 |
|
 |
|
Next: No limited slip in 2006?
|
| Author |
Message |
External

Since: Dec 06, 2004 Posts: 253
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:38 pm
Post subject: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Archived from groups: rec>autos>makers>ford>mustang (more info?)
|
|
|
Read the following article. Makes you wonder why our government didn't
really tax the hell out of fuel during the 90's and use the proceeds to
lower other taxes or to fund quality programs.
---
At nearly $3 a gallon, gasoline prices have become a nightmare for many
Michigan consumers in recent days.
But not everyone is ready to start boycotting gas stations. In fact,
some residents are far less concerned about the current levels than
people who experienced problems such as gas rationing that arose
following the oil shocks of the 1970s.
"Higher gas prices don't affect me in terms of what I do or where I
go," said Curtis Foreman, owner of Foreman Construction LLC in Oak
Park.
The 34-year-old Foreman, who spends several hours a day on the road for
work, has a Ford F-150 and a Ford F-250 Turbo Diesel he uses for work
that he fills up regularly. But gas isn't something he worries about
too much. And he's not alone.
Experts agree that the U.S. economy is far less susceptible to energy
shocks, particularly sharp increases in crude oil prices, than it was
two decades ago. The advent of fuel economy standards that promote more
efficient vehicles that get better gas mileage has helped to temper
energy consumption.
Even though retail gasoline prices give a lot of people sticker shock,
the impact of higher fuel costs is less than it was for a growing
number of households and businesses.
"I don't even know what gas costs now," Foreman said Friday. "I just
paid $75 to fill up one of my trucks, but I don't remember what it cost
a gallon. For me, it's the cost of doing business."
For the record, regular gasoline is averaging $2.72 a gallon, while
diesel fuel costs $2.65 a gallon throughout the state, AAA Michigan
reports.
The new reality has some economists questioning some old assumptions
about the nation's economy.
"The basic theme is that the U.S. economy is less sensitive to energy
costs than 20 or 30 years ago. We're not independent of energy. We're
just less sensitive," said John Silvia, chief economist of Wachovia
Securities in Charlotte, N.C. "Why hasn't consumption fallen off? When
the price of energy goes up, it does cut into household budgets, but
it's less of a cut than 20 years ago, given that incomes have almost
tripled since the 1982."
For example, American consumers spent a total of about $95 billion for
gasoline and other petroleum products in 1984. Last year, that figure
jumped to $230.4 billion, or 142% higher. But workers saw their income
shoot up 196% from $2.26 trillion to $6.69 trillion last year, the
Bureau of Economic Analysis reports.
"Looking over the last 20 years it's clear that incomes have grown
faster than the price of energy," said Jay Wortley, senior economist
with Michigan's Senate Fiscal Agency in Lansing. "But that's not to say
that this recent run-up isn't painful."
To be sure, many Michigan workers and consumers whose incomes have not
kept up with rising energy prices are feeling the pain.
The Michigan manufacturing sector, particularly autos, has caught the
brunt of higher petroleum prices. The state's unemployment rate of 7%
is one of the highest in the country.
Higher petroleum costs also have helped push some auto suppliers into
bankruptcy and limited hiring in some delivery businesses. And with
global uncertainty pumping fear into the markets, price volatility
remains a key part of Michigan's energy equation.
In fact, crude oil jumped $2.08 to settle at $65.35 per 42-gallon
barrel Friday after a week of declines, following a refinery fire in
Venezuela and an oil protest in Ecuador.
Nevertheless, some Michiganders, while expressing some frustration
about pump prices, don't seem as outraged as one might expect if there
were a shortage of oil and gasoline.
Michelle Marrs, who recently pumped in $61 of premium gasoline at $2.98
a gallon to fill up her 2003 Land Rover at a Meijer station at 8 Mile
and Haggerty in Novi, seemed pragmatic about rising fuel prices.
The Ann Arbor attorney is on the road constantly. But given that she's
part of a successful law firm, gas prices aren't as high on her list of
priorities as they might be for others.
"I travel a lot for work, so it almost doesn't matter for me," she
said. "Now, I'd be happier if it was $2.20 or something, but what are
you going to do?"
---
Patrick
'93 Cobra >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jun 25, 2004 Posts: 319
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 3:14 am
Post subject: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of Herp [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Sorry Patrick, but the last thing we need to do is give the government
one more way to yank money from our wallets. They have more ways to do
it than we can count right now. They need to REDUCE the taxes they
currently have on gas. Gas tax hurts the people that can least afford
it the most. The government collects plenty of taxes. They don't need
more money, they need to make do with less.
NoOption5L RemoveThis @aol.com wrote:
> Read the following article. Makes you wonder why our government didn't
> really tax the hell out of fuel during the 90's and use the proceeds to
> lower other taxes or to fund quality programs.
>
>
> ---
> At nearly $3 a gallon, gasoline prices have become a nightmare for many
> Michigan consumers in recent days.
