If CARB has their way, we'll be walking in California.

[AZhitman]

Some folks dno't see the devastating financial impact of these mandates. They're the ones who support them.

All I'm saying is there's better more productive ways to reduce pollution than strapping the responsibility (and cost) onto the consumer.

The "needs of society" should be determined BY that society, collectively, not by some politician with a hunch. History will not be kind to Algore and his band of freedom-wresting Chicken Littles.

FWIW, I wish you could still rip that old Husky through the desert. But the enviro-whackos have strung piano wire between the trees because you're scaring the field mice, and the Husky spews too many hydrocarbons for the atmosphere to handle.

Meanwhile, deep ocean fissures spew methane into the atmosphere in a God-ordained symphony to the tune of 10x the impact of all human civilization.

...seems Big Government needs to regulate Creation, it's obviously endangering life on Earth.

[Sentientbydesign]

rn,

We're both Cali-kids, so I see your POV, but here is the point. CARB needs to get it's act together.

We don't need regulations on our fart cans and intakes. There should be pre-flight + and final inspection stations for emissions controls.

Think about this scenario:

Jacko, moves to Cali. He buys a G35 and wants to spend $2000 on mods (Intake, plenum, exhaust, basically all that he has now).

Well how much would all of those parts be if they didn't have to lab test and get CARB stickers?

Let's just hypothesize that the $2000 in parts was now $1000. He would then go to a pre-flight station to test his G35 for compliance, do a little tuning/modding if anything was out of spec, then go to the emission testing station and get his little pass.

Voila, we've encouraged the little guy to spend money (to promote the economy), the manufacturer's are now able to spend more resources on improving designs instead of lab testing for CARB compliance, and in the end Jacko saved money.

I wish politics was as simple as finding solutions instead of linear programming (where the contraints amount to people with big pockets and lobbiest).

[AZhitman]

SBD, that's free-market thinking, and the Libs will have NO part of it. They need CONTROL.

Bob's ok with giving up his liberties. I'm not.

[audtatious]

You, who did more to prove my point than I did with the post...

Which is why you and I will never see eye to eye on this issue. You seem to think we did nothing but prove your point and we think you have done nothing but show you are like all the rest and willing to go down paths that will not give the best results. We are talking about NOW, not the 1970's when the pollution was choking. When I mean miniscule I am specifically talking about the miniscule amount of what you currently are "seeing" that will be impacted by simply throwing additional regs at cars and light trucks because those are easy targets to hit.

No you won't understand anything I just said because you are incapable oif understanding others POV's, so it's a moot point.

Let's end it here and be done with it.

[rn79870]

SBD, that's free-market thinking, and the Libs will have NO part of it. They need CONTROL.

Bob's ok with giving up his liberties. I'm not.

Sure, take my civil rights, I'm not using them.

And the lib comment, that kills me. Liberals would scream out loud at the thought of government control, choosing instead to "go it alone." Conservatives on the other hand, believe only government can get it right. We won't ID the neocons, they've been closet conservatives all along.Me thinks confusion on the issue abounds.

[audtatious]

Bob's ok with giving up his liberties. I'm not.

No, Bob is OK giving up others liberties when it suits his desires. Start taking away something that can't be justified to him and he will be beside himself with anger wondering how they can simply get away with it.

Easy, it's called precedent.

[audtatious]

Sure, take my civil rights, I'm not using them.

And the lib comment, that kills me. Liberals would scream out loud at the thought of government control, choosing instead to "go it alone." Conservatives on the other hand, believe only government can get it right. We won't ID the neocons, they've been closet conservatives all along.Me thinks confusion on the issue abounds.

Find me something that the libs are screaming about that they have not turned around and offered a nanny state solution to. Wire tapping? They are only against that when a Republican't is in office.

[Jacko3]

Azhitman:If you are the one who wrote with your hand, the comments I have reposted below, God bless you, in great quantities. I am 150% on board with you on that account. Your mind is very clear, and you have a mighty heart.

Lets hear it again, loud and clear, like a music tune to the hearing:

"Some folks dno't see the devastating financial impact of these mandates. They're the ones who support them.All I'm saying is there's better more productive ways to reduce pollution than strapping the responsibility (and cost) onto the consumer.

The "needs of society" should be determined BY that society, collectively, not by some politician with a hunch. History will not be kind to Algore and his band of freedom-wresting Chicken Littles.

FWIW, I wish you could still rip that old Husky through the desert. But the enviro-whackos have strung piano wire between the trees because you're scaring the field mice, and the Husky spews too many hydrocarbons for the atmosphere to handle.

Meanwhile, deep ocean fissures spew methane into the atmosphere in a God-ordained symphony to the tune of 10x the impact of all human civilization.

...seems Big Government needs to regulate Creation, it's obviously endangering life on Earth."

There are humanoids who would rather protect bacteria from greenhouse gases, while caring less if a human being is suffering or dying in the process of achieving that end. They will protect fish and alligators than have people eat good meat. Alligator meat is tasty. I am not going to starve for any animal. I will not eat locust and honey for anything on this earth.

These tree huggers have made my life very difficult and unpleasant, because they have denied me the use of a Race Pipe. Instead they tell me to block the air hole in my exhaust with a Catalytic Converter. Now my car is saddled with extra issues to deal with. For what?

Oceanliners and diesel trains worlwide, spew out more hydrocarbons per day per kilogram than most cars on earth. Yet, no one is asking them to choke their engines to death with a Catalytic Converter.

What really boils my cajone is that these tree huggers are about to demand that lawn mowers be covered with catalytic converters. When this happens, I shall immediately glaze my front yard with 100% concrete, and let the grass really die a serious death. At least I won't be hassled any longer with razing down the grass every two weeks.

The earth is going to flame out eventually, whether we like it or not. The earth was not designed to support 6 billion people. Too many mouths to feed, shelter, and clothe.

It is already hard enough to raise the soveriegn funds to mod out my ride. If we allow these tree hugggers to continue the bear hug every tree they can lay their hands on, we shall all be driving supercharged Pintos in no time.

I don't want to hug any tree. Leave the tree alone and let it hug the soil. The tree is happy by itself, if left alone.


Modified by Jacko3 at 11:22 AM 2/28/2008

[rn79870]

Jacko, moves to Cali. He buys a G35 and wants to spend $2000 on mods (Intake, plenum, exhaust, basically all that he has now).

Well how much would all of those parts be if they didn't have to lab test and get CARB stickers?

Jacko should buy a Ford GT, everyone all know that. Two more factory workers keep their job, and one more house fore goes foreclosure.

Let's just hypothesize that the $2000 in parts was now $1000. He would then go to a pre-flight station to test his G35 for compliance, do a little tuning/modding if anything was out of spec, then go to the emission testing station and get his little pass.

All he has to do is use CARB approved parts. The reason CARB requires such strict testing to insure that the compliance isn't short lived. Think Chinese crap on a car, works today, doesn't tomorrow.

Voila, we've encouraged the little guy to spend money (to promote the economy), the manufacturer's are now able to spend more resources on improving designs instead of lab testing for CARB compliance, and in the end Jacko saved money.

Why make people wear seatbelts? Think of the money that would be spend on medical expenses/supplies if they didn't. The medical profession would soar, nurses, doctors, physical therapist would have unlimited amounts of disposable income, and BMWs would be in every driveway.

I wish politics was as simple as finding solutions instead of linear programming (where the contraints amount to people with big pockets and lobbiest).

Sentientbydesign, it's not too late. Leave the dark side and join the illuminated.

[Jacko3]

Sentientbydesign and rn79870:

You guys are too funny

[AZhitman]

Liberals would scream out loud at the thought of government control, choosing instead to "go it alone." Conservatives on the other hand, believe only government can get it right.

Ummm, no.

The party of Big Government is the left. Rugged Individualism is a right-wing trait, no matter how much the Libbies try to "adopt" it.

Throwing a new gov't program at a problem is historically a left-handed response.

