Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘CAFE’

The Orange Car Guy – EPautos – Libertarian Car Talk

Posted by M. C. on September 10, 2019

Cars – and driving them, when it’s us doing it – are disliked by people like Obama because they run counter to the control of everything that is their heart’s most fervent desire…



Some people are single issue voters; if a candidate is in line with them on guns, for instance, they’ll support that candidate even if on other topics they’re as far apart as a Chevette and a Corvette.

This brings us to Trump.

If you care about cars, he’s your guy. He may not be a Car Guy, per se – but he’s the only guy who isn’t an obvious enemy of Car Guys.

Like his predecessor, for instance.

Barack Obama – after his anointed successor  lost the election – had his regulatory apparat fatwa a near-doubling of federal mandatory minimum gas mileage requirements (CAFE) out of pure spite, to punish the filthy deplorables who didn’t elect her – and who continued to express their lack of interest in high-mileage-uber-alles cars by not buying the ones which were – and still are – available.

Like the Toyota Prius hybrid, for instance.

Great gas mileage – but not much fun. Can’t do much with it – other than get good gas mileage. Many people want more than that.

So it’s not that high-mileage vehicles like the Prius aren’t being offered because the car companies want to deny Americans high-mileage cars in favor of “gas guzzlers” – the lie behind the CAFE reg.

The truth is people just aren’t buying them much. . . because they’re not much fun and can’t do very much, besides get good gas mileage. A Prius can’t tow . . . anything. It doesn’t go off-road or get to 60 in five seconds or even eight.

Toyota sells about 1,500 Priuii per month. Ford sells about 60,000 F-150 trucks per month.

Not a typo.

The purpose of nearly doubling the CAFE fatwa from about 35 MPG to nearly 50 MPG – and in just five years’ time; the fatwa goes into effect in 2025 – wasn’t to make the industry produce cars that get great gas mileage; the industry already does.

It was to regulate out of existence the ones that don’t – which are the cars most Americans (and all American Car Guys) are very much interested in buying despite their not averaging 50 MPG.

It’s exactly as if the government spewed a fatwa tripling the cost of cheeseburgers to “nudge” people toward soy burgers.

No outright ban on large cars, V8 SUVs and pick-ups. Too obvious – and much too clumsy. People might object such a direct approach. The coercive utopians are far more clever than they used to be…

Cars – and driving them, when it’s us doing it – are disliked by people like Obama because they run counter to the control of everything that is their heart’s most fervent desire – although this is always couched in oily euphemisms about “discussions” and “communities” and other such politcial brummagemisms.

It’s insufferable. Makes one want to – as Mencken once put it – raise the Jolly Roger and slit throats.

You and I aren’t part of the “discussion” – the terms of which (and so the outcome) have already been decided. The “community” means those elitists like Obama, who just bought a $14 million dollar compound adjacent to the Kennedy compound – how big is this joint’s “carbon footprint”? – who regard those not in their “community” as the help, at best.

But no outright ban.

It would still be perfectly legal to build them – even if they didn’t average close to 50 MPG, as demanded by the federal fatwa.

Just prohibitively expensive – because of a tripling of the fines imposed on them for “noncompliance.”

Also fatwa’d by the Car-Hater who preceded the Orange Man.

Which would result in what was wanted – a de facto ban on the kinds of cars that Car Guys like by making them too expensive to build, except in small handfuls for very rich people . . . like Barack Obama.

Well, the Orange Man is fighting this…

He may not be a Car Guy, but he is without question the best friend anyone who gives a damn about cars and driving has had in the White House since Calvin Coolidge (a most under-rated president).

He deserves the support, therefore, of everyone who still gives a damn about cars and driving and the freedom (such as remains) embodied by both, which is on the knife’s edge of being taken away for good.

Be seeing you

Kennedy compound listed for $38M - YouTube

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Offloading – EPautos – Libertarian Car Talk

Posted by M. C. on September 2, 2019

We’ll be paying a great deal more for cars, soon. And even if you don’t buy a new car, you’ll be paying more for electricity – to cover the cost of all those shifted compliance costs.

The questions you never hear. If we suddenly became 100% EV, what would that do to power grid demand? Could we meet the demand with only renewables?

When the car industry begs to be regulated, you have to wonder about the regulations. And the motivations.

Is it a case of being crazy . . . or crazy like a fox?

The car industry – well, about a third of it so far (Ford, Honda, BMW, VW and Mercedes) wants to be forced to make cars that average close to 50 miles-per-gallon by 2025, as fatwa’d about four years ago by the federal regulatory apparat.

The current head of the federal government – President Trump – is trying to rescind the fatwa or at least dial it back to something more technically and economically feasible. In a startling turnabout, the car companies have stated that even if Trump dials back the federal fatwa, they will impose it upon themselves by embracing a mirrored fatwa issued by the state of California. Which will then become a de facto national fatwa.

It sounds crazy – self-destructive, at least.

And this self-imposed mania for saving gas? It’s like losing weight. Sounds great – but it’s not as easy as it sounds .

Or inexpensive.

Nor demanded by the market – but that’s another thing…

These hybrids cost about $3k more than an otherwise similar non-hybrid. This is what the government wants you to spend to save gas. Or rather, it’s what Trump doesn’t want you to have to spend. But the car industry – VW, Ford, Honda, BMW and Benz, anyhow – wants you to spend.

Wants you to have to spend.

You will pay them more money rather than ExxonMobil.

And you’ll pay more than just $3k.

Trump failed to explain that if the fatwa stands, it will take more than a few hybrids to get to 50-something MPG. It will take a lot of electric cars. These use no gas, of course – and so they are a boon to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (the fatwa’s formal name) math. Each EV sold makes it feasible to sell non-EVs that aren’t hybrids and don’t – and can’t – achieve 50 MPG.

Trucks, for instance.

One 28 MPG truck plus one infinite MPG EV divided by two (this is crude, but it helps explain the math) equals  . . . closer to 50 MPG and fatwa compliance. The more EVs in the mix, the better the CAFE compliance math.

But there’s a fly in the soup.

Someone will have to buy all those EVs. And EVs cost many thousands more than hybrids Who’s gonna pony up – and how?…

And that figure doesn’t include the $1,000 or so you’d have to spend to have your house wired up for the “fast” charger the EV would need.

So, absent the “breakthrough” we keep hearing about (and have been hearing about, for literally decades but which has yet to materialize and may never materialize) people will either pay a great deal more for EVs – or they will pay a great deal more for non-EVs, which will become more expensive to buy in order to absorb the cost of building all those unsold (or given away at a loss) EVs.

It sounds stupid – and it is.

But the car companies aren’t run by imbeciles. Virtue signalers, certainly. But not idiots.

There is another reason for their embrace of the 50 MPG fatwa that goes beyond green – the lust for mandated profits in the name of “saving” on gas.

It is, simply, the offloading of their regulatory burdens.

Electric vehicles are categorized by the regulatory apparat as “zero emissions” vehicles – which means zero compliance costs . . . for the car companies. No more having to sweat passing federal emissions certification tests – which don’t apply at all to electric cars…

It makes sense once you understand it. The car companies are demanding to be regulated in order to be freed from being regulated.

But it won’t be free.

We’ll be paying a great deal more for cars, soon. And even if you don’t buy a new car, you’ll be paying more for electricity – to cover the cost of all those shifted compliance costs.

Be seeing you


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Economic Argument for a Carbon Tax Is a Work of Fiction | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on February 3, 2019

If these regulations are so inefficient, then why do they exist in the first place? The answer, of course, is that they are there for political reasons, not because they passed a legitimate cost-benefit test.

We live in strange times indeed when an environmental reporter for The New York Times writes that we should stop pushing for a carbon tax, just a few weeks before dozens of distinguished economists sign a letter to the Wall Street Journal calling for a carbon tax. Yet despite the prestige behind the impressive list of signers, the economists mislead the American public on several key points.

Specifically, there is quite open hostility on the progressive Left to merely a carbon tax—for example as is spelled out in the “Green New Deal” that has attracted so much attention. It is thus very dangerous for these economists to tell the public that a carbon tax would promote economic growth by eliminating unnecessary regulation. Furthermore, there is no discussion of just how severely economic growth would be limited, even if the carbon tax receipts were refunded dollar-for-dollar (which of course they won’t be). The talk about average families receiving more back in dividends than they pay out in higher energy prices is extremely misleading, and could only be true if the scheme fails in its ostensible goal of drastically cutting emissions. Finally, the attempt to maintain American competitiveness with a “border adjustment” would simply ensure that the program was symbolic and did little to slow global carbon dioxide emissions.

No, a Revenue-Neutral Carbon Tax Deal to Replace Regulations Is Not Going to Happen

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

A Vegan Menu at Your Local Steakhouse . . . – EPautos – Libertarian Car Talk

Posted by M. C. on October 31, 2018

Their solution is to back a national EV mandate, which they hope will spread out their costs by offloading them onto the backs of buyerseverywhere. And if every step mandates the production of a certain number of EVs each year, how long will it be before it mandates that people buy them?

They may be smarter than I given them credit for, though. Perhaps there is more money to be made selling rides than cars.

I just wish they hadn’t sold us out.

by eric

The federal government has already de facto outlawed non-electric cars, using a kind of slow-acting poison that is already causing symptoms to appear and will shortly fell even the healthiest-seeming non-electric vehicles (big trucks and SUVs).

That poison is the federal fuel economy fatwaknown as CAFE, which has been around since the ‘70s but is on schedule to almost double and within about five years. By model year 2025, vehicles – not just cars – will have to average 50-plus MPG.

This includes trucks and SUVs based on trucks  – which GM does sell a lot of.

How do you get a truck or an SUV based on a truck  to average 50-plus MPG?

You don’t.

What you do instead is improve your CAFE “fleet average” by folding cars that get infinite MPGs (even though they don’t get many miles down the road) into the equation.

Electric cars…  Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »