Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers

G

Gerald G. McGeorge

Guest

• Nov 5, 2003

• #1,081

> 1976. and the required MPG level didn't reach critical levels until the
mid 1980s. <

Right, and to achieve this result mfrs had to "downsize" all their cars.
However this put drivers at much elevated risk of death & serious injury,
even the Clinton-era NHTSA reported findings that concluded the forced
downsizing resulted in the unnecessary deaths of nearly 20,000 people. They
concluded the increases in milage achieved by weight reduction could have
been easily achieved through powertrain management systems that by the time
of thewir report, 2000, were already in production. You cn stick the entire
fiasco on the backs of liberals like Hopward Metzenbaum of Ohio (who gave
us the 55 mph speed limit... remember THAT fiasco?) and that @$$#01e Joan
Claybrook.

>
>

 

B

Brent P

Guest

• Nov 5, 2003

• #1,082

In article <[email protected]>, The Ancient One wrote:
>
> "Gerald G. McGeorge" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> > You forget, it's the source and location of the CO2 that matters in the
>> political arguement. Not that it simply takes from a carbon sink and
>> releases CO2 to the atmosphere. A forest fire produces good CO2. An
>> automobile in the USA produces bad CO2. A factory in China produces good
>> CO2. A factory in the USA produces bad CO2. A tractor on a farm in the USA
>> > produces bad CO2. A coal fired electric plant in china produces good
> CO2.
>> And on and on.
>>
>> BrentP nails the issue once again!
>
> He seems to have a knack for it, glad I'm not arguing against him.

Thanks

But I have to admit, this is the product of experience. First,
Dr. Parker has been around the auto groups longer than I can
remember so that's old hat. Secondly, I spent a trial by fire in
politics er sci.environment where I learned the hard way how
left-wingers masquading as environmentalists work. I had been
naive and thought it was science group.

 

B

Brent P

Guest

• Nov 5, 2003

• #1,083

In article <[email protected]>, Gerald G. McGeorge wrote:
>> 1976. and the required MPG level didn't reach critical levels until the
> mid 1980s. <
>
> Right, and to achieve this result mfrs had to "downsize" all their cars.
> However this put drivers at much elevated risk of death & serious injury,
> even the Clinton-era NHTSA reported findings that concluded the forced
> downsizing resulted in the unnecessary deaths of nearly 20,000 people. They
> concluded the increases in milage achieved by weight reduction could have
> been easily achieved through powertrain management systems that by the time
> of thewir report, 2000, were already in production. You cn stick the entire
> fiasco on the backs of liberals like Hopward Metzenbaum of Ohio (who gave
> us the 55 mph speed limit... remember THAT fiasco?) and that @$$#01e Joan
> Claybrook.

Know it well, I did not know the same people were responsible for CAFE.
But it figures. It's the same sort of half-assed job without thinking
it through. One of these days I should estimate how much extra fuel
is burned due to CAFE by calculating what could be saved using large
passenger cars instead (assuming a 15% market slice for light trucks as
it was before CAFE of course). hmmm....

I've stated it before though, emissions regs required better control
systems and better control systems lead to better fuel economy. A
simplification of course, as in some areas emissions and fuel economy
can conflict. (lean burn, NOx, etc...)

 

K

Kingbarry2000

Guest

• Nov 5, 2003

• #1,084

"Lloyd Parker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "C. E. White" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Jonesy wrote:
> >
> >> "Gerald G. McGeorge" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> >> > Or, an idealist who gets his first pay check and realizes he's just
spent
> >> > 50% of his time working for the Government.
> >>
> >> Yet another right-wing lie.
> >>
> >> No beginning worker spends even half that amount to The Government.
> >
> >In defense of Gerald, it dpends on your loaction and the starting pay.
I'd
> guess some engineers in high
> >tax staes could be approaching 50% when you include Social Security (both
> sides, not just "your half") and
>
> Then let's include the employer's property taxes and utility bills.
>
> >state and city taxes. And if you include all the taxes you pay, both
direct
> annd indirect, I'd guess a lot
> >of people pay more than 50% of their income to various governments.
>
> Gee, if you right-wingers include everything anybody pays as YOUR taxes, I
bet
> you could get up over 100%!
>
> >
> >Ed
> >

Its actually 101% when you include the death taxes.

