TheDieselPage.com Forums  
2017 - TDP's 21st Anniversary
What's New: | Feature Articles: | Product Reviews: | Member's Area: | Subscribe:
Duramax 6600 Diesel Page | Advertiser's Section | Classified Ads | Photo Album | Diesel Books, GM Licensed T-shirts


Go Back   TheDieselPage.com Forums > Chevrolet & GMC 2500HD/3500 Light Trucks > Duramax Diesel Performance Shop
Register FAQ Members List Photo Album Mark Forums Read

Duramax Diesel Performance Shop What's it take to make big power? From a little to a lot, find out what it takes. Post a question or offer your advice.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 05-23-2009, 09:09 AM
DmaxMaverick's Avatar
DmaxMaverick DmaxMaverick is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: CA
Posts: 11,614
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OhmEye View Post
Things started going wildly wacko in this state when the clowns in Sacramento began worshiping turtles.
.......Lions, tigers and bears....OhmEye!
__________________
1985 Blazer 6.2
2001 GMC 2500HD D/A
2014 Chevy Cruze Diesel - Fabulous car, no problems at all, but sold Nov. 2016 @ 55K miles.
dmaxmaverick@thedieselpage.com
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-23-2009, 11:37 AM
OhmEye's Avatar
OhmEye OhmEye is offline
Orange-Blooded American
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Springville, CA
Posts: 73
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DmaxMaverick View Post
.......Lions, tigers and bears....OhmEye!


Right you are, it'll likely get worse before it gets better. . .
__________________
'04 GMC 2500HD LB7 CC SB 4x4, 265/75R17 Dueler Revo, Bilstein HD, Banks Ram-Air, Edge Juice w/Attitude, free-flowing quiet exhaust on the cheap
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-05-2009, 07:25 AM
cowboywildbill's Avatar
cowboywildbill cowboywildbill is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 1,162
Angry

The PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF MARYLAND is talking about doing all trucks, under and over 26,000 lbs. and all motorcycles and maybe even Historic Vehicles like Hot Rods. Any mod whatsover will cause them to fail the vehicle even an extension on the exhaust like a chrome tip will have to be removed when getting an EP inspec. I was told this last week while I was going back for a retest on my wifes Z3 beamer. Which didn't fail but they wouldn't pass it until we drove it 200 more miles since repairing/replacing two O2 sensors. Go figure! It is about revenue!
__________________
0000000
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-05-2009, 12:42 PM
JohnC's Avatar
JohnC JohnC is offline
Enemy of the State
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: New Hampshire - Live Free or Die
Posts: 5,040
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cowboywildbill View Post
It is about revenue!

No, I think it's about control.

Remember when cars were exciting?
__________________
"Need" - Wanting to get someone else's money.
"Greed" (formerly meant what "need" means today) - wanting to keep your own.
"Compassion" - a politician's willingness to arrange the transfer.
-Joseph Sobran

Current oil burners: MB 350SDL, Kubota 7510
Gone but not forgotten: '87 F350 7.3, '91 C2500 6.5, '95 K2500 6.5, '06 K2500HD 6.6
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-07-2009, 08:01 AM
cowboywildbill's Avatar
cowboywildbill cowboywildbill is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 1,162
Talking

Your probably right, but if they have all your money, then they probably already have control. Did you hear that GMC is getting renamed to Gov.Motors Inc.
And now that all of the Dealerships are being closed and everyone will have to go to Jiffy Lube for service the Gov. wants to take over them also and call it JIFFY LIB.
__________________
0000000
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-07-2009, 01:32 PM
OhmEye's Avatar
OhmEye OhmEye is offline
Orange-Blooded American
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Springville, CA
Posts: 73
Default

I got an email the other day from Troy Clarke, president of GM North America. Bunch of us got the same email inviting us to get excited about the new changes at GM and the prospects of toughing it out with them. All sounded pretty good until he started talking about the new, comprehensive government-backed warranty. I wrote back and mentioned that the phrase "U.S. government-backed" is not one to instill confidence in the modern consumer. I suggested dropping that from future marketing campaigns.


They did write back:

Thanks so much for your helpful recommendation. We will take this into consideration for the future.
Sincerely,
The General Motors Marketing Team


I responded with:

You do understand?

I love my GMC vehicles, but few have any confidence in the integrity of the U.S. government any more.

David


Haven't heard back from them. Do you think I will?
__________________
'04 GMC 2500HD LB7 CC SB 4x4, 265/75R17 Dueler Revo, Bilstein HD, Banks Ram-Air, Edge Juice w/Attitude, free-flowing quiet exhaust on the cheap
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-08-2009, 05:55 AM
Mark Rinker's Avatar
Mark Rinker Mark Rinker is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,813
Default

No, but look across the street...

