[Nixon]

Originally Posted by Tijuana

Without an emissions tax in the US (which would fly about as well as an ACME anvil in a Warner Brothers cartoon)

Thanks for the nod of support.

A tax/fee based on car emissions would be shot down by Democrats for being a regressive tax that harms the poor disproportionately to the rich, and shot down by Republicans for being anti-business because it punishes businesses that require larger vehicles with higher emissions.

It would take some serious mad political manuvering to turn the US into a free market where everyone took personal financial responsibility for their share of the pollution damage their cars produced.

[mikeo]

Very interesting points of view being expressed here and a good read.

[Big Red One]

Originally Posted by Nixon

I find it interesting that you dismissed my statements about there being no free market for EMISSIONS STANDARDS and changing the topic to other car features like anti-lock brakes. I didn't claim there was a monopoly on all car features. Please explain how there can be a free market for EMISSIONS when 21 companies form a cartel and launch a lawsuit for the purpose of keeping the same existing emissions standard in place for all 21 companies?

I'm tempted to just post this point. Because the whole rest of your post about free markets falls flat on it's face, until you can explain how 21 car companies banding together and suing to keep the same emissions standard fits in a free market system.

My apologies. I only had time to read and reply to the original post. I didn't see anything in that post about a free market for emissions. I wasn't ignoring anything; just didn't see the discussion you're referring to. I wasn't changing the subject by mentioning ABS. I was using those other features to illustrate my point that when consumers vote with their dollars, manufacturers provide what they want -so much so that eventually those consumer desires that were once extra cost options eventually become standard on even low cost models.

Firstly, I don't think you can categorize the law suite as a "cartel". A cartel is an organization of companies that control the entire supply half of the market equation. That is hardly the case in this situation. They are simply working together for a common good in a LEGAL issue. It's not at all uncommon. Class action lawsuits by consumers fit perfectly in the free market, I see no reason why a class action lawsuit by suppliers can't, either. It's not like those 21 companies got together for the purpose of setting their own standards, fixing prices or colluding on supply.

As for your question about whether of not there is a free market for emissions, I would say I'm not sure. There doesn't seem to be a free flow of easily accessible information for consumers. There aren't multiple product offerings from which consumers can choose. So rather than use legislation to further restrict the possibility of a free market, why not use legislation to CREATE a free market? Why not require that all car manufacturers measure and post the annual emissions volume for each vehicle they sell? As a free market proponent, this is much more appealing to me. Similar to the way the FDA required that food manufacturers provide nutrition information on labels. This gives consumers the free flow of information they need in order to discriminate between manufacturers and vote with their dollars. And it doesn't artificially restrict choice the way New York's ridiculous ban on trans fats does.

There's just something that doesn't seem to jive here about your original statement; something that seems like a non sequiter. On the one hand, you indicate that reduced emissions are the will of the majority. Yet, on the other hand you imply that the majority are too ill-informed or too apathetic to make appropriate decisions with regard to emissions. If reduced emissions are truly the will of the people, that implies to me that they care about the issue and want something done about it. Is it too much of a stretch to think that if they care about it that much, they are prepared to do something about it personally, rather than leave it to the government? I just don't understand how the majority of people can be knowledgeable enough to care about emissions so passionately on one hand, yet "(not) see the pollution they personally are causing." I would think that if it's really an issue that they have a "will" about, they are prepared to PERSONALLY do something about it - IF they're given a free market opportunity.

I'm of the opinion that informed consumers who discriminate strongly with regard to the features that are most important to them are the best motivators of innovation and advancement. On the other hand, I believe that often times regulations serve to artificially restrict innovation, as companies will often work only to reach the minimum acceptable levels set by the regulation and no more.

So, instead of keeping environmental concerns as the sole purview of the government (which I'm not sure I believe anyway - why would Toyota be selling all those Priuses if individual consumers were abstracted from the cause of emissions?), let's empower the consumers to reward or punish companies that perform to their environmental standards. Let's give consumers easy access to environmental information. Once they start buying ULEVs from Honda by the droves, BMW will get their act together quickly.

[Big Red One]

Originally Posted by Nixon

A tax/fee based on car emissions would be shot down by Democrats for being a regressive tax that harms the poor disproportionately to the rich,

Didn't stop them from advocating punitive tobacco and gasoline taxes, which are both quite regressive.

[Big Red One]

Originally Posted by Tijuana

Without an emissions tax in the US (which would fly about as well as an ACME anvil in a Warner Brothers cartoon), individual consumers cannot be counted on the make the right decisions for the future of the environment.

Then that tells me this is not truly an issue that falls under the "will of the majority".

[Tijuana]

Originally Posted by Big Red One

Then that tells me this is not truly an issue that falls under the "will of the majority".

No, but that doesn't make it any less important.

[321]

Nixon you are my Hero! Thanks for posting and then some.... so i don't have to.

[335i=:)]

Ok, fine. I won't buy a catless Turbo back exhaust, but I will use a testpipe with race cats on the catback,

[321]

Originally Posted by 335ito135i

Ok, fine. I won't buy a catless Turbo back exhaust, but I will use a testpipe with race cats on the catback,