TDI mileage

LOL, I like that.

Well the DOT could probaly make the the states DMVs refuse to register the cars that werent certified “fixed”(dont like that word certified-reminds me of the election fiasco,when “the fox was in the henhouse” “certifying votes”.(ever notice how similar the two major parties have become?)

DOT doesn’t have that kind of authority over the states.

@the same mountainbike
"DOT doesn’t have that kind of authority over the states."

We Are Awash In A Sea Of Government Regulations, Actually Drowning In Them. Government Over-Reach Has Exceeded My Wildest Nightmare.

Actually @insightful that’s pretty much the way its done. All the smartest people are gathered at the various agencies in DC to decide what laws need to be passed on for the betterment of the little ignorant common people. Then they draft their proposed laws and find some sponsors to get it passed through Congress. Then once that is done they are free to come up with the rules necessary to implement those laws. That’s where it gets really nasty and draconian. That’s why all we’ll see is souped up 4 cylinder engines or electric motors or hybrids in our future and the coal fields shut down for the good of the earth according to them. So much for a free society. I just wish some of these “smartest” people came from other than ivy league backgrounds.

Well the DOT could probaly make the the states DMVs refuse to register the cars that werent certified "fixed"
Remember that registrations are on the STATE level. MY state (Commonwealth, actually) is in the process of SUING the EPA over CO2 caps. It's by no means a forgone conclusion that all the states play ball...
All the smartest people are gathered at the various agencies in DC...

Bwahahaha…uh, you weren’t serious, were you?

Well they think they are. Just ask them.

Stay away from bureaucracies if possible(the only thing worse then an hierarchy)

I don’t think the answer is complete market freedom nor do I think the answer is total government control. VW demonstrated here how corporate interests trump all other concerns, legal or otherwise. I think that corporations should have some freedom but that government oversight is needed or they will run wild over consumer interests. Remember that we ultimately elect government so that is OUR control. We have ZERO control over corporations, and don’t give me that “we vote with our dollars” nonsense. That’s not voting.

Coming back to the topic of the post, I think buying a VW now sets a bad example. “Bad dog, bad dog. Here’s a treat.” Besides, VW cars are not very reliable and have terrible resale value.

Remember that we ultimately elect government so that is OUR control.

But we still rarely know just what we are electing. What a politician says before being elected and what they do after the election are usually quite different. IMHO any career politician and any one who wants to be one, are nothing but self serving leaches. Term limits for every elected office is a necessity.

Ironically, VW took out a full page ad this week that read “You’ve always trusted VW; we will ensure you can still trust us”. Whatever that meant. It’s part of the $16 billion damage control budget, no doubt.

This self-serving gobbledegook assumed that the population at large trusted VW already. That may be true for Germany, Mexico and Brazil, but not true for the rest of the world.

The last time I trusted VW was in the 60s when the beetle was a good car compared with the rest of the compact European cars.

PvtPublic, what you write is accurate in terms of overall policy, although we too often get “snowed” there too, but the actual process of regulation is somewhat more complicated.

The Constitution gives the lawmaking authority largely to the houses of congress, with veto power in the executive office and veto-override power to the houses of congress, and the responsibility for enforcing the laws strictly to the executive branch. The executive branch enforces the laws through the formation of regulatory agencies, the function of which is to create regulations and enforcement protocols to ensure compliance with the laws. The regulations then take on the force of law.

IMHO the system is currently badly broken. The bodies of congress are run largely by lobbies, who actually buy legislation to support their employers’ causes from a private business that writes laws. The laws are then “tailored” to meet the need and the lobbyists try to get the legislators to support them. The houses of congress are largely no longer responsive to the wants of the people who elect them. We also have an executive branch right now who shows an appalling disregard for laws protecting personal freedoms, and a supreme court only a few of which seem loyal to the Bill of Rights. They often seem ready to twist the English language as much as needed to support the needs of the current executive branch. Read Justice Antonin Scalia’s written dissent of the decision that Obamacare was constitutional.

These problems apply to vehicle federal regulations as much as to any others. And they directly affect everyone who owns a car every single day. It’s been estimated that approximately $5,000 of the cost of a new car is for regulatory compliance. And automobile designers spend a great deal of their resources working on how to meet ever-more-stringent federal regulations rather than improving technology. When something truly new comes along, like the Tesla technology, automotive manufacturers now use the legislative avenues to try to kill it… as they have been doing in attempting at the state levels to have laws passed protecting the badly bloated “franchise” business model. Fortunately, they’ve had only mixed success.

I vote, and I do believe that sets the over principles on which the regulatory agencies operate as well as the not-to-be-underrated foreign policy, but I no longer believe that who I vote for has the influence over those regulations running our day-to-day lives that it once had.

While I largely agree with you, no domestic car manufacturer is getting a tax break for buying their cars like Tesla is. So maybe its a matter of trying to keep the playing field level instead of an undue advantage to one. The other issue is that I believe franchise/dealership law is state law and up to each state, not the feds. Not having a dealership is a distinct disadvantage to the public. Buying cars on line is a little different than buying a computer. IMHO.

I agree that lobbyists do influence law makers but that’s their job to promote their view and thank heavens some have been there for us. On the other hand the “invisible hand” in all this is the behind the scenes paid employees and the appointed unqualified agency heads promoting their particular political agenda and lifetime world view. Do not for a minute believe there aren’t some that would like to see cars as we know them off the highways and all of us on trains and buses that they regulate. For example, no one read the 10,000 page ACA legislation before it was voted on except the staff and hired consultants. Same thing in other legislation. So be grateful one lobbyist is countering what another lobbyist is pushing.

Back to the issue, it may be a very good time to buy a VW. Never thought I would consider that but keep the incentives coming.

"as they have been doing in attempting at the state levels to have laws passed protecting the badly bloated “franchise” business model."
Yup, it’s state regulated.

You might ultimately be right that not having a franchise is a disadvantage to consumers… but let’s let the marketplace decide.

Re: the ACA, nobody was given time to absorb the 10,000 pages, which it has now been disclosed (by one of its key architects) was intentionally made as complicated as possible to prevent its weaknesses from being disclosed. I just thank God that legislation has been since passed to close the “escape corridors”, which would have used our tax money to insure against losses (guarantee profits) to participating healthcare companies. In total disproval of the cost-reduction claims made by the administration, recent news reports are that the largest healthcare insurer participating in the system may be discontinuing participation because it’s so highly unprofitable and they can no longer use tax dollars to guarantee profitability.