Vehicle makers say US fuel economy standards put a million jobs at risk
 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-jobs-iygg9wja

They ask (regulation killer)Trump, they want 'regulations' combined to a single standard and fuel economy targets reflect the kinds of cars Americans actually want to buy...F-Series, Rams, Silverados...

No where else to go or say but laugh or cry

Government jobs maybe.
I think the fuel economy standards should go up over time. But not what the ridiculous standard they set, what was it something like 65mpg by 2025.
As lighter materials become cheaper to use and technology improves the auto makers would only implement these when it can make the vehicle cheaper to produce. That is the OEMs only motivation.

I'm all in favor of government and industry working together, but I think they've decided that pretending "millions" of jobs are at stake is their best tactic for getting looser regulations. And they might not be wrong.

Pro-active statement from your benevolent forum overlords!

We've had a no-politics rule for a long time, but sometimes auto efficiency-related topics clearly mesh with the political world. Tim and I just want remind members to keep things civil when these types of topics crop up.

I've seen too many comment sections on other auto sites ending up in flame wars recently.

People here are generally good about these things - please keep it that way if you're going to talk about these topics. We don't want to have to tighten topic restrictions further.

I think what Ford's Fields said was we can certainly build the high fe cars but consumers want Canyoneros. Also we want one national set of regs, none of this special stuff for Cali and elsewhere. I think the 1M jobs jobs jobs thing was B.S.

Those CAFE target fe numbers aren't just pulled out of a hat. A thorough engineering and economic analysis attempts to forecast what is reasonably attainable.

Let gas go to $6 and suddenly it all looks pretty good. Maybe the prediction is for expensive gas? Just because gas has been cheap lately doesn't mean it will be indefinitely. A national fleet composed of V8 4x4s would be pretty silly in an era of expensive fuel. Actually it's pretty damned silly anytime. :rolleyes:

I'd love to "upgrade" to a v8 sports car, but i have a feeling gas is going over $3/gal in the next 18 months. More inclined to go boosted 4 cylinder and tune with ethanol.

Everytime lifted truck DD i see is just one more person to laugh at when gas goes through the roof.

I'm sure it'll be much better for the economy when gas prices go back up and no one can afford to make their 100 mile commute. ;) Maybe we should stockpile hybrids and EVs to sell at that time and make some sweet profit. :thumbup:

Is there anyone who knows why so many jobs would supposedly be at risk? Seems to me that they could just crank out more high MPG cars and jack up the prices for lower MPG vehicles to shift demand and make up for the lower profit margins of the cheap cars.

Like it would have been nice to have had a stockpile of Metros and such when gas hit $4 and Metros were selling for crazy coin. :eek: That day may come again.

I haven't researched the jobs jobs jobs thing but that crazy number probably presumed an "inability" for an Uhmerican production facility to build something small. So all Uhmerican production would halt and the mfgs. would simply import all the little CAFE compliant cars. Oooooh, does that sound like a THREAT??? :eek:

Almost nobody wants fuel efficient vehicles at the moment.
If you have the funds and land go for it. I agree that it's only a matter of time. Gas will be at $3/gal soon and $4/gal soon enough.

Hmm, to buy that Mitsubishi Mirage now while gas is cheap and the tariffs on foreign cars haven't kicked in, or roll the dice on not needing to replace our cars for a long while... ?

<trying to make this as practical and not political as possible. ;) >