Furious1Auto Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) O.K. now I've been respectful and reasonably accommodating, lets not take it too far. Manage your own accounts! Edited August 10, 2007 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 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! Good idea. Did not think about that. Cars are fed regulated. Now, if the Auto industry never turned a profit and the feds dumped our tax $ into them every year then it would not be unexpected would it? If one subtracts all the incentives, rebates, grants, tax breaks, etc. that the airlines get one would see that none of them actually turn much if any profit and have not for decades. Peace and Blessings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 O.K. now I've been respectful and reasonable accommodating, lets not take it too far. Manage your own accounts! Thanks Furious! Later, when I irritate you, you can put it back up to spite me! Seriously, thanks. Peace and Blessings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) [attachm nt=4641:epileptic_fits.gif] Yea I am sure no one will miss the "Bandwidth Exceeded" picture Yes, there will be folk going sick at Ford plants all around the globe with epileptic fits Mr Furiuos, can't you post picture of a nice CAT diesel engine instead. [attachm nt=4641:epileptic_fits.gif] Edited August 9, 2007 by Ford Jellymoulds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 [attachmnt=4641:epileptic_fits.gif] Yes, there will be folk going sick at Ford plants all around the globe with epileptic fits Mr Furiuos, can't you post picture of a nice CAT diesel engine instead. [attachm nt=4641:epileptic_fits.gif] I think I am having a seizure... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 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. If a state runs itself better than the state next to it, where do you think the businesses are going to want to open? They'll go to the better-run state. Employees will follow. Granted, the federal government has mucked up the system FAR too much by getting its fingers on damn near everything states TRY to do themselves, so going back to a more limited federal government would be disastrous for quite some time before the competitiveness finally made an impact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob052067 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) The idea for substantially increasing the sales/use taxes on gasoline as a method to reduce oil consumption/demand and to strengthen national security has been floating around for some time - it's not something new that Mulally is pulling out of thin air. It is an idea that has support from many on all sides - liberals, moderates, and conservatives. The blog linked below lists a number of well know figures - economists, pundits, politicians, scientists, environmentalists, etc., who have endorsed the idea: http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/09/rog...pigou-club.html In most cases, the plan for gas tax increases would not necessarily mean a significant overall tax increase, but rather a tax shift. A federal increase in taxes on gasoline would most likely be offset by decreases in income taxes. State increases in gas taxes, would likely be offset by decreases in income, sales, or property taxes. What gets me in some of the responses posted here is that some of you seem to be happier sending your money to the governments of the Middle Eastern oil supplying countries than you are in paying taxes to the government of your own country. Do you really mistrust your own government so much that you prefer to send your money to foreign governments where it may end up in terrorist hands? Is the 'common good' of the country of so little value compared to that of your own individual interests? :shrug: Fortunately, there has been some interesting and informative dialogue going on here. Some educated discussion and some good alternative ideas have been tossed around. And, of course, there's also been some thick headed ignorance, along with some pathetic name calling (you know who you are). For those offering positive ideas and constructive conversation, kudos to you! :beerchug: Here's some additional resources on the subject: BusinessWeek: Higher Gas Tax? Smart Move: http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflas..._3636_db013.htm Wall Street Journal: Raise the Gas Tax! http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/m...the_Gas_Tax.pdf New York Times: Raise the Gas Tax? http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/business...nyt&emc=rss Let's Speak About Energy (And a Gas Tax) Now: http://www.energybulletin.net/22144.html :cheerleader: Edited August 9, 2007 by Rob052067 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MERKURXR4Ti Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 I wouldn't even blink at a $0.50 per gallon tax hike. All it's going to do is hurt the poor and middle class. I prefer my personal plan a lot better: The US government should introduce a new incentive program, and junk CAFE. For every average mpg above 20 that a new car gets, the consumer gets a $300 refund from the government upon purchase. So, if I buy a Fusion that gets 22mpg average, the government sends me a check for $600 towards the purchase. However, if I get a Focus that gets 30mpg, I get a $3,000 discount towards the purchase. Above 35mpg, the incentive increases to $400 per mpg above 20. Every 5 years, the minimum MPG increases by 3. So, we have demand-driven consumer change, rather than the stupidity of CAFE. Manufacturers can afford to make their fuel-efficient cars very nice, since consumers are getting huge discounts anyway. People will naturally gravitate towards more fuel-efficient cars if they can, but we aren't hurting people who NEED guzzlers. Did I mention this incentive is only available to auto companies incorporated in the United States? If Congress were serious about this, they would pay for it by cutting back on all earmarked projects by 5%, which would EASILY cover the cost. I see no downside to this, except that it just makes too much sense for anyone in Congress to implement. I think that's actually the best idea I've heard yet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MERKURXR4Ti Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) [attachmnt=4641:epileptic_fits.gif] Yes, there will be folk going sick at Ford plants all around the globe with epileptic fits Mr Furiuos, can't you post picture of a nice CAT diesel engine instead. [attachm nt=4641:epileptic_fits.gif] owww...took me a full minute to actually read the line in between that shit Edited August 9, 2007 by MERKURXR4Ti Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 What gets me in some of the responses posted here is that some of you seem to be happier sending your money to the governments of the Middle Eastern oil supplying countries than you are in paying taxes to the government of your own country. Do you really mistrust your own government so much that you prefer to send your money to foreign governments where it may end up in terrorist hands? Is the 'common good' of the country of so little value compared to that of your own individual interests? :shrug: It's not a matter of "rather". Increased fuel taxes won't do a thing to force automakers to increase fuel economy. So paying more taxes on it does nothing but take more money out of my pocket...it's not putting any more of what I already pay into other countries' pockets. Besides, more than half of our petroleum imports are not from Middle Eastern countries anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob052067 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) It's not a matter of "rather". Increased fuel taxes won't do a thing to force automakers to increase fuel economy. Why should the government 'force' automakers to increase fuel efficiency. This is a supply and demand, market driven economy. If gas taxes raise the price of gas high enough, consumers will demand more fuel efficient vehicles - large and small. Any company that fails to meet the demands of the consumers will fail. Raising the tax on gasoline should be gradual and not sudden, to give time for consumers and manufacturers to adjust to the new market realities. A gradual increase of 5-10 cents every three months (for say 10 years) would allow sufficient time for consumers to trade in old innefficient models for newer more effcient models, and also allow manufacturers time to adjust to the new demands for highly efficient vehicles and for vehicles powered by alternative bio fuels and for plug-in electric hyrids. Petroleum is not going to be around forever. It'll probably be around for the next century or so, but it will get more and more expensive due to growing world population and more difficult and more expensive extraction methods. If we gradually raise taxes on gasoline in order to gradually reduce demand over time, the country will be far more secure both economically and militarily in the future. So paying more taxes on it does nothing but take more money out of my pocket...it's not putting any more of what I already pay into other countries' pockets. Besides, more than half of our petroleum imports are not from Middle Eastern countries anyway. The US imports more than half of the oil it consumes, and roughly half of those imports come from Middle East countries. Some with ties to terrorists. Some that have governments that are vulnerable to overthrow by Muslim fanatics, and some that are already run by Mulsim fanatics. That doesn't sound like a national security threat to you? Paying higher taxes on gasoline is expected to reduce demand. Reduced demand should lower the price of gasoline as less oil is needed and fewer refineries are running at full capacity. So, the net cost out of your pocket shouldn't change that much. Either the price of gas is going to go up because increased demand raises the prices paid for oil and for gasoline refining, or the price of gas is going to go up because taxes are increased. Either way, gas prices are going to go up. The days of cheap gas are over forever regardless. I think it would be better to keep our money in the U.S. to pay for infrastructure improvements than it would be to keep sending more and more to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Nigeria, Angola, Algeria, etc. - and Russia and Venezuala for that matter. Edited August 9, 2007 by Rob052067 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnFan Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 You know Rob we don't even need America to buy our oil, China and Europe are consuming it like crazy we wouldn't notice America's abscence. So whatever "National threat" you're talking about is still in business wether you use our oil or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob052067 Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 You know Rob we don't even need America to buy our oil, China and Europe are consuming it like crazy we wouldn't notice America's abscence.So whatever "National threat" you're talking about is still in business whether you use our oil or not. What country are you from, Lincoln? I don't think there's any worry that the US won't still have a strong demand for imported oil for several years to come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnFan Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Saudi Arabia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Saudi Arabia. Ok, stay with me now Lincoln, concentrat hard on what I'm about to type. American economy shuts down ------> Chinese economy then shuts down ------> European economy shuts down -------> Saudi Arabia goes to hell in a hand basket. It's pretty simple really. Welcome back to reality my friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnFan Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Ok, stay with me now Lincoln, concentrat hard on what I'm about to type. American economy shuts down ------> Chinese economy then shuts down ------> European economy shuts down -------> Saudi Arabia goes to hell in a hand basket. It's pretty simple really. Welcome back to reality my friend. Uhm, dude, Saudi Arabia has been in hell for like over 20 years... the PEOPLE don't have money, it's the FAMILY who has all of the money around here. Isn't it spelled concentrate btw? :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 (edited) Uhm, dude, Saudi Arabia has been in hell for like over 20 years... the PEOPLE don't have money, it's the FAMILY who has all of the money around here. Isn't it spelled concentrate btw? :rolleyes: Yes I missed the "e" on the last stroke and didn't feel like editing it for one letter. Saudi has been hell for a lot longer then 20 years but if you think it's bad now let's see what happens when they can't sell oil to anyone. I'm fully aware the family of the King has all the money, I got to see it first hand. But what little the people do have will lose even that and then the Fhad's better have a private jet on standby to a friendly nation where they can live in exhile. Edited August 10, 2007 by BlackHorse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnFan Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 Trust me these guys have their asses covered already, actually back in the days of King Khalid (pre-king Fahd) it was much, much better than now. The king announced a %15 increase in salary and the next day prices of almost everything doubled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 A fuel tax will not work. We pay much higher taxes here on gasoline than in the U.S and it has not curbed consumption one bit. In fact I think Canadians consume more energy percapita than any other nation on the planet. Gasoline taxes will not work. Of course Mullaly is going to say "ya tax gasoline" in hopes it prevents them from raising the CAFE. Gasoline taxes cost Ford nothing directly increasing the CAFE does and right now. Matthew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 (edited) Why should the government 'force' automakers to increase fuel efficiency. This is a supply and demand, market driven economy. If gas taxes raise the price of gas high enough, consumers will demand more fuel efficient vehicles - large and small. Any company that fails to meet the demands of the consumers will fail. Raising the tax on gasoline should be gradual and not sudden, to give time for consumers and manufacturers to adjust to the new market realities. A gradual increase of 5-10 cents every three months (for say 10 years) would allow sufficient time for consumers to trade in old innefficient models for newer more effcient models, and also allow manufacturers time to adjust to the new demands for highly efficient vehicles and for vehicles powered by alternative bio fuels and for plug-in electric hyrids. Petroleum is not going to be around forever. It'll probably be around for the next century or so, but it will get more and more expensive due to growing world population and more difficult and more expensive extraction methods. If we gradually raise taxes on gasoline in order to gradually reduce demand over time, the country will be far more secure both economically and militarily in the future. The US imports more than half of the oil it consumes, and roughly half of those imports come from Middle East countries. Some with ties to terrorists. Some that have governments that are vulnerable to overthrow by Muslim fanatics, and some that are already run by Mulsim fanatics. That doesn't sound like a national security threat to you? Paying higher taxes on gasoline is expected to reduce demand. Reduced demand should lower the price of gasoline as less oil is needed and fewer refineries are running at full capacity. So, the net cost out of your pocket shouldn't change that much. Either the price of gas is going to go up because increased demand raises the prices paid for oil and for gasoline refining, or the price of gas is going to go up because taxes are increased. Either way, gas prices are going to go up. The days of cheap gas are over forever regardless. I think it would be better to keep our money in the U.S. to pay for infrastructure improvements than it would be to keep sending more and more to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Nigeria, Angola, Algeria, etc. - and Russia and Venezuala for that matter. The supply problem is not the availability of crude, it's the availability of refined fuels. Raising the cost of fuel only hurts us as individuals, and businesses. The only one that will profit from a tax increase is the government! I don't care what people pay in the UK, and I don't care what people pay in California. I want a fair price where I buy it. Putting undue pressure based on flawed testing method results will put people out of work. When the cost of fuel is low no one cares about MPG. The cost of fuel now, is forcing itself on our lifestyles, driving habits, and choice of vehicles. I don't like being forced in to anything! Build the damn refineries NOW! Edited August 10, 2007 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 (edited) I think I am having a seizure... You lack the necessary equipment! Nothing personal you have t admit it was a good dig! Edited August 10, 2007 by Furious1Auto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 (edited) I think Alan Mullaly is very astute, and maybe he wants US cars buyers to be nudged into buying more fuel-efficient cars & trucks to fall in line with the gas mileage of Japanese cars. Because long term having a range of poor gas mileage cars will hit sales numbers big time, and it would only take one big long lasting fuel spike like the one they had in the early 70's to push Ford into a massive sales slump nightmare, you could better weather a storm with a good range of class leading MPG vehicles. What do you think? Would Ford weather a long term high fuel price spike better than the Japanese big 3, who would best weather the storm? Could you explain why Chrysler, Ford and GM sale are down, and the Japanese big 3 sales are all up at the moment could the main cause be poor gas mileage cars? Having a fuel tax might be the biggest kick up the arse US manufacturers need now, rather than latter as l think we have seen the end of cheap oil. Is this the End of Cheap Oil as prices, as the price rises on upwards trend as demand outstrips supply worldwide? Read more here... http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/04...ure5/index.html Edited August 10, 2007 by Ford Jellymoulds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 What do you think? Would Ford weather a long term high fuel price spike better than the Japanese big 3, who would best weather the storm? Could you explain why Chrysler, Ford and GM sale are down, and the Japanese big 3 sales are all up at the moment could the main cause be poor gas mileage cars? Having a fuel tax might be the biggest kick up the arse US manufacturers need now, rather than latter as l think we have seen the end of cheap oil. Ford sells 150,000/month Trucks,SUVs and CUVs versus 60,000 cars. If you look at GM and Chrysler the proportions are similar. When you look at the Japanese makers the proportions are reversed, so of course their fleet fuel averages are much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MERKURXR4Ti Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 ........Matt Damon........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 (edited) Ford sells 150,000/month Trucks,SUVs and CUVs versus 60,000 cars.If you look at GM and Chrysler the proportions are similar. When you look at the Japanese makers the proportions are reversed, so of course their fleet fuel averages are much better. First 6 months of this year Toyota truck sales are up 10% in US. http://blog.buyingadvice.com/2007/07/toyota-car-sale.html Ford F-Series sales down 12% to July, why? Who would ever want to buy Japanese junk like a Tundra, especially since when you have Fords superb Classic F-Series trucks, which is the world’s best selling vehicle, why is it happening? If the F-Series had lets say a 10% better gas mileage would sales be heading more in Fords direction, would it have changed the buyers mind from buying the Japanese junk. Edited August 10, 2007 by Ford Jellymoulds 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.