Where is plan B?

[A Horse With No Name]

Now that gas prices are down, the number one, two, and three wealth creates, F150, Ram, and Silverado are propping up the American auto industry and by extension propping up Opel in Europe which is a 20 billion dollar black hole.

What honestly happens when the price of gas goes back up to $148 a barrel?

[balthazar]

3 pickups are "propping up" the entire domestic auto industry?? Where is this coming from?

 

And BTW- I'm not seeing any significant decline in gas prices. 87 is roughly 50 cents cheaper than the better part of a year ago, but that's in no way whatsoever 'cheap', therefore I see no run on trucks supporting that theory.

[A Horse With No Name]

They are highly profitable.

[balthazar]

No one is disputing that; that's a good thing, no?

Where's the current gas price coming in?

[G. David Felt]

Even with High gas prices, you still need trucks for construction. I do not see trucks not being a part of American business. Plan B really needs to be the focus on Volt style hybrids for SUV's and Trucks and have the generator run on CNG. Plan B needs to be what do we do with our own natural resources and how do we reduce costs so that Americans can grow their own personal wealth.

[Drew Dowdell]

Plan B is the now much more fuel efficient and excellent quality mid-size and smaller cars that are now available.   Even a V6 Chrysler 300 can get over 30mpg on the highway consistently these days. It's the Cruze Diesel, the Sonic, the Focus 3-cylinder EB, the Volt, the Verano, the Chrysler 200.  It's the Colorado and Canyon diesels, the Ram and Jeep GC Diesels. It's the F-150 2.7 EB.....

 

the list goes on.

[A Horse With No Name]

Agree with drew and Dfelt! I really think the Volt is under rated, as is the Cruize diesel. My cousin lives in LA and drives a Volt...even with LA traffic and an active lifestyle, he very rarely puts gas in it.

Much better than a Prius, IMHO.

I just hope that GM does not give up on diesels because Cruise is slow out of the gate. It took VW a long time to build their diesel market in the US, that market will be there for GM if they are willing to work at it and wait.

Edited August 5, 2014 by A Horse With No Name

[ocnblu]

I think I read somewhere that 3k+ Cruze diesels have been sold so far.  Are they even advertising it?

[A Horse With No Name]

Sadly, no. Another classic case of GM having the right car and not marketing it right. Tell me again why Regal has a fantastic price on what is probably the best mid size car but sells so many units less than it should?

[Z-06]

Gas prices are no where near the price levels of August 2010, when they were hovering at $2.60/gallon. In fact since 2010, the spikes and valleys have been more or less ocurring during the same time periods annually, i.e. Jan - March higher prices, July - October - low or almost constant.

[A Horse With No Name]

Gas prices are no where near the price levels of August 2010, when they were hovering at $2.60/gallon. In fact since 2010, the spikes and valleys have been more or less ocurring during the same time periods annually, i.e. Jan - March higher prices, July - October - low or almost constant.

 

Hopefully they will rise slowly, so we can adjsut to the market.

 

What we really need is a diesel Colorado/Canyon, a nice moderately sized truck that can out tow and out offroad a Tacoma, and yet turn 28 or 30 on the highway....THAT would be a boon for outdoorsmen, fishermen, contractors, et al.

 

As Dfelt said, the pickup is not going anywhere.

[smk4565]

I think pick up truck buyers will buy pickups regardless of what gas prices are.  I see a lot of trucks that are more for luxury than for construction, and I see lifted trucks modified for off road.  Truck buyers will spend money on trucks and not seem to care if it gets bad mileage or if gas is expensive.  Unless gas goes to $8-9 per gallon like in Europe, then sales will drop as people look for electric cars.

 

Personally I think the gas guzzler tax should apply to trucks as well as cars.  It is ridiculous that an XTS hearse has a gas guzzler tax, or an SRT Charger or a CTS-V, or any of the sports cars like Aston Martins and Ferraris that barely get driven, yet an Escalade is exempt.  An Escalade isn't a work vehicle or a necessity, it is luxury/pleasure vehicle just like a sports car is.  Pickups and big SUVs guzzle the most gas, put the same tax on the Tundra and watch how fast Toyota gets a new engine in there to avoid a $2500 tax on their truck.  If every Silverado V8 had a $2500 tax on it, Chevy would have a 3.0 liter diesel V6 with an 8-speed in their as a no cost option within 6 months.

[A Horse With No Name]

Perhaps.  actually Canada is going the other way with vehicle laws, as they have found that many emissions and fuel economy laws are having zero impact on solving the problems faced.

 

The other problem is that you are making us into a nanny state by doing so.  We already in some ways have enough regulation when it comes to vehicles. Besides, methinks you might be baiting Dfelt with the words "Guzzler Tax" and "Escalade."

