From: dcg@mogun.UUCP (David Gunsul)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Ethanol blended gasoline
Date: 9 Nov 92 02:37:19 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hotrods `R' Us, Montgomery, IL

In article <5841@balrog.ctron.com>, smith@ctron.com (Lawrence C Smith) writes:
> In article <1da8pfINN5d1@bigboote.WPI.EDU>, walkerr@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Robert A Walker) writes:
> 
> >	Taking cars off the road just because they are old, why.
> 
> Because they are responsible for 90% of the autombile pollution, and are

This is complete and total BULL-SHIT cars and I mean all cars
only make up 10% of the worlds pollution.

That's a far cry from the eco-nazis BS that's been used to scare
everyone into believing that cars are evil.


> No one has suggested a mechanism, only the result desired.  I expect that
> when an old car fails the emission test and is condemned, the owner would be
> paid some salvage fee - and perhaps be rebated some "deposit" amount collected
> from purchasers of new or used cars - resulting in enough to buy a newer car
> of similar value but less proclivity for polluting.

That's a really nice way to say: that's a nice hotrod you've got there
to bad you can't have it anymore but don't worry here's $500.00 for 
your pride and joy.


> >some people can't just go out
> >and buy a newer car.
> 
> That can no longer be used to justify letting them drive bigtime polluters.
> If we don't clean up the overall average, the econazi's will have us _all_
> walking or talking the bus.  If we can't work out some sort of way to slip
> a few bucks to the owners of condemned cars to soften the blow, well, better
> them than all of us.

You're talking about eco-nazis?
What the hell do you think YOU are?



> Well, if George had been re-elected, they could have purchased pollution
> rights.  By paying a bit extra in their registration they'd get a "classic"
> sticker which would exempt them from the most rigorous standards.  That
> money might _also_ be used to help subsidize the really needy who drive
> old smokers because that's all they can afford.  With Gore in the copilot
> seat, well, we'll _all_ wind up walking in the slush.

No arguments on this one.


> > I personally wouldn't
> >drive any newer cars by choice, maybe in the future i might be driven
> >by practicality but new cars suck.
> 
> Interesting value judgement.  You're full of grape juice, though.

He's full of grape juice???


> That is the price of progress.  But at least newer cars don't _get_ screwed
> up that often.  I haven't had an engine problem since around 1979, except for
> two EGR valves.  That's _four_ cars.

Yea, the price of progress, when you have progress that means things get 
better and/or easyer not harder.


> > Well that is my blab about why i like older cars and if you
> >don't like it, then tough.
> 
> Nice to see you have an open mind about it, though.

At least he's got a mind about it, you seem to switch from one side
to the other.


> Larry Smith (smith@ctron.com)  No, I don't speak for Cabletron.  Need you ask?
> -
> Liberty is not the freedom to do whatever we want,
> it is the freedom to do whatever we are able.

                      
                                          
                     
                     |                    
                     | David Gunsul       
                     | dcg@mogun.uucp      
                     |------------------------------------------------
                     |  It's amazing what $2,500 worth of big block
                     |  will do to $60,000 worth of high technology. 
Xref: sparky rec.autos:26471 rec.autos.driving:6553