Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 d-usa wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Who cares what standards Trump mandates for US car manufacturers? Most people want efficient vehicles, and that is what the US companies will make if they plan to stay in the game.

SUV and truck sales in the USA would beg to differ.

1) Inefficient SUV and Truck sales declined when gas rose to $3+ per gallon. They rose when gas prices dropped. They will drop again when gas prices rise again.
2) Many new vehicles do sell well, and many new vehicles have very good fuel efficiency. My 2015 Subaru Forester gets 1.6 MPG less than my 2011Ford Fusion.
3) There is always a small market for people who want big muscle engines who don't care about fuel efficiency. But manufacturers will shoot themselves in the foot if they abandon fuel efficiency.

I've certainly seen more "wimpy" cars around in the past 5 years or so. And why not, I can get 40mpg in my little hundi if I'm careful, and it actualy has quite a bit of carry space. And even a lot of the pickups are getting more fuel efficent

Guys, surely fuel efficiency isn't the only, or even primary, factor we should concern ourselves with when talking about the limits and regulations of the automotive industry.

I will argue that any person who might feel the desire to say that, for example less pollution, is automatically taken care of by more efficient engines or more efficient manufacturing processes have got their priorities backward.

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Who cares what standards Trump mandates for US car manufacturers? Most people want efficient vehicles, and that is what the US companies will make if they plan to stay in the game.

SUV and truck sales in the USA would beg to differ.

Trucks and SUVs have the same fuel efficiency they had 10 or 20 years ago?

Because the market demanded it or because the government mandated it?

Or one could just get a Tesla. Blow any street car out of the water and still be impractical. Win win.

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Evidently, Comey asked the Dept. Of Justice to denounce Trump's tweets as pure blathering. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/03/05/trump-seeks-congressional-probe-into-politically-motivated-investigation-during-2016-campaign/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumpwiretap-927am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.b3d43cc7435e

So... this kills the Russian-Trump alliance narrative then... eh?

 Breotan wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Who cares what standards Trump mandates for US car manufacturers? Most people want efficient vehicles, and that is what the US companies will make if they plan to stay in the game.

SUV and truck sales in the USA would beg to differ.

Trucks and SUVs have the same fuel efficiency they had 10 or 20 years ago?

Because the market demanded it or because the government mandated it?

Yes.

I hope Obama sues Trump over this bullgak...

 whembly wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Evidently, Comey asked the Dept. Of Justice to denounce Trump's tweets as pure blathering. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/03/05/trump-seeks-congressional-probe-into-politically-motivated-investigation-during-2016-campaign/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumpwiretap-927am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.b3d43cc7435e

So... this kills the Russian-Trump alliance narrative then... eh?

Not based on what the article says, no. There still appear to be enough indications that such an alliance exists in some form to warrant an investigation.

 whembly wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Evidently, Comey asked the Dept. Of Justice to denounce Trump's tweets as pure blathering. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/03/05/trump-seeks-congressional-probe-into-politically-motivated-investigation-during-2016-campaign/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumpwiretap-927am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.b3d43cc7435e

So... this kills the Russian-Trump alliance narrative then... eh?

Maybe read it. Yeah, I know "fake news", but I would prefer to trust it than two British sources that were then picked up by three untrustworthy second hand accounts to total trump's sources.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/03/05/trumps-evidence-for-obama-wiretap-claims-relies-on-sketchy-anonymously-sourced-reports/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_fc-wiretap-1138am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.28843ba45eed

My memory is a little sketchy. Can somebody remind me who was it that said the following;

"They have no sources. They just make them up when there are none. They shouldn't be allowed to use sources unless they use somebody's name. Let their name be put out there."

 Breotan wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Who cares what standards Trump mandates for US car manufacturers? Most people want efficient vehicles, and that is what the US companies will make if they plan to stay in the game.

SUV and truck sales in the USA would beg to differ.

Trucks and SUVs have the same fuel efficiency they had 10 or 20 years ago?

Because the market demanded it or because the government mandated it?

Why not both?

 Gordon Shumway wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Gordon Shumway wrote:
Evidently, Comey asked the Dept. Of Justice to denounce Trump's tweets as pure blathering. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/03/05/trump-seeks-congressional-probe-into-politically-motivated-investigation-during-2016-campaign/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumpwiretap-927am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.b3d43cc7435e

So... this kills the Russian-Trump alliance narrative then... eh?

