Bailout Detroit And Increase Their Business Costs?

Seeing as how Detroit will soon be headed back to Washington for billions more in bailout dollars if they are going to stay in business, it doesn't really make sense to significantly increase their business costs right now - unless of course you view taxpayers as the ATM that just never stops giving. These types of conflicting decisions are precisely what I feared the most from an Obama administration. There is no way for us to transition to a significantly more green economy quickly without burdening the economy and taxpayers to a level that will be very bad news for Americans for some time to come.

Either one hand doesn't know what the other is doing, or more likely, Obama figures if he acts quickly enough, he'll be able to get away with whatever he wants without paying for it politically in four years.

Mr. Obama’s presidential memorandum will order the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider the Bush administration’s past rejection of the California application. While it stops short of flatly ordering the Bush decision reversed, the agency’s regulators are now widely expected to do so after completing a formal review process.

Once they act, automobile manufacturers will quickly have to retool to begin producing and selling cars and trucks that get higher mileage than the national standard, and on a faster phase-in schedule. The auto companies have lobbied hard against the regulations and challenged them in court.

Comments

[AJ Lynch]

Gov. Arnold requested this. He has turned ou to be a worthless piece of crap liberal governor.

[jharp]

I agree with our President.

Why do you hate clean air?

[North Dallas Thirty]

LOL....the problem is, silly moron jharp, this actually does nothing to clean the air.

What it does is drive up the price of new cars unnecessarily, which will make people keep their older pollution-spewing ones longer.

If restrictions produced clean air, California would have the cleanest air in the nation. It doesn't. That should in and of itself show the utter bullshit that is the Obama Party's environmental regulation; the numbers of businesses leaving the state in droves and the $40 billion dollar budget sinkhole should make it clear just how successful the Obama Party's regulations are.

By the way, welfare case, private jets account for an enormous amount of air pollution. The Obama Party and its puppets flew 600 of them into Washington last week for the inauguration. Pelosi herself jets around in one. Why aren't you criticizing them?

[det]

> If restrictions produced clean air, California would have the cleanest air in the nation.

That sounds logical, but it isn't. It would depend on how bad the air was to begin with, and how long the restrictions have been in place. I think anyone who's lived in CA for the last 30 years will attest to the improvement in air quality, despite an increase in population. I assume it's our air quality regulation, but I won't bother to look up evidence because I'm lazy and I doubt you're interested.

> That should in and of itself show the utter bullshit that is the Obama Party's environmental regulation;

Um...no, the Obama party's regulations haven't been in place yet. Perhaps they will be ineffectual, perhaps the they will drive up the price of new cars -- the only certainty is that car manufacturers will cry to congress that they just won't survive if they aren't allowed to pollute. Cry me a river.

[Dan Riehl]

"Why do you hate clean air?"

I don't know, J. I guess I figure anything you liberals breathe must be worthless.

Helpfully .... me. Ha!

[mark l.]

let the states set their standards...

cost of living will explode.

Pretend you live in California, and you just got laid off, as your home price plummets, the cherry on top will be when you go to motor vehicles and they tell you your car a)doesn't pass emissions and b)never will.

cost of buying a car that meets new standards will be at least in the 6000 dollar range. What a fantastic way to tax the poor and lower middle class.

nice targetted stimulus of auto dealers. too bad the people who will be forced into a new vehicle won't have the credit to buy one.

Must be some pretty sound logic to place a big priority on the manufacturing jobs that produce the most expensive, optional items, in the heart of a recession.

[LOL]

idiotic comments dont even seem to understand how the world works...

"Pretend you live in California, and you just got laid off, as your home price plummets, the cherry on top will be when you go to motor vehicles and they tell you your car a)doesn't pass emissions and b)never will."

uhh... no. The California standards are already in place. Meaning ones car is not going to suddenly NOT pass emissions.

[templar knight]

"I guess I figure anything you liberals breathe must be worthless."

I disagree with you there, Dan. The air they breathe is much cleaner, no matter the geographic location, when it goes into a liberal as opposed to when it comes out. The air is filthy with lies and deceit when it comes out of a liberal.

[mark l.]

"uhh... no. The California standards are already in place."

are you saying that they are not subject to change? the 2009 standards will be the same as the 2011?

if you believe that the standards will not change, I'll borrow the phrase,

"idiotic comments dont even seem to understand how the world works..."

seems to work.

