just not very free.

Originally posted by Schecter
i find myself wishing cancer on people with hummers

I have to agree there, especially with the H2 & H3. The military hummer, does/can serve a purpose, but I don't thing a large number of the people who own them go wading through 5 feet of mud.

The H2 & H3 serve no purpose, besides the "look, I have a wannabe military vehicle". Sit inside either of those, they barely sit 4 people; yet they're some of the largest most fuel-sucking shitboxes on the road.