Author Topic: Oh hells no - 55mph (Read 945 times)

Chairboy · « **on:** May 24, 2006, 10:27:31 AM »

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/69045.htm

Quote

May 24, 2006 -- WASHINGTON - In a surprise move yesterday, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton called for "most of the country" to return to a speed limit of 55 mph in an effort to slash fuel consumption.

"The 55-mile speed limit really does lower gas usage. And wherever it can be required, and the people will accept it, we ought to do it," Clinton said at the National Press Club.

Before sounding off on the benefits of a lower speed limit, Clinton called for a combination of tax incentives, the use of more ethanol-based fuel and a $50 billion fund for new energy research to cut the consumption of foreign oil 50 percent by 2025.

She also pushed for half of all the nation's gas stations to have ethanol pumps by 2015, and for every gas station to have them by 2025

This is more of the nanny-state crap. This is a bad idea. Let the market forces work it out. It is not the role of the government to do this. The government should be limited to running the courts, running the military, and basic road infrastructure (maybe). Yet every day it seems that politicians (the democrats have no monopoly on this, the republicans do it just as much nowadays) are trying to make government bigger, more involved, and more controlling.

When are we going to stand up and say "Knock it off"? If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.

Toad · « **Reply #1 on:** May 24, 2006, 10:37:06 AM »

From the unending wellspring of truly bad ideas....another truly bad idea.

B@tfinkV · « **Reply #2 on:** May 24, 2006, 10:38:24 AM »

all the old biddies and less proficient drivers will be gunning it along in 4th or even 3rd gear and wasting 60% more fuel than cruising in a high gear at 70mph.

stupid law.

i bet they will claim it has saved lives pretty soon, and pitty the fool who crashes above the speed limit, for an example will be made of what happens to people who drive at excesive speeds like....63mph...now thats dangerous.

beet1e · « **Reply #3 on:** May 24, 2006, 10:49:19 AM »

This was already tried in America from c1974 until 1981, when states started getting rid of it. Nevada was the first. What I found funny was the presence of all those 7½ litre V8 monsters, in a driving environment where the maximum speed was 55mph.

Still, when the price of crude is being driven ever skywards by demand, which in America is 13m barrels of imported oil daily, mostly from OPEC, what other choices do your politicians have to reduce dependence on foreign oil? If people won't make sacrifices on their own or change their driving habits, the govt. feels obliged to act. Kind of reminds me of the ENY side balancing debacle in the early days of AH2!

Toad · « **Reply #4 on:** May 24, 2006, 10:52:46 AM »

And, as usual, government intervention made it worse.

Far better, as Chair pointed out, to let the market work.

beet1e · « **Reply #5 on:** May 24, 2006, 10:56:47 AM »

So you think that the more rapid consumption of (imported OPEC) oil is a good thing or a bad thing? Will this lead to an increase or a decrease of the price of gasoline? Oh well, if the price goes up, demand will drop.

Brenjen · « **Reply #6 on:** May 24, 2006, 10:58:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by B@tfinkV
all the old biddies and less proficient drivers will be gunning it along in 4th or even 3rd gear and wasting 60% more fuel than cruising in a high gear at 70mph.

stupid law.

i bet they will claim it has saved lives pretty soon, and pitty the fool who crashes above the speed limit, for an example will be made of what happens to people who drive at excesive speeds like....63mph...now thats dangerous.

Umm, of course they will claim that, since we had a federal 55mph law for a couple decades & that's the two selling points they used to cram it down our throat,

* it saves gas

* it saves lives

When they really meant, it generates revenue in the form of speeding tickets because 55 is a stupid speed. If you're going to set the speed limit, it should be 60mph if you used common sense as a guide. 60 seconds in a minute, 60 minutes in an hour. Much easier to calculate on the fly.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #7 on:** May 24, 2006, 10:59:18 AM »

Looks like Hillary is reading "Common Reams" website again (Rolls eyes)
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0501-01.htm

Nilsen · « **Reply #8 on:** May 24, 2006, 10:59:19 AM »

-----------"And wherever it can be required, and the people will accept it, we ought to do it,"----------

No problem then.. just dont accept it.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #9 on:** May 24, 2006, 11:01:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by beet1e
This was already tried in America from c1974 until 1981, when states started getting rid of it. Nevada was the first. What I found funny was the presence of all those 7½ litre V8 monsters, in a driving environment where the maximum speed was 55mph.

Still, when the price of crude is being driven ever skywards by demand, which in America is 13m barrels of imported oil daily, mostly from OPEC, what other choices do your politicians have to reduce dependence on foreign oil? If people won't make sacrifices on their own or change their driving habits, the govt. feels obliged to act. Kind of reminds me of the ENY side balancing debacle in the early days of AH2!

55 speed limit doesn't work, Beet. Thats the point.

Quote

The speed limit was enacted by Congress in March 1974 as part of a package of measures dealing with the oil crisis mph, it was thought, was the most efficient use of an auto's engine and thus would save fuel. As it turned out, however, the energy actually saved was minimal-at best 1 percent of gasoline consumption or about the same amount a driver could realize by increasing the pressure of his radial tires from 24 to 26 pounds.And state officials feel .that the NMSL is an Yet the 55 mph limit Cruising at 55 In the face of this data, speed limit advocates shifted ground.
Source

lukster · « **Reply #10 on:** May 24, 2006, 11:05:22 AM »

Makes me almost glad that Texas is going back to Mexico (thanks to people like Hillary) where there are no laws. Well, so long as you keep a few bucks in yer wallet.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #11 on:** May 24, 2006, 11:07:30 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lukster
Makes me almost glad that Texas is going back to Mexico (thanks to people like Hillary) where there are no laws. Well, so long as you keep a few bucks in yer wallet.

Where "Tex Mex" food takes on a whole new meaning!

Reschke · « **Reply #12 on:** May 24, 2006, 11:09:51 AM »

Yet again they are tossing out time frames that will never happen. Like reducing dependency by 50% before 2025...Geez come on toss down a gaunlet of something attainable like 5-7 years and give the people in our nation something to shoot for other than outsourcing our research on these alternatives to India, China, Malaysia and Pakistan.

Lets push for something other than ethanol as a fuel...I don't know what but something other than corn.

mtndog · « **Reply #13 on:** May 24, 2006, 11:10:09 AM »

it's not the speeding that kills , it's the sudden stop;)

actually, cant remember where i read it but speeding does not cause more accidents, but does increase the likelyhood of a fatality

mtndog

beet1e · « **Reply #14 on:** May 24, 2006, 11:17:13 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
55 speed limit doesn't work, Beet. Thats the point.

Yeah, I know. I was just tr..., er winding you guys up.

At about that same time, we had a 50mph limit imposed on all roads - Dec.73, during the first OPEC crisis. That didn't work either. In fact one of the most spectacular motorway crashes ever known, involving all 6 lanes of the M1, 123 vehicles and 5 fatalities, occurred in Feb.74 while the limit was still 50. As fuel became more plentiful and the pumps began to flow again, more and more people began to ignore it, myself included.