Replies are closed for this discussion.
I know they do, but massively raising the price of gasoline would effectively screw the customer.
Joel said:Do you think businesses don't factor the cost of taxes into their services? It is no different than employee salary, rent, raw materials, etc. It is just another bill that needs to be paid, so the price of the product or service must be sufficient to pay that bill.
Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:Yes Doug, just screw your customers - who might not be your customers much longer if you do.
Joel said:Simple, pass on the cost to the consumer. Businesses don't pay taxes in a direct sense, it is a cost of doing business and the customer ultimately foots the bill.
notoriousDUG said:Jill,
I just ran numbers because I was interested in it but your fuel tax would actually put me out of business or increase the cost of my service to my customers. I have a need to get technicians all over the Midwest, and sometimes the country, in a timely manner with hundreds of pounds of parts and tools. I have jobs that occasionally require me to transport a large welder/generator and air compressor to customers sites as well as some where I have to utilize a truck with a crane on it. How would you expect a business such as mine to cope with the fuel tax?
Simple, pass on the cost to the consumer. Businesses don't pay taxes in a direct sense, it is a cost of doing business and the customer ultimately foots the bill.
notoriousDUG said:Jill,
I just ran numbers because I was interested in it but your fuel tax would actually put me out of business or increase the cost of my service to my customers.
I have a need to get technicians all over the Midwest, and sometimes the country, in a timely manner with hundreds of pounds of parts and tools. I have jobs that occasionally require me to transport a large welder/generator and air compressor to customers sites as well as some where I have to utilize a truck with a crane on it.
How would you expect a business such as mine to cope with the fuel tax?
I suppose Ali hada good point about paying for cars.
and the thoughts about incentives- perhaps we need to transtition to alterantive vehicles, slowly so as not to put anyone out of business by paying for high gas taxes- the point is not to pay more taxes but to create a desire for alternative vehicles-
perhaps if we start with govt. assistance- the govt. could use moneys gained slowly from the decrease in need to spend on overseas oil, to actually make a free exchange of gasoline vehicles to alternatives, little by little, perhaps just for the poor who cannot afford to buy the new cars, or perhaps with an alphabet system, with one by one, every single person in america is supplied with a free exchange vehicle for the automotive they currently own.
wouldnt that be awesome if we were so organized that we could transition totally and completely to alterantives with every single person in america getting a free exchange vehicle to start out with, that later would be replaced as usual for an ordinary parts replacement price as is currently normal, all for free, and all paid for INSTEAD OF OIL, so that the govt. didnt actually have to pay for the programs with tax money.
of course I wouldn't get one because I only own a bicycle.
by the time everyone had one, alternative transportation would be up and running, and our transportation economy would be totoally green, and self sufficent!!!
HAHAHAHAA!!
notoriousDUG said:I can't tell if you are legitimately a crazy person or if you are actively trying to get a negative reaction...
Where would the money to give away all these free cars come from?
What would be their fuel source?
Do you grasp hold of the fact that the government is not going to be motivated to spend money weening us off of oil because it would eliminate a large part of their income?
Are you ever going to answer any of my questions?
jillnerkowski said:I suppose Ali hada good point about paying for cars.
and the thoughts about incentives- perhaps we need to transtition to alterantive vehicles, slowly so as not to put anyone out of business by paying for high gas taxes- the point is not to pay more taxes but to create a desire for alternative vehicles-
perhaps if we start with govt. assistance- the govt. could use moneys gained slowly from the decrease in need to spend on overseas oil, to actually make a free exchange of gasoline vehicles to alternatives, little by little, perhaps just for the poor who cannot afford to buy the new cars, or perhaps with an alphabet system, with one by one, every single person in america is supplied with a free exchange vehicle for the automotive they currently own.
wouldnt that be awesome if we were so organized that we could transition totally and completely to alterantives with every single person in america getting a free exchange vehicle to start out with, that later would be replaced as usual for an ordinary parts replacement price as is currently normal, all for free, and all paid for INSTEAD OF OIL, so that the govt. didnt actually have to pay for the programs with tax money.
of course I wouldn't get one because I only own a bicycle.
by the time everyone had one, alternative transportation would be up and running, and our transportation economy would be totoally green, and self sufficent!!!
HAHAHAHAA!!
