It's Official: SUV owners survive crashes 50% better

[nimbus]

When left alone, successful companies give customers what they want.

what customers want isn't always in the best interest of our country. also US automakers weren't that successful and def weren't giving people what they wanted

And since you are so keen on government managing externalities, do you like how they are "helping" us with steroid regulation, prostitution laws, recreational drugs, postal service, social security management and every other mess they've created?

i don't know a lot about a lot of issues =/ just from what i know which is pretty limited, im against steroid regs, against prostitution laws, torn on rec drugs, don't shit about postal service or SS. i do happen to know a lot about vehicle and energy markets though which is why i feel good about my stance on regulations

Don't get me wrong -- the moment I can decide (or at least influence) the person who decides which externalities further my goals the best, I'll be all for regulating them too.

i def know what you mean. on the whole i have an issue with excessive regulation, just not in this case

 

[mrplunkey]

what customers want isn't always in the best interest of our country. also US automakers weren't that successful and def weren't giving people what they wanted




i don't know a lot about a lot of issues =/ just from what i know which is pretty limited, im against steroid regs, against prostitution laws, torn on rec drugs, don't shit about postal service or SS. i do happen to know a lot about vehicle and energy markets though which is why i feel good about my stance on regulations




i def know what you mean. on the whole i have an issue with excessive regulation, just not in this case

Just re-read that block of quotes. You're saying that it's ok for government to know best on what size car you can drive without penalty, but they shouldn't tell you to load-up on gear? There's a huge negative externality if I've ever seen one.

That is the problem with deciding which externalities do and don't get addressed. Once you start down that slope, you can justify any type of social engineering you want. I get frustrated particularly with people who have this misguided notion that "the people" control the process (via democracy), but then act shocked when corporations and special interests subvert the process. What else could you possibly expect?

 

[miplank]

consumers actually do want them, mfrs just aren't making them. also, the new standards are based on vehicle footprint and don't really change vehicle size. mfrs can still make SUVs, they'll just pay if the SUV is inefficient compared to other SUVs of similar size. and before you bring it up, lightweighting is not a strategy used to achieve fuel economy reduction; there are other way cheaper ways to do it still.

Consumers want fuel efficient cars that look like Chevy Tahoes, Chrysler 300's, and not a Smart fortwo.

Bottom line is people bitch about filling up their big ass suv's, but at the end of the day that majority of US drivers prefer their big ass Chevy Tahoes and Ford Expeditions etc.

Kinda reminds me of this old man I was talking to a few years ago. He said, "Look at this shit, it looks like goddamn China around here with all these lil ass scooters and shit zipping around. I don't care what the price of gas is i'm still driving my big truck"

 

[mrplunkey]

Consumers want fuel efficient cars that look like Chevy Tahoes, Chrysler 300's, and not a Smart fortwo.

Bottom line is people bitch about filling up their big ass suv's, but at the end of the day that majority of US drivers prefer their big ass Chevy Tahoes and Ford Expeditions etc.

Kinda reminds me of this old man I was talking to a few years ago. He said, "Look at this shit, it looks like goddamn China around here with all these lil ass scooters and shit zipping around. I don't care what the price of gas is i'm still driving my big truck"

Aren't those just redneck peckerwoods who don't understand the intrinsic value of a federal government helping them make decisions?

Sheesh... You'd think people would be more appreciative. You're acting like those narrow-minded women folk do when a helpful social conservative has some insight into how they should treat pregnancies.

 

[nimbus]

Just re-read that block of quotes. You're saying that it's ok for government to know best on what size car you can drive without penalty, but they shouldn't tell you to load-up on gear? There's a huge negative externality if I've ever seen one.

That is the problem with deciding which externalities do and don't get addressed. Once you start down that slope, you can justify any type of social engineering you want. I get frustrated particularly with people who have this misguided notion that "the people" control the process (via democracy), but then act shocked when corporations and special interests subvert the process. What else could you possibly expect?

so to summarize/clarify/keep the issues separate:

first part:

lighter vehicles are safer for society overall. although buying a heavier vehicle increases the driver's safety, it decreases the overall safety of all drivers by even more.

fuel economy standards as currently implemented in and of themselves are good, and have a positive impact on social welfare



second part:

even though certain regulations might benefit society, perhaps governments should not have the authority to impose such regulations because when you look at all sectors, regulation to that extent may do more harm than good overall.

^^ it seems like this is where the debate is headed now. i need to think/learn about that some more

 

[mrplunkey]

so to summarize/clarify/keep the issues separate:

first part:

lighter vehicles are safer for society overall. although buying a heavier vehicle increases the driver's safety, it decreases the overall safety of all drivers by even more.

fuel economy standards as currently implemented in and of themselves are good, and have a positive impact on social welfare



second part:

even though certain regulations might benefit society, perhaps governments should not have the authority to impose such regulations because when you look at all sectors, regulation to that extent may do more harm than good overall.

^^ it seems like this is where the debate is headed now. i need to think/learn about that some more

Is there a study that proves lighter vehicles are safer for society overall? I've never seen one.

 

[nimbus]

Consumers want fuel efficient cars that look like Chevy Tahoes, Chrysler 300's, and not a Smart fortwo.

Bottom line is people bitch about filling up their big ass suv's, but at the end of the day that majority of US drivers prefer their big ass Chevy Tahoes and Ford Expeditions etc.

Kinda reminds me of this old man I was talking to a few years ago. He said, "Look at this shit, it looks like goddamn China around here with all these lil ass scooters and shit zipping around. I don't care what the price of gas is i'm still driving my big truck"

i agree, that's why i like the fact that the new standards are done by vehicle footprint. manufacturers have no incentive to make smaller vehicles, they only have an incentive to improve the efficiency of their current models

 

[nimbus]

Is there a study that proves lighter vehicles are safer for society overall? I've never seen one.

i thought f=ma was enough

 

[mrplunkey]

i thought f=ma was enough

Then let's do a little thought experiment: if we forced the entire US population to use motorcycles, would injuries and fatalities go up or down?

 

[PICK3]

Is there a study that proves lighter vehicles are safer for society overall? I've never seen one.

or at least a term paper?