--
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane
mittam.

 

G

Gerald G. McGeorge

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,085

> But I have to admit, this is the product of experience. First,
> Dr. Parker has been around the auto groups longer than I can
> remember so that's old hat. Secondly, I spent a trial by fire in
> politics er sci.environment where I learned the hard way how
> left-wingers masquading as environmentalists work. I had been naive and
thought it was science group.>

Never confuse environmentalists with science, they have repeatedly proven
themselves to be radical Socialists in green clothing!

 

G

Gerald G. McGeorge

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,086

> Its actually 101% when you include the death taxes.>

LOL!

What Lloyd doesn;t want anyone to understand is that when your employer pays
your Social Security taxes, in round numbers he pays around 13%, half paid
by you and shown on your paycheck stub, the other half withheld from your
TRUE SALARY/WAGES and paid by the employer. In other words, the employer
shows the additional 6.2% as part of your your true compensation on his
books. Lloyd thinks it's a tax on the employer, but it's not, it's a tax on
YOU. That's why self-employed persons get the joyous honor of paying the
WHOLE amount, with the second half called "self-employment tax" on the 1040,
another piece of subterfuge your liberal tax & spend eleceted
representatives concocted back in the '70's when they wrote this entire scam
tax code.

Lloyd and the other leftists think everyone's too stupid to figure this all
out, but it's actually very easy to unravel it using a program like Turbo
Tax....
> --
> Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum
immane
> mittam.
>
>

 

B

Bill Putney

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,087

Brent P wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>, FDRanger92 wrote:
>
> > What about all those greenhouse gasses that the fires have spewed into the
> > air? Does that mean that the environmental groups that blocked any thinning
> > of the forests are responsible for releasing all that CO2 and contributing
> > to global warming. Its certainly put more CO2 into the air than my little
> > truck ever will or has in the 11 years I've owned it.
>
> You forget, it's the source and location of the CO2 that matters in
> the political arguement. Not that it simply takes from a carbon sink
> and releases CO2 to the atmosphere. A forest fire produces good CO2. An
> automobile in the USA produces bad CO2. A factory in China produces good
> CO2. A factory in the USA produces bad CO2. A tractor on a farm in the USA
> produces bad CO2. A coal fired electric plant in china produces good
> CO2. And on and on...

Sarcasm, right? 8^)

I always get a kick out of hearing reports that such-and-such a city has
too much ozone (considered a pollutant). Whenever I hear such reports,
I rush to that city and discharge a couple of cans of R12 to neutralize
the ozone - what do they claim - 10 to 1 effectiveness? Just trying to
do my part to save the world.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

 

C

C. E. White

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,088

Bill Putney wrote:
>
> I always get a kick out of hearing reports that such-and-such a city has
> too much ozone (considered a pollutant). Whenever I hear such reports,
> I rush to that city and discharge a couple of cans of R12 to neutralize
> the ozone - what do they claim - 10 to 1 effectiveness? Just trying to
> do my part to save the world.

If only things worked that way.

Ed

 

J

Joe

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,089

"And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?"
Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the results of
Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.

"Lloyd Parker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Gerald G. McGeorge" <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
> And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?
>

 

J

Joe

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,090

LLoyd, please crop your messages... as for "Yes, but you right-wingers
obviously do not know what a socialist is." please use the more
politically-correct term for "right-wingers"... that would be
"correct-wingers"

 

J

Joe

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,091

At a federal level? YES. STATES should do that, NOT the feds... But why
listen to what the "founding fathers" wanted...

"Lloyd Parker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Joe" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >"Most people view paying taxes in return for government sources as
something
> >necessary"
> >Most people don't mind paying for infrastructure and defense... It's all
the
> >"social programs" and pork that I HATE...
>
> OK, ask the middle class if they want college grants and scholarships cut.
If
> they want their parents' Medicare and Medicaid benefits cut. If they want
> workplace safety not enforced. If they want no meat inspections. If they
> want to eliminate prisons, or aid to local schools, or law enforcement.
>
> >
> >"Lloyd Parker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> In article <[email protected]>,
> >> "Gerald G. McGeorge" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >snip
> >> Most people view paying taxes in return for government sources as
> >something
> >> necessary. That's why they live in a society and not an anarchy.
> >
> >

 

D

Douglas A. Shrader

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,092

"Joe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?"
> Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the results
of
> Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.

