Your gonna feel the gas prices yourself. Riding public transportion they have to get their fuel from somewhere and it will get to a point where they 'pass the buck' so to speak and charge higher transport fees or rase city taxes to cover the higher costs. This is why I said EVERYONE will be affected. Even if you walk or ride a bike everywhere unless your 100% self sustaning and never purchase anything. Then of course you wouldnt be affected. But groceries will go up as it costs more to farm the food and transport the food from field to store. Consumer goods will go up as raw parts cost more to cover suppliers shipping costs and the companies will just pass the buck. So it not only costs you more to go to the store but the products themselves are higher in cost. Wages will lag behind such inflation levels.
Sore about gas prices REad on...
- Thread starter dralarms
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an interest in aquariums or fish keeping!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
Clown, you've got a personal vendetta. Gasoline at $100 a gallon would mean no employment for any of us. I respect your opinion as your arguments are valid. The thing is, those that want 8,000lb SUVs have the right to own them. They are already paying more money to drive them. Why should the govt. excasorbate that? If you're offended by that, its because you don't want one.
Clown Monarch
Aquarium Advice FINatic
BrianNY said:
Without a doubt, high oil prices are the best way to stagnate our economy, but some are hurt more than others. It's all relative. People have a right to own 8,000 lb SUVs? Sure they do. But if you'd like make our economy LESS reliant on oil, you have to discourage them. Regardless of the tax you impose some people will still buy them and that's their right.
In the same way there are high taxes on cigarettes. Is it fair in the purest sense of capitalism that smokers should be excluded and taxed? No, but we're not living in a purely capitalistic state. Smoker's poor health is bourne by all taxpayers and therefore should be (and is) discouraged by the government.
I'm not offended by large vehicles. I've owned my share of large vehicles. But I've also taken into account the price of fuel and the practicality of owning one. I wouldn't buy one now and anyone who buys a vehicle that gets 10-12 mpg now deserves what he gets.
Clown Monarch
Aquarium Advice FINatic
fishfreek said:
It's true. Electricity that powers my train is a substitute for gasoline and is impacted by the price of gas. However in the past 5 years the price of a monthly pass has gone from $139-$153. During that same time, gasoline users have seen their costs double.
Kudos to you Clown. You can carry on a spirited debate without resorting to personal attacks. 
Good job, and some of your arguments actually make sense to me.
We differ on a basic philosophy however. Free enterprise means no govt penalties.
The cigarette issue has been brought up on another thread, and I don't want to rehash that but........... I could make the case that although cigarettes shorten ones life span, they reduce medical costs. After all, everybody dies from something. The over weight smoker that drops dead of a heart attack is less of a cost burden then the 90 year old living with a variety of age related illnesses.
The incentive for moving away from an oil based energy dependancy is much more likely with tax credits than tax penalties. My capitalism 101 so to speak. Rewards have a bigger impact on moving forward, than penalties.
Good job, and some of your arguments actually make sense to me.We differ on a basic philosophy however. Free enterprise means no govt penalties.
The cigarette issue has been brought up on another thread, and I don't want to rehash that but........... I could make the case that although cigarettes shorten ones life span, they reduce medical costs. After all, everybody dies from something. The over weight smoker that drops dead of a heart attack is less of a cost burden then the 90 year old living with a variety of age related illnesses.
The incentive for moving away from an oil based energy dependancy is much more likely with tax credits than tax penalties. My capitalism 101 so to speak. Rewards have a bigger impact on moving forward, than penalties.
QTOFFER
Aquarium Advice Addict
Clown Monarch said:
I agree with this 100%. Most people who buy 4WD SUV's are buying into an image that says, "Look at me everybody...I've got mine!"
I very rarely see an SUV with more than one occupant - or a cargo area full of mountain bikes, tents, and kayaks like you see in the commercials. They're not very convenient for families because they are so darn high off the ground - imagine strapping a squirming 2-year old into a carseat in the back of an SUV. That's why most families get minivans, which are NOT SUVs. They are what the station wagon was to our grandparents. The thing besides their weight that makes most SUVs so fuel inefficient are their honking huge engine blocks. Unless you're pulling a house or commuting over a mountain range, you really don't need all that power. But the auto manufacturers say that you do, and these are the same people who are so resistant to implementing new technologies that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
Clown Monarch
Aquarium Advice FINatic
No sense in personal attacks - just friendly discussion.
