igor Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) My point was not to do that. If you look at the Idea that I was refuting you might see better what I was up to. No specific correlation or relationship. However, if the most taxed states were the most fiscally sound I would expect someone to point that out... Reagan's advisors economic policy was the best I have ever seen from a president. But, as president, he had more than just the economy to jump start. He had to deal politics, Russia, etc. He was not perfect by any means. One could say he was more liberal than Clinton and Clinton more conservative than Reagan. If you look at spend and tax and tax and spend those two presidents, for example only, blur together more then apart in many economists eyes. GWB is an idiot. I voted for him both times and would again over Gore and others. He has stuck to his guns on somethings. But he is no Regan. Clinton just kept going the economics that Bush Sr. followed and put into place. Bush Sr. just failed to get the results he needed before the election. His results came back the next 1/4. Sooner and he would have likely won. I don't see this country changing anytime soon. We are raising 'Me' kids so how can it get better? Not for a generation or two. The world will likely be over by then. Peace and Blessings agree .. I was not picking on Reagan - but Reagan was the latests "defining president" - a phenomenon in US politics, when a strong president defined the topics and terms of discussion for 3 or so presidents after him until another "defining president "comes around .. on the topic of taxes, I disagree with Reagan's definition, and am unhappy we still are being held by it today - hence my post above .. that's all Oh an bout Clinton v Bush v Bush ... no republican president would EVER be allowed the types of anti-re-distribution reforms Clinton passed and NO Democrat would be EVER allowed the type of wasteful spending the two Bushes have shown ... it is a weird phenomenon right now, that the only people able, and willing to raise taxes are republicans - Democrats cannot/would not touch that topic with a six-foot pole ... and vice versa. .. Igor Edited August 9, 2007 by igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 as someone coming from europe - I would disagree - but then - the EU economies and US economies are so different, aligning only their tax systems would make no sense .. however Europe is ALL about low income tax and HIGH use tax .. and slowly moving to eliminate "exceptions" for necessities as they get abused and played with for political reasons (/tangent) ... regardless, low income tax, high use tax model seems to be very well fit for the EU conditions .. and in the case of Gas tax, I believe it would be very well fit for US as well - but I am not an economist - I had only one 100-level College course .. so it is good I am not in charge of Fed ... but Gas tax just makes too much sense to be ignored, just because in the Reaganism era, taxation is a four letter word ... CAFE is dumb and completely inefficient .. gas tax might not be the solution for the US, but solutions OUTSIDE of CAFE need to be seriously weighted and possibly approved if found superior. And that is where I feel Mulally was completely right. Igor But when you look at all of Europe, not just where you are, what do you see? European economies stifle innovation, entrepreneurship, capitalism, etc. Not saying they stop it. Saying they stifle it. People in the US are not smarter then Europeans right? So how come Europe is loosing 2 patents for every 1 they create while the US is the opposite? Why do Somalians relocated to the US have a 75% self sufficiency rate while those sent to N. Europe are only at 25% self sufficiency? Why did 90% of the .com $ originate in the US? I am not bashing Europe or any one country. But there are some very real differences between Old World systems and New World systems. Europe was raised in the idea of Kings, Lords, rulers, high taxes, etc. The US stated out with No taxes and Lincoln was one of the first to raise a significant tax other then for the Revolutionary war tax that was small and barely got through. The US is hugely successful. There are a lot of problems to. But capitalism is a huge success. Europe's embrace of that idea is much more limited and one can see it in the economic growth of nations over the decades. Peace and Blessings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 But when you look at all of Europe, not just where you are, what do you see? European economies stifle innovation, entrepreneurship, capitalism, etc. Not saying they stop it. Saying they stifle it. People in the US are not smarter then Europeans right? So how come Europe is loosing 2 patents for every 1 they create while the US is the opposite? Why do Somalians relocated to the US have a 75% self sufficiency rate while those sent to N. Europe are only at 25% self sufficiency? Why did 90% of the .com $ originate in the US? I am not bashing Europe or any one