Gasoline up 100% under Obama

[Ms Tree]

yes you can be stupid but we live in a society that will not let a person bleed out on a street because they do not have insurance. I'm on the fence about the helmet and seat belt laws. If you have adequate insurance to cover your care then I guess go for it. I do believe in the laws to protect minors from the ignorance of adults. As for the interest in insurance. When you hit me, I want to make sure you have the ability to pay for the damage. Vehicle inspections are a joke. They do it here in TX and it's embarrassing. They do not check brakes, light alignment, bumper height or anything that maters. I have no idea what happens if one of the petty item they do look at fail but I doubt it is major. I wish they had inspections like they do in DE, CH and the UK to name a few.

OH please. That's like saying leukemia is better than lung cancer. The mileage of trucks suck. People buy trucks because they can not because they need them. Most people who have a truck rarely use it as a truck. Rather it is a primary transportation vehicle. Nearly every truck I see has one person and an empty bed. Short of commercial vehicles, a truck is just a big car for most house holds.

The CAFE requirements change on a regular basis. The mileage requirements are upped for the fleet so the hybrids increase the fleet average. I don't like hybrids so you are preaching to the choir. As far as I am concerned, diesel and NG was always the way to go and far less expensive. Ford says 17/23. Let me know when the average person gets those averages. Did you even read past the first sentence on the 4th paragraph? I don't like hybrids so I don't know why you keep bringing them up? Even the big cars come in a diesel. Wen I was in Poland I was tailing a 7 series BMW that was diesel. That lady knew how to drive that thing. I had a Opel Astra 5 door diesel with a 6 speed and had a hard time keeping up. She nailed me on the turns every time (torque) but I could get her in the straights. I have owned a diesel since 77 so you are preaching to the choir.

Fiat is having problems because they are Fiat. Never been a big fan of French cars. Renault, Fiat and Citroen are ..... pretty but not very good quality. Kind of like the British.

Quality cannot be legislated but they do legislate requirements for safety and to a degree mileage (fuel tax).

 

[Ms Tree]

Good point Dapoes.....already reduced cigarette consumption and government reliance on generated taxes have and are creating a lack of revenue on both state and federal levels.
Chicago recently made casino's smoke free......drop in tax rev's and now you can smoke and play..............
Liberal cause and effect.....

That was the goal. Increase the tax on cigarettes to generate revenue and decrease usage. It worked by your own admission They knew revenue would shrink and that's why every so often the tax is increased. Smoking bans in public places are increasing not decreasing.

People can quit smoking, they cannot quit driving. They can drive less and get more efficient vehicles but the revenue in Europe from fuel tax is quite high and it has had h desired result in creating a desire for smaller vehicles. Also, some of the countries tax the cars based on horse power. The larger the engine displacement the higher the tax (hence the popularity of turbos). Seems to have worked quite well for them. When I was there a few years ago I do not remember seeing a pick up (unless it was commercial) and even then it was a 1/2 ton at most and always a diesel.

 

[southwind]

Insurance companies and lawyers exist and I do not see how they make anything better or safer.

Mean while thousand of people die while the insurance co and lawyers duke it out. Nah.... I'll pass.

The auto industry failure seems to have more to do with quality than anything else. Then there is the fact that the auto makers in the US seem to be looking backwards not forwards. The F-150 is still Fords biggest money maker yet here we are looking at another fuel crisis....

The hybrids are around because of CAFE. People like the 'green' idea even though the hybrids are pretty much a joke. Had we been using diesel instead we would have cars that are making 40-50mpg or more. The manufactures are making the high mileage cares to bring their fleet average down.

The free market has it's place but it not the end all be all. Honda and Toyota are not being solely guided by the free market. They were forced by the government to build efficient cars. The oil that they buy and the oil that we buy all comes from the same place and all costs the same. The difference being that in Europe and Asia the governments place a huge tax on fuel so consumers are forced to buy more efficient vehicles. They cannot afford to drive a F-150 at 15-20mpg. They need a small car that makes somewhere in the 40-50mpg range. Free market my eye hole.

Fuel tax

Just keep yer rice-burnin' , squirrel-runnin' tin can out of my F150's way, please !

