Why is it "the truckers"?
Should we not all protest price and means of our fuel?
I protest the loudest by purchasing biodiesel.
We all consume, each time it is a political choice.
You decide.

What makes you all think that $2.00 per gallon of fuel is expensive?

You go into the grocery store and willingly pay over $4.00 per gallon for bottled water. You just pump this stuff out of a local spring and bottle it. Little shipping, no refining, no taxes.

You pay over $7.00 for a 12 pack of beer (a little over a gallon).
I don't see any complaints about that.

You pay over $4.00 for two 2 liter bottles of Coke (a little over a gallon). Nobody complaining here. A bit of tap water, carbonated and a dose of sugar and caramel color.

You pay nearly $3.50 for a gallon of milk now.

The problem is not with fuel being "too expensive". The problem is with people driving much more than they absolutely have to with vehicles that are five times heavier than what is required to move a 200 lb. man around.

I'd like to see the government impose an additional $1.00 per gallon tax on gasoline. Then, every licensed driver gets a $500. credit on their tax return for the cost of the tax for 500 gallons of fuel. If you can get by with 500 gallons of fuel per year, then the tax costs you nothing. Above 500 gallons, it is $1.00 per gallon. Use what you want.

Fire away

As for a "no fuel buying day," that won't work. The oil cartel knows that they'll just sell the product the next day.

As for the tired old liberal nonesense of raising fuel taxes - do the liberals WANT another revolt in this country? Stay out of people's wallets. The government is already wasting far more money than they actually need to function.


If you want to see a viable reduction in fuel costs, lets get MORE diesels on the roads in the US, and fo those who don't like diesels, MORE hybrids on the roads for them. A consistent reduction in the demand for fuel would cause the supplies to increase, and likewise, the cost would go down.

Absolutely true. Now, you must offer a mechanism to do this. Clearly, the government has no mechanism at this time. In fact, the government actually supports the purchase of SUV's over 6,000 lb. There will be no more diesels or hybrids on the roads unless the government imposes polices to make that happen. Raising the fuel tax would make it happen in a big way.

Note that I stated each taxpayer gets a $500.00 credit on his/her tax return. The first 500 gallons of fuel is NOT TAXED. If you need to use more than 500 gallons, then you pay $1.00 per gallon. This policy would be the mechanism to get more diesels or hybrid vehicles out there. There needs to be some type of disincentive to buy an SUV.

Excellent – Except it’s really got to hurt. Leave the $500 alone and raise the tax to $2.00

__________________
89 300E
79 240D
72 Westy
63 Bug sunroof
85 Jeep CJ7
86 Chevy 6.2l diesel PU

"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
Marcus Aurelius

Brian, all these items can be purchased be purchased for far less than what you mention. These items, including milk, are often marked down as specials. If you checked the various advertisements you probably get with your mail you would find these items regularly discounted. Fuel on the othe hand is never on special or marked down like grocery items.
Your idea for taxing is just another liberal idea. If this country had a public transit system like you would find in Europe we wouldn't even need such a tax or force people into such a dilema. I don't like the government taking more out of my pocket than it already is. If we had a government with any amount of fiscal restraint and a sense of responsible spending, we wouldn't even need half the taxes we already have.

__________________
DJ


84 300D Turbodiesel 190K with 4 speed manual sold in 03/2012

I disagree. The government currently has unreachable emissions requirements for diesel cars due to our dirty fuel. Granted, this is supposed to change in two years with new fuel regs. Short term though, lift the emissions regs UNTILL the fuel regs are in effect. VW sells out their entire TDI allotment that they are allowed to import every year. All of the automakers have diesel offerings overseas that can be quickly brought to market here.

The market IS speaking on its own. Toyota has 21,000 people on WAITING LISTS for the 2004 Prius. The ENTIRE 2004 allotment is pre sold, and some people on these lists are already being bumped to 2005 orders. Pre orders are already being taken for the Lexus RX400h, and people are lining up for the Highlander hybrid as well - which is still almost a year away from being offered to the public. Ford will have their Escape SUV on the market by fall. Their hybrid system is very similar to the Toyota hybrid system.

Even with your $500 tax refund, you are still extorting $300 per year from my wallet with my driving routine. This is based on 40k miles per year, driving the very vehicle you are trying to force the public into buying - not that there are lots full of these cars. That $300 belongs to ME, not the tax wasting, inept government.

Of course adding tax to fuel is a liberal idea. All liberals love to add taxes to everything. Personally, I too am abhorrent of additional taxes. However, there needs to be something done to reduce the total amount of fuel consumed in this country. The Prius and other hybrids are excellent examples of vehicles that will offer the fuel economy needed to accomplish this. However, I do not see 20,000 hybrids making any dent in the procurement of SUV's. Each successive year sees additional sales of these fuel wasting vehicles.

Clearly, when a vehicle gets 12-17 mpg and when it is selling like hotcakes, there must be a conclusion that most people do not have a problem filling it up with fuel. Therein lies the problem. If the cost of a gallon of gasoline was $3.00, there absolutely would be less demand for these vehicles. The advent of the hybrid is not going to put a dent in the sales of the SUV. Only higher gasoline prices will accomplish this.

The fundamental premise of the discussion is that the country consumes too much fuel and that the government should do something about it because the consumption is increasing. The advent of the hybrid or the TDI diesel is not going to change this fact in any way.

For those who refuse to accept additional tax on gasoline, or anything else for that matter, because of the argument that the government will simply waste the money (true), please provide an alternative to reduce the fuel consumption in this country.
The only other way to do it is to mandate the auto manufacturers to hit MPG targets that are successively higher. This was very successful for passenger cars and has resulted in the CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) reaching 27.5 mpg. Unfortunately, SUV's fall into the category of trucks and there are no current requirements on the manufacturers for a CAFE on these vehicles.

I guess you didn't read my entire post. There are THREE SUV's hitting the market over the next 12 months that will have hybrid powertrains in them. The first one out will be the Lexus RX400h. It uses the exact same hybrid system as what is used in the Prius, with the obvious exceptions of higher powered motors, a V6 engine, a second traction motor for AWD operation, and a larger battery pack.

The Toyota Highlander hybrid is the second one. It will use the exact same system verbatim as what is in the soon to be released Lexus.

Finally will be Ford. They will be the first US automaker to offer a hybrid system, and will introduce it in the Escape SUV. It's design is so close to the Toyota system, that they bought licensing from Toyota to avoid any potential for lawsuits. It will be out this fall.

Both of the Toyota systems will be advertising V8 towing capacity, while still having a marked improvement in fuel mileage. Both Toyota systems are looking at an estimated 27 mpg and up, with their non hybrid cousins lucky to hit 20. Not bad for systems calibrated for power over economy.

The Ford Escape is estimating 40 mpg in the city. This is around double the ratings for the four cylinder non hybrid model.

Even with prices not yet set, waiting lists for pre orders are already stacking up for these vehicles.

Finally, Toyota is on schedule to have hybrid powertrains in ALL models by 2010.

The market clearly IS asking for these vehicles. We do not need more theft of people's income by the government to curb fuel consumption. We simply need QUALITY vehicles on the market that offer the better fuel economy, while still offering the other creature comforts that the buying public wants. They ARE coming, and it's only a matter of time.

I'm familiar with the new hybrid SUV's. If they fulfill their promise and can be purchased at a price that is similar to their fuel guzzling bretheren then they may make a dent in the overall fuel consumption. We'll see. However, if they cost $4K more than their cousin, I don't see them taking any significant market share.
Even if they sold 100,000 of them per year, that is a pittance when compared to the total number of SUV's sold today (something like 4 million or so? per year).

However, the $1.00 tax on fuel would immediately cause every person in the US to THINK about conserving fuel. That is not happening now, and, even with the introduction of the hybrids, it probably will not happen for quite a long time.

I've heard this rehtoric over and over. Add taxes, add taxes, add taxes. If you look at gas in NC when it was $1.60 a gallon, take out the federal and state taxes the actual cost of a gallon was $.85. Humm, rekon we are being taxed enough?

Ok, add a $2.00 a gallon tax. Better be ready for that gallon of milk to be over $10.00 a gallon. Your bottled water? Roughy $5.00 and so on. Food would go out of sight, as would pretty much anything. Diesel is what moves freight in this country, period. Wether its by train, truck, plane or slingshot you can be assured diesel had something to do with it being there.If nothing else the raw materials were shipped by diesel power in one form or another.

Typical liberal rehtoric. Add more taxes, make 'em pay. Have they not figured out that it cost them more as well? My standard of living continues to fall as prices go up. If the trend continues I'll be charging more for my services. That costs you more.... and the circle continues.

Hybrids are a good idea however dependable, clean mass transit if a better one. I would welcome a mass transit system that would allow me to drop my kid at school, park the car and ride in. Whats missing from this picture is convience. I can live with that providing it doesn't take longer than the current commute. I rode a bus in Charlotte, swapped jobs and it took 5 buses and 2 hours to get to work, not efficient at all. Thats what I miss most about Europe, mass transit that was clean, affordable and efficient.

If everyone would at least ride in with one other person daily to work, it would remove 40% of the cars from the road during rush hour and drop fuel useage about 25%. These are rough figures and depend on your geographic location. You dont need over-priced, over-complex hybrids to accomplish a geat deal just using common sense.

Something the world seems to have lost touch with.


Joe

__________________
Project Smoker, '87 603 powered wagon
Hauler, 96 CTD can you say torque?
Toy 73 Cougar xr7 convertible
Acme Automotive Inc.
Raleigh NC
919-881-0364

Joe, the suggestion was to add a tax on gasoline. The greatest consumption of oil in this country, by far, is the procurement of gasoline for automobiles. If the tax was place on gasoline, only, I do not see how that would affect the cost of commodities in any way.

The intention of the tax is to motivate people to use less fuel, either by the use of mass transit, or by the use of more fuel efficient vehicles, or by the reduction of overall miles driven.
Again, each licensed driver would get a credit of $500, or $600 or whatever, against the amount spent for the additional tax. If you are moderately conservative, the tax will cost you nothing! If you must drive a Ford Expedition 20,000 miles per year, then you will pay for it.

Highly unlikely it would even come close to the desired effect. I see the point however, feel it simply is unfeasable. Take someone like myself, at 6'6" 210 I dont fit in the little crap they want me to drive. So, I drive a MB and a diesel Dodge truck. I fit in them. Its also about safety, in a world of 90 pound women in 8000 pound SUVs full of screaming kids, ringing cell phones and other distractions I refuse to own anything smaller than the Grand Cherokee the wife has. Same reason I quit riding motorcycles.

So, how do you motivate people to commute together? I'm not 100% sure but, I know this, until we figure it out and implement it nothing is really going to change. The backlash from a excessive gas tax would not be pretty. I ride together wife my wife 4 out of 5 days a week, saves us about $100.00 a month inn fuel alone.

I know one thing, the first thing needing done is eliminate the 6500 pound tax break on trucks. Either make it across the board or drop it all together. I know a guy who saved over 20K on a LX, that'll buy a lot of gas for it.


Joe



Joe

__________________
Project Smoker, '87 603 powered wagon
Hauler, 96 CTD can you say torque?
Toy 73 Cougar xr7 convertible
Acme Automotive Inc.
Raleigh NC
919-881-0364

We’re on the edge of the largest inflation in our history – so get ready. As fuel has risen this spring it’s been a combination of the weak dollar and a lack of refining capacity. The oil companies aren’t adding capacity for a simple reason. We’re near a peak in world production – that point where new discovery can’t outpace depletion. Soon production will begin to decline. We’ve got plenty of coal, but fuel shortages are going to be a fact of life very shortly. The oil companies aren’t stupid – a new refinery is a bad investment.
The developing world is beginning to use more also. China is cooling off, but still they’re building the equivalent of a new Houston Texas every thirty days. In three years they will be the largest buyers of autos in the world. The time that 5% of the world’s population used over 25% of its resources is soon a history lesson.
If the per capita energy consumption in the developing world were to reach only 50% of that consumed by the citizens of industrialized nations, and if everyone in the prosperous industrialized nations were to conserve themselves down to that same level, energy production worldwide will have to double.

Is this alarmist – maybe – Our whole way of life depends on people spending – not conserving. Ask yourself why CEO’s are sucking company’s dry in the last few years. If a full set of data were out there people would change their spending patterns and the dog would catch his tail.

__________________
89 300E
79 240D
72 Westy
63 Bug sunroof
85 Jeep CJ7
86 Chevy 6.2l diesel PU

"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
Marcus Aurelius

And this is the fundamental problem. With the advent of 6000 lb. SUV's, and the heavy sales of them, every person now believes that he better get one of the damn things so that he, too, can now be safe! Cannot be driving a Prius around when you might get hit by an Expedition!

This can only lead to more consumption, not less. Hell, I might as well just buy an old 10 wheel Mack tractor (tractor/trailer) now. If one of those Expeditions hits the tractor, I'd hardly know it. Then everybody will want to step up to a tractor! Where do you stop?

If you did not have such a proliferation of fuel guzzling SUV's out there, people would fell safe in a Camry or a Prius.