Feds want to scrap our cars!!!

There is a bill gathering momentum in Senate RIGHT NOW that aims to eliminate ALL VEHICLES more than 15 years old: It PAYS STATES with OUR TAX REVENUES to DESTROY all such vehicles, giving their owners a pittance toward the purchase of new cars. This can be found in section 803 of S.1766. I have several problems with this!

1. I like old cars and would someday hope to own another one. I also enjoy my freedoms the way they are and do not want them diminished by any federal law that would have a minimal impact on its intended purpose.

2. I've been somewhat poor my entire life, and have already been distressed by the cost of used automobiles exceeding the rate of inflation by over 200% for the last 10 years. Eliminating these vehicles from the market will indeed rais used car prices out of reach of most single income hourly wage families, encouraging poverty and unimployement, and causing distress on the families themselves.

3. This legislation will eliminate cars that are already more fuel efficient than many of those sold today, making it a regressive effort. Most 15 year old cars already had much better fuel efficiency than todays SUV's which are replacing them. Such popular cars include the Buick Regal FWD and Century; Chevrolet Cavalier and Celebrity, Dodge/Plymouth Omni and Reliant; Ford/Mercury Escort/Lynx, Tuarus/Sable, and Tempo/Topaz; Honda Civic and Accord; Olds Cutlass Cieara/Calias; Pontiac Sunbird and 6000; and Toyota Camry. Any of these cars produced better fuel mileage (at least 30MPG highway) than even the small Ford Explorer, which has been one of the most popular vehicle in recent years.

4. Of the few larger cars that remain, many are station wagons. Full sized station wagons have passed a much higher standard of safety than the small SUV's that have replaced them, while getting similar fuel mileage.

5. Detroying such vehicles will make it far more expensive to maintain similar vihicles as the supply of used parts is diminished.

This is a perfect example of how wealthy people can harm the poor without achieving any positive goals for themselves. Please write your senator concerning this bill, and make sure to mention section 803 of S.1766.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

Come on Crash, it's dangerous to drive a 15 year old car with no brakes, one front headlight, no working flashers, no brake lights, a floor with cardboard, glued side mirrors, muffler held up with fence wire, non fonctioning horn and no working heater.
BTW, that was my 1980 impala station wagon, sorry.

Are we really ready for "contact" ?

I drive a 1987 T-bird, it handles better than most new cars its size. And yes, if forced to buy a newer car, I would get one this size.
Before that I drove a Cavalier, which was also fuel injected and got 35MPG, which goes directly against their reason for demolishing such cars (fuel milege). In fact, 15 years ago, the most popular cars ALL got better fuel mileage than todays SUVs, and were built to higher safety standards as well. Think about this-Ford, in order to demonstrate that their trucks were NOT a safety hazard to cars, did a head-on between an F-150 and a Honda Accord. The HONDA won! Yes, that same Accord was available 15 years ago (the demo took place over 10 years ago), and was already getting over 35MPG!!!

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

Here's what I found so far

<b><font color=green>Lizards</b></font color=green> for <b>THGC</b> Mascot!!!

Oh, yes, mass transit, I suppose you'll run a subway to my apartment or a trolly to my folks in the country?

What, don't even suggest bussing, it does NOT WORK at ALL outside of urban areas. Bussing is hit or miss here, it takes about 2 hours to go 2 miles, and the busses are up to 45 minutes late for pick ups!

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

Fuel cells for car propulsion, WHEN?

Are we really ready for "contact" ?

Fuel cells should be in regular production cars in as little as 10 years, and should show up in limmited production cars in fewer than 3.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

Have owned 2 nisan micras in the past 10 years. Damn best milage of all 4 cyl vehicules, i beleive. 50/60 miles to the gallon or better. My next car is going to be the absolute best that is in general production(because limited = $$$) for gas consumption.

Are we really ready for "contact" ?

Nothing smaller than a Maxima for me, thanks!

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

If you know anything about government you know it's about compromise. Offbeat measures are often thrown into larger bills in hopes that they go through unnoticed, or that people will accept one part of the bill they don't like in order to support a part of the bill they do! This ALWAYS comes back to haunt a few senators, because a bill that, say, prevents pedaphiles from working in schools may also ban possession of alcohol within 500 feet of schools (even in your own house)! So when you say "that second part is outrageous, I'm not signing this bill", your next political opponent will come out with an add that says "your current senator voted no on a bill to keep pedaphiles out of schools". The fear of such bad publicity is one way extremist can get their laws passed simply by putting them in the same bill as another law. This is the nature of the game!

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

That's stupid. Really stupid. Because most REAL environmentallist already know that these measures will do us no good. Replace an 87 Cavalier with any SUV and your already at a deficit. Plus, smelting the material produces a lot of polution. Refining it into steel again requires more.

It's a lot like the "electric car" intiative in California: It produces more polution that in prevents. How is this possible? Because most power plants use coal!

