"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...


More refinery operating would reduce the "spot" increases around the
country
due to local shortages caused by the reformulated gas requirements. Any
easing of EPA requirements to operate the the older refineries would
result
in the liebrals screaming about Bush polluting.


Is there ***any*** environmental improvement you support, or even
understand?

And whomever buys that car will be bitching about the cost of gas, and how
they can't afford to drive it. ; )


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Speaking of status symbols, I was just at the barber shop, browsing a car
magazine. Lincoln's selling what they call a "luxury pickup truck".
Someone ought to be shot for that. You *know* they're not going to bought
by bricklayers & carpenters who are gonna beat the crap out of them. That
leaves.....well...you know who.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Wow, I just doubled checked my rated MPG on my car and it is 20 mpg city
and 25 mpg highway, that is better than I remembered. When I buy my next
car it will be a hybrid, due to the forecasted gas prices in the future.
When gas reaches $4 gallon, and it will, people will still be complaining
about the cost of gas as they drive status symbol luxury SUV.



"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
I purchased a fuel efficient SUV because the cost of fuel was low enough
that I did not mind 18 mpg. With the increase in fuel costs and no
realistic change in the future, in fact, it is reasonable to forecast
more increases in the future. I know my next car will be hybrid.

The increase in fuel costs will happen under any president or congress.
It is a world market that is controlling the cost of fuel. Some people
in here either can't seem to comprehend that fact, or prefer to ignore
it for political gain.


"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
The reason for the increase in cars w/ lower fuel efficiency is the
increase
in SUV's and pickup trucks. This represents a change in buying
habits,
not
a change in fuel efficiency. There are two ways to have people buy
more
fuel efficient cars. One make the cars/trucks more expensive by
either
taxing or raising the cost of the less efficient vehicles or (2) new
technology to improve fuel efficiency. Since everyone is already
working
on
new technology, the only way to change the consumer's buying habits is
increasing the cost of the vehicles. There are two ways to tax or
raise
the
cost of less efficient vehicles, one in the initial purchase price, or
in
the cost of operating the vehicle.

I wonder why Clinton didn't propose a sur-tax on SUV's or Pickup
Trucks
when he was in office?

How predictable for the liebrals to blame consumer choice on Bush.






"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news wrote in message
oups.com...

Dan J.S. wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Regular grade gasoline was $3.05 a gallon yesterday at several
docks
in
Annapolis. Diesel was $2.61 to $2.65.

Thanks, Dubya.

If you really believe it's Bush's fault, you lost all credibility
you
had.

Bad Policy Fuels High Prices

It should be amusing to see how the automatons defend this, or
pretend
they were not aware of it. :-)

Doug,
I am a big supporter of environmental protection. Anyone who recommends
opening old antiquated refineries to temporary increase gasoline capacity is
not. They are trying to use a global problem for political gain, and to
heck with the environment.





"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...


More refinery operating would reduce the "spot" increases around the
country
due to local shortages caused by the reformulated gas requirements. Any
easing of EPA requirements to operate the the older refineries would
result
in the liebrals screaming about Bush polluting.


Is there ***any*** environmental improvement you support, or even
understand?

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
And whomever buys that car will be bitching about the cost of gas, and how
they can't afford to drive it. ; )

Dougie his showing his liebral roots......if soemone (or many) are willing
to buy "luxury pickup trucks" then that is between the individual and the
company that makes it.



"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Speaking of status symbols, I was just at the barber shop, browsing a
car
magazine. Lincoln's selling what they call a "luxury pickup truck".
Someone ought to be shot for that. You *know* they're not going to
bought
by bricklayers & carpenters who are gonna beat the crap out of them.
That
leaves.....well...you know who.


"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Wow, I just doubled checked my rated MPG on my car and it is 20 mpg
city
and 25 mpg highway, that is better than I remembered. When I buy my
next
car it will be a hybrid, due to the forecasted gas prices in the
future.
When gas reaches $4 gallon, and it will, people will still be
complaining
about the cost of gas as they drive status symbol luxury SUV.



"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
I purchased a fuel efficient SUV because the cost of fuel was low
enough
that I did not mind 18 mpg. With the increase in fuel costs and no
realistic change in the future, in fact, it is reasonable to forecast
more increases in the future. I know my next car will be hybrid.

The increase in fuel costs will happen under any president or
congress.
It is a world market that is controlling the cost of fuel. Some
people
in here either can't seem to comprehend that fact, or prefer to ignore
it for political gain.


"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
The reason for the increase in cars w/ lower fuel efficiency is the
increase
in SUV's and pickup trucks. This represents a change in buying
habits,
not
a change in fuel efficiency. There are two ways to have people buy
more
fuel efficient cars. One make the cars/trucks more expensive by
either
taxing or raising the cost of the less efficient vehicles or (2) new
technology to improve fuel efficiency. Since everyone is already
working
on
new technology, the only way to change the consumer's buying habits
is
increasing the cost of the vehicles. There are two ways to tax or
raise
the
cost of less efficient vehicles, one in the initial purchase price,
or
in
the cost of operating the vehicle.

I wonder why Clinton didn't propose a sur-tax on SUV's or Pickup
Trucks
when he was in office?

How predictable for the liebrals to blame consumer choice on Bush.






"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news wrote in message
oups.com...

Dan J.S. wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Regular grade gasoline was $3.05 a gallon yesterday at several
docks
in
Annapolis. Diesel was $2.61 to $2.65.

Thanks, Dubya.

If you really believe it's Bush's fault, you lost all
credibility
you
had.

Bad Policy Fuels High Prices

It should be amusing to see how the automatons defend this, or
pretend
they were not aware of it. :-)

"Juan Valdez" wrote in message
...
Doug,
I am a big supporter of environmental protection. Anyone who recommends
opening old antiquated refineries to temporary increase gasoline capacity
is
not. They are trying to use a global problem for political gain, and to
heck with the environment.

I wonder is dougie heard that swooshing sound as the point pasted far over
his head?







"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...


More refinery operating would reduce the "spot" increases around the
country
due to local shortages caused by the reformulated gas requirements.
Any
easing of EPA requirements to operate the the older refineries would
result
in the liebrals screaming about Bush polluting.


Is there ***any*** environmental improvement you support, or even
understand?

P. Fritz wrote:


Obviously donnie cannot grasp simple world economics.


I can grasp the fact you've added nothing of value concerning boating to
this group.

Juan Valdez wrote:
That seems to be a common problem in rec.boats. I wish more colleges
required economics to be a required core course.


"P. Fritz" wrote in message

Obviously donnie cannot grasp simple world economics.



Actually, micro & macro economics were a couple of my better courses at
University...but don't tell Frizzle.

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:52:18 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

Speaking of status symbols, I was just at the barber shop, browsing a car
magazine. Lincoln's selling what they call a "luxury pickup truck". Someone
ought to be shot for that. You *know* they're not going to bought by
bricklayers & carpenters who are gonna beat the crap out of them. That
leaves.....well...you know who.

You've never taken your Cadillac Escalade offroading into the woods and swamps?
Why pay 22,000 for an F150 when you can pay 40,000 for the Lincoln pickup?

In this case, we are in total agreement. But look at all the dumb ****s that
bought Hummers. I wonder how many have ever left the pavement.

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:52:18 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:

Speaking of status symbols, I was just at the barber shop, browsing a car
magazine. Lincoln's selling what they call a "luxury pickup truck".
Someone
ought to be shot for that. You *know* they're not going to bought by
bricklayers & carpenters who are gonna beat the crap out of them. That
leaves.....well...you know who.

You've never taken your Cadillac Escalade offroading into the woods and
swamps?
Why pay 22,000 for an F150 when you can pay 40,000 for the Lincoln pickup?

In this case, we are in total agreement. But look at all the dumb ****s
that
bought Hummers. I wonder how many have ever left the pavement.

But it is THEIR choice.......I hope you don't prefer the guvmint dictate
what they buy.


--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 16:53:59 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...


More refinery operating would reduce the "spot" increases around the
country
due to local shortages caused by the reformulated gas requirements. Any
easing of EPA requirements to operate the the older refineries would
result
in the liebrals screaming about Bush polluting.


Is there ***any*** environmental improvement you support, or even
understand?


Nuclear power. We should have nuclear reactors such as those used on naval ships
all over this country. They're small, they're safe, and the design has been
proven over and over.

--
John H.
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD