politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Someone else pointed out that the east cost apparently uses 3mil barrels per day. I highly doubt costs will be cut here. Plus the U.S. already has cheap as dirt gas prices. The guy you’re reaponding to is mad at imaginary solutions.
If Biden wants to help people he needs to reduce the reliance on fossil fuels. He needs to revise the rules that incentivise building larger, hungrier vehicles, and the citizens need to stop bitching and moaning while driving around objectively worthless guzzlers. Anyone who drives a truck or SUV when they could easily just own a station wagon has negative respect from me.
I am aware, also, that several things can happen at once but centrists are always so fucking weak in their responses to anything and never solve any problems without the left having to twist their arm every which way for decades. It’s exhausting.
Or put a cap on prices and stop letting the “market” decide the price of gas.
$1 per gallon. Figure it out.
Yes, because what we really need is to incentivize more usage of fossil fuels.
people having a life and being able to afford to change their lifestyle away from fossil fuels is more important at the moment.
we really need more education surrounding the issues and better alternatives, once everyone realises how much damage cars cause and once they realise/once they have a viable alternative (i.e. trains) then people will start to switch away. in the mean time people still need their cars to get to work, because that is how the US is designed, and expensive fuel will only result in them having less spare change, rather than them actually using their car less.
sure, if everyone had enough money that they could afford to change up the way they do things or if everyone had a job that they can do from home or if everyone lived within walking distance from their job, then maybe you would have a valid argument. people are much less likely to go on a road trip, for example, if its gonna cost them 3x more than they expect it to cost, but people need to go to work to survive.
I’ll never argue in favor of fossil fuel, but making transportation prohibitively expensive only hurts the average person.
Like subsidizing the cost of EVs with a $7500 tax credit that was accomplished in the Inflation Reduction Act Biden signed almost 2 years ago in August 16, 2022? source
So like Biden's Department of Transportation did in April 2022 by raising CAFE standards that took effect this year in 2024? source
I'm not a fan of SUVs either, but there are very few station wagons produced for the USA market, and those that are get about the same MPG as a small SUV. BEVs or hybrids (even if they are small or medium sized SUVs) are better choices than the few station wagons we that are available for sale today.
So what does that make your position where the things you're asking for passed into law years ago and you're here complaining about them not existing? Uninformed?
The EV thing isn’t the worst, though I’d like to see that money going towards public transportation for more people. It’ll always be better and all that really does is help the rich stay richer while poorer folk still need to buy used gas-powered vehicles until a used EV market picks up.
Maybe it’s in there and I just didn’t see it but the biggest issue with the CAFE laws is that there are exceptions for huge vehicles that no one needs which makes them cheaper to manufacture. A smaller, lighter wagon will generally have more space, actually, and be better on fuel but no one makes them because they realized they could just pump ads at people focused on “feeling powerful” in large vehicles. You can also make the wagons EV and the smaller size and weight will improve their range, too. You’re looking at how things are instead of how they easily could be(and were not too long ago).
I know Biden’s done ok with some stuff but it’s still kinda weak and the fact that he’s looking for a pat on the back for the bare minimum is kinda pathetic. And people still have to vote for the dumbass because the DNC won’t let anyone better come forward and the GOP are a disaster like no other.
Public transportation spending like the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that was signed into law by President Biden on November 15, 2021? source
"The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, as enacted in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, authorizes up to $108 billion for public transportation – the largest federal investment in public transportation in the nation’s history."
I agree that the "fleetwide calculation" loophole the NHTSA uses does too much to let automakers off the hook on a big part of the SUV fuel economy increase standards. I'd like this loophole closed or the rules revised drastically. However, even with the "light truck" loophole, the increased CAFE standards force SUVs to get slightly more fuel effient because of the required "fleetwide average" in place now.
You can see we get a series of small increases on "light trucks" highway mileage with a nice 3MPG bump in 2025 source
I'd like more, but its not nothing.
Okay, so your comment earlier about wanting people to buy station wagons was for a theoretical car that isn't on the market in the USA, right?
Besides tightening up the "light truck" loophole, can you please tell me what you'd expect that doesn't qualify for the "bare minimum" that you're calling the efforts so far?