Now, civil liberties ARE the "protected realm" of the left, but only when those liberties aren't already protected under the Constitution (SSM, for example).

I feel a bit bad giving a PolySci lesson to one of my elders, so please know it's done with the utmost respect to you, Bob.

[rn79870]

No, Bob is OK giving up others liberties when it suits his desires. Start taking away something that can't be justified to him and he will be beside himself with anger wondering how they can simply get away with it.

Easy, it's called precedent.

Bob is easily amused, not angered...You're blaming the messanger for the message? Bob's reaction to unforseen events isn't material, or even predictable. Just ask his wife.

[AZhitman]

Azhitman:If you are the one who wrote with your hand, the comments I have reposted below, God bless you, in great quantities. I am 150% on board with you on that account. Your mind is very clear, and you have a mighty heart.

What really boils my cajone is that these tree huggers are about to demand that lawn mowers be covered with catalytic converters. When this happens, I shall immediately glaze my front yard with 100% concrete, and let the grass really die a serious death. At least I won't be hassled any longer with razing down the grass every two weeks.

Thank you sir. I write off-the-cuff, sometimes it makes sense, sometimes i's jibberish.

Please don't lump me in as being anti-catcon. I think catalytic converters are a brilliant band-aid invention until we can achieve cleaner-burning fuels through technology.

I DO have beef with the whackos who outlawed two-stroke mowers in AZ. My old Lawn-Boy was a pricey investment in the 80's, the BEST money could buy. Since it requires mixed fuel, some wingnut lawmaker decided a sure way to phase them out was to PROHIBIT any shop from working on them. Not being a small engine mechanic, and not willing to run afoul of a (retarded) law, I let the old beast die naturally. It's surely rusting in a landfill, polluting up 12 cubic feet of space.

I'm now installing FAUX GRASS, which won't produce Oxygen, won't prevent erosion, won't provide a habitat for critters, won't harbor helpful bacteria, and won't feed insects. SO THERE, ENVIRO-WANKERS. GOOD JOB. That's your reward for taking my lawnmower away.

[AZhitman]

All he has to do is use CARB approved parts. The reason CARB requires such strict testing to insure that the compliance isn't short lived.

WHY should an agency that knows NOTHING about cars be granted that responsibility? We've ALREADY established that a PIPE will not effect emissions and that it CARB needlessly increases the price of goods.

Think Chinese crap on a car, works today, doesn't tomorrow.

And now that's the responsbility of government in your eyes? To make sure that products LAST?

TRUE leftyism at work.

The free market and Capitalism will solve that problem faster than any government oversight. How many Yugos are still being imported?

[1unar3clipse]

SBD, that's free-market thinking, and the Libs will have NO part of it. They need CONTROL.

Bob's ok with giving up his liberties. I'm not.

+1 for not giving up anymore liberties.

[rn79870]

Ummm, no.

The party of Big Government is the left. Rugged Individualism is a right-wing trait, no matter how much the Libbies try to "adopt" it.

Throwing a new gov't program at a problem is historically a left-handed response.

Now, civil liberties ARE the "protected realm" of the left, but only when those liberties aren't already protected under the Constitution (SSM, for example).

I feel a bit bad giving a PolySci lesson to one of my elders, so please know it's done with the utmost respect to you, Bob.

All right AZ, I'm going to upset your, and probably many other, carts here.Step right up, give it your best shot.

http://madrabbit.net/webrabbit/quizshow.html

You seem confused in your definition of a liberal/conservative. Others here seem even more lost. I'm going to offer all of you a chance to find out a little about yourself. Warning, if you can't handle finding out where you are in the Lib/Con scale, I suggest continuing blindly along. To the others, take this test. (I scored 18 - darn near mid-road)

This puts your liberal classification in the ...

[rn79870]

Thank you sir. I write off-the-cuff, sometimes it makes sense, sometimes it's jibberish.

Oh Crap. 2 against 1. Where is C_Kwik when you need him.

