Thanks, Don!
Now my life will improve because______________.
Please fill in the blank
Re:
http://www.mlive.com/auto/index.ssf/2017/03/trump_michigan_auto_jobs_emiss_1.html#incart_gallery
Cars could be cheaper.
So what is exactly being relaxed? The emissions controls or the fuel economy standards? Both?
It’s about fuel economy regs, but since CO2 has become an emission subject to EPA regulation, and CO2 is intimately linked to fuel economy, it ends up being about both/either.
This:
“President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he will cancel an executive order that sets stringent automotive emissions through 2025 models.”
Again, it’s specifically about greenhouse gas emissions, i.e. CO2.
Thanks to TrumpCare, more people will already be dead before the additional CO2 emissions wreck the planet.
Yeah, thanks a lot, Donald.
“Rascals, do you want to live forever ?”
Because I like swimming, and now there’s going to be even more water!
No time for jokes, E. 
Now my life will improve because those who are dead from lung and related diseases don’t breathe, don’t drive, and don’t create CO2 . Sure, cars will emit more pollutants and toxins, but there has to be a point where if you kill off enough of the urban population, the air becomes cleaner. Plus, less traffic congestion!
…VW is off the hook!
Now Donald can kill off all the city folk in the polluted blue states… especially the Hollywood and TV elites. When the cities fall, there’ll be more wide open spaces for everyone else.
Fiat-Chrysler, arguably one of the shittiest car makers in the world, can keep making shitty cars.
According to The Economist, a fuel tax is a much more efficient way to lower CO[sub]2[/sub] emissions from automobiles. It’s arguable, for sure, but continually increasing CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) goals is certainly not the only way to achieve the goal. It may actually be far from the best way, especially when loopholes are factored in.
Don’t cars in Europe get better gas mileage because of looser emission standards?
Not so much looser across the board, but different. European regs are tighter on CO and CO2, looser on NOx and PM. CO2 output is inversely proportional to fuel economy, so that one pretty much dictates “thou shalt achieve X miles per gallon;” relaxed NOx and PM standards make it easier (or simply possible) to achieve the required fuel economy. This is particularly true of diesels: delayed injection timing is a cost-free way for a manufacturer to lower engine-out NOx so they can sell vehicles in the US, resulting in smaller/cheaper exhaust aftertreatment requirements. The cost of course goes to the US consumer, who has to buy more fuel to reach his destination.
Now that CO2 output has become an issue, the tradeoff is no longer between just between manufacturing cost vs. operating cost; it’s a tradeoff between breathing clean air right now vs. staving off long-term climate change.
Of course a tax on transportation fuels is the rational way to incentivize the production and use of more fuel efficient vehicles, rather than CAFE.
This is why you sometimes hear this sort of thing proposed by conservative policy wonks.
Do you ever hear elected Republicans proposing a fuel tax? No you don’t. All they talk about is repealing CAFE and emissions standards.
Now why exactly do you think that is?
Lower standards will lead to more car sales which will lead to at LEAST 1000 more low-paying jobs so 1000 more people can slide out of welfare and in to bankruptcy. While the environment continues to kill us all, maybe a little faster.