[ProtectOurFreedom]

As I've been saying for a long time, global warming is all about taking away your liberties and freedoms. First it will be penalties on large cars, then large cars will be banned in favor of "correct" minicars. Freeway speed limits will have to come down to 50 or 55 mph. You will have limits on the number of miles you can drive per year with huge surcharges if you exceed your mileage allocation. Parking spots at your company parking lot will cost you $10 - $20 per day. Indoor temperatures will be regulated by law to 67 in winter and 80 in summer, first in government buildings, then commercial buildings and then your home. Eventually discretionary travel will be banned, ending vacation trips. Incandescent bulbs will be banned. And then the black helicopters will be searching for your outlawed backyard barbecue.

The mass of people are in favor of fixing GW, but the masses don't understand everything in their lives is fueled by carbon and, under the guise of environmental stewardship, we will cede total control of our lives to the socialists and communists.

[Inge C]

I purchased a Charger SRT-8 june last year, and already had to pay ‘gas guzzler tax’ in the amount of $2,000.00.

[Dallas59]

"Auto dealers would collect the money from buyers of gas-guzzlers and send it to the state Board of Equalization. Buyers of gas-sippers would be given a certificate from the dealer to mail to the state to receive their checks."

[traviskicks]

"Call it the Robin Hood approach to global warming. California drivers who buy new Hummers, Ford Expeditions and other big vehicles that emit high levels of greenhouse gases would pay a fee of up to $2,500. And drivers who buy more fuel-efficient cars - like the Toyota Prius or Ford Focus - would receive rebates of up to $2,500, straight from the gas-guzzlers' pockets."





Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.

[Always Independent]

Dam that George Bush for not invading CA first.

[FixitGuy]

Caleefornians need to instantly convert to water as a fuel.

There will be :

No pollution

No traffic jams

No road rage

No junk yards

No gas tax

[antiRepublicrat]

Little question, if the Focus seats four comfortably and the Expedition seats eight comfortably, shouldn’t it be okay that the Expedition puts out twice the pollution if it’s driven loaded? Or is this just a tax on large families?

Never mind, I’m using logic, and this is about control, not logic.

[goldstategop]

Agreed. This is nothing more than another income redistribution scheme disguised as an environmental protection measure. For these people the means and the ends are the same. At heart, they're the socialists they've always been.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[rabscuttle385]

...rebates of up to $2,500, straight from the gas-guzzlers' pockets.

Rebates, before or after the government declares them to be "income" and taxes them?

[Uncle Hal]

These liberals must stay awake nights making this stuff up. It would be laughable if it was not so serious. The inmates are running the insane asylum.

[GreyFlcn]

—As I’ve been saying for a long time, global warming is all about taking away your liberties and freedoms.—

Not like we can’t have big cars.
They just have to put up less pollution.

Best way to do that?
Switch to electricity.

First off electric cars get 3-4x the range off of the same ammount of electricity as hydrogen.
http://www.greyfalcon.net/hydrogen.png

This electric car, puts Ferrari’s to shame with a 0-60 of under 4 seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFVg_xEGYno
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-kdAwJcrQw

This electric SUV crossover, due out in 2008, will offer 650 horsepower, 350 mile range, with a mere 10 minute recharge. (Quicker than a roundtrip to the gas station)
http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/902

EEStor, they plan to put out new battery tech which makes all this stuff dirt cheap, long lasting, and nontoxic.
http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/15/technology/disruptors_eestor.biz2/index.htm

_

You can have your cake and eat it too.

Cool part is, mainstreaming this high density energy storage tech is going to boost our economy dramatically with all other sorts of branching technology.

And get us OFF of middle east, and venezualan oil.

Win-win-win

[TKDietz]

If they are going to do this they need to open the door for diesels to be sold in California and ease up on some of the environmental regulations for cars that get particularly good gas mileage. If a car gets three times times as many miles per gallon as another vehicle, but gives off twice as much pollutants per gallon, it’s still going to pollute a good bit less than the other vehicle that has a lot more performance reducing pollution controls on it. There are a lot of great diesels and gasoline powered vehicles sold in other countries that are incredibly fuel efficient, but they can’t be sold here, especially in California, because they aren’t equipped with all the expensive performance reducing pollution control gadgets the government requires. Big SUV’s that get twelve miles per gallon are fine, as long as they are loaded down with pollution control devices, but simple little cars getting better than forty miles per gallon can’t be sold in many cases because they don’t meet pollution control standards. That’s ridiculous.

[oceanview]

this is what it will come to everywhere. I am fine with the incentives part of a program like this, but take the money for the incentives from general revenues. instead, its going to be all about using punitive measures.

[RetiredArmy]

Don’t you just love the sweet smell of socialism and Marxism in the morning air????

[anglian]

The taxpayer already pays - the cost associated with the tax credit paid on each biofuel/ethanol vehicle sold. This is paid each year over the life of the vehicle. http://www.globalsubsidies.org/IMG/pdf/biofuels_subsidies_us.pdf

[GreyFlcn]

By the way,
Incase you actually read the law, it doesn’t neccisarily change the price of the car.

Since all the fees and rebates are given directly to the manufacturers.
The manufacturers are free to set the prices however they feel like.

So it’s more of a “car manufacturer competition” using dynamic market based mechanisms of both carrots and sticks.

Best part of it all, it doesn’t cost tax payers a thin dime to fund all this. Since the losing manufacturers pay the winners.

[Kellis91789]

It bothers me every time SUVs are dismissed as being not as efficient as smaller cars. Or that driving slower is somehow more efficient than driving fast. That is such a narrow use of the term 'efficient' and focuses only on energy usage. From Dictionary.com: ef·fi·cient /ɪˈfɪʃənt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[i-fish-uhnt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective 1. performing or functioning in the best possible manner with the least waste of time and effort; having and using requisite knowledge, skill, and industry; competent; capable. 2. satisfactory and economical to use. Why skip over the primary definition and judge vehicles or driving style by the secondary definition ? A vehicle's purpose is not simply to move a person from one place to another. Its purpose is to do so comfortably, safely, and quickly. Driving an SUV 80mph may be less energy-efficient, but it is much more efficient in achieving the comfort, safety, and speed goals than driving some Prius at 55mph.

[bert]

sounds like justifiable regicide.