Some states want to punish fuel-efficient car drivers!

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by Tim Howard, Jan 8, 2009.

  1. It's actually both groups, plus some developers, and especially the
    green movement.

    The true purpose of the environmental movement is to keep the prices of
    homes, especially good (single-family detached) homes, outrageously high
    and climbing higher forever. The movement's leaders are all rich, white
    people who own nice big houses on huge areas of land, and by stopping
    most development and new infrastructure they can: (1) create and maintain
    a huge shortage of good homes by "protecting" other people's unbuilt land
    from use; (2) in particular, make sure that any unbuilt land near THEM
    stays empty, so they can keep using it as "viewshed" without paying for
    it; and (3) prevent the riff-raff [you and me, and especially minorities]
    from moving in next door where their kids might meet ours.

    The Sierra Club, and the green movement which it leads and typifies,
    exists in order to convince the gullible that the members of this cabal
    are unselfish benefactors to the world, when the truth is that they are
    "gimme-ist" bastards who have more than enough money already, and use
    the unfair power of government to ensure that you and I can never share
    in their cherished lifestyle. They are classists, racists, and elitists.

    It astounds me that any real liberal (are there any left?) would venerate
    such a bunch of hypocrites.
     
    John David Galt, Jan 11, 2009
    #41
  2. I haven't seen any liberals in years. Lots of LIEberals.

    They want us to live in warehouses like the Russians do while they live in
    their dachas.

    Don't look now, but us conservative white males are in the minority in
    America now.

    Sir Charles the Curmudgeon
     
    CharlesTheCurmudgeon, Jan 11, 2009
    #42
  3. Now there's a fascinating statement. I'd love to see the full thesis
    and supporting evidence that backs it all up, but since this is USENET
    I know I never will.
     
    Scott in SoCal, Jan 11, 2009
    #43
  4. Tim Howard

    Mike Hunter Guest

    If you actually live in California, look around and see what the environuts
    have already done to your state, WBMS
     
    Mike Hunter, Jan 11, 2009
    #44
  5. Tim Howard

    Tim McNamara Guest

    And if that's the case, Wall Street and the banking industry is chock
    full of environmentalists.
     
    Tim McNamara, Jan 11, 2009
    #45
  6. Tim Howard

    Dave Head Guest

    Yeah, the envirowackos have run roughshod over every other interest in their
    quests, and either damage the Nation directly, or are useful idiots of those
    with more malicious ends, such as those that would want high prices for things
    such as real estate.
     
    Dave Head, Jan 11, 2009
    #46

  7. I would think that a per mile tax (gas) along with a sliding rate on
    registration fees that reflect a particular vehicles impact on roads and
    maintenance would be the way to go.

    As such, large commercial vehicles would pay considerably more than sub
    compact cars.

    JT
     
    Grumpy AuContraire, Jan 12, 2009
    #47
  8. Tim Howard

    Brent Guest

    The proof of it IMO is in the actions that they support that are counter
    to environmentalism. I've heard and read of cases where through the
    power of government (in different states) land was taken from its
    rightful owners to preserve 'open space' and the like. Later on down the
    road the land was sold by the government to insiders who then developed
    it and built very expensive homes upon it. I didn't save the cites on it
    but I have read/heard about it so it's not new to me.

    Beyond that I think he is pointing out a subset of the "true purpose".
    The true purpose is clearly that of a ruling class wishing to remain a
    ruling class and have everything to themselves while the rest of us have
    nothing.

    It is my belief that if I were to develop a $10 zero point energy device
    (I'm just using that as a 100% clean miricle energy source that would
    preserve the environment and raise the standard of living world wide)
    that could run a car or a home for 25 years that every attempt I made to
    bring it to market would be blocked by government. I would also likely
    be killed if that would prevent its release.

    There are natural zero calorie sweeteners that have been blocked from
    market in the USA by the FDA because of who stood to loose if they made
    it to market. Now the FDA is slowly reversing itself on one that has
    been used in Japan for 30 years because the soda giants want to use it.
    And that's just the sugar industry...
     
    Brent, Jan 12, 2009
    #48
  9. Tim Howard

    Brent Guest

    In the sense of using environmentalism to gain wealth and power, yes.
     
    Brent, Jan 12, 2009
    #49
  10. Tim Howard

    Dave Head Guest

    Undoubtedly why Fleischman and Ponds went public directly. Now nobody can
    "duplicate the experiment." Yeah... right...
     
    Dave Head, Jan 12, 2009
    #50
  11. Tim Howard

    Brent Guest

    Even with an explaination someone misses the point. Okay, I'll use wind
    power. Remember when we were supposed to spend money developing and
    building wind power when wind power didn't work and couldn't work? Where
    if wind was used power would have to be rationed, etc? Now wind power
    is working to a degree and guess what? Now wind power is bad. It chops
    up birds and kills fish (when hydro electric has to use the spillways
    because wind is over-generating) and the like. Wind power is ugly and
    disturbs the view and every other objection that has appeared in the
    last few years.

    If you believe that people in power wouldn't kill to preserve it, I
    suggest a better understanding of human society is in order. It is the
    most ruthless that rise to the top. If you're not willing to kill either
    directly or indirectly you won't get very far in the halls of power.

     
    Brent, Jan 12, 2009
    #51
  12. Tim Howard

    Tim McNamara Guest

    I was being ironic in response to Galt's claim about the true purpose of
    the environmental movement- a claim which about a chock full o' nuts as
    can be.
     
    Tim McNamara, Jan 12, 2009
    #52
  13. Tim Howard

    Brent Guest

    It's just one facet, not the 'true purpose'. Government takes from some
    people and gives to others so those others benefit. It uses excuses for
    this to cover it, the environment is one of those exuses.
     
    Brent, Jan 12, 2009
    #53
  14. Tim Howard

    smullenjm Guest

    They are not punishing drivers of high mpg cars for their fuel
    efficiency. They are extracting a charge for use of and wear and tear
    on the road. Roads get worn out by the number of miles an automobile
    uses the roadway and not by the mpg.

    A weight-based assesment might make some sense.
     
    smullenjm, Jan 13, 2009
    #54
  15. Tim Howard

    Tim McNamara Guest

    That's the purpose of capitalism- securing the benefit of the few at the
    expense of the many. Just check the ratio of CEO incomes to those of
    the average worker over the past 50 years.
    Tinfoil hats help.
     
    Tim McNamara, Jan 14, 2009
    #55
  16. Tim Howard

    Brent Guest

    No, that the purpose of the state. (the government) Capitalism can't do
    that, only the power of the state can.
    And Iraq was invaded for the WMD.... lol. It's amazing how people can
    compartmentalize and decide that when the government is doing something
    they like, something that happens to go along with their own views, the
    government is honest and motivated by good yet when they run the same
    sort of game to do something they don't agree with they see the excuse
    for what it is. Guess what? It's always an excuse to expand the size
    and power of the state.
     
    Brent, Jan 14, 2009
    #56
  17. Tim Howard

    Sharx35 Guest

    A good way to nail the SUV's, many of which are overkill.
     
    Sharx35, Jan 14, 2009
    #57
  18. No, that's a reason to tax New Yorkers in general to support public
    transportation. It's not a reason to tax, e.g., drivers in Albany to
    pay for NYC public transportation.

    Furthermore, NYC is pretty much singular in this respect.
    Philadelphia, for instance, works with only relatively minor
    inconvenience when SEPTA strikes.
     
    Matthew Russotto, Jan 14, 2009
    #58
  19. Tim Howard

    Brent Guest

    All of Illinois is taxed to support the CTA. Those of us closer to the
    CTA but still outside it's service area get to be taxed more for it.
     
    Brent, Jan 14, 2009
    #59
  20. Tim Howard

    marcodbeast Guest

    Because, of course, gasoline burns clean as a whistle. lol
     
    marcodbeast, Jan 14, 2009
    #60
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.