 

[dapoes]

That was the goal. Increase the tax on cigarettes to generate revenue and decrease usage. It worked by your own admission They knew revenue would shrink and that's why every so often the tax is increased. Smoking bans in public places are increasing not decreasing.

People can quit smoking, they cannot quit driving. They can drive less and get more efficient vehicles but the revenue in Europe from fuel tax is quite high and it has had h desired result in creating a desire for smaller vehicles. Also, some of the countries tax the cars based on horse power. The larger the engine displacement the higher the tax (hence the popularity of turbos). Seems to have worked quite well for them. When I was there a few years ago I do not remember seeing a pick up (unless it was commercial) and even then it was a 1/2 ton at most and always a diesel.

Again more baseless lies. Your ignorance knows now bounds.

 

[Ms Tree]

Just keep yer rice-burnin' , squirrel-runnin' tin can out of my F150's way, please !

No ricer diesels in the US. yet although I read that Honda and Subaru are looking into the possibility. Both of our cars are German. I'll wave to you as I pass by the gas station.

 

[Kev3188]

Again you have no clue what your talking about. The fuel taxes in other countries (as well as ours) are not there to be incentives to build more efficient cars. They are there to generate revenue. And as cars do become more efficient then increases in fuel taxes kick in.

(snip)


Guess what would happen of everyone used electric cars instead of gas.

What would happen to all the revenue that the government is dependent upon that comes from fuel taxes and surcharges?

Come on entertain us with your marvelous economic insight.

Take a wild guess.

... And in some the excise tax on the car itself is to discourage ownership in the first place...

Just keep yer rice-burnin' , squirrel-runnin' tin can out of my F150's way, please !

How wonderfully xenophobic of you to say...

As for F150s, if one needs a truck in order to "overcompensate," hey, go for it...

 

[SparrowHawk]

Also, some of the countries tax the cars based on horse power. The larger the engine displacement the higher the tax (hence the popularity of turbos). Seems to have worked quite well for them. When I was there a few years ago I do not remember seeing a pick up (unless it was commercial) and even then it was a 1/2 ton at most and always a diesel.

Yes the FRENCH tax based on displacement and horsepower. Now this is a country I want to emulate? I think not!

The reason Paris has so many sidewalk cafes is so the conquering troops have a place to rest.

Hey I'll give you a great deal on the WWII French Infantry rifle I have. NEVER been fired and only dropped once! 😀 😀 😀 😀

Truth is about Europe is without the gasoline tax to force people to drive smaller more efficient cars they wouldn't have enough $$$ to pay for their cradle to grave socialist states.

 

[Ms Tree]

Germans do it as well. I believe there are several others who do this also but do not feel like looking right now.

Personally I would like to see registration fees based on horse power and weight. The only exceptions would be for certain commercial purposes.

 

[southwind]

No ricer diesels in the US. yet although I read that Honda and Subaru are looking into the possibility. Both of our cars are German. I'll wave to you as I pass by the gas station.

And I'll wave to you, while your strapping that mattress or refrigerator to the top of your beamer, 'cause we hate when you people ask to borrow our trucks !

 

[southwind]

Germans do it as well. I believe there are several others who do this also but do not feel like looking right now.

Personally I would like to see registration fees based on horse power and weight. The only exceptions would be for certain commercial purposes.

And again.....................turning to government for all the answers...........................how socialistic of you !

 

[southwind]

... And in some the excise tax on the car itself is to discourage ownership in the first place...




How wonderfully xenophobic of you to say...

As for F150s, if one needs a truck in order to "overcompensate," hey, go for it...

I own an F150 because it's one one of the best built, most versatile vehicles on the planet !.........................Did I mention it's also manufactured by an American company................that didn't take a bail-out ?

 

[delldude]

That was the goal. Increase the tax on cigarettes to generate revenue and decrease usage. It worked by your own admission They knew revenue would shrink and that's why every so often the tax is increased. Smoking bans in public places are increasing not decreasing.

People can quit smoking, they cannot quit driving. They can drive less and get more efficient vehicles but the revenue in Europe from fuel tax is quite high and it has had h desired result in creating a desire for smaller vehicles. Also, some of the countries tax the cars based on horse power. The larger the engine displacement the higher the tax (hence the popularity of turbos). Seems to have worked quite well for them. When I was there a few years ago I do not remember seeing a pick up (unless it was commercial) and even then it was a 1/2 ton at most and always a diesel.

