Support NeoGAF

[mckmas8808]

How about we pass a clean ceiling raise, let the Bush tax cuts expire for top earners at end of 2012, continue phasing down the wars, completely end the Libya farce, lift the income cap on Social Security allow the government to negotiate perscription drug costs, and implement the health care law as planned. There, I've solved the issue.

Damn I wish you were a Senator from Michigan. Your plan sounds so good.

 

[jamesinclair]

Obama didnt cave!

Sorry.

Obama only caved a little bit!


Original proposal:
62mpg
Obama compromise:
56.2
Big three lobby: 45mpg

Agreed upon value...

54.5!

Ushering in the largest decrease in auto fuel consumption since the 1970s, President Barack Obama and automobile manufacturers Friday announced a deal that will save drivers money at the pump and dramatically cut heat-trapping gases coming from tailpipes.

The agreement pledges to double overall fuel economy to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, bringing major under-the-hood changes for the nation's automobiles starting in model year 2017. Cars and trucks on the road today average 27 miles per gallon.

"This agreement on fuel standards represents the single most important step we have taken as a nation to reduce our dependence on foreign oil," Obama said, sharing the stage with top executives of the major auto makers before a backdrop of some of the most cutting-edge cars on the road.

"Just as cars will go further on a gallon of gas, our economy will go further on a barrel of oil," Obama said.

When achieved, the 54.5 mile-per-gallon target will reduce U.S. oil consumption from vehicles by 40 percent and halve the amount of greenhouse gas pollution coming out of exhausts.

For American families, the president said the agreement — which will be subject to a mid-course review — means filling up the car every two weeks, instead of every week. That would save $8,000 in fuel costs over the life of a vehicle, he said.

The deal was less than what environmentalists and public health advocates wanted, but more than the Detroit Three automakers desired. In a letter to the president last week, Michigan lawmakers called the higher proposal "overly aggressive," after automakers had said they'd work to get vehicles averaging 42.6 to 46.7 miles per gallon. Green groups, meanwhile, had pushed for a 62 miles-per-gallon target by 2025.

http://news.yahoo.com/president-announces-deal-boost-fuel-economy-160848473.html


The automakers had been lobbying HEAVILY against 56.2. TV ads and all.




Oh, btw, theres just one little detail that the media (lamestream liberal media) wont tell you....

54.5 = CAFE standards....

Which translated into a sticker EPA value of 40. You know, well below the Prius, and at around the level of the Hyundai vehicles.


Thats right, the big three had been fighting tooth and nail against standards for 2025 that asian manufacturers are meeting today/

 

[Jonm1010]

Wow, I get online to get up to date and find out my Representative has been flipped from no to yes.

Jeff Flake, you just lost my vote when you run for Senate. I thought you were one of the reasonable ones.

Works for me. One less vote in support of the crazy wing is helpful no matter who it comes from.

 

[Dr. Malik]

I love how the Obama twitter is putting out the profiles of the GOP representatives in different regions.

 

[Cyan]

Another example might be the political extremes. When the extreme nature of the tea party is commented upon (calling a moderate like Obama a socialist or a marxist), many people point out that there are extremist environmentalists and other extreme liberal groups that fit the same basic description, calling George Bush a Nazi. And that's true, I think they do fit the same basic category. But they are different in every other possible way; they differ in actual influence (extreme environmentalists have virtually none, while nearly 1/4 of the sitting republicans in house self identify as tea partiers) and they differ in size.

What, you don't remember a few years ago when the Green Party took 50 seats in the House?

 

[Aylinato]

Damn I wish you were a Senator from Michigan. Your plan sounds so good.

if PD and me were senators from Michigan we'd own the shit out of congress, they wouldnt know how to handle a zergling rush

 

[DasRaven]

Oh, btw, theres just one little detail that the media (lamestream liberal media) wont tell you....

54.5 = CAFE standards....

Which translated into a sticker EPA value of 40. You know, well below the Prius, and at around the level of the Hyundai vehicles.

