A Peek into What Might Have Been

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

How many miles-per-gallon might some new cars be capable of traveling if the government hadn’t begun “mandating” how many miles-per-gallon new cars must travel? 

One way to get an idea is to consider suspension travel – which (so far) the government doesn’t “mandate” (or regulate) one way or the other. 

The results have been so good it’s almost hard to believe.

Without any government involvement at all, there are vehicles like the ’22 Ford Bronco I recently test drove for a week that ride more comfortably than luxury cars once did – despite the Bronco being a lifted 4×4 riding on 35 inch knobby tires designed for crawling over cars. This is true generally of modern 4x4s (what “SUVs” used to be called) as well as pick-trucks. If you’ve driven one made during the past ten years or so, you’ll already know all about it.

Back in the mid-‘70s, which was when the government began to “mandate” (and regulate) how many miles-per-gallon new cars must deliver – trucks and 4x4s did not ride like luxury cars.

They also did not handle better than the performance cars of the time – which the new trucks and 4x4s do. 

I am regularly amazed by the latter as much as the former, as the owner of a ‘70s performance car (my 1976 Pontiac Trans-Am) that, back in the ‘70s, was one of the best-handling new cars available. The new Bronco I recently test drove handles – and rides – better. It can take curves faster without its tires squealing, sooner. It does not feel tipsy when cornering at speeds below the speed limit – as jacked-up 4×4 SUVs once did. And when the curves straighten out, the ride is astonishingly plush. Especially compared with the ride quality of my ’76 Trans-Am, which will loosen any old crowns you might want to get rid of.

Back in the ’70s, before the government became the intermediary between the car-makers and car-buyers, buyers had to decide which they preferred: A car that could corner better than a 4×4 or pickup (and luxury cars) or a car that had a plush ride – but “handled” like a drunken oaf walks down the sidewalk.

You picked one – and put up with (or sacrificed) the other.

Then this thing called the free market applied its non-coercive pressure – exerted in the form of people who bought cars (and 4x4s and trucks) expressing their preferences, via their checkbooks, for suspensions that weren’t one-size-fits all. Performance cars got more comfortable, while becoming more capable. The same for 4x4s and pick-ups, which have achieved a level of capability and comfort that would have boggled the mind back in the ’70s. It is no hard thing to drive a vehicle like the new Bronco every day, as a general purpose vehicle. It was a very hard thing, back in the ’70s, to drive a ’70s-era Bronco every day as a general purpose vehicle.

None of this happened because the government “stepped in” – the euphemism for applied coercion – to make the car industry design and build more compliant and even-more-capable suspension systems. Luxury cars now handle better than the highest-performance cars of the ’70s and lifted 4x4s ride better than the luxury cars of the ’70s.

All of that happened naturally, as a result of market forces that never applied coercion to anyone.

Now try to imagine how market forces might have affected miles-per-gallon, absent coercion.

Prior to such coercion, there were already economical cars on the market.

Perhaps the most iconic – and best-selling – being the VW Beetle. Italicized to emphasize the point. Millions of these were sold – i.e., freely exchanged – years before the government began to apply coercion (in the form of “mandates” and regulations) requiring such cars to be sold.

Had the government not applied coercion, the market almost certainly would have resulted in an even more efficient Beetle – and other cars like it – because if people wanted more efficient cars, then there is a market for them and so a good reason (profit) for car makers to design, build and offer them for sale.

Cars like the old Beetle would have, in the natural course of things, been upgraded with more efficient fuel delivery systems (i.e., fuel injection) and other such things which would have improved their efficiency analogously to the way the suspension systems of modern vehicles have evolved to become better at more things – all without the need to force them to be made so.

One of the most extravagantly stupid assertions ever made is that it is only because of government coercion – “mandates” and regulations – that efficiency became a priority for the car industry.

In the manner of computers becoming more capable, efficient and lower-priced on account of government coercion. Whoops. The government hasn’t applied coercion to the computer industry, insofar as computer processing speed (efficiency) ease of use and general reliability.

But – somehow, to some minds – cars are different. The car industry would have ignored market preferences and continued to build “gas hogs” were it not for government “mandates” and regulations to make cars more efficient.

Kind of like the way suspensions have developed into almost miraculously capable – and comfortable – technologies, without a single “mandate” or regulation forcing them to be so.

. . .

Got a question about cars, bikes or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in! Or email me directly at EPeters952@yahoo.com if the @!** “ask Eric” button doesn’t work!

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend 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

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com and I will send you a copy directly!




Share Button


  1. These EV’s just added another 1000 lb on to already overweight cars.

    The quickest cars in the world usually weigh 2000 lb or less, a modern 3000 lb to 4500 lb supercar/hypercar will never be as fast, you can’t overcome that much extra weight.

    To overcome the weight they add huge hp, this makes the car unstable so they control it with, stabilize it with AI, computers, they drive the car you don’t. These aren’t driver’s cars you are just along for the ride….

    In 1961 F1 cars weighed 450 kg 990 lb, in 2022 700 kg. 1540 lb.

    The Porsche 919 hybrid EVO 850 kg 1873 lb

    The VW IDR EV race car aboiut 907 kg. 2000 lb

    Porsche 917 30 845 kg 1863 lb.

    Double A fuel dragster about 1400 lb.

    The answer? Buy an ultralight like a Super 7, or a Super 7 clone, around 1200 lb. and totally analog no driver assists…you have to drive it, and more fun then any other car.
    Over weight EV’s = no fun….

  2. I’m getting so sick of “crossovers”. So tired of riding behind their tiny rear windows and huge, fat asses. It went from being a future of flying cars and freedom, to these ugly abominations, these “smartphones with wheels” that are oh-so-very “saaafety!”.

    Heavily disappointing.

  3. It was nice over the weekend and people were pulling their classics out for a drive.
    One that pulled up beside me was a convertible VW Beetle. Excellent looking specimen.

    And I thought it was appropriate to preserve that car. Even though it was a mass produced, cheap vehicle because it serves as a reminder of how a cheap car for the masses was needed and provided. It successfully competed against family cars, luxury cars, vans, trucks & sports cars for decades. It was a rolling representation of what used to be available before it was regulated away.

    • Air cooled VW’s are were definitely mass produced, but they were never “cheap”! They were actually very high quality, inexpensive, and economical. Throw in innovative, well engineered, and simple. I know what you mean, but the Vega was cheap, the beetle never was.

  4. The average person has a tendency to be apathetic in most scenarios. The average libertarian has tendency to be mistrustful (and doubtful) of most scenarios. 🙂

    I am playing Devil’s Advocate…what if the world is not what it seems? What happens if not everyone is vying toward the goal (those of the WEF, WHO, or Gates Foundation)? What happens if the system being implemented is meant to destroy it, but not for the reasons that we believe…climate change, one world domination, depopulation, but to showcase how evil the people working the system are?

    Unfortunately, France did not get this memo yesterday as they re-elected that swarmy little shit Macron by a large margin.

    Here is an article from Breitbart who is concerned about the lack of supplies needed to make lithium batteries for electric cars. The USSA promotes climate change, but they really haven’t done anything to stabilize or rework the supply chain. China will likely lockdown Beijing shortly. Currently, there are several hundreds of ships waiting outside Chinese ports. China’s commodity market is crashing. Can China become the world’s Superpower when they fail to deliver the supplies and recourses that the world needs?


    How does one takeover the world when none of the serfs want to work or are being forced not to work?

    • There is no intention of preserving people’s lifestyles, motoring especially. There’s no intention of building enough BEVs never mind at the increased volumes needed to replace the vehicles more often than ICE due to battery packs reaching their demise. No intention of improving the grid to charge the BEVs either. It’s all about impoverishing people. For the fun of it is a big part, but I doubt it is the primary part. Their wealth and power are primary. Destroying it for the sake of evil? Well that’s a spiritual question and it may be if there is some entity that the powers that be worship.

