Interesting Op-Ed in today’s Wall Street Journal (CLOSED DUE TO POLITICS)

[Old Hickory Trojan]

A) we need smaller cars
B) we need lighter cars
C) transportation problem is solved

Look at everything the Maverick can do.
This size should be the norm.
Anything larger should require a permit based on demonstrated need.

Smaller cars & trucks will cut our energy needs in half. Instantly.

Tell that to someone who requires bigger and more powerful vehicles to do their job. Might work for city folks but go out to the farm or the woods and tell someone to use a truck where he needs to make more then twice the trips to move the same amount of materials. That wouldn't cut the cost of fuel and definitely wouldn't go to places that a truck might need to go. Lastly until the Maverick has been around for a few more years no telling how well it would hold up especially considering the issues Ford has with it's quality. Before I ordered my Hybrid and have my Santa Cruz I had a RAM 1500 Hemi 4x4 and Jeep 4x4 that was the only two vehicles we could get out to the Farm that wouldn't get stuck in good old Tennessee mud.

Sponsored

 

[BohemianLikeYou]

So what? First of all the US has Oil but because of a Political agenda refuses to increase production. We don't need to rely on anyone but ourselves to produce oil and stop selling our oil production to other countries while at the same time reducing production. and using our Strategic Reserves to prop up our domestic supply and artificially lower the price at the pump. The so called scientific consensus is anything but about the danger to the planet. The guy that ran Green Peace said as much and there is more evidence each day that shows the data used has been manipulated by Climate Extremists. We also know from studies that EV's have a 75% greater carbon footprint to produce then a gasoline vehicle. It takes 8 years for an EV to become a lesser carbon footprint due to it's emissions but the production of an EV is where it has a greater impact. The US cannot support 100% EV's with our current Grid and nothing is being done to fix that. anyone concerned with mankind should be concerned where we get the minerals for todays batteries using child slave labor to extract it. If fossil fuels were as bad as you've been told, why is it that these same Climate Extremists have predicted the end of mankind by a certain time frame and have been proven absolutely wrong each time?
Get this, I'm not saying fossil fuels are the only answer. what I am saying is there are other solutions besides Fossil fuels and there are other solutions besides electricity. The fact our government has set course on a single solution that relys on foreign unfriendly nations to support their agenda is worrisome. We've discussed hydrogen and nuclear as existing options for energy but when 60% of our electricity comes from fossil fuels the idea to cancel that without a backup replacement is rediculous.

Whether the US is self sufficient or not is irrelevant cos we are not the only country on the planet. If you are apprehensive abt China and Russia..then guess what as long as fossil fuels are being pushed, you are supporting them and their activities.
Regarding climate change, its not rocket science (if you open your eyes). Here are are indisputable facts
1) CO2 is a greenhouse gas
2) Greenhouse gases trap heat
3) Heat melts snow
4) snow reflects sunrays
5) since 1981 earth, is warming more than twice as fast: 0.32° F (0.18° C) per decade.
6) We have lost glaciers at unprecedent rates due to warming

A section of American (political) society have developed a cultish mentality and forgotten the difference between religion and reasoning. Till a few years communist(like Russia) were the enemy, but after their cult leader figured to be in his own interest to side with Russia, they now seem to be fans of the murderous dictator. They have an ecosystem (bubble) around them where so-called (Faux) news outlets have actually admitted in sworn depositions that they lied to their viewers for financial reasons.
When a large section of society no longer believes in facts and science...its a matter of time before a Conman(s) exploits the situation

 

[Old Hickory Trojan]

Whether the US is self sufficient or not is irrelevant cos we are not the only country on the planet. If you are apprehensive abt China and Russia..then guess what as long as fossil fuels are being pushed, you are supporting them and their activities.
Regarding climate change, its not rocket science (if you open your eyes). Here are are indisputable facts
1) CO2 is a greenhouse gas
2) Greenhouse gases trap heat
3) Heat melts snow
4) snow reflects sunrays
5) since 1981 earth, is warming more than twice as fast: 0.32° F (0.18° C) per decade.
6) We have lost glaciers at unprecedent rates due to warming

A section of American (political) society have developed a cultish mentality and forgotten the difference between religion and reasoning. Till a few years communist(like Russia) were the enemy, but after their cult leader figured to be in his own interest to side with Russia, they now seem to be fans of the murderous dictator. They have an ecosystem (bubble) around them where so-called (Faux) news outlets have actually admitted in sworn depositions that they lied to their viewers for financial reasons.
When a large section of society no longer believes in facts and science...its a matter of time before a Conman(s) exploits the situation

You've proven my point. You are exactly right except I think you have it backwards. The so called science you speak of has proven to be manipulating the facts. Time and time again they have shown that they are not trustworthy. Our government has shown they are untrustworthy. Who is forcing the push for EV' and regulating against fossil fuels...our government. Who is relying on dictatorships to supply our abilities to produce EV's? Our government. Read the Twitter files and find out how close we are getting to a dictatorship. If you trust our current leadership that is trying to shred the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and think it isn't globalism that is bringing us to an eventual disaster you are totally misreading what is going on. There is a reason our forefathers wanted us to be a Sovereign Nation and self reliant which used to be the American way. Bottom line you have it backwards if you think what is being legislated by executive order and the green movement is about saving the planet. My question is at what expense to human rights and liberty. The approach from my perspective is one step forward two steps back....

