BBD, there are two possibilities

There is a third: that you are bullshitting again.

I’ve already demonstrated that you are, so further typing by you is redundant.

My second argument was: Is a concern for public safety consistent with the policies and values of the Trump administration? The answer is an unequivocal no. The threats Trump presents – marauding bands of immigrant killers and rapists – are made up to appeal to racism and xenophobia. Real threats to public safety are ignored and exacerbated. While the lives saved from increased traffic safety are illusory, the increased number of premature deaths from pollution are real. The contribution to climate change is real.

Trump claims that he supports coal miners. The truth is that he sees them as easily manipulated, expendable tools for corporate profits. At a time when the incidence of black lung disease is going up, the administration is considering undoing regulations that impose costs on coal mine owners, but that protect miners.
https://thinkprogress.org/as-black-lung-disease-makes-comeback-trump-seeks-to-weaken-coal-miner-protections-3c802d50eaab/
Trump’s pollution enabling initiatives will kill people while raising corporate profits. Opioid-related deaths continue to increase. Gun violence is another public safety issue.
http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
Has Trump done anything to stop the “carnage?” Communicable diseases, epidemics, and antibiotic resistant bacteria is another public safety issue. Trump has responded by proposing to cut funding, both nationally and internationally. Meanwhile, people are dying from climate change related causes – heat, wildfires, floods. Trump’s response has been to call climate change a hoax. His response to Hurricane Maria was to ignore the problem, underestimate the number of deaths, and praise himself.

Trump shows no sign of being concerned with public safety, and the sanctimonious show of concern for the safety of motorists is a cover-up for less commendable motives.

If 1) then the mandate is not needed.

If 2) people are buying different cars than they want to buy.
The car companies are not going to eliminate every model that people want to buy. Some will be because it will be too difficult to fit them in under the MPG mandate, just as station wagons were largely disappeared.
However, other models will have their price adjusted to reflect demand. Higher mileage cars sold cheaper, while the cars people want are sold at a higher price.

There will also be some technology changes that will add to price, like the aluminum alloys.

Generally it is true, no name poster. The biggest gains are made
do to weight reduction, which in most cases requires the use
of exotic and unconventional materials. Yes, matey, it will cost
more.

Sorry, I forgot to fill in the field. It’s BBD 🙂

I understand the basics of automotive design and the cost argument is bullshit in 2018. See ‘Skoda Rapid’ and all the other affordable high efficiency cars on the market. The cost argument is counterfactual bullshit.

Even energy efficient appliances, cost more than their lesser
efficient standard rival.

First off, I think this is bullshit in 2018. Second, it ignores the higher energy cost to the user over the inefficient product’s lifetime, which typically exceed the price premium (if any, in 2018). Third, it ignores externalised costs of energy inefficiency – climate change and particulate air pollution.

So just all bullshit, really.

2) MPG requirements increase the cost of cars

Such a load of shite. A few years back my wife switched to Skoda Rapids with a 1.2 and now 1 litre petrol engine (!) which goes like a train and is astonishingly fuel efficient and relatively cheap. Much cheaper than the diesel Golf it replaced.

You are bullshitting again.

Generally it is true, no name poster. The biggest gains are made
do to weight reduction, which in most cases requires the use
of exotic and unconventional materials. Yes, matey, it will cost
more.

Anonymous
August 4, 2018 at 3:00 pm

2) MPG requirements increase the cost of cars

Such a load of shite. A few years back my wife switched to Skoda Rapids with a 1.2 and now 1 litre petrol engine (!) which goes like a train and is astonishingly fuel efficient and relatively cheap. Much cheaper than the diesel Golf it replaced.

You are bullshitting again.”

It is true, no name poster. In order to increase mileage, it generally
requires weight reduction (axe Oprah). This means the use of exotic
and expensive, unconventional material. Example would be the American
F-150, version of an all aluminum lorry.

Even energy efficient appliances, cost more than their lesser
efficient standard rival. Keeping your boot and bonnet up while driving,
will cause drag and also increase the use of petro.

https://www.autoblog.com/2009/10/29/greenlings-how-does-weight-affect-a-vehicles-efficiency/?guccounter=1

2) MPG requirements increase the cost of cars

Such a load of shite. A few years back my wife switched to Skoda Rapids with a 1.2 and now 1 litre petrol engine (!) which goes like a train and is astonishingly fuel efficient and relatively cheap. Much cheaper than the diesel Golf it replaced.

You are bullshitting again.

Trump’s attempt to block Obama’s fuel efficiency standards has nothing to do with traffic safety, but much to do with his vindictiveness and his support for the fossil fuel industry.

Completely so. There is nothing close to valid about the “arguments” put forth for this change. The notion that vehicle quality (from American manufacturers, at least) improve without requirements is no and has always been empty.

The one thing that will be interesting to watch is this: all of the big manufacturers have stated their intent to make a significant move to electric vehicles over a rather short period of time. Whether they’ll stick to that given moves like this relaxation free them up to go back to the shoddy products of old is anyone’s guess.

But yeah, the excuse that “these regulations make cars far too expensive” isn’t one that should be believed by anybody.

They are saying
1) New cars are safer than old cars
2) MPG requirements increase the cost of cars
3) Higher cost for new cars means consumers are more likely to use old cars than new cars.
4) People will be driving cars that are less safe.

If people are going to buy these cheap to use cars anyways, then there is no downside to removing the regulation. The MPG will go up even without it.