Lol, TSLA is going to die.
TSLA was going to die anyways, mostly from competition from better manufacturers.
Trump is going after California’s clean car mandate
41–50 of 141 posts
Re: Trump is going after California’s clean car mandate
#42Elon musk want only his car to sell in the state of California. People are upset now cause Trump wants things to be fair.
Edit: LOL at the hate for Trump. He is the only guy who wants to stop the consistent H1B misuse but people here are to dumb/sensitive to support him.
Re: Trump is going after California’s clean car mandate
#43These regulations impose an unfair burden on consumers outside of the state, who must pay for California-spec'ed emissions equipment that they never wanted or were required to have. Non-Californians have litte power in the voting booth to resist California's impositions. By going after the exemption, the administration is making things more fair for the folks in the other 49 states.
The lack of regulations regarding car emissions imposes an unfair burden on California's air breathing residents, who must live on the same overheating planet as the other 49 states without any power in the voting booth to make them employ more planet-friendly transportation systems.
By keeping the exemption, the state is making things more fair for its residents :)
Re: Trump is going after California’s clean car mandate
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not true--when CA imposes new emissions or efficiency regulations, the automakers are forced to comply to keep access to that huge market. Not wanting to design two different vehicles, they simply comply and pass the cost along to all of the buyers, whether they live in CA or not. The rest of the country has no way to directly affect the CARB's decisions. This exemption, therefore, is very unfair for the rest of us.…
> automakers are forced to comply to keep access to that huge market As has already been explained, this is false. These rules are for CARB states, not for California. California is in charge of working with the other states to set the rules.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the other states only have a say, and not a vote? It's ultimately California's decision what they must accept.
Edit: Looked it up, no other states have a vote. 12 governor appointed members and 2 elected members of the CARB board decide.
Re: Trump is going after California’s clean car mandate
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then ask your state to enact tougher restrictions
That's the point, they can't . Only California is allowed to do so.
Other states can adopt the California standard or the Federal one, and 14 other states and the District of Columbia has done so.
What they’re not allowed to do is to set their own standard, because 300,000 people in Wyoming is just too small of a market.
Re: Trump is going after California’s clean car mandate
#46states' rights?
[deleted]
Re: Trump is going after California’s clean car mandate
#47It seems odd to me that California gets a pass to make their own rules here. I don't know the law enough, but there does seem to be some minor parallels to the sports betting SCOTUS case that was just ruled on (saying that it was illegal to have special waivers for a single state). Maybe this is different as it was a waiver by the EPA and not a law?
Why? Min wage uses the same concept. Feds set the bottom threshold and states can make it higher.
Re: Trump is going after California’s clean car mandate
#48These regulations impose an unfair burden on consumers outside of the state, who must pay for California-spec'ed emissions equipment that they never wanted or were required to have. Non-Californians have litte power in the voting booth to resist California's impositions. By going after the exemption, the administration is making things more fair for the folks in the other 49 states.
It’s not 49 other states. Over half the US population lives in a state that enforces the CARB standards.
According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_emission_standar..., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ..., and some arithmetic, about 36% of the US population lives in CARB states.
Re: Trump is going after California’s clean car mandate
#49In wickard vs filburn the govt made the case that a wheat farmer that grew wheat only for himself was subject to the interstate commerce clause. The reasoning was that he impacted markets by not having to buy wheat and therefore he should be fined for violating farming restrictions. The supreme court ruled in favor of the US govt. This expansion of the commerce clause could lead to trump being able to get something l…
> The reasoning was that he impacted markets by not having to buy wheat and therefore he should be fined for violating farming restrictions
I see the government is familiar with interaction-free measurements of quantum systems.
But seriously, it sounds like people will "interpret" anything in any way that is most convenient to them. I almost wish we had a formal system of language so these sorts of things would not occur. Of course, then we would have bugs in that system that would miss important edge cases...
Re: Trump is going after California’s clean car mandate
#50These regulations impose an unfair burden on consumers outside of the state, who must pay for California-spec'ed emissions equipment that they never wanted or were required to have. Non-Californians have litte power in the voting booth to resist California's impositions. By going after the exemption, the administration is making things more fair for the folks in the other 49 states.
I have a sense that there's something wrong here. Wrong layer of abstraction? California imposes whatever pollution regulations it wants, then it's up to the car manufacturers how to handle that. They could choose not to sell to CA residents. They could choose to make a separate line of CA-specific cars. But they choose instead to make all their cars up to CA standard because whatever, it's cheaper for them overall,…
If you have been in manufacturing, you will know that building 2 differently spec'ed cars is much more expensive than have an assembly line with a same spec'ed car. And California has a large population to be a lucrative market. In essence, that means that car manufacturers have to build to California's emission standards and distribute the costs to all users (even those who aren't in California).