No. They hire people for that. But they and thus the people they hire are accountable to the voter.

HUGE particulate matter emissions from that truck.

So pollution and economy are of no concern to you.

It would be even steeper if new cars were cheaper.

So you are exploiting a loophole known as grandfathering. Hypocritical of you to criticize those who are resisting even tougher regs.

You live in a country that was the first to declare its independence from government without representation. Why are you so keen to surrender that?

No it’s about all car sales. New car prices/costs have a direct impact on all vehicle prices.

And both are likely massive polluters and the scooter is grotesquely unsafe at any speed.

They were recalled because they were failing safety tests when new?

And it would have cost even less if that $11000 car was $8000.

A receding tide lowers all boats. Lower cost new cars means lower cost used cars. All consumers win

And your point would be?

It is more expensive than an $8000 car. That kind of difference might mean the difference between many being without a car versus having one.

Stop with the strawman. Don't lower yourself to the level of alinskyite scumbags like Obama and hrc and warren.

It's about a 30 percent difference - your points don't account for all of that.

Unleaded fuel was coming long before the EPA was created. Pollution should be regulated - never said it shouldn’t. It’s the EPA that is a mistake

No he’s actually incorrect. The average cost of a car is 30,000 in 2015 in 1970 it was 3,542. adjusted for inflation that is $22,000.

an Obama appointee. Answerable - sort of - only to him. I’m sure you would be over-joyed with who Trump would put in her place...

Imagine how much less they would cost without the the excessive govt rules re: fuel economy.

It did and does all of the time. No government agency is compelling self-driving cars, for example. Ditto DOHC, SBC and on and on.