Thats right, the big three had been fighting tooth and nail against standards for 2025 that asian manufacturers are meeting today/

The 54.5mpg is for fleet average not individual vehicles. So the Big3, which produce far more large vehicles (pickups, suvs, large sedans), would have to balance that against increased sales and/or efficiency of their smaller offerings.

A company that doesn't produce a large range of vehicles has an advantage, thus the lobbying for a lower standard.

 

[reilo]

I really do feel like gradience has largley been lost in modern discourse of all stripes. If group A does [X] and is criticized for it, group A will point out that group B has also done something in the same basic category as [X]. For example, holding up a vote for the debt limit.

But being in the same basic category leaves enormous wiggle room. In our example above, the Democrats did not actually bring raising the debt limit to an emminent, we-will-default-in-less-than-a-week crisis; they did not extract demands for raising the debt limit, as the limit was passed cleanly.

Another example might be the political extremes. When the extreme nature of the tea party is commented upon (calling a moderate like Obama a socialist or a marxist), many people point out that there are extremist environmentalists and other extreme liberal groups that fit the same basic description, calling George Bush a Nazi. And that's true, I think they do fit the same basic category. But they are different in every other possible way; they differ in actual influence (extreme environmentalists have virtually none, while nearly 1/4 of the sitting republicans in house self identify as tea partiers) and they differ in size.

I think this sort of nuance -- very basic nuance, I might add -- seems to be lost in discussions. This is commonly referred to as "false equivalency," but I think it needs to be explained more fully. Things often differ more in degree than in kind, and degree matters quite a bit.

Totally agreed.

I, and many others, have had immeasurable number of arguments on here about the false equivalency being trotted out day in and day out by many on here.

Similarly in nature, it's also why it's hilarious, to me at least, to read about how republicans are "compromising" on this debt ceiling vote by accepting certain concessions.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I love how the Obama twitter is putting out the profiles of the GOP representatives in different regions.

As if they give a flying fuck.

Boehner has clearly chosen to cave rather than risk his speakership. This all might be brinkmanship still, but with mere days left...putting the BBA in the package is perhaps the most divisive thing he could have done. There should be enough sane republicans in the house to pass a real bill, with full democratic support. There's almost no more time for these games.

Horrible GDP growth
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2011/07/economic_growth_tepid_as_spending_flat.php?ref=fpb

We're fucked.

 

[capslock]

This is the same Obama who ordered the executions of Osama bin Laden?

WTF?

He is infuriatingly wimpy.

 

[Chichikov]

He never said this. He said 'partially'. Which would indicate a small amount.

Fair point.
I guess I should've say I have hard time seeing how cutting pell grants is an effective way to control tuition cost.
Can we agree on that?

I really do feel like gradience has largley been lost in modern discourse of all stripes. If group A does [X] and is criticized for it, group A will point out that group B has also done something in the same basic category as [X]. For example, holding up a vote for the debt limit.

But being in the same basic category leaves enormous wiggle room. In our example above, the Democrats did not actually bring raising the debt limit to an emminent, we-will-default-in-less-than-a-week crisis; they did not extract demands for raising the debt limit, as the limit was passed cleanly.

Another example might be the political extremes. When the extreme nature of the tea party is commented upon (calling a moderate like Obama a socialist or a marxist), many people point out that there are extremist environmentalists and other extreme liberal groups that fit the same basic description, calling George Bush a Nazi. And that's true, I think they do fit the same basic category. But they are different in every other possible way; they differ in actual influence (extreme environmentalists have virtually none, while nearly 1/4 of the sitting republicans in house self identify as tea partiers) and they differ in size.

I think this sort of nuance -- very basic nuance, I might add -- seems to be lost in discussions. This is commonly referred to as "false equivalency," but I think it needs to be explained more fully. Things often differ more in degree than in kind, and degree matters quite a bit.

I think it goes back to our stupid search for "balance" and "hearing both sides of the story".
Not everything in life is balanced, and not every question has two equally correct but politically opposite answers.

 

[Jonm1010]

Is there a chart tracking the unemployment rate and GDP since the republicans took the House and essentially put a stop to any economic recovery activity?

 

[Chichikov]

Is there a chart tracking the unemployment rate and GDP since the republicans took the House and essentially put a stop to any economic recovery activity?

There is such chart, it doesn't support your theory though.

 

[gcubed]

There is such chart, it doesn't support your theory though.

it actually does, but its such a small sample (assuming he means the rate of unemployment since they took office). And if you bigsicily it up its even more drastic

 

[Deku]

I really do feel like gradience has largley been lost in modern discourse of all stripes. If group A does [X] and is criticized for it, group A will point out that group B has also done something in the same basic category as [X]. For example, holding up a vote for the debt limit.
...
I think this sort of nuance -- very basic nuance, I might add -- seems to be lost in discussions. This is commonly referred to as "false equivalency," but I think it needs to be explained more fully. Things often differ more in degree than in kind, and degree matters quite a bit.

I think its often intentional on the part of some people in the sense that when they want to disprove something, it's often easier to use false equivalency to put the side making a claim on the defensive and tangentially derail a topic and take the heat off so to speak.

It happens quite often.

 

[Chichikov]

it actually does, but its such a small sample (assuming he means the rate of unemployment since they took office). And if you bigsicily it up its even more drastic

I don't see how it does.
And by the way, it doesn't mean that the proposition is wrong, just that looking at unemployment data does not support it.

Listen, I too think that the current congress has been destructive to our recovery effort, but that's not enough for me to bend data to fit my ideology.

 

[Jonm1010]

There is such chart, it doesn't support your theory though.

What's my theory? I was just curious to see what's changed for the purposes of possible election drama.

 

[Jonm1010]

I don't see how it does.
And by the way, it doesn't mean that the proposition is wrong, just that looking at unemployment data does not support it.

Listen, I too think that the current congress has been destructive to our recovery effort, but that's not enough for me to bend data to fit my ideology.

If anything my theory would be more tied to the expiration of the stimulus and the overall business community reacting to the drop in demand at large by continuing to slim payroll to remain profitable.

 

[gcubed]

I don't see how it does.
And by the way, it doesn't mean that the proposition is wrong, just that looking at unemployment data does not support it.

Listen, I too think that the current congress has been destructive to our recovery effort, but that's not enough for me to bend data to fit my ideology.

no, i'm not trying to argue it in one way or the other, just noting that the Unemployment rate is higher now then it was in Jan11... and you an remove that dip by putting a blank block over top of it and you just wouldnt see it

 

[GhaleonEB]

Obama didnt cave!

Sorry.

Obama only caved a little bit!


Original proposal:
62mpg
Obama compromise:
56.2
Big three lobby: 45mpg

Agreed upon value...

54.5!

Yeah, I've been reading about these all morning. They're better than I was expecting and will have a pretty huge impact on our overall oil consumption (Ezra Klein has a good poston it today). But right now I get about 37 MPG in my 13 year old Saturn, and I'm looking at 40+ for my next car.

It's one of the administration's strongest policy areas, but we're still playing catch-up. The auto industry really self-immolated (aided by Congress) by holding standards flat the past two decades.

 

[speculawyer]

Obama didnt cave!
Original proposal:
62mpg
Obama compromise:
56.2
Big three lobby: 45mpg

Agreed upon value...

54.5!

I worry about over-reach here. You can't legislate the laws of physics nor can you significantly legislate against what the market wants. It is difficult to make really high mileage cars and it is expensive. If peak oil hits hard, this CAFE number will make sense . . . perhaps it would be even too low. But if peak oil hits hard, there will be no reason to need a high CAFE number since the market will be demanding the high MPG cars.

I worry that if they pick too high of a number too quickly, this will be used against them and the Dems will be all kicked out of office and replaced by ones who want a 28MPG CAFE number. So one needs to be careful not to over-reach since that can be counter-productive.

Look at the hay they made out of a fucking stupid 90+% energy wasting light-bulb. Now imagine the new campaign about how "Obama wants to take away your SUV and your pick-up truck!!!" Careful what you wish for . . .

 

[Suikoguy]

Yeah, I've been reading about these all morning. They're better than I was expecting and will have a pretty huge impact on our oil consumption. But right now I get about 37 MPG in my 13 year old Saturn, and I'm looking at 40+ for my next car.

It's one of the administration's best policy areas, but we're still playing catch-up.

Look at the Ford Focus, seriously.

 

[Chichikov]

What's my theory? I was just curious to see what's changed for the purposes of possible election drama.

I thought you implied that unemployment skyrocketed since the new congress was sworn in.
Did not mean to put words in your mouth.

 

[speculawyer]

Look at the Ford Focus, seriously.

Or the Ford Fusion hybrid.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Is there a chart tracking the unemployment rate and GDP since the republicans took the House and essentially put a stop to any economic recovery activity?

The activity of the House of Representatives is the main driver of economic activity in America? You should write a book on this new theory.

 

[speculawyer]

The activity of the House of Representatives is the main driver of economic activity in America? You should write a book on this new theory.

He said 'economic recovery activity' which obviously referred to legislation.

 

[gcubed]

I thought you implied that unemployment skyrocketed since the new congress was sworn in.
Did not mean to put words in your mouth.

look at this!!

 

[Bishman]

Damn, Nintendo's stock dropped 20 percent today. Hasn't been this low since 2004.

http://www.google.com/finance?q=TYO:7974

Nintendo

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

In our example above, the Democrats did not actually bring raising the debt limit to an emminent, we-will-default-in-less-than-a-week crisis; they did not extract demands for raising the debt limit, as the limit was passed cleanly.

No. They didn't. And give them credit for that.
And I never meant to imply equivalency. I was responding to a post that said McConnell is a scumbag for saying he won't vote for the bill, yet, at the same time, won't oppose it. I don't see the unusual "scumbaggery" in that move. I think it's fairly common practice on both sides. But, I also think that's unfortunate. Sure, that's "politics as usual" and I'm not naive, but why do we accept this kind of thing? It's completely disingenous to get up on the floor and give a grandoise speech (I'm looking at you Obama) about lack of leadership and how our children and seniors will suffer from the massive debt and urging every Democrat to vote no on raising the debt ceiling.
Ugh.... I hate politicians. Every one of them. I don't know why I come here.

 

[Blergmeister]

The activity of the House of Representatives is the main driver of economic activity in America? You should write a book on this new theory.

I think he is just waiting for Republicans in Congress to be congradulated for their hands in the Bush Recovery.

 

[Jonm1010]

The activity of the House of Representatives is the main driver of economic activity in America? You should write a book on this new theory.

That is exactly what I just said.

 

[ToxicAdam]

That is exactly what I just said.

Why else would you want to draw a correlation between the two?

 

[mckmas8808]

Obama didnt cave!

Sorry.

Obama only caved a little bit!


Original proposal:
62mpg
Obama compromise:
56.2
Big three lobby: 45mpg

Agreed upon value...

54.5!


http://news.yahoo.com/president-announces-deal-boost-fuel-economy-160848473.html


The automakers had been lobbying HEAVILY against 56.2. TV ads and all.




Oh, btw, theres just one little detail that the media (lamestream liberal media) wont tell you....

54.5 = CAFE standards....

Which translated into a sticker EPA value of 40. You know, well below the Prius, and at around the level of the Hyundai vehicles.


Thats right, the big three had been fighting tooth and nail against standards for 2025 that asian manufacturers are meeting today/

Glad to see them come to an agreement. So how is this agreement binding? Does it have to pass the Congress?

 

[Jonm1010]

Why else would you want to draw a correlation between the two?

I already stated why in a subsequent post.

 

[Neo C.]

