55 mpg by 2030?

She strikes me as the type of person who wouldn't even know how to pump her own gas, let alone dictate fuel economy standards. "Henry Ford would immediately recognize today's engines". OK then Hillary, time to go back to La-La Land. As if our trade deficit weren't bad enough, eliminating Auto production from the US would drive our economy into the ground even faster than the current powers are doing it.

My question when I read this on AutoBlog yesterday was "where is the $20 billion in low-interest loans for automakers coming from?" It sure as heck cant be coming from her universal healthcare plan.
 
But really... are any of us surprised this comment was made? I mean, it IS Hillary.

While a bit of a blowhard move. I would rather this comment than 35 mpg on some distant timeline for automakers who could hit 55mpg in production cars in 3 to 4 cycles. As with everything, its a matter of priorities.
 
Flicmod I laughed with your comment. If we had universal healthcare the domestic automakers would have more than $20 billion coming their way in savings...but that is another discussion for another blog.

Ah yes, universal healthcare. I'm living in England right now, and lets just say if I need medical attention, I'll be paying for a flight back to the states. Healthcare is a complete disaster here.

Somehow the administrations I've lived through (since '82) have managed to spend several trillion dollars more than they've had... so no surprise politicians don't bat an eye at $20 billion.
 
The usual excuse, that it's in our long term strategic interests, isn't a bad one. It's worth considering plans like this one. The reason I don't like it is that it's committing to a lot of technological progress in a fixed timespan, which you just can't count on.

Ron Paul in 2008!
 
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

^ It was just a matter of time before he popped up. Most excellent.
 
While I have no doubt the auto industry can vastly improve fuel economy, I think the market will do more to speed the development of fuel efficient cars than new CAFE standards. Why force automakers to make cars people won't buy? If fuel costs are high enough, the demand for more fuel efficiency will rise, and successful automakers will make cars to meet that demand. Market demand usually exceeds CAFE anyway.

wtf... fuel economy is the least of the worries when it comes to global warming.
 
hillary clinton is the worst candidate ever, calling for both 55mph speed limit and 55mpg!??!

Really, when you think about it, universal healthcare would probably be worse in the end for the Detroit Big 3. The government is so inefficient that any savings that the Big 3 would have after not needing to pay for their own healthcare would be swallowed up by the increased taxes that Clinton would probably have to cover the healthcare. The government simply cannot provide a service like healthcare without having most of the money disappear through the cracks, so to speak, then guess what they do when the already-increased taxes doesn't actually pay for the people's healthcare? They increase the taxes even more! (which will only cause more cracks in the system to appear for the money to disappear out of, and so the never-ending cycle goes on and on, and on, and...)

The problem with these political hacks is that they actually believe that by mandating, say, 35MPG by 2020 that it means that the carmakers will create the same car/truck, for the same price, but it'll magically get 35MPG. And that's what your average person on the street is thinking when a pollster asks "Do you favor increasing fuel economy standards to 35MPG?" Who wouldn't, if it was free. But guess what the answer would be if you asked them "Would you like to have a 6 month long waiting list for trucks/SUV's/Crossovers/Minivans and pay full sticker + an extra grand or two? Or would you like to have a compact car as your "largest" car and pay a couple grand extra for it?"

You know that if there was a Government Insurance, medical bill prices would skyrocket! Doctors, prescriptions, lawsuits, malpractice insurance etc. would increase so much that it would just about break the bank. What needs to be done is get rid of all insurances. Once the supply of money is cut down, the demand of it will have to follow.
 
I know it won't happen but it's just a thought.
 
And as far as Hillary, well what can I say? Is she planning to stay as president until 2030? How else will she be able to ensure that her mandate stays? She's trying to convince us with far-reaching promises that will keep her only until 2016 at most, and then the other 14 years will just have to hope that her mandates stay...PLEASE!!

Ain't happening.
 
CAFE has failed miserably. In fact, the only thing it did was shift more production to trucks and actually make the fleet average DROP in the USA.

How some politicians can be so numbingly stupid or pander so much (I'm honestly not sure which is worse) makes me want to cry.
 
The government can NEVER do a better job of regulating the market than the market (and the good old invisible hand) itself can. You know what happens when you make manufacturers produce underpowered tin cans that no one wants to buy? You get a surplus of cars that don't sell. And you know what happens then? The government writes a nice fat subsidy to automakers so that they keep producing the cars that people don't want. If people wanted fuel efficient cars, they would demand them, and the market would then supply them! That's how capitalism, economics, and plain common sense works, but apparently Mrs. Communism thinks she knows better. It makes me sick. Oh, and if anyone disagrees, show me what part of the constitution gives the federal government the right to regulate fuel economy (or speed limits for that matter). Because really, the founding fathers weren't concerned with democracy. They were concerned with LIBERTY!
 
Oh, and nr9, please tell me that you are kidding about the 55 mph speed limit. I can only take so much Orwell in a day.

It's always funny yet at the same time sick to hear politicians talk all this crap about global warming and pollution and emissions. How does Clinton crisscross the country? In a private plane of course, wonder how good the mileage is of that and how much gas it consumes. What vehicle does she use on land to get between meetings and all? Most likely something large and heavy, like a Suburban or Expedition. How dare she talk about 55 mpg with consumption like that.
 
By 2030 she probably wont even be alive so this is all such a load of crap. Just as stupid as the idiot I remember a while ago who was encouraging Americans to give up SUVs.

Ateixeira's absolutely right about CAFE. It only prompted people to buy gigantic trucks that aren't liable to CAFE standards. Besides, any government intervention will hamper the US's ability to manufacture automobiles.
If the government wants to initiate subsidies for automotive technology, that's all well and good. But forcing the industry to produce vehicles that cost significantly more will not return the kind of results Congress is looking for.

how much viral marketing is ron pauls paying for that even this board is infected.