4 ms·
>I think we can agree that the goal is to reduce dangerous emissions, we can reduce the emissions to zero by banning all cars, would you support that regulati
by syshum 8y ago
>I think we can agree that the goal is to reduce dangerous emissions,
we can reduce the emissions to zero by banning all cars, would you support that regulation?
>then how?
Improvements to technology the lessen the dependency on those energy sources.
Regulations will not solve the problem, no matter how draconian you desire to make them. Regulations will just increase the cost of goods furthering the economic divide and harming the people that can least afford the changes
- simplify 8y agoHave regulations not solved water potability, domestic child labor, lead in paint, water tables, airline safety, accessibility, and many more problems?
- syshum 8y agoYou will disagree, but largely no. Those things where solved by a variety of other factors and where on their way out long before the government came along to "regulate" them and take the credit for it.
- Semirhage 8y agoCould you elaborate in some detail on those other factors? Preferably with some citations. I’m totally unfamiliar with this second narrative, while I am familiar with the likes of ‘The Jungle’.
- openasocket 8y ago> Regulations will just increase the cost of goods furthering the economic divide and harming the people that can least afford the changes NOx gas emissions from cars cause and worsen respiratory diseases, especially in urban areas where it is especially concentrated, thus ALSO harming people that can least afford it. I'd also note there are plenty of cheap vehicles that do meet these regulations.
- wlll 8y ago> we can reduce the emissions to zero by banning all cars, would you support that regulation? That's ridiculous, of course not. > Improvements to technology the lessen the dependency on those energy sources. > > Regulations will not solve the problem, no matter how draconian you desire to make them. Regulations will just increase the cost of goods… Regulations will drive technological solutions, and if it weren't for regulations around emissions then car manufacturers have proved that they will quite happily sacrifice the health of everyone in the search of profit. > furthering the economic divide and harming the people that can least afford the changes Oh please. Car manufacturers will always sell budget cars to people with small budgets, because there's a market for it.
- syshum 8y ago>>Car manufacturers will always sell budget cars to people with small budgets, because there's a market for it. I think your definition of "budget cars" and mine are vastly different, Regulations have already priced new car ownership out of the hands of many people. New car prices have far outpaced inflation for many many years and wages are stagnate for many occupations >> quite happily sacrifice the health of everyone in the search of profit. All yes, the evil for profit corporations... Well comrade show me all the innovations that regulations directly have inspired. I would be interested in the that list. I always forget how must support for communism there is here in HN circles...
- sulam 8y agoI don't actually think you're interested in that list, but there is a whole theory with scholarly support describing how regulations inspire innovation. It's called the "Porter Hypothesis" (the Porter of Porter's Five Forces), and like all theories it has some evidence for and some evidence against. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter_hypothesis
- aerotwelve 8y agoVery interesting -- I had no idea this was a scholarly domain of study; thanks for posting this.