      • Hi Brent,

        I believe there are evil people in the world, but I cannot believe (nor do the numbers co-relate) that all people in positions of higher power are evil. Some? Absolutely. All? Not likely. The oligarchy has already stated what they wish to achieve. Nowhere in the “Art of War” does it state “tell the world your plans.” Maybe, the plan is for enough people to wake up to eradicate the plan?

        I have read the Rockefeller Foundation’s “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” far too many times. The gist of Step 4 is that the plan fails. The system breaks down and globalization is destroyed. Local communities are the building blocks of the entire premise. Maybe, some of the higher ups realize that globalization cannot succeed and to destroy it is the only means of salvation and continuance of the species.

        • All people in positions of higher power ARE evil, or insane. Sane people with ethical standards do not seek such power over their neighbors. All governments are founded on the assumption of authority to kill you if you don’t obey. They cannot function without it.

          • elite nobility/un/wef/ccp/.0001% satanist/nazi theocracy
            Psychopathic members of an occult satanic death cult running the planet, planning your horrible future. a satanic cult that believe in eugenics, slavery,pedophilia, transhumanism and fake science.

            wef runs the new bankster/nwo/wef/ccp/.0001% one world government being put in place worldwide right now, this will be your new government. the cv19 hoax is a cover, excuse, trap, to put it in place. covid cult: an occult satanic death cult run by fanatics.

            some wef history

            the World Economic Forum was co-founded by Maurice Strong, who was the main promoter of the climate change movement.
            the much more exclusive World Forum of 300 which was created by Maurice Strong in 1982 and was co-founded with Klaus Schwab as his assistant.

            Prince Charles hired Schwab to run the WEF.
            Great Reset” Schwab’s son is married to a Chinese woman. The Schwabs are China lovers. The “build back better” part of the great reset agenda intends to turn the west in to China.

            The Origins of the World Economic Forum Go Back to the Third Reich nazis.

            schwab runs the wef his family was connected to the nazis in germany.

            World Forum leaves a blind spot to the alien agenda in the the creation of the plan, the blind spot also leaves out Dr Muller, creator of the UNESCO programs and the Common Core education system.

            Muller and Strong created of the United Nations University at Mt Rasur where they communicate with a demon called Rasur,

            Maurice Strong was creator of Agenda 21 along with his buddies Prince Phillip and Charles and Ted Turner. Someone said Turner put up the georgia guidestones that says the population should be 500 million only. Persons will be coerced through lies, drugs, fear, and pain to surrender themselves, their egos to the collective consciousness.

            The blind spot leaves out the involvement of Nazi German Vril psychics who were involved
            at the Maurice Strong Baca Grande hippie commune where Laurence Rockefeller say’s he met the Devil just prior to presenting the plans to the first World Forum in 1982 in Vail Colorado.

            We don’t associate Eugenics with David Rockefeller, like we do with Hitler, but it was actually the Rockefeller Foundation that first did the research,
            their groundbreaking 1930 work on Eugenics, an idea that became so popular in Europe Hitler monetized it domestically to justify global domination.

            Beginning in 1930 the Rockefeller Foundation provided financial support to the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics, which later inspired and conducted eugenics experiments in the Third Reich.

            Rockefeller got his monopoly on drugs, and Big Pharma and Rockefeller Medicine were born – and has only grown bigger and more terrible since, now routinely bribing doctors to prescribe their toxic and side effect-laden pills, not to mention their autism-causing vaccines, all based on the germ theory. Rockefeller, the AMA and Big Pharma are now all key aspects of the NWO (New World Order),

            The nazis adopted it and promoted it. “The infection theories (germ theory) were only established as a global dogma through the concrete policies and eugenics of the Third Reich nazis. Before 1933, scientists dared to contradict this gerrm theory; after 1933, these critical scientists were silenced.”
            now we have the allopathic germ theory nazi medicine used exclusively worldwide and big pharma is the most profitable business on the planet, thanks to pasteur, rockefeller and flexner.

            the modern monetary system is based on keynesian beliefs.

            Keynes is heralded as the guiding light of the New Deal (and, as such defended by modern “Green New Dealers” and Great Reset technocrats wishing to impose a top-down system of governance onto the world),

            This will be seen clearly in 1) his devotion to the theories of Thomas Malthus, 2) his promotion of eugenics as a science of racial purification and population control, and 3) his general devotion to World Government as a leading member of the Fabian Society. The fabians bringing communism to all western countries.

            Depopulation: The provable reality was that Indian famines were coordinated tools of population control by the Malthusian elite of the British establishment who considered “war, famine and disease” as the gifts nature gave the strong to manage the weak.
            read again: “disease” as the gifts nature gave the strong to manage the weak. now the great reset wants to use poisonous injections for depopulation.

            Thomas Malthus (a British East India Company economist) stated in his famous 1799 Essay on Population:
            “The power of population is so superior to the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race.” gates wants to use vaccines.

            “We should facilitate, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavoring to impede, the operations of nature in producing this mortality; and if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction, which we compel nature to use. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague.” today: herding the useless eaters into large cities.

            In his May 2, 1914 lecture Population, Keynes argued that government should “mould law and custom deliberately to bring about that density of population which there ought to be” and that “there would be more happiness in the world if the population of it were to be diminished.”
            now the gates led nwo/ccp/wef globalists are saying after great depopulation reset you will own nothing and be happier.

            Hitler himself was not only a devout eugenicist (whose racial purification policies emerged through the funding of the Rockefeller, Carnegie Foundations as well as British establishment), but was also a devout Malthusian saying:

            “The day will certainly come when the whole of mankind will be forced to check the augmentation of the human species, because there will be no further possibility of adjusting the productivity of the soil to the perpetual increase in the population.”
            now gates is saying the same thing, depopulation is good.

            After the war, eugenics-promoting organizations and think tanks changed their names while continuing their work, morphing into new forms by the 1960s such as the
            NOTE :environmental movement, transhumanist movement, including the pharmaceutical/healthcare sector. now we have the wef pushing this with the great reset.

            cv19 religion/climate change/depopulation agenda………it sounds a bit like The church of euthanasia: The church of euthanasia “devoted to restoring the balance between Humans and the remaining species on Earth. “Save the Planet, Kill Yourself”

            the climate change/global warming hoax is an excuse for a cull. the satanists will do it with their cull of useless eaters, they already warned you of the depopulation agenda, there was silence, that is implied consent, the cull progresses.
            Get this: the two top psychos that are administrators for the banksters, gates and soros, have no education, they are morons.

            The psychos running the planet: Mt Rasur where they communicate with a demon called Rasur.
            Laurence Rockefeller say’s he met the Devil just prior to presenting the plans to the first World Forum in 1982 in Vail Colorado.
            the pope is part of this cult.

            The government/church/medical system is just a huge occult satanic death cult now

    • Raider,

      “How does one takeover the world when none of the serfs want to work or are being forced not to work?”

      These days, ex-fucking-actly! I can’t get anyone to do anything. Everyone has a backlog of weeks, months or years, and they might tell you that if they ever return your calls or emails.

      We have Elon Musk buying Twitter today, which hopefully will be a good thing and wipe out a huge censorial arm of the MSM (though I’m still skeptical). But where are the entrepreneurs taking advantage of the dysfunction of China and the supply chain? Now is a time for someone with capital to make a move and begin manufacturing HERE all kinds of things. But I’m not seeing that.

      • Hi BaDnOn,

        If one wants to make money there is no better time in history to do so. I took on way too much work, but greed got to me and I saw the potential to blast through previous year figures. I did, very easily. Customers just want someone to start and complete a project so they have one less thing on their “To Do” list.