[smk4565]

I just picked Escalade as an example, the same could apply to the Infiniti QX-Armada, the Navigator, etc.  There should be a gas guzzler tax on an vehicle that gets below 18 or 20 mpg EPA combined or whatever the number is now.  I think they have tiers, where the worse the fuel economy the higher the tax which I am fine with.  There is probably 2 million trucks a year sold that would then get taxed, at $2500 per truck that is $5 billion to go toward road funding so our roads aren't crap.

 

For a Ferrari buyer, the $3,000 guzzler tax is nothing, they are going to buy the car anyway and it is only 1% of the sale price.  But on a pick up, that $3,000 could be 10% of the sale price, which would force automakers to boost fuel economy to avoid it.

[A Horse With No Name]

It may really also change peoples behavior.  how do the rest of the members here feel about having the guzzler tax apply to SUV's and trucks also?  Too much government interference, or a good idea?

[smk4565]

I like the SUV tax idea because it could fund road and bridge improvements that the government currently doesn't have, and it means they won't have to raise the gas tax to make up that shortfall.  And it challenges automakers to build a better car.  Toyota hasn't put a new engine in the Tundra in 8 years, and it isn't for lack of money or resources, Toyota just doesn't have to because all trucks get bad mileage and there is no penalty for it.

[A Horse With No Name]

But eventually the market will be an issue. Guys who tow or work trucks often buy diesels, which Toyota doesn't offer.

So the free market is in part also dealing with this.

[smk4565]

I would be okay with exempting heavy duty trucks from any tax, dual back tire trucks should be exempt, because those really are work vehicles, the moving vans, school buses dump trucks, etc.

[Z-06]

No sarcasm, what are the SUV/Truck buyers doing morally, legally and ethically wrong that warrants taxing them for being "illegal"?

[G. David Felt]

I just picked Escalade as an example, the same could apply to the Infiniti QX-Armada, the Navigator, etc.  There should be a gas guzzler tax on an vehicle that gets below 18 or 20 mpg EPA combined or whatever the number is now.  I think they have tiers, where the worse the fuel economy the higher the tax which I am fine with.  There is probably 2 million trucks a year sold that would then get taxed, at $2500 per truck that is $5 billion to go toward road funding so our roads aren't crap.

 

For a Ferrari buyer, the $3,000 guzzler tax is nothing, they are going to buy the car anyway and it is only 1% of the sale price.  But on a pick up, that $3,000 could be 10% of the sale price, which would force automakers to boost fuel economy to avoid it.

So SMK what you are saying is you want our life to be a socialist hell with forced inflation. Your thinking is just stupid like all the idiots who say we need $15 minimum wage as a living wage. Base minimum wages is to give young a chance to earn money and learn to work, not ever meant to be a living wage. This in it's own right forces inflation of increasing costs and no real gain long term. Education and performance to grow and get promoted is what it should always be about.

 

Trucks and SUV's are the backbone of America work force. If you force your tax on them then everything else will be forced to go up and that pushes houses out of reach of more people. Even your apartments will cost more to rent due to increased cost. The Construction companies are not going to absorb these tax's and neither can America afford to adsorb these cost with stupid tax right off's.

 

What you are also saying is that large people like me with large families should be penalized since we do not fit in the standard mid size sedan.

 

The GAS Guzzler tax is the stupidity of the Tree Huggers movement. We can live just fine with out all the wasted regulation and forced taxation Inflation.

 

So more to your thinking, since most people cannot afford an E series MB, we need to add additional tax's to these expensive auto's to make this about sharing the wealth with everyone else. If you can afford to drive a luxury auto  then you have to pay a luxury use tax. How do you like that thinking then?

[smk4565]

 

I just picked Escalade as an example, the same could apply to the Infiniti QX-Armada, the Navigator, etc.  There should be a gas guzzler tax on an vehicle that gets below 18 or 20 mpg EPA combined or whatever the number is now.  I think they have tiers, where the worse the fuel economy the higher the tax which I am fine with.  There is probably 2 million trucks a year sold that would then get taxed, at $2500 per truck that is $5 billion to go toward road funding so our roads aren't crap.

 

For a Ferrari buyer, the $3,000 guzzler tax is nothing, they are going to buy the car anyway and it is only 1% of the sale price.  But on a pick up, that $3,000 could be 10% of the sale price, which would force automakers to boost fuel economy to avoid it.

So SMK what you are saying is you want our life to be a socialist hell with forced inflation. Your thinking is just stupid like all the idiots who say we need $15 minimum wage as a living wage. Base minimum wages is to give young a chance to earn money and learn to work, not ever meant to be a living wage. This in it's own right forces inflation of increasing costs and no real gain long term. Education and performance to grow and get promoted is what it should always be about.

