Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [hreg] Automakers adding more MPG to new cars

Expand Messages
  • Robert Johnston
    This is so wrong. Congress is the last organization I want to see micromanaging vehicle design and corporate operations. Might as well shut down Detroit and
    Message 1 of 8 , Dec 2, 2007
    • 0 Attachment

      This is so wrong.  Congress is the last organization I want to see micromanaging vehicle design and corporate operations.  Might as well shut down Detroit and send all the jobs to China .

      If we believe we need to legislate conservation, wouldn’t it be better to simply charge a large gasoline tax and then let the market dictate car design according to consumer demand?

       

      Robert

       

       


      From: hreg@yahoogroups.com [mailto: hreg@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Solar Energy
      Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 11:24 PM
      To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [hreg] Automakers adding more MPG to new cars

       

      Energy plan pushes automakers on mpg

      By KEN THOMAS, Associated Press Writer

      WASHINGTON - The groundbreaking deal in Congress to raise mile-per-gallon standards will compel the auto industry to churn out more fuel-efficient vehicles on a faster timeline than the companies wanted, though with flexibility to get the job done.

      The auto industry's fleet of new cars, sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks and vans will have to average 35 mpg by 2020, according to the agreement that congressional negotiators announced late Friday. That compares with the 2008 requirement of 27.5 mpg average for cars and 22.5 mpg for light trucks. It would be first increase ordered by Congress in three decades.

      Majority Democrats plan to include the requirement in broader energy legislation to be debated in the context of $90-per-barrel oil, $3-plus pump prices and growing concerns about climate change. The House plans to begin debate this week.

      "It is a major milestone and the first concrete legislation to address global warming," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

      While Senate Democrats were quick to embrace the compromise, the energy bill may face problems over requirements for nonpublic electric utilities to produce 15 percent of their power from renewable energy sources such as wind or solar.

      Sen. Pete Domenici

      , R-N.M., on Saturday said that idea "will make this bill untenable for many in the Senate."

      Environmentalists have sought stricter mileage standards for years, saying that is the most effective way to curb greenhouse gas emissions and oil consumption.

      The energy bill will help accelerate plans by automakers to bring more fuel-efficient technologies to conventional engines and alternatives such as gas-electric hybrids and vehicles running on ethanol blends. For the first time, for example, manufacturers will receive credits for building vehicles running on biodiesel fuel.

      Domestic automakers and Toyota Motor Corp. vehemently opposed a Senate bill approved passed in June that contained the same mileage requirements and timeline. They warned the measure would limit the choice of vehicles, threaten jobs and drive up costs.

      The companies backed an alternative of 32 mpg to 35 mpg by 2022. At the time, Chrysler LLC executive Tom LaSorda told employees the Senate bill would "add up to a staggering $6,700 — almost a 40 percent increase — to the cost of every Chrysler vehicle."

      But the compromise worked out by Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate leaders, maintains a significant boost in mileage standards while giving the industry more flexibility and certainty as they plan new vehicles.

      The proposal would continue separate standards for cars and trucks, extend credits for producing vehicles that run on ethanol blends, and allow automakers to receive separate credits for exceeding the standards and then apply those credits to other model years.

      Michigan lawmakers secured an extension of the current 1.2 mpg credit for the production of each "flexible fuel" vehicle, capable of running on ethanol blends of 15 percent gasoline and 85 percent ethanol. Without the extension, the credits may have run out by 2010, but under the deal, they will be phased out by 2020.

      The United Auto Workers union also won a provision intended to prevent companies from shifting production of less profitable small cars to overseas plants. At stake are an estimated 17,000 jobs.

      The House's energy bill, approved in August, did not include mileage standards, and lawmakers had worked since then to include them.

      Rick Wagoner, General Motors Corp.'s chairman and chief executive, said the new rules would "pose a significant technical and economic challenge to the industry." He said GM would tackle the changes "with an array of engineering, research and development resources."

      GM, Chrysler and Ford Motor Co. have announced plans to double their production by 2010 of flex-fuel vehicles. Toyota has said it will bring the option to the Tundra pickup.

      Among hybrids, Toyota has dominated the market with the Prius, but several automakers are beginning to bring the technology to large SUVs and pickups.

      Environmental groups estimate the deal would save the country 1.2 million barrels of oil per day by 2020 while helping motorists save at the pump.

      "Cars are going to be more attractive to consumers because they won't cost as much to own and operate," said David Doniger, director of the climate center for the Natural Resources Defense Council.

       


      Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.

    • Ryan Evans
      Why not just get rid of the congress then? Just keep the treasury department and get rid of the congress all together if our country is to be completely run by
      Message 2 of 8 , Dec 2, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Why not just get rid of the congress then?
        Just keep the treasury department and get rid of the
        congress all together if our country is to be
        completely run by capitalism.
        I mean we're pretty much at that stage already right?
        So just let the "consumer" dictate the outcome of life
        and everything, because that has worked out so well
        for us so far.
        You want to know the sole purpose of the as you so put
        it "corporate operations"?
        It is to make money. That's it. That is it's absolute
        only purpose of existence.
        It's not to improve quality of life. It's not to
        create a better world or to have harmony amongst our
        species. Although sometimes these are circumstancial
        bi-products, 99.9% of the time, the main driving force
        behind a corporate operation is to sell the product
        thay have in their hand and make money.
        And as we've all seen in the past and up to today,
        corporate operations with little to no supervision
        fueled by consumers has alwayshad great outcomes.
        Let's think about some of the examples
        Tobacco,
        Pharmacuticals,
        ....well I could write a list that goes on for pages.
        Thus leading me to the subject matter of automobiles
        and consumers.
        Besides the catalytic converter and the seat belt, the
        car has not had any real supervision and it's
        transformation of what it is today has been driven by
        consumerism.
        As I said earlier, the corporate operations only
        purpose is to make money. And even with the enormous
        attention to global warming, gas, etc etc, there is a
        reason that air polluting, gas guzzling SUV's and
        Pickup trucks that literally get 12 miles to the
        gallon are still being sold by the millions.........
        So though anarchism and barterism would be the most
        ideal form of life for humanity, it is simply not in
        our nature as a whole and we need authoratative roles
        to keep oursleves from complete self-destruction. In
        so many levels, we've already come to understand this,
        which gave birth to government.
        Our government, though very extrememly flawed because
        as one great quote says "power corrupts" is still a
        phenomenal body of work that we humans created to help
        give all people under it's system an equal chance at
        living....it is capitalism that has actually twisted
        and deformed it into the monster. and what keeps
        feeding the capital beast?
        us...the consumer.....
        consumers dictating the outcome of humanity?
        I just don't see a good outcome of that.




