I think everyone should e-mail this guy and tell him what a moron he is
04-27-2002, 11:33 AM
#16
Nordschleife Master
[quote]Originally posted by Robby:
[QB]I suppose he didn't come up w/a formula for how much more deadly it is to run into a big heavy SUV or pick-em-up truck than it would be to hit aother carI(?). Maybe we should ban them! Any vehicle that weighs more than 4500lbs, or, any vehicle that has more than 1200lbs per wheel(?).
QB]<hr></blockquote>
Absolutely the Suburban is the most dangerous vehicle on his list for other drivers. There are more of them, and their bulk makes them more dangerous to drive at speed and lethal to smaller vehicles they hit.
For a while there was an unspoken agreement in Europe to limit the power of bikes, but that fell apart years ago.
[QB]I suppose he didn't come up w/a formula for how much more deadly it is to run into a big heavy SUV or pick-em-up truck than it would be to hit aother carI(?). Maybe we should ban them! Any vehicle that weighs more than 4500lbs, or, any vehicle that has more than 1200lbs per wheel(?).
QB]<hr></blockquote>
Absolutely the Suburban is the most dangerous vehicle on his list for other drivers. There are more of them, and their bulk makes them more dangerous to drive at speed and lethal to smaller vehicles they hit.
For a while there was an unspoken agreement in Europe to limit the power of bikes, but that fell apart years ago.
04-27-2002, 12:24 PM
#17
Advanced
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Burlington, WI
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wow that made me sick....I wish all the "non americans" who want government to take care of everythin would leave this country.....I could go on and on but I think I will just drive my SUV over some small cars <img src="graemlins/soapbox.gif" border="0" alt="[soapbox]" />
04-27-2002, 12:36 PM
#18
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This guy should move to Norway. We have the kind of tax policy he is talking about. The result of that is that the average car is more then 10 years old and a "sports car" is rearly seen on the streets.
Eirik Kvello-Aune
<a href="http://www.diateam.no/porsche" target="_blank">www.diateam.no/porsche</a>
Eirik Kvello-Aune
<a href="http://www.diateam.no/porsche" target="_blank">www.diateam.no/porsche</a>
04-27-2002, 02:05 PM
#19
Instructor
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hey... I'm over here! In your face.
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the guy is such a moron then why does your silly bad luck fund consist of children loosing control of their cars and hitting jeeps and hydrants?
maybe if you children had a few less ponies or learned how to control what you had you would have straighter bodies.
i think the moron is the child that thinks he is king of the road just cuz he has power. i have more horsies than you which compensates for my other mental and physical deficiencies!
Grow up children!
maybe if you children had a few less ponies or learned how to control what you had you would have straighter bodies.
i think the moron is the child that thinks he is king of the road just cuz he has power. i have more horsies than you which compensates for my other mental and physical deficiencies!
Grow up children!
04-27-2002, 02:46 PM
#20
Thinking outside da' bun...
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Well, I have to agree with the guy in the sense that 350hp doesnt make a sports car. Its how it looks, how it drives, how it feels, how it connects to the road. Miatas are just as much sports cars as Vipers in my opinion. Different type, but same club. Lest we forget the NA944 was getting taken to the cleaners in the mid80s by Supras, Zs, RX7s, and other Jap GTs in terms of raw power yet I dont think anyone here would want to exclude the NA944 from any sports car list.
On the other hand, I think banning cars b/c of power is silly and I think he wrote the column as a spoof as much as anything. Perhaps he means it, but he's also in the business to sell himself and his CarTalk show too. Nobody remembers the mundane but they do remember the audacious. Just my .02.
On the other hand, I think banning cars b/c of power is silly and I think he wrote the column as a spoof as much as anything. Perhaps he means it, but he's also in the business to sell himself and his CarTalk show too. Nobody remembers the mundane but they do remember the audacious. Just my .02.