And what the Dems never acknowledge is the fact that Floridas votes were
recounted again after Bush was declared the winner, every vote was counted,
no matter how poorly marked, and it gave Bush more votes than the final
official count had given him.


>
> "Lloyd Parker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <[email protected]> wrote:
> <snip>
> > And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?
> >
>
>
>

 

J

Joe

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,093

"Explain how increased taxes improve the economy."
It improves the economy by starting a recession (ex. the Clinton
Recession)... see the logic I followed there??

"Bill Funk" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 05 Nov 03 11:42:46 GMT, [email protected] (Lloyd Parker)
> wrote:
>
> >>We all remember that lying bastard Clinton ran in '92 on a
> >>middle class tax cut.
> >
> >And when Bush left the budget in much worse shape, to his credit, he took
> >steps to get it under control.
>
> Would that be by instituting the largest tax increase in our history?
> Explain how increased taxes improve the economy.
>
> --
> Bill Funk
> replace "g" with "a"

 

J

Joe

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,094

Those damn corrupt republicans!!! The damn corrupt republicans also kept
that news out of the mainstream press that is obviously conservative...

"Douglas A. Shrader" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Joe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?"
> > Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the
results
> of
> > Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.
>
> And what the Dems never acknowledge is the fact that Floridas votes were
> recounted again after Bush was declared the winner, every vote was
counted,
> no matter how poorly marked, and it gave Bush more votes than the final
> official count had given him.
>
>
> >
> > "Lloyd Parker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > "Gerald G. McGeorge" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

 

J

Joe

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,095

Hello??? LLLLLOYD are you published in your field of expertise?? I am, are
you?????

"Joe" <[email protected] ([email protected])> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> LLoyd,
> are you published anywhere?
>
> "Lloyd Parker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <duSpb.77564$275.206280@attbi_s53>,
> > [email protected] (Brent P) wrote:
> > >In article <[email protected]>, Lloyd Parker wrote:
> > >> [email protected] (Brent P) wrote:
> > >
> > >>>http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994321
> > >
> > >>>I am sure parker will just call it a 'right-wing' publication
> > >>>or something to dismiss it all.
> > >
> > >> Why not read something a real scientific group says? IPCC, or EPA,
or
> > >> National Academy of Sciences? Afraid?
> > >
> > >You didn't comment on the journal article URL I posted earlier.
> >
> > Because it's not a peer-reviewed scientific journal. You know, the kind
> real
> > scientists publish in.
>
>

 

J

Joe

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,096

"But I bet you understood what I menat in the first place....didn't you?"
Nope, thought you were being stoopid... sorry!

"C. E. White" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Joe wrote:
>
> > "Nature doesn't extinguish fires started by lightening "
> > if this were true, there would be no vegitation on the planet. It would
> > have burned off long before humans showed up.
>
> OK, you got me. I should have said something like "nature lets fires burn
until
> rain storms put them out and doesn't fight them just becasue they are in
> national forests or near populated areas or becasue they dump lots of
pollution
> into the environment." But I bet you understood what I menat in the first
> place....didn't you?
>
> Ed
>

 

C

C. E. White

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,097

"Douglas A. Shrader" wrote:
>
> "Joe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "And there're no corrupt Republican machines? Hello, Texas? Florida?"
> > Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the results
> of
> > Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.
>
> And what the Dems never acknowledge is the fact that Floridas votes were
> recounted again after Bush was declared the winner, every vote was counted,
> no matter how poorly marked, and it gave Bush more votes than the final
> official count had given him.

I was listening to NLPR (National Liberal Public Radio) earlier today
and they ahd a piece on how certain groups were disenchanted with the
electoral process because of the supposed problems in Florida (see
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1493747 ). They had
numerous people talk about how they were certain that their ballots had
been incorrectly marked and that their votes weren't counted. The funny
thing was, the only people that seemed to have problems voting in
Florida were trying to vote for Gore. I find it hard to believe that the
system was so out of whack that only people voting for Gore had hanging
chads, or voted for the wrong person, or couldn't get to the polls, or
had to wait in long lines. They interviewed one person who claimed that
the poll worker told her she had actually voted for Bucannon when she
meant to vote for Gore and then refused to give her a new ballot.
Apparently not a single Bush voter accidently voted for Nader or had any
problem with the ballots or had to wait in lines.