 

Trucks and SUV's are the backbone of America work force. If you force your tax on them then everything else will be forced to go up and that pushes houses out of reach of more people. Even your apartments will cost more to rent due to increased cost. The Construction companies are not going to absorb these tax's and neither can America afford to adsorb these cost with stupid tax right off's.

So more to your thinking, since most people cannot afford an E series MB, we need to add additional tax's to these expensive auto's to make this about sharing the wealth with everyone else. If you can afford to drive a luxury auto  then you have to pay a luxury use tax. How do you like that thinking then?

 

I never mentioned anything about minimum wage (although it should be $10 an hour) and I bought my car used, so it was no more expensive than a well optioned Focus or Cruze.  But there is a sales tax in place, so the more expensive the car, the more tax the buyer pays.

 

I don't see the Porsche Cayenne, Mercedes G63 AMG, Infiniti QX80, Escalade, Navigator, Yukon/Tahoe, Lexus LX570, Grand Cherokee SRT-8 and all the other gas hog SUVs as the backbone of the American workforce.  Neither is the F150 Raptor, or a V8 King Ranch luxury truck or a Sierra Denali 6.2 liter.  All I am saying is if you are going to put a gas guzzler tax on a CTS-V, then there should be a tax on an Escalade that gets worse mileage than the CTS-V.  Likewise with BMW M5 that gets taxed, but the thirstier X5 M does not.  

 

The gas guzzler tax would not hurt the construction workers, because they could buy a Ram diesel or Pentastar for example that would not have a gas guzzler tax.  The new Ford Transit with base V6 and the turbodiesel inline 5 probably will get high enough mileage to beat the car gas guzzler tax.   That helps the businesses save money by not having a van that gets 13/18 mpg or whatever the Econoline got. 

 

Right now the gas guzzler tax threshold is 22.5 mpg, and the lower the mileage the higher the tax.  If you put that on pickups, vans, and SUVs, every car maker would offer a pickup that beat 22.5 mpg.  And using the equation a truck would have to get 17/24 mpg to avoid any tax, that isn't that hard to achieve.   And I'd think if the F150 ecoboost and Ram Pentastar/diesel didn't have a tax and the Silverado did, then Chevy would have to price their truck lower to compensate, otherwise risk losing sales.  So I don't think the end consumer would pay more, they would in the long run save on gas.

[Drew Dowdell]

I see SMK's point that it is unfair how the gas guzzler tax is applied... however I disagree with his implementation.   I think the gas guzzler tax should be abolished entirely and the gas tax per gallon raised accordingly. That way the tax is charged at the pump instead of at the purchase of the car. 

 

If someone buys a new Lambo and sticks it in a garage for the next 30 years as a trophy, why charge a gas guzzler tax when it is in fact going to use less fuel during it's life than a Pruis that gets driven 300k miles before being sent to the crusher?  In this (admittedly extreme) case, the Pruis is actually less "green" than the Lambo.

 

No, charge the tax per gallon of fuel actually consumed... but that tax also needs to be raised since it hasn't been adjusted in nearly 25 years.

[A Horse With No Name]

I think Drew's case makes a lot more sense. I would gladly pay a higher gas tax for better bridges, better highways, et al.

[G. David Felt]

I love Drew's stated plan, that is what should be done.

[A Horse With No Name]

And as Balthazar (IIRC) pointed out, make sure the actual money goes to roads.

As far as the minimum wage thing goes, yes, in Australia with its high minimum wage a fast food worker can buy a new car. However, due in large part to wage inflation, no one can afford to actually build new cars in Australia.

[smk4565]

I would be fine with no gas guzzler tax on any car, and a higher per gallon tax.  Although I think that doesn't push manufacturers to boost mileage as much.  Because the tax makes you hit 22.5 mpg or have your price go up while your competitors might not.  Although CAFE is supposed to push manufacturers up, although I don't know how well that works either.  The higher gas tax per gallon I think would hurt businesses and individuals more, because they wouldn't be able to avoid it.  But ultimately if gas costs more, consumers would gobble up fuel efficient or electric cars and flee the gas hogs.

 

I definitely think it is stupid that a car that gets 19 mpg combined would get taxed, but an SUV that gets the same is exempt.  That makes no sense, if anything it rewards people to buy less efficient SUVs.  I agree with Drew's point on the Lamborghini, most of the gas guzzler taxed cars are high performance exotics that probably only log 2,000 miles a year, so they aren't using that much gas. 

Edited August 7, 2014 by smk4565

[Drew Dowdell]

And as Balthazar (IIRC) pointed out, make sure the actual money goes to roads.

 

 

Well... no.... sometimes the best thing you can do for a road is give people an alternative to driving on it.  A portion of the fuel tax should be used for funding public transportation.