Well, to get the govt. to pay for the cars: the price of a barrel of crude oil is about 80 dollars which is about 42 gallons of gasoline, which is roughly 100 dollars per barrel.
A smart electric car uses about 1/3 the cost of gas ,for the cost of electricity, to charge the car.
If an average ford taurus, runs 30 miles per gallon, 60 miles per day, 22,000 miles per year, and expires in 7 years, and the cost of a ford taurus and an electric smart car are roughly equivalent brand new, then it would cost roughly 50,ooo gallons, or 1,200 barrels of gas, or 120,000 dollars worth of crude oil to replace one car, which is 4 times more than the cost of the car itself.
If the money saved from using one electric smart car, is 2/3 of the cost to run one gasoline car, and a standard car drives 22,000 miles per year/30 miles per gallon, using 7,333 gallons per year@2.50 per gallon, it costs 18,333 dollars per year to drive, 2/3rds of which , if a smart car is used compared to a taurus, it would save 12,000 dollars per year to drive a smart car, which would pay for the cost of a smart car in about 3 years!
how to get from that savings to the savings of our govt. from the reduction in crude oil purchases is a whole other story.
But how does that provide the government with the money to buy the cars you are advocating they give out to people?
The savings are to the consumer; not the government.
Not only that but the reduction in fuel use is going to cost the government income, not increase their income.
Seriously, are you insane or are you just fucking with us because I honestly cannot tell.
jillnerkowski said:notoriousDUG said:I can't tell if you are legitimately a crazy person or if you are actively trying to get a negative reaction...
Where would the money to give away all these free cars come from?
What would be their fuel source?
Do you grasp hold of the fact that the government is not going to be motivated to spend money weening us off of oil because it would eliminate a large part of their income?
Are you ever going to answer any of my questions?
jillnerkowski said:I suppose Ali hada good point about paying for cars.
and the thoughts about incentives- perhaps we need to transtition to alterantive vehicles, slowly so as not to put anyone out of business by paying for high gas taxes- the point is not to pay more taxes but to create a desire for alternative vehicles-
perhaps if we start with govt. assistance- the govt. could use moneys gained slowly from the decrease in need to spend on overseas oil, to actually make a free exchange of gasoline vehicles to alternatives, little by little, perhaps just for the poor who cannot afford to buy the new cars, or perhaps with an alphabet system, with one by one, every single person in america is supplied with a free exchange vehicle for the automotive they currently own.
wouldnt that be awesome if we were so organized that we could transition totally and completely to alterantives with every single person in america getting a free exchange vehicle to start out with, that later would be replaced as usual for an ordinary parts replacement price as is currently normal, all for free, and all paid for INSTEAD OF OIL, so that the govt. didnt actually have to pay for the programs with tax money.
of course I wouldn't get one because I only own a bicycle.
by the time everyone had one, alternative transportation would be up and running, and our transportation economy would be totoally green, and self sufficent!!!
HAHAHAHAA!!
Well, to get the govt. to pay for the cars: the price of a barrel of crude oil is about 80 dollars which is about 42 gallons of gasoline, which is roughly 100 dollars per barrel.
A smart electric car uses about 1/3 the cost of gas ,for the cost of electricity, to charge the car.
If an average ford taurus, runs 30 miles per gallon, 60 miles per day, 22,000 miles per year, and expires in 7 years, and the cost of a ford taurus and an electric smart car are roughly equivalent brand new, then it would cost roughly 50,ooo gallons, or 1,200 barrels of gas, or 120,000 dollars worth of crude oil to replace one car, which is 4 times more than the cost of the car itself.
If the money saved from using one electric smart car, is 2/3 of the cost to run one gasoline car, and a standard car drives 22,000 miles per year/30 miles per gallon, using 7,333 gallons per year@2.50 per gallon, it costs 18,333 dollars per year to drive, 2/3rds of which , if a smart car is used compared to a taurus, it would save 12,000 dollars per year to drive a smart car, which would pay for the cost of a smart car in about 3 years!
how to get from that savings to the savings of our govt. from the reduction in crude oil purchases is a whole other story.
But how does that provide the government with the money to buy the cars you are advocating they give out to people?
The savings are to the consumer; not the government.
Not only that but the reduction in fuel use is going to cost the government income, not increase their income.
