ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 18th September 2019, 09:33 PM   #1
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,749
How will Trump supporters spin this one?

At his New Mexico rally, Trump stated that as part of his wanting to make cars safer he was planned to get rid of rules and regulations so that cars could be made of stronger materials that won't "collapse" in an accident.

So just curious, how does removing crumple zones make cars safer?
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2019, 09:44 PM   #2
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 25,665
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
At his New Mexico rally, Trump stated that as part of his wanting to make cars safer he was planned to get rid of rules and regulations so that cars could be made of stronger materials that won't "collapse" in an accident.

So just curious, how does removing crumple zones make cars safer?
"We take him seriously, not literally..."
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2019, 09:54 PM   #3
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 17,704
Nothing to defend. He sounds like my in laws. Some old people are not afraid to tell you cars were safer back in their day.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2019, 10:11 PM   #4
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,122
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
At his New Mexico rally, Trump stated that as part of his wanting to make cars safer he was planned to get rid of rules and regulations so that cars could be made of stronger materials that won't "collapse" in an accident.

So just curious, how does removing crumple zones make cars safer?
Do you think Trump understands what a crumple zone is?
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2019, 10:22 PM   #5
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,482
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
At his New Mexico rally, Trump stated that as part of his wanting to make cars safer he was planned to get rid of rules and regulations so that cars could be made of stronger materials that won't "collapse" in an accident.

So just curious, how does removing crumple zones make cars safer?
"It's true, just look at how these new deathtraps collapse in a car crash. The old beasts of steel could brush off collisions that total the new cars. Think of the children!"

They've come so far, they might as well go all the way to Retardtown.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2019, 11:36 PM   #6
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,233
Just another in an endless series of stupid things Trump blurts out that he’s forgotten or contradicted by the next day/hour/sentence.

As it doesn’t involve treason or corruption and will cost no lives because it will never happen, I don’t really care too much about this one. It’s just another illustration of what a dolt he is. Over a decade in fire/EMS confirmed vividly how much safer today’s cars are then the “stronger” cars of decades past.

What a flaming idiot bigmouth Trump is.

Last edited by sts60; 19th September 2019 at 12:05 AM.
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2019, 11:45 PM   #7
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 27,123
Originally Posted by sts60 View Post
Just another in an endless series of stupid things Trump blurts our that he’s forgotten or contradicted the next day/hour/sentence.

As it doesn’t involve treason or corruption and will cost no lives because it will never happen, I don’t really care too much about this one. It’s just another illustration of what a dolt he is. Over a decade in fire/EMS confirmed vividly how much safer today’s cars are then the “stronger” cars of decades past.

What a flaming idiot bigmouth Trump is.
All of the above is true but then again there's 40% of the US electorate who believe what President Trump says because it aligns with their own world view.

They honestly believe that making cars more environmentally friendly and fuel efficient drives up the price significantly. If it wasn't for all that eco-nonsense, their car would cost the same as it did in 1980.

Same with crumple zones. Time was when you could have a fender bender and everything could be fixed for $100 and there was no need to involve the insurance company. Nowadays all you need do is lean against a car and you've caused $1000s in damage. Stands to reason that older cars are sturdier and better in a crash regardless of what so-called experts might say. It's all a scam to get good honest people to pay far more than they need to for their cars.

IOW, as BobTheCoward says, there's nothing to defend, he's describing the world as a significant proportion of the US electorate, and almost all of his base, see it.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 01:17 AM   #8
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,203
Then they can have cheaper cars with no safety built in. As long as they are prepared to buy them from North Korea and to die horrifically when they crash. Darwinism in action.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 01:31 AM   #9
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 27,123
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Then they can have cheaper cars with no safety built in. As long as they are prepared to buy them from North Korea and to die horrifically when they crash. Darwinism in action.
Sadly given their age profile they've likely already bred so little chance of Darwinism having much of an effect.

The US auto industry will be delighted to provide vehicles which are as dangerous and inefficient as the market will bear and in any case the US auto makers seem to be retreating to their own market and not really bothering with the rest of the world. Time to break out those late 1970's designs again, a proper 427 engine yielding 160 hp and getting 6 mpg is what a significant part of the US market seems to want.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 03:55 AM   #10
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,870
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
All of the above is true but then again there's 40% of the US electorate who believe what President Trump says because it aligns with their own world view.

They honestly believe that making cars more environmentally friendly and fuel efficient drives up the price significantly. If it wasn't for all that eco-nonsense, their car would cost the same as it did in 1980.

Same with crumple zones. Time was when you could have a fender bender and everything could be fixed for $100 and there was no need to involve the insurance company. Nowadays all you need do is lean against a car and you've caused $1000s in damage. Stands to reason that older cars are sturdier and better in a crash regardless of what so-called experts might say. It's all a scam to get good honest people to pay far more than they need to for their cars.
To be fair the cars themselves did better in accidents, just not the occupants which some people think is important.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 04:11 AM   #11
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 27,123
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
To be fair the cars themselves did better in accidents, just not the occupants which some people think is important.
Not if the video posted earlier is representative, the older car came off a lot worse.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 04:13 AM   #12
erlando
Graduate Poster
 
erlando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,554
Just another proof that the doofus doesn't even understand concepts explained in early high school. Why not get rid of seat belts while he's at it..?

I'm sure american car manufacturers will gladly supply cars human-sized blenders to idiots ignorant of basic physics.
__________________
"If it can grow, it can evolve" - Eugenie Scott, Ph.D Creationism disproved?
Evolution IS a blind watchmaker
erlando is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 05:44 AM   #13
Armitage72
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,316
Originally Posted by erlando View Post
Just another proof that the doofus doesn't even understand concepts explained in early high school. Why not get rid of seat belts while he's at it..?

"The next time you're in your car, put on the seat belt and lean forward. It doesn't stop you from moving. How is that supposed to protect you? It's just an added expense for something completely useless."
Armitage72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 05:51 AM   #14
timhau
NWO Litter Technician
 
timhau's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Looks like Finland. Smells like Finland. Quacks like Finland. Where the hell am I?
Posts: 13,268
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
Not if the video posted earlier is representative, the older car came off a lot worse.
Yeah. And if the drivers were people, the driver of the Malibu might walk away from the crash if he was lucky. The driver of the Bel-Air would never walk again.
__________________
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me.
- Emo Philips
timhau is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 05:53 AM   #15
bonzombiekitty
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,486
Originally Posted by timhau View Post
Yeah. And if the drivers were people, the driver of the Malibu might walk away from the crash if he was lucky. The driver of the Bel-Air would never walk again.
It looked like the driver of the Malibu would almost certainly walk away from that crash - possibly with a limp from a foot injury. The driver of the Bel-Air, as you said would probably never walk again if they even survived.

It's an argument I've had with my parents before. "Look at how much the new cars collapse!" I've had to explain a few times that's the whole point. The car takes the force of the impact and protects the passengers.

Last edited by bonzombiekitty; 19th September 2019 at 05:55 AM.
bonzombiekitty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 06:04 AM   #16
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 27,123
Originally Posted by Armitage72 View Post
"The next time you're in your car, put on the seat belt and lean forward. It doesn't stop you from moving. How is that supposed to protect you? It's just an added expense for something completely useless."
.....and if it did hold, it'd just trap you in the car whereas without that belt you could very well be thrown safely clear .....
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 06:10 AM   #17
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 32,522
He's going to hire these guys design his new cars...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."
Mike! is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 06:35 AM   #18
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 13,902
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
Sadly given their age profile they've likely already bred so little chance of Darwinism having much of an effect.

The US auto industry will be delighted to provide vehicles which are as dangerous and inefficient as the market will bear and in any case the US auto makers seem to be retreating to their own market and not really bothering with the rest of the world. Time to break out those late 1970's designs again, a proper 427 engine yielding 160 hp and getting 6 mpg is what a significant part of the US market seems to want.
Actually, in a pleasant surprise, it seems that U.S. Auto manufacturers have been backing California on this. Unless there's new information I haven't gotten yet (I reserve the right to be wrong )
__________________
Ideologies separate us. Dreams and anguish bring us together. - Eugene Ionesco
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 06:37 AM   #19
slyjoe
Graduate Poster
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins
Posts: 1,703
Originally Posted by sts60 View Post
Just another in an endless series of stupid things Trump blurts out that he’s forgotten or contradicted by the next day/hour/sentence.

As it doesn’t involve treason or corruption and will cost no lives because it will never happen, I don’t really care too much about this one. It’s just another illustration of what a dolt he is. Over a decade in fire/EMS confirmed vividly how much safer today’s cars are then the “stronger” cars of decades past.

What a flaming idiot bigmouth Trump is.
What a flaming flamingo flamenco idiot bigmouth Trump is. No, wait - I guess you did have it right
__________________
"You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade
slyjoe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 06:41 AM   #20
slyjoe
Graduate Poster
 
slyjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Near Harmonica Virgins
Posts: 1,703
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
Sadly given their age profile they've likely already bred so little chance of Darwinism having much of an effect.

