Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 23:52:14 -0700
Reply-To: Todd Last <Rubatoguy@MINDSPRING.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Todd Last <Rubatoguy@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject: Re: Attention California Vanagonites
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I don't think the tax has any altruistic motives to it. The state is
experiencing a huge budget deficit, in part due to the mishandling of
the energy situation, and they are looking for ways to increase revenues
to make the mandated balanced budget.
I have not heard of any proposal to increase the gasoline tax, but they
are considering doubling the vehicle registration fees, and upping the
tax on cigarettes and alcohol.
Todd
'88 Westy
Clive Smith wrote:
>Whilst risking all your wraths from a far and safe distance, it does need
>pointing out that the US with 4% of the Worlds population, produces 25% of
>its carbon pollution.
>If I thought Americans were totally insensitive or unsympathetic to the fact
>that Europe has taken a much more constrained and responsible approach by
>using generally smaller vehicles, and pricing carbon fuels much higher - gas
>is at least $4 a (UK) gallon - I'd not bother making the comparisons below:-
>The massive trend towards driving heavy, uneconomical SUV's in Europe, just
>to run kids to school or go shopping, simply as a status symbol and (some
>would say selfish motives) is deplored by environmentalists - and on any
>reasonable grounds one has to at least agree in principle.
>The question is.... how do we distinguish between those that a) need SUV's
>for everyday use and b) use their larger, uneconomical vehicles unwisely, or
>not ? The answers are not easy to come by, if at all.
>
>I would think that the sensible approach here, is to NOT make the tax
>retrospective, and thus exempt vehicles of the age that all your vanagons
>are - if I were in California, I'd start lobbying on this basis NOW. Perhaps
>this will have an effect on prices of exempt vehicles - for instance, here
>in the UK, vehicles under 1 litre were given a £50 tax exemption every year,
>now this has been upped to 1200cc they do indeed fetch a premium, and
>2nd-hand gas-guzzlers have been worth almost nothing for many years now.
>Personally, even though owning one, I would be prepared to pay a premium on
>road tax to own a vehicle over 1.5 tons, seemingly a good cut-off point
>between a reasonable vehicular convenience and one that is obviously more of
>an environmental (and crash damage to pedestrians) threat, however our
>government prefers to leave that alone and rely on the poor fuel consumption
>to 'naturally' regulate the mileage and hence pollution. However, since rich
>people tend to use these vehicles, it is not a very good control.
>
>As much as it hurts, it is a fact that without any controls, everyone here
>at least is going to be driving about in 1.5+ ton monsters. Not long ago,
>the majority of vehicles here were between half and one ton. Whether this is
>a transatlantic trend or just the effect of affluence is not that important.
>But the environmental effects of their production alone is something not to
>be sniffed at, with Germany particularly working hard at making components
>less damaging and even recyclable.
>
>Maybe the best defence against this sort of legislation is first to show
>sympathy with its goals... yet well informed about the pros and cons, and
>with extremely well marshalled arguments for your side of the case. A
>campaign, however big, without reasoned and rational arguments is a weak
>one - get organised early.
>
>Clive Smith
>'88 1.5 ton monster motor!
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Dave Baker" <DBAKER5@KC.RR.COM>
>To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
>Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 1:29 AM
>Subject: Attention California Vanagonites
>
>
>
>
>>I just heard a devastating rumor the CA is considering a 50 cent/gal
>>surcharge on gas and a 2 cents a mile tax at license renewal time for
>>drivers of minivans and SUVs. Would this also apply to our beloved VWs?
>>
>>Is this just a rumor, or are they really considering it?
>>
>>Dave in KC
>>85 Westy (who may think twice before visiting CA)
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
| 
