The Impossible Standard . . . a Year Early

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you probably have heard something about Dieselgate – the VW exhaust emissions “cheating” scandal (in quotes for the same reason I’d air quote using a radar detector to “cheat” a speed trap).

But you probably don’t know about the real “emissions scandal.”

That would be the lame duck Obama EPA’s decision – its peremptory fatwa – to categorize carbon dioxide as a “pollutant” subject to federal regulation. It did so post-election, more than a year before the deadline (April, 2018) it had established, prior to which there was supposed to have been “public comment.” The hurry-up no doubt due to the fact that Obama’s intended successor – a “climate change” high priestess, did not win the election.

The winner – a “denier” – might just not play ball.

“The April 28 (2018) deadline was ‘no later than’ set forth in the 2012 rule,” warbled Obama’s soon-to-be-not acting assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation.” Rather than risk a “denier” (Trump) not imposing this fatwa – based on the fact that he was elected to not issue such fatwas – the Obama politburo simply decided to decide.

Whatever happened to “democracy”?

Apparently, when the voters express wishes contrary to those of the ruling cabal, then minority rule muss sein.  They Know Best – and are going to make sure we know it. And, abide by it.

Well, this business is bad business, for two very big reasons:

First, it’s new. Historically – since the 1970s – the EPA only regulated reactive exhaust emissions; things like unburned hydrocarbons/volatile organic compounds and so on that had tangible (provable) negative effects on air quality or people’s health. Exhaust byproducts that caused or worsened smog, or created acid rain or made it harder for people with respiratory problems to breathe.

These were not hypothetical problems. Smog was a real problem.

But Obama’s fatwa deals with carbon dioxide, which is non-reactive and has absolutely nothing to do with smog formation or acid rain; which does not in any way contribute to or cause breathing problems.

It causes the opposite, in fact.

Carbon dioxide is what plants breathe – and in return, they give us oxygen, which is a thing we need to live. More carbon dioxide means faster plant growth; more oxygen – and more food, too.

Those are facts.

Now, it’s alleged that carbon dioxide is a “greenhouse gas” (which is true) that contributes to  unnatural and man-caused “climate change” – a truly oily term that can mean almost anything (warmer, colder, in between…?) and which therefore ought to raise any thinking person’s suspicions on that account.

When there’s no specific definition, nothing tangible to hang your hat on – nothing that is subject to a firm “yes” or “no” – whatever is being alleged is, at best, well-meant but vacuous emoting.

Or it is a con.

Either way, it’s not good.

Which brings us to the second thing.

Unlike, say, unburned hydrocarbons – which can be chemically scrubbed (catalytic converters) or otherwise rendered inert/harmless other things (like water vapor, another “greenhouse gas,” incidentally) by making an internal combustion engine burn its fuel more completely and precisely, there is only one way to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide produced as a result of internal combustion:

There must be less combustion.

A given quantity of fuel burned will always produce “x” volume of carbon dioxide. It cannot be chemically altered, sequestered or scrubbed. To get less, you burn less – period.

Consider what this will mean.

A car company can design a clean-running V8 muscle car or SUV. You can have your horsepower and clean air, too. Go outside, see for yourself. A 2017 Dodge Hellcat – with 707 hp – produces fewer harmful compounds at the tailpipe than a ’79 Cordoba with 120 hp. The Cordoba’s exhaust will make your eyes water; the Hellcat’s won’t. 

But reducing carbon dioxide can’t be done without also reducing horsepower – and engine size.

Smaller and smaller, weaker and weaker.

No more Hellcats. Maybe no more V6 Camrys, either.

Littler engines, that’s our future (but not Obama’s; he will still be ferried about in his sub-10 MPG armored SUV). The “carbon footprint” of some animals is more (or less) equal than others. Notice that engines larger than about 2.0 liters are becoming scarce. Obama’s fatwa – which was anticipated by the industry – is why.

They are going to get even smaller than that.

Or, electric.

EVs do not emit anything at all – “greenhouse” or otherwise. But as economically realistic and functionally practical conveyances, they leave a lot to be desired. Well, they’ll cost you a lot – and won’t take you very far.

EVs are not going to replace internal combustion – except for the very few who can afford them and who are willing and able to put up with their debilities. And this may be just exactly the point.

Which is: To get most of us out of cars entirely – and into buses or other forms of “public” (that is, government) transport. Which is wanted because it is much easier to control.

Us, that is.

It is probably a source of great frustration in certain quarters that new cars are not only clean but so clean that the EPA has become – like Mothers Against Drunk Driving – a bureaucracy that’s in it for the money and power, the original justification for its existence no longer existing.

It cannot be conceded that the problem (in this case, “clean air”) has been solved. New problems (“climate change”) must be confected.

Like “climate change.”

And this time, there is no solution.

Except for one.

Pull the plug – and drain the swamp.

The one upside to modern Deciderism –  the fatwa-spewing precedent established by that bandy-legged canker sore on two legs, George W. Bush (who, I remind “conservatives,” made Obama not only possible but inevitable) is that it works both ways.

A couple of weeks from now, the “denier” can issue his own fatwa. One that rescinds the Obama fatwa.

Not only could it be done – it must be done.

Else we’ll all be taking the bus.

Well, most of us will be… .

If you have had it with control freak Clovers, Goo-guhl, diversity mongers and like contrarian, liberty-minded media, please consider supporting EPautos.

We depends on you to keep the wheels turning!

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

EPautos stickers – new design, larger and magnetic! – are free to those who send in $10 or more to support the site.




  1. Imagine a world where we could buy a brand new ’65 Mustang or ’69 Charger. That could happen with the stroke of a pen, if we’d just eliminate the regulations that make these cars illegal to make today. The creativity could come back to car design, and most cars wouldn’t look the same anymore.

    I would love to see the auto industry deregulated, probably more than any other industry.

    • Here you go Dervish –

      V50 10-SPOKE WHEELS, 17×8 FRONT / 17X9 REAR
      FORD 9” 31-SPLINE REAR, 3.89 RATIO

      The part where your dick goes limp? $189,500.00 (starting price0

      • That’s cool! I’m frankly surprised that it’s even legal at all though, at any price. I would have thought that 50 years worth of regulations would have made it “unsafe” and in violation of various emissions standards.

    • There are almost enough parts in production right now to build new 1965 Mustangs. The things that can’t be bought new can be substituted for.

  2. Since this is an EPA dictate, it can be overturned by a new president, IF Trump is for real. I wasn’t able to pick a font big enough for that “IF”. It’s a really big “IF”, you know.

  3. We emit CO2. So will The Chimp’s decree ultimately be a fartwar against us? Ironic that the guy should initiate so many fartwars, because he sure looks and smells and acts like something I deposited in my toilet!

  4. It’s not just the FedGov. States & cities do it too. I am currently bidding on a City of Phoenix contract that required full or mid-sized “alt fuel” vehicles. CNG & propane power are out, because where are you going to put the fuel tanks in a modern car? And conversion is prohibitively expensive. Electric is out because of range & recharge times. That leaves Flex Fuel (E85) cars, or hybrids. And only 4 vehicles out there fit the specs: the Camry hybrid, the Cherokee, the Chevy Equinox, and the Malibu. All but the Camry have to be special ordered, new from the factory.
    Stupidest thing I’ve seen in a while.

    Meanwhile, a single 737 taking off burns more fuel at take-off than a single taxi does in a year…

    • Hi Paul,

      Why are you trying to do business with the city?

      Is this a regular thing? Do you make it a practice to work with thieves, murderers, rapists, and their ilk?

      Have you considered engaging in honest business practices? Would you be able to compete in the market if men with guns were not available to limit your competition?

      • Right on, Tuanorea! Don’t do business with crooks, and you likely won’t get robbed (Nor facilitate the robbing of others).

        Just from Paul’s short blurb, we can tell that that city is an enemy. Probably a “sanctuary city” too. Imagine if all people of good conscience stopped doing business with the enemy, instead of kissing their ass? They’d be begging us to come back and dropping their loony liberal fairy-tale junk-science requirements in a heartbeat, because the only other ones left to do business with them would be crooks and other loonies, like the “greens”, who couldn’t sustain a successfull business orc provide a reliable service for a year if they were given a going concern; much less when having to cow-tow to idiotic requirements which were thought up by people who never held a free-market non-taxpayer-funded job in their life.

        All that doing business with such lunatics will do, is bankrupt an otherwise good business. And believe me, no matter how rigidly you adhere to their BS. they will find ways to say that you are not complying and penalize you. Such are criminals.

        • If you don’t want the job/contract, someone behind you will just take it. Bids for services for govt payers are optional. If the govt CHOOSES you to buy from, refusing will result in scrutiny, lawsuits, and eventual collapse of the business at best, or your life at worst. It would be stupid to refuse gay customers if you were against homosexuality, right? Is it still stupid to refuse govt money if you’re against govt criminality? Everyone would have to stop doing business with them at the same time for this to work.

          • Brandonjin, if no one, -not even libertarians, are going to resist the corrupt collectivist system; if even libertarians have come to the point where they don’t need a gun pointed at them to force them to cooperate, but do so voluntarily, then there is no hope left in the world.

            It doesn’t matter what “everyone” or others do. There will always be adherents of the state; but when those from our ranks start seeking their favor and conforming to their dictates -voluntarily, no less, then there is no opposition. At that point, instead of working for what is good, we are working against the very things we believe in, and for the enemy.

            At that point, we might as well just accept welfare and food stamps, and affirmative action and subsidies….or become stinking cops or IRS agents…….

            • I won’t do business with government entities. Besides the obvious, they also demand that they get the lowest price, and they also decide on a whim to just not pay invoices for months at a time. If I was a money sucking publicly traded company without a moral compass, then that would be right up our alley. Alas…

        • Thanks Nunzio.

          I didn’t know everyone else had tossed principles out the window. We used to call them philosophical whores, now I guess they are good libertarians.

          Enough to gag a maggot.

          • Right on! I’m not necessarily condemning Paul, as I don’t know the details of his position or how much he has thought about this subject etc. But this is a great opportunity to explore such matters- as we’ve all done at some point in our walk.

            I have more of a problem with someone like Brandonjin, who basically makes justifications to the point where our actions can be rationalized, and we end up being no different than the system we criticize- as if receiving some gain/benefit, or avoiding scrutiny is sufficient justification to practice the very things which our beliefs would forbid/condemn.

            • Nunzio, I asked questions and presented a scenario to get the perspective of those here. I don’t do any voluntary business with govt, I make every effort to avoid supporting govt, and I don’t justify anything they do.

              • Sorry if I misunderstood, Brandonjin- Sometimes I read a little too quickly…..

                It is just those very types of questions which get us to confront our own beliefs and their validity, and that is what makes debate so valuable. When we test our own concepts and scrutinize them, and take them to their logical conclusions, we ultimately learn the most and hone our philosophy, and we thus get more from such debates than what we are trying to impart to others.

                • I’m still wondering why Peters is giving advice about how to land a govco contract.

                  Have force and theft become the new libertarian philosophy?

                    • Eric,

                      let’s see, Paul said “I am currently bidding on a City of Phoenix contract that required full or mid-sized “alt fuel” vehicles.”

                      Your response was “Hi Paul,

                      A Volt might be viable except for the idiotic four-seater configuration…”

                      That seemed to me to be giving advice about how to land a govco contract.

                      Where did I make a mistake?