04-27-2002, 04:12 PM
#21
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Auburn, AL
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok, the guy does have a point. however trying to pass legislation putting an max on the HP/Weight Ratio is idiotic. <img src="graemlins/c.gif" border="0" alt="[ouch]" /> I can see his point that many of the cars on the road have too much hp/TQ for every day use, useless waste of gas, etc. Now hear me out, I not saying that there should be a max for power or anything, but he does have a valid point. but his failure is that his theory to solve the problem is totally inappropriate and unethical. <img src="graemlins/oops.gif" border="0" alt="[oops]" />
I think if anything we should have a tax system like the one in Europe, just more forgiving. A tax system more dependent on the size of the engine, ie displacement, than year. We should all drive turbo charged cars, with better fuels. that would be better for the environment, better MPG bcs you have a much smaller engine. and there would be tons of power, but only when you need it. the new 996 TT exhaust is cleaner than most city air, bcs in part to the twin turbos and adv exhaust system. My hope for a tax system basis on displacement, would be to get rid of all the @#$%^ SUVs and trucks, are on the roads today. <img src="graemlins/bigok.gif" border="0" alt="[thumbsup]" /> <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" />
I to agree that this guy has some poor logic going on. <img src="graemlins/c.gif" border="0" alt="[ouch]" /> But all I?m saying is think before you act. He also seemed to forget that the natural progression of automobile industry is to have better and better performance vehicles to order to create a larger and larger market share.
And let me add that I agree with the Europe Tax system on cars more than America?s system, however they took their system to the extreme. mmmbeer, is right, when I was Europe last summer, you every saw any older or sports cars, bcs of the tax system. I found out that my 86 944 NA would cost about $5,000 and year just for taxes and the insurance in England, and I?m just 19. <img src="graemlins/crying.gif" border="0" alt="[crying]" /> <img src="graemlins/cussing.gif" border="0" alt="[grrrrrrr]" />
I think if anything we should have a tax system like the one in Europe, just more forgiving. A tax system more dependent on the size of the engine, ie displacement, than year. We should all drive turbo charged cars, with better fuels.
that would be better for the environment, better MPG bcs you have a much smaller engine. and there would be tons of power, but only when you need it. the new 996 TT exhaust is cleaner than most city air, bcs in part to the twin turbos and adv exhaust system. My hope for a tax system basis on displacement, would be to get rid of all the @#$%^ SUVs and trucks, are on the roads today. <img src="graemlins/bigok.gif" border="0" alt="[thumbsup]" /> <img src="graemlins/beerchug.gif" border="0" alt="[cheers]" /> I to agree that this guy has some poor logic going on. <img src="graemlins/c.gif" border="0" alt="[ouch]" /> But all I?m saying is think before you act. He also seemed to forget that the natural progression of automobile industry is to have better and better performance vehicles to order to create a larger and larger market share.
And let me add that I agree with the Europe Tax system on cars more than America?s system, however they took their system to the extreme. mmmbeer, is right, when I was Europe last summer, you every saw any older or sports cars, bcs of the tax system. I found out that my 86 944 NA would cost about $5,000 and year just for taxes and the insurance in England, and I?m just 19. <img src="graemlins/crying.gif" border="0" alt="[crying]" /> <img src="graemlins/cussing.gif" border="0" alt="[grrrrrrr]" />
04-27-2002, 04:39 PM
#22
Drifting
WAKE UP. This is AMERICA. Contrary to popular belief, using TAXES to influence people's decision-making is UNETHICAL.
You people are saying "well, since the MAJORITY doesn't see the point in powerful sportscars, we should impose a tax penalty on the owners of those sportscars, so they will think twice about that kind of lifestyle. They have the FREEDOM to buy the car they want, but since I don't agree with there decision, maybe we should levy a tax against them..."
I say screw you to the author of the article, and everyone else who didn't think it was important to read George Orwell or Aldous Huxley or Ayn Rand.
Simpering idiots.
We are already ruled by the corporate world, why not remove the rest of our decision-making? I mean, it's not like we aren't ALREADY PENALIZED by the insurance industry because of our CHOICE of transportation and recreation... right?
