<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CAFE Kills</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.freedomtalks.org/2007/12/04/cafe-kills/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.freedomtalks.org/2007/12/04/cafe-kills/</link>
	<description>The FreedomWorks blog dedicated to lower taxes and more freedom.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 07:53:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: suey</title>
		<link>http://www.freedomtalks.org/2007/12/04/cafe-kills/#comment-72829</link>
		<dc:creator>suey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 21:20:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.freedomtalks.org/?p=1215#comment-72829</guid>
		<description>This is a little dishonest.  You'll note in the footnote that the committee was not unanimous about the death issue and that a dissent in the report's appendix argues (rather convincingly) that the increase in deaths might be "zero," since myriad other factors in (what is actually a statistically insignificant) increase in deaths were not examined.  Also, note this from the same page:

"Improved fuel economy has reduced dependence on imported oil, improved the nation's terms of trade ... If fuel economy had not improved, gasoline consumption (and crude oil imports) would be about 2.8 million barrels per day greater than it is, or about 14 percent of today's consumption."

That's an additional $280 million PER DAY coming out of the pockets of  American consumers.  Conservatively, that's $340 a year saved by every man, woman, and child in America.  Obviously the actual savings are far higher, since not every American drives.  That's a lot of additional money going into the economy.  

There are really good reasons to oppose CAFE, but the "OMG deaths!" thing isn't one of them.  I'm surprised that a blog all about economics would be highlighting the death thing and ignoring the economic benefit of CAFE.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a little dishonest.  You&#8217;ll note in the footnote that the committee was not unanimous about the death issue and that a dissent in the report&#8217;s appendix argues (rather convincingly) that the increase in deaths might be &#8220;zero,&#8221; since myriad other factors in (what is actually a statistically insignificant) increase in deaths were not examined.  Also, note this from the same page:</p>
<p>&#8220;Improved fuel economy has reduced dependence on imported oil, improved the nation&#8217;s terms of trade &#8230; If fuel economy had not improved, gasoline consumption (and crude oil imports) would be about 2.8 million barrels per day greater than it is, or about 14 percent of today&#8217;s consumption.&#8221;</p>
<p>That&#8217;s an additional $280 million PER DAY coming out of the pockets of  American consumers.  Conservatively, that&#8217;s $340 a year saved by every man, woman, and child in America.  Obviously the actual savings are far higher, since not every American drives.  That&#8217;s a lot of additional money going into the economy.  </p>
<p>There are really good reasons to oppose CAFE, but the &#8220;OMG deaths!&#8221; thing isn&#8217;t one of them.  I&#8217;m surprised that a blog all about economics would be highlighting the death thing and ignoring the economic benefit of CAFE.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
