Re: Oil prices just took their biggest nose dive in two years
[quote=Shining Arcanine;105368]
How many cars from the 1950s are still in operation? What percentage is that of all of the cars made during the 1950s?
With time, everything changes. Nothing will last forever. To transition the economy to being more efficient, people can use the most efficient method of transition that modern man has, time. Very few cars sold today will be around in 2050. If the market dictates that automobile manufacturers make efficient vehicles, in 2050, people will be driving fuel efficient vehicles. The state government has the power to ensure that, through a gasoline guzzler tax.
By the way, hypothetically speaking, a vehicle manufacturer could make a 100 mpg equivalent of a Hummer and by your definition, people should not drive it. I am not talking about getting people into smaller cars; I am talking about getting people into more fuel efficient cars, which I believe is the point of all of this.
My suggestion was to tax all vehicles that cannot do at least both 25 mpg city and highway, at a rate of either 10% of the vehicle's price or $2000 per gallon under 25 mpg so if a car does 24 mpg city and 24 mpg highway, and it costs $10,000, it will have a $4,000 tax.
As for you being slapped with a tax, no, not unless you buy a new inefficient vehicle. You could purchase a perfectly good used vehicle and use that. The point of a gasoline guzzler tax is not to stop people from buying cars, but to coerce vehicle manufacturers into making vehicles that are fuel efficient. Giving them your business would be extremely damaging to this end, as they would have no reason to improve their vehicles if they are making money off their current ones, hence the idea of placing a tax on new vehicles that do not get 25 mpg. Your using an old vehicle because you cannot afford a new one will economically coerce them to make a vehicle you can afford and that will mean making a vehicle that is fuel efficient.
That is exactly why I am not suggesting a tax on extremely large vehicles, just a tax on fuel inefficient ones. If a vehicle manufacturer makes the equivalent of a Hummer that gets 100 mpg city and highway, this tax that I am suggesting would not apply to it, as it would exceed 25 mpg in both city and highway driving.
If the government ensured that fuel inefficient vehicles were unaffordable, no one would buy them, economically coercing manufacturers to increase their vehicles' fuel economy. No one is proposing taxing the consumer, unless the consumer decides to buy a new vehicle that is less efficient than 25 mpg.[/quote]
Here are some points/questions I have about your view point:
1. There is a conciderable market for vintage automobiles. I myself restore and sell them. Are you saying that those that purchase these vintage cars should be taxed to the eyeballs? That would be double taxation, and would create an outcry from the general public. The automobiles are works of art that should never be allowed to die.
2. How would taxing the purchaser of a vehilce coerce the manufacturer? There will always be a market for the larger vehicles. Horse Power and Torque are trade offs for fuel effeciency. Thees vehicles are used for work, used to ferry people around in large quantities. If you make all vehicles effecient to your standards, then there would be more vehicles on the road. Vehicles carrying larger loads of cargo or people use more fuel.
3. What is your definition of "extremely large vehicle"
4. You ARE proposing taxing the consumer...the ones that need a larger vehicle to tow with, carry larger cargos with, etc.
I agree with the tax rebate system on buying fuel effecient vehicles, but it's not appropiate, in the era we are in right now, to raise taxes on people trying to get by financially. Hybrids are more expensive due to the newer and evolving technology used to manfacture them. They haven't exhibited a proven 15 year track record, and the parts to repair them aren't as easily procured by the shade tree mechanic. Most families that own these larger vehicles own them NOT for the status symbol of having "one that is bigger", they own them out of necessity for having larger "combined" families. They also own them because they are needed for work.
I implore you to re-think your position on this matter, as it scares the heck out of me that people are wanting to raise taxes in a world where the general working man is already highly taxed fron the Income Tax
Perhaps a flat purchase tax should be instituted, drop the income tax, then raise the taxes as a purchase tax on the vehicles in question.
I hand it over to you now.
Last edited by pmagnavox : 01-27-2007 at 08:17 AM.
Reason: clarity of the issue
|