            • When are Nunzio and Taunorea going to stop driving on the government roads? Stop using federal reserve notes maybe?
              What Paul is talking about I’m sure is the ability to even run taxi’s in Phoenix–an area where he likely resides and obviously employs people. If his fleet doesn’t meet the cities “requirements”, he can’t operate there. All he is doing is conforming to–the crony companies like Yellow cab and others who lobbied government to make requirements–insane rules and regulations so he doesn’t get forced out of business. I’m sure he’d like the regulations to go away. Since they aren’t, he’s doing what he can to survive.

              I have an excavation business in Idaho. I did 2 miles of a private sewer line this past spring. The line went down the government road. The sewer district received a government loan to pay for the line. They were forced into the situation by the Idaho Dept. of Environmental quality. I had to work with Idaho DEQ, the county. If I install pipe on private property within the limits of any municipality–the owner of the water, sewer, streets, etc., I have to work with them and be permitted and licensed with them to complete the job.

              I could go on and on, but the point is that every libertarian among us us could stop doing business in our respective fields and the only thing that would happen is no businesses with libertarian owners. Seeing how there is no more than 2% of the business in the country that are likely libertarian owned, nothing would change.

              Unless you guys work for yourselves and weed out any customers or any associates who work with the government in any way whatsoever, and pay only with gold, silver or bitcoin, you’re hypocrites.

              If people work in an industry that is controlled or regulated by govco, but would be a legitimate business in the free market, there’s no conflict with principle. If I, and every other private excavation company got out of excavation because the city controlled the water, sewer and roads, the city would do nothing but hire people to do the work themselves. They already do in many municipalities. Who would you rather have working to restore your water in an outage; the city who works 9-5 or private contractor, who stops when your water is back in service, not at “quitting time”? This applies to many fields.

              The government isn’t going to throw their hands in the air and quit running things because people like Paul and many of us quit doing anything they are involved in. Just like Brandionjin tried to point out.

              • Hi Ancap, I also do work that some libertarians probably wouldn’t approve of. I drive a semi-truck pulling a tanker filled with ethanol made from corn. I dislike ethanol as much as anyone, and absent the ethanol mandate I would be hauling gasoline instead. The company I drive for also hauls gas and diesel, but I am working at their new terminal. This terminal will eventually haul gas and diesel too.
                It is a certainty that a portion of the ethanol I haul will be mixed with gas and be used in government vehicles. I can’t prevent that from happening.

                • Hey Brian,

                  Some people would have you quit your job. It’s a ridiculous mindset. There’s a big difference between working for a mercenary company in Iraq and hauling ethanol for a company that hauls all kinds of fuel. Maybe you could quit your job and move into your parents basement. That would truly change the world, amirite? hahahahaha

                  • Ancap, I totally agree with you. I have to use public roads since I can’t make a semi fly. Even building entrances to private companies involves getting govt. approval and doing it the “govt. way”.

                    I even hauled on a contract for a govt. road this year. All us(nearly everyone in a big rig who had been working the patch)could have refused, gotten fired or gone broke and to what advantage? Plenty Cuban’s(yep, most not a word of English)to step in there and haul it with their rigs that the DOT regularly red tags but there’s plenty of them so another one just takes the place of the red tagged rig.

                    Would a libertarian care about all the illegal loads I’ve hauled? I damaged nothing but the letter of the law. I’ve driven the back roads so I wouldn’t get weighed or written up for a plethora of violations, overweight, over-height, over-width but there were no victims I could tell. I regularly operated illegally but no one was harmed. It didn’t increase anyone’s taxes or hurt anything but an arbitrary law so I fail to see how a libertarian could give a damn.

                    An overweight permit in Tx. only gets you 2 extra tons and that ain’t crap hauling a 350 Cat trackhoe….still way overweight, over-width and over-height. Even the DOT enforcers don’t look twice at you since they can understand not breaking down a piece of equipment to haul it on a public road.

                    I could have refused, lost my job, sat at the house and starved but I live in the real world and you often must break the law.

                    I had a rookie DOT guy look at my load ticket one day. It was 20 lbs shy of the legal limit. He mentioned I was running awfully heavy. What’s not to get there? You get paid by how much you haul in this instance(hauling aggregate for lease roads). I pointed out to him that every load I hauled that wasn’t right at the limit was leaving money on the table for me. Next time he stopped me he didn’t mention my weight tickets showing right at the limit. What he didn’t know was that if I were on the scale and was 500 lbs over I’d get out, stand on the rail beside the scale and lift up on the door of the cab till the scale operator said “That’s good”, get my legal weight ticket and be on my way. Of course you don’t get paid for the extra but you don’t have to try to dump out some specific amount(hard to do) or dump the whole load and get re-loaded and waste time that might cost me a load that day.

                    I don’t recall any work I’ve done that hasn’t had some govt. fatwa applied to it. I don’t remember having not broken that law, regulation, etc. many times also and don’t recall not getting caught and punished. With the exception of causing harm, laws are there to be broken, hence the plethora of people employed to look for infractions, no matter what business I’ve been in. In a libertarian world I wouldn’t have been subject to fines, etcetera but I don’t live in a libertarian world and the best I can do is uphold the NAP.

                    • Brian, the the good old days when DOT inspections were rare and the state wasn’t caught up in revenooing (55mph speed limit changed the entire perspective), DPS would just off the cuff give you a ton over, no problem, just look at the ticket and call it good. Cotton bales were judged by number so 100 bales equaled 25 tons, a legal load and if you had a lightweight tractor you could legal out with 102. The fact of the matter was most bales were closer to 550 lbs. but still, 102 bales and you were still good. Show them your bill of lading and they’d say, You’re good. and go on. Then the states began to see what a revenue maker 55 mph was and then the change to nocking every little thing they could. Two years ago Tx. passed the back-up light law and DOT would drive up to see the back of the tractor. If you didn’t have one or the one you had looked dirty, you could count on being stopped just for that. That same year a working windshield washer WITH FLUID(it has to work)was also mandated, a couple more things to collect $250 each on. Say it fast and it doesn’t hurt ha ha. $500 for no backup light and no fluid in the windshield washer….what’s not to like when you’re a predator looking to rob?

