NIMBY

[SouthernN'Proud]

SNP, look again. That's already the case. It's not a matter of bigger than you need. It's Big, it get's taxed more. What you might want or need isn't at issue. And it's always politicians that get to set it. A house valued at $90,000 one year drops to $60,000 the next because they zoned a drug rehab centre around the corner. Or jumps to 110,000 because they zoned a park. The tax burden goes from .10 per $1000 to .16 per thousand because they decided to change your curb (yes I know, you don't have curbs) to sidewalks. Or they fill in the ditches with storm sewers.

Nor do I have rehab centers, or parks, or...

I am familiar with the concept of property taxes.

I am talking about government taking your logic on engine restrictions and applying it to the other major purchase in most of our lives, your home. If they can limit the engine size in my truck, who'll stop 'em from passing "energy conservation" restrictions and thus deciding that any home with a heat cost/size ratio over X is now non-efficient and therefore must be seized. That's a little too much hands on for me, and shall be greeted with a 12 guage until I'm hauled off one way or the other.

 

[Gonz]

That system already exists. We've got gas-guzzler taxes, luxury auto taexes, etc.

Not every state has all those & those that have any of them are wrong. The sheep are the ones allowing us to turn our system into a haves vs haves not.

 

[Professur]

Your prerogative. I disagree. A beaurocrat who steps on my property and starts telling me what to do, how to do it, and that my house is too big or the engine in my truck is out of bounds does so at his/her own peril.

These dorks can't manage the tax revenue they already have. Now I'm supposed to listen to their theories on what engine my truck, that I pay for, with the income left over after they get their cut off the top, can have?

Like hell I will. I know too many junkyards with restorable engines in 'em. Pass all the laws you want, [Hank Jr]A country boy CAN survive![/Hank]

Hey!!! Did you even read what I posted? You want a 500cu engine, go ahead. I want it capable of 50 mpg. If you can make it happen, God speed.
Noone suggested you redneck, self important hicks can't have the biggest engine you want.

But if you want to start thumping your chest, remember a few things. You already pay your taxes, like a good little lamb. Just like they tell you to do. You already line up and pay what they tell you for gas, just like the rest of the flock. And in most parts of the country, you already have to pass emissions tests.

Now get your head out of your ass, it makes you look silly.

 

[Luis G]

Nor do I have rehab centers, or parks, or...

I am familiar with the concept of property taxes.

I am talking about government taking your logic on engine restrictions and applying it to the other major purchase in most of our lives, your home. If they can limit the engine size in my truck, who'll stop 'em from passing "energy conservation" restrictions and thus deciding that any home with a heat cost/size ratio over X is now non-efficient and therefore must be seized. That's a little too much hands on for me, and shall be greeted with a 12 guage until I'm hauled off one way or the other.

Well, how about this?

Over here the goverment is planning on cut car taxes for those that are efficient (light compact car with small engine), it really doesn't matter how much it costs or how many HP it has as long as it has low gasoline consumption it qualifies for the tax cut.


Edit: forgot to point out that I've always thought you guys in the USA have cars with big engines simply because gasoline prices over there are low and hence, you can afford the luxury. I wonder if many of you would still have those big engines if you had to pay 6USD per gallon.

 

[Professur]

Nor do I have rehab centers, or parks, or...

I am familiar with the concept of property taxes.

I am talking about government taking your logic on engine restrictions and applying it to the other major purchase in most of our lives, your home. If they can limit the engine size in my truck, who'll stop 'em from passing "energy conservation" restrictions and thus deciding that any home with a heat cost/size ratio over X is now non-efficient and therefore must be seized. That's a little too much hands on for me, and shall be greeted with a 12 guage until I'm hauled off one way or the other.

*yawn* I refuse to repeat what I've already said. Noone said anything about seizure, except you. I said make it cost more to be inefficient. And you already do pay that, with the taxes on your heatsource. Or the sweat of your brow, if you heat with wood.

 

[Gonz]

Choice. If I chose to pay for a Hemi instad of a 1.6 litre who the hell is my neighbor, or my governor for that matter, to tell me I have to pay an additional tax for my choice? Let the market decide. If a Hemi demands 10x as much fuel at three bucks a gallon, the market begins to change. We don't need government interference.

 

[HomeLAN]

Not every state has all those & those that have any of them are wrong. The sheep are the ones allowing us to turn our system into a haves vs haves not.

Those are federal, fella. Anything the states tag onto that is a separate deal.

 

[Professur]

Choice. If I chose to pay for a Hemi instad of a 1.6 litre who the hell is my neighbor, or my governor for that matter, to tell me I have to pay an additional tax for my choice? Let the market decide. If a Hemi demands 10x as much fuel at three bucks a gallon, the market begins to change. We don't need government interference.

So, you want us to revisit the '70's because people are too stupid to remember the lessons learned. Why am I not terribly suprised. Perhaps we need another depression to remind us of the damage the stock market can inflict too.

Oh, and TAKE A GOOD LOOK!!! THEY'RE ALREADY DOING IT.

 

[Gonz]

What damage. The 70s were set up because the A-rabs wanted more money for their oil. We had plenty then & we have plenty today. We're paying over $3.00/gallon today not because of shortages on product (crude) but because environmental concerns have stopped us from building more refineries. Canadians & Euro-peons are paying more because they allow their government to tax them to death. All these taxes do is slow, or stop, progress.

 

[Professur]

I see. So you're gonna stay blind to the fact that those additional refineries that you're so desperate to build aren't actually needed, if people would just think beyond their own daily wants. That with a little intelligence, gas prices would drop ... all by themselves, by reducing demand instead of increasing supply.

And of course, the new refineries wouldn't produce any polution at all, would they? The only reason I can see justifying building new refineries would be to make them more efficient, and cleaner, and be able to reduce production at older, dirtier ones.

 

[Gonz]

Not needed? There are 70,000,000 more Americans alive today than in 1973. By simple math, that menas more cars on the roads. On average, our cars already get better mileage than in 1973. There is legislation in the pipeline to force automakers to increase MPG ratings over the next several years.

Let the market decide. If we choose to buy SUVs instead of Yugos, let us pay the market price. Just keep the government out of it. Taxes are always a bad solution.

 

[paul_valaru]

Tax the gas, not the cars, you buy a SUV you pay more gas tax, buy a econo-car pay less gas tax.

If someone wants to pay more, and has the $$ for it, let em get an Escalade.

 

[Gonz]

Taxes are never any kind of solution. Free markets automatically find their level.

 

[Professur]

So it's rule by the lowest common denominator? Don't even attempt to encourage the sheep to improvement?

Gonz, exactly how do you think the automakers are gonna be forced to accept that legisation? By taxation. Our cars are more efficient? Yes, yes they are. Get them to 50mpg. There's not one automaker out there that's not capable of that. There's a full sized Silverado driving around montreal today that's 50mpg capable. We've got city buses that come close. It's not really that big a challenge.

 

[catocom]

Not In MY BackYard.

Are you ready for more oil refineries in the US yet? There hasn't been a new one built since the 70s & the others are running at or above 98% 24/7/365 (minus maintenance).

As long as it's a mile or better from my house, and not upstream, I say go for it.

 

[paul_valaru]

Taxes are never any kind of solution. Free markets automatically find their level.

Gas taxes to pay for road repairs, new piplines, new CLEANER refineries, enviromental cleanups.

 

[Gonz]

So it's rule by the lowest common denominator? Don't even attempt to encourage the sheep to improvement?

You don't need to give money to the gov't to make the sheep stampede toward the exit. PR, pseudo-science (global warming is not man-made but you'd never know it), market incentives.

Taxes do nothing but make our politicians hungrier.

 

[Gonz]

Gas taxes to pay for road repairs, new piplines, new CLEANER refineries, enviromental cleanups.

Pipelines & refineries are private sector. Enviromental cleanup? Are you kidding? We're cleaner today than at any point in our history. If there's a spill, make those responsible clean it up, not the taxpayer.

 

[Professur]

Gonz, that same PR dept is the very reason that that tit with the Lincoln Pickup drives it in the first place. PR told him it was what he had to have. PR doesn't work for the gov't. It works for the oil producers.

 

[Professur]

Pipelines & refineries are private sector. Enviromental cleanup? Are you kidding? We're cleaner today than at any point in our history. If there's a spill, make those responsible clean it up, not the taxpayer.

They declare bankruptcy and walk away.