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.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,400,252 times
Reputation: 40736
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
We are not in disagreement. This woman is foul for trusting the USG "estimate" and letting a slimy salesperson hoodwink her into believing those numbers were absolutes, and maybe even understated. Afterall, she brought 50mpg into the discussion. Since it's not known where the "50mpg" proclomation came from, we (I) can only assume that she's just another ignorant consumer who sees the USG as infalliable and big corporations (Honda) the devil reincarnated.
I despise people like her. I really do.
Why do you allege " she's just another ignorant consumer who sees the USG as infalliable " AFTER you've stated "it's not known where the "50mpg" proclomation came from"? It's painfully obvious your hard-on against the government has eliminated any semblance of objectivity. I guess the government's only good when supplying jobs to contractors, eh?
Why do you allege " she's just another ignorant consumer who sees the USG as infalliable " AFTER you've stated "it's not known where the "50mpg" proclomation came from"? It's painfully obvious your hard-on against the government has eliminated any semblance of objectivity. I guess the government's only good when supplying jobs to contractors, eh?
Huh? We don't know where the 50mpg proclamation comes from. All we know is that EPA estimates for that car are 44mpg. So, for all intents and purposes, we have to throw 50mpg out the window and go by the estimated 44mpg. She claims she only got 30mpg, which is far from the USG estimate of 44.....so yes....she is indeed ignorant for:
1) Believing whomever told her 50mpg without doing her research
2) Believing the USG for it's "estimate", although "estimate" by definition should have been enough for her to question the viability of the number.
The result? This woman is an an idiot. And she chose to sue a big corporation instead of petitioning her government, who by the way derived the "estimate" to begin with. Should we be surprised that a presumably liberal lawyer from California chose to sue the corporation instead of the government?
She's the idiot burdell. Her grievance is misplaced.
This woman is an an idiot. And she chose to sue a big corporation instead of petitioning her government, who by the way derived the "estimate" to begin with.
She's the idiot burdell. Her grievance is misplaced.
So are people who're using her "win" to complain about government.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,400,252 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
Huh? We don't know where the 50mpg proclamation comes from. All we know is that EPA estimates for that car are 44mpg. So, for all intents and purposes, we have to throw 50mpg out the window and go by the estimated 44mpg. She claims she only got 30mpg, which is far from the USG estimate of 44.....so yes....she is indeed ignorant for:
1) Believing whomever told her 50mpg without doing her research
2) Believing the USG for it's "estimate", although "estimate" by definition should have been enough for her to question the viability of the number.
The result? This woman is an an idiot. And she chose to sue a big corporation instead of petitioning her government, who by the way derived the "estimate" to begin with. Should we be surprised that a presumably liberal lawyer from California chose to sue the corporation instead of the government?
She's the idiot burdell. Her grievance is misplaced.
Did you even READ the friggin' article??????????????????
It clearly states she claims she was PROMISED 50MPG and that was the basis of her suit. NO WHERE does it make the EPA estimate the basis of the suit.
It clearly states she claims she was PROMISED 50MPG and that was the basis of her suit. NO WHERE does it make the EPA estimate the basis of the suit.
Did she name the person/persons/dealership who made this promise?
Because in EACH new vehicle, there is a big sign that lists the EPA estimates for mileage before you buy the car. So it wasn't "Honda" as a company making this claim, since they fall back on what the sign says, but its the person/persons/dealership who told her the false information.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,400,252 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arus
Did she name the person/persons/dealership who made this promise?
Because in EACH new vehicle, there is a big sign that lists the EPA estimates for mileage before you buy the car. So it wasn't "Honda" as a company making this claim, since they fall back on what the sign says, but its the person/persons/dealership who told her the false information.
The article is about as factually lacking as they come. Being that she sued HONDA I have to guess it was either something in their advertising or something from their dealership that was the basis for the suit. Odds are an appeal won by HONDA won't garner near the attention from the press this case did.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,400,252 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
I'll say it again. She's the idiot. If you were "promised 50mpg", would you have believed it when the sticker on the window suggested otherwise?
Be honest.
You've been attempring to somehow blame the government, how is the government responsible for her idiocy?
Give me virtually any vehicle to drive for a week and I'll bet dollars to donuts I can achieve less than 70% of its EPA estimate.
Does that make the 'estimate' somehow bad and invalid? No, it doesn't as it's the result of driving a standard cycle and is a useful tool to compare different vehicles under THE SAME conditions which may or may not be similar to one's personal driving habits.
You righties continually accuse the left of not accepting personal responsibility yet here you are trying to put what should be this woman's personal responsibility off on the government.
Have you not yet learned you can't have your cake and eat it too?
You've been attempring to somehow blame the government, how is the government responsible for her idiocy?
Give me virtually any vehicle to drive for a week and I'll bet dollars to donuts I can achieve less than 70% of its EPA estimate.
Does that make the 'estimate' somehow bad and invalid? No, it doesn't as it's the result of driving a standard cycle and is a useful tool to compare different vehicles under THE SAME conditions which may or may not be similar to one's personal driving habits.
You righties continually accuse the left of not accepting personal responsibility yet here you are trying to put what should be this woman's personal responsibility off on the government.
Have you not yet learned you can't have your cake and eat it too?
I'm not blaming the government. I'm blaming her for trusting the government, and not doing her due diligence in researching car-buying options that fit her desires. She clearly did not do her homework, but certainly didn't mind accepting everything at face value!
She's the idiot.
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.
