Quoting Mham001 (Reply 139): You made the claim that those of us driving used cars now should pay some new tax. Rubbish.
You apparently are trying to add a yearly tax for the energy to build the vehicle. We really don't have a way to pay a yearly Federal tax like that, it would have to be a state bureaucracy which just adds 50 more layers to the scam. The way it would work would be a one-time tax upon purchasing the new car. That additional cost would be part of the value of the car when its resold and the government would not have the need to retax. The life expectancy of the car has no basis, it is the amount of the energy used to build and nothing more.
At any rate, the whole scheme is nothing more than a power and money grab, much like most of the global warming scare. |
Ok. Start from the start. We are not talking about taxing, we are talking about
pricing. Big difference. Second, we are talking about consumption and emissions of every single resource and pollutant. Nothing to do with global warming/Al Gore. Simple resource pricing that actually reflects consumption and emissions, individually, and for each vehicle owner. Not some unfair, undiscriminating flat registration and/or fuel tax that affects everyone regardless of resource use.
You can price the energy consumptions/emissions of the building process by two different ways:
1) You can apply a once-off emission offset on the purchase price of the brand new car. Every single supplier and manufacturer (basically anyone taking part in the building and delivery of the vehicle) passes the emissions/consumption price onto the next, all the way down to the end user who simply pays 10, 20, ... 250% more at the dealership for their car, depending on the amount of energy needed and emissions generated by the process. Once-off, done, and then you don't have to carry it over onto the second-hand market.
2) You can
actually establish a commercial life for a vehicle - fleet managers can tell you all about it, there is extensive literature available for that. And then you can go on and divide the energy consumption and emissions of the building process by the number of years/kilometres of service, as projected by the manufacturer/authority, and adjust once you sell/replace/smash your car.
No rocket science there.
If your current car is, say, 20 years old, and its projected commercial life was 10 years, then that's it, you're done with it, you are not paying for its assembly emissions/consumption anymore.
Once again, it is not a
tax, it is a price, which is a vital component of free market economy. You cannot bash government intervention and then complain when the laws of market actually apply.
Relax, no worries there.
Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 140): Why? Because your "environmental" tax has been paid in full when the car was purchased and undoubtedly has an influence on the car's resale value. |
Instead of playing smartarse, would you care to explain exactly how
that happens? Do you have a price to pay for the emissions/consumption resulting from building your car? No.
Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 140): The car is already there, it wasn't re-manufactured. Therefore, tax it again would be a highway robbery. How would you like to pay income tax on your savings account's whole balance instead of the interest? Because this is exactly what you're proposing. Bovine fecal matter if you ask me. |
Besides the fact that you are obviously unable to understand basic economic concepts, maybe you should tone it down a bit.
The car is there - so what? It was built, wasn't it? Did someone pay the price of the pollution and depletion of natural resources for it? Absolutely not. Someone has to. Remember? Free market economy? Everything has a price? Ring any bells? Thank you.
No free rides. Get over it, make an effort to document yourself a bit, and then discuss.