Comments on: Coping With The New CAFÉ Standards http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2008/01/07/coping-with-the-new-cafe-standards/ Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics Wed, 10 Mar 2010 03:17:24 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: GriffithLea http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2008/01/07/coping-with-the-new-cafe-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-68201 GriffithLea Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:39:01 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2008/01/05/coping-with-the-new-cafe-standards/#comment-68201 It sounds like there are three mileage ratings: CAFE, EPA (window sticker figures), and actual mileage. EPA and actual mileage seem to be converging somewhat over time (EPA used to be higher, too, when it was more closely aligned with CAFE), while CAFE figures are still much higher than actual. I'm not surprised that Jack missed this point, as I would probably have done myself - CAFE is a regulation or law, and if it's called a law it would generally be adhered to, one would think - though perhaps in the future a little more research before posting would be a good thing. :) It occurs to me that this increase in the CAFE amounts to a hidden tax increase. People want big cars and good fuel economy, but since they can't have both, they choose size over economy, most likely because it's safer. So, in order to sell cars, automakers must make the larger cars that people want, bust the CAFE regulation, and in doing so they incur fines, and that cost can only be passed on to the consumer. Result - effectively a tax increase. It sounds like there are three mileage ratings: CAFE, EPA (window sticker figures), and actual mileage. EPA and actual mileage seem to be converging somewhat over time (EPA used to be higher, too, when it was more closely aligned with CAFE), while CAFE figures are still much higher than actual.

I'm not surprised that Jack missed this point, as I would probably have done myself – CAFE is a regulation or law, and if it's called a law it would generally be adhered to, one would think – though perhaps in the future a little more research before posting would be a good thing. :)

It occurs to me that this increase in the CAFE amounts to a hidden tax increase. People want big cars and good fuel economy, but since they can't have both, they choose size over economy, most likely because it's safer. So, in order to sell cars, automakers must make the larger cars that people want, bust the CAFE regulation, and in doing so they incur fines, and that cost can only be passed on to the consumer. Result – effectively a tax increase.

]]> By: 210delray http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2008/01/07/coping-with-the-new-cafe-standards/comment-page-1/#comment-68093 210delray Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:43:56 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2008/01/05/coping-with-the-new-cafe-standards/#comment-68093 A basic fact that you need to know is that the CAFE mpg requirements do NOT align with the mpg figures on new car window stickers. The latter have been downrated twice, once in the 1985 model year and again in 2008. This means the 35 mpg CAFE translates to an average (city/highway combined) of only about 26 mpg as listed on the stickers. So, the increase is nowhere near as draconian as you're making it out to be. For more on this see http://blogs.edmunds.com/.eea1691 A basic fact that you need to know is that the CAFE mpg requirements do NOT align with the mpg figures on new car window stickers. The latter have been downrated twice, once in the 1985 model year and again in 2008. This means the 35 mpg CAFE translates to an average (city/highway combined) of only about 26 mpg as listed on the stickers. So, the increase is nowhere near as draconian as you're making it out to be.

For more on this see http://blogs.edmunds.com/.eea1691

]]>