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

I love it: But the standards might CHANGE!!! Now what, LIEbruls?! HUH?!

In any event, if the goal is to ween the U.S. off of dirty, polluting, ineficient engergy, maybe, just maybe, Obama's approach will, I don't know, encourage innovation among the autos and others to produce cleaner, less-polluting, more efficient energy / vehicles? Doesn't this go hand-in-hand with the plan to invest in "greener" energy. Seems to me that this will help the autos roll out their cleaner automobiles.

But wingnuts are very serious and learned with respect to economic matters, so I'm probably wrong. Obama should just cut taxes on the wealthy; cut corporate taxes; eliminate the "death tax"; and elimiate the capital gains tax, because as history tells us, such tactics are guaranteed to not explode the deficit and increase income inequality!!

[mark l.]

"But wingnuts are very serious and learned with respect to economic matters, so I'm probably wrong."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-budget21feb21,0,6427050.story

"California's budget gap at $16 billion"

The beauty of the US is that we have 50 seperate govts running 50 'experiments'.

Some states are conservative, some are liberal. I have little doubt that even liberals would have to agree that California is one of the most 'progressive' states. They are also one of the worst states in regard to deficit as % of gdp.

California is the poster child of economic failure.

[Lala]

Life, liberty, income equality, and the pursuit of happiness. Obama will fix it.

[WBestPresidentEver]

I hope all the auto industries fail.
Then Al Whore will be a happy camper.
This is crazy to put higher standards in place and increase the cost to the auto makers when they are already in trouble.
This is nothing more than an appeaser president.
(Appeaser: to bring to a state of peace, quiet, ease, calm, or contentment; pacify; soothe: to appease an angry king.)
Or should I say ruler. LOL
The guy is merely a puppet for all these lobbiest groups. Nothing more, nothing less.
He has lost his mind if he ever had one.
We are in for a rough 4 years. I hope by then people come to their senses and put the koolaide away.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"In any event, if the goal is to ween the U.S. off of dirty, polluting, ineficient engergy, maybe, just maybe, Obama's approach will, I don't know, encourage innovation among the autos and others to produce cleaner, less-polluting, more efficient energy / vehicles?"

How about the government simply removes all forms of vehicle tax for any vehicle that makes over 30 mpg? That wouldn't require anything of the automakers, it wouldn't punish consumers, and it would allow people to make choices.

But no, the Obama Party, addicted as it is to governmental mandate, insists it will punish anyone who doesn't do what it says and will, in the process, put out of business contractors, home repair people, and anyone else who has to carry things larger than can fit into a Honda Fit.

[SacTownMan]

The THC Abuser thinks,

"maybe, just maybe, Obama's approach will, I don't know,..."

Let me finish your sentence... "help destroy the automobile industry just at a time when they are fighting for their survival."

You see my socialist friend in a FREE market economy the type of vehicle that is sought after and purchased is determined by the CONSUMER not the govt. Now it may not make you and your troll buddies happy but I may not want to drive around in a sewing machine converted into a car and I sure don't want your POS Prius. Maybe I need a Ford F-250 pickup to haul around my tools to my job or maybe a big old Cadillac suits my needs. Either way the govt. and you have NO business getting in mine or dictating to the auto industry when your party leaders are doing more damage in one cross country jaunt in the private jet than I can in 10 years of driving!

Go mandate softer toilet paper in airports or some other do gooder work that trips your trigger.

In the meantime stay the hell out of my life you bleeding heart liberal!

[Totally Heterosexual Conservative]

"Either way the govt. and you have NO business getting in mine or dictating to the auto industry when your party leaders are doing more damage in one cross country jaunt in the private jet than I can in 10 years of driving!"

Commerce Clause, dipshit.

In any event, that's NOT what this order is about. The order permits states to regulate emissions as they see fit. Besides, I thought "states rights" was what the wingnuts believed in most. If you don't like how your state regulates emissions, move to a different state. I'm sure Mississippi, Arkansas, and other states on the low end of public health will be glad to you!

[mark l.]

"The California standards are already in place."

CO2?

The reason California is seeking to set their own standards is so that they can regulate CO2. If the standards of CO2 emissions are in place, why would they need to seek permission from Obama?

"idiotic comments dont even seem to understand how the world works..."

there are two methods of reducing CO2, ie, increasing fuel economy.
1. keep existing engines and drop the weight of the vehicle.
2. more diesel engines, as the provide better mileage.

pick #1 would produce a massive increase in road fatalities. pick #2 is going to bring back smog.

yes, the emmissions of diesel engines is far better than in the past, but what is the net effect of further reducing smog based emissions in individual cars, when you increase the % of diesels on the road?

here's an example(without precise numbers):

pretend you have 20 million cars, with 15% of them being diesel- producing 100 million tons of nitrogen based emissions-smog.

commitment to fighting smog brings about a far cleaner diesel engine, cutting the 100 million tons to 50 million tons.

suddenly CO2 standards require a more efficent car. Diesel use increases to 50% of the market. Even with the reduction in individual cars, you will wind up producing a 300% increase in smog producing gases becuase you have created a market for the efficient output engine that a diesel provides. You go from 50 million tons to 166.6 tons of nitrogen based gases.

walk around a european city...take a whiff. you can go with CO2 or smog, forgive me if I choose the former.

[Lala]

Yeah, let's hear it for States' Rights

Obama pushing stronger fuel-efficiency standard - USATODAY.com

WASHINGTON — President Obama reversed more Bush administration policies Monday, endorsing state efforts to restrict tailpipe emissions and ordering higher fuel-efficiency standards.

"I look forward to President Obama’s efforts to free states to opt out of oppressive federal gun control regulations and set their own, more liberal gun ownership policies."

http://dailypundit.com/?p=33544

[mark l.]

"The California standards are already in place."

CO2?

The reason California is seeking to set their own standards is so that they can regulate CO2. If the standards of CO2 emissions are in place, why would they need to seek permission from Obama?

"idiotic comments dont even seem to understand how the world works..."

there are two methods of reducing CO2, but the one goal is increasing fuel economy.
1. keep existing engines and drop the weight of the vehicle.
2. more diesel engines, as the provide better mileage.

pick #1 would produce a massive increase in road fatalities. pick #2 is going to bring back smog.

yes, the emmissions of diesel engines is far better than in the past, but what is the net effect of further reducing smog based emissions in individual cars, when you increase the % of diesels on the road?

here's an example(without precise numbers):

pretend you have 20 million cars, with 15% of them being diesel- producing 100 million tons of nitrogen based emissions-smog.

commitment to fighting smog brings about a far cleaner diesel engine, cutting the 100 million tons to 50 million tons for the 15%.

suddenly CO2 standards require a more efficent car. Diesel use increases to 50% of the market. Even with the reduction in individual cars, you will wind up producing a 300% increase in smog producing gases becuase you have created a market for the efficient output engine that a diesel provides. You go from 50 million tons to 166.6 tons of nitrogen based gases.

walk around a european city...take a whiff. you can go with CO2 or smog, forgive me if I choose the former.

I'm getting 39 mpg city/47 highway in jetta TDI. At present it is one of the only cars that can meet the emission standards in regards to CO2(mpg). Even the prius fall short of CA's 2020 goal.

[templar knight]

"I'm sure Mississippi, Arkansas....will be glad to (have) you."

Thanks for that advice, nutroot. I just bought 900 acres of land between the White and Little Red rivers in Arkansas, to go with 40 acres and a cabin I already had at Tumbling Shoales, Ar. I really like the area, and so do thousands of other people from all parts of the country, but mainly from the Midwest. There are great hospitals in Little Rock, which is not too far away, and the local hospital in Heber Springs is pretty good as well. The QOL is great.

The scenary is spectacular, the trout fishing is the best in the World, the water and air are clean, and the people are mostly conservative. I like that part the very best. Not a filthy liberal to be seen or heard, perhaps that is why the crime rate is so low.

[templar knight]

Uh, sorry, that would be 90 acres, not 900.

[Lala]

There's more to come - Hillary's climate envoy -

"My question is this: Were these people elected to run the United States federal government or the World Wildlife Federation?

Well, he did tell us he was a lefty as soon as he got to work.

New climate commie envoy Todd Stern set the Hope and Change tone upon his appointment:

The time for denial, delay and dispute is over

You may not question, got that?"

http://www.stephenkruiser.com/?p=624