              • Ancap, we all have to defile ourselves by contact with their tyrannical system at some point. The roads are good example.

                Since they have made it their business to pave the country with smooth high-speed roads, and have left no alternatives, what else can we do, but use them?

                That is the nature of totalitarianism: They never asked for my permission; they force to pay 12 different taxes to pay for those roads, and then tell me I need a license to use them, and subject me to dealing with armed thugs, when it is supposed to be my right to travel.

                That is far different than voluntarily seeking to do business with the cretins. And quite frankly, even before I came around to libertarianism, I would never voluntarily seek a relationship with the state, merely because one has to give up a lot of rights and/or privacy in order to do so- just as if you become a doctor and join their medical cartel, you are prohibited from doing what actually may be helpful, and forced to dispense bogus cures like chemotherapy and narcotics which do more harm than good, and you will actually be punished if you do what is right and not harmful.

                I have a little farm. Do you think I take their subsidies or participate in their programs? No freaking way! Thus, I am free to make my own decisions and do as I please. Some of my neighbors get thousands of dollars for not cultivating part of their land; for accepting price supports; bull improvement programs, etc. etc. – but guess what? They have to do what the state decrees; they have to allow the state to come and do inspections; they have to keep records and file tax returns…. In the end, the money they receive is costing them an awful lot, AND it causes the recipients to perpetuate the system, and to grow the budgets of the various agencies involved, which we all fund, more than any crop!

                And so now, as for the matter in question, instead of going out and buying some old Crown Vics and starting a cab company, one is forced to buy new[er] expensive vehicles, which will have a limited lifespan and likely not be as durable in commercial service, and which will probably require great debt, etc. etc. -See how they perpetuate their own?

                Even before I knew what Libertarianism was, I always sought to live free and to make my own decisions. Ultimately, isn’t that what Libertarianism boils down to? And if we can’t practice that in our own lives, what right do we have to advocate it as a philosophy?

                tl;dr version: We have to make a distinction between what we have to do to maintain our rights when we have had no choice in the matter vs. what we do voluntarily to seek some benefit.

                  • Now most states have mandated running lights and slow moving vehicle signs for their buggies so how are they avoiding big brother? Do they have a turdcharger on the horses? Or do they have to use a bicycle charger on their wheels? Either way, they fall under the thumb of the state.

                    The Amish have been forced to use electric compressors that sit off their property(don’t know the specifics)so they can run compressed air to their shops. Somebody must have a meter in their name or an ICE compressor in the woods.

                    • Eight,

                      I can’t confirm that.

                      When I travel in Amishland (around Arcola, Illinois) the power lines simply stop.

                    • There are many different sorts of Amish, each with their own fine tuned rules of what is allowed and not allowed with if, ands, and buts. Many Amish as I understand it are allowed to use power tools and such for business purposes.

                    • Hi Tuan,

                      Sorry, I couldn’t access that article, as detected my ad blocker, and was spamming me with a bunch of other stuff…so I just clicked away.

                  • Hi Nunzio,

                    There are various religious exemptions from Uncle’s edicts – but only for Uncle-approved religions. And then one must accept the edicts of the religious group… so, you’re swapping one form of authoritarian control freaks for another.

                    There is no leave me alone option.

                    • Exactly, Eric. No one is totally free, but all that I was trying to illustrate, is that the Amish do manage to live a lot freer than the average American, or even than many Libertarians, because they simply avoid things like doing business with the state; sending their kids to public schools; driving cars; and participation in many of the other “programs” which many of us take for granted as just being a normal part of life.

                      That being said, even the Amish are starting to compromise. There is an Amish store c.20 miles from me, and they now have a telephone and accept food stamps and credit cards.(!!! :o). [Ironically, the non-Amish person who formerly owned the store didn’t even accept food stamps, because he had the sense to not want the gov’t involvement; Not to mention wanting a better class of customer. The Amish seem to be catering to the welfare crowd, and as such, I no longer have any use for their store.]

                      Quite simply, the more we all compromise, the less free we are. As just a regular everyday person, I have managed to live unusually free, because I have scrupulously avoided involvement with things government-regulated or funded. If it weren’t for driving, I’d pretty much have no contact with/no info on file with them.

                      Still, I am subject to their BS…but I have managed to avoid it more than virtually anyone I know of, because I avoid participation.

                      I never even transferred the title to my mobile home into my name. Why should the state hold a record of my title? Why should they have this info? Why should I have to pay a tax merely fro the “privilege” of having them be my secretary? So, yeah, I have to forgo loss insurance. Oh well…I’d rather be free.

                • I have 250 acres of farm ground in the high country of Idaho. I’ve never taken a subsidized loan. I don’t take any subsidies for the crops.

                  Paul owns a cab business. For him to operate that cab business, he must have a contract with the municipality he works in. He didn’t make those edicts. No matter where he moves, municipalities are going to make him contract with them to operate. His option is to quit the business he has built or contract with a municipality. Not much choice at all.

                  I practice black market options anywhere and everywhere I can. I install sewer drain fields when they fail without getting a permit. It saves the homeowner a minimum of $500 and in instances where the health dept. would make them change out their tank, it saves them $4-5 grand, or more depending on the regulations. However, that is not an option for someone on a small city lot that is hooked into a city or wastewater company line. If their service line fails, I have to have permission to dig in the street and the city/wastewater company must inspect it before it is covered back up. I could tell government to fuck off, but then I’d be out of business and would no longer be able to do any black market work.

                  You don’t understand the conundrum that Paul is in because you don’t own a taxi company. He isn’t actively seeking a govco contract. In the cab business a city contract is merely the ability to operate in that city. There is a difference between actively seeking a mercenary contract in Iraq and trying to continue to operate a business where control freaks have foisted new regulations and control on people.

                  I hear libertarians praising uber and lyft all the time–and there’s nothing wrong with them–but they comply with every single regulation they are faced with. There is absolutely no option to avoid taxes with them because both companies make you fill out a 1099 and the funds are electronic. Paul’s cab business–likely–can at least accept cash and operate underground in some way. Try doing that with uber or lyft and the companies themselves will turn you in to the authorities.

                  It’s easy to wave our fatty fingers and question everyone’s libertarian cred. Any time I have met any super critical of all other libertarians, libertarians and got to know them, I have found them to be the most hypocritical of all. It seems to be like that in any group of people. The most critical are the worst offenders.

                  Libertarian’s are like Christians in so many ways. Always waving our fingers at the people not as pure as “us”.

                  • There are many businesses that I might have liked to have been in, but rejected because of how they would shackle me to the state, whether via licensure; regulations; taxes; etc.
                    Not criticizing Paul- he should do what he is comfortable with- but as for myself, I want to live my beliefs as much as possible; I want to be as free as possible; I don’t want to have to ask for permission or have Daddy looking over my shoulder, nor go and declare every detail of my finances to a gov’t goon, like a schoolboy showing a report card to Mommy.

                    Nor do I want my actions nor my money to fund the continuation or expansion of their authoritarian system, so I pursue a simple, “small footprint” lifestyle in which I manage to avoid mainstream participation, and live very freely.

                    If I compromised my Libertarian principles, I wouldn’t just feel that proclaiming to be a Libertarian would then be just an exercise in intellect and wishful thinking, but I would be compromising my own freedom, and be allowing myself to be manipulated by the enemy to a much greater degree than they could otherwise affect me.

                    I often avoid their laws even when they are compulsory; it would be absurd if i volunteered to come under their jurisdiction and forced to do things which I did not agree with, by voluntarily choosing to do so, right?

                    • Hi Nunzio,

                      Many would call what you do, “cheating”. But, the system cannot be “cheated”. It can be supported, grudgingly tolerated or avoided. Kudos for your efforts. My more liberal friends think I’m joking when I say that I consider paying taxes to be my greatest moral failure.


                    • Thanks, Jeremy,

                      Hehe, yep, yep, yep. To the communists, the greatest “crime” one can commit is non-participation, because then you efforts and wealth don’t further their corrupt system, and they largely can’t control you.

                      Where you live can make a huge difference too. I came fr4om a “blue” state which was espeically tyrannical. Moved to a state that is much freer. HUGE difference. Although, year by year, one can see the noose tightening everywhere. They copy from one another.

        • Ed,

          He may not have any freedom, but what he does have is a choice.

          That’s about all anyone has these days.

          The good news is that globally, over 50% of the economy is “black” or free market.

          So if over half of the world can do it, please don ‘t try and make excuses for someone who makes a got-damned conscience decision to get in bed with the fucking govco. Paul just needs to obtain a bit of creativity.

          Paul uses the government guns to limit his competition. The question then becomes, would he suck the taxi commissioner’s dick for the privilege of the taxi license?

          Or is that where the line is drawn? It seems to me that there are a few here who wouldn’t even have a problem swallowing.

          Mele Kalikifuckingmaka and happy Hanuka.

          • Tuan,

            You know, it’s funny. When I was only 6 or 7 years old, I realized that we weren’t free. I knew that if they could compel me to go to school, and compel my mother to send me, that this “freedom” they preached was a huge lie.

            Even in those grade-school years, I’d cringe as I’d see other kids just accept their plight and say things like “Well, if you want to get a good job…” or “Everyone has to do it, so why should you be different?” [i.e. apparently, totalitarianism is fine, as long as it is applied to all people equally…]- and then I’d see adults, who just seemed to have been beaten down, or just didn’t care, and I wondered if that would happen to me at some point? [Luckily, it hasn’tr! And I’m a middle-aged man now!]

            Those of us who care enough, will maintain as much freedom and independence in our lives as is humanly possible. The mere prospect of a little profit shouldn’t be enough to sway us from the course we believe in, and ESPECIALLY when there are so many other alternatives in which one can make a living AND maintain freedom as a private individual who is free to enter into contracts with other individuals. And even more so, when one considers the onerous requirements often imposed by partnering with the state and having to fulfill their requirements, which often greatly limits or negates any potential profit, anyhow.

            The choice should be so clear, and even more so for Libertarians. When I see a Libertarian compromising, i feel the way I felt as a child when I’d see adults who knuckled-under. It’s very disheartening and sad- bith for the person involved, and Libertarianism as a whole, because if Libertarians aren’t even going to uphold and fight for freedom in their own lives, then who is? It makes us realize how alone we truly are, even among others who speak words similar to ours.

            • Another interesting thought on the state taxi business: I’d be almost willing to bet that the majority of business in Paul’s city (as is the case in most places these days, except for all but tghe biggest cities which have full mass-transit coverage_ comes from Medicaid fares.

              So you get Big Brother’s licenses, drive the kind of cars Big Bro approves of, and then 85% of your business is shuttling around welfare queens and their illegitimate kids to doctors, for shot and pills. And there ya have it- it’s like being a miniature Elon Musk, where your business is only profitable because of the taxpayer funds.

              Not saying that this is the case in Paul’s situation, but I’d be surprised if it weren’t, as no one goes through all the trouble involved, just to make $10 taking grandma to the bingo hall on a wednesday night. They more often do it for the never-ending $100 round-trips, taking Tonnequa and li’l Dayshon to the doctor every few days, so the kid can start getting SSI payments as soon as possible for his “disability”.

              • You’re mixing up taxi’s with transportation companies. To be a part of medicaid payments, you have to have your fleet of vehicles inspected by a state medicaid inspector and fill out paperwork with the state. That’s totally different than having a license to operate in the city of Phoenix.

