Hello:

Last night Marco Rubio said his family immigrated here in pursuit of the opportunity to improve their lives... He leaves the impression that his family went through the LEGAL immigration process, and Mexicans didn't. That's why they have to go to the end of the line.

But, did you know that the LEGAL process his family went through involved NOTHING more than landing their rickety boat in Key West (http://immigration.about.com/od/immigrationlawandpolicy/a/U-S-Allows-Cuban-Migrants-Different-Treatment.htm)? That was ALL it took to make his family LEGAL!

If a Haitian landed his rickety boat on the same beach, he'd be sent BACK. Is this fair?

excon

Whoever said that life is always fair? No, many things in life are not fair. But, we take what we have, make the best of it, and live as happy as we can.
Rubio and other Reps had better start speaking out more. All Obama wants is to make the Fed Gov't bigger, tax the rich (who already pay the majority of all Fed. Taxes), and give more people food stamps.
There are many Mexicans in America today. What will become of them, if they can't become citizens, or go back home. Rubio makes more sense out of everything going on than any Dem I have heard in the last 5 years.
Someone said that the US is becoming a 3rd. World country, and it's true. Rubio knows that China and Russia are becoming stronger than the US. If we ever have to enter another conflict, it might not happen, cause China might not loan us the money to do it.
Keep your eyes on Rubio, and other upcoming Reps. Things will change enventually and swing back to being more conservative, with much less spending. If I spent like Obama, I would be broke tomorrow!

Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act (CRAA) was passed in 1966.. Rubio's family came here in the 1950s.Rubio's grandfather came here and was almost deported.. How could he be in danger of deportation if all he had to do was land on American soil ?

If a Haitian landed his rickety boat on the same beach, he'd be sent BACK. Is this fair?
The difference is that Cubans are political refugees . Haitians and Mexicans are attempting to immigrate for economic reasons. For my 2 cents... I think they should all be vetted .

Yep, would be hard to have gotten here on the CRAA a full decade before it was passed.

Hello again,

I might have gotten some dates mixed up... Or maybe not.

excon

The point is Rubios family wasn't deported and thrived on government hand outs. Let the mexicans do the same since they were here first, not as immigrants but as natives until the european immigrants decided to make them illegal.


Haitians and Mexicans are attempting to immigrate for economic reasons

Just like all the immigrants did until european immigrants decide they were first class and everybody else was second class and since the Indians that were here first were a lousy class they had to go by force.

The point is Rubios family wasn't deported and thrived on government hand outs. Let the mexicans do the same since they were here first, not as immigrants but as natives until the european immigrants decided to make them illegal.



Just like all the immigrants did until european immigrants decide they were first class and everybody else was second class and since the Indians that were here first were a lousy class they had to go by force.

I don't know about your family.. But mine waited in line and was vetted at Ellis Island. They did not illegally cross the border and claim rights .

The point is Rubios family wasn't deported and thrived on government hand outs. Let the mexicans do the same since they were here first, not as immigrants but as natives until the european immigrants decided to make them illegal.



Just like all the immigrants did until european immigrants decide they were first class and everybody else was second class and since the Indians that were here first were a lousy class they had to go by force.

Um, the point is Rubio's family came here legally on an immigration visa. Let the Mexicans do the same.

Marco Rubio's family immigration story addressed in new books - Political Hotsheet - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57455101-503544/marco-rubios-family-immigration-story-addressed-in-new-books/)


In The Rise of Marco Rubio, excerpted in the Washington Post today, Roig-Franzia explains how Rubio's grandfather, Pedro Victor, came to the United States and was for a time in the country illegally.

Okay so start making those visas for the rest of the so called illegals just like they did for Rubios family.

Marco Rubio's family immigration story addressed in new books - Political Hotsheet - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57455101-503544/marco-rubios-family-immigration-story-addressed-in-new-books/)



Okay so start making those visas for the rest of the so called illegals just like they did for Rubios family.

Um, a visa is what you acquire BEFORE coming, not after coming illegally. Obama may actually be on the same page there, from last night...


Real reform means establishing a responsible pathway to earned citizenship, a path that includes passing a background check, paying taxes and a meaningful penalty, learning English, and going to the back of the line behind the folks trying to come here legally

Ball's in your court.

That ain't how Rubios family did it, and that's from his own book. He came here illegally and then got a visa. Now give one to the mexicans and let them earn their own citizenship. All you have to do is pass the bill.

They did it before, time to do it again.