(can you tell I feel strongly about the implications of this?) <img src="graemlins/jumper.gif" border="0" alt="[jumper]" />
I'll tell you this - The ONLY reason to live in this country vs. another is the FREEDOM from social control. AND THAT IS DISAPPEARING.
BTW, Remember "no taxation without representation"? Ever wonder when that disappeared from the American agenda?
You people are saying "well, since the MAJORITY doesn't see the point in powerful sportscars, we should impose a tax penalty on the owners of those sportscars, so they will think twice about that kind of lifestyle. They have the FREEDOM to buy the car they want, but since I don't agree with there decision, maybe we should levy a tax against them..."
I say screw you to the author of the article, and everyone else who didn't think it was important to read George Orwell or Aldous Huxley or Ayn Rand.
Simpering idiots.
We are already ruled by the corporate world, why not remove the rest of our decision-making? I mean, it's not like we aren't ALREADY PENALIZED by the insurance industry because of our CHOICE of transportation and recreation... right?
(can you tell I feel strongly about the implications of this?) <img src="graemlins/jumper.gif" border="0" alt="[jumper]" />
I'll tell you this - The ONLY reason to live in this country vs. another is the FREEDOM from social control. AND THAT IS DISAPPEARING.
BTW, Remember "no taxation without representation"? Ever wonder when that disappeared from the American agenda?
04-27-2002, 05:02 PM
#23
Deer Slayer
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Everybody just calm down. This is the kind of legislation that's dead on arrival. He has a right to post his opinions, however misguided they may be, and THAT's what America is all about.
Fact is, very little regulatory legislation ever happens that impacts the general public directly. You feel about 2% of it, the rest of the pain is felt by business. That's why most environmental regulation is targeted at big co.s, not individual polluters. One example: the average suburban lawn causes more pollution in a nearby river(in the form of pesticide and fertilizer runoff) than gets placed there by a typical factory... it's because a factory can hide the costs of regulation and the impact to the general public, and so is regulated; but if people were regulated on a personal level, there'd be hell to pay.
There's another principle at work also: the principle of directed lobbying. One person, if fervent and insistent enough, can make more happen in the legislature than a whole lot of indifferent people. If this sort of thing tried to go through, a lot of very angry and fervent people would be calling, writing, complaining... it would be a hell of a fight if it was introduced. Every 'car person' would be screaming, every libertarian, the car co.s, etc. It's a fight nobody's seriously going to pick. There's too much other 'low hanging fruit' in the car safety tree to go after, before going after cars with a high power-to-weight ratio.
Bottom line: chill out. Enjoy the weekend. If it's introduced in Congress or whatever, then you can go ape****. But it's premature now.
my 2 cents
Thaddeus
Fact is, very little regulatory legislation ever happens that impacts the general public directly. You feel about 2% of it, the rest of the pain is felt by business. That's why most environmental regulation is targeted at big co.s, not individual polluters. One example: the average suburban lawn causes more pollution in a nearby river(in the form of pesticide and fertilizer runoff) than gets placed there by a typical factory... it's because a factory can hide the costs of regulation and the impact to the general public, and so is regulated; but if people were regulated on a personal level, there'd be hell to pay.
There's another principle at work also: the principle of directed lobbying. One person, if fervent and insistent enough, can make more happen in the legislature than a whole lot of indifferent people. If this sort of thing tried to go through, a lot of very angry and fervent people would be calling, writing, complaining... it would be a hell of a fight if it was introduced. Every 'car person' would be screaming, every libertarian, the car co.s, etc. It's a fight nobody's seriously going to pick. There's too much other 'low hanging fruit' in the car safety tree to go after, before going after cars with a high power-to-weight ratio.
Bottom line: chill out. Enjoy the weekend. If it's introduced in Congress or whatever, then you can go ape****. But it's premature now.
my 2 cents
Thaddeus
04-27-2002, 07:51 PM
#25
Race Car
[quote]Originally posted by keith:
<strong>WAKE UP. This is AMERICA. Contrary to popular belief, using TAXES to influence people's decision-making is UNETHICAL.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Between this and the NC address....you aren't in the tobacco industry are you? (
JK) My first reaction was similar to yours, then I realized just how many ways this clown was screwed up in the head.
What gets me is how many people think this makes him a liberal. He strikes me as more of a communist, or at least the US version of extreem conservative.
<strong>WAKE UP. This is AMERICA. Contrary to popular belief, using TAXES to influence people's decision-making is UNETHICAL.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Between this and the NC address....you aren't in the tobacco industry are you? (
JK) My first reaction was similar to yours, then I realized just how many ways this clown was screwed up in the head. What gets me is how many people think this makes him a liberal. He strikes me as more of a communist, or at least the US version of extreem conservative.
04-27-2002, 08:42 PM
#29
Instructor
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, I was going to stand aside as Keith had already brought Rand (and some very valid points) into this. But, this reply is ridiculous:
[quote]Originally posted by Thaddeus:
Fact is, very little regulatory legislation ever happens that impacts the general public directly. You feel about 2% of it, the rest of the pain is felt by business.<hr></blockquote>
Oh yeah? A) Where is this magic 2% number from, a bottle of milk? B) How exactly does legislation that affects business not "impact the general public directly"???!!! Read _Atlas Shrugged_ before replying.
[quote]There's too much other 'low hanging fruit' in the car safety tree to go after, before going after cars with a high power-to-weight ratio.<hr></blockquote>
Right. If you believe that, I have some lords a-leaping for sale.
[quote]Bottom line: chill out. Enjoy the weekend. If it's introduced in Congress or whatever, then you can go ape****. But it's premature now.<hr></blockquote>
Wrong. Discussing ideas BEFORE they have the potential for impact is in fact the best time for discussion - a snowball sitting at the top of the hill is a lot easier to stop than one going down the side. If respect for ideas, and the correct philosophy therefore, had been heeded historically, this column would never have been written or published - and the world would in fact not be in the downward spiral it is now pretty much stuck in.
[quote]my 2 cents<hr></blockquote>
Perhaps it is advisable for you not to provide estimates of the worth of your own opinions.
T
[quote]Originally posted by Thaddeus:
Fact is, very little regulatory legislation ever happens that impacts the general public directly. You feel about 2% of it, the rest of the pain is felt by business.<hr></blockquote>
Oh yeah? A) Where is this magic 2% number from, a bottle of milk? B) How exactly does legislation that affects business not "impact the general public directly"???!!! Read _Atlas Shrugged_ before replying.
[quote]There's too much other 'low hanging fruit' in the car safety tree to go after, before going after cars with a high power-to-weight ratio.<hr></blockquote>
Right. If you believe that, I have some lords a-leaping for sale.
[quote]Bottom line: chill out. Enjoy the weekend. If it's introduced in Congress or whatever, then you can go ape****. But it's premature now.<hr></blockquote>
Wrong. Discussing ideas BEFORE they have the potential for impact is in fact the best time for discussion - a snowball sitting at the top of the hill is a lot easier to stop than one going down the side. If respect for ideas, and the correct philosophy therefore, had been heeded historically, this column would never have been written or published - and the world would in fact not be in the downward spiral it is now pretty much stuck in.
[quote]my 2 cents<hr></blockquote>
Perhaps it is advisable for you not to provide estimates of the worth of your own opinions.
T
04-27-2002, 09:25 PM
#30
Instructor
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Christchurch, England
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Horsepower isn't the issue, the problem with newer cars is the insulation from the power. Go into a corner too fast - stability control will deal with it. Boot it on a wet bend - traction control will sort that out. Try braking and steering at the same time - step in ABS.
This is why I love the 944 - it may not be the fastest machine on the road, but it DEMANDS my attention. The car keeps me informed of this through a stream of sensations, through my ears, eyes, backside, feet and hands. I would not feel comfortable talking on the phone, eating, reading a book or watching TV (maybe extreme, but some have been caught doing it) while driving, nor should I because like it or not, I am in charge of a ton and a quarter of fast moving metal.