>
> But not everyone is ready to start boycotting gas stations. In fact,
> some residents are far less concerned about the current levels than
> people who experienced problems such as gas rationing that arose
> following the oil shocks of the 1970s.
>
> "Higher gas prices don't affect me in terms of what I do or where I
> go," said Curtis Foreman, owner of Foreman Construction LLC in Oak
> Park.
>
> The 34-year-old Foreman, who spends several hours a day on the road for
> work, has a Ford F-150 and a Ford F-250 Turbo Diesel he uses for work
> that he fills up regularly. But gas isn't something he worries about
> too much. And he's not alone.
>
> Experts agree that the U.S. economy is far less susceptible to energy
> shocks, particularly sharp increases in crude oil prices, than it was
> two decades ago. The advent of fuel economy standards that promote more
> efficient vehicles that get better gas mileage has helped to temper
> energy consumption.
>
> Even though retail gasoline prices give a lot of people sticker shock,
> the impact of higher fuel costs is less than it was for a growing
> number of households and businesses.
>
> "I don't even know what gas costs now," Foreman said Friday. "I just
> paid $75 to fill up one of my trucks, but I don't remember what it cost
> a gallon. For me, it's the cost of doing business."
>
> For the record, regular gasoline is averaging $2.72 a gallon, while
> diesel fuel costs $2.65 a gallon throughout the state, AAA Michigan
> reports.
>
> The new reality has some economists questioning some old assumptions
> about the nation's economy.
>
> "The basic theme is that the U.S. economy is less sensitive to energy
> costs than 20 or 30 years ago. We're not independent of energy. We're
> just less sensitive," said John Silvia, chief economist of Wachovia
> Securities in Charlotte, N.C. "Why hasn't consumption fallen off? When
> the price of energy goes up, it does cut into household budgets, but
> it's less of a cut than 20 years ago, given that incomes have almost
> tripled since the 1982."
>
> For example, American consumers spent a total of about $95 billion for
> gasoline and other petroleum products in 1984. Last year, that figure
> jumped to $230.4 billion, or 142% higher. But workers saw their income
> shoot up 196% from $2.26 trillion to $6.69 trillion last year, the
> Bureau of Economic Analysis reports.
>
> "Looking over the last 20 years it's clear that incomes have grown
> faster than the price of energy," said Jay Wortley, senior economist
> with Michigan's Senate Fiscal Agency in Lansing. "But that's not to say
> that this recent run-up isn't painful."
>
> To be sure, many Michigan workers and consumers whose incomes have not
> kept up with rising energy prices are feeling the pain.
>
> The Michigan manufacturing sector, particularly autos, has caught the
> brunt of higher petroleum prices. The state's unemployment rate of 7%
> is one of the highest in the country.
>
> Higher petroleum costs also have helped push some auto suppliers into
> bankruptcy and limited hiring in some delivery businesses. And with
> global uncertainty pumping fear into the markets, price volatility
> remains a key part of Michigan's energy equation.
>
> In fact, crude oil jumped $2.08 to settle at $65.35 per 42-gallon
> barrel Friday after a week of declines, following a refinery fire in
> Venezuela and an oil protest in Ecuador.
>
> Nevertheless, some Michiganders, while expressing some frustration
> about pump prices, don't seem as outraged as one might expect if there
> were a shortage of oil and gasoline.
>
> Michelle Marrs, who recently pumped in $61 of premium gasoline at $2.98
> a gallon to fill up her 2003 Land Rover at a Meijer station at 8 Mile
> and Haggerty in Novi, seemed pragmatic about rising fuel prices.
>
> The Ann Arbor attorney is on the road constantly. But given that she's
> part of a successful law firm, gas prices aren't as high on her list of
> priorities as they might be for others.
>
> "I travel a lot for work, so it almost doesn't matter for me," she
> said. "Now, I'd be happier if it was $2.20 or something, but what are
> you going to do?"
> ---
>
> Patrick
> '93 Cobra
> >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jul 07, 2005 Posts: 14
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 9:16 am
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of Herpes [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 03:14:48 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
wrote:
>Sorry Patrick, but the last thing we need to do is give the government
>one more way to yank money from our wallets. They have more ways to do
>it than we can count right now. They need to REDUCE the taxes they
>currently have on gas. Gas tax hurts the people that can least afford
>it the most. The government collects plenty of taxes. They don't need
>more money, they need to make do with less.
>
This is a yes & no proposition. While it does in fact hurt those who
can least afford it (minimum wage burger flippers in an area of no
mass transit). Those whom it doesn't affect would go freakin hog
crazy and stick their noses so far into the damn trough there would be
nothing left.
Already many who need fuel to conduct business (farmers & others) do
not have to pay the taxes on fuel needed to produce certain things in
our economy. Of course the Military which sucks up a tremendous
amount of fuel and the US Postal Service (Number one consumer of fuel)
already don't pay taxes either.
Even though the prices of crude do have an impact there is also the
issue of the capacity to turn raw crude into fuels. There hasn't been
a new refinery built in the US in about 30 years while the demand
curve has steadily increased.
Certain taxes on fuel are supposed to go to pay for the infrastructure
to support the use of vehicles, i.e. roads & bridges. Unfortunately
in many states these taxes go directly into the states general funds
and never do get spent on improving the roads if the roads in my area
are any indicator.
Yes driving a high-performance vehicle to & from work is a royal
blast. However, it simply isn't required. The major problem is no
viable mass transit alternative for the majority of the country to get
anywhere. I can drive the 18 miles to work in 30/40 minutes. If I
was to take the bus it would be more like 2.5 hours in each direction
and I still have to get to the bus stop.
The answer is out there somewhere, but I doubt that anyone in the US
government is going to come up with it.
>NoOption5L@aol.com wrote:
>> Read the following article. Makes you wonder why our government didn't
>> really tax the hell out of fuel during the 90's and use the proceeds to
>> lower other taxes or to fund quality programs.
>>
>>
>> ---
>> At nearly $3 a gallon, gasoline prices have become a nightmare for many
>> Michigan consumers in recent days.
>>
>> But not everyone is ready to start boycotting gas stations. In fact,
>> some residents are far less concerned about the current levels than
>> people who experienced problems such as gas rationing that arose
>> following the oil shocks of the 1970s.
>>
>> "Higher gas prices don't affect me in terms of what I do or where I
>> go," said Curtis Foreman, owner of Foreman Construction LLC in Oak
>> Park.
>>
>> The 34-year-old Foreman, who spends several hours a day on the road for
>> work, has a Ford F-150 and a Ford F-250 Turbo Diesel he uses for work
>> that he fills up regularly. But gas isn't something he worries about
>> too much. And he's not alone.
>>
>> Experts agree that the U.S. economy is far less susceptible to energy
>> shocks, particularly sharp increases in crude oil prices, than it was
>> two decades ago. The advent of fuel economy standards that promote more
>> efficient vehicles that get better gas mileage has helped to temper
>> energy consumption.
>>
>> Even though retail gasoline prices give a lot of people sticker shock,
>> the impact of higher fuel costs is less than it was for a growing
>> number of households and businesses.
>>
>> "I don't even know what gas costs now," Foreman said Friday. "I just
>> paid $75 to fill up one of my trucks, but I don't remember what it cost
>> a gallon. For me, it's the cost of doing business."
>>
>> For the record, regular gasoline is averaging $2.72 a gallon, while
>> diesel fuel costs $2.65 a gallon throughout the state, AAA Michigan
>> reports.
>>
>> The new reality has some economists questioning some old assumptions
>> about the nation's economy.
>>
>> "The basic theme is that the U.S. economy is less sensitive to energy
>> costs than 20 or 30 years ago. We're not independent of energy. We're
>> just less sensitive," said John Silvia, chief economist of Wachovia
>> Securities in Charlotte, N.C. "Why hasn't consumption fallen off? When
>> the price of energy goes up, it does cut into household budgets, but
>> it's less of a cut than 20 years ago, given that incomes have almost
>> tripled since the 1982."
>>
>> For example, American consumers spent a total of about $95 billion for
>> gasoline and other petroleum products in 1984. Last year, that figure
>> jumped to $230.4 billion, or 142% higher. But workers saw their income
>> shoot up 196% from $2.26 trillion to $6.69 trillion last year, the
>> Bureau of Economic Analysis reports.
>>
>> "Looking over the last 20 years it's clear that incomes have grown
>> faster than the price of energy," said Jay Wortley, senior economist
>> with Michigan's Senate Fiscal Agency in Lansing. "But that's not to say
>> that this recent run-up isn't painful."
>>
>> To be sure, many Michigan workers and consumers whose incomes have not
>> kept up with rising energy prices are feeling the pain.
>>
>> The Michigan manufacturing sector, particularly autos, has caught the
>> brunt of higher petroleum prices. The state's unemployment rate of 7%
>> is one of the highest in the country.
>>
>> Higher petroleum costs also have helped push some auto suppliers into
>> bankruptcy and limited hiring in some delivery businesses. And with
>> global uncertainty pumping fear into the markets, price volatility
>> remains a key part of Michigan's energy equation.
>>
>> In fact, crude oil jumped $2.08 to settle at $65.35 per 42-gallon
>> barrel Friday after a week of declines, following a refinery fire in
>> Venezuela and an oil protest in Ecuador.
>>
>> Nevertheless, some Michiganders, while expressing some frustration
>> about pump prices, don't seem as outraged as one might expect if there
>> were a shortage of oil and gasoline.
>>
>> Michelle Marrs, who recently pumped in $61 of premium gasoline at $2.98
>> a gallon to fill up her 2003 Land Rover at a Meijer station at 8 Mile
>> and Haggerty in Novi, seemed pragmatic about rising fuel prices.