Seriously, are you insane or are you just fucking with us because I honestly cannot tell.
jillnerkowski said:notoriousDUG said:I can't tell if you are legitimately a crazy person or if you are actively trying to get a negative reaction...
Where would the money to give away all these free cars come from?
What would be their fuel source?
Do you grasp hold of the fact that the government is not going to be motivated to spend money weening us off of oil because it would eliminate a large part of their income?
Are you ever going to answer any of my questions?
jillnerkowski said:I suppose Ali hada good point about paying for cars.
and the thoughts about incentives- perhaps we need to transtition to alterantive vehicles, slowly so as not to put anyone out of business by paying for high gas taxes- the point is not to pay more taxes but to create a desire for alternative vehicles-
perhaps if we start with govt. assistance- the govt. could use moneys gained slowly from the decrease in need to spend on overseas oil, to actually make a free exchange of gasoline vehicles to alternatives, little by little, perhaps just for the poor who cannot afford to buy the new cars, or perhaps with an alphabet system, with one by one, every single person in america is supplied with a free exchange vehicle for the automotive they currently own.
wouldnt that be awesome if we were so organized that we could transition totally and completely to alterantives with every single person in america getting a free exchange vehicle to start out with, that later would be replaced as usual for an ordinary parts replacement price as is currently normal, all for free, and all paid for INSTEAD OF OIL, so that the govt. didnt actually have to pay for the programs with tax money.
of course I wouldn't get one because I only own a bicycle.
by the time everyone had one, alternative transportation would be up and running, and our transportation economy would be totoally green, and self sufficent!!!
HAHAHAHAA!!
Well, to get the govt. to pay for the cars: the price of a barrel of crude oil is about 80 dollars which is about 42 gallons of gasoline, which is roughly 100 dollars per barrel.
A smart electric car uses about 1/3 the cost of gas ,for the cost of electricity, to charge the car.
If an average ford taurus, runs 30 miles per gallon, 60 miles per day, 22,000 miles per year, and expires in 7 years, and the cost of a ford taurus and an electric smart car are roughly equivalent brand new, then it would cost roughly 50,ooo gallons, or 1,200 barrels of gas, or 120,000 dollars worth of crude oil to replace one car, which is 4 times more than the cost of the car itself.
If the money saved from using one electric smart car, is 2/3 of the cost to run one gasoline car, and a standard car drives 22,000 miles per year/30 miles per gallon, using 7,333 gallons per year@2.50 per gallon, it costs 18,333 dollars per year to drive, 2/3rds of which , if a smart car is used compared to a taurus, it would save 12,000 dollars per year to drive a smart car, which would pay for the cost of a smart car in about 3 years!
how to get from that savings to the savings of our govt. from the reduction in crude oil purchases is a whole other story.
to notorious dug, like jeff schneider pointed out way back in the discussion, our military spends close to 400 billion a year .
and by : http://ntl.bts.gov/data/military.pdf, 32 billion of that is spent specifically to defend middleast oil.
another report states that at the cost of 7 dollars per gallon ( which they then estimated for 2010, two years ago) the price of gas would knock 24 million households with cars off the road, a little more than half of which have access to public transportation.
asssuming the rest of us could afford either the cost of the gas, granted with budget reductions and complaints or the purchase of a new alternative vehicle, the govt, would be responsible for equipting 10 million people with alternative cars.
if the price of a smart car is 35,000, then the savings in military costs could buy those cars in ten years. thats a long time, but if they were provided on a loan basis, it would be more feasible.
of course a behind the scenes is the conversion of electricity to alternatives as well.
by the time igot here in our discussion, I wonder if it might just be better to make regulations after all and just mandate that all new car purchases be alternative vehicles. and then with the trickle down effect they'd catch up with the poor people after a while.
can we talk about cycling (something we know a lot about, it's less controversial here, etc.) ... or not ?
sorry ...
DB
notoriousDUG said:But how does that provide the government with the money to buy the cars you are advocating they give out to people?
The savings are to the consumer; not the government.
Not only that but the reduction in fuel use is going to cost the government income, not increase their income.
Seriously, are you insane or are you just fucking with us because I honestly cannot tell.
jillnerkowski said:notoriousDUG said:I can't tell if you are legitimately a crazy person or if you are actively trying to get a negative reaction...
Where would the money to give away all these free cars come from?
What would be their fuel source?
