Insurance Safety Group: Death Rates in Minicars More Than Double Rates in Other Cars

December 19, 2006

  • December 20, 2006 at 2:40 am
    Jeff says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Al,

    Glad to hear you love everyone equally…really warms the heart (no pun intended). Just so you know, I don\’t blame President Bush for global warming, but to simply disregard that it even exists is irresponsible. I think it\’s obviously that large vehicles are convenient and they are safer than their smaller counterparts, but they do contribute to oil dependence and unsafe driving. They have bigger blind spots, the increase our overall demand for a products that we import (adding to the already lopsided trade deficit), and you can\’t tell me you\’ve never seen someone have to do about a 20 point turn to get into a parking spot or make a U-turn. Hopefully, with the advent of Hybrids, including our beloved SUVs, we can come to a compromise between efficiency and convenience. My apologies for the snide Fox news comments. Oh, and by the way, I own a copy of Fahrenheit 911 or Bowling for Columbine.

  • December 20, 2006 at 2:45 am
    Al Gore says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    So will the Democratic Congress be any better than the Republican Congress was? A look at half a dozen likely policy proposals makes clear the answer will probably be no:
    • Tax Increases. From the liberal perspective the good news is that the major Bush tax cuts will expire in 2010. So if the Democrats simply do nothing, the tax rates on lower-income individuals will rise to 15% from 10% and on higher incomes to 39.6% from 35%. Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin says that tax increases are the only way to solve the nation\’s fiscal problems, so that will be the Democratic strategy.

    • Spending Increases. The incoming House leadership says it will hold spending flat for the remainder of the current fiscal year. Perhaps, but for liberal Democrats spending increases are political no-brainers: appropriate more and expand the government to make the country better. And if the deficit grows, well, that\’s because of the Bush tax cuts, not the Democratic spending increases. Historically Democratic Congresses have outspent Republican ones, and it will surely happen again.

    • Alternative Minimum Tax. A 1969 tax increase that was enacted to soak the rich is suddenly going to seriously soak the middle class. Some 3.5 million taxpayers paid the AMT this year. But unlike the regular tax, the AMT is not indexed to inflation, which means the number of taxpayers the AMT hits is expected to balloon–by some estimates to as many as 23 million in 2007. Less than 5% of families with incomes between $100,000 and $200,000 are now paying the AMT, but more than 80% may pay it in 2008. Almost no families with incomes of $50,000 to $100,000 pays the AMT today; but as many as 35% of such families will in 2008.

    To eliminate these very unpopular AMT increases would cost about $750 billion over the next 10 years. What taxes the new Congress will raise to solve this dilemma is unclear, but either AMT or other taxes will have to rise.

    • Protectionism. Almost as passionate a liberal idea as spending more money is abandoning free trade and returning to protectionism. The AFL-CIO wants to limit lower priced goods from being imported into America even though it gives people a wider variety of products to choose from.

    The truth is that the export of goods and services from America accounted for 10.4% of our gross domestic product in 2005 and created more than five million jobs over the previous 10 years. Imports have been increasing American trade deficits over the last quarter century, but U.S. employment simultaneously rose from 99 million to 145 million people. So trade has not cost us jobs; in fact it brings jobs into America–foreign auto manufacturers building cars here being the best example. Nevertheless, the Democrats will start by refusing to renew the president\’s trade authority, which expires next year.

    • Energy. One of the last acts of the current Republican Congress was to pass legislation permitting more oil and natural gas exploration in the Gulf of Mexico. It will lead to the production of about 1.3 billion barrels of oil and 5.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, two things America badly needs.

    But that will be the end of progress, for the Democrats have a very different set of energy goals. First, no more offshore drilling, even though there are 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas on the Outer Continental Shelf–a 19-year supply at today\’s usage rate–and 102 billion barrels of oil in the OCS and Alaska. Next, Hillary Clinton\’s repeal of oil drilling tax deductions and another windfall profits tax on oil companies, just like Jimmy Carter\’s, which reduced domestic oil production between 3% and 6% and increased oil imports by about 10%.

    No more nuclear power plants will be allowed either. We have 104 operating successfully–our cleanest source of energy. But liberals believe they need more regulation and are too risky.

    • Social Security. Just 10 years from now Social Security benefits paid out will exceed taxes paid in, so something will have to be done to fix the system. Individually owned Social Security accounts would help by allowing workers to enjoy bigger returns. But Democrats are dead opposed to the idea of turning millions of Americans into owners of stocks and bonds, which will lead to the liberal solution of raising Social Security taxes and reducing benefits. The forthcoming plan will likely be to raise the cap on earnings subject to Social Security taxes ($97,500 in 2007). That would raise taxes on everyone earning more than this amount, especially the most productive wage earners. If the cap went up to $150,000, for example, it would mean a tax increase of $6,510 on a worker earning that amount.

    Golly, I just wanted to stick it to big oil, but my party is all over the place; we need a cohesive, nuanced, innovative plan to fix this global warming, which I didn\’t invent, but I did discover.

  • December 20, 2006 at 2:49 am
    Chad Balaamaba says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    does anyone know if GM is going to bring the Chevy Cavalier back? I see Obama is a fan, and I like mine allot, but it\’s getting a bit long in the tooth. It\’s still a pretty cool looking car, though, I\’d like to find a new one.

  • December 20, 2006 at 2:53 am
    John Kerry says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Study hard, Chad, and I bet you\’ll get the Cavalier your heart dreams of. I worked hard and look where I am; this is a great country. You know, education–if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you can do well. If you don\’t, you get stuck in Iraq.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*