Oh, and I'm sure that you'de be willing to sacrifice someone ELSES car, or their ability to afford one, and by that means someone ELSES job, and when FIA steps in because they are "no longer providing adequately for their family", someone ELSES children. But if you were to have to make sacrifices of THIS magnitude yourself, I think you would change your tune quickly!

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

Give me a minute to get back up on my feet there Crash.
Ok, ouf.
I was`nt following topic to the letter there.
The environmental extremists i was thinking of at teh time was "GreenPeace" and their different approches. They are considered "extremists". I have in the past monetarily supported them. I am seriously thinking of starting again.

Old cars that are keap longer on the road and hence out of the scrap jard contribute by not having to be replaced by new vehicules with the resources that implies. It's like reusing or prolonging the usefull life of old pcs. They are therefore keap out of the environment as polutants and new products are less needed as replacement.
I'm not a complet idiot u know.
My first joke about teh old bazoos must however be taken seriously. They must not be a danger to drive. Would feel bad ramming a kindergarden class on an outing because of a rusted steering spindle or brake line.

Are we really ready for "contact" ?

Greenpeace is a legit organization who actually understands what I said, and many of their members agree with me. It's those people who THINK they're environmentalist, or who want to provide the APPEARENCE of being environmentally friendly, with no regard for the truth, that tend to have the most influence on public policy! Politicians don't listen to GreenPeace!

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

The people in power are concerned with their image more than anything else.

<font color=red><i>I refugee from Guatanamo Bay,
dance around the border like I'm Cassius Clay
</i></font color=red>

I already covered this arguement. There is no need for an Internal Combustion Engine backup. Fuel cells can be made to use gasoline! So all you really need to run both gasoline and hydrogen is a dual fuel fuel cell!

But hydrogen is still a ways off, gasoline powered fuel cells will probably take hold much sooner.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

Are you sure it will be the same cells for the current fuel? And all the research is aimed towards Hydrogen. The BMW and UAE thing is a current project with one of their cars doing a Europe/Asia Trip. Their technology runs on Hydrogen and have a mass production plan that is supposed to recoup all the development cost on the UAE side by 2013/2014, which means its gotta be launched way sooner. And that contract is around Hydrogen.

<font color=red><i>I refugee from Guatanamo Bay,
dance around the border like I'm Cassius Clay
</i></font color=red>

Is'nt there a difference between a person that buys a new vehicule that has an inscription on the door regarding a correction for the tire pressure to be used and a person voluntarily driving down the road in a 15/20 year old rust bucket knowing full well the dangers of such a vehicule.

A couple years back her in Québec a private transportation company lend a passenger bus for a senior citezens outing.
While negociating a steep countryside descent, the bus lost its brakes plus backup brakes. Over 15 died, if my memmory serves. It was determined the vehicule had not had a proper mechanical inspection.
I have driven my share of authentic "rust buckets". Many would not have passed a mechanical. All I'm stating is rather than have an "all or nothing regulation" as that cided above, a yearly and mandatory basic mechanical inspection could be required for 15 year and older vehicules. And you know what, for the environmental reasons that even i can understand, part or all of the costs of such inspections could come off the back of taxes applied to those categories of 4X4 SUV gas guzzlers.

I'm really not an insensitive, idiotic sob, and if this post is still considered as such so be it.

Danny Mayers

Are we really ready for "contact" ?

Houston! we have a problem! no brakes! no sterring!

Are we really ready for "contact" ?

Hehe, you should have seen my '70 Cutlass! Now THAT was a CAR!

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

Teh wife's is a 90 cavalier wagon auto. And yes, you are right, it get's damn good gas milage. 174,000 clics on it, kms

Are we really ready for "contact" ?

yep. shoot it.
at least u get a few good meals out of it

The lack of thermal protection on Athlon's is cunning way to stop morons from using AMD.

My dad has a subaru outback. That's not a heavy 4 X 4. It gets quite good gas millage, don't have the numbers. It is an expensive vehicule however. He has a 4 X 4 for the following reasons:
- he's 82 and can't manage pushing or shoveling
- he frequently visits the mountain areas north of Montréal
- his wife like's the Crocodile Dundee commercials
Given there are situations where large 4 X 4 are necessary as:
- small snow removal & lanscaping services
- farms
However, having a 17 mpg 4 X 4 in order to occasionnally help out a neighbor who has perhaps not done a proper snow removal job of his entrance, does not add up.
Furthermore, the object here has not been about such isolated situations but more of the suburban area owners who have good/acceptable public snow removal services and still own a huge 4 X 4 SUV to drive themselves to the city and back every day. These are the cases we are talking about here. And these cases should have their butts taxed to kingdom come.


Are we really ready for "contact" ?

Soo, what's your take on all this?

Are we really ready for "contact" ?

deliverance.

<b><font color=green>Lizards</b></font color=green> for <b>THGC</b> Mascot!!!

I think Trucks are great. But that's if you are going to use them for what they are intended.

<b><font color=green>Lizards</b></font color=green> for <b>THGC</b> Mascot!!!

I don't think this will apply to military vehicles.

<b><font color=green>Lizards</b></font color=green> for <b>THGC</b> Mascot!!!