[DaveC113]

Regs are put into place as a direct result of harm done.

For example, leaded gas has measurably decreased IQ levels of generations, thank god it isn't allowed any longer, we were literally poisoning ourselves. Same with the clean air act, it prevented us from doing ourselves great harm.

It is absolutely true that regs are often overbearing, they waste time and money, they are used for political purposes, etc... This is because they are implemented by imperfect human beings, everything we do is flawed to some degree. So there's no doubt we can do better, but the answer is to improve the system, not simply get rid of it.

Another example is the recent bank failures are a direct result of deregulation. And with all the train derailment issues and the fact a whole town was just poisoned by toxic cargo... maybe we need to look into regulating that industry a bit more? Sometimes there are no easy answers.

[Mark R]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

Regs are put into place as a direct result of harm done.

For example, leaded gas has measurably decreased IQ levels of generations, thank god it isn't allowed any longer, we were literally poisoning ourselves. Same with the clean air act, it prevented us from doing ourselves great harm.

It is absolutely true that regs are often overbearing, they waste time and money, they are used for political purposes, etc... This is because they are implemented by imperfect human beings, everything we do is flawed to some degree. So there's no doubt we can do better, but the answer is to improve the system, not simply get rid of it.

Another example is the recent bank failures are a direct result of deregulation. And with all the train derailment issues and the fact a whole town was just poisoned by toxic cargo... maybe we need to look into regulating that industry a bit more? Sometimes there are no easy answers.

I don't want to take this thread too far off the rails, but bank failures are not caused by insufficient regulation.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by 79 TransAm that never was

In all cases employees can quickly shut the line down and correct anything that is wrong. It's when the government gets involved that I take issue with. I've seen numerous instances where the computers f-up, go down for unexplained reasons, etc. and when this occurs the line automatically shuts down even though employees can still do their job, do it safely, and without any risk to the consumer.
Perhaps I should have been more specific when it comes to wheel assembly, my bad. Numerous times we lost hours of production due to government mandated computers that forced us to document everything to do with the tires, from mounting to final assembly. If a car company can't manufacture a safe vehicle without the governments interference, then they won't be in business long. But, when an assembly plant is micro managed by computers it's prone to way too many computer errors.


We'll have to agree to disagree about air bags. However if you were to look back at their history you'll find that air bags came into play the same time as CAFE standards. Why is that? Because government mandated CAFE standards were impossible to meet without manufacturers lightening the weight of the vehicle with thinner steel and plastics making those vehicles unsafe to ride in.

Government CAFE standards are exactly what is forcing manufacturers to switch over to electric vehicles. Manufacturers aren't switching because of consumer demand, they're being forced to switch due to ever rising CAFE standards. And the government is subsidizing what they've forced manufacturers to do.

Thanks a lot for the additional insight

I was still a teenager when airbags were mandated and didn't pay much attention to the fact, but now I'm curious what your alternative solution would be. Thinner steel and plastic panels/bumpers also led to improved crumple zones that absorb a good chunk of kinetic crash energy, another chunk is picked up by the airbag(s), so the energy that does reach the driver and passengers is much less.

As an overall result, crashes are much more survivable with fewer and less severe injuries in modern cars, I don't think that is even worth debating (see a testimony at https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showthread.php?t=523530), but if airbags were not mandated, do you think the same amount of development would've happened and we'd still have the same or better technology?

I'm asking because I'm thinking of the Walmart mentality that began to soar at roughly the same time, ie more and more people began buying whatever was the cheapest, disregarding practically everything else. Would this not apply to airbag and crumple zone equipped vehicles whose manufacturers would then become boutique or go out of business?

Originally Posted by DaveC113

Regs are put into place as a direct result of harm done.

For example, leaded gas has measurably decreased IQ levels of generations, thank god it isn't allowed any longer, we were literally poisoning ourselves. Same with the clean air act, it prevented us from doing ourselves great harm.

