[NefCanuck]

torradan,May 10 2007, 08:54 AM Wrote:Figures, authored by a democrat in California.  Go eat some tofu.  Probably rides a segway while using her blackberry too.

I don't even know why a bill is needed here, the car companies seem to be doing fine on their own.  its slow going, but MPG numbers seem to be creeping up.

I don't see the gov't penalizing oil & gas companies at all.  What do they consider an emergency?  Compared to the emergency I have in my wallet right now paying $40 to fill up a frickin FOCUS?  Granted, its running 93, but its only 20 cents a gallon higher than the regular 87.  A whole $2.50 difference, give or take.
[right][snapback]237927[/snapback][/right]

torradan,

I don't think this is necessarily about the cars per se, but about the trucks. As long as the bill treats them equally and forces both to the higher MPG numbers I think you would see a dramatic decline in the consumption numbers.

Besides which car companies refuse to spend money on their product that doesn't net them more $ back. Raising the MPG won't earn these companies a dime in revenue so why would they otherwise? No less than Bob Lutz head of GM basically called the environmental movement "A bunch of baloney" (or words to that effect)

Why do you think the government had to legislate in airbags for example? People balked at the extra cost, the government saw that airbags were a benefit and brought the hammer down on 'em saying they had to go in for the front seat driver/passenger...

As for punishing oil companies? -pfft- yeah right, Big Oil has their hooks in so deep into the US government that it could be proven tommorow that extracting crude oil kills babies and it would get deemed "acceptable losses" by the government :rolleyes:

Besides, Bush could still kill this bill deader than dead with a veto, what does he care about any voter backlash? He's gone by '08 <_<

NefCanuck