Jump to content


The General Election


Recommended Posts

 

 

 

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

Regulations serve a purpose.

 

 

I realize my posts talked about regulations, that was my fault, I should have said excessive regulations, those are hurting the economy.. like the EPA regulations regarding man made climate change, which is why VW is in the mess the are in. TDI's before 2009 are ok to drive, but all of a sudden after 2008, regulations made it so that car manufacturers had to cheat. it isn't just Volkswagen.

They did not have to cheat. Their engineers elected to cheat. Plenty of other manufacturers did not do this. Further more these regulations level the playing field. If they are forced to meet the same regs no one can neglect health and safety to boost the bottom line over a competitor. You really think the indusrty would move to cleaner more efficient cars if the government didn't pushed them to?

 

Sure they would if the buying public forced them. Government isn't the answer to everything, shocker for some, I know.

 

Capitalism has always done a good job of pushing companies to change... Without government control!

 

EDIT: Like I said before, I know all about the situation.. I have two of those cars.

No. They wouldn't. The consumer needs a vehicle for daily life, therefore they buy what is there. Manufacturers have no interest in improvement to those things until we have issues like Katrina and recessions.

 

I might know a thing or two working in the indusrty.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

Regulations serve a purpose.

 

I realize my posts talked about regulations, that was my fault, I should have said excessive regulations, those are hurting the economy.. like the EPA regulations regarding man made climate change, which is why VW is in the mess the are in. TDI's before 2009 are ok to drive, but all of a sudden after 2008, regulations made it so that car manufacturers had to cheat. it isn't just Volkswagen.

They did not have to cheat. Their engineers elected to cheat. Plenty of other manufacturers did not do this. Further more these regulations level the playing field. If they are forced to meet the same regs no one can neglect health and safety to boost the bottom line over a competitor. You really think the indusrty would move to cleaner more efficient cars if the government didn't pushed them to?

 

Sure they would if the buying public forced them. Government isn't the answer to everything, shocker for some, I know.

 

Capitalism has always done a good job of pushing companies to change... Without government control!

 

EDIT: Like I said before, I know all about the situation.. I have two of those cars.

Really? What do you call companies who are doing somehing that causes cancer, know about it, and continue to donit until they're caught. Did they stop causing cancer due to healthy competition or because they were caught?

 

 

What companies are causing cancer and why isn't your government regulations stopping it?

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

Regulations serve a purpose.

 

I realize my posts talked about regulations, that was my fault, I should have said excessive regulations, those are hurting the economy.. like the EPA regulations regarding man made climate change, which is why VW is in the mess the are in. TDI's before 2009 are ok to drive, but all of a sudden after 2008, regulations made it so that car manufacturers had to cheat. it isn't just Volkswagen.

They did not have to cheat. Their engineers elected to cheat. Plenty of other manufacturers did not do this. Further more these regulations level the playing field. If they are forced to meet the same regs no one can neglect health and safety to boost the bottom line over a competitor. You really think the indusrty would move to cleaner more efficient cars if the government didn't pushed them to?

 

Sure they would if the buying public forced them. Government isn't the answer to everything, shocker for some, I know.

 

Capitalism has always done a good job of pushing companies to change... Without government control!

 

EDIT: Like I said before, I know all about the situation.. I have two of those cars.

No. They wouldn't. The consumer needs a vehicle for daily life, therefore they buy what is there. Manufacturers have no interest in improvement to those things until we have issues like Katrina and recessions.

 

I might know a thing or two working in the indusrty.

 

 

Yes, they would.. the rest is just silly

 

I get it, you are a government is best guy, as silly as that is, I get it.

 

EDIT: To the bold.. So do I, what do you do?

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

 

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

Regulations serve a purpose.

 

 

I realize my posts talked about regulations, that was my fault, I should have said excessive regulations, those are hurting the economy.. like the EPA regulations regarding man made climate change, which is why VW is in the mess the are in. TDI's before 2009 are ok to drive, but all of a sudden after 2008, regulations made it so that car manufacturers had to cheat. it isn't just Volkswagen.

They did not have to cheat. Their engineers elected to cheat. Plenty of other manufacturers did not do this. Further more these regulations level the playing field. If they are forced to meet the same regs no one can neglect health and safety to boost the bottom line over a competitor. You really think the indusrty would move to cleaner more efficient cars if the government didn't pushed them to?

 

Sure they would if the buying public forced them. Government isn't the answer to everything, shocker for some, I know.

 

Capitalism has always done a good job of pushing companies to change... Without government control!