The US auto industry will be delighted to provide vehicles which are as dangerous and inefficient as the market will bear and in any case the US auto makers seem to be retreating to their own market and not really bothering with the rest of the world. Time to break out those late 1970's designs again, a proper 427 engine yielding 160 hp and getting 6 mpg is what a significant part of the US market seems to want.
I'm not so sure. Consumers are more educated these days, and as litigious as our society is, the carmakers may view some changes as more costly than the savings.
__________________
"You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade
slyjoe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 06:46 AM   #21
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,734
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
At his New Mexico rally, Trump stated that as part of his wanting to make cars safer he was planned to get rid of rules and regulations so that cars could be made of stronger materials that won't "collapse" in an accident.

So just curious, how does removing crumple zones make cars safer?
I tuned into some right wing radio the other week, can't remember which guy but he had a rant about lightweight cars, I think this is a talking point they're pushing.

The gist was that liberals hate cars because they represent freedom. Seriously, that's not the exact words but they were pretty close.

The narrative is that liberals started pushing for lighter cars in the 70s and justified it as cutting foreign oil dependence. Then they switched to limiting carbon as a justification. But its all a ruse, they just hate freedom.

The punchline of the whole thing is that thousands of deaths a year are attributable to these lighter cars (supposedly) and that liberals are murdering thousands of people a year because they hate car freedom.

Now I'm not sure if the reports that they point to say that heavier cars would save that many lives. Given the wacky misrepresentations in the rest of the rant, I'm not inclined to assume the science is being accurately portrayed.

But I expect to hear more of this talking point.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 06:50 AM   #22
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,870
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I tuned into some right wing radio the other week, can't remember which guy but he had a rant about lightweight cars, I think this is a talking point they're pushing.

The gist was that liberals hate cars because they represent freedom. Seriously, that's not the exact words but they were pretty close.

The narrative is that liberals started pushing for lighter cars in the 70s and justified it as cutting foreign oil dependence. Then they switched to limiting carbon as a justification. But its all a ruse, they just hate freedom.

The punchline of the whole thing is that thousands of deaths a year are attributable to these lighter cars (supposedly) and that liberals are murdering thousands of people a year because they hate car freedom.

Now I'm not sure if the reports that they point to say that heavier cars would save that many lives. Given the wacky misrepresentations in the rest of the rant, I'm not inclined to assume the science is being accurately portrayed.

But I expect to hear more of this talking point.
Like how efficient light bulbs turned Trump Orange you have to remember that Republican Science is nothing like our own.

Seriously this is really far from the craziest thing Trump pushes, like windmill cancer. What to Trump supporting republicans actually think?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 07:14 AM   #23
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 20,468
When you watch the Malibu/Bel Air crash what drives it home for me is the interior camera where it shows that almost at the exact moment of impact the entire interior of the Bel Air almost immediately ceases to exist. Like a few milliseconds after the impact there is just no "interior" of the Bel Air left. You ain't walking away from that.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 07:15 AM   #24
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 6,720
I wonder how many of these rollbacks on regulations will effect those industries.

Lets be honest, best case scenario for Trump is he gets voted in again next year. It's not really likely, but it's possible. If he doesn't get voted in, whatever Dem POTUS comes in is going to completely unravel Trump's presidency and flip everything he's done in their first month. I'd assume making changes in the way plants and factories do their manufacturing or whatever would cost money. So would it even be in their best interest to adhere to the more lenient policies knowing that it's completely possible it could change in a year and a half? I feel like they would just stick to the more restrictive side in an attempt to forego having to change everything again in a year and a half.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 07:31 AM   #25
Shalamar
Dark Lord of the JREF
 
Shalamar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Else
Posts: 4,585
I have enough issues buying and driving cars as it is (I'm very tall). Why would I want to buy a car that is more likely to severely injure, or even kill me? I also drive a couple hundred miles a day. I also don't want a LESS fuel efficient vehicle!
__________________

"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head."
Shalamar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 07:53 AM   #26
Armitage72
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,316
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
I wonder how many of these rollbacks on regulations will effect those industries.

Lets be honest, best case scenario for Trump is he gets voted in again next year. It's not really likely, but it's possible. If he doesn't get voted in, whatever Dem POTUS comes in is going to completely unravel Trump's presidency and flip everything he's done in their first month. I'd assume making changes in the way plants and factories do their manufacturing or whatever would cost money. So would it even be in their best interest to adhere to the more lenient policies knowing that it's completely possible it could change in a year and a half? I feel like they would just stick to the more restrictive side in an attempt to forego having to change everything again in a year and a half.


Part of the current problem is that car manufacturers didn't immediately begin changing their operations while praising Trump for his generosity.