LOL.......you are wrong.....Pol's figured they'd have a new tax stream to rely on and the addiction would provide it.

 

[SparrowHawk]

I found this tidbit (Among Others) that was a rather interesting piece. Now before you denigrate the source please note that the article is presented as an Op-Ed piece and you can use your own resources to verify the veracity of said remarks.

Love Oil And It Loves You Back

A few snippets for your reading pleasure

Even a Hollywood environmentalist like Avatar director James Cameron admits that the U.S. needs oil. He recently told TIME Magazine, "We're going to need it regardless no matter how fast you move off oil. We're not there yet—renewables make up maybe 3% of the grid, even if it's changing fast. ... I'm speaking from a U.S. perspective, and you still need oil—you need it for trucks and airplanes. You need it for fuel."

But, political correctness keeps the EPA and this Administration from listening to the majority of Americans while shaping energy policy:

Timeline of Inconsistency

• 2009: Newly elected President Obama lends $2 billion to Petrobras, Brazil's national oil corporation, via the Export Import Bank of the U.S. (Bush appointees on Ex-Im’s board approved the preliminary commitment).

• March, 2010: President Obama proposes "compromise" to drill offshore for oil and natural gas "along the Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska," reports The New York Times.

• April 20, 2010: Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

• May 4, 2010: The White House says it will keep the "boot on the throat" of BP.

• May 27, 2010: Department of Interior announces a six-month ban on deepwater drilling, despite lack of scientific support for a moratorium.

• December 1, 2010: President reverses decision to re-open drilling and keeps the moratorium indefinite for most areas.

• January 3, 2011: President reneges and allows 13 companies to return to 16 existing and mostly exploratory deepwater wells.

• March 19, 2011: President visits Brazil with the pledge: “… when you're ready to start selling (oil), we want to be one of your best customers.”

• March 30, 2011: President announces specific, politically correct green energy goals. He places blame on the petroleum industry while his effective ban on new deep water drilling persists since drilling permits are being issued at a snail’s pace.

Oil is amazing. It represents opportunities for wealth, freedom, health and security that we are snubbing our noses at so we can be “green” prematurely. Indeed, thriving economies produce clean environments and longer life spans, explains Forbes.

The most positive thing that could happen to America would be economic stability. Drilling for oil would create jobs, lower gas prices, enhance national security and boost consumer spending. Let’s turn off the negative voices and embrace oil for the sake of happiness and prosperity.

Well folks it appears that the head phoney and political fraud AKA Obama is at it again. Nothing like a nice little imperialist incursion into Libya to obfuscate his failures. Heck even Dennis Kuchinich came out against him on Libya.

 

[dapoes]

Lessons learned by gov intervention:

Social Security? Broke.
Fannie/Freddie? Broke
Medicare? Broke.
Medicaid? Broke.
The Post Office? Broke.
Amtrak? Broke.

The government even lost money running the famous Mustang Ranch brothel. The feds couldn’t turn a profit selling sex. :blink:

Gov (GM) Motors? Epic Flop
Ford Motor Co. is poised to be the top U.S. auto seller in March, surpassing General Motors Co. for only the second time since 1998, according to projections by auto information company Edmunds.com.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Lessons learned by gov intervention:

Social Security? Broke.
Fannie/Freddie? Broke
Medicare? Broke.
Medicaid? Broke.
The Post Office? Broke.
Amtrak? Broke.

The government even lost money running the famous Mustang Ranch brothel. The feds couldn’t turn a profit selling sex. :blink:

Gov (GM) Motors? Epic Flop
Ford Motor Co. is poised to be the top U.S. auto seller in March, surpassing General Motors Co. for only the second time since 1998, according to projections by auto information company Edmunds.com.

Interesting post. I bet if we really thought about it we could come up with half a dozen more.

Chrysler/Fiat comes to mind. Fiat is hiring for their re-introduction in the US market. Other than that I'm not certain how that is all going to work. Ford is kicking butt right now and it's not because they didn't take the bailout. Fact is they were poised for a turnaround and saw the bailout as a distraction with to many strings attached. Plus they have a strong leader and generally better Labor Relations,