Ed

 

J

John T. Waisanen

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,098

damn you gerald....will you let this useless thread die already?



Gerald G. McGeorge wrote:

>>Its actually 101% when you include the death taxes.>
>
>
> LOL!
>
> What Lloyd doesn;t want anyone to understand is that when your employer pays
> your Social Security taxes, in round numbers he pays around 13%, half paid
> by you and shown on your paycheck stub, the other half withheld from your
> TRUE SALARY/WAGES and paid by the employer. In other words, the employer
> shows the additional 6.2% as part of your your true compensation on his
> books. Lloyd thinks it's a tax on the employer, but it's not, it's a tax on
> YOU. That's why self-employed persons get the joyous honor of paying the
> WHOLE amount, with the second half called "self-employment tax" on the 1040,
> another piece of subterfuge your liberal tax & spend eleceted
> representatives concocted back in the '70's when they wrote this entire scam
> tax code.
>
> Lloyd and the other leftists think everyone's too stupid to figure this all
> out, but it's actually very easy to unravel it using a program like Turbo
> Tax....
>

 

G

Gerald G. McGeorge

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,099

> Wasn't it the corrupt democrats that tried to illegally alter the results
of Florida? The final results were accurate and valid.>

Actually it looks like the ORIGINAL results were accurate & valid!

The Democrats proved their disegenuousness when they only wanted to recout
three heavily Democratic counties. Worse, with a perfectly straight face
they had Bill Daley act as their spokesperson! For those too young to
remember, Daley is the son of the late Richard J. Daley, mayor of Chicago in
the 50's & 60's. Daley stole the 1960 election for Kennedy, which had a much
closer National vote count than 2000, only 100,000 difference. Daley's
Democratic machine created massive voter fraud, people voted twice, dead
people voted, Hell, dead people's DOGS voted. Hence the old Chicago saying
"vote early, vote often!"

No, old Al Gore screwed himself and the entire Democrat party by what he
did, and the public hasn't forgotten. By the way, Texas has only recently
become a Republican state. The Democrats have controlled politics there
since the 1870's, and their latest trick to keep from accepting reality was
to LEAVE THE STATE! Some representation!

 

D

David J. Allen

Guest

• Nov 6, 2003

• #1,100

Thanks! Of course these are old arguments. Lloyd's arguments look like
cut/paste jobs from previous posts he's made. He always says the same thing
over and over. And he always degenerates to name calling....
"right-winger", "fascist", "hate-monger", etc. or self-agrandizement being
that he's such an intelligent guy....Phd and all.... "What are YOUR
credentials?" or "Take a science class!". What's good about that is it's a
chance for those of us on the other side of the idealogical divide to home
in on a fixed target.

Nonetheless, I believe he really enjoys it. He's been doing this for years
and he always gets beat-up and then comes back for more!

"Gerald G. McGeorge" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Great post, David.
>
> > Fascism and Socialism have one thing in common... they view government
as
> > able to give and take away rights according to their respective value
> > systems. That puts both of them on the opposite side of conservatism
> where
> > government is limited precisely because of it's belief in God given,
> > individual, indivisible, inalienable rights that government as no
> > jurisdiction over. Fascism and Socialism both reject that notion as
> > government is the vehicle to compel their values on people.
> >
> > Democrats are in a constant dance on the edge of socialism. Their
values
> > include rejecting the unfairness of their being a large disparity
between
> > rich and poor, which isn't a bad value.... but their answer is to use
> > government to compel "charity" or the "transfer of wealth" through
taxes.
> > The effort includes finding "rights" to justify this, like rights to
> > employment, rights to minimum wages, rights of healthcare, rights to
> > shelter, right to education, ad infinitum, which rights have to be
"found"
> > in the constitution via "activist", "progressive" judges.
> >
> >
>
>