Let’s see how Chicago looks when it goes bankrupt. Because it’s coming. No doubt about it.
UnknownUser
david-c-david
I’m going to laugh when Ford fixes up the train station for millions then sells it to GM for millions less (like they did the RenCen) LOL.
Where can I buy my “South Dakota emissions” car? Oh wait, I can’t? What if South Dakota decides “we don’t have a city the size of anything in California, and we have never had a “smog” problem, therefore we don’t want to follow ANY of the federal standards”. Apparently you’d be all for that, right? (feels a…
We have a federal system that creates federal standards. If California want’s tougher national standards, they can try to get laws passed in the federal congress, just like everyone else does. People that keep saying California is doing nothing to other states by doing this are delusional.
You realize people have pulled smoke into their lungs for “fun” for hundreds of years, right? Visual smog is not dangerous, it just looks ugly.
This suit is about rolling back CO2 levels. It’s not about Pollution.
On the other hand, the left keep making autos more and more expensive, taking them out of the reach of the poor, stranding them and forever dooming them to live in the city squalor. No, the health costs are much much higher as liberals increase the price of individual transportation out of the reach of anyone but the…
The left want poor people stuck in slums inside cities so they will vote for them. Expensive cars force the poor to live, grow up, and raise more kids inside these mostly democrat controlled hell holes by keeping them from leaving the city. Transportation, individual transportation, is what give freedom. Liberals want…
Counter argument. This lawsuit is about MPG and CO2. Not “smog”. Sorry. Get your fact first.
What’s even more hilarious, is the EPA that studied it, finally admitted Particulate matter from autos and diesels cause NO deaths. There is ZERO proof, as you said.
See, you read this blog site, that doesn’t really talk about the facts, and went right to “SMOG!” Unfortunately, that’s not what this is about. Don’t worry, Pruitt isn’t trying to bring back smoggy LA, regardless of what uniformed (or out right lying bloggers) try to tell you.
Even more hilarious, is they are complaining about Car’s output of PLANT FOOD. That’s what this argument is about, California wants to force everyone on the planet to stop putting PLANT FOOD into the atmosphere.
ZERO studies show current particulate laws are inadiquate.
CO2 is plant food, not polution.
You are spewing complete BS. The exemption was for CO2 and particulate, which is Plant Food and tiny things that have been proven to be non-toxic to humans at current federal levels. This has nothing to do with “pollution”. CO2 is plant food, not pollution. Seriously, learn what you’re talking about.
So, you have the mistaken belief that the EPA fixes technology, or develops it. It does not. And the laws created to create the EPA and it’s power ALL have “cost” in them. When poor people can no longer afford personal transportation because California has made the price of cars astronomical, the Feds MUST reign them…
LOL, it’s not the job of the government to contstrain business. You are very very very confused.
So move. You don’t have the right to force Montana or North Dakota to suffer because you chose to live in a valley after the internal combustion engine became something needed.
Wrong. As soon as you figure out a way for the rich people of California, who’s average income is almost TWICE as much as the states at the bottom, to pay for those poor people’s autos that California regulation forces on the entire US, you can have your separate and expensive CARB. What Pruitt is doing is EXACTLY why…