Do you grasp hold of the fact that the government is not going to be motivated to spend money weening us off of oil because it would eliminate a large part of their income?
Are you ever going to answer any of my questions?
jillnerkowski said:I suppose Ali hada good point about paying for cars.
and the thoughts about incentives- perhaps we need to transtition to alterantive vehicles, slowly so as not to put anyone out of business by paying for high gas taxes- the point is not to pay more taxes but to create a desire for alternative vehicles-
perhaps if we start with govt. assistance- the govt. could use moneys gained slowly from the decrease in need to spend on overseas oil, to actually make a free exchange of gasoline vehicles to alternatives, little by little, perhaps just for the poor who cannot afford to buy the new cars, or perhaps with an alphabet system, with one by one, every single person in america is supplied with a free exchange vehicle for the automotive they currently own.
wouldnt that be awesome if we were so organized that we could transition totally and completely to alterantives with every single person in america getting a free exchange vehicle to start out with, that later would be replaced as usual for an ordinary parts replacement price as is currently normal, all for free, and all paid for INSTEAD OF OIL, so that the govt. didnt actually have to pay for the programs with tax money.
of course I wouldn't get one because I only own a bicycle.
by the time everyone had one, alternative transportation would be up and running, and our transportation economy would be totoally green, and self sufficent!!!
HAHAHAHAA!!
Well, to get the govt. to pay for the cars: the price of a barrel of crude oil is about 80 dollars which is about 42 gallons of gasoline, which is roughly 100 dollars per barrel.
A smart electric car uses about 1/3 the cost of gas ,for the cost of electricity, to charge the car.
If an average ford taurus, runs 30 miles per gallon, 60 miles per day, 22,000 miles per year, and expires in 7 years, and the cost of a ford taurus and an electric smart car are roughly equivalent brand new, then it would cost roughly 50,ooo gallons, or 1,200 barrels of gas, or 120,000 dollars worth of crude oil to replace one car, which is 4 times more than the cost of the car itself.
If the money saved from using one electric smart car, is 2/3 of the cost to run one gasoline car, and a standard car drives 22,000 miles per year/30 miles per gallon, using 7,333 gallons per year@2.50 per gallon, it costs 18,333 dollars per year to drive, 2/3rds of which , if a smart car is used compared to a taurus, it would save 12,000 dollars per year to drive a smart car, which would pay for the cost of a smart car in about 3 years!
how to get from that savings to the savings of our govt. from the reduction in crude oil purchases is a whole other story.
to notorious dug, like jeff schneider pointed out way back in the discussion, our military spends close to 400 billion a year .
and by : http://ntl.bts.gov/data/military.pdf, 32 billion of that is spent specifically to defend middleast oil.
another report states that at the cost of 7 dollars per gallon ( which they then estimated for 2010, two years ago) the price of gas would knock 24 million households with cars off the road, a little more than half of which have access to public transportation.
asssuming the rest of us could afford either the cost of the gas, granted with budget reductions and complaints or the purchase of a new alternative vehicle, the govt, would be responsible for equipting 10 million people with alternative cars.
if the price of a smart car is 35,000, then the savings in military costs could buy those cars in ten years. thats a long time, but if they were provided on a loan basis, it would be more feasible.
of course a behind the scenes is the conversion of electricity to alternatives as well.
by the time igot here in our discussion, I wonder if it might just be better to make regulations after all and just mandate that all new car purchases be alternative vehicles. and then with the trickle down effect they'd catch up with the poor people after a while.
plus besides the war costs, if the govt. doesnt actually have to purchase oil, it might save some money from the actual costs of oil, which may not all go back into the govt. by the time all is said and done.
plus dan, with the change over to alterantives, much of these will be bicycles and new bike lanes, covering more miles than ever for making bicycling safer , more fun, and more practical. we may even two significant lanes, one for vehicles travelling more than 35 miles per hour ,and one for those travelling less than 35 miles or less.
these may be various mopeds and motor scooters, electric bikes ,and, three wheel covered electric bikes, and things four wheel sophisticated gocarts.
with additional taxes, we may be able to cover all the major routes form the suburbs to the cities with just such bike lanes so that we never have to hear again , oh bicycle riding is a good idea, and its healthy and green and all but its not for me. everything is too far where I live.
203 members
269 members
63 members
172 members
119 members