The Hidden Costs of Obama's Fuel Efficiency Standards

Reader Comments
Back to blog

This "article" is a slanted smudge of dog poo.

Pegasus of NJ 2:09PM October 17, 2011

In this article, Thomas Pyle asserts that "Americans are smart enough to weigh the costs and benefits of safety, fuel efficiency, comfort, and all other factors when purchasing a vehicle." Quite simply, the implication is that costs are purely economic in nature.
Unfortunately, as Pyle has neglected to mention, many costs are not incorporated into the decision to buy a car. I can but name a few, knowing that there are far more "costs" than meets the eye. First, I'm quite confident that individuals who buy cars do not take into account the costs of registration, insurance, maintenance costs over the life of the car, among a variety of other long-term and less direct costs. Second, like the smokers who never think about the costs associated with healthcare later in life, buying a car is not purely about what one writes on a check. The environmental costs are never put into the cost of the car, those costs that are only realized down the road when the effects become too obvious to ignore.
While Pyle would like to think that the "free market" should dictate what Americans buy, I believe Pyle conflates personal decision-making with what is best for the economy and long-term benefit. As the market has already shown, buying houses was not a very good investment or purchase for a significnat portion of the population. Should we sincerely believe in the thoughtfulness of Americans when it comes to making significant financial decisions?
Now, I am certainly not advocating a system wherein government dictates what people can specifically buy or not. However, this is an entirely separate issue than the optimism of Pyle in the ability of citizens to make wise decisions regarding their finances. Boiled down, the fact is that the government has a role to play in the affairs of society and should invest in long-term strategies for the general welfare of its citizens. The free-market, contrary to the assumptions of Mr. Pyle, is a convenient myth.
Besides, who is stopping someone from purchasing an SUV? Contrary to the remarks of Mitchell of TN, I do not see car police dictating what people buy and not buy; I do not see the government telling people to not buy cars of a particular class or type. Besides, for all the talk about free market, I'm confident Mr. Pyle was not the first in line to tell the government to stop subsidizing purchases of SUV's during the 1990s and early 2000s (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Hybrid/story?id=97505&page=1). At least be consistent and avoid promoting what is clearly biased, ill-informed, and distortive of what is going on in the world. Most importantly, stop relying on provocative talking-heads for your information.

Gabriel of MI 9:25PM August 15, 2011

1. Firstly Arab countries would like to thank United States for its continual financial support through the purchase of Arab oil at extremely high price.
2. USA is not independent until it is dependent on foreign oil that comes from the countries that do not share USA human rights values.
3. Mid size Hybrid like Hyundai Sonata is roomy enough for 90% of Americans and twice more fuel efficient that average car sold today. It costs $25,800 today. But most of the people do not need so much room Toyota Prius is enough - it costs $23,500 today. Both cars will returns much more than the price premium over the life of the cars in fuel savings and cost of brakes replacement.
4. An average consumer have no idea what is the real cost of oil - the cost of policing the oil supply countries, the number of people that get diseases from oil pollution and the amount of money that goes into health care to treat those diseases. If you try to explained all of this to regular Joe with numbers he will switch to a fuel efficient cars.
5. Lastly do not worry: the new CAFE is just a smoke screen to calm down voices - it is full of loopholes to drive gas guzzler through - OPEC money at work.

George 11:58PM August 12, 2011

Part of the job, yes, being driven around in the Beast. Don't forgot moms who drive their kids around in mini-vans. Don't forget the farmers and ranchers and others who carry heavy payloads or live in rural areas.
At what point did auto manufacturers sit around in a room and say, "you know what, let's just keep making inefficient cars because we want to pollute the environment!"
Constrained and increasingly limited resource. Prove it.
Something else that makes good sense is that I get my daughter a unicorn for her birthday, but just because it makes sense doesn't mean it is grounded in reality.
If you care so much, stop using electricity, stop driving a car and you pay for the federal government's good intentions.

Tom of MD 9:59PM August 12, 2011

Great article Mr. Pyle. It is well beyond time that the government quit making regulations that inhibit the freedoms of the people. Manufacturers are already making huge strides in fuel economy. The problem is that most of these vehicles that have outstanding MPG numbers do not have the utility required by the average vehicle consumer. As per the unfortunate norm, the government ignores the needs of the people to forward their agendas.
I'm saddened by individuals, like Dave, think a political ideology should dictate everything from charitable donations to the vehicles that we all drive. History has taught us time and again that government intrusion into the free market and our homes rarely, if ever, results in positive outcomes.

Mitchel of TN 3:07PM August 12, 2011

So... what you are saying is that we should continue to preserve everyone's right to drive inefficient cars that consume a constrained and increasingly limited resource because it is our right as a citizen? Are you an idiot? What are the hidden cost of ensuring our supply of oil?
Your comment about the President's driving habits are infantile at best. Part of the job. Part of the requirement of being President. How that is relevant to an effort to reduce our oil consumption is beyond me. You must think I am an idiot.
How many hundreds of billions of dollars have we spent of tax payer money in efforts to keep the oil flowing? I've not done the math but I'm confident that when we include our forays into ensuring our supply chain a gallon of gas costs significantly more than the $3.90 we pay at the pump.
I am disappointed that you are just one more talking head promoting a political ideology instead of something that makes good sense. I'm sick to death of politicians and bureaucrats that put party and ideology ahead of the health and benefit of our nation. You should run for congress.

dave of WA 5:50PM August 11, 2011