Thread
:
Lake Superior RAPIDLY WARMING!
View Single Post
#
62
posted to rec.boats.cruising
Keith nuttle
external usenet poster
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jan 2007
Posts: 388
Lake Superior RAPIDLY WARMING!
Bruce in Bangkok wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 08:10:52 -0400,
wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 08:01:59 +0700, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 10:47:36 -0500, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:
"Bruce in Bangkok" wrote in message
...
I've always advocated an annual "road tax" based on engine size. Use a
base level, say 1,500 c.c., for a nominal tax. then as the
displacement goes up the tax goes up, but at, say multiples of 100
c.c..
Say you bought a 2.0 liter car. The first 1,500 c.c costs, say 10
dollars a year, the next 100 c.c = 2 X original tax; second 100 c.c. =
3 X O.T., and so on. You could do the same thing with horse power but
it is easier to get into arguments about horse power then it is about
displacement.
People will say, OH! But I need a big engine". I remember when a 100
HP engine was a BIG engine and most people got along perfectly well
with about 65 HP. You can certainly get 100 H.P. out of a 1.5 liter
engine these days.
This is not a new idea, by the way, it has been used in Europe for
many years.
Cheers,
Bruce in Bangkok
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)
How would you calculate the horsepower on a car like my Impala, which shifts
into 3 cylinder mode whenever it doesn't need all six? Cruising down the
highway on long trips I get over 32mpg, but that drops down to around 28 for
mostly city driving (of which I do hardly any).
Fuel taxes take all that into consideration automatically.
I wouldn't even begin to base any plan on horse power. As I said, it
is too easy to get into an argument about horse power and impossible
to argue about displacement.
The point is, if you want to decrease the numbers of giant motor cars
with the idea that you will decrease global warming, or whatever
reason you have, then this is a method of doing it.
The nut of the matter is, of course, does the population of the U.S.
(the group that the original poster addressed) really WANT to decrease
emissions, or simply give lip service to the idea.
Cheers,
Bruce in Bangkok
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)
It should be based on Vehicle weight.
Right. a F-1 car weighs 1,334 lbs. gets 3 MPG with about 700 H.P.
A Honda Jazz weighs about 2,390 lbs. gets 51.4 MPG with about 77 H.P.
Cheers,
Bruce in Bangkok
(bruceinbangkokatgmaildotcom)
I have a solution: NO NEW TAXES. Lets not use the tax system as a
vehicle for social change. There are some people who need a large
vehicle to complete their daily errands, and their need will exist no
matter what the liberals want.
Reply With Quote
Keith nuttle
View Public Profile
Find all posts by Keith nuttle