Once again, CA thinks it's special...

[AZhitman]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2013 ... z2QhP9yHjV

Broke state. A failed emissions regulation system. Roads that look like downtown Baghdad. And this blowhard woman thinks she's going to tell manufacturers what to do?

Who the hell appoints these nutcases?

p.s. I've got an idea to reduce emissions in CA: Do something about the damned traffic. You people couldn't build a logical freeway interchange if you tried.

[NolimitZ32]

absolutely ridiculous

[Jesda]

Years ago Governor Gray Beavis boasted at a freeway ribbon cutting that it was the last road that California would ever build.

Yeesh.

[themadscientist]

Let the rule pass then announce the cap on sellable non-ZEV vehicles based on the ratio and let the market go to town driving prices up on the artificially-constrained supply. Californians will pay more and if they want to know why I would post this lady's face and contact information prominently in the showroom. Meanwhile, set up dealerships in neighboring states right on the border.

[Hijacker]

Knowing that she's the chair for CARB, it's pretty transparent her issue is that she wants more CARB stamps on ZEV, while the lobbyists are trying to lighten the workload on the automakers who are still trying to meet CAFE standards, let alone the stricter CARB standards. It's all about the Benjimans in the end. She wants more money coming in through CARB certs.

[WDRacing]

CA is special alright...

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

f*** hate this state ...

[300ZXttZMAN]

Wow, just wow.

[MinisterofDOOM]

When I take over, California is getting cut off. They will become the Republik of Shut Up and Go Away and will get no Imperial or Federal support. Good luck suffering through your own stupid without help from the rest of humanity, scumbags!

[Looneybomber]

And L.A. used to have a pretty decent public rail system decades ago until they tore up the tracks. Retrofitting for a subway and surface rails unfortunately costs a bazillion dollars. Maybe if CA wasn't so poor, they could fix their own state instead of trying to have others share in their problems.

[AZhitman]

Tuesday, I had the misfortune of having to fly into LAX and drive back to Phoenix. At 3pm, I left Santa Monica. I was stuck in traffic for the next THREE hours before I was able to exceed 30mph. Despite staying at or above 90 the whole way home, it was still 11 pm before I arrived.

Driving on the 405 freeway is a special kind of hell, designed and built by orangutans with epilepsy.

No civilized society would willingly build such a pathetic excuse for a roadway.

[Bubba1]

Tuesday, I had the misfortune of having to fly into LAX and drive back to Phoenix. At 3pm, I left Santa Monica. I was stuck in traffic for the next THREE hours before I was able to exceed 30mph. Despite staying at or above 90 the whole way home, it was still 11 pm before I arrived.

Driving on the 405 freeway is a special kind of hell, designed and built by orangutans with epilepsy.

No civilized society would willingly build such a pathetic excuse for a roadway.

I can't imagine when the engineers designed the 405 almost 60(?) years ago that they anticipated that traffic volume would explode the way it has. This ain't a problem that began last week. But add in that Californian mindset that their mass transit system is for everyone else but them, and there' a classic traffic clusterfark.

[Looneybomber]

Are these roads freeways or interstates? I think they should install toll booths and charge $X to use these super busy roads. At peak travel times, charge more. This will deter some folks from using the highway and thus decrease traffic. This may encourage more to use mass transit and also build more public transportation infrastructure.

[Ace2cool]

To hell with that idea. The traffic is bad enough already.

[themadscientist]

Taxation to steer behavior, classic leftist tactic.

[Bubba1]

Taxation to steer behavior, classic leftist tactic.

Since appears most of the solutions require money that the state doesn't have, from where do you realistically propose getting the money to fix it?

[mechanicalmoron]

It's totally understandable that a state would want as little emissions as possible, and it's totally understandable that buying something that makes a lot of emissions, just for s*** and grins, would cost more.

But that doesn't make me hate california any less.

Maybe if the auto industry could organize a boycott of CARB.... nobody make ANY california vehicles, until they at least appoint a less infuriatingly smug looking chairperson.

I must say, my solution to california would be really serious taxes, to make the state solvent. They have lots of money, the state needs lots of money.... all the rich people use their infrastructure, tax them for it.

And mass-transit that actually works.

[themadscientist]

Taxation to steer behavior, classic leftist tactic.

