It’s been nice, I’ll check back time to time. I wish this new board would have worked out, but it hasn’t and it seem we have been shown the door. I say that because we haven?t had ANY real response from the web monkeys.
I may have found a place to start the unofficial car talk BBS, if it checks out and if I get a few volunteers to help out, I?ll start the unofficial car talk BBS. I would need some volunteers to keep trolls and such away.
It?s been fun, I?ve really enjoyed it here, but after standing around and waiting and waiting, I?m getting the hint. I know we, all of us, are not really that important here, I say that because the NEWEST post from Keith Hopper I could find was from 06/06/2007 6:01:54 PM.
Well, like I said nice talking to you all, if the new site looks like it?ll work out I?ll post back for volunteers.
Of course there are several factors to be considered.
Will it reduce fuel usage. Sure it will. [list] People will chose to drive less, making fewer trips, combining trips, etc.
The choice of cars will change, more smaller more fuel efficient cars will be bought
People will choose mass transit more often
People will chose to live and work closer together. [/list]
Will it cause unemployment in the auto industry. Well maybe, but someone will need to build the more fuel efficient cars that will be demanded and someone will need to recycle the gas hogs people will dump sooner. If you follow the logic of wanting to demand more employment, then we should mandate that all cars weigh at least 4,000 lbs.
Will it save the earth, maybe just a little.
Will the government spend the additional money wisely. Well that is up to you. If you have not become part of the solution of good wise government by voting and being a part of the system (no I don’t mean big political contributions) then you are the problem, not the money coming in the form of taxes
Hopefully the increased taxes will be used to provide the needed mass transit and to reduce the impact on those least able to pay the additional taxes.
Driving is a privilege, not a right but, with that being said, any tax outside of a graduated income tax is a flat or regressive tax. For middle to upper income drivers it is not that big of a deal but for low income drivers it may mean the difference of being able to get to their job or not. I am also selfish since I drive 150 miles a day to get to and from work (in a fuel efficient vehicle).
I really don’t want to hear about how I should get a job closer to home because you do not know my circumstances or what I do for a living but suffice it to say that it may be a few years before I will be able to relocate closer to work. Anyway, it is not my reason for not supporting the tax.
As long as there are poor people working for minimum wage and no benefits, and they are having to provide transportation to these low paying jobs, this would be a very unfair proposition. I live in a rural area, and there is no public transportation. Just about everyone commutes, even to manual labor jobs. People do carpool when possible, but that is fairly rare. What we CAN do is re-develop the electric car, further develop the hybrid, and continue to look for other alternate methods of fuel. However, the oil lovers will continue to keep those ideas on the backburner until the voters of this country have had enough.
I would agree with you Tamale, except the price of motor fuel is going up anyway, whether there is a new tax or not. Without the tax to suppress demand, the money will leave the country and support the citizens of other countries. “Working People” are going to get hit either way…The inflationary impact of the recent run-up in prices has been minimized by cooking the books. But it won’t be long before Joe Sixpack is demanding a hefty pay raise to cover his added costs of driving to work…A large gas tax could finance a massive improvement in our public transportation networks and greatly reduce our ever growing demand for imported gasoline…The tax on gasoline should be around 50% of the cost of the gasoline. Back in the '50 and '60s if was just that…
The simpler answer is to stop the government subsidy into oil and general environmental destruction. Frankly, I’m sick, as a low-mileage driver, of paying taxes to subsidize those who elect to drive quite a bit. People moan about a minor subsidy for Amtrak or mass Transit, but scream any time Government wants to ask drivers to pay for the roads they use with a gas tax.
While I understand the importance for conserving fuel (use of oil), some people just have a harder time of it.If you live in a big city, you have public transportation you can use. You also have 100’s of stores you can go to (most within a couple of miles from you home).
I live in a small community that has a population of 250. The nearest city is 6 miles away, however, the city has a population of only 12,000, and your store selection is limited and you’re stuck paying higher prices. When you need good clothes for work, etc. you have to drive to a larger city. In my case, Sioux Falls, SD is 90 miles away and St. Paul is around 200 miles in the opposit direction.
So before you start raising the price on gas, think about the people that don’t live in a big city. If everyone lived in big cities, can you imagine the polution problem??
US Troops are in Iraq because Saddam promised to help fund Al Qaeda. I heard him (actually his translator) say so on TV two months before the invasion.
We are also in Iraq because Saddam used a ruse to smoke out a double agent. He told him about his weapons of mass destruction cache (which really did not exist).When we started making demands about weapons of mass destruction, he knew which aide to kill.
Now we are in Iraq because we can’t figure a way to get out without causing a bloodbath by removing our troops, and without leaving Al Qaeda in charge of the government.
You can’t just go, “Waaaah! We want the war to end!” and expect everything to be alright afterwards.
The main reasons most alternative fuel vehicles aren’t built are:
There isn’t enough supply of most of the fuels developed so far to justify mass-producing the vehicles. Ethanol is the only one off the ground, and it is energy-inefficient.
Hydrogen as a fuel is a total scam. There are no natural sources of hydrogen (unless you want to mine space, and that irretrievably removes oxygen from the air if it is burnt). It takes away 40 percent of the energy just to convert any other fuel into hydrogen. It’s more efficient to use the other fuel as it is.
The other cars would cost too much for anyone but the rich to afford.
Our oil companies are not operating at 100 percent production, because several refineries are shut down. They are still rebuilding from Katrina, there were fires at several refineries the past year, and environmental protection agencies have shut some down until they install pollution-reducing equipment. This is a large part of the reason why prices are high this year.
It wouldn’t be good for me and people like me; my income is less than $12,000 a year. Lately I’ve had to drive just as infrequently as possible (I’m retired, so I can do that.} But there are working people who already can’t afford the current gas prices–how would they handle the six-dollar-a-gallon gas price?
Presidential candidate John Anderson wanted to do this in the 70’s. The extra money would have stayed in the US instead of the middle east. The price went up and the money went to the oil kingdoms.
Every environment “brain” says “Mass transit is the answer!” But they don’t think, they just blab.
Here are the reasons mass transit never covers more than 15 percent of the traffic in all but the top 10 cities:
The transit doesn’t run near where the person happens to be.
The transit doesn’t run near where the person needs to go.
The transit trip takes too long for the needs of the person.
The transit does not run when the person needs to make the trip.
The fares are based on what it costs to run the system, but do not take in to account how much people are willing to pay for the service rendered.
Some people need their vehicles at both ends of the run.
Some people have to carry goods with them.
Riding mass transit vehicles is a security risk.
Some people can’t ride transit vehicles because they are allergic to gases given off by perfumes, cosmetics, or chewing gum used by other riders, or to pollen or fragrances from flowers planted by the transit company next to the bus shelters.
Some people are unable to wait in inclement weather due to health problems.
The transit system is unreliable.
Some people do not want to waste their time waiting an hour for the transit vehicle to arrive.
They also don’t seem to see that the same problems also apply to shipping by rail. In addition, the labor costs for loading and unloading are triple, if the shipper and receiver have to use trucks to get the freight to and from the station.
good idea
anyone who doesn’t realize the curent costs of excessive oil consumption NOW should take a basic economics course–or at least read tom freedman–from “defense” spending to health to our underwriting of mid east oil producing regimes, we are suffering predictable consequences of not now paying the REAL cost of petroleum.Just when was the last time any of you suv drivers walked or biked to shop?