It is absolutely true that regs are often overbearing, they waste time and money, they are used for political purposes, etc... This is because they are implemented by imperfect human beings, everything we do is flawed to some degree. So there's no doubt we can do better, but the answer is to improve the system, not simply get rid of it.

Another example is the recent bank failures are a direct result of deregulation. And with all the train derailment issues and the fact a whole town was just poisoned by toxic cargo... maybe we need to look into regulating that industry a bit more? Sometimes there are no easy answers.

These are very good examples, I'm not sure about those bank failures, but that's just ignorance on my part, you may or may not be right with that as well. The general problem is very nuanced.

[Wyzz Kydd]

SVB bought long term fixed rate bonds in a rising interest rate environment. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that won't work.

Customers see SVB paying little to no interest on their deposits while government bonds are just as safe and are paying considerably more, so they pull their deposits.

The inflation reduction act, reckless deficit spending (I repeat myself) and the FED raising interest rates have a lot more to do with SVB failing than a lack of regulation.

[79 TransAm that never was]

Originally Posted by Mark R

I don't want to take this thread too far off the rails, but bank failures are not caused by insufficient regulation.

Banks are the highest regulated business in America.
It didn't go unnoticed how quickly the millionaires at SVB were bailed out. OVERNIGHT!
Yet those in East Palestine OH still haven't been visited weeks after the disaster...

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by 79 TransAm that never was

Banks are the highest regulated business in America.
It didn't go unnoticed how quickly the millionaires at SVB were bailed out. OVERNIGHT!
Yet those in East Palestine OH still haven't been visited weeks after the disaster...

Trump visited them

[DaveC113]

Originally Posted by Wyzz Kydd

SVB bought long term fixed rate bonds in a rising interest rate environment. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that won't work.

Customers see SVB paying little to no interest on their deposits while government bonds are just as safe and are paying considerably more, so they pull their deposits.

The inflation reduction act, reckless deficit spending (I repeat myself) and the FED raising interest rates have a lot more to do with SVB failing than a lack of regulation.

The regs removed were stress testing implemented as a result of '08. If there had been stress testing, they wouldn't have passed. So there were no longer regs preventing them from making very poor investment decisions, their customers saw this and we know the result.

To run a bank requires some level of competency which it seems SVB lacked.

[ariZona28]

Quick Cliff Note version of this thread: I love my Camaro but I wouldn't ride on a chemical train through Ohio if I was attempting to make a deposit at a California bank.

[Devstrike]

Quick Cliff Note seems legit

[Mark R]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

The regs removed were stress testing implemented as a result of '08. If there had been stress testing, they wouldn't have passed. So there were no longer regs preventing them from making very poor investment decisions, their customers saw this and we know the result.

To run a bank requires some level of competency which it seems SVB lacked.

For sure. Apparently, they had their risk management position vacant for many months before the collapse. That right there might have prevented their downfall, as they could have hedged their risks and not had problems.

[Mark R]

Originally Posted by ariZona28

Quick Cliff Note version of this thread: I love my Camaro but I wouldn't ride on a chemical train through Ohio if I was attempting to make a deposit at a California bank.

LOL. But could you drive your Camaro through the chemical spill on your way to California to save that bank? That is the question on my mind.

[Matos1LE]

Originally Posted by DancingJess

My protein shaker bottle doesn’t even fit in the cup holder. I still love my car but would be nice to have decent cup holders

We both know that protein would mix a lot better in your blender at home and you could drink it there or fit it blended into a bottle that works with the car lol. Don't be that BRO with the shaker bottle, don't do it bro!!!!

[Matos1LE]

Originally Posted by ariZona28

Quick Cliff Note version of this thread: I love my Camaro but I wouldn't ride on a chemical train through Ohio if I was attempting to make a deposit at a California bank.

Yep, this thread derailed rather quickly

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by Matos1LE

Yep, this thread derailed rather quickly

Au contraire, I think it's still very much on track