>>
>> The Ann Arbor attorney is on the road constantly. But given that she's
>> part of a successful law firm, gas prices aren't as high on her list of
>> priorities as they might be for others.
>>
>> "I travel a lot for work, so it almost doesn't matter for me," she
>> said. "Now, I'd be happier if it was $2.20 or something, but what are
>> you going to do?"
>> ---
>>
>> Patrick
>> '93 Cobra
>>
--
Please Don't Steal - The Government Hates Competition
ZombyWoof
(take the dogs when replying via e-mail) >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jun 25, 2004 Posts: 319
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:35 pm
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of Herpes [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
ZombyWoof wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 03:14:48 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
> wrote:
>
>
>>Sorry Patrick, but the last thing we need to do is give the government
>>one more way to yank money from our wallets. They have more ways to do
>>it than we can count right now. They need to REDUCE the taxes they
>>currently have on gas. Gas tax hurts the people that can least afford
>>it the most. The government collects plenty of taxes. They don't need
>>more money, they need to make do with less.
>>
>
> This is a yes & no proposition. While it does in fact hurt those who
> can least afford it (minimum wage burger flippers in an area of no
> mass transit). Those whom it doesn't affect would go freakin hog
> crazy and stick their noses so far into the damn trough there would be
> nothing left.
>
> Already many who need fuel to conduct business (farmers & others) do
> not have to pay the taxes on fuel needed to produce certain things in
> our economy. Of course the Military which sucks up a tremendous
> amount of fuel and the US Postal Service (Number one consumer of fuel)
> already don't pay taxes either.
>
> Even though the prices of crude do have an impact there is also the
> issue of the capacity to turn raw crude into fuels. There hasn't been
> a new refinery built in the US in about 30 years while the demand
> curve has steadily increased.
>
> Certain taxes on fuel are supposed to go to pay for the infrastructure
> to support the use of vehicles, i.e. roads & bridges. Unfortunately
> in many states these taxes go directly into the states general funds
> and never do get spent on improving the roads if the roads in my area
> are any indicator.
>
> Yes driving a high-performance vehicle to & from work is a royal
> blast. However, it simply isn't required. The major problem is no
> viable mass transit alternative for the majority of the country to get
> anywhere. I can drive the 18 miles to work in 30/40 minutes. If I
> was to take the bus it would be more like 2.5 hours in each direction
> and I still have to get to the bus stop.
>
> The answer is out there somewhere, but I doubt that anyone in the US
> government is going to come up with it.
Here's a link that gives current gasoline tax rates:
http://tinyurl.com/exjpg New York is probably the worst case as they
charge over 50 cents a gallon in total state and federal taxes. For
EVERY 18 gallon fill-up the driver in New York pays about nine dollars
in taxes. At $2.50/gallon that equates to a tax rate of 20%. When gas
was $1.75/gallon the tax rate was near 29%. How long do you think it
will take the states and the federal governments to get the tax rate, as
a percentage, back up to what they were before this last price spike
happened? My guess is it won't be long.
If the government wants to reduce our consumption of fuel then they
should just ration gasoline and be done with it. That way we won't have
them digging in our wallets so deep. Personally, I think fuel should be
taxed just like any other commodity. Just apply the state's sales tax
rate. Fuel tax is just another way government has found to increase
revenue covertly. I don't believe these amounts per gallon tax rates
are shown on the pumps. Why do you think that is so? Also, why are
they included in the advertised price? If the tax was added on to the
purchase like sales tax the public would be forced to know they are
getting raped on gas taxes and probably wouldn't stand for it.
The reason I am so passionate about lowering taxes, or at least keeping
them stagnant, is that we are taxed at incredible rates when all the
local, state and federal taxes are combined. Individually they don't
seem so bad but add them up and most of us would be shocked. The thing
is that many of these taxes are not based on income so the poor are hit
disproportionately hard. Hell, state governments even pray on people
through lotteries. Many of the people I see buying those tickets
haven't got the income to justify such an extravagant purchase. Do you
think the government cares that they are praying on the poor by offering
lottery tickets? Granted, no one is forced to by a lottery ticket but I
expect more from our elected leaders than to shamelessly take money from
people that can't afford it.
One day people will put all this together and the politicians will be
held accountable at the ballot box. It is happening gradually right
now. Why do you think the Republicans have retained the House, Senate
and more often than not the Presidency? The biggest reason is they are
the only party that is willing to cut taxes. Even they aren't doing it
enough to suit most people. It is happening here where I live at the
local level. People can't understand why there property taxes are sky
rocketing when inflation isn't. The expenses of the local government
aren't increasing 20% a year so why are their local taxes. The average
person is starting to see what is being done to them from a tax
standpoint. It may take a few more election cycles but I believe there
will be a major shift in the public's attitude toward how they are taxed.
Well, I feel better after that rant. >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Dec 06, 2004 Posts: 253
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 7:14 pm
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of Herpes [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> >>Sorry Patrick, but the last thing we need to do is give the government
> >>one more way to yank money from our wallets. They have more ways to do
> >>it than we can count right now.
> >>They need to REDUCE the taxes they currently have on gas.
Right, then the American consumer is so darn happy with the cheap gas
he responds by doing what? Well, of course, he consumes more gas which
in turn drives the price, and the profits of oil-rich countries (many
of which we are spending huge amounts/$Bs of dollars wagging war on or
trying to control.), back up.
Plus, cheap gas keeps anyone from investing in alternative fuel
sources. It's a nice little cycle. And that's the main reason the
oil-rich countries walk a tight-rope on prices -- high enough to make
good money, but not too high to cause investment in alternatives.
> >>Gas tax hurts the people that can least afford it the most.
Only if the government doesn't "redistribute" those dollars in the
forms of compensation -- reduction of other taxes.
> >> The government collects plenty of taxes. They don't need more money, they > >> need to make do with less.
Agreed.
> > Even though the prices of crude do have an impact there is also the
> > issue of the capacity to turn raw crude into fuels. There hasn't been
> > a new refinery built in the US in about 30 years while the demand
> > curve has steadily increased.
That's an issue, but the bottom line is demand is growing faster than
they can pump it out of the ground.
> > Certain taxes on fuel are supposed to go to pay for the infrastructure
> > to support the use of vehicles, i.e. roads & bridges. Unfortunately
> > in many states these taxes go directly into the states general funds
> > and never do get spent on improving the roads if the roads in my area
> > are any indicator.
The problem is we have more roads/bridges than we can take care of. A
road that was a single lane ten years ago, is now probably two lanes,
at least. And a two-lane road is twice as expensive to resurface.
> > Yes driving a high-performance vehicle to & from work is a royal
> > blast. However, it simply isn't required. The major problem is no
> > viable mass transit alternative for the majority of the country to get
> > anywhere. I can drive the 18 miles to work in 30/40 minutes. If I
> > was to take the bus it would be more like 2.5 hours in each direction
> > and I still have to get to the bus stop.
There is no fix to that one. Human nature is we all want our space.
And space now often means living 10+ miles from work.
> > The answer is out there somewhere, but I doubt that anyone in the US
> > government is going to come up with it.
It's higher fuel prices by way of higher gas taxes. Think about this.
If you had to pay say... an extra $1K per year for fuel, but received
other tax cuts to make up the difference what would your response be?
Of course, you'd find ways to cut your gas consumption, and a brainy
neighbor or company would search for cheaper alternatives to oil.
> If the government wants to reduce our consumption of fuel then they
> should just ration gasoline and be done with it. That way we won't have
> them digging in our wallets so deep. Personally, I think fuel should be
> taxed just like any other commodity. Just apply the state's sales tax
> rate.
Drop gas prices that far and you'd breed fleets of Hummer-sized
vehicles.
> Fuel tax is just another way government has found to increase
> revenue covertly. I don't believe these amounts per gallon tax rates
> are shown on the pumps. Why do you think that is so? Also, why are
> they included in the advertised price? If the tax was added on to the
> purchase like sales tax the public would be forced to know they are
> getting raped on gas taxes and probably wouldn't stand for it.
Exactly, and then the consumer would respond to the new lower prices by
doing the above.
> The reason I am so passionate about lowering taxes, or at least keeping
> them stagnant, is that we are taxed at incredible rates when all the
> local, state and federal taxes are combined. Individually they don't
> seem so bad but add them up and most of us would be shocked. The thing
> is that many of these taxes are not based on income so the poor are hit
> disproportionately hard. Hell, state governments even pray on people
> through lotteries. Many of the people I see buying those tickets
> haven't got the income to justify such an extravagant purchase. Do you
> think the government cares that they are praying on the poor by offering
> lottery tickets? Granted, no one is forced to by a lottery ticket but I
> expect more from our elected leaders than to shamelessly take money from
> people that can't afford it.
Aren't they required to print the odds of winning on every ticket? If
folks can't do simple math, or use simple logic, they deserve their
money to be pissed away. But let's face the facts, most want a
"simple" way to fortune.
> One day people will put all this together and the politicians will be
> held accountable at the ballot box. It is happening gradually right
> now. Why do you think the Republicans have retained the House, Senate
> and more often than not the Presidency?
They have big business and the religous right in their back pocket?
Money + religion is tough to beat/defeat. Just ask Bin Laden.
> The biggest reason is they are the only party that is willing to cut taxes.
They're not cutting sh*t. They're building debt. Yeah, they give you a
little tax break here and there, but they're paying for it with a check
they don't have the funds for.
> Even they aren't doing it enough to suit most people. It is happening here
> where I live at the local level. People can't understand why there property
> taxes are sky rocketing when inflation isn't. The expenses of the local
> government aren't increasing 20% a year so why are their local taxes. The
> average person is starting to see what is being done to them from a tax
> standpoint. It may take a few more election cycles but I believe there
> will be a major shift in the public's attitude toward how they are taxed.
Oh, it's coming. But unfortunately the debt will still need to be
paid.
> Well, I feel better after that rant.
Me too.
Patrick
'93 Cobra >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Aug 09, 2005 Posts: 22
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 11:55 pm
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
NoOption5L.TakeThisOut@aol.com wrote:
> Read the following article. Makes you wonder why our government didn't
> really tax the hell out of fuel during the 90's and use the proceeds to
> lower other taxes or to fund quality programs.
Man, you sure picked a prickly topic here!
Here is my two cents.
I believe in the school of economics that says the basic problem with
any government, with soft budget constraints, is that it's fundamentally
incapable of the necessary self-regulation and efficiency the free
market can provide. Socializing health care can give you good stories,
but on the whole, it costs everyone more. And as for the gross
shortcomings of the free market, cite Enron, cite WorldCom, fine; I
agree that it's all flawed. But nothing is more flawed than an
enterprise that can never actually go bankrupt. Nothing can borrow from
Peter to pay Paul with more impugnity than a wealthy democratic government.
Futhermore, attempting to place too many artificial controls on the free
markets in the form of excessive taxes, price supports, price ceilings
and other mechanisms such as subsidies does more damage in the long term
than good, and creates more inequity than it ever solves. These things
creates perverse incentives, and dysfunctional reactions that are
counterproductive to the causes in general - and I'm not talking in
terms of years, I'm talking in terms of seconds, once the news breaks.
Gasoline is a very price-inelastic commodity, like tobacco and illicit
drugs. As such, raising its price by 1% will always result in an
increase in revenue and profits that is more than 1%.
All the government is going to do by taxing the hell out of fuel and
energy is to raise more money to fund its inefficiencies, causing more
inefficiencies of bloated bureacracy to oversee the inefficiencies it
caused, hence costing the consumer again a disproportionately large sum
of money for a paternalistic policy, and the original intentions of the
legislation are forever lost and twisted by those who come along and
figure out how to make money off of it.
We most definitely do need an energy policy. It just cannot be solely
based on taxing fuel. It sounds good until you dig deeper.
--
Wound Up
ThunderSnake #65 >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Sep 06, 2005 Posts: 50
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:09 pm
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of Herpes [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:16:04 -0400, ZombyWoof
puked:
>Already many who need fuel to conduct business (farmers & others) do
>not have to pay the taxes on fuel needed to produce certain things in
>our economy. Of course the Military which sucks up a tremendous
>amount of fuel and the US Postal Service (Number one consumer of fuel)
>already don't pay taxes either.
How much money would be saved if the postal service eliminated
Saturday delivery? In fact, Monday - Wednesday - Friday delivery
would probably serve most people what with fax, email and other
delivery services already working...
--
lab~rat >
Do you want polite or do you want sincere? >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Dec 06, 2004 Posts: 253
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:18 pm
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of Herpes [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
lab~rat wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:16:04 -0400, ZombyWoof
> puked:
> >Already many who need fuel to conduct business (farmers & others) do
> >not have to pay the taxes on fuel needed to produce certain things in
> >our economy. Of course the Military which sucks up a tremendous
> >amount of fuel and the US Postal Service (Number one consumer of fuel)
> >already don't pay taxes either.
>
> How much money would be saved if the postal service eliminated
> Saturday delivery? In fact, Monday - Wednesday - Friday delivery
> would probably serve most people what with fax, email and other
> delivery services already working...
You know that's a DAMN good idea!
Patrick
'93 Cobra >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Dec 06, 2004 Posts: 253
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 8:34 pm
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Hank wrote:
> Go back to insulting the grieving mother of a dead soldier.
> That's more your speed...
While I agree with much that you say, I don't agree with this. Her son
was an *adult* who knew the risk and accepted that risk. While she has
every right to object to war, to use her son's death as some sort of
justification for us to pull out, is a damn joke. The bottom line is
her son died doing what *he* thought was right.
Patrick
'93 Cobra >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jun 25, 2004 Posts: 319
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 9:56 pm
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of Herpes [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
lab~rat wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:16:04 -0400, ZombyWoof
> puked:
>
>
>>Already many who need fuel to conduct business (farmers & others) do
>>not have to pay the taxes on fuel needed to produce certain things in
>>our economy. Of course the Military which sucks up a tremendous
>>amount of fuel and the US Postal Service (Number one consumer of fuel)
>>already don't pay taxes either.
>
>
> How much money would be saved if the postal service eliminated
> Saturday delivery? In fact, Monday - Wednesday - Friday delivery
> would probably serve most people what with fax, email and other
> delivery services already working...
They have already dropped most Saturday deliveries to businesses if they
are closed on the weekends. >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Jun 25, 2004 Posts: 319
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2005 1:05 am
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Hank, unfortunately you are the classic "Bush Hater" of which the left
seems to have an over abundance. I'm going to spare ramfm a long
diatribe with you because there's great odds that we will NEVER agree
politically on ANYTHING. You said your piece and I said mine. Let's
leave it at that. >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Apr 28, 2004 Posts: 312
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2005 1:25 am
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of Herpes [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article , Michael Johnson, PE wrote:
> If you want to see how the Bush's tax policies have effected your tax
> rates check out this link: http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxfreedomday/
> It graphs Tax Freedom Day for the last 25 years and shows what that day
> was over the last 100+ years. Look further down the page and see the
> pie chart that compares federal/state/local taxes to other typical
> expenses. Taxes took 107 days of income and household and household
> operations (i.e. mortage, utilities, repairs etc.) only took 65 days of
> income! On average government takes 65% more money than the average
> person spends on owning and maintaining a house every year. Plus, I
> would wager they don't calculate all the user fees and micellaneous
> hidden taxes in their figures.
My biggest expense by far is taxes. Nothing else comes close. Even if I
start adding stuff together. Taxes are probably about equal to all my
other expenses, manditory, optional, and otherwise combined.
Government can help people the most by eliminating the dependency class,
making sure that everyone pays at least some taxes and pass the
savings on to those who actually pay taxes.
Of course that will never happen because a dependency class and a class
of voters that pay no taxes (of a particular type) are in government's best
interest. The group that is dependent will continue to vote for the
status quo and those who pay no taxes will continually vote for tax
increases on other people. >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Apr 28, 2004 Posts: 312
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2005 1:46 am
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article , Hank wrote:
> Here in the U.S., 50 million people have no health care,
This is a bogus figure because it includes people who simply have a gap
in coverage. For instance, I had a gap in coverage when I went from one
employer to another. I then counted as not having health care for the
full year. Pretty bogus. Also counted are people who on their own decide
they would rather have the money and pay for insurance even though they
could afford to.
> and
> if you look at infant mortality rates, you see countries with
> a socialist government with the lowest rates and a high quality
> of life.
Quality of life is a problem in the USA because there is a constant
influx of people willing to work for very low wages and we have a system
that basically gives us very little time for our own lives. It's work
hard until you die. I'd love to have a month off each year. If the choice
was the status quo and gasoline taxed to $5 a gallon but I got a month
off every year, I'd go for the later.
> I suppose you're not concerned with bu$h's record spending,
> deficits, or his sale of our economy to Communist China,
> either.
We have a one party system. The differences amount to nothing more than
words. The sale of our economy to Communist China became wholesale while
Clinton was in office and has only continued. In fact most of the changes
that allowed this occured under Clinton. Both of our so called parties
support this nonsense because their money supply supports it.
It's the real treason here. Acting in the interest of lobbiests and
campiagn donors instead of doing what is right for the nation.
> Fairly taxing the wealthiest top 5% percent, has nothing to
> do with your bizarre "removing incentives" rant. You're not
> making any sense at all.
If you look at who actually pays the taxes in this nation I would say the
top 5% of wage earners is currently paying 53% of the income taxes while
earning 32% of all income. The top 50% of wage earners are currently
paying 96% of the income taxes while earning 86% of all income.
Could you point out what isn't fair here and in which direction?
> If bu$h continues to export our jobs,
This started before shrub and only continues under him unchecked.
> and cut job training
> and education funding, that's exactly what will happen.
> We should stop giving government handouts to billion dollar
> corporations before we eliminate school lunches for poor
> kids. Greed is ugly.
Democrats have had control of the schools for decades. They decided to
use the schools to increase government power and promote the status quo.
The republicans don't fix this because it's not in their intrests to, in
fact it is also in their interests to make sure people are not educated.
Corporations get money under democrat admins as well. So do foreign
countries. You just don't hear about it as much.
We have one effective party in this nation. The difference between Ds and
Rs is an illusion, a perception to keep the populace bickering back and
forth while the elites continue to control everything unchecked.
I'll sum up how the two parties are the same with a quote:
"We know we can't count on the French. We know we can't count on the
Russians, We know that Iraq is a danger to the United States, and we
reserve the right to take pre-emptive action whenever we feel it's in
our national interest." -Sen. John Kerry, CNN, 1997. >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Apr 28, 2004 Posts: 312
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2005 10:49 am
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
In article , 351CJ wrote:
> If a criminal wants a gun they will get it with or without these silly
> little feel good infringements, and they do because they know there are no
> serious ramifications if they get caught with a gun.
Furthermore, the penalities for having the illegal gun will always be
less than the crimes these criminals intend to use the gun for. So the
penalty will not deter them by definition because they are CRIMINALS. >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
External

Since: Dec 06, 2004 Posts: 253
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Thu Aug 25, 2005 6:05 pm
Post subject: Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of [Login to view extended thread Info.] Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
351CJ wrote:
> > And as
> > far as gun control, I don't think it's a big thing if someone has to
> > wait 24 hours to be checked out for a criminal record/mental health
> > issue before buying an AK-47, do you? But some seem to think doing
> > that background check is the begining of a slippery slope to banning
> > shotguns for quail hunting.
> You really need a little more information on this subject.
> The second amendment has nothing whatsoever to do with hunting or shotguns.
It's the right to bear arms. Or, basically, if you want to own a gun,
any gun, you're free to do so.
> Waiting periods are NOT about background checks. That has been covered
> since 1998 by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
Educate me. What's the waiting period for? And why is it a hassle?
> Or in the case of individuals who carry concealed weapons permits from one
> or multiple states, they have already passed one or more stringent
> background check.
Good.
> How many is enough?
I just don't want the guy who has had some "stress incidents" at work
and was seeing a doctor for maybe talking about suicide or suggesting a
little revenge on someone who pissed him off; or the guy who just got
out of jail for armed robbery and was "just trying to get his life back
in order" being able to walk into any gun show, or worse a Wally World,
and *freely* buy a weapon. That scares me. Yeah, they could steal one
or buy one from a "dealer", but at least they obtained it illegally...
we didn't just give him a sales receipt and say have a nice day, thanks
for shopping at WalMart.
> Should you have to retake your drivers exam once a month?
We have "exams"?! I only remember having to start the car, put it in
drive, turn the wheel a little, hit the brake once or twice and then a
driver's license spit out. But what a novel idea! I'd suggest a real
road course with curves, cones, water, heavy acceleration, braking and
turning. Followed by a written test about the rules of the road --
blinker use, tailgating, obstructing the left/passing lane and lane
discipline in general, paying attention to traffic signals (not running
them, or be talking on a cell phone and stopped, after it has changed
to green 5-10 seconds ago) and requiring every licensed driver pass
both exams about every 3-4 years.
> After all many more Americans die from automobiles than guns.
I'm just glad the average American isn't in the [immediate] possession
of gun as often as they drive a car.
> Does your "no big thing" attitude apply to a person who already has one or
> more guns?
Why not? Just like I wouldn't have a problem waiting 24 hours or doing
a background check before buying a car.
> What practical difference does that person waiting to buy their 2nd, 3rd, or > 4th gun make?
Ask the folks who survived Columbine, CO. More weapons can mean more
carnage. Seen the video floating around with the high school kid
packing about 9-10 guns under everyday baggy clothing?
> If you really wanted to do something about criminals with guns, you would
> stop supporting the harassment of honest law abiding Americans, and go after
> the criminals.
We already go after criminals... the cops do a great job... they get
them locked up. Unfortunately, the punishments don't fit the crimes.
> If a criminal wants a gun they will get it with or without these silly
> little feel good infringements, and they do because they know there are no
> serious ramifications if they get caught with a gun.
Do you lock your doors at night? Do lock your car doors when you leave
it in a parking lot? Do you try to keep your house looking lived in
while you're gone out of town? Sure you do. But why do you do these
"little feel good infringements"? Because it's something... and it
helps, if even just a little.
> Law abiding Americans have an inalienable right to firearms,
I totally agree! You should be able to own an armory, as long as you
don't have a history of pointing guns at people or have serious mental
problems.
Patrick
'93 Cobra >> Stay informed about: We Needed A Big Gas Tax |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |  |
| Related Topics: | Battery terminal covers needed - I need a set of OEM Ford battery terminal covers for my 1997 GT. The new ones I ordered from the local Ford dealer do not have the raised (+) and (-) symbols. They would work, but I want the original style. I know: Picky, picky. I want to keep her 100...
1994 Mustang Cobra R replica wheel help needed - I have a set of 17 x 9 Cobra R replica rims. Lost one of the centers and since it is an aftermarket rim, a couple of years old; I can not locate a replacement. So, I am looking for someone who can make a chrome center for me, blank or engraved with...
Opinions on Actron scan tools needed - I've decided to go ahead and purchase an OBD-II scan tool. Good investment for the DIY'er. The simple, old 'beeper' code scanner I used on the '89 LX saved me a lot of grief, time and money on several occasions. I like Autoxray's scanners, but..
Early Mustang rear end measurments needed. - Does anyone happen to know the lengths of the axles in a '65-'66 Mustang? Specifically looking for the lengths of each of the two axles in an 8" V8 drum brake rear end. The '65-'66 was narrower than the '67 and later 8's. I'm sourcing some new ...
mustang purchase help - Hello, I'm looking at a 1965 ivy green mustang conv. Since it is a big investment for me I'd like a get some helpful feedback. It does not have a power top, but does have a/c & pb & ps. Is it a waste to pay a premium for the AC feature in a conv... |
|
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You can edit your posts in this forum You can delete your posts in this forum You can vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|