If the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration makes its proposed 2025 fuel economy standardsofficial, cars are going to be more expensive, and that’s going to shut millions of buyers out, argues theNational Automobile Dealers Association. “If the price of a vehicle goes up by the government estimate of almost $3,000,” says David Wagner, an analyst for the NADA Used Car Guide, “millions of people will no longer be able to finance a new vehicle.” The proposed standard is aiming for an average of 54.5 mpg for both cars and trucks by 2025, and is predicted to add $2,000 to the cost of a vehicle. Add to that the $1,000 or so that’s going to be added to the price of vehicles as the current fuel economy requirements phase-in between now and 2016, and the $30,000 average price of a new car rises to the point where lower income buyers may not be able to qualify for financing.
If that happens, the net effect would be a reduction in the buyer pool for the more fuel efficient, cleaner cars these fuel economy regulations are intended to create.
Not so. They will be driven to buy used cars, which are often a better deal, both economically and technically.
@Mannie:
…because they’ve been driven out of the new car market which is exactly what the article says is going to happen.
What was your point again?
Certain States like New Jersey and California have strict Emission standards on even Used Cars, if they can’t meet the standards they are slated to be scrapped or to be forced off the roadways. Failure to obey in New Jersey is a serious fine on the driver. So no, Used Car markets will also be hard to contend with for buyers in the other States start have to deal with the Same Emission standards and cars being built now have one State in mind for market: California. While other states may have more Lax emission standards, California’s tight regulations dictates what is Nationally consumed due to the Car Industry wanting to make sells in that State. It is counter productive as a business to make two emission variants of a Model to meet a certain State’s Emission laws while the other model doesn’t and it would lead to serious issues for those of the lax emissions model driver if they ever crossed the California State Line or New Jersey State Line.
A large portion of Cities in the Midwest does not have the luxury of not needing a car. Major Cities are sprawled out and streched out, requiring many to commute across the entire city pending their jobs or daily needs via car. My very first job was a paper press cargo devliery boy, a Train or Public Transport service was out of the question because the destinations for my cargo drop offs were far removed from any Public Transport Bus stops (about 4 blocks worth fo distance off) and Train/Subway systems for public use are non-existant where I’m from. While St. Louis has a Tram system for public access to hot zones in the city, it’s still not enough to get work done for mass transit of supplies and equipment.
Then there’s the weather out in the Midwest, being stuck on a Subway or train public transport service during serious storm with gusts hitting 120 miles per hour and the possiblity of tornados? We’ll take our affordable cars with basic emissions verus being crammed into trains like sardines. Weather in the Midwest can be totally vicious and cruel, and being stuck in a train car can be life threating (Watch the recent Dallas Tornados tossing Steel Containers around for example of this). Plus the CO2 is a boon for crop production… oh wait, Liberals are supposed to understand Biology… I guess no one ever told them that little bit of CO2 being needed for plants to live…
@Mr. Irons: Liberals do not understand anything — otherwise they would not be liberals