Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to re: To put it less subtly

re: less subtly
Tom Brosz — (archived)

Not even if one of the reasons they exist is to use the "truck" exemption loophole in the CAFE requirements?

Are you in favor of closing the loophole or is that too much government restriction?

I'm in favor of anything that lets me own a car that I can fit six kids into in a pinch, or drop the seats and slap in a Christmas tree or 4 x 8' piece of plywood. And just because some pony-tailed asshat in Washington or Sacramento doesn't need to drive anything with more than two seats--assuming he drives himself around at all--doesn't mean he gets to force me out of my car. Bad enough he gets to tell me how big my goddam toilet is.

I'd be happy as a clam if my car ran on Mr. Fusion. It doesn't. When they come out with big hybrids with twice the mileage at a reasonable markup, I'll buy one. If they come out with a hydrogen SUV or big van someday, and I can run it for about the same price, I'd be interested. If solar cells get cheap enough, I'll stick them on my house. So will a lot of other people. I pay more for gas each month than the Honda Civic driver, but that's part of the price I'm willing to pay. I'm not out to use up resources, I'm out to get the job done.

Families when I was a kid drove station wagons. The only vans you saw on the road were VW microbuses or big Dodges. The only 4WD vehicles were old Jeeps. When the mileage requirements killed the station wagon, that loophole saved the ass of many a farmer, workman, and family. Closing it would screw up a lot of Americans, but then that's no skin off the politician's nose, is it? If that makes me a subversive, then make the most of it.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (56 posts)