That ain't how Rubios family did it, and that's from his own book. He came here illegally and then got a visa. Now give one to the mexicans and let them earn their own citizenship. All you have to do is pass the bill.

They did it before, time to do it again.

And I once thought I had a significant percentage of Cherokee blood


Marco Rubio: My family's flight from Castro

The Washington Post on Friday accused me of seeking political advantage by embellishing the story of how my parents arrived in the United States.

That is an outrageous allegation that is not only incorrect, but an insult to the sacrifices my parents made to provide a better life for their children. They claim I did this because “being connected to the post-revolution exile community gives a politician cachet that could never be achieved by someone identified with the pre-Castro exodus, a group sometimes viewed with suspicion.”

If The Washington Post wants to criticize me for getting a few dates wrong, I accept that. But to call into question the central and defining event of my parents’ young lives – the fact that a brutal communist dictator took control of their homeland and they were never able to return – is something I will not tolerate.

My understanding of my parents’ journey has always been based on what they told me about events that took place more than 50 years ago — more than a decade before I was born. What they described was not a timeline, or specific dates.

They talked about their desire to find a better life, and the pain of being separated from the nation of their birth. What they described was the struggle they faced growing up, and their obsession with giving their children the chance to do the things they never could.

But the Post story misses the point completely. The real essence of my family’s story is not about the date my parents first entered the United States. Or whether they traveled back and forth between the two nations. Or even the date they left Fidel Castro’s Cuba forever and permanently settled here.

The essence of my family story is why they came to America in the first place; and why they had to stay.

I now know that they entered the U.S. legally on an immigration visa in May of 1956. Not, as some have said before, as part of some special privilege reserved only for Cubans. They came because they wanted to achieve things they could not achieve in their native land.

And they stayed because, after January 1959, the Cuba they knew disappeared. They wanted to go back — and in fact they did. Like many Cubans, they initially held out hope that Castro’s revolution would bring about positive change. So after 1959, they traveled back several times — to assess the prospect of returning home.

In February 1961, my mother took my older siblings to Cuba with the intention of moving back. My father was wrapping up family matters in Miami and was set to join them.

But after just a few weeks, it became clear that the change happening in Cuba was not for the better. It was communism. So in late March 1961, just weeks before the Bay of Pigs invasion, my mother and siblings left Cuba and my family settled permanently in the United States.

Soon after, Castro officially declared Cuba a Marxist state. My family has never been able to return.

I am the son of immigrants and exiles, raised by people who know all too well that you can lose your country. By people who know firsthand that America is a very special place.

My father spent the last 50 years of his life separated from the nation of his birth. Separated from his two brothers, who died in Cuba in the 1980s. Unable to show us where he played baseball as a boy. Where he met my mother. Unable to visit his parents’ grave.

My mother has spent the last 50 years separated from her native land as well. Unable to take us to her family’s farm, to her schools or to the notary office where she married my father.

A few years ago, using Google Earth, I attempted to take my parents back to Cuba. We found the rooftop of the house where my father was born. What I wouldn’t give to visit these places where my story really began, before I was born.

One day, when Cuba is free, I will. But I wish I could have done it with my parents.

The Post story misses the entire point about my family and why their story is relevant. People didn’t vote for me because they thought my parents came in 1961, or 1956, or any other year. Among others things, they voted for me because, as the son of immigrants, I know how special America really is. As the son of exiles, I know how much it hurts to lose your country.

Ultimately what The Post writes is not that important to me. I am the son of exiles. I inherited two generations of unfulfilled dreams. This is a story that needs no embellishing.

Read more: Opinion: Marco Rubio: My family's flight from Castro - Sen. Marco Rubio - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66567.html#ixzz2Knb6NkhR)

I agree his compelling story is one of many stories so pass the work visas out tomorrow, why wait.

I agree his compelling story is one of many stories so pass the work visas out tomorrow, why wait.

So flood the market with immigrants and raise the minimum wage, yeah that's going to work well.

And tax companies that create jobs overseas, and give breaks for those that create them here. Reward real job creators, and not the ones who just say they are. Yeah, should work great.

And tax companies that create jobs overseas, and give breaks for those that create them here. Reward real job creators, and not the ones who just say they are. Yeah, should work great.

You still haven't figured out that government policies are why jobs are going overseas. I know, those evil corporations expect to make a profit to survive, even the ones Obama is beholden to, damn them. And so liberals answer is to clamp down more, regulate more and penalize businesses for trying to survive the burden government puts on them. You create the mess then exacerbate it with more of the same.

What are you not getting about being allowed a chance to thrive so everyone can have a slice of the pie instead of apportioning a crumb to everyone?

Don't you have some nice offshore island you could send these immigrants to while they await vetting?

I hear Australia has lots of space.

I hear Australia has lots of space.
What; are you suggesting we dump them in a desert?

No we are full and are already using Christmas Island, Nauru and Manus Island; our latest venue will be New Zealand. No, I thought, like, Peuto Rica, or Virgin Islands, or Cuba

You still haven't figured out that government policies are why jobs are going overseas. I know, those evil corporations expect to make a profit to survive, even the ones Obama is beholden to, damn them. And so liberals answer is to clamp down more, regulate more and penalize businesses for trying to survive the burden government puts on them. You create the mess then exacerbate it with more of the same.

What are you not getting about being allowed a chance to thrive so everyone can have a slice of the pie instead of apportioning a crumb to everyone?

But businesses have been thriving even under Obama, record profits dude, even through a recession the banks created. Companies went to Mexico, then overseas to exploit cheap labor and sweat shops. That's been going on for 30 years. Deregulation and no energy or immigration policy. You mean for us to thrive we have to have the rules and taxes of third world nations o thrive and survive?

You making excuse for corporate greed and welfare is nothing new though is it? That's why a Rubio who parrots Romney was a big thing to you guys. Even while he admits how government hand outs is what helped him get where he is.

But businesses have been thriving even under Obama, record profits dude, even thru a recession the banks created. Companies went to Mexico, then overseas to exploit cheap labor and sweat shops. Thats been going on for 30 years. Deregulation and no energy or immigration policy. You mean for us to thrive we have to have the rules and taxes of third world nations o thrive and survive?

You making excuse for corporate greed and welfare is nothing new though is it? Thats why a Rubio who parrots Romney was a big thing to you guys. Even while he admits how government hand outs is what helped him get where he is.

Rubio is nothing like Romney. Dude, corporate America is sitting on cash because they aren't going to go on a hiring spree because of being choked by regulation and the uncertainty Obama breeds. And one only needs so many English majors and art students, they suck at construction.

They weren't so choked by regulation when they were making huge profits up the butt.

They weren't choked by regulations when they got bailed out either.

They weren't choked by regulations when they exploited cheap slave labor in other countries.

They weren't choked by regulations when Bush cut their taxes either.

So what could those regulations that are choking them so bad be? You can't name not one can you? You just repeat the same old spin as the repub spin machine that got us the "job creators" BS.

They want no regulation, you want no government. Not so strange bedfellows at all.

The business model is broken by greed and corruption, and you support it instead of calling for change that would stop the crumbs from trickling down and we could get a piece of the pie. Keep hollering, sensible Americans ain't listening

The point is Rubios family wasn't deported and thrived on government hand outs. Let the mexicans do the same since they were here first, not as immigrants but as natives until the european immigrants decided to make them illegal.



Just like all the immigrants did until european immigrants decide they were first class and everybody else was second class and since the Indians that were here first were a lousy class they had to go by force.

Would those be the same hand outs that obama received for being an immigrant ?

Hey Dad, he was born in Hawaii, right, how can he be an immigrant?

I get it; you're a birther, right?

They weren't so choked by regulation when they were making huge profits up the butt.

They weren't choked by regulations when they got bailed out either.

They weren't choked by regulations when they exploited cheap slave labor in other countries.

They weren't choked by regulations when Bush cut their taxes either.

So what could those regulations that are choking them so bad be? You can't name not one can you? You just repeat the same old spin as the repub spin machine that got us the "job creators" BS.

They want no regulation, you want no government. Not so strange bedfellows at all.

The business model is broken by greed and corruption, and you support it instead of calling for change that would stop the crumbs from trickling down and we could get a piece of the pie. Keep hollering, sensible Americans ain't listening

I'm not the one hollering DAILY about corporate greed. Unlike you I'm not so cynical about business in America, I'm a realist. You'd rather hear feel good nonsense about creating 6 million jobs under Obama while ignoring the fact that we still have 3.2 million fewer jobs since 2007.

You and ex can holler all you want about hiring but in the real world businesses are not going to hire unless it makes sense, that's just a fact of life. Also unlike you I don't believe profits are evil, you can't sustain a business without them, also another fact of life, and when government keeps trying to find more ways to take their profits why the hell would they sit there and say "ok, take my money please"? It's not rocket science. Do you do that, or do you find ways to minimize your tax burden?

You can't seriously believe we aren't over-regulated. Try here (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collectionCfr.action?collectionCode=CFR), here (http://www.sba.gov/category/navigation-structure/starting-managing-business/managing-business/business-law-regulations), here (http://www.ada.gov/cguide.htm), here (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=FR), here (http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/) and here (http://www.osha.gov/law-regs.html) for starters. Let me know when you've interpreted them all and assessed their impact, then we can move on to state regulations.

LOL, you stole the short cuts I use off my laptop. Ready to discuss any whose impact you find disturbing. Stick with federal, and also what part of a living wage is it you don't get?

I guess its okay for two people, at minimum wage working ALMOST 40 hours a week, and two young kids, to be on food stamps or energy assistance. But you rather defend a gazillionaire who has an office full of lawyers and accountants, to explain what all those regulations mean.

You put it out there so pick one regulation and I will explain it to you. Get another winger to help you if you like.

Dude, you said I couldn't name one, it's your turn. Explain away.

You didn't pick one, your links are home pages. What's your issue? Too many pages to read? Need a staff to read it for you? Broadbrushing in generalities is a stall tactic. Pick a regulation you disagree with. Take your time, no hurry.

The Dems loved this idea when they thought they had the Cuban vote locked up.

My same challenge to Speech goes to you too, Smoothy, pick a reg and lets tear it apart.

I wonder why no one has lighted on the paper work generated by obabamcare, but then that's a law not a regulation

My same challenge to Speech goes to you too, Smoothy, pick a reg and lets tear it apart.

I'll see if I can pick one out tomorrow... got a few things that need doing before I close up the office for today.

Sorry guys, my bad, I forgot what the topic of this thread was. Back to Rubio, if he brings his fellow TPartier to a good comprehensive immigration law, then he has creds to build on otherwise he is a not ready for prime time window dressing.

Don't tell the right his plan is similar to the Prez's plan.

Threads have topics?

I wonder why no one has lighted on the paper work generated by obabamcare, but then that's a law not a regulation

The thousands of pages of regulations associated with the law are only now being authored by the 4th branch of government .When they are finished there will be many more volumes in the Federal Register.

You didn't pick one, your links are home pages. Whats your issue? Too many pages to read? Need a staff to read it for you? Broadbrushing in generalities is a stall tactic. Pick a regulation you disagree with. Take your time, no hurry.

If all anyone needed to do was pick apart one regulation you might have a point, but as I demonstrated so aptly one regulation is not the problem. 49 CFR (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title49/49tab_02.tpl)alone has 1699 sections, you can start with this one (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=bd4134f9627edf521eb527121c2187fa&rgn=div5&view=text&node=49:2.1.1.3.8&idno=49). Have at it.

So that's what Pelosi means by we will see what's in it

My same challenge to Speech goes to you too, Smoothy, pick a reg and lets tear it apart.

How about café standards ?

Corporate Average Fuel Economy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy)

If all anyone needed to do was pick apart one regulation you might have a point, but as I demonstrated so aptly one regulation is not the problem. 49 CFR (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title49/49tab_02.tpl)alone has 1699 sections, you can start with this one (http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=bd4134f9627edf521eb527121c2187fa&rgn=div5&view=text&node=49:2.1.1.3.8&idno=49). Have at it.

You demonstrated that you cannot read and cross reference data written as a law, and I can dig that, but if you could be so gracious as to name a regulation you object to I will find the specifics for you as it relates to a specific business.

It helps to have the specific business or industry or endeavor in mind though or else you chase your own tail when you don't know what you are searching for.

The transportation department overview and glossary you have cited covers many procedures and standards for MANY situations, across several agencies and several industries from clerical reporting rules to truck driver requirements for the labeling and moving of a variety of materials and handling thereof. It also lays out jurisdiction preference within the agencies involved and basically who is responsible for what area.

Without these regulations it's a disaster if something is mislabeled, mishandled or or not safely transported safely.

I thought you would present a specific regulation for a specific business, institution, or industry that you think is onerous, outdated, and unfair or the business cannot comply with. Being in Texas I thought you would have brought up the clean air restrictions on coal burning power plants, or emission standards on industries that discharge pollutants into the air.


How about cafe standards ?

Corporate Average Fuel Economy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy)

Thanks dad, the amazing thing about the café standards is how it's driven all the participants to newer technologies from the steel alloys and new materials used to the robots that build them. When they make the right power source, and the infrastructure to support it, no telling where this is headed so my question is what your objection to it is?

