Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
See, here's where it would help to know anything at all about how government works.
Yes it would and I'll be happy to explain it. A treaty is all encompassing word for an agreement between two or more nations. The Constitution dictates that treaties must be approved by a 2/3 vote in the Senate. All major treaties that we are legally obligated to uphold have gone through this process. A sitting President or even the government as whole cannot simply decide to back out of them.
Early on in our history it became apparent that this clause was impractical and the Senate has abdicated some it's responsibility to the President for minor things. The Senate does not have to involved in an agreement between the US and Afghanistan for buying some goat cheese for the troops. This is something that can be done unilaterally by the administration.
That agreement by the President is subject to two things. Laws passed by Congress or the President deciding to vacate the agreement.
In other words the same legal authority exercised by Obama to come to this agreement with Iran is same legal authority Trump can use to end it. See the Kyoto protocol signed under the Clinton administration but never passed by the Senate for reference.
Last edited by thecoalman; 11-22-2016 at 10:25 AM..
Reliability? My old Lexus RX Hybrid has been bulletproof from a reliability stand point. So much so that, although there a lot of things I like about the 2016, I see no reason to upgrade just to get something newer.
Maintenance wise, there isn't any difference in cost. And if things don't break I have no reason to visit the repair shop.
Republicans really wanted to kill the Iran deal, but lacked the votes to make it stick.
FYI yes they did including some Democrat votes. The reason it went through was a very odd way this went down and it angered many people like me because the minority was allowed to dictate the outcome. They did not vote on approving it, they voted on disapproving it which means you only need 41 votes in the Senate to kill the resolution without actually approving anyhting. This deal was never approved by Congress.
Reliability? My old Lexus RX Hybrid has been bulletproof from a reliability stand point. So much so that, although there a lot of things I like about the 2016, I see no reason to upgrade just to get something newer.
Maintenance wise, there isn't any difference in cost. And if things don't break I have no reason to visit the repair shop.
If one drives a diesel, the emission systems post '07 have done nothing but cause headaches. Also the addition of them has brought the MPG down.
I also happen to be into snowmobiles and UTV's. Again, the added emission requirements have caused many issues. A snowmobile engine that once would go 8k miles , now needs a rebuilt at half that interval.
Polaris RZR's have caused injuries due to fires being started by the heat generated by having the engine running extremely lean.
You don't get something for nothing, added MPG isn't just done by waving a magic wand.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,551 posts, read 81,085,957 times
Reputation: 57750
It probably won't last, but right now the cost of gas makes it more desirable to drive than use public transportation, and people tend to pay less attention to MPG when buying cars, with comfort and power more important. I filled up my wife's car Sunday for $2.26/gallon, went back Sunday to fill mine and it was down to $2.19. We have a high gas tax, many states are averaging below $2 now.
Why would anyone want to waste money fueling and maintaining an ICE any longer than necessary? This makes no sense in my mind but then I have to work for my money which makes dogmatic statements like the above nonsensical. I'll drive whatever works.
Why do you "waste" money on a big house or a $700 iphone when there are much cheaper alternatives?
I'm not wasting money at all with a combustion engine vehicle. When an electric car can go over 400 miles without a charge like i can now in my chevy tahoe then i might consider it. And when the infrastructure is set up and just as easy as fueling up my tahoe again i might consider it. I can find a gas station almost every mile almost anywhere in the country but I can't find electric car charging stations anywhere. I also love parking my tahoe and not having to worry about plugging it in every night.
It probably won't last, but right now the cost of gas makes it more desirable to drive than use public transportation, and people tend to pay less attention to MPG when buying cars, with comfort and power more important. I filled up my wife's car Sunday for $2.26/gallon, went back Sunday to fill mine and it was down to $2.19. We have a high gas tax, many states are averaging below $2 now.
It would take a drastic cost of gas to get me to ride public transportation. I would say if gas costs close to $5 a gallon then i would THINK about public transportation. Even then taking public transportation wouldn't save you much because they would raise the ticket price because of higher fuel costs.