Holy shit, US Dollar to Swiss Franc is now 0.79:1.

WTF is this shit, fix your economy!

 

[Plinko]

Obama didnt cave!

Sorry.

Obama only caved a little bit!


Original proposal:
62mpg
Obama compromise:
56.2
Big three lobby: 45mpg

Agreed upon value...

54.5!


http://news.yahoo.com/president-announces-deal-boost-fuel-economy-160848473.html


The automakers had been lobbying HEAVILY against 56.2. TV ads and all.




Oh, btw, theres just one little detail that the media (lamestream liberal media) wont tell you....

54.5 = CAFE standards....

Which translated into a sticker EPA value of 40. You know, well below the Prius, and at around the level of the Hyundai vehicles.


Thats right, the big three had been fighting tooth and nail against standards for 2025 that asian manufacturers are meeting today/

I always love watching these debates. Seems like it always goes like this:

Auto Industry: We'll never be able to raise MPG more than 5 MPG! Cars will be terribly unsafe! They'll have 50 HP!

Government: Here's a law that says you have to.

Auto Industry: *Shrinks back to HQ to get started*

A couple years down the road, everything is fine and the auto industry has met the MPG standards.

 

[GhaleonEB]

No. They didn't. And give them credit for that.
And I never meant to imply equivalency. I was responding to a post that said McConnell is a scumbag for saying he won't vote for the bill, yet, at the same time, won't oppose it. I don't see the unusual "scumbaggery" in that move.

The reason Reid's bill is in its current state is McConnell told him they would filibuster it if it wasn't. So, um...

 

[Zzoram]

The reason Reid's bill is in its current state is McConnell told him they would filibuster it if it wasn't. So, um...

If Senate Republicans can accept Reid's bill, why can't they convince House Republicans to vote for it?

 

[ToxicAdam]

Holy shit, US Dollar to Swiss Franc is now 0.79:1.

WTF is this shit, fix your economy!

That is fixing our economy (sorta).

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2041115,00.html

 

[SteveMeister]

But right now I get about 37 MPG in my 13 year old Saturn

Which model? None of the '98s were rated anywhere near that under the old system, and all are even lower under the new system:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectModel.jsp?year=1998&make=Saturn

 

[Byakuya769]

Which model? None of the '98s were rated anywhere near that under the old system, and all are even lower under the new system:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectModel.jsp?year=1998&make=Saturn

Busted! Ghaleon's a hyper-miler!

 

[Neo C.]

That is fixing our economy (sorta).

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2041115,00.html

It's horrible. If we didn't get the deal on Tuesday, the Dollar and the Euro will lose their worth significantly, and everybody is going to buy Swiss Franc, thus kill our economy within weeks. The Swiss Franc is already disturbingly overvalued.

 

[Novid]

ok folks which countries dont have a debt celing?

 

[Byakuya769]

ok folks which countries dont have a debt celing?

Only Denmark has something analogous to ours.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Which model? None of the '98s were rated anywhere near that under the old system, and all are even lower under the new system:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectModel.jsp?year=1998&make=Saturn

I know. I don't know why it gets what it does, but it's possible the previous owner tweaked it. I used to get just over 40 MPG, but as it's aged, that has dropped a bit. It's a 1998 SL2, and the reason I'm slow to give it up is because of what I get out of it.

It's showing signs of dying, though, so it needs to be put down this year or early next.

 

[RustyNails]

New things I'm hearing is that if Obama uses 14th, the confidence in US economy will still be impacted. Gosh, this is so disorienting.

 

[Oblivion]

 

[balladofwindfishes]

http://images2.dailykos.com/i/user/6685/tweet2.jpg

Was he drunk?

 

[empty vessel]

New things I'm hearing is that if Obama uses 14th, the confidence in US economy will still be impacted. Gosh, this is so disorienting.

Banana Republic.

(Which we totally are, incidentally.)

 

[outunderthestars]

Was he drunk?

At least he wasn't crying this time....