Maybe read it. Yeah, I know "fake news", but I would prefer to trust it than two British sources that were then picked up by three untrustworthy second hand accounts to total trump's sources.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/03/05/trumps-evidence-for-obama-wiretap-claims-relies-on-sketchy-anonymously-sourced-reports/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_fc-wiretap-1138am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.28843ba45eed

Nah, they even have photo evidence.

Where do "things" like this individual come from?


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/oklahoma-lawmaker-asks-muslims-do-you-beat-your-wife/ar-AAnNneC?li=AAn4eAA&ocid=ASUDHP

 BigWaaagh wrote:
Where do "things" like this come from?


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/oklahoma-lawmaker-asks-muslims-do-you-beat-your-wife/ar-AAnNneC?li=AAn4eAA&ocid=ASUDHP

I wonder... how many Christians beat their spouses?

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Who cares what standards Trump mandates for US car manufacturers? Most people want efficient vehicles, and that is what the US companies will make if they plan to stay in the game.

SUV and truck sales in the USA would beg to differ.

Trucks and SUVs have the same fuel efficiency they had 10 or 20 years ago?

Because the market demanded it or because the government mandated it?

Why not both?

It's almost like people have completely forgotten that the weakness of the US auto industry since 2000 has largely been attributed to producing gas guzzlers that only a (comparatively) small number of Americans want to buy. I mean it's not like the only major US manufacturer who was ahead of the curve making economical vehicles was also the only one not to request a government bail out or anything, and it's not like GM is still being kept afloat almost solely on the sales of four or so major brands that only Americans buy while Toyota has been eating up market share left and right by producing a metric ton of cheap fuel economy focused vehicles or anything.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Breotan wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Who cares what standards Trump mandates for US car manufacturers? Most people want efficient vehicles, and that is what the US companies will make if they plan to stay in the game.

SUV and truck sales in the USA would beg to differ.

Trucks and SUVs have the same fuel efficiency they had 10 or 20 years ago?

Because the market demanded it or because the government mandated it?

Why not both?

It's almost like people have completely forgotten that the weakness of the US auto industry since 2000 has largely been attributed to producing gas guzzlers that only a (comparatively) small number of Americans want to buy. I mean it's not like the only major US manufacturer who was ahead of the curve making economical vehicles was also the only one not to request a government bail out or anything, and it's not like GM is still being kept afloat almost solely on the sales of four or so major brands that only Americans buy while Toyota has been eating up market share left and right by producing a metric ton of cheap fuel economy focused vehicles or anything.

And yet every auto manufacturer still make and sell significant numbers of SUVs, Trucks, and sports cars.

Electric cars won't become a significant element of the market until they can either put into place a nationwide infrastructure of fast charging stations, or somehow get past the current limits on travel range. Oh, and they'll need to justify their cost as well. Tesla may be all the rage today but their cars are expensive as hell.

Is it actually legal for a representative of the people to discriminate against his constituents on the grounds of religion?

It seems to me that basic democracy, as well as the separation clause, make it deeply immoral.

 Breotan wrote:
And yet every auto manufacturer still make and sell significant numbers of SUVs, Trucks, and sports cars.

Sure, but for all I see of US auto manufacturers it seems like the SUVs, trucks and sports cars are the main point and the drab four-door sedan is just an afterthought. Others make basic and not-so-basic cars for families first, then put out a SUV for "tough conditions", a truck for workers who need to haul their gear and a sports model for enthusiasts. There's manufacturers who are still stuck thinking a V8 is the only proper engine for real men, a V6 something for the poor and anything less just something to build because some hippies want it and their money doesn't smell too bad...

 Breotan wrote:

And yet every auto manufacturer still make and sell significant numbers of SUVs, Trucks, and sports cars.

You continue to assume that whenever people mention fuel economy they're talking about SUVs and Trucks and such. Ignore that even accounting for the robuts truck and SUV market, US vehicles are usually less efficient and more expensive than their competition and have next to no market outside the United States where they're appeal mostly stems from being US made (on the tin anyway). We're talking about fuel economy, which is a factor in all vehicles. GM is still trying to incorporate full body sedans as something other than a niche market, having learned nothing from the recession crash that stemmed from poor investment decisions in what kind of vehicles to develop and push. About the only US firm that has kept up on this front is Ford (aka the only US maker who didn't need a bailout to survive), and they also happen to be the only US maker with substantial overseas markets outside industrial/business service vehicles.

