I've suggested the tax idea in the past.

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #182,979

Picture of a6l6e6x

11/4/04 11:33:34 PM

I've suggested the tax idea in the past.

What I had suggested was a penny increase a week for 5 years. Perhaps that's to fast adapt to in both habits and products from manufacturers. But, it seems like 10 years aught to be plenty for everyone to adapt.

I recall how after the second gas crunch (~1979, first crunch was in 1973) efficient cars were hard to find on dealer lots. The Japanese cars were at a premium. Detroit got serious in changing designs after that.

Alex

In politics, what begins in fear usually ends in folly. -- Samuel Taylor Coleridge, poet (1772-1834)

Post #182,982

by Another Scott

11/4/04 11:47:00 PM

Several things happened at once in the 1970s.

I like your timeframe better. A 30 year timeframe seems very long to me (and we know that Congress would want to change the tax every year or so anyway).

There were more stringent safety regulations (e.g. 5 mph bumpers, air bags), more stringent emissions regulations (e.g. catalytic converters became ubiquitous), and CAFE standards. It was good for the industry and for the economy because more sophisticated engines were required (e.g. 4 valve per cylinder heads), and more efficient, more sophisticated cars that the manufacturers could charge more for resulted.

US manufacturers are being very short sighted by not pursuing efficiency. Honda and Toyota "get it". GM, Ford, and DC don't to anywhere near the same extent. They must see that very soon giant pickups, SUVs and minivans aren't going to sell well. If they don't get on the stick, the Japanese and Korean car companies are going to eat them up again. Hybrids are [link|http://www.freep.com/money/autonews/hybrid8e_20041008.htm|growing] and US companies are late to the party.

I'm generally opposed to government trying to guide the market, in the abstract. But oil consumption isn't just a consumer-choice issue. It's a national security issue, it's a balance of trade issue, it's a technological competitiveness issue, and it's an environmental issue. The US needs to have government policies that recognize this, and I think that includes raising CAFE standards.

Cheers,
Scott.
(Who remembers gas being over $1 a gallon when he was making ~$3.10 an hour.)

the political and the personal - (rcareaga) - (44) - Nov. 3, 2004, 08:34:28 PM EST

Badly. - (imric) - (1) - Nov. 3, 2004, 08:44:22 PM EST

I'm afraid I have to agree with imric - (jb4) - Nov. 4, 2004, 06:49:22 PM EST

thats why we have liquor stores and gun shows, no pesky - (daemon) - Nov. 3, 2004, 08:53:04 PM EST

I didn't think much would change either way. - (Another Scott) - Nov. 3, 2004, 08:55:11 PM EST

Surprise - (bepatient) - (1) - Nov. 3, 2004, 09:22:48 PM EST

Zell Miller - (rcareaga) - Nov. 3, 2004, 09:37:37 PM EST

I am not disappointed - (Silverlock) - (4) - Nov. 3, 2004, 09:45:51 PM EST

And that is ridiculous - (bepatient) - (3) - Nov. 4, 2004, 07:43:44 AM EST

You need to put the crank pipe down Bill -NT - (Silverlock) - (2) - Nov. 4, 2004, 09:00:57 AM EST

Golf.. golf can do this to an otherwise functioning mind -NT - (Ashton) - (1) - Nov. 11, 2004, 09:44:40 PM EST

Shame I didn't get to play much - (bepatient) - Nov. 12, 2004, 07:47:07 AM EST

I'm coping - (Nightowl) - Nov. 3, 2004, 09:50:51 PM EST

Well, I'm wondering if I should develop an interest in... - (a6l6e6x) - Nov. 3, 2004, 10:11:18 PM EST

Drained. - (inthane-chan) - (2) - Nov. 3, 2004, 10:22:38 PM EST

Sorry 'bout your birthday, Thane :-( -NT - (jb4) - (1) - Nov. 4, 2004, 06:52:14 PM EST

Eh, no biggie - fetal position is comfortable. :D -NT - (inthane-chan) - Nov. 4, 2004, 06:53:47 PM EST

I see the two-party system as a pendulum - (FuManChu) - (2) - Nov. 4, 2004, 12:49:44 AM EST

Re: I see the two-party system as a pendulum - (inthane-chan) - Nov. 4, 2004, 11:21:19 AM EST

Yep, it's the pits -NT - (deSitter) - Nov. 4, 2004, 11:34:29 AM EST

Anticipating the destruction of the last super power - (tuberculosis) - (10) - Nov. 4, 2004, 01:00:17 AM EST

Yes, but a slow one. Maybe in my life but not within 4 years -NT - (FuManChu) - Nov. 4, 2004, 01:16:19 AM EST

Re: foreign oil dependence. - (mmoffitt) - (8) - Nov. 4, 2004, 09:55:30 AM EST

Eliminate dependence on foreign oil with this - (tuberculosis) - (7) - Nov. 4, 2004, 10:46:37 PM EST

Another solution. - (Another Scott) - (6) - Nov. 4, 2004, 11:11:32 PM EST

I've suggested the tax idea in the past. - (a6l6e6x) - (1) - Nov. 4, 2004, 11:33:34 PM EST

Several things happened at once in the 1970s. - (Another Scott) - Nov. 4, 2004, 11:47:00 PM EST

Re: pricing in liters - (jb4) - (3) - Nov. 5, 2004, 10:02:49 AM EST

On word usage - (drewk) - Nov. 5, 2004, 10:13:37 AM EST

YKMV - (jbrabeck) - (1) - Nov. 5, 2004, 10:20:32 AM EST

That's more directly useful - (drewk) - Nov. 5, 2004, 10:49:40 AM EST

Re: the political and the personal - (deSitter) - Nov. 4, 2004, 01:58:54 AM EST

Ambivalent - (Andrew Grygus) - (5) - Nov. 4, 2004, 03:42:41 AM EST

You make a good point. - (admin) - (4) - Nov. 4, 2004, 10:15:20 AM EST

Oh, Bush isn't going to clean it up. - (Andrew Grygus) - (3) - Nov. 4, 2004, 12:30:41 PM EST

Only "another"? - (Yendor) - Nov. 4, 2004, 12:49:15 PM EST

Exactly. - (admin) - (1) - Nov. 4, 2004, 03:22:58 PM EST

{chortle} ..yearning for the Dead Parrot crew to rhapsodize -NT - (Ashton) - Nov. 12, 2004, 08:19:06 PM EST

Re: the political and the personal - (JvlivsCaesar) - (6) - Nov. 5, 2004, 03:30:39 AM EST

deep man, well said -NT - (deSitter) - Nov. 5, 2004, 04:26:17 AM EST

No argument here. -NT - (inthane-chan) - Nov. 5, 2004, 10:48:55 AM EST

Don't be sorry for the neocons... - (jb4) - (3) - Nov. 5, 2004, 04:00:40 PM EST

Re: Don't be sorry for the neocons... - (JvlivsCaesar) - (2) - Nov. 7, 2004, 04:04:55 AM EST

You kidding?!? - (jb4) - Nov. 8, 2004, 02:04:04 PM EST

Thank you for that idea. - (Arkadiy) - Nov. 8, 2004, 05:16:30 PM EST

Perhaps if we built this large wooden badger...
75 ms