The House abandons the tougher of the new fuel economy rules
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
There's 2 ways to do this.
1) CAFE: which will take over a decade to implement and decades to actually make a substantial dent. It puts the entire burden on our automakers not just to make fuel efficient cars, but to convince you to buy them... even at the point of losing money.
2) Fuel taxes: which will have an immediate impact on oil consumption since it affects all cars on the road, not just new cars. It places the burden in the marketplace and leaves it to the manufactures to satisfy demand.
All this talk of drops in the bucket is mostly just talk. The issue isn't finding more drops. The issue is reducing our consumption.
1) CAFE: which will take over a decade to implement and decades to actually make a substantial dent. It puts the entire burden on our automakers not just to make fuel efficient cars, but to convince you to buy them... even at the point of losing money.
2) Fuel taxes: which will have an immediate impact on oil consumption since it affects all cars on the road, not just new cars. It places the burden in the marketplace and leaves it to the manufactures to satisfy demand.
All this talk of drops in the bucket is mostly just talk. The issue isn't finding more drops. The issue is reducing our consumption.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 753
From: Annapolis Md. USA
DAMN, YOUR'RE GOOD!!! 
That's why I get irked when someone reaches for that old tired "Liberal vs Conservative" blanket to answer things they have no clue.
To those people:
1. China is supporting deficit spending by buying US Bonds and securities. It's like buying things with your neighbor's credit card. He's going to get something in return. Think about it. Iraq was thought to have nukes. North Korea does have nukes. We're under treaty to support South Korea, Japan, and the Philipenes if threatened. Yet we attack Iraq and leave NK to China to talk to. Oh, and by the way, all factories we open up in China must be part Chinese owned... so effectively, we're giving them technology.
2. The US consumes 20,730,000 barrels of oil per day. The US is the world's 3rd largest producer of oil, and we make 7,230,000. We simply are not going to produce enough oil to supply ourselves, regardless as to how much wilderness we strip away. We can send the military into Saudi Arabia (#1 oil producer)tomorrow, and it's 10,580,000 barrels of oil combined with ours is still not enough to meet our needs alone. (in case you were wondering who produces the 2nd most amount of oil between us and Saudi Arabia, it's Russia... but I don't think they'd be a pushover if we invaded them).
3. Deficits don't go away. We have to pay them. Right now your share of just the intrest on the current debt owed is over $12,000 per year. That's just each person. If China (and Saudi Arabia for that instance) is funding the debt, guess who you should make your check out to? 20% of the debt is owned by foreign intrests.
4. Bigger the debt and the bigger the deficit, the cheaper our money becomes. Canada, whose's dollar was once worth 60 cents to ours, is now about even. The value of other currencies against the US dollar have risen similar amounts the past 6 years. Oil is paid in dollars. While the rest of the world's oil price hasn't changed much, our plunging dollar makes ours cost more, feeding inflation pressures.
5. A tax increase on fuel would certainly reduce the amount used. It would also send that increased cost to the government which would be a great thing as long as the government showed the same wisdom (regardless as to how it happened) they showed in the late 90s when surpluses went towards paying off the national debt and help fuel our economic expansion far longer than it should have lasted.
Everything above is a National issue, not a conservative versus liberal issue. Not a republican versus democrat issue. Despite what "Talk Radio" ratings ****** tell you on the radio, these are things that are going to have to be faced, regardless as to who's sitting in the White House, or your Congressional District.
That's why I get irked when someone reaches for that old tired "Liberal vs Conservative" blanket to answer things they have no clue.
To those people:
1. China is supporting deficit spending by buying US Bonds and securities. It's like buying things with your neighbor's credit card. He's going to get something in return. Think about it. Iraq was thought to have nukes. North Korea does have nukes. We're under treaty to support South Korea, Japan, and the Philipenes if threatened. Yet we attack Iraq and leave NK to China to talk to. Oh, and by the way, all factories we open up in China must be part Chinese owned... so effectively, we're giving them technology.