        --- Robert Johnston <junk1@...> wrote:

        > This is so wrong. Congress is the last organization
        > I want to see
        > micromanaging vehicle design and corporate
        > operations. Might as well shut
        > down Detroit and send all the jobs to China.
        >
        > If we believe we need to legislate conservation,
        > wouldn't it be better to
        > simply charge a large gasoline tax and then let the
        > market dictate car
        > design according to consumer demand?
        >
        >
        >
        > Robert
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        > From: hreg@yahoogroups.com
        > [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Solar
        > Energy
        > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 11:24 PM
        > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [hreg] Automakers adding more MPG to new
        > cars
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Energy plan pushes automakers on mpg
        >
        >
        > By KEN THOMAS, Associated Press Writer
        >
        > WASHINGTON - The groundbreaking deal in Congress to
        > raise mile-per-gallon
        > standards will compel the auto industry to churn out
        > more fuel-efficient
        > vehicles on a faster timeline than the companies
        > wanted, though with
        > flexibility to get the job done.
        >
        > The auto industry's fleet of new cars, sport utility
        > vehicles, pickup trucks
        > and vans will have to average 35 mpg by 2020,
        > according to the agreement
        > that congressional negotiators announced late
        > Friday. That compares with the
        > 2008 requirement of 27.5 mpg average for cars and
        > 22.5 mpg for light trucks.
        > It would be first increase ordered by Congress in
        > three decades.
        >
        > Majority Democrats plan to include the requirement
        > in broader energy
        > legislation to be debated in the context of
        > $90-per-barrel oil, $3-plus pump
        > prices and growing concerns about climate change.
        > The House plans to begin
        > debate this week.
        >
        > "It is a major milestone and the first concrete
        > legislation to address
        > global warming," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein,
        > D-Calif.
        >
        > While Senate Democrats were quick to embrace the
        > compromise, the energy bill
        > may face problems over requirements for nonpublic
        > electric utilities to
        > produce 15 percent of their power from renewable
        > energy sources such as wind
        > or solar.
        >
        > Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., on Saturday said that
        > idea "will make this bill
        > untenable for many in the Senate."
        >
        > Environmentalists have sought stricter mileage
        > standards for years, saying
        > that is the most effective way to curb greenhouse
        > gas emissions and oil
        > consumption.
        >
        > The energy bill will help accelerate plans by
        > automakers to bring more
        > fuel-efficient technologies to conventional engines
        > and alternatives such as
        > gas-electric hybrids and vehicles running on ethanol
        > blends. For the first
        > time, for example, manufacturers will receive
        > credits for building vehicles
        > running on biodiesel fuel.
        >
        > Domestic automakers and Toyota Motor Corp.
        > vehemently opposed a Senate bill
        > approved passed in June that contained the same
        > mileage requirements and
        > timeline. They warned the measure would limit the
        > choice of vehicles,
        > threaten jobs and drive up costs.
        >
        > The companies backed an alternative of 32 mpg to 35
        > mpg by 2022. At the
        > time, Chrysler LLC executive Tom LaSorda told
        > employees the Senate bill
        > would "add up to a staggering $6,700 - almost a 40
        > percent increase - to the
        > cost of every Chrysler vehicle."
        >
        > But the compromise worked out by Rep. John Dingell,
        > D-Mich., House Speaker
        > Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate leaders,
        > maintains a significant boost in
        > mileage standards while giving the industry more
        > flexibility and certainty
        > as they plan new vehicles.
        >
        > The proposal would continue separate standards for
        > cars and trucks, extend
        > credits for producing vehicles that run on ethanol
        > blends, and allow
        > automakers to receive separate credits for exceeding
        > the standards and then
        > apply those credits to other model years.
        >
        > Michigan lawmakers secured an extension of the
        > current 1.2 mpg credit for
        > the production of each "flexible fuel" vehicle,
        > capable of running on
        > ethanol blends of 15 percent gasoline and 85 percent
        > ethanol. Without the
        > extension, the credits may have run out by 2010, but
        > under the deal, they
        > will be phased out by 2020.
        >
        > The United Auto Workers union also won a provision
        > intended to prevent
        > companies from shifting production of less
        > profitable small cars to overseas
        > plants. At stake are an estimated 17,000 jobs.
        >
        > The House's energy bill, approved in August, did not
        > include mileage
        > standards, and lawmakers had worked since then to
        > include them.
        >
        > Rick Wagoner, General Motors Corp.'s chairman and
        > chief executive, said the
        > new rules would "pose a significant technical and
        > economic challenge to the
        > industry." He said GM would tackle the changes "with
        > an array of
        > engineering, research and development resources."
        >
        > GM, Chrysler and Ford Motor Co. have announced plans
        > to double their
        > production by 2010 of flex-fuel vehicles. Toyota has
        > said it will bring the
        > option to the Tundra pickup.
        >
        > Among hybrids, Toyota has dominated the market with
        > the Prius, but several
        > automakers are beginning to bring the technology to
        > large SUVs and pickups.
        >
        > Environmental groups estimate the deal would save
        > the country 1.2 million
        > barrels of oil per day by 2020 while helping
        > motorists save at the pump.
        >
        > "Cars are going to be more attractive to consumers
        > because they won't cost
        > as much to own and operate," said David Doniger,
        > director of the climate
        > center for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
        >
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        > Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
        > with Yahoo Mobile. Try
        >
        <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51731/*http:/mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qD
        > KvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ%0d%0a> it now.
        >
        >
        >
        >



        ____________________________________________________________________________________
        Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
        with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ
      • Ryan Evans
        and as far as you claim that we re sending all the jobs to china I drive a Honda Civic that is 15 years old. with 170,000+ miles on it. still starts and runs
        Message 3 of 8 , Dec 2, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          and as far as you claim that we're sending
          "all the jobs to china"

          I drive a Honda Civic that is 15 years old. with
          170,000+ miles on it. still starts and runs smoothly,
          and passes emissions.
          with it's ten gallon tank it still gets 330 miles
          each fill-up
          My wife has a Honda Civic, 8 years old. still starts
          and runs smoothly, passes emissions, new it got 42
          miles to the gallon, now it still gets 39 miles to the
          gallon after being driven over 200,000 miles....one
          day my dream is to own a diesel car and convert it to
          a bio...but for now I work for not a whole lot of
          money and for practicality I will not pay money for a
          car that i have to spend 30 bucks on every three days.
          the only cars I've seen so far that have the most bang
          for the buck are the hondas
          the hondas are several thousand dollars cheaper than
          an american car with the same amount of engine
          power.....even then you could find a cheaper american
          car, but I am an extremely frugal consumer and from
          what I've found, the only american cars that have a
          cheaper price tag, have less power(do not do well at
          all on the highways) and by reputation don't have the
          long life you get from a honda or even toyota.
          Are the asian car makers smarter than us?
          do they have some secret that we don't know about?
          I don't know why the u.s. auto quality is the way it
          is, but
          I'm guessing what they are doing is nothing we can't
          do oursleves......so are we sending all the jobs to
          china?
          maybe
          if that's the case
          then why?
          why is the concern of losing jobs to the overseas car
          makers not a big issue?
          why has it been decades and no real substantial change
          has been made to the way cars are made here in the
          u.s.?
          what does it all boil down to?
          you guessed it
          the consumer!
          well then why haven't things changed sooner?
          because by webster dictionary, the definition of
          consumer is
          "one that consumes" that is the first entry in the
          definition
          we are consumers.
          the corpoartions convince us to eat something, we eat
          it
          they convince us that something is "cool" we must have
          it....
          when no one is there to tell the makers, "don't do
          that, it will kill people" they wil continue to sell
          as long as there are people to consume and since we
          live in an age of consumerism...well, the numbers
          simply add up.
          the car is a MACHINE that has proven itself time and
          time again over decades that it is capable of Great
          destruction. Stricter and greater numbers of
          regulations should have been put on these contraptions
          a long long time ago.



          --- Robert Johnston <junk1@...> wrote:

          > This is so wrong. Congress is the last organization
          > I want to see
          > micromanaging vehicle design and corporate
          > operations. Might as well shut
          > down Detroit and send all the jobs to China.
          >
          > If we believe we need to legislate conservation,
          > wouldn't it be better to
          > simply charge a large gasoline tax and then let the
          > market dictate car
          > design according to consumer demand?
          >
          >
          >
          > Robert
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > _____
          >
          > From: hreg@yahoogroups.com
          > [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Solar
          > Energy
          > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 11:24 PM
          > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: [hreg] Automakers adding more MPG to new
          > cars
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Energy plan pushes automakers on mpg
          >
          >
          > By KEN THOMAS, Associated Press Writer
          >
          > WASHINGTON - The groundbreaking deal in Congress to
          > raise mile-per-gallon
          > standards will compel the auto industry to churn out
          > more fuel-efficient
          > vehicles on a faster timeline than the companies
          > wanted, though with
          > flexibility to get the job done.
          >
          > The auto industry's fleet of new cars, sport utility
          > vehicles, pickup trucks
          > and vans will have to average 35 mpg by 2020,
          > according to the agreement
          > that congressional negotiators announced late
          > Friday. That compares with the
          > 2008 requirement of 27.5 mpg average for cars and
          > 22.5 mpg for light trucks.
          > It would be first increase ordered by Congress in
          > three decades.
          >
          > Majority Democrats plan to include the requirement
          > in broader energy
          > legislation to be debated in the context of
          > $90-per-barrel oil, $3-plus pump
          > prices and growing concerns about climate change.
          > The House plans to begin
          > debate this week.
          >
          > "It is a major milestone and the first concrete
          > legislation to address
          > global warming," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein,
          > D-Calif.
          >
          > While Senate Democrats were quick to embrace the
          > compromise, the energy bill
          > may face problems over requirements for nonpublic
          > electric utilities to
          > produce 15 percent of their power from renewable
          > energy sources such as wind
          > or solar.
          >
          > Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., on Saturday said that
          > idea "will make this bill
          > untenable for many in the Senate."
          >
          > Environmentalists have sought stricter mileage
          > standards for years, saying
          > that is the most effective way to curb greenhouse
          > gas emissions and oil
          > consumption.
          >
          > The energy bill will help accelerate plans by
          > automakers to bring more
          > fuel-efficient technologies to conventional engines
          > and alternatives such as
          > gas-electric hybrids and vehicles running on ethanol
          > blends. For the first
          > time, for example, manufacturers will receive
          > credits for building vehicles
          > running on biodiesel fuel.
          >
          > Domestic automakers and Toyota Motor Corp.
          > vehemently opposed a Senate bill
          > approved passed in June that contained the same
          > mileage requirements and
          > timeline. They warned the measure would limit the
          > choice of vehicles,
          > threaten jobs and drive up costs.
          >
          > The companies backed an alternative of 32 mpg to 35
          > mpg by 2022. At the
          > time, Chrysler LLC executive Tom LaSorda told
          > employees the Senate bill
          > would "add up to a staggering $6,700 - almost a 40
          > percent increase - to the
          > cost of every Chrysler vehicle."
          >
          > But the compromise worked out by Rep. John Dingell,
          > D-Mich., House Speaker
          > Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate leaders,
          > maintains a significant boost in
          > mileage standards while giving the industry more
          > flexibility and certainty
          > as they plan new vehicles.
          >
          > The proposal would continue separate standards for
          > cars and trucks, extend
          > credits for producing vehicles that run on ethanol
          > blends, and allow
          > automakers to receive separate credits for exceeding
          > the standards and then
          > apply those credits to other model years.
          >
          > Michigan lawmakers secured an extension of the
          > current 1.2 mpg credit for
          > the production of each "flexible fuel" vehicle,
          > capable of running on
          > ethanol blends of 15 percent gasoline and 85 percent
          > ethanol. Without the
          > extension, the credits may have run out by 2010, but
          > under the deal, they
          > will be phased out by 2020.
          >
          > The United Auto Workers union also won a provision
          > intended to prevent
          > companies from shifting production of less
          > profitable small cars to overseas
          > plants. At stake are an estimated 17,000 jobs.
          >
          > The House's energy bill, approved in August, did not
          > include mileage
          > standards, and lawmakers had worked since then to
          > include them.
          >
          > Rick Wagoner, General Motors Corp.'s chairman and
          > chief executive, said the
          > new rules would "pose a significant technical and
          > economic challenge to the
          > industry." He said GM would tackle the changes "with
          > an array of
          > engineering, research and development resources."
          >
          > GM, Chrysler and Ford Motor Co. have announced plans
          > to double their
          > production by 2010 of flex-fuel vehicles. Toyota has
          > said it will bring the
          > option to the Tundra pickup.
          >
          > Among hybrids, Toyota has dominated the market with
          > the Prius, but several
          > automakers are beginning to bring the technology to
          > large SUVs and pickups.
          >
          > Environmental groups estimate the deal would save
          > the country 1.2 million
          > barrels of oil per day by 2020 while helping
          > motorists save at the pump.
          >
          > "Cars are going to be more attractive to consumers
          > because they won't cost
          > as much to own and operate," said David Doniger,
          > director of the climate
          > center for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
          >
          >
          >
          > _____
          >
          > Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
          > with Yahoo Mobile. Try
          >
          <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51731/*http:/mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qD
          > KvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ%0d%0a> it now.
          >
          >
          >
          >



          ____________________________________________________________________________________
          Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
          http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
        • Robert Johnston
          My point was not to eliminate government, but to argue that government action should be aligned with sound economic principles rather than simply using its
          Message 4 of 8 , Dec 3, 2007
          • 0 Attachment

            My point was not to eliminate government, but to argue that government action should be aligned with sound economic principles rather than simply using its power to manipulate the economy according to the dictates of either do-gooders who don’t know how the world works, or the corporate interests that you despise.  If you re-read my email, I didn’t say anything about congress not being able to legislate to control emissions, fuel economy, etc.  I simply argued that they should not be micromanaging, but rather setting policies that let economics and the market natural find the best solutions.  Doing otherwise only makes things worse in the long run.

             

            Your examples clearly demonstrate my point.  It was CONGRESS that:

            1. Propped up (and continues to) tobacco industry through farm subsidies and protection of tobacco trade overseas.
            2. Accelerated the rise of the pharmaceutical industry through its heavy subsidization of drug research, FDA suppression of drug import/export, FDA suppression of alternative health/supplement industries.  This will be even further accelerated by the eventual implementation of government funded healthcare.  Consumers will have no options then except feeding the medical-pharmaceutical industry.
            3. On topic, ethanol subsidies are doing the same thing to energy that these other policies did in their fields.  Thus, you can see that the recent congressional action that I was responding to further perpetuates the fraud by allowing fleet mileage credits for flexi-fuel cars (ethanol consumers).
            4. In reference to your 2nd email, it was congress that implemented import quotas on fuel-efficient foreign cars, thereby protecting Detroit so they could resist changing their designs.
            5. It was congress that continues to protect organized labor to the extent that Detroit can’t be competitive.  Part of this is due to high cost of health care benefits, to which I refer you back to #2.

            You may think that industry is out to make a buck and that is true.  Isn’t everyone who provides a service or product?  But I find nothing wrong with that.  It is how I put food on the table.  That stands in stark contrast to Congress whose mission is to spend.

             

            There is a role for government, obviously.  My point is that it needs to be high level guidance through policy setting that works WITH economic principles.  Unfortunately, power and money prevents that in many cases. 