1. Trump rolled back President Obama's emissions regulations, which were comparable to California.
2. Several major auto manufacturers said "No thanks, we're going to stick with California's limits.
3. Trump is currently trying to revoke California's ability to set their own standards.
Armitage72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 07:55 AM   #27
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 20,468
So what's his next step? Order the Big 3 to make less efficient cars?
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 07:56 AM   #28
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,395
What's to spin?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 07:58 AM   #29
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,749
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What's to spin?
That Trump believes that removing the crumple zones and making cars of stronger materials will make cars safer. i.e. the exact opposite of what we have learned about car safety in the last 40 years.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 08:03 AM   #30
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,395
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
That Trump believes that removing the crumple zones and making cars of stronger materials will make cars safer. i.e. the exact opposite of what we have learned about car safety in the last 40 years.
Sorry. I should have been more clear. I understand the what, as such. I guess I'm asking, why does it need to be spun?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 08:05 AM   #31
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 6,720
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Sorry. I should have been more clear. I understand the what, as such. I guess I'm asking, why does it need to be spun?
Because it makes him look like a raving jackass which triggers most of his supporters to imply he's playing 3d chess instead of just being a born and bred moron.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

Last edited by plague311; 19th September 2019 at 08:17 AM.
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 08:15 AM   #32
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,395
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
Because it makes him look like a raving jackass which triggers most of his supporters to imply he's playing 3d chess instead of just being a born andbred moron.
Oh, okay.

theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 08:17 AM   #33
Cabbage
Graduate Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,628
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Sorry. I should have been more clear. I understand the what, as such. I guess I'm asking, why does it need to be spun?
If, as I surmise, you think it need not be spun: You are correct!

Wanna know why you are correct?

Because Trump's constituency is a Confederacy of Dunces.


Edited by kmortis:  Removed to comply with rule 12/0

Last edited by kmortis; 23rd September 2019 at 05:45 AM.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 08:30 AM   #34
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,355
Originally Posted by bonzombiekitty View Post
It looked like the driver of the Malibu would almost certainly walk away from that crash - possibly with a limp from a foot injury. The driver of the Bel-Air, as you said would probably never walk again if they even survived.

It's an argument I've had with my parents before. "Look at how much the new cars collapse!" I've had to explain a few times that's the whole point. The car takes the force of the impact and protects the passengers.
BMW and VW figured that out a while back. When you have cars flying down the autobahn, it helps to figure out how to minimize injuries when they wreck. The problem isn't crashing the car into a pole, it's the engine plowing through the driver's seat when you hit a pole. So if you can figure out how to send that a different direction, it makes it a lot easier to survive.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 08:36 AM   #35
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 20,468
And now with things like adaptive cruise, lane departure warnings, automatic breaking we're moving (even more) into the "hey how about just not having the accident in the first place?" mentality which is also good.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 09:17 AM   #36
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,197
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
At his New Mexico rally, Trump stated that as part of his wanting to make cars safer he was planned to get rid of rules and regulations so that cars could be made of stronger materials that won't "collapse" in an accident.

So just curious, how does removing crumple zones make cars safer?
The cage around the passengers is not supposed to collapse in an accident. And even with crumple zones, the sections that crumple still need significant strength, or the crumpling process won't absorb enough energy.

The real argument here is about gas mileage requirements, and how they affect car safety. The argument Trump is referring to is basically that in order to meet gas mileage requirements, car manufacturers have to make their cars as light as possible. But if they could make their cars heavier (and with worse gas mileage), they could make them stronger and therefore safer. And it's a very reasonable argument.

It's not an open-and-shut case for three reasons, though. First, how much safety benefit you get, and how much worse mileage you get, from adding more weight is not a simple question, it's a complex engineering one. But it can probably be figured out with enough effort.

The second and third are related, and harder to predict though less technical. Second, since using more material costs more, and car manufacturers have an incentive to cut costs even in the absence of gas mileage regulations, it's not clear how much car manufacturers would change their designs if the gas mileage regs were scaled back. Third, it's not obvious what customers would prefer in the tradeoff between gas mileage and safety.

But even in the absence of such answers, the case for it is basically that manufacturers and consumers should be the ones deciding, not the government. In other words, consumers should be allowed to pick less fuel efficient cars in exchange for more safety, if that's what they want.

So, anyone want to voice their opinion about the actual tradeoff here?
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 09:32 AM   #37
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 27,123
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The cage around the passengers is not supposed to collapse in an accident. And even with crumple zones, the sections that crumple still need significant strength, or the crumpling process won't absorb enough energy.