I would cut back on other areas i spend in my life before i would stop driving my personal vehicle. Most people buy luxuries like $700 phones and eat out a lot and buy all these luxuries then complain about gas prices. A car is a necessity not a luxury. There is no public transportation where i live unless you drive to it first.
Location: San Ramon, Seattle, Anchorage, Reykjavik
2,254 posts, read 2,734,754 times
Reputation: 3203
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabchuck
If one drives a diesel, the emission systems post '07 have done nothing but cause headaches. Also the addition of them has brought the MPG down.
I also happen to be into snowmobiles and UTV's. Again, the added emission requirements have caused many issues. A snowmobile engine that once would go 8k miles , now needs a rebuilt at half that interval.
Polaris RZR's have caused injuries due to fires being started by the heat generated by having the engine running extremely lean.
You don't get something for nothing, added MPG isn't just done by waving a magic wand.
I hate to say it as someone who rides snow machines a lot, but thank god they have gotten quieter and less polluting. Same goes for outboard motors. The old versions were annoyingly loud, stunk so bad that you could smell the unburnt fuel and exhaust on your clothes for days after riding them, drank fuel, and caused a huge amount of conflicts with other resource users. Good riddance.
I think the 'reliability' issues have more to do with people learning how to maintain and repair the new tech. My new machines don't break down any more or less than the old ones, although they are harder to fix on the knowledge that I have. Over time I'm sure I'll learn.
I hate to say it as someone who rides snow machines a lot, but thank god they have gotten quieter and less polluting. Same goes for outboard motors. The old versions were annoyingly loud, stunk so bad that you could smell the unburnt fuel and exhaust on your clothes for days after riding them, drank fuel, and caused a huge amount of conflicts with other resource users. Good riddance.
I think the 'reliability' issues have more to do with people learning how to maintain and repair the new tech. My new machines don't break down any more or less than the old ones, although they are harder to fix on the knowledge that I have. Over time I'm sure I'll learn.
LOL, well I do agree with you there. It is nice being able to ride the day and not end up smelling like an exhaust pipe. Although, the new Ski Doo motors where having a lot of issues with crank bearings, and it is a direct result of the lack of oil mixture they run which is due to emissions. On my '14 Polaris, I checked my oil usage and it was on the high end of 80:1, I adjusted the oil pump to bring that down some.
My old '09 Polaris RZR ran flawlessly, now my new XP1000 has so many issues related to heat which is because they have the motor so lean.
As far as outboard motors, it created a whole new generation of them, mostly going to 4 strokes. The Merc Verado is incredible, although costly.
Yes it would and I'll be happy to explain it. A treaty is all encompassing word for an agreement between two or more nations. The Constitution dictates that treaties must be approved by a 2/3 vote in the Senate. All major treaties that we are legally obligated to uphold have gone through this process. A sitting President or even the government as whole cannot simply decide to back out of them.
Quite true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman
Early on in our history it became apparent that this clause was impractical and the Senate has abdicated some it's responsibility to the President for minor things. The Senate does not have to involved in an agreement between the US and Afghanistan for buying some goat cheese for the troops. This is something that can be done unilaterally by the administration.
That agreement by the President is subject to two things. Laws passed by Congress or the President deciding to vacate the agreement.
Quite true as well. And hopefully we back out of at least the Paris Climate Accords on that basis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman
In other words the same legal authority exercised by Obama to come to this agreement with Iran is same legal authority Trump can use to end it. See the Kyoto protocol signed under the Clinton administration but never passed by the Senate for reference.
Kyoto was never "signed" by the Clinton Administration. What happened was that the Senate, by 97-2 vote instructed Gore not to even submit to Senate vote a treaty that did not bind China and India on greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions. Paris attempts to back-door standards similar to Kyoto. The Supreme Court has already affirmed the stay of either emissions and/or mining regulations (I forget which) imposed by executive order by Obama under the Paris Accords.
The problem with trying to back out of Iran is that Iran already has the billions of frozen assets "returned" to it. Iran is not going to hand over the money even if Trump vacates the JCPOA.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