             

            Robert

             

             


            From: hreg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ryan Evans
            Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 7:35 AM
            To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [hreg] Automakers adding more MPG to new cars

             

            Why not just get rid of the congress then?
            Just keep the treasury department and get rid of the
            congress all together if our country is to be
            completely run by capitalism.
            I mean we're pretty much at that stage already right?
            So just let the "consumer" dictate the outcome of life
            and everything, because that has worked out so well
            for us so far.
            You want to know the sole purpose of the as you so put
            it "corporate operations"?
            It is to make money. That's it. That is it's absolute
            only purpose of existence.
            It's not to improve quality of life. It's not to
            create a better world or to have harmony amongst our
            species. Although sometimes these are circumstancial
            bi-products, 99.9% of the time, the main driving force
            behind a corporate operation is to sell the product
            thay have in their hand and make money.
            And as we've all seen in the past and up to today,
            corporate operations with little to no supervision
            fueled by consumers has alwayshad great outcomes.
            Let's think about some of the examples
            Tobacco,
            Pharmacuticals,
            ....well I could write a list that goes on for pages.
            Thus leading me to the subject matter of automobiles
            and consumers.
            Besides the catalytic converter and the seat belt, the
            car has not had any real supervision and it's
            transformation of what it is today has been driven by
            consumerism.
            As I said earlier, the corporate operations only
            purpose is to make money. And even with the enormous
            attention to global warming, gas, etc etc, there is a
            reason that air polluting, gas guzzling SUV's and
            Pickup trucks that literally get 12 miles to the
            gallon are still being sold by the millions.... .....
            So though anarchism and barterism would be the most
            ideal form of life for humanity, it is simply not in
            our nature as a whole and we need authoratative roles
            to keep oursleves from complete self-destruction. In
            so many levels, we've already come to understand this,
            which gave birth to government.
            Our government, though very extrememly flawed because
            as one great quote says "power corrupts" is still a
            phenomenal body of work that we humans created to help
            give all people under it's system an equal chance at
            living....it is capitalism that has actually twisted
            and deformed it into the monster. and what keeps
            feeding the capital beast?
            us...the consumer.... .
            consumers dictating the outcome of humanity?
            I just don't see a good outcome of that.

            --- Robert Johnston <junk1@plastability. com> wrote:

            > This is so wrong. Congress is the last organization
            > I want to see
            > micromanaging vehicle design and corporate
            > operations. Might as well shut
            > down Detroit and send all the jobs to
            w:st="on"> China .
            >
            > If we believe we need to legislate conservation,
            > wouldn't it be better to
            > simply charge a large gasoline tax and then let the
            > market dictate car
            > design according to consumer demand?
            >
            >
            >
            > Robert
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > _____
            >
            > From: hreg@yahoogroups. com
            > [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups. com]
            On Behalf Of Solar
            > Energy
            > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 11:24 PM
            > To: hreg@yahoogroups. com
            > Subject: [hreg] Automakers adding more MPG to new
            > cars
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Energy plan pushes automakers on mpg
            >
            >
            > By KEN THOMAS, Associated Press Writer
            >
            > WASHINGTON
            - The groundbreaking deal in Congress to
            > raise mile-per-gallon
            > standards will compel the auto industry to churn out
            > more fuel-efficient
            > vehicles on a faster timeline than the companies
            > wanted, though with
            > flexibility to get the job done.
            >
            > The auto industry's fleet of new cars, sport utility
            > vehicles, pickup trucks
            > and vans will have to average 35 mpg by 2020,
            > according to the agreement
            > that congressional negotiators announced late
            > Friday. That compares with the
            > 2008 requirement of 27.5 mpg average for cars and
            > 22.5 mpg for light trucks.
            > It would be first increase ordered by Congress in
            > three decades.
            >
            > Majority Democrats plan to include the requirement
            > in broader energy
            > legislation to be debated in the context of
            > $90-per-barrel oil, $3-plus pump
            > prices and growing concerns about climate change.
            > The House plans to begin
            > debate this week.
            >
            > "It is a major milestone and the first concrete
            > legislation to address
            > global warming," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein,
            > D-Calif.
            >
            > While Senate Democrats were quick to embrace the
            > compromise, the energy bill
            > may face problems over requirements for nonpublic
            > electric utilities to
            > produce 15 percent of their power from renewable
            > energy sources such as wind
            > or solar.
            >
            > Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., on Saturday said that
            > idea "will make this bill
            > untenable for many in the Senate."
            >
            > Environmentalists have sought stricter mileage
            > standards for years, saying
            > that is the most effective way to curb greenhouse
            > gas emissions and oil
            > consumption.
            >
            > The energy bill will help accelerate plans by
            > automakers to bring more
            > fuel-efficient technologies to conventional engines
            > and alternatives such as
            > gas-electric hybrids and vehicles running on ethanol
            > blends. For the first
            > time, for example, manufacturers will receive
            > credits for building vehicles
            > running on biodiesel fuel.
            >
            > Domestic automakers and Toyota Motor Corp.
            > vehemently opposed a Senate bill
            > approved passed in June that contained the same
            > mileage requirements and
            > timeline. They warned the measure would limit the
            > choice of vehicles,
            > threaten jobs and drive up costs.
            >
            > The companies backed an alternative of 32 mpg to 35
            > mpg by 2022. At the
            > time, Chrysler LLC executive Tom LaSorda told
            > employees the Senate bill
            > would "add up to a staggering $6,700 - almost a 40
            > percent increase - to the
            > cost of every Chrysler vehicle."
            >
            > But the compromise worked out by Rep. John Dingell,
            > D-Mich., House Speaker
            > Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate leaders,
            > maintains a significant boost in
            > mileage standards while giving the industry more
            > flexibility and certainty
            > as they plan new vehicles.
            >
            > The proposal would continue separate standards for
            > cars and trucks, extend
            > credits for producing vehicles that run on ethanol
            > blends, and allow
            > automakers to receive separate credits for exceeding
            > the standards and then
            > apply those credits to other model years.
            >
            > Michigan
            lawmakers secured an extension of the
            > current 1.2 mpg credit for
            > the production of each "flexible fuel" vehicle,
            > capable of running on
            > ethanol blends of 15 percent gasoline and 85 percent
            > ethanol. Without the
            > extension, the credits may have run out by 2010, but
            > under the deal, they
            > will be phased out by 2020.
            >
            > The United Auto Workers union also won a provision
            > intended to prevent
            > companies from shifting production of less
            > profitable small cars to overseas
            > plants. At stake are an estimated 17,000 jobs.
            >
            > The House's energy bill, approved in August, did not
            > include mileage
            > standards, and lawmakers had worked since then to
            > include them.
            >
            > Rick Wagoner, General Motors Corp.'s chairman and
            > chief executive, said the
            > new rules would "pose a significant technical and
            > economic challenge to the
            > industry." He said GM would tackle the changes "with
            > an array of
            > engineering, research and development resources."
            >
            > GM, Chrysler and Ford Motor Co. have announced plans
            > to double their
            > production by 2010 of flex-fuel vehicles.
            w:st="on">Toyota has
            > said it will bring the
            > option to the Tundra pickup.
            >
            > Among hybrids, Toyota
            has dominated the market with
            > the Prius, but several
            > automakers are beginning to bring the technology to
            > large SUVs and pickups.
            >
            > Environmental groups estimate the deal would save
            > the country 1.2 million
            > barrels of oil per day by 2020 while helping
            > motorists save at the pump.
            >
            > "Cars are going to be more attractive to consumers
            > because they won't cost
            > as much to own and operate," said David Doniger,
            > director of the climate
            > center for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
            >
            >
            >
            > _____
            >
            > Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
            > with Yahoo Mobile .
            Try
            >
            <http://us.rd. yahoo.com/ evt=51731/ *http:/mobile. yahoo.com/ sports;_ylt= At9_qD
            > KvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7nt AcJ%0d%0a> it now.
            >
            >
            >
            >

            ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
            Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
            with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile. yahoo.com/ sports;_ylt= At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G 1SQtBI7ntAcJ

          • Ryan Evans
            you re absolutely right on all accounts it is all shouldered by the congress....... but who do you think the congress really works for anyway? I still say it
            Message 5 of 8 , Dec 3, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              you're absolutely right on all accounts
              it is all shouldered by the congress.......

              but who do you think the congress really works for
              anyway?
              I still say it circles back around to comsumerism.
              It is US who are keeping the big business in business,
              who in turn, grease the congessional gears, who in
              turn pass legislation that aids the big business, that
              keeps them in control, which all comes back to us who
              are funding the whole damn thing.
              Oh you're right...the united states congress and many
              factions of our system have bugs in them....but it is
              ultimately under OUR control...we are either "too
              busy" or apathetic to actually make the changes...and
              again because of human nature
              the almighty dollar is always going to win because
              self preservation is in our nature and in this modern
              age, what is the best means of self
              preservation?..having money,
              we have to have our cel phones, our tv's, our
              automobiles.

              another disfunctional aspect of the situation that we
              are all in......take a look at cities in
              europe...built centuries before the auto...now look at
              most of the cities in the u.s.
              prime example Houston.
              what is the main difference you can see?....
              I shouldn't have to go into details there.
              I challenge you to take a day...not a day where you
              don't need to be anywhere in a hurry, or you just go
              to work and home.
              take a real day where you have a full schedule and
              places you've gotta go and do it without your
              car.....and then tell me how simple it is.
              it's anything but.
              that right there is at the heart of the whole
              predicament that we face as americans...lifestyle.
              we are the ones giving control to these corporations
              and government bodies.
              I for one do believe that there needs to be
              regulations on our lifestyles...habits...the way we
              treat our surroundings.
              because it's clearly evident that left to our own
              devices, we merely muck things up.
              you may think it starts with better representatives in
              our govenment.....but it really starts with us.
              plain and simple
              --- Robert Johnston <junk1@...> wrote:

