On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 19:59:50 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
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.

Harry,
Why should one boat get a tax break and another one support someone
else's habit? Tax them all, and let God sort them out.



We should be encouraging more economical use of resources by taxing the
big users into boats with smaller engines.

The vast majority of Americans don't own a boat, they would say that all
boaters should be taxed to save our limited resources. Since I don't
trailer a boat, and don't own a pickup truck, I think all pick up trucks
should pay a 100% surcharge on all gas purchased.

Well I think any car whose parent company is located in another
country should be taxed at 200% each year.

Cars from companies HQ'd in the US shouldn't be taxed.

Oh - special consideration for those who drive vehicles made by Ford -
as in a special bonus payment from the gubmint for supporting the best
car brand on the planet.

Except for Mustangs - even the best make mistakes from time-to-time.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 19:59:50 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
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.
Harry,
Why should one boat get a tax break and another one support someone
else's habit? Tax them all, and let God sort them out.


We should be encouraging more economical use of resources by taxing the
big users into boats with smaller engines.
The vast majority of Americans don't own a boat, they would say that all
boaters should be taxed to save our limited resources. Since I don't
trailer a boat, and don't own a pickup truck, I think all pick up trucks
should pay a 100% surcharge on all gas purchased.

Well I think any car whose parent company is located in another
country should be taxed at 200% each year.

Cars from companies HQ'd in the US shouldn't be taxed.

Oh - special consideration for those who drive vehicles made by Ford -
as in a special bonus payment from the gubmint for supporting the best
car brand on the planet.

Except for Mustangs - even the best make mistakes from time-to-time.

I agree with all of your points, but think we need to make sure Mazda is
included in the tax support, since they are a division of Ford.