With that said I think we've gotten far from what this topic was about and have gotten political when my point which I've stated numerous times is that there is more then one solution and our government is not looking at them and is regulating and subsidizing an approach without looking at the underpinnings needed to move forward

 

[GPSMan]

Tell that to someone who requires bigger and more powerful vehicles to do their job. Might work for city folks but go out to the farm or the woods and tell someone to use a truck where he needs to make more then twice the trips to move the same amount of materials. That wouldn't cut the cost of fuel and definitely wouldn't go to places that a truck might need to go. Lastly until the Maverick has been around for a few more years no telling how well it would hold up especially considering the issues Ford has with it's quality. Before I ordered my Hybrid and have my Santa Cruz I had a RAM 1500 Hemi 4x4 and Jeep 4x4 that was the only two vehicles we could get out to the Farm that wouldn't get stuck in good old Tennessee mud.

Obviously you didn't read everything I said. Obviously. I covered that.

 

[Old Hickory Trojan]

Obviously you didn't read everything I said. Obviously. I covered that.

I read it but I don't need to get a permit or justification. I also don't need more government red tape and control in my life...save that shet for California and New York.

 

[mr mojo risen]

A) we need smaller cars
B) we need lighter cars
C) transportation problem is solved

Look at everything the Maverick can do.
This size should be the norm.
Anything larger should require a permit based on demonstrated need.

Smaller cars & trucks will cut our energy needs in half. Instantly.

There's no doubt a lot of people buy a bigger car, truck or SUV than they really need...... but it's their choice and their money. Requiring a permit to justify a vehicle purchase / ownership sounds like something I would expect from People's Republic of China..... but I wouldn't be surprised to see this come to the People's Republic of California in the near future.

 

[GPSMan]

CAFE
Corporate
Average
Fuel
Economy

A decent idea, except we need to not let medium and heavy duty trucks and SUV's off the hook.
I'm ok exempting things with more than 6 wheels. There's demonstrated needs for moving heavy stuff, and heavy stuff requires extra fuel.

A farmer moving hay or cattle to market, sure. Fine. Usemore than 6 wheels.

The F-350 going to soccer practice should not be exempt. So yes, that farmer needs to keep the F-350 for moving cattle and buy a people mover for soccer.

There is no such thing as an "all purpose" vehicle. But I know of about 100,000 people who think the Maverick is pretty darn close!

For two decades I had a small, cheap car for commuting to work. I had a Silverado 2500HD that sat around most of the year.

Recently with such high resale values I sold the big truck and car and got a Maverick Hybrid.

My only "inconvenience" thus far was not having the "extra" vehicle when my Maverick went in for Air Bag Replacements last week. But even that was OK. Kind of nice having my wife for conversation in the car as she drove me to work, before herself. We both lost 30 minutes of our day. That's it. I can live with that.

 

[GPSMan]

There's no doubt a lot of people buy a bigger car, truck or SUV than they really need...... but it's their choice and their money. Requiring a permit to justify a vehicle purchase / ownership sounds like something I would expect from People's Republic of China..... but I wouldn't be surprised to see this come to the People's Republic of California in the near future.

Half of the people in the USA are not very smart.

No one can argue I'm wrong on this.

 

[mr mojo risen]

CAFE
Corporate
Average
Fuel
Economy

A decent idea, except we need to not let medium and heavy duty trucks and SUV's off the hook.
I'm ok exempting things with more than 6 wheels. There's demonstrated needs for moving heavy stuff, and heavy stuff requires extra fuel.

A farmer moving hay or cattle to market, sure. Fine. Usemore than 6 wheels.

The F-350 going to soccer practice should not be exempt. So yes, that farmer needs to keep the F-350 for moving cattle and buy a people mover for soccer.

There is no such thing as an "all purpose" vehicle. But I know of about 100,000 people who think the Maverick is pretty darn close!

For two decades I had a small, cheap car for commuting to work. I had a Silverado 2500HD that sat around most of the year.

Recently with such high resale values I sold the big truck and car and got a Maverick Hybrid.

My only "inconvenience" thus far was not having the "extra" vehicle when my Maverick went in for Air Bag Replacements last week. But even that was OK. Kind of nice having my wife for conversation in the car as she drove me to work, before herself. We both lost 30 minutes of our day. That's it. I can live with that.

As a petroleum industry employee, I admit that I cringe at ramped-up CAFE standards..... but I strongly prefer this over the permit system you suggested on the previous page.

CAFE standards shift the burden to the automaker to decide how to allocate their vehicle mix.

 

[GPSMan]

When did "freedom to pollute"

(air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, light pollution....)

get added to the Constitution?

 

[BohemianLikeYou]

You've proven my point. You are exactly right except I think you have it backwards. The so called science you speak of has proven to be manipulating the facts. Time and time again they have shown that they are not trustworthy. Our government has shown they are untrustworthy. Who is forcing the push for EV' and regulating against fossil fuels...our government. Who is relying on dictatorships to supply our abilities to produce EV's? Our government. Read the Twitter files and find out how close we are getting to a dictatorship. If you trust our current leadership that is trying to shred the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and think it isn't globalism that is bringing us to an eventual disaster you are totally misreading what is going on. There is a reason our forefathers wanted us to be a Sovereign Nation and self reliant which used to be the American way. Bottom line you have it backwards if you think what is being legislated by executive order and the green movement is about saving the planet. My question is at what expense to human rights and liberty. The approach from my perspective is one step forward two steps back....

With that said I think we've gotten far from what this topic was about and have gotten political when my point which I've stated numerous times is that there is more then one solution and our government is not looking at them and is regulating and subsidizing an approach without looking at the underpinnings needed to move forward

Which one of the following would be closest to a dictatorship/shredding the constitution ?
1) Trying to overhtrow a democratic election results
2) Pushing EVs/climate change

In case you haven't noticed, we both approach the world in completely different ways...when I and people like me make claims/statements, we follow it up with reasoning and/or evidence. Similarly your posts are emblematic of the other side.....evidence/reasoning is optional and substituted by hyperbole and paranoia and grandiose...geez, did i just describe your "chosen one" .

 

[Old Hickory Trojan]

CAFE
Corporate
Average
Fuel
Economy

A decent idea, except we need to not let medium and heavy duty trucks and SUV's off the hook.
I'm ok exempting things with more than 6 wheels. There's demonstrated needs for moving heavy stuff, and heavy stuff requires extra fuel.

A farmer moving hay or cattle to market, sure. Fine. Usemore than 6 wheels.

The F-350 going to soccer practice should not be exempt. So yes, that farmer needs to keep the F-350 for moving cattle and buy a people mover for soccer.

There is no such thing as an "all purpose" vehicle. But I know of about 100,000 people who think the Maverick is pretty darn close!

For two decades I had a small, cheap car for commuting to work. I had a Silverado 2500HD that sat around most of the year.

Recently with such high resale values I sold the big truck and car and got a Maverick Hybrid.

My only "inconvenience" thus far was not having the "extra" vehicle when my Maverick went in for Air Bag Replacements last week. But even that was OK. Kind of nice having my wife for conversation in the car as she drove me to work, before herself. We both lost 30 minutes of our day. That's it. I can live with that.

Six wheels?....in my state where I live we have small family farms that move hay and cattle with vehicles with less then 6 wheels. They use Tractors on our roads to move from one pot to another and we take our trash to the Dump. We get our beef off the hoof, eggs straight from chickens, fruits and vegetables from family plots, and some of our needs from the Co-Ops. Please stay in California because you have no clue about middle America needs. The idea that I should have to pay to be able to own a vehicle under your guidelines doesn't fit my lifestyle or my needs and that's why I have a Subaru Crosstrek, Santa Cruz, a Maverick Hybrid, a Jeep and a Winnebago Motorhome that gets 18-20 MPG and those are my choices not the government's.

 

[GPSMan]

Tractors? Off highway designation. Off the table of this discussion.

 

[Old Hickory Trojan]

When did "freedom to pollute"

(air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, light pollution....)

get added to the Constitution?

Freedom to speak, freedom to own and freedom of choice are all in the Constitution and in fact Freedom to be free from an oppressive government is also in our Constitution. Where in the Constitution is it legislated that the Federal government has a right to dictate and legislate with unelected bureaucrats regulations without the voice of the people? Where does it say in the Constitution that you can't polute. It doesn't and I have a great example.
I'll tell you how effective Government works. The County decided to put a culvert in a public road that drains on my property because the road would get flooded by heavy rains. That culvert dumped every piece of trash it found in the road onto my property and in addition cut a waterway directly to a natural stream running through my property that my cattle drink from. When I approached the county about correcting it I was told they could do nothing past their easment and it would be my responsibility to correct the problem. When I had my Lawyer report this to the Department of the Interior they responded I had to correct this problem. With that said why do I need a government that creates a problem and refuses to correct it legislate anything without the voice of the people. Tell the folks in St Louis that had their kids in a school where the government dumped nuclear waste that dumped into a stream and into the ground and eventually put radioactive waste in the air and school and decided it wasn't the governments problem. Pick and choose is the way the Government regulates all without the vote of the populace.
Polution works fine for the government s why shouldn't it for the public sector. Just like the government wailing about human rights violation but forces auto makers to go to countries that violate human rights. why is our government as part of NATO allowing shells used in tanks to Ukraine that are armed with depleted uranium. Look that shet up. If you are so worried about polution how come all this is OK. Nuff politics for me I'm done.

 

[Old Hickory Trojan]

Tractors? Off highway designation. Off the table of this discussion.

Tractors? Off highway designation. Off the table of this discussion.

Do they operate on the highways? Do they burn fuel? Are they OK or do they need a permit and justification?

Sponsored