              > My point was not to eliminate government, but to
              > argue that government
              > action should be aligned with sound economic
              > principles rather than simply
              > using its power to manipulate the economy according
              > to the dictates of
              > either do-gooders who don't know how the world
              > works, or the corporate
              > interests that you despise. If you re-read my
              > email, I didn't say anything
              > about congress not being able to legislate to
              > control emissions, fuel
              > economy, etc. I simply argued that they should not
              > be micromanaging, but
              > rather setting policies that let economics and the
              > market natural find the
              > best solutions. Doing otherwise only makes things
              > worse in the long run.
              >
              >
              >
              > Your examples clearly demonstrate my point. It was
              > CONGRESS that:
              >
              > 1. Propped up (and continues to) tobacco industry
              > through farm
              > subsidies and protection of tobacco trade overseas.
              > 2. Accelerated the rise of the pharmaceutical
              > industry through its
              > heavy subsidization of drug research, FDA
              > suppression of drug import/export,
              > FDA suppression of alternative health/supplement
              > industries. This will be
              > even further accelerated by the eventual
              > implementation of government funded
              > healthcare. Consumers will have no options then
              > except feeding the
              > medical-pharmaceutical industry.
              > 3. On topic, ethanol subsidies are doing the same
              > thing to energy that
              > these other policies did in their fields. Thus, you
              > can see that the recent
              > congressional action that I was responding to
              > further perpetuates the fraud
              > by allowing fleet mileage credits for flexi-fuel
              > cars (ethanol consumers).
              > 4. In reference to your 2nd email, it was congress
              > that implemented
              > import quotas on fuel-efficient foreign cars,
              > thereby protecting Detroit so
              > they could resist changing their designs.
              > 5. It was congress that continues to protect
              > organized labor to the
              > extent that Detroit can't be competitive. Part of
              > this is due to high cost
              > of health care benefits, to which I refer you back
              > to #2.
              >
              > You may think that industry is out to make a buck
              > and that is true. Isn't
              > everyone who provides a service or product? But I
              > find nothing wrong with
              > that. It is how I put food on the table. That
              > stands in stark contrast to
              > Congress whose mission is to spend.
              >
              >
              >
              > There is a role for government, obviously. My point
              > is that it needs to be
              > high level guidance through policy setting that
              > works WITH economic
              > principles. Unfortunately, power and money prevents
              > that in many cases.
              >
              >
              >
              > Robert
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > _____
              >
              > From: hreg@yahoogroups.com
              > [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ryan
              > Evans
              > Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 7:35 AM
              > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: RE: [hreg] Automakers adding more MPG to
              > new cars
              >
              >
              >
              > Why not just get rid of the congress then?
              > Just keep the treasury department and get rid of the
              > congress all together if our country is to be
              > completely run by capitalism.
              > I mean we're pretty much at that stage already
              > right?
              > So just let the "consumer" dictate the outcome of
              > life
              > and everything, because that has worked out so well
              > for us so far.
              > You want to know the sole purpose of the as you so
              > put
              > it "corporate operations"?
              > It is to make money. That's it. That is it's
              > absolute
              > only purpose of existence.
              > It's not to improve quality of life. It's not to
              > create a better world or to have harmony amongst our
              > species. Although sometimes these are circumstancial
              > bi-products, 99.9% of the time, the main driving
              > force
              > behind a corporate operation is to sell the product
              > thay have in their hand and make money.
              > And as we've all seen in the past and up to today,
              > corporate operations with little to no supervision
              > fueled by consumers has alwayshad great outcomes.
              > Let's think about some of the examples
              > Tobacco,
              > Pharmacuticals,
              > ....well I could write a list that goes on for
              > pages.
              > Thus leading me to the subject matter of automobiles
              > and consumers.
              > Besides the catalytic converter and the seat belt,
              > the
              > car has not had any real supervision and it's
              > transformation of what it is today has been driven
              > by
              > consumerism.
              > As I said earlier, the corporate operations only
              > purpose is to make money. And even with the enormous
              > attention to global warming, gas, etc etc, there is
              > a
              > reason that air polluting, gas guzzling SUV's and
              > Pickup trucks that literally get 12 miles to the
              > gallon are still being sold by the millions.........
              > So though anarchism and barterism would be the most
              > ideal form of life for humanity, it is simply not in
              > our nature as a whole and we need authoratative
              > roles
              > to keep oursleves from complete self-destruction. In
              > so many levels, we've already come to understand
              > this,
              > which gave birth to government.
              > Our government, though very extrememly flawed
              > because
              > as one great quote says "power corrupts" is still a
              > phenomenal body of work that we humans created to
              > help
              > give all people under it's system an equal chance at
              > living....it is capitalism that has actually twisted
              > and deformed it into the monster. and what keeps
              > feeding the capital beast?
              > us...the consumer.....
              > consumers dictating the outcome of humanity?
              > I just don't see a good outcome of that.
              >
              > --- Robert Johnston <junk1@plastability.
              > <mailto:junk1%40plastability.com>
              > com> wrote:
              >
              > > This is so wrong. Congress is the last
              > organization
              > > I want to see
              > > micromanaging vehicle design and corporate
              > > operations. Might as well shut
              > > down Detroit and send all the jobs to China.
              > >
              > > If we believe we need to legislate conservation,
              > > wouldn't it be better to
              > > simply charge a large gasoline tax and then let
              > the
              > > market dictate car
              > > design according to consumer demand?
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Robert
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > _____
              > >
              > > From: hreg@yahoogroups.
              > <mailto:hreg%40yahoogroups.com> com
              > > [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.
              > <mailto:hreg%40yahoogroups.com> com] On Behalf
              > Of Solar
              > > Energy
              > > Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 11:24 PM
              > > To: hreg@yahoogroups.
              > <mailto:hreg%40yahoogroups.com> com
              > > Subject: [hreg] Automakers adding more MPG to new
              > > cars
              >
              === message truncated ===



              ____________________________________________________________________________________
              Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
              with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ
            • Ryan Evans
              and to further comment on your notion that natural economic flow is the best solution for policy making....... please don t forget the hundreds of economical
              Message 6 of 8 , Dec 3, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                and to further comment on your notion that natural
                economic flow is the best solution for policy
                making.......
                please don't forget the hundreds of economical
                successes that went on for years and that are still
                going on that basically undermine our general health
                and well being as a human race.
                no I'm sorry, basing governmental policy off of
                economic flow is going to lead self destruction.
                if you look around, we are already on that
                path.....thankfully there have been those who have
                risen above the "bottom line" and at least slowed down
                the train somewhat....but unfortunately common sense
                is no longer common these days.
                --- Ryan Evans <southlandbooking@...> wrote:

                > you're absolutely right on all accounts
                > it is all shouldered by the congress.......
                >
                > but who do you think the congress really works for
                > anyway?
                > I still say it circles back around to comsumerism.
                > It is US who are keeping the big business in
                > business,
                > who in turn, grease the congessional gears, who in
                > turn pass legislation that aids the big business,
                > that
                > keeps them in control, which all comes back to us
                > who
                > are funding the whole damn thing.
                > Oh you're right...the united states congress and
                > many
                > factions of our system have bugs in them....but it
                > is
                > ultimately under OUR control...we are either "too
                > busy" or apathetic to actually make the
                > changes...and
                > again because of human nature
                > the almighty dollar is always going to win because
                > self preservation is in our nature and in this
                > modern
                > age, what is the best means of self
                > preservation?..having money,
                > we have to have our cel phones, our tv's, our
                > automobiles.
                >
                > another disfunctional aspect of the situation that
                > we
                > are all in......take a look at cities in
                > europe...built centuries before the auto...now look
                > at
                > most of the cities in the u.s.
                > prime example Houston.
                > what is the main difference you can see?....
                > I shouldn't have to go into details there.
                > I challenge you to take a day...not a day where you
                > don't need to be anywhere in a hurry, or you just go
                > to work and home.
                > take a real day where you have a full schedule and
                > places you've gotta go and do it without your
                > car.....and then tell me how simple it is.
                > it's anything but.
                > that right there is at the heart of the whole
                > predicament that we face as americans...lifestyle.
                > we are the ones giving control to these corporations
                > and government bodies.
                > I for one do believe that there needs to be
                > regulations on our lifestyles...habits...the way we
                > treat our surroundings.
                > because it's clearly evident that left to our own
                > devices, we merely muck things up.
                > you may think it starts with better representatives
                > in
                > our govenment.....but it really starts with us.
                > plain and simple
                > --- Robert Johnston <junk1@...> wrote:
                >
                > > My point was not to eliminate government, but to
                > > argue that government
                > > action should be aligned with sound economic
                > > principles rather than simply
                > > using its power to manipulate the economy
                > according
                > > to the dictates of
                > > either do-gooders who don't know how the world
                > > works, or the corporate
                > > interests that you despise. If you re-read my
                > > email, I didn't say anything
                > > about congress not being able to legislate to
                > > control emissions, fuel
                > > economy, etc. I simply argued that they should
                > not
                > > be micromanaging, but
                > > rather setting policies that let economics and the
                > > market natural find the
                > > best solutions. Doing otherwise only makes things
                > > worse in the long run.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Your examples clearly demonstrate my point. It
                > was
                > > CONGRESS that:
                > >
                > > 1. Propped up (and continues to) tobacco industry
                > > through farm
                > > subsidies and protection of tobacco trade
                > overseas.
                > > 2. Accelerated the rise of the pharmaceutical
                > > industry through its
                > > heavy subsidization of drug research, FDA
                > > suppression of drug import/export,
                > > FDA suppression of alternative health/supplement
                > > industries. This will be
                > > even further accelerated by the eventual
                > > implementation of government funded
                > > healthcare. Consumers will have no options then
                > > except feeding the
                > > medical-pharmaceutical industry.
                > > 3. On topic, ethanol subsidies are doing the same
                > > thing to energy that
                > > these other policies did in their fields. Thus,
                > you
                > > can see that the recent
                > > congressional action that I was responding to
                > > further perpetuates the fraud
                > > by allowing fleet mileage credits for flexi-fuel
                > > cars (ethanol consumers).
                > > 4. In reference to your 2nd email, it was congress
                > > that implemented
                > > import quotas on fuel-efficient foreign cars,
                > > thereby protecting Detroit so
                > > they could resist changing their designs.
                > > 5. It was congress that continues to protect
                > > organized labor to the
                > > extent that Detroit can't be competitive. Part of
                > > this is due to high cost
                > > of health care benefits, to which I refer you back
                > > to #2.
                > >
                > > You may think that industry is out to make a buck
                > > and that is true. Isn't
                > > everyone who provides a service or product? But I
                > > find nothing wrong with
                > > that. It is how I put food on the table. That
                > > stands in stark contrast to
                > > Congress whose mission is to spend.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > There is a role for government, obviously. My
                > point
                > > is that it needs to be
                > > high level guidance through policy setting that
                > > works WITH economic
                > > principles. Unfortunately, power and money
                > prevents
                > > that in many cases.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Robert
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > _____
                > >
                > > From: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                > > [mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ryan
                > > Evans
                > > Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 7:35 AM
                > > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                > > Subject: RE: [hreg] Automakers adding more MPG to
                > > new cars
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Why not just get rid of the congress then?
                > > Just keep the treasury department and get rid of
                > the
                > > congress all together if our country is to be
                > > completely run by capitalism.
                > > I mean we're pretty much at that stage already
                > > right?
                > > So just let the "consumer" dictate the outcome of
                > > life
                > > and everything, because that has worked out so
                > well
                > > for us so far.
                > > You want to know the sole purpose of the as you so
                > > put
                > > it "corporate operations"?
                > > It is to make money. That's it. That is it's
                > > absolute
                > > only purpose of existence.
                > > It's not to improve quality of life. It's not to
                > > create a better world or to have harmony amongst
                > our
                > > species. Although sometimes these are
                > circumstancial
                > > bi-products, 99.9% of the time, the main driving
                > > force
                > > behind a corporate operation is to sell the
                > product
                > > thay have in their hand and make money.
                > > And as we've all seen in the past and up to today,
                > > corporate operations with little to no supervision
                > > fueled by consumers has alwayshad great outcomes.
                > > Let's think about some of the examples
                > > Tobacco,
                > > Pharmacuticals,
                > > ....well I could write a list that goes on for
                > > pages.
                > > Thus leading me to the subject matter of
                > automobiles
                >
                === message truncated ===


                ____________________________________________________________________________________
                Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you
                with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.