What is Digg?Sponsored by Norton 2010
80's metal band Dokken vs. a chicken. Who would win? view!
everyclickmatters.com - The question has finally been answered, and we've got it on tape. See the showdown.
208 Comments
- 0260, on 06/11/2009, -7/+72If only we can have a car that ran on useless politicians
- neelshiv, on 06/10/2009, -13/+77No.
- inactive, on 06/11/2009, -23/+57The Dimocrats' energy policy, in a nutshell: 1. Raise taxes to reduce gasoline consumption; 2. Raise taxes to make up for reduced gasoline consumption. 3. Repeat until thrown out of office.
- FakingFamous, on 06/10/2009, -9/+40it's all BS. gas prices and taxes will continue to rise regardless of how many eectric cars enter the roadways
- johndavidjack, on 06/11/2009, -12/+31Oh good, so it's more expensive to move food and normal merchandise around the country, causing prices on everything to increase.
Great critical thinking there. - asgardshill, on 06/11/2009, -5/+23Then prepare yourself for $5.00 Big Macs, $10.00 gallons of milk and $70 no-name brand blue jeans, coming to a retail outlet near you. Chances are, if you eat it, wear it or use it, a truck brought it to you.
- diemunkiesdie, on 06/11/2009, -3/+20GPS tracking for taxes? I think not! If they really want to do it on distance driven then they can just look at emissions reports for the car. Compare the odometer reading from the previous years emissions test with the reading the next year. Done! Distance driven can be immediately calculated and the tax can be determined!
But they should not go to distance driven tax if they don't also get rid of the tax on gasoline. - inactive, on 06/11/2009, -1/+17I would buy 42
- NorthMass, on 06/11/2009, -4/+20Both parties are full of crap, how can people still be stuck in this mindset that one party is inherently good for the most part, and one is inherently bad for the most part?
- IADTatami, on 06/11/2009, -3/+19I'd rather suffer higher gasoline taxes than an expensive and invasive mileage tax predicated upon installing GPS devices in every vehicle.
- FLUX, on 06/11/2009, -4/+19The god damn govt needs to learn to live on less, not figure out new ways to take my god damn hard earned money to waste on pork projects for corrupt politicians
- Richandler, on 06/11/2009, -11/+25Hey I have and idea lets see if liberals can find something they don't want to tax!
- Xaevier, on 06/11/2009, -3/+17They should just cut all their stupid pet projects and we wouldn't be in debt in the first place.
- inactive, on 06/11/2009, -2/+14Truckers and Freight movers already pay a lot in taxes, more than you would ever realize.
- d3dm, on 06/11/2009, -3/+14Abortions?
- publiclurker, on 06/11/2009, -1/+12If you are actually using the road less then you are not paying more. Stop trying to make everyone else pay for you mechanical toupee.
- tonmil, on 06/11/2009, -5/+15The prices shown for most consumer goods don't have the tax bundled into the figure. Too bad the prices quoted at gas stations don't show the price BEFORE the tax is added. Unfortunately, most Americans don't realize how much tax they are really paying, which can be over 20%.
- stox, on 06/11/2009, -15/+24Tax vehicles by how much wear and tear they put on the roads. Small cars put almost no wear on the road. An 100,000lb truck puts an amazing amount of wear on the road.
- pissshivers, on 06/11/2009, -0/+9***** no, tax weed instead...
- walruspanzer, on 06/11/2009, -2/+10Taxes in place now fund state road projects. No new taxes!
- crypticcipher, on 06/11/2009, -1/+9Ever seen a weigh station? That's exactly the reason that trucks are heavily regulated, heavily monitored and consistently taxed.
- bury, on 06/11/2009, -1/+9Another problem with that is not every road is publicly funded. I'm not paying taxes for driving on my own property or on a toll road I'm already paying a toll for.
- freshgrease, on 06/11/2009, -3/+11That's a legitimate claim, but I would only buy a gas sipper to save gas. If you are just going to offset that savings, I'll just get a car that I really want that'll make a hippie cry himself to sleep at night.
- Ugoff, on 06/11/2009, -0/+7Though I'm sure it would be a dirty resource to use, it's at least self replenishing.
- MasterGrief, on 06/11/2009, -2/+9Calling a group of people names does nothing to elevate the name-caller's position.
Also, Democrats, Republicans... We really should have more than two major parties.
Two's only one more than China. - inactive, on 06/11/2009, -9/+16Taxation is theft.
- Nerys, on 06/11/2009, -0/+799% of the time singling out one party IS IN FACT an implied and intended endorsement for the other party.
you see the only people who really get on republicans cases are democrats meaning there intent is clear democrats are better
the only people who REALLY get on democrats cases are republicans meaning there intent is clear republicans are better.
the only people who do NOT intend to endorse one or the other implicitly are USUALLY up front and pretty clear about it.
I am one of those people
THEY BOTH SUCK option D please None of the Above. - Ymeg, on 06/11/2009, -0/+6like the government is not already getting their share of our profits.
- ConfirmedCynic, on 06/11/2009, -1/+7Do gas taxes even go to maintain the roads, or do they just go into general revenues?
Sounds counterproductive to me. - NorthMass, on 06/11/2009, -1/+7The more meat you eat, the more you damage the enviornment. Time to tax the carnivores.
- ontain, on 06/11/2009, -1/+7such higher prices on items from farther away could actually spark more local businesses and also a demand for items that aren't built to break. quality made stuff like our parents had.
- 5urr3al5am, on 06/11/2009, -1/+7how about the Politicians just GTFO!?
- Dream0Weaver, on 06/11/2009, -3/+9Trees...? No... Religion?
- DarkShroud, on 06/11/2009, -0/+5In Europe you at least get health care for those taxes. Here the polititions blow the money by giving it to companies run by their friends.
- PsychoPNut, on 06/11/2009, -5/+10in short:
just because you save money should you be forced to pay more for other things?
no - foohookups311, on 06/11/2009, -1/+6@xexx
It's really a shame your this stupid. If you followed the auto industry at all you would know your comment #2 is ignorant and shows lack of research. It is a known fact that GM and Chrysler have always done much better overseas in foreign countries. Just do a google search for "GM sales overseas" notice I didn't put anything in the search for looking for positive articles. You will get bombarded with articles that mention how GM does better overseas. Here is one:
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/07/business/f ...
Here is the first result when we use Chrysler:
http://www.motorauthority.com/despite-troubles-at- ...
Okay now for the rest of your points:
1) Yes "Do Nothing" has always been good for capitalism. Okay maybe not in the literal sense but LIMITED government intervention is what keeps companies lean and allows for restructure. Not funding them with my tax dollars so that they can keep their failing institution and when they do finally fail anyways spend more tax payer dollars. You don't give a drunk a drink.
3) "Pollute the Planet" - Keep drinking the Kool-Aid my man the environmental wack jobs want YOU to drive less while they fly in there private jets (AL GORE sound familiar) How much is old Al making off his "climate change" - carbon offset scam? We just gonna ignore his financial ties to his message? No... That would make your Kool-Aid taste bad. Sounds like a Bernie Madoff in the making.. And why aren't you all up Communist China's ass about this there standards? Their environment standards are a joke compared to ours.
4) Yeah and this is all part of the republican conspiracy to keep the public in fear...RIGHTTT??? /sarcasm
5) Oil was already dropping before Bush was out. The rise to $150 a barrel oil was because of economics. Please drive less; the price comes down. Supply and Demand sprinkled with a main ingredient of Speculators.
6) ***** right we should drill baby drill.... We have the oil in our own backyard and drilling it would lessen our dependence on foreign oil, therefor giving the Saudis less power and drive the price of oil even further down.
7) Keep tuning to The Daily Show to get all your information HAHA - inactive, on 06/11/2009, -1/+6"Do you own research."
This is *****. If I said there are statistics out there pointing out that 80% of anti-tax activists willingly suck off their fathers, you'd be right to ask for a citation. When someone asserts a fact, it's up to THEM to cite their source. It isn't up to everyone else to look for it. - GamerXR72, on 06/11/2009, -4/+9Try living in a place without a government to tax you. Your tune will change mighty fast.
- inactive, on 06/11/2009, -2/+7Just tax the ***** out of the rich, they probably don't need all that money they worked hard for. /s
- enigmaneo, on 06/11/2009, -0/+5I think we should take the conservative route on this. First cut all taxes for gas, and then on top of that give a rebate. Let the roads and infrastructure fall to crap. Then we sell the crap roads, bridges and infrastructure to a few rich private companies. On top of that we give them tax breaks to rebuild our infrastructure. Then they take the money, build crap roads and infrastructure and get rich. Then they probably add tolls to these roads to milk the customers. Sounds like a great plan to me.
- Jeepinator, on 06/11/2009, -0/+5What we need is positive reinforcement if anything. Punishing someone for driving a low-mpg car will just make them angry. Rewarding people for making good decisions is what needs to be done.
- cashmonkey, on 06/11/2009, -1/+5...it's expensive anyway. Read above, "wear and tear on road". Who do you think pays for the road damage at the moment? It's the tax payers but not the tax payers that did the damage. Hence the distorted market.
- AReallyGoodName, on 06/11/2009, -1/+5It's exactly what already happens at the moment.
A big vehicle tears up the road more per km travelled. It also pays more tax because it also uses more fuel per km.
The system is pretty fair as it is. - inactive, on 06/11/2009, -0/+4escalade hybrid is 325 lb. heavier than the normal one.
- biobio903, on 06/11/2009, -1/+5I'm going to burn a lot more gas tomorrow just because you said that. Way to do your part!
- Nerys, on 06/11/2009, -1/+5actually the wear and tear idea is pointless. CARS do not wear out roads. Neither do TRUCKS.
the actual WEAR and TEAR caused by the cars driving on the roads is almost ZERO compared to the REAL source of wear and tear.
LOUSY WORKMANSHIP making the roads Horrible Maintenance and WEATHER.
There can never be $10 gallons of milk because people would simply NOT BUY MILK.
You can not charge anything you want for OPTIONAL items. you can only charge what the market will bear.
that is the problem with gas ITS NOT OPTIONAL. so they CAN in fact charge pretty much anything they want because the market has no choice but to "bear" it.
the limit here is not what the market can bear (you and me) but what the market can bear (countries going to war or not)
Its a whole different ball game when its a necessity.
Do you know one of the reasons gas prices went DOWN? its because they realized they were pushing TOO HARD which was accelerating development of alternatives to gasoline.
SO they "let up" a bit to slow down development of alternatives. Then they had the bad luck to do this at the same time our economy went splat so it went down A LOT. :-) - altgeeky1, on 06/11/2009, -1/+5Why do you want America to fail?
- sodade, on 06/11/2009, -1/+5Or gee, maybe america will realize that trucking is ***** lame and that we should rebuild rail infrastructure?
- jintaehuan, on 06/11/2009, -4/+8More higher gas milage cars DOES NOT mean less gas used. This is augmented by the fact that there will continue to be MORE vehicles on the road in the future. If anything, the most optimistic theory would be that the amount of gas used will slow its rate of incline.
- tas08, on 06/11/2009, -0/+4At least, certainly not yet.
Raising the gas tax like this is incredibly regressive. The people who were able to afford to get the new cars that get better gas mileage, won't notice the tax much. However, the vast majority of people are not those people. We can't afford to buy a new car, even if it's more efficient, so a higher tax would just hurt us, who use the same amount of gas as always because we have to.
Side note. I don't believe the gas mileage on our cars actually is increasing much at all anyway. My 1997 Ford Escort with 100,000 miles on it gets between 35 and 45 MPG highway (towards the higher end if I'm using cruise control). -
Show 51 - 100 of 221 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is