wrote:
On Aug 17, 10:26 am, hk wrote:


Around here we consider an oyster boat carrying a 6-pack of Bud to be
a yacht. The demise of rich peoples boats will have no affect on me.




In reality, it isn't the boats that matter; it is the loss of more
industrial jobs.

"hk" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Aug 17, 10:26 am, hk wrote:


Around here we consider an oyster boat carrying a 6-pack of Bud to be
a yacht. The demise of rich peoples boats will have no affect on me.




In reality, it isn't the boats that matter; it is the loss of more
industrial jobs.

The job losses are unfortunate. But weren't you also questioning the
justification of big, high fuel usage boats recently? Weren't you in favor
of a big tax on use and/or ownership of larger boats because they used more
fuel than you thought reasonable? Seems to me that your own bias leads to
job losses as well.

You can't have it both ways.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Aug 17, 10:26 am, hk wrote:
Around here we consider an oyster boat carrying a 6-pack of Bud to be
a yacht. The demise of rich peoples boats will have no affect on me.



In reality, it isn't the boats that matter; it is the loss of more
industrial jobs.

The job losses are unfortunate. But weren't you also questioning the
justification of big, high fuel usage boats recently? Weren't you in favor
of a big tax on use and/or ownership of larger boats because they used more
fuel than you thought reasonable? Seems to me that your own bias leads to
job losses as well.

You can't have it both ways.

Eisboch




Sure you can, if you start making "green" manufactured products that
serve the transportation needs of the populace. That way, skilled
workers can find new jobs that pay family supporting wages with benefits.

"hk" wrote in message
.com...
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Aug 17, 10:26 am, hk wrote:
Around here we consider an oyster boat carrying a 6-pack of Bud to be
a yacht. The demise of rich peoples boats will have no affect on me.



In reality, it isn't the boats that matter; it is the loss of more
industrial jobs.

The job losses are unfortunate. But weren't you also questioning the
justification of big, high fuel usage boats recently? Weren't you in
favor of a big tax on use and/or ownership of larger boats because they
used more fuel than you thought reasonable? Seems to me that your own
bias leads to job losses as well.

You can't have it both ways.

Eisboch


Sure you can, if you start making "green" manufactured products that serve
the transportation needs of the populace. That way, skilled workers can
find new jobs that pay family supporting wages with benefits.


You've been listening to BObama too much. He preaches the same kind of
non-specific rhetoric.

Eisboch

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
.com...


The last time Hatteras took it on the chin like this was when GHWB's
administration put a "luxury tax" on boats. In essence, it closed the
original Hatteras facility in High Point for good....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...C0A9679582 60



I goes without saying that the current issue is fuel costs. Everyone has
a limit to what they are willing to pay for recreational enjoyment.

We had friends visiting today from Germany and we got on the subject of
boats, cars, the high cost of fuel and how it was affecting our respective
countries. He told me that in Germany, people scoff at us Americans
complaining about our 4 buck a gallon fuel. They are paying well over
$9/gallon (equivalent in liters).

The unemployment rate in Germany also remains very high .... over 10
percent.

He is seriously considering relocating to the USA.

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
.com...


The last time Hatteras took it on the chin like this was when GHWB's
administration put a "luxury tax" on boats. In essence, it closed the
original Hatteras facility in High Point for good....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...C0A9679582 60



I goes without saying that the current issue is fuel costs. Everyone
has a limit to what they are willing to pay for recreational enjoyment.

We had friends visiting today from Germany and we got on the subject of
boats, cars, the high cost of fuel and how it was affecting our respective
countries. He told me that in Germany, people scoff at us Americans
complaining about our 4 buck a gallon fuel. They are paying well over
$9/gallon (equivalent in liters).

The unemployment rate in Germany also remains very high .... over 10
percent.

He is seriously considering relocating to the USA.

Eisboch


I think some of the blame for boat biz decline can be placed on the housing
mortgage debacle. If your home is in foreclosure you probably won't be
buying a yacht.

On Aug 17, 6:45*pm, "D.Duck" wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message

...







"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
e.com...

The last time Hatteras took it on the chin like this was when GHWB's
administration put a "luxury tax" on boats. In essence, it closed the
original Hatteras facility in High Point for good....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...1430F930A35752....

I goes without saying that the current issue is fuel costs. * *Everyone
has a limit to what they are willing to pay for recreational enjoyment.

We had friends visiting today from Germany and we got on the subject of
boats, cars, the high cost of fuel and how it was affecting our respective
countries. * He told me that in Germany, people scoff at us Americans
complaining about our 4 buck a gallon fuel. * They are paying well over
$9/gallon *(equivalent in liters).

The unemployment rate in Germany also remains very high .... over 10
percent.

He is seriously considering relocating to the USA.

Eisboch

I think some of the blame for boat biz decline can be placed on the housing
mortgage debacle. *If your home is in foreclosure you probably won't be
buying a yacht.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Or, you bought a yacht, and now your home is in forclosure.

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:03:32 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

The last time Hatteras took it on the chin like this was when GHWB's
administration put a "luxury tax" on boats. In essence, it closed the
original Hatteras facility in High Point for good....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...C0A9679582 60

Um...no?

That was strictly the work of Ted Kennedy, et.al. - I remember it
well.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:03:32 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

The last time Hatteras took it on the chin like this was when GHWB's
administration put a "luxury tax" on boats. In essence, it closed the
original Hatteras facility in High Point for good....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...C0A9679582 60

Um...no?

That was strictly the work of Ted Kennedy, et.al. - I remember it
well.


What we have now is a Dubya-Dick "luxury tax," part and parcel of an
administration too busy to promote sensible energy policies because the
ones we have now make their buddies rich.

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 20:21:48 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 23:42:34 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 19:03:32 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote:

The last time Hatteras took it on the chin like this was when GHWB's
administration put a "luxury tax" on boats. In essence, it closed the
original Hatteras facility in High Point for good....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...C0A9679582 60

Um...no?

That was strictly the work of Ted Kennedy, et.al. - I remember it
well.

Who was president?

Who initiated the legislation? Who sponsored the bill? Who passed it
with a veto proof majority?

Hmmmm?