country. But there are some very real differences between Old World systems and New World systems. Europe was raised in the idea of Kings, Lords, rulers, high taxes, etc. The US stated out with No taxes and Lincoln was one of the first to raise a significant tax other then for the Revolutionary war tax that was small and barely got through. The US is hugely successful. There are a lot of problems to. But capitalism is a huge success. Europe's embrace of that idea is much more limited and one can see it in the economic growth of nations over the decades. Peace and Blessings never said one is better than the other - they have very different histories and thus a very different presence of their economies .. what works in Europe cannot be copied blindly to US .. that was my point .. EU has HUGE issues .. and while most of them could be "boxed" in the same categories as US issues - taxes, social security, poverty, innovation - the nature of problems INSIDE each of those categories is amazingly different between US and EU ... and thus .. the EU model of low income tax and high use tax cannot be directly and blindly applied in US ... I was just advocating for one use that I believe WOULD work .. but as I said .. I am a researcher, but no economist ... so in effect we were agreeing .. Either I have to express myself better, or you should read more carefully ... or both Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 You know what this detroit news article didn't cover about this idiot John Dingell's proposal to raise gas tax? It didn't cover the other part of it. That is that in addition to raising gas tax 50 cents a gallon he would also like to categorize any home over 3000 square feet as a mansion and as such declare that homeowners of said homes are not entitled to their mortgage deduction on their taxes. I wonder how some of you guys that are cheering for this gas tax feel about that because I got a feeling some of you are in the 3000 plus range on your homes. This is the kind of bullshit nonsense that Mulally wants us to go along with? I'm so pissed off right now I am seriously considering getting rid of my car and never buying a damn Ford product again. Macattack is right, he should have kept his fool mouth shut. Sitting around your ivory tower and telling the rank and file American that you think he should surrender another 20 to 40 dollars a month in gas tax just because is pretty damned moronic. Shit I might just go buy a damn toyota tomorrow! Fuck it!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 You know what this detroit news article didn't cover about this idiot John Dingell's proposal to raise gas tax? It didn't cover the other part of it. That is that in addition to raising gas tax 50 cents a gallon he would also like to categorize any home over 3000 square feet as a mansion and as such declare that homeowners of said homes are not entitled to their mortgage deduction on their taxes. I wonder how some of you guys that are cheering for this gas tax feel about that because I got a feeling some of you are in the 3000 plus range on your homes. This is the kind of bullshit nonsense that Mulally wants us to go along with? I'm so pissed off right now I am seriously considering getting rid of my car and never buying a damn Ford product again. Macattack is right, he should have kept his fool mouth shut. Sitting around your ivory tower and telling the rank and file American that you think he should surrender another 20 to 40 dollars a month in gas tax just because is pretty damned moronic. Shit I might just go buy a damn toyota tomorrow! Fuck it!! why do you assume he has any interest in ANYTHING beyond his stated objective and obvious interest in CAFE - related issues? and BTW -- I would LOVE for the mansion piece to pass - why should MY taxes subside mortgage for houses way larger than people need .. 3k sq ft might be arbitrary and ultimately stupid cutoff .. but I always cringed at the fact that everyone blames the "urban Black single welfare mother" for all of our budgetary issues when rural white families take most of the benefits, and the second biggest beneficiaries are not poor at all - large corporations and middle - to - high income families with their mortgage subsidies ... There is a LOT of distortion in the US tax code, and people just seem to get their panties in a bunch then people tough their little pet distortion that helps them .... regardless - my point was - what grudge you hold against Mulally? he stated a simple support for evaluating alternatives to CAFE such as gas tax.. and you are darn near declaring him "John Dingell"'s left hand man plotting to take over US ... Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 why do you assume he has any interest in ANYTHING beyond his stated objective and obvious interest in CAFE - related issues? and BTW -- I would LOVE for the mansion piece to pass - why should MY taxes subside mortgage for houses way larger than people need .. 3k sq ft might be arbitrary and ultimately stupid cutoff .. but I always cringed at the fact that everyone blames the "urban Black single welfare mother" for all of our budgetary issues when rural white families take most of the benefits, and the second biggest beneficiaries are not poor at all - large corporations and middle - to - high income families with their mortgage subsidies ... There is a LOT of distortion in the US tax code, and people just seem to get their panties in a bunch then people tough their little pet distortion that helps them .... regardless - my point was - what grudge you hold against Mulally? he stated a simple support for evaluating alternatives to CAFE such as gas tax.. and you are darn near declaring him "John Dingell"'s left hand man plotting to take over US ... Igor I expected nothing less then some liberalified bullshit like this from you buddy. First. I would LOVE for the mansion piece to pass - why should MY taxes subside mortgage for houses way larger than people need Exactly who the hell made you the determiner of what size home people do or do not need? Oh that's right, nobody did so shut up about it. but I always cringed at the fact that everyone blames the "urban Black single welfare mother" for all of our budgetary issues when rural white families take most of the benefits, and the second biggest beneficiaries are not poor at all Spare us all the bullshit about how the white man is ruining America and the white man is real root of all ills ok. It's fuckin nonsense. I guess all the black families that live in 3000 plus square foot homes don't count right. Or the Asian ones or the Latinos or what have you. I figure if the government gives them back 3 or 4 grand at the end of the year as their mortgage dedcution that's not really pissing off the welfare mom that takes home 3 or 4 times that much in government hand outs. Finally, this isn't about a grudge against Mulally and it's not about CAFE standards. It's about the CEO of an American car company, a car company I was just starting to have hope in again, getting up in front of the press and telling average Americans they ought to be paying more in gas tax. That he thinks this plan that Dingellberry has come up with is a good idea. Well I'm sorry I figure I already pay enough in gas tax at over 40 cents a gallon and I don't need this idiot to tell me I ought to be happy to pay upwards of a dollar per gallon. He can go fuck himself and he can take his car company along for the ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) LINK-Detroit News This is a recap of an old story, I read nearly the same article in the weekly Ford World. The mention of a fuel tax is new though. Sounds like Detroit news is spinning in order to scare us about a fuel price increase so we will be satisfied with $2.50 a gallon gas and the refineries won't have to drop the price this fall... I guarantee that the owner of this publication owns stock in oil and Toyota! If I could control the thoughts of people in order to manipulate personal profits I probably would! What now is Ford going to be the patsy for the cost of fuel! F-ck Detroit news! Edited August 9, 2007 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I expected nothing less then some liberalified bullshit like this from you buddy. First. Exactly who the hell made you the determiner of what size home people do or do not need? Oh that's right, nobody did so shut up about it. Spare us all the bullshit about how the white man is ruining America and the white man is real root of all ills ok. It's fuckin nonsense. I guess all the black families that live in 3000 plus square foot homes don't count right. Or the Asian ones or the Latinos or what have you. I figure if the government gives them back 3 or 4 grand at the end of the year as their mortgage dedcution that's not really pissing off the welfare mom that takes home 3 or 4 times that much in government hand outs. Finally, this isn't about a grudge against Mulally and it's not about CAFE standards. It's about the CEO of an American car company, a car company I was just starting to have hope in again, getting up in front of the press and telling average Americans they ought to be paying more in gas tax. That he thinks this plan that Dingellberry has come up with is a good idea. Well I'm sorry I figure I already pay enough in gas tax at over 40 cents a gallon and I don't need this idiot to tell me I ought to be happy to pay upwards of a dollar per gallon. He can go fuck himself and he can take his car company along for the ride. and I expected nothing more from you - a knee jerk reaction with NO BRAINS ... as usual - am I not allowed to have an opinion that does not agree with you? I guess not ... w/e PS: you have a choice 1) have the gov't regulate the SUPPLY (Automakers) and thus increasing the price of new car, and possibly limiting your ability to purchase a vehicle you would like because it is either too expensive or it is not offered anymore 2) have Gov't regulate DEMAND (buyers) and you have all the models you want to choose from, but their operations costs will change ... and you have to decide how much you want to spend for owning that dream vehicle .. It is your choice - I personally would prefer #2 (we would all prefer #3, but I believe that will not happen anymore) .. what would you prefer? PS2: just effing realize that I am a freaking SINGLE PERSON running his mouth .. I am not a politician, so STOP TREATING ME LIKE ONE - I am not forcing my beliefs on you .. I am not in charge of anything that will affect you .. so how about you fucking let me have my opinions .. I let you have yours ..... unless you become in charge of my life, or I become in charge of yours .. shut the fuck up ... feel free to express your opinions, but stop attacking my person ... I do not attack yours .... Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) We have got a fuel tax in the UK it stinks, once it is installed in the US you will never ever get it removed, because it will become a dollar milking the motorist machine for which ever government is in power, it will get tweaked changed and adjusted to milk more cash from the motorist when ever needed. Our cash milking machine in the UK increases the amount of tax you pay every time the cost of fuel rises, and the tax escalator keeps getting tweaked upwards by successive governments. Gasoline has a 69% tax slapped on every litre you buy at pump, tax increases with every fuel price rise. You don’t want this http://www.petrolprices.com/fuel-tax.html What ever road you down now it looks like you are going to get stuffed by a CAFÉ rise in MPG or Fuel Tax, which is going to play into the hands of the Japanese car importer. If everybody changed to manufacturing, buying diesel cars this would totally free up the reliance on Arab oils & meet CAFÉ MPG standards without having to change to small eco boxes to do it. Diesels are already breaking through the 50% sales barrier in Europe; the next big move will be Diesel GTL gas cars in Europe, which is half the price of a litre of Diesel http://article.wn.com/view/2007/05/11/Dies...ch_over_to_gas/ Once government notices the poor old motorist is a captive audience, it will become a TAX TAX TAX dollar milking machine. London left wing mayor Ken Livingstone has just added an indirect congestion tax $18,615 tax to be paid per year if you drive on London’s Roads 365 days per year in a big SUV Land Rover, Jaguar or Aston Martin type sports car, other cities around the UK have been given the green light to apply the same tax’s, Reading & Manchester will be next with another 8 following London’s Example. Toyota Prius is tax exempt in London, so will most small French Citroen/Peugeot gasoline/diesel cars that have a lower than 120g Co2/perKm. http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/08/lo...nchin.html#more Edited August 9, 2007 by Ford Jellymoulds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wescoent Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I would have no problem pulling our military out of Every country but England. I don't care what anyone says about England. They are the ONLY country after 911 that said Any Time Any Place and they would be there. Pull out of the countries except for those that Back us and there are not too many. We could save 100s of billions of $s there alone. I think this is worth repeating. We may have our disagreements about Jaguar, Land Rover, and FoE, but God bless all you Britons. True friends of the US if there ever were any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I couldn't disagree more. The so-called 'wasteful pork barrel' spending by Congress is really such a miniscule blip on the radar of the Budget of the U.S. that it could be likened to a rounding error. First, most of those 'pork' projects are useful and necessary, and bringing money back to their home states and districts is part of what Congressmen are elected to do (and, sadly, some of that pork is often needed to gain votes on crucial bills - that's just politics). Second, the actual amount of wasted money on unnecessary projects is in the blown out of proportion by the media and amounts to a couple of billion dollars a year at the most. Repairing America's aging infrastructure will cost over a Trillion dollars over 10 years (ie: over $1,000 Billion!), and there's no way to pay for it without raising revenues (taxes). There's only a very small percentage of the US Budget that doesn't go toward Defense, Social Security, Medicare, and Interest Payments. The Federal Debt is nearly $9 Trillion dollars, and we sure don't need to pile on more debt to pay for infrastructure repairs. In Fiscal Year 2006 alone, the U. S. Government spent $406 Billion on Interest Payments on the National Debt. Compare that to spending for NASA at $15 Billion, Education at $61 Billion, and Department of Transportation at $56 Billion. Just think what that $406 billion dollars could have been better spent on had Congress not mortgaged the future with annual deficit spending. For decades, Republicans have pushed tax cuts on top of tax cuts while wrongly claiming that economic growth will increase revenues and eliminate deficits. That hasn't happened. There's been revenue increases, but that's to be expected with population increases. Unfortunately, spending has also increased as the demands on Defense, Social Security, and Medicare increased, and the ever growing national debt required larger and larger interest payments. Basically, the Republicans have been 'Borrow and Spenders'. At the same time, Democrats have been shamed and belittled as 'Tax and Spenders' for so long that they've been wary to push for needed tax increases to eliminate deficits, to pay down the debt, and to pay for much needed infrastructure repairs and improvements. There's been no real leadership in government on either side to get the job done for the good of the country in the long run. Everything is done for the here and now: to please supporters, so more campaign funds can be raised, so they can get re-elected... wash, rinse, repeat, ad-infinitum... :titanic: The wasting of federal money is far deeper than pork projects. It's the fact that technically speaking, over half of the federal government is constitutionally illegal. What is the federal government supposed to actually do? Protect our borders. Coin currency. Resolve Disputes between states. That's really about it. If I were in charge, the following (and then some) would be immediately eliminated: Medicare Medicaid Social Security Dept of Education ALL of those functions (and most others) could be performed on the STATE level much more efficiently. Make the states actually COMPETE with one another for business. As it stands now, states have become little more than imaginary lines on a map with virtually no difference between one or the other. That needs to change. It all comes down to this: Do you think 535 guys n gals in Washington, DC know how to spend your money better than you do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 It all comes down to this: Do you think 535 guys n gals in Washington, DC know how to spend your money better than you do? But the problem is that the assholes that run your state are just as corrupt as the ones in Washington. Plus you'll never spend your "money", since you'll have people spend it on shit instead of what they need like health care. Its like the Katrina victims going out and buying big screen TV's instead using the money to fix their houses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 But the problem is that the assholes that run your state are just as corrupt as the ones in Washington. Plus you'll never spend your "money", since you'll have people spend it on shit instead of what they need like health care. Its like the Katrina victims going out and buying big screen TV's instead using the money to fix their houses. Yes, local politicians are probably just as bad. But they are local. If you don't like the corruption, move to another state that is less corrupt. That's where the competition between states comes into play. Who competes with the federal government? Nobody. So what's their incentive to behave? As for people blowing their money on things they don't need. Tough. Let them blow it instead of spending it on things they actually need. I'm sick of living in an ever-increasing welfare state. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I think this is worth repeating. We may have our disagreements about Jaguar, Land Rover, and FoE, but God bless all you Britons. True friends of the US if there ever were any. Ditto. Pretty big fan of Australia too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 The wasting of federal money is far deeper than pork projects. It's the fact that technically speaking, over half of the federal government is constitutionally illegal. What is the federal government supposed to actually do? Protect our borders. Coin currency. Resolve Disputes between states. That's really about it. If I were in charge, the following (and then some) would be immediately eliminated: Medicare Medicaid Social Security Dept of Education ALL of those functions (and most others) could be performed on the STATE level much more efficiently. Make the states actually COMPETE with one another for business. As it stands now, states have become little more than imaginary lines on a map with virtually no difference between one or the other. That needs to change. It all comes down to this: Do you think 535 guys n gals in Washington, DC know how to spend your money better than you do? Social Security is defined as a benefit, not a tax. We pay in with an expectation that we will get a return at retirement age. This program doesn't need to be eliminated, just restricted so that the only ones entitled are those who have been vested by paying in! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Yes, local politicians are probably just as bad. But they are local. If you don't like the corruption, move to another state that is less corrupt. That's where the competition between states comes into play. Who competes with the federal government? Nobody. So what's their incentive to behave? I have a hard time believing that having states compete against one another is going to solve anything. People live where they live because of employment opportunities...I don't think someone is going to move to Michigan to get a job with the way things are going there. Then you run into the same problems again....people will move to the states where there are jobs and the state with the most jobs will get the most money and will most likely be the most corrupt because of that. As for people blowing their money on things they don't need. Tough. Let them blow it instead of spending it on things they actually need. I'm sick of living in an ever-increasing welfare state. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? I agree with you, but as long as way our law system is in place, it will never change. Plus how far do you go? If you cut out say unemployment benefits, you lose your job, what are you gonna say? Oh you should have been saving for a day like this? There are pently of people who can't afford to do that since they need to pay their rent/mortgage and whatnot instead. I know my unemployment taxes I pay are only $300 a year and I'll get a pretty decent check to hold me over till I find another job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 never said one is better than the other - they have very different histories and thus a very different presence of their economies .. what works in Europe cannot be copied blindly to US .. that was my point .. EU has HUGE issues .. and while most of them could be "boxed" in the same categories as US issues - taxes, social security, poverty, innovation - the nature of problems INSIDE each of those categories is amazingly different between US and EU ... and thus .. the EU model of low income tax and high use tax cannot be directly and blindly applied in US ... I was just advocating for one use that I believe WOULD work .. but as I said .. I am a researcher, but no economist ... so in effect we were agreeing .. Either I have to express myself better, or you should read more carefully ... or both Igor Ha. We are good. Clearly you are following my lead and almost as intelligent as I. Seriously, on both our counts and everyone else's, a little education can be dangerous. Just imagine becoming an Econ expert? Imagine you and I both spend 10 years educating our selves in college on it. Lets say we do it in the US. You East cost and I West cost. How absolutely different we would end up with regard to econ positions. Then if we switched our eyes would be hugely opened again. Knowledge is only as good as its source. Especially in todays college campuses in the US. If you don't mind, what country are you in? Peace and Blessings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I have a hard time believing that having states compete against one another is going to solve anything. People live where they live because of employment opportunities...I don't think someone is going to move to Michigan to get a job with the way things are going there. Then you run into the same problems again....people will move to the states where there are jobs and the state with the most jobs will get the most money and will most likely be the most corrupt because of that.I agree with you, but as long as way our law system is in place, it will never change. Plus how far do you go? If you cut out say unemployment benefits, you lose your job, what are you gonna say? Oh you should have been saving for a day like this? There are pently of people who can't afford to do that since they need to pay their rent/mortgage and whatnot instead. I know my unemployment taxes I pay are only $300 a year and I'll get a pretty decent check to hold me over till I find another job. There has already been reform, the maximum amount of time that someone can draw welfare benefits is 2 years. That includes medical, ADC cash, and food stamps. If there is an increase in people drawing I would look at our immigration policies. Why are these benefits being payed to non-citizens and people who have never paid taxes. The way it is now people can come here and sign up for welfare without ever paying taxes, or working if they marry a citizen! If you weren't born here you should not be entitled to social programs. The government also needs to cut business loans and business tax abatements to foreigners. If there going to give five years of no taxes to start business's then it should be only for natural born citizens. We should be the shop keepers, as it is now every Mr. Hero in my county is owned by immigrants because of these programs. Natural born citizens aren't even entitled to programs. It's a shame to because I love Mr. Hero, but I refuse to buy from these foreigners. Subway eat fresh, If I find that a store is owned by a foreigner I refuse to shop there. there getting wise now and are employing Americans to work their registers. I shopped at a foreign owned store for almost 6 months until I saw a foreigner stocking the shelves, once I found out that he was the owner I haven't been back! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 You know what this detroit news article didn't cover about this idiot John Dingell's proposal to raise gas tax? It didn't cover the other part of it. That is that in addition to raising gas tax 50 cents a gallon he would also like to categorize any home over 3000 square feet as a mansion and as such declare that homeowners of said homes are not entitled to their mortgage deduction on their taxes. I wonder how some of you guys that are cheering for this gas tax feel about that because I got a feeling some of you are in the 3000 plus range on your homes. This is the kind of bullshit nonsense that Mulally wants us to go along with? I'm so pissed off right now I am seriously considering getting rid of my car and never buying a damn Ford product again. Macattack is right, he should have kept his fool mouth shut. Sitting around your ivory tower and telling the rank and file American that you think he should surrender another 20 to 40 dollars a month in gas tax just because is pretty damned moronic. Shit I might just go buy a damn toyota tomorrow! Fuck it!! Exactly. That was a point I was going to make. Let's take it one step further. The average house size in S.F. Ca ~1960 was 850' sq. with 5+ people in it. Now it is ~3000' sq with 2.something people in it. So, lets get rid of all these houses over 1000' sq. Just get rid of them. Don't even allow a house over 1000' sq period. Where is SaveThePlanet? He will be the first to move out of his house if it is over 1000' sq. Then 1 car per house hold. People need to learn to commute and ride share and work it out. Peace and Blessings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 This is a recap of an old story, I read nearly the same article in the weekly Ford World. The mention of a fuel tax is new though. Sounds like Detroit news is spinning in order to scare us about a fuel price increase so we will be satisfied with $2.50 a gallon gas and the refineries won't have to drop the price this fall... I guarantee that the owner of this publication owns stock in oil and Toyota! If I could control the thoughts of people in order to manipulate personal profits I probably would! What now is Ford going to be the patsy for the cost of fuel! F-ck Detroit news! Furious, could you please think about removing that Honda pic from your sig. I have kids and it not appropriate for them to see that kind of stuff and would appreciate your help in keeping it out of their view, even accidentally. Thanks for considering it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Furious, could you please think about removing that Honda pic from your sig. I have kids and it not appropriate for them to see that kind of stuff and would appreciate your help in keeping it out of their view, even accidentally. Thanks for considering it. Give me time and I'll find a suitable replacement. I put it their because another user was puffing in favor of Honda! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Ha. We are good. Clearly you are following my lead and almost as intelligent as I. Seriously, on both our counts and everyone else's, a little education can be dangerous. Just imagine becoming an Econ expert? Imagine you and I both spend 10 years educating our selves in college on it. Lets say we do it in the US. You East cost and I West cost. How absolutely different we would end up with regard to econ positions. Then if we switched our eyes would be hugely opened again. Knowledge is only as good as its source. Especially in todays college campuses in the US. If you don't mind, what country are you in? Peace and Blessings I am in US ... but grew up in Slovakia ... well Czechoslovakia when I was born, and then Slovakia. Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meelaan Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Furious, could you please think about removing that Honda pic from your sig. I have kids and it not appropriate for them to see that kind of stuff and would appreciate your help in keeping it out of their view, even accidentally. Thanks for considering it. Go into your "My Controls" screen and select hide signatures. On topic: Anyone ever heard the theory that if cars were invented now, they'd be federally controlled like airplanes? Wrap your minds around that one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) Go into your "My Controls" screen and select hide signatures.On topic: Anyone ever heard the theory that if cars were invented now, they'd be federally controlled like airplanes? Wrap your minds around that one! I like my signature, it makes it easier to locate my posts! Edited August 9, 2007 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnFan Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Yea I am sure no one will miss the "Bandwidth Exceeded" picture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.