                How does Paul contracting with the city of Phoenix to operate a cab company differ from you contracting with your state to operate a motor vehicle? He’s only contracting to stay out of jail or being fined for doing what he should have the right to do, just as you are. You obviously disagree and feel you are an expert on Paul’s business though. So, by all means, keep casting aspersions on his character. Everyone likes a know it all fucker that makes accusations with nothing to back them up.

                • I don’t know about that, Ancap. I have a friend who sells old Crown Vics to cab companies. He knows the business. There are companies which do only medical transportation, but any cab company can do routine Medicaid doctor’s office/hospital runs as long as they are willing to abide by the terms of the state’s Medicaid payment system. It is VERY lucrative, and the reason many of the companies stay in business. Most private fares are just $10 or $15 runs to a train station or neighborhood bar. No one’s gonna blow $50 each way to a doctor, and even less so today with things like Uber around. It’s the Medicaid fares that keep the small/medium-sized city and suburban cab co.s going in most places. The actual medical transportation co.s get paid even more, but they’re generally for the handicapped, not for some welfare queen taking little Jamaal to the pill man.

                  • I had a cab company in Idaho Falls up until about 2 years ago. We got calls from people all the time asking if we accepted medicaid/medicare. My response was always no. I don’t want anything to do with that paperwork.

                    Uber has been here for almost as long as I sold, but Uber costs more than a cab ride and they aren’t available when you really need them. At least that is what I am told by the current owner and a guy I know that drove for Uber for some extra cash. Didn’t work well for him.

                    When I started the business in 2009, I catered to the drinking crowd and the airport. I got quite a little bit into the tourist industry because of the close proximity of Yellowstone and Jackson Hole WY. It was excellent money with a Suburban load of skiers headed to Jackson Hole Mountain resort. We also hauled plenty of welfare queens it seemed, but they paid cash that was extracted from someone at the point of a gun earlier.

                    If ever there was a business that could run under the money extractors radar, it’s cabs. If you do it right. I would have kept the business if I had more time, but my family is growing and it was too much to work all day and then deal with stupid drivers with the cab company.

                    Maybe I’m naive, but it doesn’t seem like my competitors hauled many welfare queens either. Idunno. I do know that many bustling transportation co’s have gone out of business over the past 5-6 years because they were out 10’s of thousands of dollars from the state for medicaid. Probably varies from state to state.

                    • Yeah, there’s a big difference between locales. I’ve seen a few small guys start up around here too, for the drinking crowd, where there has never been taxi service.

                      Most of your big blue cities and more heavily populated areas, especially in the east though, where there have been taxis since cars were first invented….it is largely all about the medicaid now.

                      I was speaking to friend on the phone over the weekend, and I had mentioned this, and he said that the way it works in the Northeast, is the cab co.s have contracts with Medicaid- and the deadbeats are given a list of companies which are on the list- and they (the deadbeat) just call Medicaid to approve the trip, and then call the cab co.

                      And get this… He says that this is touted as a “cost-saving measure”, because instead of calling the ambulance to take illegitimate kid #5 to the ER for a tummy ache (for which Medicaid gets billed $500) they can instead take the cab, which might “only” cost $100 round-trip.

                      But yeah, I agree, I would not have anything to do with a business model like that- but the sick thing is, in many such places, that means basically not being able to be in that business, because while they can’t force you to accept Medicaid, they essentially make it so that you can’t compete unless you do- i.e. by the cost of licenses and fees and requirements, you can’t turn a profit unless you’re pimping-out for the state.

                      Such is communism.

                      Where I live now, there are no real cabs. Just a few drunk services in the bigger towns, and of course, the “medical tramsportation” cronies in every county, which get 100% of their business from medicaid and medicare, and don’t even want to do private work, because it doesn’t pay as well.

    • GM’s been making CNG trucks for years but using them probably won’t win a contract. There’s quite a hickey as opposed to a gas or diesel pickup. I don’t get that since they’re produced to run on only CNG. It’s not a conversion. I notice more CNG big rigs pulling into fueling stations every day.

  5. CEOs know very little if anything about coding and computer programming. When something goes wrong however not only does the buck stop at their desk but they have to take full responsibility for every thing! It is my opinion and conclusion that the engineering department had an infiltrator (mole) who did a number on VW.
    A company like VW would have never risked its reputation and trust of its customers in such an intentional heating scheme gamble!

  6. The hair….that freak’n hair! I know I’m being extremely impolite, but what is it with the hair on these EPA females such as Janet McCabe…×594

    and Gina McCarthy…×594

    Do they run a k.d. lang look-a-like contest at the EPA?

    Good grief!

        • Excellent, Eight – thanks for the heads up!

          PS: I look like I just killed someone and threw ’em in the Woods… blood everywhere. I got my pinkie caught in between some unforgiving metal and a piece o’ meat came off… no major damage… but lots of blood!

          • Dang, doncha just hate that unforgiving metal? My cousin told me just before I was going to replace a top seal kit in a steering gearbox “Here, I have a trick for you that makes it easy”. So he sat down and had a hooked pick and began prying like crazy on it. When the pick came loose without budging the seal his wrist and hand went into that thick sheetmetal on the bottom of the inner fender on my 82 Chevy pickup. I saw it happened and he knew it too. We sat there for a while looking at the various tendons and viscera before the blood began to take over the show. He wrapped it up, said so long as his wife hauled his butt to the ER.
            Well, gotta be a better way than that thinks me. I picked up the box and there were instructions. “Start pickup, turn steering wheel to left lock. The seal with be forced out by pressure at this point. Turn wheel off lock and shut off engine.” It worked so fast I didn’t have time to say anything. I pulled out the other seals and gaskets easily and replaced them in order, took me about 3 minutes to make sure the last seal was seated evenly and then I just replaced the shaft, put a bit of fluid back in it and cleaned the floor. He wasn’t to return that day so I work on some customers pickup and mashed my fingers with his new super duty Snap On 3/8″ butterfly ratchet that seemed to have a few hundred foot lbs. of torque. It pulled my hand around that was on the butterfly up against an immovable object so I couldn’t let off and had to use my other hand to unplug the hose. Then it took both hands to pull the wrench back to get my hand loose. No real injury there but plenty pain of mashed fingers.