The real argument here is about gas mileage requirements, and how they affect car safety. The argument Trump is referring to is basically that in order to meet gas mileage requirements, car manufacturers have to make their cars as light as possible. But if they could make their cars heavier (and with worse gas mileage), they could make them stronger and therefore safer. And it's a very reasonable argument.

It's not an open-and-shut case for three reasons, though. First, how much safety benefit you get, and how much worse mileage you get, from adding more weight is not a simple question, it's a complex engineering one. But it can probably be figured out with enough effort.

The second and third are related, and harder to predict though less technical. Second, since using more material costs more, and car manufacturers have an incentive to cut costs even in the absence of gas mileage regulations, it's not clear how much car manufacturers would change their designs if the gas mileage regs were scaled back. Third, it's not obvious what customers would prefer in the tradeoff between gas mileage and safety.

But even in the absence of such answers, the case for it is basically that manufacturers and consumers should be the ones deciding, not the government. In other words, consumers should be allowed to pick less fuel efficient cars in exchange for more safety, if that's what they want.

So, anyone want to voice their opinion about the actual tradeoff here?
Car manufacturers presumably just want to make money so they will tend to maximise profit. Unless people are willing to pay a premium for a "better" car (and many will as BMW/Mercedes/Lexus success shows), it comes down to building a car as cheaply as possible. Heavy cars can be cheaper to build than lighter ones because you can use cheap, weak materials and under-engineer them.

Of course, if the rest of the world demands highly fuel efficient vehicles, then it's unlikely that too many global car makers will make a US-only model that's heavier and less fuel efficient (it doesn't make much sense). I guess domestic market SUVs and pickups can be made solely to meet US market demand but most manufacturers think globally and employ platform sharing.

Even if there are US-only models it also doesn't follow that a heavy car is necessarily a safer car. As long as safety standards are met then it could just be that the heavier car uses less strong materials (per unit weight) in a less optimised design. Instead of a carbon fibre monocoque, just build a heavy old ladder chassis and have a separate body. Indeed the heavier vehicle could be less crash-worthy.

The thing that strikes me even with global vehicles, is that US models tend to have larger engines, without necessarily having higher power outputs, so while in Europe we may have a 1.4, 1.6, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 litre engines on sale, only the 3.0 is available in the US. My Skoda is car with an engine which simply isn't available in the US but the 1.4 litre 150hp petrol engine is plenty powerful enough for most needs apart from heavy towing and the car happily does 800+ miles in a day from South Wales to the Alps without missing a beat while getting around 50mpg at an indicated steady 80mph.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 09:44 AM   #38
Doubt
Philosopher
 
Doubt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,051
Trump's grandstanding won't change what the automakers are working on.

The one thing it might do is make it easier for a competitor from outside the US to get into the US market. But that only works if the competitor is already making a substandard product in a third world country. That is something to worry about.

Trump has not touched safety standards yet, which is why cars have crumple zones.

The technology investments needed to make cars as fuel efficient won't be going away. I used to work in a steel mill that made auto body panel steel. The hot and cold rolling mills used to have fixed settings on each stand for reduction. The fixed settings limited how thin the steel could be made. To make thinner steel dynamically controlled pressure and speed systems were needed. Those have been in place for decades now and improved over time. They won't go back to making thicker steel and the auto companies won't ask for it.

The auto industry is global. The car makers, (Old and new world,) still have to meet standards for Europe and Japan that won't be weakened by Trump. They are not going to separate all their design work for different countries for major components.

All Trump is accomplishing here is "owning the libs" while potentially opening the market up to really bad cars and trucks from underdeveloped countries.
__________________
45 es un titere
Doubt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 09:48 AM   #39
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 27,123
Originally Posted by Doubt View Post
Trump's grandstanding won't change what the automakers are working on.

The one thing it might do is make it easier for a competitor from outside the US to get into the US market.
Expect the launch of the Hindustan Ambassador in the near future (though they will have to fit it with a 7 litre V8 for the US market)
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th September 2019, 09:58 AM   #40
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 22,905
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
"It's true, just look at how these new deathtraps collapse in a car crash. The old beasts of steel could brush off collisions that total the new cars. Think of the children!"

They've come so far, they might as well go all the way to Retardtown.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


McHrozni
Consumer Reports? You know what else starts with "Co"? That's right, COMMUNISM!

Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
BMW and VW figured that out a while back. When you have cars flying down the autobahn, it helps to figure out how to minimize injuries when they wreck. The problem isn't crashing the car into a pole, it's the engine plowing through the driver's seat when you hit a pole. So if you can figure out how to send that a different direction, it makes it a lot easier to survive.
It also helps to have breakaway poles. I expect Trump will be coming out against those any day now.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:54 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.