GM is literally surviving on Ram, Cherokee, and various vans and tractor trucks. Another major market crash and they'll need to be bailed out again because they learned nothing.

Since the first caveman figured out it was better to build his fire in a ring of stones than slopped out over the floor of his cave, humans have been improving the efficiency of their technology with or without government impetus.

California's vehicle rules give manufacturer's a specific goal to work towards, which covers the case of negative externalities (pollution, etc.) Without that, cars have become much more efficient over the decades anyway, because better vehicles outcompete worse ones in the market.

If Trump genuinely wants to halt and reverse efficiency, he will need to create laws to mandate heavier chassis, higher rolling resistance tyres and so on. GM will build such vehicles. Toyota will build efficient vehicles with easily reversible adaptations (e.g. detachable weights) so that they pass the government inefficiency test and can easily be restored to modern functionality in the after-market. Then people will buy the Toyota vehicles.

 whembly wrote:


These lends zero credibiility to the idea that Trumpo connived with Putie-poo...
.

uh huh.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-oil-gas-anti-corruption-remove-rules-deregulation-energy-industry-companies-a7581691.html

sure no one in Russia would be interested in a massive bribe.

No way at all.

Press Secretary Sean Spicer said: “Misguided federal regulations such as the SEC rule addressed by H.J.R. 41 inflict real cost on the American people and put our businesses, especially small businesses, at a significant disadvantage.

???

In what context is energy small business? Who the feth is competing with US energy firms for people's business? Energy is either sold to people who use it at a relatively low rate, or financed and exchanged between massive firms at really high rates. There's literally nothing about that regulation that has any impact of small business competitiveness because there's no such thing as a small energy business.

 LordofHats wrote:

Press Secretary Sean Spicer said: “Misguided federal regulations such as the SEC rule addressed by H.J.R. 41 inflict real cost on the American people and put our businesses, especially small businesses, at a significant disadvantage.

???

In what context is energy small business? Who the feth is competing with US energy firms for people's business? Energy is either sold to people who use it at a relatively low rate, or financed and exchanged between massive firms at really high rates. There's literally nothing about that regulation that has any impact of small business competitiveness because there's no such thing as a small energy business.

You need to let your logic and rational thought evaporate. Seriously. The aim of this administration is to cause embolisms and aneurysms in anyone who has a smidge of critical awareness.

You must be supporter of big government and are one of the anti americans who spread the lies of fake news. Don't you want small business owners to succeed? You must be a shill for the dems. You know that Trump is the only person who can take on Obamas shadow government and he can only do this by dismantling the regulatory industry which is overseen by dem jews. Only then can Americans take back the jobs taken by the immigrant army which has been secretly built up over the last 8 years.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/charliewarzel/from-reddit-to-trumps-twitter-in-less-than-24-hours?utm_term=.ssx6VoZWb#.xw3BKaLM8





... future sure ain't what it used to be.

...I'm not even surprised that T_D is actually shaping presidential actions. We're so completely fethed. Let's hope that he doesn't randomly nuke Sacremento because Jerry Brown hurt his fee fees.

I love the "Obama Shadow Government" idea. It allows DT and the Rs to essential continue to blame D's for everythign bad that happens and ask their supporters to keep voting more of them in.

Brilliant and terrifying.

 Easy E wrote:
I love the "Obama Shadow Government" idea. It allows DT and the Rs to essential continue to blame D's for everythign bad that happens and ask their supporters to keep voting more of them in.

Brilliant and terrifying.

I've said it before, will say it again.

Rs can't do anything. They know they can't do anything. So they'll just keep blaming the Ds. It's their MO. And their voter base keeps going for it. Worse, their voter base eats it up.

You'd think that anyone with the point to run a shadow government would have been able to get more done over the last 8 years.

Welp...

Spokeswoman: 'I don't think' Trump accepts Comey's denial of wiretap claims

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/322446-wh-spokeswoman-i-dont-think-trump-accepts-comeys-denial-of

Comey seemed to be plenty reliable enough for them back in November...

 Vaktathi wrote:
Welp...

Spokeswoman: 'I don't think' Trump accepts Comey's denial of wiretap claims

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/322446-wh-spokeswoman-i-dont-think-trump-accepts-comeys-denial-of

Comey seemed to be plenty reliable enough for them back in November...

Yeah, but now the shoe is on the other foot.

Also, didn't one of Trump's guys just admit on Twitter that he was in contact with Wikileaks back in October...and then try to delete the tweet?