        True story: my parents sanitation man is making $2000 a week in rural Virginia just driving a trash truck. Seriously. The owner of the business has lost half of his workforce that he is willing to pay anything to keep the rest of the drivers on the payroll. No workers, no business. The guys left are up to 7 days a week and will likely start quitting due to exhaustion.

        Unfortunately, many of these businesses will end up going bankrupt because they do not have the staff to keep things moving. Unemployment will increase as businesses close their doors and the idiots sitting on the sidelines waiting for a management position will not be hired at the bottom of the rung because 100 people will be applying for the same position.

        Actions have consequences. Once the Stock Market starts siphoning off their profits those that retired early will realize they don’t have the finances to live the lifestyle that they want. They (and millions of others) will find their way back to the Job Market and the jobs they want will no longer be there.

      • BaDnOn, who in (or even out of) their right mind would want to operate a business within the Empire these days? Their endless regulations (local, state, federal) have priced most businesses out. Not to mention the more than 200,000 small and medium sized business out right destroyed during the plandemic. Then there are various barriers to entry. Many of which are the results of corruption and Sweet Deals with government at some level. Anyone with enough personal capital to do that, also knows better than to bother.

        Are you familiar with ESG? Its being pushed by Blackrock and Vanguard to name but a few. They are making entire industry sectors unprofitable.


        I’d love to see our manufacturing base re shored. But its not going to happen. Why? because anything personnel intensive is simply too expensive to compete with whats available outside of the country. The only alternative at this point would be near total automation. But that is VERY expensive. Why invest that huge amount of capital, in a place that can destroy your investment at their whim? There are now countless law suits over the businesses that have been destroyed. Those are likely to drag on for many years. Bottom line, those with the capital to start/operate many types of businesses inside the Empire, are also smart enough not to risk that capital.

      • I’ll be glad to manufacture here, but:
        1. Capital is captured by insane concepts like communism, ESG, CRT, and medical tyranny. So I cannot expand more than organically or grow very large.
        2. The system is all communist/fascist/statist from top to bottom, controlled by a system of payoffs and lies (licenses for every-damn-thing).
        3. If I hire employees, I would be better off and have fewer legal obligations by adopting children. If you haven’t done it, you have no idea how bad it is.
        4. If I succeed, I will be raped by the patent trolls of the legal system, or just run over by Chinese communists with motives far beyond an honest living and honest trade.

        So, I continue to do boutique manufacturing, with limited revenue possibilities, so that my kids will have a chance at a livable society and a heritage. Want to buy a ghost gun? Oh wait, supposedly I can’t make those any more…

      • Welcome to the country Badnon,

        One thing to remember, it takes time and effort, forging relationships out here. I’ve been out here 12 years and still get treated like a newbie by some. Oh well. I have customers that I’ve had for years that I will go out of the way for. New clients, not so much. I’m sure you understand the dynamic, but most don’t.

        I get calls from people in a panic wanting me to drop what I’m doing so I can re-plumb their 2nd, 3rd, or 4th house they just bought in Sedona. When they start with that I usually give a hard no. I always return calls, usually within 2 hours. Found out years ago if you do this it puts you in the top tier right out of the gate.

        The backlog is sometimes a way of testing you. If you asked to be put on their wait list/schedule, and are happy for that, I find sometimes in a few days they call with an opening.

        If I was 20 years younger I’d be hiring and making an obscene amount of coin. I just don’t have the energy, interest in it. I prefer to spend my time in the garden, writing, reading, hiking , fishing. Life is short.

        You picked a good time to emigrate from the city, enjoy the journey. It’ll be a long strange trip which will give you many stories to tell your grandkids.

        • Thanks, Norman!

          I’m looking forward to being out there. Life is way too short, by the way! I wish I could’ve done this 10 years ago, but life didn’t work out that way.

          • Reading yours and Turtles comments on another thread, it sounds like you both have found a good path. When I read your comments now I’ll think of Thomas Dolby.

            If you’re near the Verde, not on the other side of the hill, see if Eric will give you my E-mail. I might have people I can refer you to, depending on what it is you need done.

  5. Again the question comes to my mind is this: Would vehicles be as safe as they are now if there was no government intervention? Do you believe that market forces always produce positive outcomes. Foreign competition has forced domestic manufacture to improve quality. We needed to adapt as we were losing market share. The price of fuel forced the development of more efficient engines and the use of lighter materia!s. I am not so sure that market forces could have improved safety to the level we now see in modern cars. I raise this question, because the attitude of letting the chips fall where they may could create unfortunate outcomes. Comments appreciated.

    • More 4-lane highways reduce accidents and traffic deaths, better roads, better driving skills, improved techniques in building safer vehicles. Automobiles are manufactured with design features that work to prevent serious injury, seat belts and crush points in case of an accident do reduce highway fatalities. 31,000 fatalities in 2021, compared to 1979 and 1980 statistics which all recorded 51,000 plus highway deaths each year.


      The wikipedia entry has 1972 and 1973 highway fatalities at 54,000.


      The nanny state encumbrances on new automobiles probably cause accidents. The DOT electronic sign says: STAY IN YOUR LANE.

      Lane keep in newer automobiles might be causing problems driving down the highway. The reason for the message/warning. Could be.

      Follow the rules of the road, the speed limit is there for a reason.

      • No it isn’t. A speed limit is supposed to be set according to sound engineering principles that consider maximum safe operating speed and roadway design characteristics. Maximum safe operating speed changes with the vehicle mix and driver skill level. The most democratic and efficient way to set that is to measure the 85th percentile speed which correlates with lowest accident involvement.

        Unfortunately, it’s not done that way today. Speed limits are an arbitrary construct set by politicians in know nothing city councils and established state highway departments under state statute.

        I agree with your assertion that 4 lane highways have saved lives. Turning a 2 lane into a 4 lane road reduces accident and death by some 77 percent per the Road Trip Information Program…

        Lane assist, reduced outward visibility from blind spots caused by side impact and roof standards, and distracting touchscreens contribute to increased accident rates.

        We would be much better off if cars didn’t have all this nonsense and didn’t cost 50k

      • I do follow the rules of the road, as I determine, commensurate with my ability, road conditions, and traffic density. We are all required to obey the speed limit, which is the speed of light.

    • Oskar, that’s a good question. If you examine past history the question answers itself. Compare electronics as just one example. Over decades they have grown ever more effective, but the price has also dropped. One of the reasons is that government isn’t highly involved. Look at Lasik eye surgery in the medical market. Since it wasn’t originally covered by either insurance, or government programs it had to compete in the market. It has grown ever more effective, and the price is far below that of other typical medical procedures. There are quite a number of other examples. The fact is, that just about anything done by the government, or covered by its cronies in the medical mafia is hugely expensive, and typically lower quality. While there may well be some edge cases, I’d be much more likely to trust the free market, than government coercion. Rothbard, Mises and Hayek have written extensively on why this happens. Here is but one of many such examples.

    • Market forces wouldn’t have.

      Because no one wants to pay for $5-10k worth of extra safety crap on a car, and most can’t afford it anyway. Except whoever drives a Volvo.

      Why should I be forced to buy so much stuff I don’t necessarily need or want, that I definitely can’t afford?

      Comments appreciated.

      • Hi Publius,

        Yup; I’ve tried to make the same case for decades. If Smith wants air bags (and so on) then he has every right to buy them, at the price necessary to make their offering worth doing for the car manufacturer. But Jones has just as much right to not buy air bags (and so on) and thereby save money.

        But this choice is denied Jones, who is compelled not only to spend money he would not have spent, had he been free to elect not to – but also compelled to partially subsidize the cost Smith pays, thereby reducing Smith’s costs at the expense of Jones.

        When air bags were first offered – and could be refused – most did. Precisely because they were too expensive for most people. And – once upon a time – people who esteemed “safety” above other considerations were free to buy Volvos. And the rest of us were free not to.

        • I worked in the insurance industry for 30 years (yeah, I know, we aren’t the most loved around here) and was privy to numerous studies done on all manner of issues. One that comes to mind discussed the subject of airbags. The study found that the average driver would “need” an airbag once in 110 years. “Need” was described as significantly mitigating the injuries sustained during a vehicle crash. If the occupants were wearing their seatbelts, the best method for avoiding injuries, in a majority of accidents the airbags provided very little benefit.

          In other words, airbags are a pricey and small enhancement for what many would consider a minor risk. Personally, I would never pay for them.

          • Hi James,

            That sounds about right. In all the years I’ve been driving – since the ’80s – I’ve needed air bag exactly never. The neurotic/control freak will say: But it might save your life! And so might never leaving my house. I assume the slight risk without quaking precisely because the risk is slight – as established by the fact that I have never needed an air bag even once in all my years of driving.

          • James, I’d have nothing against insurance companies, if they hadn’t made a Sweet Deal with the governments to turn the population into a captive audience. Forcing people to purchase insurance is simply an example of how corrupt the system has become. Not to mention how the insurance mafia and its government cronies has made health care extremely expensive. FAR more expensive than can ever be justified. Its yet another example of how corruption goes hand in hand with coercion.

            • BJ,

              I agree with everything you’ve said. The thing that pisses me off most about the insurance mafia, (looking at you State Farm) is the non-stop virtue signaling, where every single event, concert, car show, sports ball, whatever, they feel the need to spend money plastering their pathetic logo everywhere.

              Then to make it worse they pay illiterate joggers 100s of millions to show their diseased mugs all over Tee Vee, why not reduce the premiums for everyone a 100$ a year? To top it off Every Single Time they show a couple its a god damned mixed race abortion, its some kind of slop of un unknown quality. Sorry I don’t see that in the real world. Maybe I don’t get out enough. Either way, not my idea of a good neighbor.

        • Eric, that tracks with the priorities of those in power. Remember our discussion on the difference priorities between men and women? In general, those priorities are hard wired. There have been studies that have found links between the rise to power of women, that have linked those priorities, with the increase of the Nanny State. But of course, they have been suppressed. Such would not fit the Narrative. Does this sound familiar?

        • There are a lot of things one could optimize a car for.

          Fuel economy
          Low purchase price
          Low maintenance cost
          Ease of maintenance
          Frequency of maintenance
          Cargo capacity
          Minimum driver engagement
          Maximum driver enjoyment

          None of them is wrong. Some people will choose one or another factor (or a combination). Some factors are (more or less) mutually exclusive. That’s all fine. The “right” answer is what you value, and that is highly individual.

          Too many rules, too few manufacturers. Not enough innovation.

        • You are free to choose… until you (and almost everyone else) choose the “wrong” answer (and who decided that, anyway?).

          At which point, it is then announced that because too many people made the “wrong” choice, everyone’s choice will henceforth be constrained accordingly.

          This has been the game my entire life. I, for one, have had it. Whatever it is, it is most definitely NOT freedom, and as far as I am concerned, insofar as I can actually influence anything, it ends now. I’ll choose for me.

    • How do you define safe?
      Government largely defines safety as something that happens after you’ve crashed. Thus government demands roll over strength instead of visibility for example.
      Safety at what cost elsewhere? Government demands all this crash safety but that comes at the expense of fuel economy for example.

      So what would the free market have done? Better balance and more choice of balance points.

      The auto industry tried to sell safety for decades before it was finally able to.

  6. Should be pointed out that one reason why SUV suspensions have dramatically improved over the years is because of lawsuits.


    For years, Ford has battled lawsuits alleging that the compact Bronco II is inherently prone to roll over because of its short wheelbase and high center of gravity.

    Ford stopped producing the two-door Bronco II in 1990, but has vigorously defended the vehicle, blaming rollovers on poor driving or unsafe modifications to the vehicles.

    As much as everyone hates lawyers they do serve a purpose. In fact, I think in my libertarian Utopia lawyers would be as common as open carry, for many of the same reasons.

    • No, because SUV’s have become crossovers, so they are underrepresented in car crashes. The only people who buy real truck based SUVs today are Very rich people who prefer to fly anyway, hence the lower crash rates.

  7. The free market was created by God. There is no flaw in it. The Devil rules governments, as has been so clearly demonstrated over the last couple of years, and far longer if you care to look.

    • John, I wish that attitude were widely shared. Most Christians seem to believe exactly the opposite: that talking about economic law is shameful because it shows that “you only care about money,” and that we should instead trust in politicians – because “Render unto Caesar” (note that they seldom even finish the sentence, let alone try to understand the context or real meaning).
      So instead of having confidence in the miracle of voluntary trade, which our creator gave us so that we could survive – even thrive – in a world of scarcity, they put their faith in men. Not just any men, but the dumbest ones on earth: bossy central planners whose only skill is bamboozling suckers into voting for them.

      • It doesn’t matter what “Christians” say. This is what the Bible has to say about who runs the State.

        From Luke 4:
        “And he [Satan] led Him [Jesus] up and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said to Him, “I will give You all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. “Therefore if You worship before me, it shall all be Yours.” Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and serve Him only.’””

        I make a point to not Bible thump here, but people’s BS needs to be called out (not Roland, but the people he is criticizing).

        • Horst Muhlmann:
          My response to Churchian boot lickers who spout “muh Romans 13” The verse written by the guy who was beheaded by his own government (no irony there.) Is 1 Samuel 10-18

    • Well… To my mind the free market is created by un coerced Human Action (sorry I had to… 🙂 ). It is simply the natural result of human exchange of goods and services. Any real flaws are the result of it being linked to a political system. Crony capitalism comes to mind in that regard. Anarcho capitalism would be the pure form of free market. That is unlikely in a world ruled by coercive states. As for who or what rules governments, I thought that was the cabal of central banks. Which is itself ruled by the BIS. So if you want to say that the BIS is the Devil, I’d be hard pressed to disagree with you. 🙂

      • ” the free market is created by un coerced Human Action (sorry I had to… 🙂 ). It is simply the natural result of human exchange of goods and services”. Or God, for short. Depending on whether you believe in intelligent design or not.

        • As I’ve mentioned I’m a deist. But my God believes in free will. Thus He doesn’t intervene in human affairs. Thus from my perspective, the free market is entirely a human construct.

  8. Let’s not forget about the chicken tax which has robbed the public of affordable small trucks for generations. Without competition the so called american auto makers have rested on their laurels and taken us on an absurd journey where all the puckups on the market are massive overpriced behemoths hardly usable as trucks anymore. How much gas would have been saved if we could have bought small utes, jap kei trucks or plain ol isuzus like the “chevy” luv?

    • All we need is one state to license any vehicle that can be imported or built.

      But the US fedgov would cut off that state’s transportation funding.

      Secession is the only answer.

      • Good luck finding state legislatures willing to nullify much less secede. It has to be organic, grassroots rather than driven by politicians.

      • It’s actually already being done. Look at all the Polaris Rangers, Quadcycles, Mahindras, etc being run on city streets. At least out here in the hinterlands they need lights, turn signals (not sure why- hand signals still work) horns, and (gag) seat belts. Places where the parasites have been kept in check do this- blue states and localities never.

        The dissolution and collapse of centralized authority is inevitable- the tower of Babel always falls in the end.

  9. And in a free market, entrepreneurs would bear the risk. Only they and their voluntary investors would suffer losses if they tried to unload stupid ideas on consumers.

    • I’ll go ya one better. The responsibility rests primarily and almost exclusively on the consumer. The maker/seller/producer is blameless if the consumer is an idiot. This also extends to buying and using inferior quality and designs and expecting good/safe results.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here