2. The US consumes 20,730,000 barrels of oil per day. The US is the world's 3rd largest producer of oil, and we make 7,230,000. We simply are not going to produce enough oil to supply ourselves, regardless as to how much wilderness we strip away. We can send the military into Saudi Arabia (#1 oil producer)tomorrow, and it's 10,580,000 barrels of oil combined with ours is still not enough to meet our needs alone. (in case you were wondering who produces the 2nd most amount of oil between us and Saudi Arabia, it's Russia... but I don't think they'd be a pushover if we invaded them).
3. Deficits don't go away. We have to pay them. Right now your share of just the intrest on the current debt owed is over $12,000 per year. That's just each person. If China (and Saudi Arabia for that instance) is funding the debt, guess who you should make your check out to? 20% of the debt is owned by foreign intrests.
4. Bigger the debt and the bigger the deficit, the cheaper our money becomes. Canada, whose's dollar was once worth 60 cents to ours, is now about even. The value of other currencies against the US dollar have risen similar amounts the past 6 years. Oil is paid in dollars. While the rest of the world's oil price hasn't changed much, our plunging dollar makes ours cost more, feeding inflation pressures.
5. A tax increase on fuel would certainly reduce the amount used. It would also send that increased cost to the government which would be a great thing as long as the government showed the same wisdom (regardless as to how it happened) they showed in the late 90s when surpluses went towards paying off the national debt and help fuel our economic expansion far longer than it should have lasted.
Everything above is a National issue, not a conservative versus liberal issue. Not a republican versus democrat issue. Despite what "Talk Radio" ratings ****** tell you on the radio, these are things that are going to have to be faced, regardless as to who's sitting in the White House, or your Congressional District.
Try and find a tax that will not burden our economy so directly and you might have something.I do not think higher taxes will reduce long term the amount of fuel used. Americans will pay higher prices, and not buy other non necessity items that help our economy out. That on top of higher prices across the board directly due to higher fuel prices, and you have a recipe for disaster. I am not that smart when it comes to how the economy works, but from what I do know, it seems like a very bad idea. I seriously doubt the govt would ever get their act together and actually use that money to pay off debt anyway
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,028
From: Chicago, IL
If you want to talk about bigger debt and deficits, then raise oil prices and see what happens to the economy. BTW you are totally correct about foreign interests like China, but you are trying to justify paying off debt by raising taxes on fuel, which will tank the economy even worse. Full circle it just wont work. A direct tax on fuel is the worst thing economically, yet you want to use this as a means to correct it Try and find a tax that will not burden our economy so directly and you might have something.
I do not think higher taxes will reduce long term the amount of fuel used. Americans will pay higher prices, and not buy other non necessity items that help our economy out. That on top of higher prices across the board directly due to higher fuel prices, and you have a recipe for disaster. I am not that smart when it comes to how the economy works, but from what I do know, it seems like a very bad idea. I seriously doubt the govt would ever get their act together and actually use that money to pay off debt anyway
Try and find a tax that will not burden our economy so directly and you might have something.I do not think higher taxes will reduce long term the amount of fuel used. Americans will pay higher prices, and not buy other non necessity items that help our economy out. That on top of higher prices across the board directly due to higher fuel prices, and you have a recipe for disaster. I am not that smart when it comes to how the economy works, but from what I do know, it seems like a very bad idea. I seriously doubt the govt would ever get their act together and actually use that money to pay off debt anyway
while i agree that up to a point, consumers will simply cut back on other things while still purchasing the same ammount of gas.. but there is a tipping point where the gas price would be just too high, in that case they would find ways to cut back on their fuel consumption.. either by driving less, or driving something more fuel efficient.. or carpooling, or taking public transportation....
