" I would argue that it seems that you would rather use ad hominem attacks rather than any logical arguments."
Uh, you started with the illogical, factless, and ridiculous statement in post #8 "We could cut our consumption in half by raising fuel efficiency standards. That is a good place to start."
No, we couldn't. That is a false claim. You have nothing to base that on other than your hopes.
In fact, even a hybrid advocate said that if were replaced the vehicles on the road with hybrids, we could reduce usage by 15% Not 50. And that assumes that hybrids get the mileage they claim, which most times, they do not.
Other studies have shown that if every SUV was replaced with a hybrid,the savings would last no more than a couple of years, before increased demand raised usage to above the previous levels.
Again, when you argue for government control of standards, you are NOT a conservative. So don't even bother to put yourself off as one. People will chose their cars according to their needs,and they will adjust their usage accordingly.
BTW, in your quuest for feeling good about yourself, you apparently don't give a damn that raising CAFE Standards cost lives:
Fuel Efficiency Regulations Cost Lives and Money
by Mary Katherine Ascik
That new car you just bought may be a threat to your health - and even your life - thanks to Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. These federal rules are responsible for thousands of needless deaths and injuries. Not only that, CAFE standards make it difficult for many Americans to afford safe cars.
The CAFE program was established by Congress in 1975. Current CAFE standards require motor vehicle manufacturers' fleets of cars to average 27.5 miles per gallon of gasoline and their fleets of light trucks (which include minivans and SUVs) to average 20.7 miles per gallon.1 The only affordable way for automakers to meet these standards is to reduce the mass and weight of their vehicles.2
This reduction has had deadly consequences. According to a study by the National Research Council (NRC), reductions in vehicle mass and weight necessary to meet CAFE standards increase the risk of death or serious injury in crashes. The NRC study found that vehicle downsizing and downweighting resulted in between 1,300 and 2,600 deaths and between 13,000 and 26,000 serious injuries in 1993 alone.3 A USA Today report, using data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, estimated that 46,000 people - nearly as many Americans as lost their lives in the Vietnam War - have died since 1975 as a result of the vehicle downsizing and downweighting due to CAFE standards.4
CAFE standards have also been responsible for several hundred thousand injuries. African-Americans should be particularly concerned about these dangers because motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for black children.5
CAFE standards also make it harder for people to purchase cars. To meet fuel efficiency requirements, automakers must sell a certain number of small (read: fuel efficient) cars. But to induce consumers to purchase these small cars, automakers must sell them at little more than their production cost.6 To recover the profits lost through the sale of these small cars, automakers must raise the prices of larger cars and light trucks. In short, according to environmental policy expert Charli Coon of The Heritage Foundation, "CAFE standards act as a tax on larger, safer cars that is used in turn to subsidize sales of smaller, less safe cars that get more miles per gallon."7
This de facto tax on larger cars and light trucks essentially discriminates against people who have lower incomes, larger families, need a larger vehicle or just want to own a safer car. African-Americans are particularly affected, since their incomes tend to be lower than those of whites.8
CAFE standards make today's small cars smaller than ever, making them more dangerous than when the CAFE program was established in 1975.9 Since smaller cars are more dangerous, collision insurance for small cars is now more expensive than for larger cars and light trucks. Small, cheap cars also depreciate more quickly and can be easily damaged even in minor accidents.10
In the 27 years since they were established, CAFE standards have not only taken a toll on consumers' lives, health and wallets; they have also failed to accomplish the goals for which they were created - reducing U.S. gasoline consumption and dependence on foreign oil. Since CAFE standards were established in 1975, oil imports have increased from approximately 35 percent of supply to 52 percent.11 Although fuel efficiency has improved, this improvement has encouraged people to drive more. Hence, CAFE has had little success in reducing overall fuel usage.12
CAFE is a failed government program that has had deadly and costly consequences for thousands of Americans, and it places those with lower incomes at particular risk. It's time to repeal CAFE standards and put safety first.
You want logical arguments? Here's a hint: They start with the use of facts, not feelings. All you've provided is feelings. I've got enough facts to prove you wrong all day long.
"Again, when you argue for government control of standards, you are NOT a conservative. So don't even bother to put yourself off as one."
NEWS FLASH: Almost everything around you is regulated, from the electrical cord on your computer to the carpet in your house. CARS ARE ALREADY REGULTED. Are you proposing to lift all regulations off of everything?
"Uh, you started with the illogical, factless, and ridiculous statement in post #8 "We could cut our consumption in half by raising fuel efficiency standards. That is a good place to start."
No, we couldn't. That is a false claim. You have nothing to base that on other than your hopes."
If cars get twice the gas mileage and everything stays the same, we will cut consumption in half. What is illogical about that simple fact. That is as basic of logic as one could ask for.