Msybe on a wholesale level. I was at the Chevy dealership 2 weeks ago and they had a Volt for sale there. The salesman was trying hard to make the sale to me but its not for me. Went by the dealership a couple of days ago and the car is still there.

 

You are right they're is no way to proove it because the government give away programs will never end, unless the country finally goes bankrupt.
It doesnt take a genious to realize that my assumption is probably right. For the price of a new Volt, without the rebate, I could buy 2 brand new Cruzes and have $5,000.00 left over for gas.

 

This is the latest revealed classy act from "Lt. Dan."

Frankly, he is an ***. A big mouthed, egotistical ***. He doesn't even have the history to back himself up, like Lutz did.

BTW, when we raise the gas tax by $1 a gallon, so we can divert the funds from infrastructure improvement to the general fund, to be squandered by the government.................. are we also planning on giving the working poor, and middle class money for gas and food?? You know, those who cannot go out and buy a new fuel efficient vehicle. You know, those who are all too aware how the price of gas affects everything that they buy. You know, those luxuries............ like food.

 

I think you may have been closer if you said he was trying to sell more Cruzes.

 

Just another rich **** shooting his mouth off.

 

Maybe every road in America should be a toll road, then we won't need a fuel tax.

 

Consumers have no motivation to buy alternatively powered cars because gas is "cheap". A gas tax would actually create more DEMAND for those sorts of cars instead of just forcing automakers to supply them to a lack of demand to meed CAFE, etc. standards.

 

I see no reason why they need to be motivated, or do you mean manipulated. People should be allowed to buy what they want. The price of gas is enough to keep people interested in cars that get good mileage. Gas prices above $3.00 a gallon are here to stay.

 

Please explain how making fuel artificially more expensive, will create the demand for more fuel efficient cars................ from the working poor, and the average middle class family. You know, those people who cannot afford to buy a new car.

Please explain how they can cut out their unnecessary spending, and discretionary spending, so they can put gasoline in their usually older, much less fuel efficient vehicles. I suppose maybe buying less.............. oh.............. food??? (since it would also go up in price, as it is now) Maybe they can do away with luxuries.............. like electricity??

A gas tax hurts everyone, but it hurts the working poor and the lower middle class the worst. These are people who struggle week to week, and who do not have the means to buy new fuel efficient cars. They struggle to keep their old whatevers running, so they can get to work. They don't fix the luxuries that their vehicles have, like heaters, so they can spend money on gas. Make it to where they can't keep a roof over their heads, because they can no longer afford to own a car, so they can't keep their job.............. and they will go on welfare.

Spend a week, or a month in their shoes, and then tell me how good of an idea this is. At least making the automakers make more fuel efficient vehicles, even when it raises the price of cars, mainly affects those who buy new cars. What you want really hurts those who do not have the choice to do so.

However, if you are more than happy to give more of your income to the government, so they can squander it on anything and everything other than what it is supposed to be spent on, be my guest. Noone is stopping you.

 

I do not even need to type up 90% of my response.. you said almost everything I was thinking.

Seriously.. aren't we already in bad enough of a recession? New cars are a luxury, houses are a luxury, and yes at this point for alot of people I know a full time/stable job is a luxury. Who would benefit from increasing gas prices right now? It's great to say the increase in tax would be put to good use but we all know that is not true. We know this on local, state, and government levels.

Yes something needs to be done and I will admit like 99.9% of the population whatever answer I have would not work but I find it hard to believe such an increase could actually have short to medium term benefits.

Prices in Europe are much higher than here, they have smaller/fuel efficient cars. Why do they not then have 100mpg gas/diesel engines and long range electric or fuel cell cars that are being massed produced?

 

There is some serious thinking about privatizing highways and surface roads. IIRC, Chicago did that very thing to generate some capital.

They sold a section of road, installed toll booths, and as part of the agreement, lowered the speed limit on neighboring roads to make the toll road more attractive. I can't remember if the toll road was any more convient than the publicly owned roads, but they made sure it was in the end.

