• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Stay alive drive 55

RaleBulgarian said:
I’m willing to bet that your link didn’t include all of the factors, objectively stated/supported, that you asserted in your post #264.
Click to expand...
If you feel my thesis is flawed feel free to present your own counter thesis.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Didn't prove anything at all.

If driving a rice grinder makes you feel good about yourself and saving the climate...... then I say go for it!
Click to expand...
Except that's not what you said. Your posts indicated a dick measuring contest. Only those trying to compensate enter dick measuring contests.
 
Chainsawmassacre said:
If you feel my thesis is flawed feel free to present your own counter thesis.
Click to expand...
Not how it works. It’s up to you to prove your assertion when challenged. You haven’t done that. Not even close.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Again...... you lie.

Post #9?

Of course, the right complains about electric cars and hybrids, which saves on gas usage, while they drive their little dick big trucks with horrible gas mileage

Please Stop lying.
Click to expand...
You proved his point. Saying it's a work truck is fine. Challenging him is a dick measuring contest. Obviously, he was spot on
 
RetiredUSN said:
No....you feel that it's perfectly fine carpet bomb and then cry like a baby when someone comes back at you.
Click to expand...
Do you even know what you’re talking about now?
 
RaleBulgarian said:
😄 I’m not the one butt hurt by @Lloyd Christmas’ general comment.
Click to expand...

it's funny, if someone said something about liberals that didn't apply to me, I would laugh it off and point out why it was so stupid, not whine like a baby and get all worked up. that's what insecure people do when someone hit on the truth

anyway, he's not really upset, he is just doing what he always does, trolls
 
Lloyd Christmas said:
it's funny, if someone said something about liberals that didn't apply to me, I would laugh it off and point out why it was so stupid, not whine like a baby and get all worked up. that's what insecure people do when someone hit on the truth
Click to expand...
Same here. Some folks are just too sensitive to any perceived insult. A personal weakness, IMO.
Lloyd Christmas said:
anyway, he's not really upset, he is just doing what he always does, trolls
Click to expand...
Maybe trolling or maybe genuinely childishly butt hurt. With @RetiredUSN it’s sometimes hard to tell.
 
Chainsawmassacre said:
Lots of liberal kids in here don’t remember that but it saved lives and gas. 55 was a bit slow and people complained but how about 60mph? A mile a minute seems a reasonable speed. Save lives and gas as we stop importing Russian oil.
If Biden was a leader and he would propose this and convince Americans it was a war effort we should all be willing to participate in. The gas saved would go a long way in making up for lost Russian oil and people on both sides of the isle could at least unite behind this one thing.
Click to expand...
The National Maximum Speed Law set a national speed limit of 55 mph in 1974. The aim was to cut national petroleum consumption by 2.2 percent, but the Department of Transportation says it saved just 1 percent. Perhaps that's because the law was widely ignored and barely enforced.
The Department of Energy noted in 2008 that lowering the national speed limit to 55 mph would save 175,000 to 275,000 barrels of oil daily. The United States consumes about 19.5 million barrels per day. But the GAO is quick to note that a lower limit would have little effect in urban areas, where congestion forces people to drive more slowly than 55 anyway. It cites the Federal Highway Administration when it says fewer than one-quarter of all vehicle miles traveled would be directly affected by a 55 mph limit.

https://www.wired.com/2010/06/50-mph-speed-limit-curb-emissions/#:~:text=The National Maximum Speed Law,it saved just 1 percent.

If the high price of gas does not save more than the 1% that the drive 55 limit did I will be very surprised. It is funny that a right winger would be praising something that Carter did too. Perhaps you are realizing that he was smarter than you right wingers thought.
 
Chainsawmassacre said:
I knew this idea would be wildly unpopular with both liberals and conservatives. We are a fat, entitled and soiled bunch aren’t we.
Click to expand...
Would electric cars be exempted from the limit? They certainly should be. It would be a boon for EV sales not that they need it. Ford is selling every Mach-E it can make.
 
RetiredUSN said:
I know that you lie and that you think it's fine to carpet bomb without getting slapped.
Click to expand...
When/where do you think I “carpet bombed”?
RetiredUSN said:
Typical elementary school bully who gets punched in the cafeteria and cries like a baby..
Click to expand...
You haven’t punched anyone. You’ve been atomic wedgied! 😄
 
iguanaman said:
Would electric cars be exempted from the limit? They certainly should be. It would be a boon for EV sales not that they need it. Ford is selling every Mach-E it can make.
Click to expand...
Chainsawmassacre said:
The AGW crowd should be all over this for multiple reasons. One of them could be a proposal to make fast lane for e vehicles only with an increased top speed. This would incentivize purchases of e vehicles.
Click to expand...
 
Chainsawmassacre said:
Your freedom was gifted to you by those willing to sacrifice. Now it's your turn and you won't even suffer a minor inconvenience to preserve what others died to give you.
Click to expand...
Suffering a minor inconvenience to preserve the freedom that others died to give me to drive faster than 55 mph? What minor inconvenience? Your question is confusing. Their deaths are the price we pay for the freedom to drive faster than 55 mph. Sacrificing that freedom would reduce those deaths, but it wouldn't preserve that freedom.

I appreciate the sacrifice 38,000 Americans make each year to allow me the freedom to drive faster than 55 mph. Do you appreciate the sacrifice 95,000 Americans make each year to allow you the freedom to imbibe alcohol?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom