"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

You just don't seem to get it. It isn't a matter of affording it. It is
a matter of wasting huge amounts of dwindling resources for "fun."

Harry, you should then consider giving up your airplane trips to Hawaii,
Costa Rica or any other non-essential trips. A Boeing 747 uses
approximately 1 gallon of fuel every second.

Eisboch


There's a bit of a difference when 300 people are on a common carrier air
transport and four guys are out on a gas hog sportfish.




But there is also a difference between the purpose of a boat like yours,
being a near shore or coastal fishing boat versus a large sportsfishing boat
designed for use 40 or more miles offshore, fishing for bigger fish. Are
you suggesting that offshore fishing be eliminated because the boats are
bigger and use more fuel?

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
...
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...

You just don't seem to get it. It isn't a matter of affording it. It is
a matter of wasting huge amounts of dwindling resources for "fun."
Harry, you should then consider giving up your airplane trips to Hawaii,
Costa Rica or any other non-essential trips. A Boeing 747 uses
approximately 1 gallon of fuel every second.

Eisboch

There's a bit of a difference when 300 people are on a common carrier air
transport and four guys are out on a gas hog sportfish.



But there is also a difference between the purpose of a boat like yours,
being a near shore or coastal fishing boat versus a large sportsfishing boat
designed for use 40 or more miles offshore, fishing for bigger fish. Are
you suggesting that offshore fishing be eliminated because the boats are
bigger and use more fuel?

Eisboch



Not at all. As I stated many posts ago, a fuel usage surcharge tax for
boats burning more than X gallons an hour at cruise would be sufficient.
Let's say diesel/gas is $3.00 at the dock...you burn more than, say, 40
gallons an hour at cruise, you pay $6.00 or $9.00 a gallon.

"HK" wrote in message
. ..



Not at all. As I stated many posts ago, a fuel usage surcharge tax for
boats burning more than X gallons an hour at cruise would be sufficient.
Let's say diesel/gas is $3.00 at the dock...you burn more than, say, 40
gallons an hour at cruise, you pay $6.00 or $9.00 a gallon.

I could live with that as neither of my boats burn anything close to that.
But there are others that would complain because offshore fishing is what
they do for recreation and they probably have a lot invested in it.

Unfortunately, the only fair way to deal with it is to have a across the
board fuel surcharge that applies to everyone. Use more, pay more. Heck,
congress is pushing to raise federal cigarette taxes to discourage smoking.
Everyone that smokes will pay with no special consideration to those who can
afford it and those that can't.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..

Not at all. As I stated many posts ago, a fuel usage surcharge tax for
boats burning more than X gallons an hour at cruise would be sufficient.
Let's say diesel/gas is $3.00 at the dock...you burn more than, say, 40
gallons an hour at cruise, you pay $6.00 or $9.00 a gallon.

I could live with that as neither of my boats burn anything close to that.
But there are others that would complain because offshore fishing is what
they do for recreation and they probably have a lot invested in it.




Let them complain.

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..

Not at all. As I stated many posts ago, a fuel usage surcharge tax for
boats burning more than X gallons an hour at cruise would be sufficient.
Let's say diesel/gas is $3.00 at the dock...you burn more than, say, 40
gallons an hour at cruise, you pay $6.00 or $9.00 a gallon.

I could live with that as neither of my boats burn anything close to
that. But there are others that would complain because offshore fishing
is what they do for recreation and they probably have a lot invested in
it.




Let them complain.

And you can just complain when something you like is taxed to excess. The
Govenator's new universal health plan for children in California is to be
paid for by tobacco taxes. What a crock. If it is a good thing to have
cheap universal insurance, then let everyone pay for it.

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..

Not at all. As I stated many posts ago, a fuel usage surcharge tax for
boats burning more than X gallons an hour at cruise would be
sufficient.
Let's say diesel/gas is $3.00 at the dock...you burn more than, say, 40
gallons an hour at cruise, you pay $6.00 or $9.00 a gallon.

I could live with that as neither of my boats burn anything close to
that. But there are others that would complain because offshore fishing
is what they do for recreation and they probably have a lot invested in
it.




Let them complain.

And you can just complain when something you like is taxed to excess. The
Govenator's new universal health plan for children in California is to be
paid for by tobacco taxes. What a crock. If it is a good thing to have
cheap universal insurance, then let everyone pay for it.

Paying for long term programs with tobacco taxes is a Catch 22. Smoking is
declining and additional taxes will only serve to hasten the decline as will
the decline of revenues generated by the tax.