[AZhitman]

As a side note, let's not forget all the pollutants spewed by Crown Vic V8's patrolling CA highways and pulling over "offenders" who've done nothing more heinous than slap a fartcan muffler on their Civic, while said Crown Vic idles on the roadside with the A/C running.... Absurd.

While I'm lobbing this grenade BACK into Bob's foxhole, why is CARB-approval enforcement a LAW ENFORCEMENT matter?

How many manhours of police time are wasted popping hoods and citing ricers? At least those kids are rolling on half the cylinders and emitting half the pollutants of the Crown Vickys patrolling for them!

[AZhitman]

Oh Crap. 2 against 1. Where is C_Kwik when you need him.

Don't concern yourself with Jacko, we kicked his a$$ in another thread. He's not on my team.

[Sentientbydesign]

Jacko should buy a Ford GT, everyone all know that. Two more factory workers keep their job, and one more house fore goes foreclosure.

All he has to do is use CARB approved parts. The reason CARB requires such strict testing to insure that the compliance isn't short lived. Think Chinese crap on a car, works today, doesn't tomorrow.

Why make people wear seatbelts? Think of the money that would be spend on medical expenses/supplies if they didn't. The medical profession would soar, nurses, doctors, physical therapist would have unlimited amounts of disposable income, and BMWs would be in every driveway.

Sentientbydesign, it's not too late. Leave the dark side and join the illuminated.

rn,

Here is the point. That exhaust doesn't need to cost a grand. It's bent stainless steel. As it is we have to pay sales tax and deal with the profit margins of the manufacturer.

Why should CARB get thousands of dollars just to issue a damned sticker?

My scenario also addressed your point regarding crappy parts. The emission testing is annually. Even the chinese parts should last that long.

I think you're taking this debate personally. I'm from Cali too, I enjoy the cleaner air too, I just don't like people (dumb ones at that) telling me what to do.

If you've read my recent threads, you'll see that I'm all for increasing fuel economy and reducing pollution. But my AEM dryflow filter isn't going to make one bit of negative difference and as such, CARB shouldn't govern it.

Simple. Plain. Period.

You're arguing that CARB has improved things, I'm arguing that the good things that they've done have NOTHING to do with regulating mods.

And futhermore, the 44MPG standard is comical. Like I said earlier. Limit the least amount of MPG a vehicle can have. Don't try to create an average so that some people can drive around in Hummers getting 8-10 MPG and others are driving priuses getting 45-50.

By implementing my suggestions, we'd all be able to mod our cars the way we wanted without hurting the environment. We'd also be making the greatest impact on the worst wasters.

It's like this. One of your sprinkler heads got cut off and it's a geyser on your lawn. You also have a few heads that leak a little. You are poor and can't repair it all.

What do you do?

Shut the water off and let the lawn die until you've saved up- Your walking idea.

Let it run until the water bill comes in- The way it was done from the 60s - the 90s.

Spend a buck and plug up that geyser- Hit the diesels and SUV's the hardest and make them better now!

Or fix the leaky sprinklers one by one until you get to the geyser last?- CAFE and CARB's way

There really isn't any room for disagreement in this discussion. We all agree that pollution is a problem. We all agree that increased fuel economy is better. We all agree that Diesels, large trucks, and other mass transport methods are the worst polluters.

So why are we still debating this?

[AZhitman]

All right AZ, I'm going to upset your, and probably many other, carts here.Step right up, give it your best shot.

http://madrabbit.net/webrabbit/quizshow.htmlThis puts your liberal classification in the ...

Not quite sure how, except that I scored a 36.

Kitschy little tool, but irrelevant. I'll take my state university 4 years of PolySci over an outdated novelty survey, thanks.

-5 for that attempt Bob. I still like ya and would buy you a beer.

Incidentally, and quite scary, I took a little poll in USA Today that said my views were most aligned with 2 GOP candidates that are out of the race and *GASP* Hillary Clinton.

I immediately took a long hot shower.

[rn79870]

WHY should an agency that knows NOTHING about cars be granted that responsibility? We've ALREADY established that a PIPE will not effect emissions and that it CARB needlessly increases the price of goods.