            Then there was the day same guy had a piece of high pressure hose in his hand and whipped out his new knife. He said “Man, this new knife is a sharp mother”. Indeed it was cause when it came through that hose it went on up into his left bicep and looked like it gutted him with the blood gushing. Actually, it had only severed that big artery so it a WOT drive to the ER again. No doubt they knew him well there.

    • Angry lesbian dikes for sure. Except only an ugly fat old dike would put up with that ugly face. A face that can functions as a cockroach trap. How could any even ugly fat old pregnant looking old man be attracted to such an ugly cow? These are the kind of creatures that attract the throwing of rotten tomatoes!

  7. The Obama regime seems to be trying to shove speed limited new heavy trucks in too before leaving. That one will likely stand because the large trucking companies and their associations actually SUPPORT it. It’s the little companies and individual OO that are leading the opposition.

    • Oh goody! Make all highways like driving through Indiana, where trucks’ speed limit is 65 and cars’ 70. Basically just turns I-70 into a two lane road, one for the trucks and one for the cars.

      • Oh, it’s worse than that. All those trucks that run 75 and above will be trying to get around all those stupid people who ball up behind the slow trucks. I’ve never understood why somebody running 75 or above has to let off, often with big rigs right on their ass, and pace that slow truck right on the rear driver’s corner of the trailer. It’ s a great place to pick up a blow-out which will most likely result in several car/truck/truck wrecks. I’ve turned down several jobs because the trucks were speed limited to 62 or 65. The trucking companies get a break on insurance rates and fuel used at the expense of actually being more dangerous. The insurance companies rightly think slower is safer……on a track with no other vehicles when in actuality, slower is much more dangerous.

        When you’re on I-20 and run into the counties with 80mph speed limits and most traffic is already doing 80 then they’re jumping it up to near 85. You often see someone who doesn’t realize that truck in front is only doing 60(that’s what the trucking companies who supposedly say their trucks are limited to 62 really run)and have to whip out, hopefully not in front of a vehicle about to pass them. People in cars have much more important things to do than drive. I got caught out in the middle of a busy 4 lane traffic intersection because a little ugly girl run out so far I couldn’t make my turn but she was busy……curling her eyelashes. Then there’s the people of both sexes who have their cell phone hanging on the power cord from the mirror and texting or playing games and they’re not even looking ahead. Or even worse, the ones with their phone in their lap looking down…..shit!

  8. CO2 is a product of *any* combustion. Are they going to regulate campfires next?

    That being said, I don’t miss the days of hydrocarbon-laden air. While the smell of a classic car is really cool (did you see Jay Leno’s recent post with his 1964 426-Hemi Coronet?), I wouldn’t want millions of them on the roads these days.

    LA smog, before/after:

    • Places like Arizona already prohibit wood burning fireplaces in new construction homes. The EPA has made new regulations for new wood stoves that are difficult to comply with. So regulating campfires wouldn’t be out of the picture.

  9. I wonder if the engineers who built the aqueducts that brought fresh water (more per capita than we get today) to Rome had to put up with this foolishness? After all, if they divert a stream it is altering the environment.

  10. Engines can’t get that much smaller, because at around two liters of displacement, they start having problems meeting NOx emissions limits. These smaller engines must work harder to move modern heavy cars which start at around 3,000 lb. Working hard in a thermodynamic sense means running hotter, which makes NOx, but it also makes for more efficient combustion and less CO2. The problem is that NOx is banned too, so to meet these fatwas, cars must get lighter. Oh wait, the side impact standards, mandatory air bags, roll over requirements and all that stuff make it impossible to make a light car, unless you pay a fortune for exotic materials. We have so many rules pulling cars in opposite design directions that it’s becoming really hard to make a car that the fascists will allow, and it’s why all cars now are fundamentally similar in design – smallish engines, small windows and high doors, extremely thick pillars, and shaped for aerodynamics. You can’t even build an efficient, reliable 1990’s 4-cylinder anymore, they’re not good enough, so you need variable valve timing, lift, and Nissan has just designed a variable compression engine. Honda is making true Atkinson cycle engines. Everyone is compromising the gasoline engine for efficiency, and augmenting it with a hybrid system – more weight and cost.

    These fascists don’t care how difficult it is for the rest of us to afford these cars, since they generally make a lot more than average. They also exempt government from these burdensome regulations – do you think military vehicles have catalysts or care about NOx? One city bus spewing its dirty diesel exhaust for a few days is the equivalent of a tens of thousands of diesel VW’s driving all year and “cheating”.

    • I’m curious about this as I thought the same thing. “it’s why all cars now are fundamentally similar in design”

      Then I was playing with craigslist and old cars and started to realize that even the old cars all looked the same. Look at the 40’s, 50′ and 60’s cars. They were all very, very similar.

      Have the car companies just been playing copy cat since the beginning? Sure the look of the new cars is driven by mandate but do you think anyone would create a 1961 dart phoenix if they could? It seems we are due for the “same”.

  11. More than hating us.

    The LOVE Power. Power and Money. There is money in the research so long as it provides the correct response. The reverse is also true, if research provides the wrong answer then you get no funding, ever, your career is over. I think it is mostly about egos and power. They all feel powerful making these decisions. I doubt that most of them have any nefarious intentions, it’s just the power of look what we can do.

    It’s a power they should not have.

    • All the research is just running computer models. Computer models predicted the election. Computer models predict Wall St trades. Computer models predict the short-term weather forecast. If the models are so good, why isn’t Hillary preparing for her inauguration? Why do stock prices ever change (if the models were perfect price discovery wouldn’t be necessary). Why is precipitation forecast expressed as a percentage chance? If the models are so good, shouldn’t they be able to tell me exactly when it will start raining at my house?

      Imperfect beings create imperfect software. People who can’t even manage to keep their email servers secure think otherwise.

      • “Why is precipitation forecast expressed as a percentage chance?”
        That’s simple to explain. The weatherman (meteorologist) goes out in the street and asks 10 people if it’s going to rain. 1 says no, 1 says not sure, 8 say yes. Therefore 85% chance of rain.

      • Computer models are used in the chemical industry to study gas and vapor explosions. Problem is when an event happens, the models are invariably showing the opposite of what happened. Bunsfield in England for example. Computer models allow engineers to not think with their brains, but to use idiotic machines instead. And when a computer gets one little piece of rubbish fed to it, the computer keeps going on because it has no authority to ask, “Why?”

  12. This information about reactive and non-reactive components of exhaust gasses is over looked by nearly anyone who mentions global warming. I got tired enough of this Chicken Little, the sky is falling trope. I revisited some of my elementary school science, most people may also recall some of these figures concerning the composition of earths atmosphere: 78% nitrogen, 21% oxygen 1% argon and 0.04% carbon dioxide and a remainder of negligible odds and ends. The last alarmist headline I read was concerned that CO2 levels had finally arrived at 400 parts per million(actually reflected in the above figures from Wikipedia) from 350 PPM sometime nearly a century ago. To explain how tiny these percentages and PPM figures are: 10,000 is 1% of 1,000,000. At 400 PPM or 0.04% CO2, I really am having a hard time believing any of this stuff. If a change of +50 PPM is a concern now, wouldn’t the inverse be equally as alarming, if we were to arrive miraculously at or near 0 ppm vegetation ceases its metabolic functions. Do they hate plants?

    • Plants need a minimum of 150-180 ppm CO2 to even survive. Ideal is somewhere around 1000. 500 would be nice. Ever notice that a good greenhouse will have CO2 release containers? It’s clear we would benefit from a little more CO2 in our lives.

    • “From a historical perspective, an atmospheric CO2 concentration of 400 ppm is actually almost scraping the bottom of the barrel. Over the Earth’s history, atmospheric CO2 concentrations have ranged from 180 ppm to 7000 ppm.”

      “That 400 ppm is actually dangerously low is a fact the alarmists keep avoiding and suppressing. Below 150 ppm, plant-life dies off on a massive scale.”

      • Above the useful idiot level they know exactly what they are doing. They don’t want other people to thrive. They may actually want to harm the planet.

        CO2 is a life giving gas and I am almost convinced that burning hydrocarbon fuels is presently every bit as vital to the planet as bacteria creating oxygen once were. CO2 levels were dangerously low and then came the age of hydrocarbon fuels in the nick of time (geologically) to arrest the decline. The result has been to give the planet millions of years of more life. Climate stability is increasing too best that I can tell.

        • Brent, you’re probably right…..but, there must be a plethora of idiots. A great deal of it comes from colleges where the little illiterate kids can only repeat what they hear and rely only on the falsified data they’ve been fed.
          Of course news sources will repeat any horseshit they are fed and be happy.
          I guess I said horseshit cause I got some really rank stuff in the tread of my boots and have scrubbed and washed and done everything I can think of and they still smell like horseshit.

    • Max,

      CO2 is a greenhouse gas but it follows a curve of diminishing returns. From where we are now CO2 can increase dramatically and there will be barely any change in the energy CO2 traps. Authority claims amplification effects. The problem is we are already well past where we should see severe problems on that theory. And we don’t. The hypothesis already failed. So they do various unscientific things to convince people we are. (see tony heller’s work for details)

      I’ve learned most people are repeaters. When I go out into the wilds of the internet I’ll get people telling me exactly what teachers and media say. Exactly. No independent thought. They just act like I must have missed class that day. They are like robots.

      Anyway, it’s kind of that living earth hypothesis stuff. The carbon cycle isn’t perfect. A lot of it gets sequestered over the eons. Some critter has to put more CO2 into play. That critter is us. We take hydrocarbons from the bowels of the earth and turn it into life’s basic needs, CO2 and H2O. There’s something so very natural about it. Has it been a perfect process? No. But we’ve figured it out in a the blink of an eye for the earth.

      Environmentalist logic fails because to them the sequestering of CO2 and water (as ice) has to keep continuing forever without anything getting released back. Makes no sense. Life would end under that system. Their ice theory scares me from a mechanical standpoint. If ice mass builds up enough and creates an eccentric mass on the earth, what happens to its spin? That’s extreme, but build up cannot happen without ice returning to the sea forever. It can’t. If it does we can calculate the day the earth wobbles out this life compatible rotation.

      • BrentP,

        I was going to point out a few other things I’d noticed, not being a accredited scientist I felt it really didn’t add much. The above proportions of atmosphere cite nitrogen and oxygen as the largest constituents of the atmosphere, these are in a gaseous elemental state which means they exist as molecules with themselves N2 and O2 respectively. CO2 contains apparently another of these O2 molecules, a snarky question might be: Are these O2s included or in addition to the already accounted for O2 molecules? As CO2 is already such a tiny proportion to begin with I doubt it matters much, but it was still given as if there should be a difference. It would seem the issue is really with solitary C+ ions latching upon O2 molecules.

        Properties of matter can be profoundly effected when they combine, producing many new characteristics. If you consult the periodic table of elements we notice carbon, nitrogen and oxygen(99% of the atmosphere) are all neighbors, carbon the least massive progressing to oxygen the most massive. It would seem to me that these nitrogen and oxygen molecules would be of much more concern when considering solar radiation inciting and transmitting upon and through them, carbon seems so insignificant.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here