If everyone in the US quit smoking tomorrow, new taxes would spring up
somewhere else to make up the tax deficit. Who's next?

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..

Not at all. As I stated many posts ago, a fuel usage surcharge tax for
boats burning more than X gallons an hour at cruise would be
sufficient.
Let's say diesel/gas is $3.00 at the dock...you burn more than, say,
40 gallons an hour at cruise, you pay $6.00 or $9.00 a gallon.

I could live with that as neither of my boats burn anything close to
that. But there are others that would complain because offshore fishing
is what they do for recreation and they probably have a lot invested in
it.




Let them complain.

And you can just complain when something you like is taxed to excess.
The Govenator's new universal health plan for children in California is
to be paid for by tobacco taxes. What a crock. If it is a good thing to
have cheap universal insurance, then let everyone pay for it.

Paying for long term programs with tobacco taxes is a Catch 22. Smoking
is declining and additional taxes will only serve to hasten the decline as
will the decline of revenues generated by the tax.

If everyone in the US quit smoking tomorrow, new taxes would spring up
somewhere else to make up the tax deficit. Who's next?

Eisboch


Boaters. :)

Eisboch wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Not at all. As I stated many posts ago, a fuel usage surcharge tax for
boats burning more than X gallons an hour at cruise would be
sufficient.
Let's say diesel/gas is $3.00 at the dock...you burn more than, say, 40
gallons an hour at cruise, you pay $6.00 or $9.00 a gallon.
I could live with that as neither of my boats burn anything close to
that. But there are others that would complain because offshore fishing
is what they do for recreation and they probably have a lot invested in
it.



Let them complain.
And you can just complain when something you like is taxed to excess. The
Govenator's new universal health plan for children in California is to be
paid for by tobacco taxes. What a crock. If it is a good thing to have
cheap universal insurance, then let everyone pay for it.

Paying for long term programs with tobacco taxes is a Catch 22. Smoking is
declining and additional taxes will only serve to hasten the decline as will
the decline of revenues generated by the tax.

If everyone in the US quit smoking tomorrow, new taxes would spring up
somewhere else to make up the tax deficit. Who's next?

Eisboch



The benefit of the tabacco tax is it will encourage smokers to quit. We
all pay for the increased health cost related to smoking.

I am sure there are some who would prefer that all rec. boating be
outlawed as it is waste of limited resources. I guess we can all buy
sailboats w/o a iron gennie.

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 02:11:29 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..

Not at all. As I stated many posts ago, a fuel usage surcharge tax for
boats burning more than X gallons an hour at cruise would be
sufficient.
Let's say diesel/gas is $3.00 at the dock...you burn more than, say, 40
gallons an hour at cruise, you pay $6.00 or $9.00 a gallon.

I could live with that as neither of my boats burn anything close to
that. But there are others that would complain because offshore fishing
is what they do for recreation and they probably have a lot invested in
it.




Let them complain.

And you can just complain when something you like is taxed to excess. The
Govenator's new universal health plan for children in California is to be
paid for by tobacco taxes. What a crock. If it is a good thing to have
cheap universal insurance, then let everyone pay for it.

Paying for long term programs with tobacco taxes is a Catch 22. Smoking is
declining and additional taxes will only serve to hasten the decline as will
the decline of revenues generated by the tax.

If everyone in the US quit smoking tomorrow, new taxes would spring up
somewhere else to make up the tax deficit. Who's next?

Eisboch


Besides, the population with the greatest percent of smokers is the poor.
There is one political group which seems to forget that. Maybe the
rationale is to make them poorer, and then tax the rich even more to
redistribute the wealth. That would make good sense.

http://tinyurl.com/2pl7p9

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 02:11:29 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:

snippity-snip

And you can just complain when something you like is taxed to excess. The
Govenator's new universal health plan for children in California is to be
paid for by tobacco taxes. What a crock. If it is a good thing to have
cheap universal insurance, then let everyone pay for it.

Paying for long term programs with tobacco taxes is a Catch 22. Smoking is
declining and additional taxes will only serve to hasten the decline as will
the decline of revenues generated by the tax.

If everyone in the US quit smoking tomorrow, new taxes would spring up
somewhere else to make up the tax deficit. Who's next?

Eisboch


Kansas decided to ride the tobacco tax windfall and raised the taxes
by a huge amount. Missouri next door left the tobacco taxes alone.
Kansas lost their asses while Missouri gained a huge tax proffit
because the eastern half of Kansas was going to Missouri to buy
cigaretts. Greed? LOL
Kansas even tried laws and border checks until they got their asses
sued over it.
Mark E. Williams