Much of the research for CARB was started in the UC system. They do employ people with all those fancy letters following their name too. I think they can even spell engineer, in fact, I think one or two work there.

And now that's the responsbility of government in your eyes? To make sure that products LAST? TRUE leftyism at work.

I didn't say LAST. I said WORK. aka, remain functional for a period of time.

The free market and Capitalism will solve that problem faster than any government oversight. How many Yugos are still being imported?

With GM, do we need Yugos?

We already agreed that Free market capitalism would not have taken a single step towards producing emission efficient vehicles. I've never heard anyone who has bought a new car say "I bought the widget because it produced .02 less CO2 in a 100 mile loop."

[WDRacing]

Bob...

I've spent the last 30-45 minutes reflecting on certain aspects of this thread.

One is that you don't listen. You've been told this by more then one person. I don't mean to say that you're wrong, I mean to say you are close minded 100% of the time. You have not entertained one idea or theory that goes against a system that is already in place. A system that none of us are arguing is wholly bad, just aspects of it need to be changed. Yet you have this odd stance behind a paranoid ideal that to change any aspect of this program known as CARB is the same thing as abolishing it all together. When we suggest changing something, you get these horrible flash backs of your youth when your eyes were on fire and everyone in the entire state had to have supplemental O2 just to suvive.

What that means is that you completely lack any type of creativity and have no ability to think for yourself. You are perfectly happy resiting the same thing over and over again. Even if those things you're resiting have nothing to do with what we're trying to convey.

You are stubborn to the 10th power man...

I've explained things to a degree that a 16 yr old that has just recieved his license can understand fully and see the benefits of. Yet you can't possibly fathom that any other opinion other then your own could hold anything other then contempt.

You keep saying that CARB has to have these certifications because of chinese parts. Are you now an expert on everything imported from China? Is everything imported from China a bad thing? As soon as someone installs a certain part the emissions are going to so severly pollute the world that your eyes may once again burn...or perhaps your lungs will immediatly combust. Even though I laid out in no uncertain terms exactly how this could be avoided all the while keeping CARB in the loop to monitor and set the standard for everyone to adhere to. No no...its change therefore its bad right Bob?

You are so backwards in your thinking that you don't even realize how Liberal you are. Or have atleast how Liberal you've become do to your narrow mind set.

I've asked you specificly to entertain a few basic idea's, yet you have not attempted to answer even one with anything that you came up with on your own. Instead you sidestep anything and everything I've said with some link that doesn't even marginally come close to what I was talking about. It's almost like you are mocking me on purpose by acting like you don't understand what I'm saying.

You keep making these references that we're proving your point when in fact we are doing nothing of the sort. I know this to be fact because 4 people have now said basically the same exact thing in different words.

Are you doing this just to further debate? Are you really unable to understand the things I've said? Do you really believe that what we're saying is that we should go back to the way things used to be and just have no auto emissions control what-so-ever? Because that's not what we're saying at all.

We are standing up against a system that needs to be reformed. Not done away with. But I think that concept is to much for you to grasp.

When will you consider that when more then one person is saying the exact same thing over and over again, you may indeed be backing the wrong horse?

When more then one person has an idea, perhaps that idea is worth listening to if not examining on a level more the total denial.

WD

[AZhitman]

Much of the research for CARB was started in the UC system. They do employ people with all those fancy letters following their name too. I think they can even spell engineer, in fact, I think one or two work there.

Well-said, but not my point. I sit next to two MBA's wo I wouldn't trust to do my taxes.

My point is that CARB should have NO jurisdiction over inconsequential bolt-ons.

I didn't say LAST. I said WORK. aka, remain functional for a period of time.

That's the same as lasting.

Ford claims to have the longest-lasting trucks on the road. i.e. the trucks that remain functional for a period of time.

"My Ford didn't last very long so I bought a Nissan."

"My Nissan is likely to remain functional for a [LONG] period of time."

With GM, do we need Yugos?

Good on ya, Mate.

We already agreed that Free market capitalism would not have taken a single step towards producing emission efficient vehicles.

I've never heard anyone who has bought a new car say "I bought the widget because it produced .02 less CO2 in a 100 mile loop."

Again, not my point at all. Re-read what I wrote... People will quit buying an inferior product, WITHOUT government intervention, if it fails to LAST (or "work").

And yes, some douches buy ENTIRE CARS based on their emissions alone. I sit next to an annoying Insight owner who thinks she's got a free pass to Heaven for that $24K expenditure alone.

[audtatious]

All right AZ, I'm going to upset your, and probably many other, carts here.Step right up, give it your best shot.

http://madrabbit.net/webrabbit/quizshow.html

You seem confused in your definition of a liberal/conservative. Others here seem even more lost. I'm going to offer all of you a chance to find out a little about yourself. Warning, if you can't handle finding out where you are in the Lib/Con scale, I suggest continuing blindly along. To the others, take this test. (I scored 18 - darn near mid-road)

This puts your liberal classification in the ...

I scored a 27 which put me exactly where I expected to be. A moderate republican. Nothing surprising to me at all altho a number of the questions were crap and did not have any answer that I really approved of.

[rn79870]

While I'm lobbing this grenade BACK into Bob's foxhole, why is CARB-approval enforcement a LAW ENFORCEMENT matter?

How many manhours of police time are wasted popping hoods and citing ricers? At least those kids are rolling on half the cylinders and emitting half the pollutants of the Crown Vickys patrolling for them!

I dunno? And I'm not in the foxhole, I'm the tower, look, up here...

[AZhitman]

I dunno? And I'm not in the foxhole, I'm the tower, look, up here...

The libbies never are, are they?



OK, that was a low blow. I kid, Bob.

For all I know, you're a decorated veteran.

Incidentally, a few tidbits on "small government", just to support my point:

A quarter century after the Reagan revolution and a dozen years after Republicans vaulted into control of Congress, a new CNN poll finds most Americans still agree with the bedrock conservative premise that, as the Gipper put it, "government is not the answer to our problems -- government is the problem."

"Conservatives came to office to reduce the size of government and enlarge the sphere of free and private initiative," said Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona. "But lately, we have increased government in order to stay in office."

FROM the Wall Street Journal:"As the party of smaller government, Republicans will always have a more difficult job governing than Democrats do. "

Granted, I'm disenchanted with the Right's adherence to this tradition of late, which is why I'm an Independent.

[justjuiceit4]

I'd like to revisit a comment you made earlier, and provide a counterpoint.

However, one of my favorite authors, Csaba Csere, does so FAR more eloquently than I could.

The free market has, historically, demanded higher-MPG cars:

http://www.caranddriver.com/fe...olumn

I actually interviewed Csaba one year at the Detroit Auto Show. Theguy is a total pompoust @ss. He makes an idiotic statement in that article "one wonders why the Honda Insight, the highest-mileage car ever sold in America, was discontinued for lack of demand a year ago. "

The Honda insight originally only came with a manual transmission and was a 2-seater. Those two factors killed a ton of potential buyers. During my extensive test drive I was only getting 23 mpg and felt like I was in a sardine can! Even with conservative driving, those EPA numbers were very difficult to achieve if you drove like a normal human being (drive over 55mph, use the air conditioning when its 100 degrees outside, etc.) Also, when these hybrids first came out (not sure if now), Honda was taking a loss for each one sold.

The Toyota Prius is automatic, can hold more than 2 people, gets 34 mpg with aggresive driving and feels like a real car. Honda stopped selling them because they probably were not making a profit off of them, they did not get the mileage claimed and the Prius is a much better vehicle.

[AZhitman]

He was being facetious, not asking "Why."

After all, if life were just about saving money, we would all dress in Wal-Mart jeans, eat Swanson frozen dinners, and live in trailers. If fuel economy were such a big concern for today’s vehicle buyers, one wonders why the Honda Insight, the highest-mileage car ever sold in America, was discontinued for lack of demand a year ago.

[audtatious]

Greg, does CARB actually consider CO2 to be a pollutant?