I'm afraid to say, "No", I wasn't being facetious. I'm dead serious. A passenger car is all that should occupy the road under normal circumstances. If it was up to me, (which I am sure somebody here will point out that it isn't), I would limit the speed of all vehicles that do not conform to a set of standards and make them less desirable to buy/run. Much like they do in F1, make the vehicles max and min size and weights conform to a specification of some sort. So that yes, you can vary the dimensions and weight of a vehicle but within limits that would make it kinder to pedestrians and other road users alike.
Vans, SUVs, MPVs, 4x4s etc I would speed limit and tax the crap out of for any use that is not for business or for its intended use.
Having said that I love the G55.
Socialism at its finest. Make everyone equal and take away, or restrict, disuade by edict, personal choice and freedom. That's the usual European way.
That's the way everywhere in the western world I'm afraid. We do it already but all to differing degrees. That's why we have different classifications for trucks buses, HGVs and the like. They are alll wheeled vehicles but all fall under slightly different rules and regulations to restrict and disuade. Tell that to your capitalist government. Even in a free society nobody can do what they want. They only think they can.
A socialist society restricts by law, a capitalist one by stealth.
__________________
The Internet. The place where men are men, women are men, and underage teens are Undercover Cops.
Vehicle: Current: 2006 S350 and 2008 GL 450. Previous Benz's: 2001 CLK 320 and 2006 E350
Location: Southern California
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercedesvivian
civics are the worst of the " Putt-Putts" as my family likes to call that class of cars.
my college and grad day cars were affordable, practical and reliable honda's. two accords and a civic. excellent cars and, actually, had fewer trips to the dealer to fix minor but annoying problems that plagued every benz i have every purchased.
as reliable as honda's are, yes, i prefer benz's for the sake of comfort, safety, features, driving feel and, you guessed it, status.
i spent a decade and a half eating top ramen, hot dogs and left over pizza in my school days. i refused my parents to help me as i believe that everything in life should be earned and with this, i appreciate things in life (material and social) much much more.
civics, to me, are not a putt putt car. nor is a toyota tercel, a kia or a hyundai. what makes a car a dangerous menace on the road is the NUT holding the steering wheel (get it???hehehe). some of the most annoying drivers i have encountered (generalized observation) are those in benz's, bmw's etc. that seem to possess a sense of entitlement.
Vehicle: 2002 ML 500, 1994 Ford Explorer donated to Doctors without Borders
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,906
I think the driver's airbag should be replaced by a bayonet that will eject from the steering column at the slightest touch of the bumper. Only then, will there be a reduction in casualties on the road.
Agreed with Bergzy,
I drive an Acura RSX as a commuter, enjoying the 27MPG.
I love my ML though.
in 2000, I saw a Head on collision between an ML and a Semi truck. ML had crossed over the freeway. NOBODY was killed. Amazing.
My wife was also hit on the rear quarter panel of our ML, a witness said the Taurus just bounced off our car like it was a tank.
All problems aside, the engine and stucture of the ML are well designed
Vehicle: Current: 2006 S350 and 2008 GL 450. Previous Benz's: 2001 CLK 320 and 2006 E350
Location: Southern California
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by gumsie
That's the way everywhere in the western world I'm afraid. We do it already but all to differing degrees. That's why we have different classifications for trucks buses, HGVs and the like. They are alll wheeled vehicles but all fall under slightly different rules and regulations to restrict and disuade. Tell that to your capitalist government. Even in a free society nobody can do what they want. They only think they can.
A socialist society restricts by law, a capitalist one by stealth.
having been born and raised in canada which is a very socialistic country, i would never EVER go back to canada. the social political repressive atmosphere and environment is so overtly overwhelming present that i was dying every minute i was there.
i would have to say a big N-O to your point that capitalistic societies restrict by stealth. i have had more freedom of opinion and expression than i have ever ever had while living in canada.
canada and other commonwealth country citizens i have come across are literally prudish about earnings. they feel embarrassment and shame if they earn a good living. most of them hide their wealth by living as modestly as they can. they almost feel embarrassed to be seen by others if they show any sign of affluence. i see no enjoyment from the efforts of their hard labor. perhaps it was just my family, friends and those i associated with...but this was the general attitude that i constantly got.
not only do i not work as hard as i would if i were in canada, i enjoy a MUCH higher standard of living. not just materially...but, like i said, a positive and optimistic outlook on life and health care! yes, health care. that idiot michael moore can make all the right wing biased movies he wants about the poor health care in america...but there is no other country in the world i would rather be sick in than america.
when i had a hernia, i went in to see my general doctor who then sent me to see the surgeon...all in the same day! then i was scheduled for surgery in two weeks. why two weeks? because the following week i wanted to go to vegas for a party i had planned a while back. my surgery was flawless and i had THREE post op nurses tend me as i was waking up. all this cost SIGNIFICANTLY less than if i were constantly contributing my 50-60% income tax to the horrifically overused and abused social welfare system and profoundly inadequate medical system of canada. i am not telling you this to brag. here is the contrast with my friend in canada who had a DOUBLE hernia. he went to see his gp, he was told to make an appointment with a surgeon. it took 3 MONTHS to see him. the surgeon sees him and says 'yep, you need surgery'. he got it...but that was 8 months later. it took 11 MONTHS for him to receive routine surgery. btw, he makes more money than i do...and he he is taxed accordingly...and ironically, i received faster and better care.
as for freedom. yes, here in america, we can not do everything we like. that is a very unrealistic thing to say. no country is lawless. what i enjoy about america is the most freedom i have ever lived in. i have true freedom of speech. the 'freedom' when i was present in canada was no where near free. it was shaped by opinionated, one sided and near slanderous twists of truths to make america (for some reason) look like a bullying power obsessed monster.
does america have problems? you bet she does! but does great britain and other members of the g8 have problems? oh yeah...and in my opinion, a whole lot more than america!!! but that is just my point of view from personal experience...not from watching the news or some movie.
...A socialist society restricts by law, a capitalist one by stealth.
No, a capitalist society restricts by transparent market forces and the fact that choices and decisions have consequences for those who make those choices and decisions. It may be true that some people don't fully appreciate those market forces or the possible consequences of their decisions, but that's their fault and not the fault of government.
One problem with the socialist notion of restricting by law is that those who make the laws are cloaked in privileges that help them avoid suffering under such restrictions.
__________________ Drive as fast as you can...but no faster.
Wow, surprised this is still going. Agree with that cloaked in privileges bit though. Have to say I still think that a capitalist society is a little more cloak and dagger. (Much as I might enjoy my life in one).