home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.autos
- Path: sparky!uunet!noc.near.net!gateway!miki!harling
- From: harling@miki.pictel.com (Dan Harling)
- Subject: Re: Hot rods & clunkers
- Message-ID: <1992Nov23.183838.19592@miki.pictel.com>
- Sender: Dan Harling
- Organization: PictureTel Corporation
- References: <1992Nov23.131650.2526@infonode.ingr.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:38:38 GMT
- Lines: 31
-
- In article <1992Nov23.131650.2526@infonode.ingr.com> greg@cherokee.b23b.ingr.com (Greg Moritz) writes:
- >> > > ... *not* equating smoke-belchers with hod-rods.
- >
- >> > That is fine and dandy if you see a distinction. The thing that
- >> > scares me is that _most_ environmentalists don't!
- >
- >> The govt. does not distinguish between the belchers and the
- >> rods/restored cars.
- >
- >It has been my observation that Hot Rodders / Restorers don't seem to
- >be able to see teh distinction either.
- > [...]
- >When they see voluntary buying program, they think mandatory confiscation.
- >Therefore the program is Evil. Bad. [blah] [blah] [blah]
-
- The problem I have with the proposed voluntary buying programs is not
- the spectre of mandatory confiscation (which is there nevertheless); it
- is that the current programs specify that the car is to be utterly
- destroyed, including parts that could be used to repair or restore
- other cars that are in better shape. The only motivation I can imagine
- behind this is to make it more difficult for owners to maintain the
- remaining cars.
-
- When I hear about a bill that allows the car bodies and engines to be
- salvaged for other cars, I will support it wholeheartedly. Until then,
- I can't help but observe that it fits right in with both the
- environmentalists' and auto manufacturers' agendas.
- ____________________________________________________________________________
- Daniel A. Harling (harling@pictel.com)
- PictureTel Corp. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of
- Peabody, MA 01960 PictureTel, but they ought to be!
-