See that black Suburban with no plates and the two guys wearing sunglasses sitting in it...?

__________________
2011 Chevrolet Tahoe 5.3L daily driver
  • Previous owner of two 1994 6.5L K3500s, '01, '02, and '05 6.6L K2500s, '04 C4500, '06 K3500 dually, '06 K3500 SRW, '09 K3500HD SRW, '05 Denali
  • Total GM diesel miles to date : ~950K
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-08-2009, 11:19 AM
OhmEye's Avatar
OhmEye OhmEye is offline
Orange-Blooded American
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Springville, CA
Posts: 73
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rinker View Post
No, but look across the street...

See that black Suburban with no plates and the two guys wearing sunglasses sitting in it...?


Really? No I mean really!! Most of the time people see stuff like that is when they haven't gotten enough sleep. Make sure there's not a little self-induced paranoia rearing its ugly head my friend! This is imperative. I'm not thinking at this point that this is you, Mark. From what I've gathered on the few posts I've seen here, you're a truck driver, thus hard-working and a member of a D.O.T. mandated drug testing consortium. Still, these cases of "M.I.B." are very rare. There are so many of us and so few of them. They're definitely nothing to be afraid of, though we've got some real dumb-a$$es in Washington who want us afraid: they can only exist if fear prevails.

That being said, If you know that what you're seeing is what you're seeing, and these guys are really bothering you, just plan ahead a little and plot yourself a stealthy route so you can sneak up and scare the hell out of them. Take a friend with you so you can grab them both, but if your friends are all at work then just grab the clown in the driver's seat, put him on the ground and make him start answering your questions. Take his identification. Coach him on the wisdom of affixing license plates with up-to-date tags on his vehicle. His partner's not going to want to get involved, so don't worry about him. He's too worried about himself. These bozos are all about looking after #1.

These guys aren't as sharp as the TV programs would have you believe, Mark. Especially since B.O. blew into the white house, your average agent is smug, arrogant, lazy, and stupid, in other words they exhibit all the attributes of someone who is all appetite.

Let us know how it goes Mark! If you need any help, just call. We own these guys--our public servants--even though they would like us to believe that it is the other way around.
__________________
'04 GMC 2500HD LB7 CC SB 4x4, 265/75R17 Dueler Revo, Bilstein HD, Banks Ram-Air, Edge Juice w/Attitude, free-flowing quiet exhaust on the cheap
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-09-2009, 11:19 AM
OhmEye's Avatar
OhmEye OhmEye is offline
Orange-Blooded American
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Springville, CA
Posts: 73
Default

Here's the message back. They are truly oblivious.

Thank you for contacting General Motors. Everyone at GM appreciates your concern and support.

We are confident that we will emerge a leaner, stronger company for you, offering desirable, high-quality vehicles from the Chevy, Cadillac, Buick and GMC brands. The resulting General Motors will be more efficient. Smarter. Faster. More competitive. With a renewed commitment to cutting-edge automotive technologies, including improved fuel efficiency, quality and design.

I invite you to stay up-to-date on our promising new future by visiting GMreinvention.com.
Sincerely,
The General Motors Marketing Team



It seems they may have hired Outlook's "auto-reply" feature to be their new spokes-hole.
__________________
'04 GMC 2500HD LB7 CC SB 4x4, 265/75R17 Dueler Revo, Bilstein HD, Banks Ram-Air, Edge Juice w/Attitude, free-flowing quiet exhaust on the cheap
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-21-2012, 03:37 PM
gimpyhauler's Avatar
gimpyhauler gimpyhauler is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: klamath Falls, Oregon
Posts: 131
Default Update this discussion?

Please let us update this discussion? I just got my notice to get my truck smogged. What is the latest on the testing? Expectations? Recommendations?

/\/\/\/\/\/\

PS: If you want to learn the truth behind how and why CA is soooo screwed up, you really need to read our past Austrian govenator's report. http://cpr.ca.gov/CPR_Report/ Hard to believe it was put together by a politician. The report is hugely detailed and for those that don't want to read it all, here's a short list of dirt that is of particular importance in this discussion.

PROPOSED ORGANIZATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
To address these problems, an integrated Infrastructure Department should be created from the different infrastructure operations currently spread across 32 departments, agencies, boards and commissions. The Department should have six operating divisions:
1. Water;
2. Energy;
3. Transportation;
4. Housing, Buildings and Construction;
5. Telecommunications; and
6. Boating and Waterways.

In addition to a central Infrastructure Authority, there should be a division for planning, programming and evaluation and a division for research and development.

This organizational framework is depicted in Exhibit 8.