When I see all of the crap that gets put on cars now - rain sensing wipers, night sensing headlights, radar cruise control, etc. etc. I question the safety of a vehicle that requires so little interaction. But then at the other extreme is something as stupid as the iDrive system on the BMW 7 series - scroll through menus to adjust the heating > crash into the back of someone while not paying attention to the road.
Capping power to weight is a ridiculous notion but a cap on road legal HP for new cars (this is hypothetical, because I know it won't happen) would generate some excellent designs. Instead what we get is... make it bigger, make it heavier, make it more powerful, make it non user-serviceable and fill it full of breakable toys. Yawn.
One thing that did annoy me reading a lot of the replies on that forum is the response of the people who feel that it is their divine right to demand 8 MPG leviathans. It's the motoring equivalent of the people who used to shoot the buffalo from trains and just leave them to rot, to hell with anyone else - I enjoy it. Reading those posts reminded me of spoiled children told they can't eat chocolate for dinner. Before anyone thinks that this is a pop at the U.S.A. I have to say that it is the same here - despite the huge premium we pay for fuel ($5 gallon). Pig headed stupidity is a worldwide epidemic.
But all this talk of freedom in motoring is a smokescreen assisted by the auto lobby, SUV's are cheap to produce and sell for a lot of money, bigger cars carry a higher margin, more gizmos cost a lot more to fix when they break - which they do frequently. Headlights are vast moulded glass creations that are unique to the vehicle and cost a fortune to replace if damaged, likewise polycarbonate bumpers, foglamps, mirrors etc. Engines now have covers over them fastened by unusual bolts - in other words... stay out! Platform sharing and badge engineering is rife, marketing people set the tone and target the brand. Freedom?
The guy isn't a moron, he is a representative of the mass media, and there is nothing they like more than to poke a stick into an ants nest and watch 'em all run around. Divide and conquer, the establishment don't want us banding together - things might change and where would that leave them?
This is why I love the 944 - it may not be the fastest machine on the road, but it DEMANDS my attention. The car keeps me informed of this through a stream of sensations, through my ears, eyes, backside, feet and hands. I would not feel comfortable talking on the phone, eating, reading a book or watching TV (maybe extreme, but some have been caught doing it) while driving, nor should I because like it or not, I am in charge of a ton and a quarter of fast moving metal.
When I see all of the crap that gets put on cars now - rain sensing wipers, night sensing headlights, radar cruise control, etc. etc. I question the safety of a vehicle that requires so little interaction. But then at the other extreme is something as stupid as the iDrive system on the BMW 7 series - scroll through menus to adjust the heating > crash into the back of someone while not paying attention to the road.
Capping power to weight is a ridiculous notion but a cap on road legal HP for new cars (this is hypothetical, because I know it won't happen) would generate some excellent designs. Instead what we get is... make it bigger, make it heavier, make it more powerful, make it non user-serviceable and fill it full of breakable toys. Yawn.
One thing that did annoy me reading a lot of the replies on that forum is the response of the people who feel that it is their divine right to demand 8 MPG leviathans. It's the motoring equivalent of the people who used to shoot the buffalo from trains and just leave them to rot, to hell with anyone else - I enjoy it. Reading those posts reminded me of spoiled children told they can't eat chocolate for dinner. Before anyone thinks that this is a pop at the U.S.A. I have to say that it is the same here - despite the huge premium we pay for fuel ($5 gallon). Pig headed stupidity is a worldwide epidemic.
But all this talk of freedom in motoring is a smokescreen assisted by the auto lobby, SUV's are cheap to produce and sell for a lot of money, bigger cars carry a higher margin, more gizmos cost a lot more to fix when they break - which they do frequently. Headlights are vast moulded glass creations that are unique to the vehicle and cost a fortune to replace if damaged, likewise polycarbonate bumpers, foglamps, mirrors etc. Engines now have covers over them fastened by unusual bolts - in other words... stay out! Platform sharing and badge engineering is rife, marketing people set the tone and target the brand. Freedom?
The guy isn't a moron, he is a representative of the mass media, and there is nothing they like more than to poke a stick into an ants nest and watch 'em all run around. Divide and conquer, the establishment don't want us banding together - things might change and where would that leave them?