 

EDIT: Like I said before, I know all about the situation.. I have two of those cars.

No. They wouldn't. The consumer needs a vehicle for daily life, therefore they buy what is there. Manufacturers have no interest in improvement to those things until we have issues like Katrina and recessions.I might know a thing or two working in the indusrty.

Yes, they would.. the rest is just silly

 

I get it, you are a government is best guy, as silly as that is, I get it.

 

EDIT: To the bold.. So do I, what do you do?

I'm am engineer for an OEM.

 

I'm not a government is best guy, I just understand that the government has a place and corporations have a long history of neglecting to do what's best for the long term. In automotive just look at car safety, efficiency, emissions, new technologies jn general. Some corps are better than others but American OEMs tend to be short sighted and stuborn about implementing knew technologies and standards.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

 

 

Life gave us a great commentary on regulations today. 5.6 magnitude earthquake strikes Oklahoma, tremors are felt hundreds of miles away, but there are no deaths and very little property damage. Why? Because regulations stipulate that buildings are constructed to sufficient strength that they don't collapse.

Contrast that with the 5.6 magnitude quake from 2014 in Yunnan Province in China where over 9,000 homes were destroyed. Or the 2012 Yunnan earthquake that killed more than 80 people. Or the 2008 earthquake from Sichuan that killed more than 40 people.

Regulations serve a purpose.

 

I realize my posts talked about regulations, that was my fault, I should have said excessive regulations, those are hurting the economy.. like the EPA regulations regarding man made climate change, which is why VW is in the mess the are in. TDI's before 2009 are ok to drive, but all of a sudden after 2008, regulations made it so that car manufacturers had to cheat. it isn't just Volkswagen.

They did not have to cheat. Their engineers elected to cheat. Plenty of other manufacturers did not do this. Further more these regulations level the playing field. If they are forced to meet the same regs no one can neglect health and safety to boost the bottom line over a competitor. You really think the indusrty would move to cleaner more efficient cars if the government didn't pushed them to?

 

Sure they would if the buying public forced them. Government isn't the answer to everything, shocker for some, I know.

 

Capitalism has always done a good job of pushing companies to change... Without government control!

 

EDIT: Like I said before, I know all about the situation.. I have two of those cars.

No. They wouldn't. The consumer needs a vehicle for daily life, therefore they buy what is there. Manufacturers have no interest in improvement to those things until we have issues like Katrina and recessions.I might know a thing or two working in the indusrty.

Yes, they would.. the rest is just silly

 

I get it, you are a government is best guy, as silly as that is, I get it.

 

EDIT: To the bold.. So do I, what do you do?

I'm am engineer for an OEM.

 

I'm not a government is best guy, I just understand that the government has a place and corporations have a long history of neglecting to do what's best for the long term. In automotive just look at car safety, efficiency, emissions, new technologies jn general. Some corps are better than others but American OEMs tend to be short sighted and stuborn about implementing knew technologies and standards.

 

 

We are going to agree to disagree.

Link to comment


Sure they would if the buying public forced them. Government isn't the answer to everything, shocker for some, I know.

 

Capitalism has always done a good job of pushing companies to change... Without government control!

 

EDIT: Like I said before, I know all about the situation.. I have two of those cars.

 

 

 

 

Cigarettes and casinos.

Link to comment

 

 

Still going strong, after all these years:

 

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/772892328906334209

That ego would never let him admit being wrong so he really is forced to avoid the topic or double down against indisputable evidence.

Needs to be asked at a debate.

 

How about we stick to things that matter such as policies. Lord knows that neither of them have given us much to go by other than general statements on most issues. I think the people would like to know how each of them are going to back their plans and how much that will mean the taxpayers are going to get hosed this time around.

Link to comment

 

 

 

Still going strong, after all these years:

 

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/772892328906334209

That ego would never let him admit being wrong so he really is forced to avoid the topic or double down against indisputable evidence.

Needs to be asked at a debate.

 

How about we stick to things that matter such as policies. Lord knows that neither of them have given us much to go by other than general statements on most issues. I think the people would like to know how each of them are going to back their plans and how much that will mean the taxpayers are going to get hosed this time around.

 

 

I mean, ordinarily I'd agree. But given that Trump has made a campaign built on avoiding the important stuff and built on personal attacks and drumming up controversy, I totally hope he gets asked this at a debate. He deserves to get nailed on some of his crap instead of just brushing it off.

 

You know the media is going there. They spend most of their time covering Clinton discussing the Foundation or emails. I hope they don't shy away from gotcha stuff with him, either.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...