![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
GREAT IDEA
Or not.
A few months ago, the Cash for Clunkers bill was proposed.
Now it looks like it might actually go through.
(Read about it here from Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-BarackObama/idUSTRE5444LR20090505 )
It would stimulate the American auto industry and improve the environment by offering money to people who agree to turn in their older cars, assuming that they would then put that money toward a new American-built auto. Well, this is the idea, anyway.
As Jalopnik.com helpfully points out, unless the milage improvement from the old car to the new car is downright astronomical, there is no way that CREATING MORE CARS is going to help the environment. Furthermore, it is a one-time deal. It might give a temporary surge to the failing automakers, but it would only be delaying the inevitable.
While this on its own might seem harmless, I can easily see a voluntary program turn into a mandatory one, especially here in California. (California, the state that considered limiting the creation of black-colored cars in an effort to fight global warming -- I shit you not.) Now, I buy into quite a few "conspiracy theories," and this may well be another, but I can't be entirely alone when I say that this looks like a step toward the eradication of older automobiles from the general population.
What's to stop the change from the milage limit to a production year limit, under the assumption that all older cars get poorer gas milage than newer ones?
A few months ago, the Cash for Clunkers bill was proposed.
Now it looks like it might actually go through.
(Read about it here from Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-BarackObama/idUSTRE5444LR20090505 )
It would stimulate the American auto industry and improve the environment by offering money to people who agree to turn in their older cars, assuming that they would then put that money toward a new American-built auto. Well, this is the idea, anyway.
As Jalopnik.com helpfully points out, unless the milage improvement from the old car to the new car is downright astronomical, there is no way that CREATING MORE CARS is going to help the environment. Furthermore, it is a one-time deal. It might give a temporary surge to the failing automakers, but it would only be delaying the inevitable.
While this on its own might seem harmless, I can easily see a voluntary program turn into a mandatory one, especially here in California. (California, the state that considered limiting the creation of black-colored cars in an effort to fight global warming -- I shit you not.) Now, I buy into quite a few "conspiracy theories," and this may well be another, but I can't be entirely alone when I say that this looks like a step toward the eradication of older automobiles from the general population.
What's to stop the change from the milage limit to a production year limit, under the assumption that all older cars get poorer gas milage than newer ones?
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
I refuse to let her fall apart, you see.
no subject
no subject
True, true....and they could pry my bug out of my cold dead hands.
My car gets as good of gas millage, if not better, than some of these stupid SUVs on the road. Not to mention without the new computer junk in my car, I as a person with little mechanical experience, have been able to fix my own car. Without special equipment, without special training....oh and the bug uses the least amount of oil of any car ever made (so said the history channel)
Sorry, wandered in off the digital street and had to comment.
no subject
It is true! Bugs (and Dubs in general) are supremely awesome when it comes to maintenance. The average car owner can do pretty much anything, so long as they have a hammer, screwdriver, and a Bently manual. They really are as close to the perfect car as you can get.
I will disagree with the oil only on the account that my Dub eats more oil than it does gas. Granted, I have a torn dipstick seal, but still... X3