[G. David Felt]

I think all fuel tax's should go to road and mass transit. That way you have the funds dedicated. I am not a fan of the so called general fund and then idiots end up using the money for other social pet projects rather than what it was intended for.

 

Perfect example of this was the Lotto that was added in washington state back in the early 90's. They said the money earned would be dedicated to the school system. Instead they put all the money into the general fund and now we have 500 million spent on illegal medical care rather than taking care of the teachers properly.

[balthazar]

Politicians & lawmakers CANNOT help themselves- they're total crank addicts. 

 

Public road/infrastructure and mass transit project funding is fine, but NEVER spend more than you take in, idiots. If overall gas usage drops via whatever the cause, tough $h!; your pet project, inner-city, mag-lev people mover will have to WAIT. You are NOT going to raise the tax at your whim just to get your name on a public project (that is grossly out-of-line budget-wise before you even start).

 

Get a clue, get a long-range plan, do some budgeting work, then get private industry experience in to run these jobs cost-effectively, and maybe, just maybe you can ALSO put in a dozen turtle crossing tunnels this year, too.

[Drew Dowdell]

Actually, the tax should be recalculated annually.  Budget for the existing projects / # of gallons sold.

 

Private industry experience is no panacea either... it's not like companies never fail.

[Z-06]

Actually, the tax should be recalculated annually.  Budget for the existing projects / # of gallons sold.

 

Private industry experience is no panacea either... it's not like companies never fail.

 

I like annual tax calculation, but how are we going to execute it flawlessly?

 

Private companies fail, but experience is provided even in failure. Do you think Reids, Feinsteins, Pelosis, Rubios, McConnells, Cruzes have any? If they do, doesn't seem like they learned anything.

[A Horse With No Name]

At this point, reading our constitution in front of Congress is sort of like giving a dead person an aspirin. Our government is overwhelmingly and astonishingly broken.

But I do not think it had to be. Lots of other countries can can attempt to solve their problems as adults. We lack that ability in spades.

[Drew Dowdell]

 

Actually, the tax should be recalculated annually.  Budget for the existing projects / # of gallons sold.

 

Private industry experience is no panacea either... it's not like companies never fail.

 

I like annual tax calculation, but how are we going to execute it flawlessly?

 

Private companies fail, but experience is provided even in failure. Do you think Reids, Feinsteins, Pelosis, Rubios, McConnells, Cruzes have any? If they do, doesn't seem like they learned anything.

 

 

How much more money should we be shoving into Haliburton's pockets?

 

We know exactly how many gallons of fuel are sold in this country every year because we already charge a tax per gallon on it. So, take the number of gallons we sold nationwide in the prior year and divide the budget by that.  It's not perfect (nor does it have to be) but it would mean that the tax is automatically adjusted for both inflation and improvement in fuel economy. The only question mark becomes pure EVs. 

[smk4565]

They should raise the gas tax, but not on diesel, if diesel was the same price as 87 octane and cheaper than premium gas, people would buy more diesels too. 

[balthazar]

...take the number of gallons we sold nationwide in the prior year and divide the budget by that.  It's not perfect (nor does it have to be) but it would mean that the tax is automatically adjusted for both inflation and improvement in fuel economy. 

 

There is FAR more money to pass thru their greasy fingers by improvements in efficiencies than sliding scales that just penalize non-EV drivers ("& the poor").

But the crank addicts like plenty of slop in their $2.5 trillion revenue stream, plus they're mostly too stupid/proud to figure out how to implement it. 

[G. David Felt]

We could just kill off the whole Gas Tax thing and apply a mileage tax to everyone so it is fair across all powertrain types / auto types. We also then should just clean up and remove the stupid states double taxation and have just one clean gov agency that manages all freeways / roadways.

 

A Mileage tax would then allow everyone to pay as you go. The more you drive the more you pay.

[Drew Dowdell]

 

...take the number of gallons we sold nationwide in the prior year and divide the budget by that.  It's not perfect (nor does it have to be) but it would mean that the tax is automatically adjusted for both inflation and improvement in fuel economy. 

 

There is FAR more money to pass thru their greasy fingers by improvements in efficiencies than sliding scales that just penalize non-EV drivers ("& the poor").

But the crank addicts like plenty of slop in their $2.5 trillion revenue stream, plus they're mostly too stupid/proud to figure out how to implement it. 

 

 

Two different issues there.   Yes, we need a highway budget.  Yes it needs to be paid for in a way that is fair and is quickly responsive to change.  "The Poor" can go out and by an old Civic or Cobalt just like everyone else.

 

Yes we need better (central?) planning. Yes we need better oversight.

[balthazar]

Revenue streams that are 'quickly responsive to change' invite corruption via manipulation, one of the few things Gov't does on a professional level.