Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views How does gas at $4 and higher impact you?
2183 messages, Last post on Nov 21, 2009 at 5:13 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
That they were preaching for us to cut back on useage and out of the other side of their face they decide to punish us for doing just what they told us we should do. Think about it. If they would have taxed us first and then we cut back on useage they would have had to tax us again to make us pay for successfully getting us to drive less or heaven forbid use more fuel efficient cars. With their reasoning if we all would have switched to diesels or Hybrids they would have increased our fuel taxes by 100 percent just to cover the lose tax revenue from using less fuel. Maybe if we have a very cold winter our country can burn enough oil to save the rest of us from being taxed out of our socks. If any have been reading this forum they will remember there were those that were sad to see gas drop below $4.00. They were sad when SUVs roamed the streets and said we would live in a better country is we only started saving fuel by driving sub compacts and hybrids. We saved more than 6 percent in fuel useage and now we have the joy of making it up in increased taxes? Makes one hope the SUV makes a comeback.
|
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Jan 02, 2009 1:17 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Jan 02, 2009 9:18 pm) We could privatize all of them and let the owner collect tolls.
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 02, 2009 9:54 pm) Obama plans to spend a $1,000,000,000,000 on fixing all the problems. Infrastructure was top of the list. So not to worry. High mileage cars are an issue. Those that hate SUVs like the fact that we pay 2 to 3 times more road tax than the econo boxes. What would be the tax revenue taken in if all the PU Trucks and SUVs were banned? How much does each Prius driver contribute to the roads compared to each Tahoe Driver? Right today in CA there is more fuel tax than any other state. Yet they want more. If Ahnold and the goons in the legislature would spend the road tax on the roads we would not need an SUV to get home through all the potholes. I feel like I am living in Mexico with some of our roads. I was very impressed with the roads in Texas. We traveled 8 days in Texas and rarely used the Interstate highways. We stuck to back roads and 2 lane highways. Many were posted 75 MPH and were wide and smooth. Unlike here where the let every tom, dick and harry contractor dig them up for utilities, then haphazardly patch them. I would doubt that even half of our CA gas tax goes to maintaining roads and bridges. Unless they are spending it all in and around Sacramento. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 03, 2009 6:14 am) The UAE counties have some impressive roads too.  Taming the Jebel Hafeet Mountain Road
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 03, 2009 7:51 am)  I think it is more a case of mismanagement than lack of funds when you look at the different states. Getting any figures on how the money is spent from different sources of revenue is complex. I do know the National average to educate a kid in public schools is $9866 per student per year. CA has districts that are pushing $20k per student per year. You could buy a heck of a good PRIVATE education for that amount. So private roads? One of the best kept secrets in CA was a private toll road 73, that cut across and saved driving through the I5 to I405 interchange. It used to cost about $2. Then as people found out about it and it got built up around there it became just as crowded. I avoid any place North of San Clemente if possible. It is just horrible driving. Other than parts of the Coast, there is not much worth seeing until you get way past San Francisco.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 03, 2009 8:23 am) |
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 03, 2009 7:51 am) As does Southern California. THUMS has oil islands in LongBeach/LA harbor. Three large off shore drilling rigs are off Hunington flats about 8-10 miles off shore. But that isn't the point. The point is a bate and switch on conservation. Some cried that without higher taxes we wouldn't conserve. So we conserved and as a reward we get higher taxes anyway? Isn't that like telling your child, "be good while we are out visiting friends or when we get home you will get a spanking", and when the child is good and you get home you spank them anyway? If we could get a movement going it might be time to get our fellow SUV drivers back on the road in greater numbers. If they are losing tax revenue because of falling SUV road taxes and lower fuel useage isn't it our civic duty to use more and drive more? Like I have said before once the government gets a taste of a particular tax it is like an addiction and they budget for X amount of tax revenue. When they ask the public to cut back then they, the government, should cut back as well. If we cut back in driving and fuel useage by 6 percent they should cut back in spending by 6 percent not raise taxes even more. The banks, wall street, and the auto manufacturers played it right. Don't co-operate and mess up and the average tax payer will bail you out. When are we going to get a bail out? |
|
|
If you frequented the Real-World Trade-In Values forum when gas prices peaked last summer, you'll recall the posters looking to trade late-model SUVs for small, fuel-efficient cars. In many cases, the outstanding loan balances far exceeded the resale value of these trucks, so the posters had to roll significant negative equity into their new loans. In the absence of high gas prices, these transactions made no sense. The posters reasoned thusly: "Sure, my loan payment will be $XXX higher, but I'll save $XXX+YYY per month on gasoline." I wonder how many of these people are suffering from buyer's remorse today?
|
|
|
|
|
I think someone mentioned the concept of a tax based on mileage a while back. I didn't pay much attention since it seemed such a new age wacko idea. Now I hear on the news today that Oregon wants to do just that, impose a tax based on how many miles you drive. While this might make some sense at first glance, the more you think about it, it is an awful idea. First off, what about those who live in rural areas that have to drive 2, 5, or 10 times the milage to reach basic services. This would be blatant discrimination of city vs. country folks. Without acess to any reasonable alternatives the people in eastern Oregon would have to pay or do without. (sorry dear, can't take you the 40 miles to the hospital, my taxes would go up). Second, the way they plan on assessing the tax is to install a GPS tracking device in every car. Did some one say Big Brother? Although they say they won't use the GPS to violate your privacy I've seen enough abuse of the E-Z Pass system here in NY to be very wary. Just wait until your wife's divorce lawyer subpoenas your records to track your movements. And if you think the government is above messing with your private information just ask "Joe the Plumber" what happened in Ohio.  Oh, and finally, who is going to pay for all the equipment and infrastructure required to make the system work and collect the tax? How much money would really reach the roads? 
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views How does gas at $4 and higher impact you?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