i'm not convinced raising gas taxes would hurt the economy.. but i do know that it would reduce our consumption of oil and thus reduce our dependence on foreign oil, which is certainly a good thing
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
One thing better than fuel tax is cutting the tax breaks big oil gets. A direct fuel tax would also allow the gov't to cut taxes in other areas. At the end of the day the same amount of tax is taken from the consumer so there is no loss of dollars for other things.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 753
From: Annapolis Md. USA
Well not when the prices of goods go up due to the tax. Most all goods are trucked to stores, among other things that will drive the price up.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
That can be fixed by giving tax credits/deductions to businesses. Right now the deduction is 48.5˘ per mile. Plus we probably would ship more by rail which would be great to get a lot of those huge trucks off the road that are driving cross country.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Alan Mulally's comments on CAFE and gasoline taxes:
Bob Lutz has also rang in on this:
Both are about as conservative, pro-big business as you're going to find in the auto industry.
Detroit News-
Ford Motor Co. President and Chief Executive Alan Mulally said Wednesday that federal regulations to improve fuel economy will cut into automakers' profits by pushing them to build more small cars than demand warrants.
"You're trying to force-feed the market rather than being market driven," he said during a panel discussion at the Center for Automotive Research Management Briefing Seminars in Traverse City.
"I've never seen a market-distorting policy like CAFE," he said, referring to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards....
A gasoline tax would be a more market-driven solution to solving the oil independence problem instead of CAFE, which has not worked, Mulally said.
"If we're really going to work on this, then the way you get at it is you make an economic decision just like they do in Europe where the prices are seven, eight, nine dollars a gallon, and our behavior would change dramatically," Mulally said during the panel discussion.
Ford Motor Co. President and Chief Executive Alan Mulally said Wednesday that federal regulations to improve fuel economy will cut into automakers' profits by pushing them to build more small cars than demand warrants.
"You're trying to force-feed the market rather than being market driven," he said during a panel discussion at the Center for Automotive Research Management Briefing Seminars in Traverse City.
"I've never seen a market-distorting policy like CAFE," he said, referring to the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards....
A gasoline tax would be a more market-driven solution to solving the oil independence problem instead of CAFE, which has not worked, Mulally said.
"If we're really going to work on this, then the way you get at it is you make an economic decision just like they do in Europe where the prices are seven, eight, nine dollars a gallon, and our behavior would change dramatically," Mulally said during the panel discussion.
Wall Street Journal-
General Motors vice chairman Bob Lutz said the U.S. government should gradually increase taxation on gasoline to force consumers into smaller, more efficient cars. "I'd say the best thing the (U.S.) government can do is to raise the gas tax by 10 or 15 cents a year until it reaches European levels," Mr. Lutz told the Wall Street Journal at the Paris Motor Show.
"In Europe people buy $30,000 Golfs," Lutz said. "People are willing to pay lots of money for extremely well equipped, fuel-efficient cars." Lutz said higher gas prices would help accelerate the transition to alternative fuels and cleaner forms of propulsion.
General Motors vice chairman Bob Lutz said the U.S. government should gradually increase taxation on gasoline to force consumers into smaller, more efficient cars. "I'd say the best thing the (U.S.) government can do is to raise the gas tax by 10 or 15 cents a year until it reaches European levels," Mr. Lutz told the Wall Street Journal at the Paris Motor Show.
"In Europe people buy $30,000 Golfs," Lutz said. "People are willing to pay lots of money for extremely well equipped, fuel-efficient cars." Lutz said higher gas prices would help accelerate the transition to alternative fuels and cleaner forms of propulsion.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 753
From: Annapolis Md. USA
Well of course they are saying this considering they fear CAFE standards. What else would they say in their shoes?
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Registered User
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 753
From: Annapolis Md. USA
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CARiD
Supporting Vendor Group Purchases and Sales
0
Jan 27, 2015 06:27 AM
CARiD
Supporting Vendor Group Purchases and Sales
0
Dec 26, 2014 04:20 AM
chevroletfreak
LT1 Based Engine Tech
202
Jul 4, 2005 05:00 PM