I'm all for subsidies over taxes because I believe most taxes to be bad (I was gonna say ALL, but I guess we can't exactly pass the hat for roads and sewer lines).
But when you REALLY want to discourage something, taxes are the way to go. I believe in a gasoline tax for no other reason than to encourage the growth of alternative sources. It'll help smooth the transition, too.
I'm all for subsidies over taxes because I believe most taxes to be bad (I was gonna say ALL, but I guess we can't exactly pass the hat for roads and sewer lines).
But when you REALLY want to discourage something, taxes are the way to go. I believe in a gasoline tax for no other reason than to encourage the growth of alternative sources. It'll help smooth the transition, too.
Melody
Aquarium Advice Addict
Clown Monarch said:
I remember those days too
I got to stand up in the front seat of my Grandfathers lincoln convertible... top down... makes me shudder...Fishyfanatic said:
Some people that own these cars (exception/ the restored classics) cant afford a new car anyways! Let alone the taxes! Good Heavens dont let the commonwealth of VA get a hold of that idea! They already tax us every way possible! after I get my tags, I have to have an inspection... thats fine. Safety!
Then I have to go pay a personal property tax... for buying the car. Then I have to go get a town sticker... that says I paid my tax.
Then they charge me every year just to have that car... if I dont pay the tax... I cant get a town sticker... then I will get a nice yellow piece of paper from Johnny Law...
BrianNY said:
ohhh good one...! and good comeback Clown Monarch!
All of this thread has been very interesting. I agree with some, but disagree with alot Im seeing, Driving is a privilege, not a right. But I feel its my right as a consumer to choose the vehicle I want, need or can afford. I dont think that I should be punished because I may need a large vehicle. So what if someone decideds they want to have 12 kids. They need a large van... and even if they are getting tax breaks out the wazoo... they are STILL very tight on money... so we are going to tax them there? Im rehashing stuff that has already been said, Im sorry. This has been a very interesting topic!
deli_conker
Aquarium Advice Addict
A lot to read since I las looked at this one...
Fuel cells are the way to go. All that energy with the H2O being what is emitted. But as said earlier, we all have to jump together to make that happen. And that probably won't happen without a government push to make it happen. People with hybrid cars get a tax break. They need to get the fuel cell technology rolling so it can be made affordable. Government aid would do this.
Fuel cells are the way to go. All that energy with the H2O being what is emitted. But as said earlier, we all have to jump together to make that happen. And that probably won't happen without a government push to make it happen. People with hybrid cars get a tax break. They need to get the fuel cell technology rolling so it can be made affordable. Government aid would do this.
Clown Monarch
Aquarium Advice FINatic
Have you seen the Mercedes concept car that runs on hydrogen? Hydrogen is readily abundant, cheap, and the only emissions would be water. Is that what you're talking about, deli?
Sounds like a dream, eh?
Why haven't we been developing the holy heck out of this? I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist so I'm pretty sure that too many influential people derive too much income from oil in this country to let that happen.
Sounds like a dream, eh?
Why haven't we been developing the holy heck out of this? I'm a bit of a conspiracy theorist so I'm pretty sure that too many influential people derive too much income from oil in this country to let that happen.
Clown Monarch
Aquarium Advice FINatic
The real question is what's going to happen to the Middle East once the U.S. is no longer dependent on their oil?
Gee, I'd just hate to see that entire region wither and die...
Gee, I'd just hate to see that entire region wither and die...
deli_conker
Aquarium Advice Addict
They're not the only ones. Unfortunately, I'd have to travel too far to fill up...Clown Monarch said:
Clicky
I'm not sure what to say to that. My derision for that area of the world comes from zealots and their leaders and not from the general population.Clown Monarch said:
QTOFFER
Aquarium Advice Addict
Sadly enough, solar power really hasn't lived up to its high expectations. Despite much R&D, photovoltaic cell technology just hasn't reached the point where solar powered cars can become an economically feasible reality.
Electric cars take a long time to charge up, have short cruising range, and not enough power to satisfy the typical driver.
That leaves gasoline/electric hybrid vehicles that charge use regenerative braking to charge up their batteries as you coast downhill, or brake. These vehicles are the most exciting and promising things to come down the pike. Hopefully, as they gain popularity, their prices will drop.
Other alternatives include hydrogen fuel cell, natural gas, and ethanol-driven engines. Problem is, there is no refueling infrastructure in place for these vehicles, and it is very unlikely that any company would have the money or desire to invest so heavily in such a risky venture. Hydrogen is highly explosive (remember reading about the Hindenburg air ship disaster?), and would require a trained technician at every pump. There are many technological, political, and economic hurdles that would have to be overcome. If any of these alternative fuels are to ever become popular, it's clear that the govt will have to play a major role - at, or above the level of its involvement in the atomic bomb Manhattan Project, or the Apollo Space Program.
I don't think that we will ever run out of fossil fuels - demand will continue to drive the development of better (and more expensive) extraction technologies. Economically, this is unsustainable. That's why our nation needs an energy policy that can provide alternative fuel technology with the big push it needs during its infancy.
Electric cars take a long time to charge up, have short cruising range, and not enough power to satisfy the typical driver.
That leaves gasoline/electric hybrid vehicles that charge use regenerative braking to charge up their batteries as you coast downhill, or brake. These vehicles are the most exciting and promising things to come down the pike. Hopefully, as they gain popularity, their prices will drop.
Other alternatives include hydrogen fuel cell, natural gas, and ethanol-driven engines. Problem is, there is no refueling infrastructure in place for these vehicles, and it is very unlikely that any company would have the money or desire to invest so heavily in such a risky venture. Hydrogen is highly explosive (remember reading about the Hindenburg air ship disaster?), and would require a trained technician at every pump. There are many technological, political, and economic hurdles that would have to be overcome. If any of these alternative fuels are to ever become popular, it's clear that the govt will have to play a major role - at, or above the level of its involvement in the atomic bomb Manhattan Project, or the Apollo Space Program.
I don't think that we will ever run out of fossil fuels - demand will continue to drive the development of better (and more expensive) extraction technologies. Economically, this is unsustainable. That's why our nation needs an energy policy that can provide alternative fuel technology with the big push it needs during its infancy.
We are not the only consumers of oil. If we should ever become self sustaning ( i highly doubt that will ever happen) other countries like China will just pickup their use and demand.
If we are still the biggest users of oil I suspect in the next 5 years we will NOT be the biggest.
If we are still the biggest users of oil I suspect in the next 5 years we will NOT be the biggest.
Clown Monarch
Aquarium Advice FINatic
Clown Monarch said:
That's true I guess. The wealthy oil barons would hardly suffer at all. It would be the other 99.9% of the population that's living in poverty that would be devastated.
It would be nice to see the headline "WAR BREAKS OUT IN THE MIDDLE EAST" move from headline to footnote, however.
Clown Monarch
Aquarium Advice FINatic
QTOFFER said:
We'll never run out of oil; the price will just be driven to the point where it becomes impractical for the average person to use.
aquanaut
Aquarium Advice Freak
I think Hydrogen fuel cells are the answer. They just aneed a "reason" to make them cheap enough. They had them for the moon landing why not now . Can anyone say "Big Oil " 
. Can anyone say "Big Oil " aquanaut
Aquarium Advice Freak
Henry Ford did not have gas stations set up everywhere when he started mass producing cars and trucks. It has to start somewhere. It would not take too much effort to get hydrogen to the local stations....just dangerous
deli_conker
Aquarium Advice Addict
I already answered this one...fishfreek said:
deli_conker said:
(you'll have to go back to the original post to click the link. I'm too lazy to repeat it)
- Status
Similar threads
