DKW 86 7,427 Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 Link from Yahoo I love bike riding, but I dont know here... I am very much for anything that gets our money out of the Middle East/Al qaeda supporters. If I am becoming more LIBERAL on this issue, sue me. I dont want freaking dime more than has to to go to the people that finance al qaeda. If riding bikes in the nude somehow???? does that sometime in the future (2nd year for the protest), then, what the hey... Anything, even higher gas taxes, would be okay with me. Take the money out of al qaeda, and lets just see how far the attacks on America go. Or, even better, lets see how fewer times we have to deploy naval, air, or ground forces to the middle east. Seems like a winner all around to me, except for the bicycle seats... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 Anything, even higher gas taxes, would be okay with me. And exactly how would higher taxes on gas affect the $ going to the Middle East ? If you're so eager to part w/ your hard earned $, then I suggest you give it to me. It would have about the same effect on our use of oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,427 Posted June 11, 2005 Author Share Posted June 11, 2005 Simple supply and demand. Raise taxes and the cost of gas would go up and people here in the US would use less of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,125 Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 Simple supply and demand. Raise taxes and the cost of gas would go up and people here in the US would use less of it. 163546[/snapback] That would cripple the economy. Besides, gas already is taxed too much as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,427 Posted June 11, 2005 Author Share Posted June 11, 2005 I think it would just shift our priorities. From gas guzzling SUVs and large trucks, to smaller vans, trucks, and cars. Nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 I think it would just shift our priorities. From gas guzzling SUVs and large trucks, to smaller vans, trucks, and cars. Nothing more. 163556[/snapback] yes, I'm for this..... but state and federal governments are bad about this....yes, they have vans and cars, but remember Nancy Worley? Plus, look at all the suburbans that the government uses. And only people who want to show off their wealth buy Hummers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexbo 104 Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 Simple supply and demand. Raise taxes and the cost of gas would go up and people here in the US would use less of it. 163546[/snapback] That would cripple the economy. Besides, gas already is taxed too much as it is. 163548[/snapback] He says as he complains about the horrible conditions of the roads and all of the traffic in his way... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piglet 0 Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 Simple supply and demand. Raise taxes and the cost of gas would go up and people here in the US would use less of it. 163546[/snapback] Not sure about that, 'cause they keep taxing the cigarettes and beer, and people keep using those things just as much. Why would it be different for something that's actually needed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,427 Posted June 11, 2005 Author Share Posted June 11, 2005 Simple supply and demand. Raise taxes and the cost of gas would go up and people here in the US would use less of it. 163546[/snapback] Not sure about that, 'cause they keep taxing the cigarettes and beer, and people keep using those things just as much. Why would it be different for something that's actually needed? 163568[/snapback] It all depends on diposable income and the elasticity of demand. (And Dr. Jackson thought I would never use that phrase in a sentence!) Cigs and Liquor are very strong demand items. However I think gas would be affected pretty quickly. Just look at the SUVs piling up now on car lots. Look at GM cut 25K jobs until they correct their product mix. It would not be painless, but it would cause less pain than to keep financing al qaeda. That is the ultimate goal in my argument anyway. Saudi Arabia was funding the Taliban in Afghanistan big time. They have only recently wised up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,037 Posted June 12, 2005 Share Posted June 12, 2005 And when the US begins to use less foreign fuel, they (OPEC) will just shift their excess supply to China. Which BTW is a huge consumer of petroleum products and their consumption is rising at a tremendous rate. There is also the possibility that now that the strategic oil reserves are almost full and the govt will dramatically slow down their purchasing, demand will drop and prices will as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,427 Posted June 12, 2005 Author Share Posted June 12, 2005 And when the US begins to use less foreign fuel, they (OPEC) will just shift their excess supply to China. Which BTW is a huge consumer of petroleum products and their consumption is rising at a tremendous rate.There is also the possibility that now that the strategic oil reserves are almost full and the govt will dramatically slow down their purchasing, demand will drop and prices will as well. 163602[/snapback] MIke, let the Muislim Fanatics then bomb and attack China then. We were attacked because we had troops in Saudi Soil. Al Qaeda thought that was our sin. Let the Chinese have to guard their economy with troops in the Middle East. Let someone else fight a war that is going to take decades and cost many lives. Hey with several ten of millions in their Army, China has the man power to win... That almost sounds Bibilical too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 Simple supply and demand. Raise taxes and the cost of gas would go up and people here in the US would use less of it. 163546[/snapback] OMG!!! Isn't this one of Kerry's ideas that he had in the early 90's that you skewered him for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlue72 0 Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 David, I have to agree with you on this one. Taxes on automotive fuel are legitimate for building and maintaining highways and for assuring a stable supply of fuel. Our gasoline prices are still less than half of that paid by the rest of the non oil producing countries. If you have ever travelled in Europe, you know what I mean. Many years ago, I suggested that with the fluctuating gas prices, we should increase the tax one cent for every two cents that the price declines after the prices had been up for a time. This would make a relatively painless increase and provide the funds to make our roads what they should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexbo 104 Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 Because gas is taxed per gallon, and rising fuel mileage (despite the high sales of SUVs), we are paying less taxes per mile traveled than 20 years ago. So, that's why the roads are falling apart all around us. I drove with my family from Florida to DC and back this past week; on the way back we lost about 4 hours total on the 15 hour drive, over 25%, because of huge pile-ups on the Interstate. That experience, and seeing the horrific traffic in DC has convinced me that our country has a major, major crisis coming, if not already there, with personal transportation in this country. Once I am King, gas taxes will be tripled, SUVs will be outlawed, and people will actually have to earn a Driver's License... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,427 Posted June 13, 2005 Author Share Posted June 13, 2005 Once I am King, gas taxes will be tripled, SUVs will be outlawed, and people will actually have to earn a Driver's License... Go REX! In Germany, I hear that they have a three part drivers license. I propose something like that here too. Just a proosal... an outline. This way we keep idiots out of the cars and trucks, high performance and high gvw that can cause the most damage. 1) Learners permit: 2 Years, day light only16-18 year olds. 2) Basic driving license: for cars midsize (Taurus and smaller) 3) Large Car/Truck license: say 5 years experience with no violations to qualify, retake written and performance test. 4) High Speed/Performance car test. Any car over 200 HP and under 3000GVW, or 250HP and 3500GVW, or 300HP and 4000GVW. High speed certificate, with a high speed performance school attendance and 5 years without a violation. Two violations in 2 years and you go back to #2 and start all over again. Maybe we have all truck drivers, halfton and up, qualify for towing/hauling license before they get a tag issued to them or can carry insurance on a truck. How to tie down loads, how to load a trailer, etc. I have seen two accidents here in Decatur recently where a trailer was loaded rear of the axle and did major damage to a brand new Ford F-150 and flipped a Dodge B-100 fullsize van. If nothing else, maybe we will all take driving much more seriously. I also propose standards for car height (damage to roads) and safety/smog device inspections too. Am I becoming a Lib? And Al, I am growing and changing. My problem with Kerry, was that Kerry denied proposing the $.50 a gallon tax, and was quoted in a Congressional newspaper as complaining for not getting credit for proposing it with a Liberal rating service. It was just another in a long line of Kerry flip-flops. His Lib rating went from #1 in the Senate to like #3 and he was complaining about not getting credit for the tax proposal and denying he proposed it at the same time. Typical Kerry... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CCTAU 3,327 Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 It's always the same. Just because you can't afford a truck or an SUV. Or your family does not utilze the convenience of having one, you want to punish those who can. My wife is disabled, we have a full size van. Guess she should just suck it up and cram herself in a damn Civic like you do. We have a 30 foot camper we travel in. It contains a special mattress for her back. I'm sure you use hotels, because that is the proper way to travel. build me a crackerbox civic that can pull my camper and boat and then we'll talk taxes. Gas prices are directly related to the oil companies' greed, nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,427 Posted June 13, 2005 Author Share Posted June 13, 2005 It's always the same. Just because you can't afford a truck or an SUV. Or your family does not utilze the convenience of having one, you want to punish those who can. My wife is disabled, we have a full size van. Guess she should just suck it up and cram herself in a damn Civic like you do. We have a 30 foot camper we travel in. It contains a special mattress for her back. I'm sure you use hotels, because that is the proper way to travel. build me a crackerbox civic that can pull my camper and boat and then we'll talk taxes. Gas prices are directly related to the oil companies' greed, nothing else. 163740[/snapback] Sorry to hear about your wife's condition. I do not think she should be inconvenienced in anyway. I support your ownership of appropriate vehicles totally. I do think that driving around in a Hummer getting 8 MPG just so you can look cool is just a bit much tho. What kind of over-compensation complex do you have to have to justify any vehicle that big being employed for grocery getting instead of boat hauling, trailer towing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted June 13, 2005 Share Posted June 13, 2005 I do think that driving around in a Hummer getting 8 MPG just so you can look cool is just a bit much tho. What kind of over-compensation complex do you have to have to justify any vehicle that big being employed for grocery getting instead of boat hauling, trailer towing? 163770[/snapback] Then I'll bet you really hate partially subsidizing that over-compensation complex, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,427 Posted June 13, 2005 Author Share Posted June 13, 2005 I do think that driving around in a Hummer getting 8 MPG just so you can look cool is just a bit much tho. What kind of over-compensation complex do you have to have to justify any vehicle that big being employed for grocery getting instead of boat hauling, trailer towing? 163770[/snapback] Then I'll bet you really hate partially subsidizing that over-compensation complex, don't you? 163802[/snapback] A tax break for farmers ends up helping out over-compensation crowd. That is funny! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,037 Posted June 14, 2005 Share Posted June 14, 2005 Those Nude Bike Riders could all get a W tattoed on each cheek of their butts. WoW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.