So what's the problem, excepting it might be a little outdated

You demonstrated that you cannot read and cross reference data written as a law, and I can dig that, but if you could be so gracious as to name a regulation you object to I will find the specifics for you as it relates to a specific business.

Dude, stop dancing around the issue and insulting my intelligence. My occupation is in SAFETY, we have to comply with DOT, MSHA and OSHA for starters, the scope is MIND BOGGLING, and that doesn't take into account the usual regs applicable to most businesses, state regulations and local code.

One shouldn't need a 400 page safety manual to walk around a plant inspecting fire extinguishers, but thanks to liability issues and over-regulation that's EXACTLY what all those evil corporations that you think need more oversight are requiring now and it gets deeper every day. So don't condescend to me on regulations, put up and show us how easy it is to comply or shut up

Hello:

The term "regulations" means different things to different people. I think we have too many, but I don't think we should get rid of ALL of 'em... I actually LIKE regulations that keep us "safe". Of course, the word "safe" means different things to different people..

Fer instance, I think it's FINE that I can't smoke in public buildings, and it's FINE that I have to wear a seat belt. It's NOT fine that the government wants to put me in jail for smoking pot..

excon

But of course claiming that we want to get rid of ALL regulation is a strawman.

Again with myth that we want to get rid of ALL regulations. Come on ex, you know that's ridiculous.

Dude, stop dancing around the issue and insulting my intelligence. My occupation is in SAFETY, we have to comply with DOT, MSHA and OSHA for starters, the scope is MIND BOGGLING, and that doesn't take into account the usual regs applicable to most businesses, state regulations and local code.

One shouldn't need a 400 page safety manual to walk around a plant inspecting fire extinguishers, but thanks to liability issues and over-regulation that's EXACTLY what all those evil corporations that you think need more oversight are requiring now and it gets deeper every day. So don't condescend to me on regulations, put up and show us how easy it is to comply or shut up

My occupation was safety too, and I did a lot more than just walk around checking for fire extinguishers, and know full well the short cuts workers and companies take for convenience and save a few bucks. If its not in detailed writing, and put into practice it doesn't get done so keep your manual handy and read the damn thing because it might save your life.

And stop belly aching because I have personal friends who have died because of not paying attention and not following the rules so get the freak off my back about what's needed and NOT needed.

We aren't talking about just you, we are talking about how to handle very dangerous materials and situations that do occur industry wide, and for your information many deaths and injuries have resulted in procedures and policy being updated, or changed completely. The first rule is to be aware of your surroundings and pay attention to potential hazards. Even if all your doing is checking fire extinguishers.

Sorry the manual is 400 pages, there is a lot to cover. Read it BEFORE you check those extinguishers. And I have acknowledged the difficulties involved with compliance, never said it was easy nor should it be, but the alternatives are death and injury, sometimes serious injury.

Take your pick.


Again with myth that we want to get rid of ALL regulations. Come on ex, you know that's ridiculous.

So far all you have complained about are the number of pages to read but you have not articulated any regulation to date that HURTS a business. Big business has NOT either, so what the hell are you guys b1tching about?

In other words, you're all hat and no cattle.

No, you parrot the straw argument that regulations hurt businesses and have laid out no specific examples, so that makes YOU what you refer to me as and I ain't going for it.

Talking loud, and saying nothing is unnacceptable. That's no way to have a debate and arguing abstract ideas is NOT a debate. Be specific, like why the government has stricter requirements for energy companies for emissions or disposal of left over by products of refining shale oil, or diclosure of chemicals used in frakking, as that's specific, not the entire regulation guide for the whole country.

Now if you want to know how to use those tools that's different than hollering about the expense of compliance.

No, you parrot the straw argument that regulations hurt businesses and have laid out no specific examples, so that makes YOU what you refer to me as and I ain't going for it.

Talking loud, and saying nothing is unnacceptable. Thats no way to have a debate and arguing abstract ideas is NOT a debate. Be specific, like why the government has stricter requirements for energy companies for emissions or disposal of left over by products of refining shale oil, or diclosure of chemicals used in frakking, as thats specific, not the entire regulation guide for the whole country.

Now if you want to know how to use those tools thats different than hollering about the expense of compliance.

Wrong Bucko, you asked "So what could those regulations that are choking them so bad be?"

I did my part, all you give us is a head fake.

I have already pointed out they have trained lawyers and accountants to explain things to them and devise strategies, and you don't. What do you think congressional staffers do? Read and explain stuff, and write legislation. You have to get your own understanding from other sources like the boss or a manual.

