Chevrolet Corvette Stingray C7 Forum - View Single Post

ZYAL8R · 01-07-2009, 01:23 AM

That they put GM at a disadvantage because thanks to low gas prices, the cars the gov't wants them to build aren't desireable to consumers. They exist though.

One last thing before I turn in. We bought 142.3 billion gallons of gasoline in 2007 (which was the highest year to date). at $.18 a gallon; the federal government makes roughly $26 billion. That's pocket change hardly worth mentioning when your an entity taking in Trillions of dollars a year. The government not allowing high-mpg cars theories just don't make sense....

http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html[/QUOTE]

But that's a contradiction in itself. Think about it. If those low MPG cars exist, and I think they do. And the gov't says, OK, we want some higher MPG cars, BUT not the ones that we know can go much higher, that do exist, but we won't mention it here, well that does add billions to the G-man's bottom line. It looks "green-er" than what is currently available, but not as "green" as what could be done. Which in in turn adds an a@@load of "green" to the bottom line, b/c of more gas purchased, then taxed by the G-Man.

I fully believe in the theory behind big oil, but I am not so sure that the average legislator can fully appreciate the dynamics of what they might be asking for in terms of greener, higher MPG cars and what it may/may not do for the economy. Of course the economy is just stupid right now, which in turn affects me. Maybe I'm looking for answers and can find none, but just b/c the economy is stupid-bad, I can't think for one minute big oil doesn't have something to do with it.

The worst part is, come hell or high water, I will cower at the pumps and burn as much fuel as fast as I can in my new 2SS.

And after all the ranting, that's how "they" know they have me by the

I do however, value your opinion

and it has me thinking.

01-07-2009, 01:23 AM	#30
ZYAL8R Drives: 2010 SS/RS Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: In my garage Posts: 905	That they put GM at a disadvantage because thanks to low gas prices, the cars the gov't wants them to build aren't desireable to consumers. They exist though. One last thing before I turn in. We bought 142.3 billion gallons of gasoline in 2007 (which was the highest year to date). at $.18 a gallon; the federal government makes roughly $26 billion. That's pocket change hardly worth mentioning when your an entity taking in Trillions of dollars a year. The government not allowing high-mpg cars theories just don't make sense.... http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html[/QUOTE] But that's a contradiction in itself. Think about it. If those low MPG cars exist, and I think they do. And the gov't says, OK, we want some higher MPG cars, BUT not the ones that we know can go much higher, that do exist, but we won't mention it here, well that does add billions to the G-man's bottom line. It looks "green-er" than what is currently available, but not as "green" as what could be done. Which in in turn adds an a@@load of "green" to the bottom line, b/c of more gas purchased, then taxed by the G-Man. I fully believe in the theory behind big oil, but I am not so sure that the average legislator can fully appreciate the dynamics of what they might be asking for in terms of greener, higher MPG cars and what it may/may not do for the economy. Of course the economy is just stupid right now, which in turn affects me. Maybe I'm looking for answers and can find none, but just b/c the economy is stupid-bad, I can't think for one minute big oil doesn't have something to do with it. The worst part is, come hell or high water, I will cower at the pumps and burn as much fuel as fast as I can in my new 2SS. And after all the ranting, that's how "they" know they have me by the I do however, value your opinion and it has me thinking.