Y'know nothing cool like an american autobahn where a toll road kept in decent shape allowed higher than 70 or 80mph. Then again, I suppose something like that would go bust, since most people seem to be scared ****less at anything more than 64.9 mph.

 

So this guy is basically a Arlen Spector RINO.

The gas tax thing is stupid..because it is a regressive tax, just like sales tax. If you can't afford a new, or more fuel efficiant car, you are stuck driving what you have, and paying the taxes.

He is only saying this because he does not have to want to give Cruzes away once gas goes back down. They need to make money on that program. If gas was taxed more, then there would be more demand for cars like the Cruze, and he could charge more. A Suburban probaly has as much profit in it as a Cruze costs..so they will always be profitable.

IF...and I say only IF...something has to be taxed automotive wise...my proposal would be to expand the gas guzzler tax to apply to some kind of moving average. Right now it only applies to very few cars. Maybe make it progressive. A car that gets average gas milage gets no tax..then the worse gas milage it gets, the higher the tax. Additionaly, apply it to used cars to make them less desireable.

Then take the money raised, and use some of it for credits for vehicles that get the best milage, and some of it as a grant money for automakers who invest the most, and have the best results in improving gas milage. Make it a competition.

 

as ntoed hes trying to get peopel to buy fuel efficient vehicles, this is not the way to do it. cause it hurts those who cannot afford the new vehicle.

Better to keep gas prices as they are so those people can get to work and buy groceries, while raising the gg tax (maybe make it harder to pass/CAFE**). The higher prices will be easy for anyone who can reasonably afford say, a Corvette. $50,000 car, $2500 is 5%. On a $25,000 car it rises to 10% of the vehicle cost added on top. Further pushing away the gas guzzling bare 1SS Camaro to a more friendly and loaded 2LT V6 Camaro.

its all wonky, but the important part is to remember not everyone buys or can buy a fuel efficient vehicle at any random time of the month. Many people have other concerns that usualyl force them into a used vehicle way before buyign a brand new one. It gets similar mileage and costs thousands less.

**CAFE is bad because you build vehicles there might not be a demand for. Thus your intention of selling them to makeup your Average, just wastes money and doesn't do didly squat for your Average.

CAFE is good that Automakers are required to make better efficient vehicles so people have a choice and can get a vehicle than can withstand rising prices in gas.

CAFE is, like a Market Demanded Event, 'make us these vehicles', but it's not the market saying it. So it falls very oddly.

 

Posted this in the lounge thread on the same topic:

(However, CAFE is absurd, and higher fuel prices ARE what cause people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles. CAFE affects only the supply, but does not give any incentive to change the demand. Fuel prices hit $4+ per gallon and, like magic, big truck sales go down and small car sales go up. It's amazing... )

I was always intrigued by this: "A Gas Tax We Could Live With"

Holy cow, I can't believe that was written in 2001. Love how gas was $2.00 / gallon and people were pissed. $2.00 would ROCK!!

I'm not saying that I want higher taxes. BUT, if we as a nation are serious about "reducing dependency on foreign oil" for economic and national security reasons, creating incentive for people to buy the more fuel efficient vehicles would be far more effective than the CAFE approach. The math on his proposal might be a bit on the simple side, but I find the general concept of a net-zero revenue fuel tax intriging. Of course, the pols in D.C. would find a way to eff it up.

EDIT: A more stringent and graduated "gas guzzler" tax could also work, and it would have the benefit of not targeting those who can't afford new cars. Of course, it would still drive up the value of used cars, so the less affluent would still be affected. The zero / neutral revenue aspect is sort of key in that regard.

 

How about we let the market set the price of gas by demand and keep the govt out of every damn part of our lives. I can't stand it when people try to promote a certain behavior thru taxes. All it does is screw things up worse! Once again GM higher ups are trying to dump their problems on the taxpayer.