Don't blame your own innability to articulate your questions on me.

I have already pointed out they have trained lawyers and accountants to explain things to them and devise strategies, and you don't. What do you think congressional staffers do? Read and explain stuff, and write legislation. You have to get your own understanding from other sources like the boss or a manual.

Don't blame your own innability to articulate your questions on me.

Oh I get it, I forget sometimes that you lefties think we're too stupid for our own good and that bogging business down with the expense of lawyers, accountants and consultants and otherwise complying with the over-bloated bureaucracy is just the cost of doing business.. Sorry dude, but you're just digging yourself a deeper and deeper hole.

You aren't dumb or stupid I just worked for a global company that demanded I have a formal education to have a good job is all.

And yet you can't see the forest for the trees.

Thanks dad, the amazing thing about the café standards is how it’s driven all the participants to newer technologies from the steel alloys and new materials used to the robots that build them. When they make the right power source, and the infrastructure to support it, no telling where this is headed so my question is what your objection to it is?

Café standards didn't lead to new materials nor robots. It lead to plastics being used so if the car catchs fire you have yet another hazzard on your hands from the smoke. There is enough competition in the world that it should be eliminated as the standards they are using is actually holding back progress rather then promoting it. Also why should there be a built in penalty for the working man? Its time is long past to drop it as a "standard".

The great difficulty with standards is they are often written with the close involvement of industry, so it becomes not something to be attained but that which is already attainable. A country will write standards which force its competitors into disadvantage

The great difficulty with standards is they are often written with the close involvment of industry, so it becomes not some thing to be attained but that which is already attainable. a country will write standards which force its competitors into disadvantage

You see Clete its not the 70's anymore. That is what brought this whole thing about.

More info:

CAFE (Fuel Efficiency) Standards for Passenger Cars and Light Trucks (http://uspolitics.about.com/od/energy/i/cafe_standards.htm)

Café standards ,like the Tesla are built for utopia instead of the roads of the North East.
Tesla Nightmare Shows Problem With All-Electric Cars - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-problem-electric-cars-2013-2)

Obama's CAFE Standards – The Obama Administration's CAFE Standards (http://environment.about.com/od/environmentallawpolicy/a/obama-sets-new-fuel-efficiency-standards.htm)

Still not sure why you are opposed to Café?

Obama’s CAFE Standards – The Obama Administration’s CAFE Standards (http://environment.about.com/od/environmentallawpolicy/a/obama-sets-new-fuel-efficiency-standards.htm)

Still not sure why you are opposed to CAFE?

I had told you. It is no longer needed and is holding back progress. What more do you need for opposition ?

I think there is much room for improvement, and I think we can and should build on what we have done so far. Why stop now?

What progress does this stop?

I think there is much room for improvement, and I think we can and should build on what we have done so far. Why stop now?

What progress does this stop?

The standards are in conjunction with the EPA and prevent inovative ways of making things much more efficient. So once they have a "standard" then there is no need to reach above the bar. It is a disincentive to all of us to hold everything back.

I think I see what your driving at. Once a goal is reached then the creative thinking for a better product declines? Couldn't raising the bar a bit higher help with that?

I think I see what your driving at. Once a goal is reached then the creative thinking for a better product declines? Couldn't raising the bar a bit higher help with that?

Not really as then you obtain unreachable goals with the way they demand it being done. You have to understand that they are stuck on the stochiometric standard. If they remove it then we could go places where there are no such limitations. Instead with this in place your limited in the scope of your thinking.

Comes down to a reliable long lasting power source if I understand you correctly. That is the key and like everything else the support and delivery system around it. We seem to be having the same problem in lighting our cities too.

For now we are limited.

Comes down to a reliable long lasting power source if I understand you correctly. That is the key and like everything else the support and delivery system around it. We seem to be having the same problem in lighting our cities too.

For now we are limited.

Do you have a problem lighting your cities? I thought that only happened in the third world. When I was in Pakistan it reminded me of the days of my childhood when power interruptions were frequent but such problems have long since been solved by digging up some deep green. I know that is out of favour but reality demonstrates that we have not had to build a power station in many years since we exported all our polluting industries to China, where I didn't see the sun from the time I got there until the time I left

The problem is not lighting the cities, its more maintaining an aging grid subject to failures under stress, like from the weather. We don't even prune the trees back from transmission lines any more due to cut backs.

You can't get away with that here once it was proven that power lines cause catastrophic fire events but then our transmission lines aren't in private hands