Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

ashlan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 139 posts

Re: Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

#71

Post by toss1 »

Geonode wrote: post #2

Why can't they government fix my pet peeves? This kind of thinking is what's leading us to a prison society without privacy or freedom, one little whiny step at a time. The government should do as little as possible, and the least at the federal level.

Nonsense, particularly in this case - the SUV is not some act of god but a result of prior necessary regulation that needs adjustment.

The SUV was basically created by the govt when CAFE (Corp Average Fuel Efficiency) standards specified higher fuel efficiency for cars vs "light trucks" (27.5 vs 21mpg, IIRC). So, instead of promoting the previously ubiquitous station wagon as a family-hauler, automakers started promoting the SUV under the "Light Truck" category.

The appropriate response is to adjust the rules to account for the unintended consequences, not to simply say "whatever - we shouldn't do anything!". Tho, TBF, the article was also missing these key historical details.

Re: Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

#72

Post by rpmisms »

happytoexplain wrote: post #64
rpmisms wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the road being public mean that my family should have been forced to drive two cars, thus polluting more, all because of some people who can't stay out of other's business? I understand the argument here, but I think it's bad. Government does get a say in what is driven on roads: safe cars that are often inspected and pose less danger to those around and inside them. That's already a lot of restriction, now we l…

>my family should have been forced to drive two cars, thus polluting more, all because of some people who can't stay out of other's business You're depicting one side of a question with a practical example ("more pollution") and the other side as though they are simply assholes ("they just can't stay out of other's business"). There is a reasonable version of both sides.

This is true, but someone else telling you how to live your life with obviously zero practical experience in how you live your life will generally seem unreasonable to you. My bias is showing, but my bias is, I think, reasonable.

Re: Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

#73

Post by goodpoint »

havblue wrote: post #51

I might as well repeat the overprotective parent perspective. Fatalities are higher if you're in a sedan in an accident with a pickup or semi. There are a lot of trucks on the road as well. Finally, road accidents are the one of the biggest risks young people face. So ignoring the fact that this makes it into an arms race of weight and size, a parents desire for child safety wins against someone's desire to lower car…

You are forgetting a crucial aspect. When all cars increase in size and weight the total risk only increases!

This is not a zero-sum game, it's a net negative.

Edit: no, saying that it's an arms race does not implies it's a negative for everybody.

Re: Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

#74

Post by vorpalhex »

eertami wrote: post #38
Geonode wrote: post #2

Why can't they government fix my pet peeves? This kind of thinking is what's leading us to a prison society without privacy or freedom, one little whiny step at a time. The government should do as little as possible, and the least at the federal level.

The government built the roads, to a specific specification of assumed car sizes. If cars get so big that they break these assumptions then roads start getting blocked, or you start to have streets that some cars are too big to fit through (already happens in older cities in Europe) - and this would adversely affect other people. What next, are speed limits also leading us to a prison society, because people don't ha…

As a society where we all pay for these things, we all get a say.

If you want to live in a place where large vehicles are banned, you can always go build your own private roads...

Re: Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

#75

Post by rpmisms »

mbg721 wrote: post #39
HWR_14 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the government should have been more in your parents' business. I'm not usually one to think that the government has any place in the family, but 10 children seem like too many for 2 parents to wrangle well. Unless your family has more than two adults, how were you supervised?

They're offsetting the 30 other people who are hand-wringing about having kids.

Honestly, this is a weird thing to see. My parents just... did it, while so many people wait for the perfect time, have kids into their 40s, and then have to deal with teenagers in their 60s. Perhaps not for everyone, but there are perks.

Re: Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

#76

Post by [deleted] »

kcb wrote: post #27
tacostakohashi wrote: post #8

There are already many incentives in place for smaller cars: * Use less fuel * Easier to park * Cheaper to buy There is generally not much point in having the government incentivize "good" things. Whatever makes them good is already the incentive, and if that's not enough, then there are probably other issues at play that some feel-good government initiative isn't going to overcome.

* Die when hit by a lifted pick up

[deleted]

Re: Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

#77

Post by Dracophoenix »

abakker wrote: post #33
roleplayer wrote: post #5

The massive car sizes we see are because of government emissions regulations to begin with. That’s right, the “big truck to make up for lack of X” phenomenon was actually caused by people attempting to regulate how trucks are made without thinking through thr consequences. People who reach for regulations tend to be bad with incentives, not always, but usually.

to add to this, there is a hilarious plague of "second order" thinking in government, while ignoring first order. We got into this mess with things like the 21 year old drinking age. The federal government doesn't have the authority to make that rule, so instead they provide a highway funding incentive to the states who offer it. The issues is that it has become the federal government's only tool - provide incentives…

> if we wanted to have a more sane system, we'd remove second order incentives in favor of direct first order regulations. but, that would require constitutional amendments which are unlikely to pass.

I detest both arguments. The drinking age didn't stop under-21's from drinking. They just don't do it publicly. You're correct in that governments shouldn't use legislative carrots and sticks to influence state policies. But I disagree that direct federal control is a replacement for philosophical reasons as well as the fact that the government already tried the more honest approach of passing a constitutional amendment to regulate the consumption of alcohol only to have it blowback on them. And due to the resulting backlash and unenforcability, the government passed another amendment to deregulate it. As the old saying goes, prohibition doesn't work.

Re: Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

#78

Post by samemail88 »

kodah wrote: post #68

> There were 35,766 fatal motor vehicle crashes in the United States in 2020 in which 38,824 deaths occurred. This resulted in 11.7 deaths per 100,000 people and 1.34 deaths per 100 million miles traveled. The fatality rate per 100,000 people ranged from 4.9 in Massachusetts to 25.4 in Mississippi. The death rate per 100 million miles traveled ranged from 0.63 in Massachusetts to 1.97 in South Carolina. Footnote Sour…

But does this include pedestrians and bikers who are killed by vehicles?

Re: Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

#79

Post by vorpalhex »

happytoexplain wrote: post #64
rpmisms wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the road being public mean that my family should have been forced to drive two cars, thus polluting more, all because of some people who can't stay out of other's business? I understand the argument here, but I think it's bad. Government does get a say in what is driven on roads: safe cars that are often inspected and pose less danger to those around and inside them. That's already a lot of restriction, now we l…

>my family should have been forced to drive two cars, thus polluting more, all because of some people who can't stay out of other's business You're depicting one side of a question with a practical example ("more pollution") and the other side as though they are simply assholes ("they just can't stay out of other's business"). There is a reasonable version of both sides.

The question didn't start with trying to take reasonable stock of both sides.

Re: Why can't the government put a limit on car sizes?

#80

Post by [deleted] »

goodpoint wrote: post #73
havblue wrote: post #51

I might as well repeat the overprotective parent perspective. Fatalities are higher if you're in a sedan in an accident with a pickup or semi. There are a lot of trucks on the road as well. Finally, road accidents are the one of the biggest risks young people face. So ignoring the fact that this makes it into an arms race of weight and size, a parents desire for child safety wins against someone's desire to lower car…

You are forgetting a crucial aspect. When all cars increase in size and weight the total risk only increases! This is not a zero-sum game, it's a net negative. Edit: no, saying that it's an arms race does not implies it's a negative for everybody.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN