VW cheat emissions test with "defeat device"

[Richard]

If the free market didn't incentivize corporate malfeasance, then there would be no need for regulatory bodies to protect the public from acts of corporate malfeasance. Instead, Volkswagen's actions have yet again demonstrated the need for oversight.

As an economist by academic education, I very much salute you for that comment.

Public institutions also need regulatory bodies to protect the public from acts of institutional malfeasance. The police/politicians/church/health service again and again demonstrated the need for oversight.

[bhall II]

We call those "voters." (Of course, the value of a vote isn't nearly what it used to be.)

[Tommy Cookers]

..... The issue here is not now, nor has it ever been, about the increased levels of NOx emissions from VW diesels in everyday use; it's about the company's widespread deception of consumers and government regulators.

..... If the free market didn't incentivize corporate malfeasance, then there would be no need for regulatory bodies to protect the public from acts of corporate malfeasance. Instead, Volkswagen's actions have yet again demonstrated the need for oversight.

this seems to have cut to the chase

in principle, if everyday emissions are acceptable when higher than test emission limits, where exactly is clear malfeasance ?
the only clear argument in law is over the nature of the means whereby everyday emissions are higher than test limits
if the main or only purpose of the means is raising emissions in everyday use, then it's a 'defeat device' and so illegal

any opinions out there wrt the other 11 million (non-USA) VW group cars and their NOx status or DD interpretation ??

in the UK no-one in authority is saying that test limits do not apply in everyday use (many opinion-formers are saying they do)
there's scrutiny over financial penalties on existing vehicles justified by (now-suspect) test emissions of the newest vehicles

and those with health worries over particulates can now include NOx
serious question - (conventionally viewed UK city air being the cleanest for 500 years) are we saying that actual NOx is a new thing ??

[bhall II]

Simply put, even though a car is only subjected to limited initial testing by the EPA, it's nonetheless held to the standards detailed by the manufacturer in its request for a "certificate of conformity," which is meant to be an absolute description of all aspects of the car's emissions system in all conditions. It is the alpha and the omega.

If that information conforms to Clean Air Act requirements and correlates with available EPA test data, the car is then certified for sale in the US. But, that doesn't necessarily mean it's legal; it just means the EPA has declared it legal based on information it has at the time.

Volkswagen (allegedly) lied about the emissions of its 2L diesels in its requests for certification. Had the company been forthright about the true nature of those vehicles' emissions systems, or if EPA testing had been more thorough, the cars would have never been certified in the first place, because they are, and have been, (allegedly) illegal the whole time.

After CAFEE's study uncovered VW's (alleged) lie, the EPA availed itself of the CAA-sanctioned option to complete additional testing and inspection of the cars in question. From data gleaned during that process came the EPA's notice of violation.

In other words, by (allegedly) cheating a law that relies on a bit of self-policing, Volkswagen (allegedly) gamed what can be considered something of an honor system - Congress loves unfunded mandates. If CAFEE had not undertaken that ICCT-funded study, it's likely none of this would have ever been brought to light.

[bucker]

[Ultra]

The "free market" is nothing more than exchange of products and services amongst people's. Incentivizing malfeasance has nothing to do with the free market. Malfeasance is defined as follows:

the performance by a public official of an act that is legally unjustified, harmful, or contrary to law; wrongdoing (used especially of an act in violation of a public trust).
Compare misfeasance (def 2), nonfeasance.

Public officials are government. Free markets are between private individuals and organizations and, by definition, are not capable of malfeasance.

Full stop.

[bhall II]

Yeah, tell that to shareholders who just saw nearly $28 billion of Volkswagen's market cap disappear into a thick haze of diesel smoke as a direct consequence of its illegal activities.

malfeasance

noun | mal·fea·sance | \ˌmal-ˈfē-zən(t)s\

law : illegal or dishonest activity especially by a public official or a corporation

Fuller stop.

[Ultra]

Yeah, tell that to shareholders who just saw nearly $28 billion of Volkswagen's market cap disappear into a thick haze of diesel smoke as a direct consequence of its illegal activities.

malfeasance

noun | mal·fea·sance | \ˌmal-ˈfē-zən(t)s\

law : illegal or dishonest activity especially by a public official or a corporation

Fuller stop.

All because a power center, the largest and most powerful in the history of mankind, arbitrarily interfered with free exchange between peoples.

I can't help but wonder if VW choosing Russia for its new plant plays into the motivations of the US government.

[bhall II]

Let me get this straight: it's the big, bad American government's fault that an NGO discovered what ultimately amounts to a series of repeated abdications of accountability by a publicly traded company that willfully violated a law passed with bipartisan support by democratically elected legislators?

"...government of the people, by the people, for the people..." until it's inconvenient?

[Ultra]

Fault?

Really?

The EPA, the folks that spend over $6,000 per employee for office furniture, have decided to go after Volkswagen to the tune of 18 billion dollars.

18 billion dollars.

18,000,000,000.

All because their cars passed the EPA's test, but did so with code in place to help them pass the test.

Meanwhile, Government Motors knowingly make defective cars that kill people and get a slap on the wrist. Again, KILL PEOPLE.

No 18 billion dollar fine for them though.

Nope, no favortism here. No government playing favorites with their voting blocs here. Just move along.

You wanna cite the constitution? EPA is an unconstitutional bureaucracy. Theirs is only administrative law. No "of the people, by the people or for the people. Just bureaucrats arbitrarily setting rules and playing favorites while doing so.

[bhall II]

The EPA is going after Volkswagen, because the company broke the law. If that results in a fine of roughly $18 billion, it will be because that's the maximum permitted by law for the violations in question, rather like $35 million was the maximum fine permitted for GM's violations. (Context is important.)

No company is under any obligation whatsoever to do business in the United States; indeed, firms are free to market their wares wherever they see fit. But, if one chooses to do so in the US, it must comply with the rule of law just like everyone else.

Volkswagen knew what it was doing, and the consequences of its illegal actions were clearly enumerated.

And what you call "administrative law" and "arbitrarily setting rules," I call a statutory authority granted by an act of Congress, one passed by elected officials who represented ~112,000,000 people out of a contemporary population of ~180,000,000, a law later upheld by the Supreme Court (Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497).

Like it or not, the democratic process outranks idealism.

Full stop.

[No Lotus]

If the free market didn't incentivize corporate malfeasance, then there would be no need for regulatory bodies to protect the public from acts of corporate malfeasance. Instead, Volkswagen's actions have yet again demonstrated the need for oversight.

The free market is in the process of punishing them.

[bhall II]

I don't disagree with that. But, would it be happening without the specter of costly EPA sanctions?

At any rate, I think I've done enough soapbox ranting for one day (or twelve).

[Ultra]

You can call a turd a diamond all you like. You can paint it and shine it up if it suits your whims.

It'll still be a turd.

The law you accuse them of breaking is a non-constitutional. It is nothing more than another of the EPA’s politically-motivated, special interest-benefiting mandates. Congress did not legislate the ppm of diesel particulate emissions. The very first article of the constitution, the very first section:

"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."


Hence, only congress has the power to legislate. Not the executive. The rule of law is the constitution and the government doesn't even bother to follow it. Here, EPA is legislating via executive fiat. That, mon frere, is not constitutional.

The federal government passes many laws and does many things that are clearly unconstitutional. The Iraq war, the drug war, the alphabet soup of executive agencies, and on and on.

Can you show me where in the constitution the federal government is empowered to pass "environmental laws?" Have you read the document? Especially the 10th amendment....

The "democratic process" is mob rule and nothing more. If 50%+1 vote to kill all the first born sons, that doesn't make it right. We don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic. A big distinction you clearly fail to make, due solely to your idealism.

Speaking of context, your GM link states they received the maximum fine "for a recall delay." Can you find where the government pursued them for selling defective vehicles that kill people? Oh, you glossed over that distinction as well. Didn't suit the context of your assertions, I imagine.


Look, VW did a very stupid thing. I don't disagree. But for you to sit there and act like justice will be served because of the EPA. That is just pure, unadulterated nonsense. GM and the families of the dead don't get justice. The Feds don't do justice. They arbitrarily punish in whatever manner suits them. VW has decided to build a factory in Russia. That isn't gonna sit well with the DC crowd. That is motivating them to stick it to VW and hard.

35 million for over 100 dead.

18 billion for a few ppm over an arbitrary amount decided solely by a bureaucrat.

Nope, no ulterior motives here. Nothing to see. Just move along.

Good reading, if you can bring yourself to click the link:

https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/vo ... gn-policy/

[Ultra]

Incoming bhall post......

Back on your soapbox again?

Apparently, we can take your assertions with a grain of salt.

Gnite.