Since appears most of the solutions require money that the state doesn't have, from where do you realistically propose getting the money to fix it?

Taxation based on use is legitimate as long as it truly funds improvements, but that was not the spirit of his idea. It was punitive, meant to steer users away as much, possibly more than contributing to the upkeep of the structure used. Compare it to vice taxes like cigarettes. If you are paying higher insurance premiums because your behavior makes you riskier to insure, fine. If, however, the government is heaping taxes on the product purely to discourage your purchase and punish you for your behavior, that's BS.

If the toll is based on a consistent use table like point to point scales and load charts that objectively charge you for use, fine. If the rates are manipulated to discourage use outright through punitive rate hikes then you start down the behavior modification road and you lose my support.

[Looneybomber]

The higher the demand, the higher the price. If it's too expensive for some, then they can take public transportation or surface streets. Either way, revenue will be generated and there will be less traffic jams, and less cars on the road, so less exhaust.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G7ViTTuwno

[mechanicalmoron]

Taxation based on use is legitimate as long as it truly funds improvements, but that was not the spirit of his idea. It was punitive, meant to steer users away as much, possibly more than contributing to the upkeep of the structure used. Compare it to vice taxes like cigarettes. If you are paying higher insurance premiums because your behavior makes you riskier to insure, fine. If, however, the government is heaping taxes on the product purely to discourage your purchase and punish you for your behavior, that's BS.

If the toll is based on a consistent use table like point to point scales and load charts that objectively charge you for use, fine. If the rates are manipulated to discourage use outright through punitive rate hikes then you start down the behavior modification road and you lose my support.

Well, that makes it entirely reasonable to tax people on the purchase of vehicles that pollute the state that all of them have to live in....

I think the main problem is CARB and how pretentious they are. "for the betterment of your whole industry, just agree with anything we say, with no examination or review".

[themadscientist]

No.

[AZhitman]

I think the main problem is CARB and how pretentious they are. "for the betterment of your whole industry, just agree with anything we say, with no examination or review".

Yep.

I'd like to get that gasbag alone in a room and pummel her with questions, on tape.

I've said it time and time again - CA law on emissions has NO TEETH when you can pay Homey down at the corner garage $200 and get a clean emissions pass for your smoke-puking hoopty. It's a joke.

[themadscientist]

I used to hand the keys over to the inspector and say "there's a case of beer in the trunk, or maybe there isn't."

Always passed.

I've had my 180 pass inspection when it didn't even have an engine in it....

Talk about a zero emission vehicle!

[s0m3th1ngAZ]

Imperial or Federal support

Question...define the difference between Imperial and Federal support.

[MinisterofDOOM]

Imperial or Federal support

Question...define the difference between Imperial and Federal support.

Imperial is Universal (at least as far as Humanity...I claim no sovereignty over other sentient races that might be out there).
Federal is US only.
Like Fed vs State. Local governments are always necessary. My Empire will be an entity of oversight: empower and reign in the national governments so that they can maintain their cultural/geographical identities without the need for meticulous meddling from the Emperor. Which is EXACTLY what our FEDERAL government is supposed to do when stupid bullcrap like this happens in individual states. Allowing California to operate on separate rules from the rest of the Nation back in the 1970s was a very bad decision that set a very bad precedent and is responsible for a HUGE number of immensely expensive problems that impair the effective operation of our auto industry (and many others in connection) today. Why have a standardized national system if you're just going to allow states to opt out as desired? Stupid, inefficient, and with HUGE far-reaching consequences (which, of course, idiot idealist dipoars like our Mary Nichols here are entirely incapable of comprehending OR caring about).

FWIW, The US is already technically an empire. We have Federal, state, county, city. 200 years ago this would have been interpreted much differently...a number of NATIONS aligned under an Imperial flag with county and city governments beneath them.

I think the thing that pisses me off about this s*** more than anything is that there are REAL problems out there in need of REAL solutions, but instead the people with power are sitting behind desks scowling dramatically and feeling important while handing down silly laws about s*** that doesn't matter.

Imagine reading a history book in 3000 years and wondering why on earth Humans of the 21st century had so much trouble with basic stuff that no one even remembers...

Our leaders are so short-sighted it's painful.