Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Smart Fortwo Electric.... $24,000
Mitsubishi i-MiEV...... $21,000
Nissan Leaf..... $28,000 ..... current lease program at $199/mo
Resale value with 7 years/70K on it?
Quote:
Passing it into law would be problematic. Administration would be a nightmare. Uniform smog test rules with strict guidelines for getting cars off the road that can't pass would be simpler and easier to accomplish, and probably more effective.
We don't have a uniform fleet of cars in this country. I owned a 72 ford f-250 I used occasionally, I'd be forced to get rid of it?
Last edited by thecoalman; 10-20-2014 at 06:48 PM..
Gas taxes only address one problem and then not every well. Gas taxes were designed to raise revenue, not care for the environment.
No, but they have the effect of acting as a pollution tax. If you have 2 cars with the same weight they will do the same amount of damage to the road, but if one of those cars gets 17 mpg while the other gets 45 mpg the less fuel efficient car will be paying more in taxes despite not doing more damage to the road. Similarly, you could have a heavy truck get better mpg than a lighter car, so gas taxes are not perfect, but do act as a form of pollution tax. Naturally, the gas taxes don't fund anything for the environment as they don't even pay the cost of roads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mack Knife
Paying to offset carbon footprints is a scam. That only provides the means for those that want and can afford to to avoid changing their consumption of materials and resources that create pollution. Carbon credits or whatever fancy name is used to name is all the same scam.
We can figure out a way to allow for offsetting carbon footprints but then say we can't figure out how to assess a tax on pollution? Don't look now, we just did.
What I was saying was there are companies offering carbon offsets for a fee, but I don't know how accurate , efficient, or effective those programs are and if you introduce the government then you have a new set of problems to deal with that will be difficult to address and introduce a perverse incentive for companies to make their products in countries that have lower pollution controls (if the carbon tax is applied to businesses).
At least with private companies and private citizens doing the work and voluntarily reducing their footprint we are allowing the free market to work through the most effective means. And let's face it, pollution does have a cost, although it is difficult to assess the cost it does exist. All anyone has to do is go visit Iowa and smell the clean air and then go to a large city to try and do the same thing. Unless your sense of smell it damaged you can tell a district difference. The biggest problem with pollution is the cost/damage isn't incurred at the source. Normally private citizens have to bear the cost in terms of lower quality of life or increased illnesses even though they might not have had anything to do with creating the pollution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mack Knife
If the means to calculate a carbon footprint offset exists, then either it is accurate or it isn't. It isn't accurate so then what purpose does it serve? If one person offsets their carbon footprint, the only thing that happens is that someone else has more to play with. Carbon footprint offset, carbon credits, the names are different the scam is the same.
I don't think they are because it doesn't sound like we are talking about the same thing. What I was referring to are the companies that, for a fee (and sometimes free), do something to offset your carbon footprint. I don't know how accurate they are in actually offsetting your carbon or if they are accurately priced and that's why I said that I don't if they are accurate. However, assuming those programs are accurate what would happen is they would take your money and go plant trees or invest in renewable energy. I've seen one project that invests in electrified truck stops which allows truckers to heat/cool their cab and use their electronics without having to idle their truck.
Something sticks out at me though. If you are wondering why we don't tax pollution from cars then it stands to reason that you think pollution should be taxed (at least that's what I got from your OP), so the question remains what is the most efficient way to tax. However, if you think carbon offsets are a scam then what purpose would taxing car pollution solve unless you are just trying to generate a source of revenue for the government?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mack Knife
If we can't determine how much pollution a vehicle will produce and how much was created in it's manufacture, then how can the EV makers put out claims about how little they generate in manufacturing compared to other car manufacturing? Perhaps we can agree that regardless of what they make, EV or ICE cars, they are all FOS?
I'm sure it is possible to obtain a rough estimate, but estimates mean nothing if you are trying to tax actual pollution. Manufacturing plants operate differently though because they have a standardized process and it is much easier to determine how much pollution they create at that plant. Now, if they are advertising what the supply chain produces they have to rely on accuracy of their partners - some of which are small and others whom are not very honest.
I'll steal a quote from Grover Norquist on this one. "On the subject of taxation, liberals are like boys on prom night. They keep asking for the same thing in different ways."
To be a little more specific, history would show that taxation and government intervention in general have been a pretty lousy way to incent certain behavior. A generation ago, big families bought station wagons, now they buy minivans and SUVs. The origin of this change is the original CAFE standards. SUVs and minivans could be held to the less strict standards for trucks rather than cars, which is why car makers started building and selling them. Corporate Average Fuel Economy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Taxes are generally are a very effective way to funnel money from individuals and businesses to the government. Any other side effects are usually unintentional, like killing station wagons in favor of larger vehicles.
I have to wonder if the issue of a pollution tax on cars is much ado about nothing. The technology of lowering emissions from gasoline powered cars is now quite advanced, and the emissions are therefore very low, so low that I question whether it's something to be concerned about. With each passing year more and more older cars go to the scrap heap and are replaced by more and more new cars which incorporate newer, more advanced technology, resulting in an automatic reduction in the total amount of pollution emitted by cars with the passing of time.
I'll steal a quote from Grover Norquist on this one. "On the subject of taxation, liberals are like boys on prom night. They keep asking for the same thing in different ways."
To be a little more specific, history would show that taxation and government intervention in general have been a pretty lousy way to incent certain behavior. A generation ago, big families bought station wagons, now they buy minivans and SUVs. The origin of this change is the original CAFE standards. SUVs and minivans could be held to the less strict standards for trucks rather than cars, which is why car makers started building and selling them. Corporate Average Fuel Economy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Taxes are generally are a very effective way to funnel money from individuals and businesses to the government. Any other side effects are usually unintentional, like killing station wagons in favor of larger vehicles.
I don't see how that explains why we don't have a pollution tax on cars.
I have to wonder if the issue of a pollution tax on cars is much ado about nothing. The technology of lowering emissions from gasoline powered cars is now quite advanced, and the emissions are therefore very low, so low that I question whether it's something to be concerned about. With each passing year more and more older cars go to the scrap heap and are replaced by more and more new cars which incorporate newer, more advanced technology, resulting in an automatic reduction in the total amount of pollution emitted by cars with the passing of time.
It's largely a matter of timing, I think. How long are you willing to wait? According to R.L. Polk, the average age of American cars still on the road is 11.4 years.
I have to wonder if the issue of a pollution tax on cars is much ado about nothing. The technology of lowering emissions from gasoline powered cars is now quite advanced, and the emissions are therefore very low, so low that I question whether it's something to be concerned about. With each passing year more and more older cars go to the scrap heap and are replaced by more and more new cars which incorporate newer, more advanced technology, resulting in an automatic reduction in the total amount of pollution emitted by cars with the passing of time.
Sure, in the long run we don't have to do anything because people will get newer and more efficient cars. However, the issue with pollution is a case of a negative externality where the person making the decision does not have to pay the full cost of that decision. Gas taxes serve as an incentive to move towards efficiency, but that strategy has problems as well.
My sister is liberal ~~ and lives in a notably upscale neighborhood. When driving around with her she sometimes points out large houses and makes comments such as ''They should be taxed for a house that big! Think of the electricity they use" as if they don't pay for the use of it. I try to remind her of the fact.
It's the same for a vehicle which uses more fuel. The driver pays for it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A larger context