The mission of the Department should be to provide for and manage the full life cycle of the state’s infrastructure network to achieve the best value for the people of California, the business community and the environment. Its strategic goals should include:
• Integrating transportation and housing to achieve sustainable communities;
• Delivering energy and water where needed and when needed;
• Managing state infrastructure assets to obtain maximum use and revenue; and
• Delivering resources to maintain infrastructure, not fund overhead.


Evaluating California’s Boards and Commissions
Boards and commissions conduct a variety of tasks in California state government. Some simply provide advice to departments, programs, or even other boards or commissions. Some hear denial of benefit appeals. Some enact regulations and establish policy. Others are responsible for licensing and disciplining professionals such as physicians, contractors, or guide dog trainers.

Some of these boards are highly paid, earning salaries of more than $100,000 a year for only a few meetings. In fact, the 17 boards and commissions whose members are the highest paid cost the state more than $9 million in board member salaries alone. While many boards and commissions are composed of volunteer members, they often have permanent staffs, pay rent, or create other costs for the state.

While the cost of the state’s myriad boards and commissions is of concern, more important is the desire to ensure that California’s governance structure is highly accountable. The line between the Governor and the performance of executive branch functions should be as straight as possible.

When state goals are pursued through un-elected boards and commissions, government is less accountable than if the tasks had been performed directly. If a program is failing Californians, good government demands that blame be easy to affix and hard to deflect. The current structure of boards and commissions creates the opposite situation. For this reason, we pursued a comprehensive review of all boards and commissions within the executive branch.

Within the executive branch of state government, there are more than 300 boards, commissions, panels, task forces, committees and other appointed bodies. These entities are so scattered and numerous across government that arriving at a firm number is nearly impossible. In our search, there was no single source we could turn to find out which commissions existed and why. In fact, state government has no master list of all boards and commissions and the thousands of political appointees that populate them.

While boards and commissions requiring appointment by the Governor or legislative leaders are fairly easy to catalogue, many boards and commissions are appointed by the heads of agencies, departments—even by other boards and commissions. Throughout our investigation new entities were routinely discovered. No doubt, appointed bodies remain deeply buried within the state government structure that we did not find. When they are located, they too will warrant direct evaluation.

A Historical Perspective of Boards and Commissions
Boards and commissions first became popular in the late 19th Century. As a response to the corrupt “big city bosses” that ruled American cities during the late 1800s and the early 1900s, reformers sought to remove power and influence over services from what they believed were the clutches of highly partisan and self-centered politicians. Instead, key government decisions would be made by boards and commissions comprised of “experts” who would supposedly apply their expertise in a neutral fashion, influenced only by what worked and what was right, or so the theory went.

The controversy surrounding the criminal trials of the officers accused of beating Rodney King and the subsequent riots provides an excellent example of how boards and commissions can insulate elected officials and confuse accountability. During the riots, former Police Chief Daryl Gates was widely criticized for failing to send in a sufficient number of police soon enough to prevent bloodshed and looting. Yet, under Los Angeles’ boards and commissions structure, neither the Mayor not the City Council—those most accountable to the electorate—could fire the Chief. That could only be done by the unelected appointees of the Los Angeles Police Commission.

While boards and commissions have in some measure successfully insulated decision-makers from politics and given a semblance of transparency and public access, the problem now is a lack of general accountability. When something goes wrong with a board or commission, the electorate feels powerless because it is powerless; there is literally no one to hold directly accountable. And transparency without accountability is a façade.

With this in mind, we evaluated the state’s governance model to determine if it still made sense. We explored opportunities for consolidation, where overlap existed. Where decisions could be more logically and appropriately made by another entity, we explored transferring functions and eliminating the board leadership. We also considered whether or not the functions of the boards and commissions were appropriate at all. Our proposal, based on this analysis, is presented below.

Importantly, eliminating a board or commission does not legally bar the government from soliciting the advice of relevant experts. Administrative agencies without statutory board or commission leadership do this all the time. They do it informally, through ad hoc consultations, or formally, through advisory boards or task forces appointed by the director of a program. When the head of an agency seeks such expertise, it will be because—as an accountable official—he or she thinks the advice is needed. It will not be because a statute passed thirty years ago forced the agency head to obtain the advice, needed or not.

As former President Ronald Reagan once observed, “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” Hence, an ongoing process is required to ensure that all boards and commissions, as well as other executive branch departments and functions, are subject to periodic and rigorous evaluation.


Why a comprehensive review?
The citizens who pay for boards and commissions through taxes and fees deserve to have the efficiency and cost effectiveness of those boards and commissions tested regularly for legitimacy, accountability, customer service, innovation and resourcefulness.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1996-2017 by TheDieselPage.com - All Rights Reserved