Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Taxing for your own good... enough already!
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
"Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
news:Misc-8E18DF.20312904042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
> In article <65nvsdF2h610pU1@mid.individual,net >,
> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> "Tom S." <t.m.s.work@cox,net > wrote in message
>> news:wWyJj.53376$yk5.1384@newsfe18.lga...
>> > The problem with mass transit is not the infrastructure, it's the very
>> > premises they hold are faulty in a major way.
>
>> Mass transit can and does work -- if the circumstances are right.
>
> The main circumstance you need is cultural. People don't car pool or
> take the bus because they have this notion (something like 98%+ of those
> surveyed) that they MIGHT need a car during the day to do some errand or
> another.
>
> Oddly, when asked if they'd needed a car any time in the past 2 weeks to
> do some errand or another during the work day, more than 80% replied in
> the negative.
>
> 1 car per person is cultural. We don't need taxes, we need education &
> psychology.
Psychology is very important, IMO. In between the constant demands of
spouse and kids, the ever-increasing constraints of laws, rules and
regulations placing a straitjacket on our actions at the workplace and
elswhere, almost the one place where we still have some semblance of control
over our actions and environment is behind the wheel of our car. As a space
of retreat where we may assert "mastery" -- even if illusory and for a
time -- is psychologically very important to us. I don't think we are ready
and willing to give this up other than under the most extreme duress.
"Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
news:Misc-8E18DF.20312904042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
> In article <65nvsdF2h610pU1@mid.individual,net >,
> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> "Tom S." <t.m.s.work@cox,net > wrote in message
>> news:wWyJj.53376$yk5.1384@newsfe18.lga...
>> > The problem with mass transit is not the infrastructure, it's the very
>> > premises they hold are faulty in a major way.
>
>> Mass transit can and does work -- if the circumstances are right.
>
> The main circumstance you need is cultural. People don't car pool or
> take the bus because they have this notion (something like 98%+ of those
> surveyed) that they MIGHT need a car during the day to do some errand or
> another.
>
> Oddly, when asked if they'd needed a car any time in the past 2 weeks to
> do some errand or another during the work day, more than 80% replied in
> the negative.
>
> 1 car per person is cultural. We don't need taxes, we need education &
> psychology.
Psychology is very important, IMO. In between the constant demands of
spouse and kids, the ever-increasing constraints of laws, rules and
regulations placing a straitjacket on our actions at the workplace and
elswhere, almost the one place where we still have some semblance of control
over our actions and environment is behind the wheel of our car. As a space
of retreat where we may assert "mastery" -- even if illusory and for a
time -- is psychologically very important to us. I don't think we are ready
and willing to give this up other than under the most extreme duress.
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
On 2008-04-04, Mike <cigarmikeBAND@sbcglobal,net > wrote:
>
> Tax gasoline more. The nannies love to drive their pollution spewing
> globally polluting machines to the polls to vote for taxes on smokers.
> Hypocrites. Maybe some more people will argue for long over due increases in
> mass transit infrastructure.
Gasoline is taxed enough. I'd prefer to see them drop the oil company
subsidies over increasing taxes. An industry making over $150 Billion
in profits does not have any need for federal subsidies.
>
> Tax wolmanized lumber a lot more. It pollutes the global water supply.
>
> Tax fertilizer more. It eutrifies lakes. We need clean water a heck of a lot
> more than green lawns.
We need food pretty much as much as we need water. Taxing fertilizer
also taxes corn and broccoli.
>
> Tax the hybrid cars more. It costs more in pollution to make the cells
> overseas and ship them all the way back here. Plus it feeds the economy of
> foreign countries that don't even like us.
The cells are made in Canada. They like us well enough... Of
course, I'd rather not see the cells made in Canada, shipped to Japan,
then have the finished product shipped to the US. Maybe work with
Honda and Toyota to have the cells shipped to manufacturing plants in
the US and installed in the cars there, or even have the cars, sans
cells, shipped to the manufacturing plants in Canada... Or go way
out on a ledge, and have the cars manufactured in Canada...
>
> Tax the sh*t out of Chinese imports of all kinds. That'll pay for the health
> program in no time, and help to level the economic playing field.
And reduce lead poisoning in our kids. I am not interested in a
"level playing field", but I'd be all for taxing the shit out of
products made in communist countries that want us dead...
--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
time..." - Danny, American History X
On 2008-04-04, Mike <cigarmikeBAND@sbcglobal,net > wrote:
>
> Tax gasoline more. The nannies love to drive their pollution spewing
> globally polluting machines to the polls to vote for taxes on smokers.
> Hypocrites. Maybe some more people will argue for long over due increases in
> mass transit infrastructure.
Gasoline is taxed enough. I'd prefer to see them drop the oil company
subsidies over increasing taxes. An industry making over $150 Billion
in profits does not have any need for federal subsidies.
>
> Tax wolmanized lumber a lot more. It pollutes the global water supply.
>
> Tax fertilizer more. It eutrifies lakes. We need clean water a heck of a lot
> more than green lawns.
We need food pretty much as much as we need water. Taxing fertilizer
also taxes corn and broccoli.
>
> Tax the hybrid cars more. It costs more in pollution to make the cells
> overseas and ship them all the way back here. Plus it feeds the economy of
> foreign countries that don't even like us.
The cells are made in Canada. They like us well enough... Of
course, I'd rather not see the cells made in Canada, shipped to Japan,
then have the finished product shipped to the US. Maybe work with
Honda and Toyota to have the cells shipped to manufacturing plants in
the US and installed in the cars there, or even have the cars, sans
cells, shipped to the manufacturing plants in Canada... Or go way
out on a ledge, and have the cars manufactured in Canada...
>
> Tax the sh*t out of Chinese imports of all kinds. That'll pay for the health
> program in no time, and help to level the economic playing field.
And reduce lead poisoning in our kids. I am not interested in a
"level playing field", but I'd be all for taxing the shit out of
products made in communist countries that want us dead...
--
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
time..." - Danny, American History X
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
In article <slrnfvdjdc.r2.joe@barada.griffincs.local>,
Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo,com > wrote:
> On 2008-04-04, Mike <cigarmikeBAND@sbcglobal,net > wrote:
> > Tax gasoline more. The nannies love to drive their pollution spewing
> > globally polluting machines to the polls to vote for taxes on smokers.
> > Hypocrites. Maybe some more people will argue for long over due increases in
> > mass transit infrastructure.
> Gasoline is taxed enough. I'd prefer to see them drop the oil company
> subsidies over increasing taxes. An industry making over $150 Billion
> in profits does not have any need for federal subsidies.
Alternately, everyone could pay for their own health care insurance.
I mean, if we're just going to tax the poor & minorities into oblivion,
anyway, why not just require them to buy health insurance?! Then they
can ignore that the same as they do for car insurance, and Bob's your
Fanny's brother ("...or something like that" ;)
--
Please take off your pants or I won't read your e-mail.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.
In article <slrnfvdjdc.r2.joe@barada.griffincs.local>,
Joe <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo,com > wrote:
> On 2008-04-04, Mike <cigarmikeBAND@sbcglobal,net > wrote:
> > Tax gasoline more. The nannies love to drive their pollution spewing
> > globally polluting machines to the polls to vote for taxes on smokers.
> > Hypocrites. Maybe some more people will argue for long over due increases in
> > mass transit infrastructure.
> Gasoline is taxed enough. I'd prefer to see them drop the oil company
> subsidies over increasing taxes. An industry making over $150 Billion
> in profits does not have any need for federal subsidies.
Alternately, everyone could pay for their own health care insurance.
I mean, if we're just going to tax the poor & minorities into oblivion,
anyway, why not just require them to buy health insurance?! Then they
can ignore that the same as they do for car insurance, and Bob's your
Fanny's brother ("...or something like that" ;)
--
Please take off your pants or I won't read your e-mail.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
"Joe" <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo,com > wrote in message
news:slrnfvdjdc.r2.joe@barada.griffincs.local...
> On 2008-04-04, Mike <cigarmikeBAND@sbcglobal,net > wrote:
>>
>> Tax gasoline more. The nannies love to drive their pollution spewing
>> globally polluting machines to the polls to vote for taxes on smokers.
>> Hypocrites. Maybe some more people will argue for long over due increases
>> in
>> mass transit infrastructure.
>
> Gasoline is taxed enough. I'd prefer to see them drop the oil company
> subsidies over increasing taxes. An industry making over $150 Billion
> in profits does not have any need for federal subsidies.
We don't tax them enough. There are huge costs associated with the negative
externalities of using internal combustion, and current US levels of
taxation aren't even close to covering them.
The perfectly equitable alternative, of course, would be to tax internal
combustion machines, at the point of purchase perhaps or through an annual
road tax.
>
>>
>> Tax wolmanized lumber a lot more. It pollutes the global water supply.
>>
>> Tax fertilizer more. It eutrifies lakes. We need clean water a heck of a
>> lot
>> more than green lawns.
>
> We need food pretty much as much as we need water. Taxing fertilizer
> also taxes corn and broccoli.
Depends what fertiliser, how much and where it is used. Sure, dumping loads
of nitrogen-fixing fertliser on the fields will increase the yield, but the
run-off will cause all kinds of havoc to downstream users and ecosystems.
Fishermen tend not to appreciate your fine crop of broccoli if your
fertiliser kills all the fish in the lake ...
"Joe" <joe@nospam.hits-buffalo,com > wrote in message
news:slrnfvdjdc.r2.joe@barada.griffincs.local...
> On 2008-04-04, Mike <cigarmikeBAND@sbcglobal,net > wrote:
>>
>> Tax gasoline more. The nannies love to drive their pollution spewing
>> globally polluting machines to the polls to vote for taxes on smokers.
>> Hypocrites. Maybe some more people will argue for long over due increases
>> in
>> mass transit infrastructure.
>
> Gasoline is taxed enough. I'd prefer to see them drop the oil company
> subsidies over increasing taxes. An industry making over $150 Billion
> in profits does not have any need for federal subsidies.
We don't tax them enough. There are huge costs associated with the negative
externalities of using internal combustion, and current US levels of
taxation aren't even close to covering them.
The perfectly equitable alternative, of course, would be to tax internal
combustion machines, at the point of purchase perhaps or through an annual
road tax.
>
>>
>> Tax wolmanized lumber a lot more. It pollutes the global water supply.
>>
>> Tax fertilizer more. It eutrifies lakes. We need clean water a heck of a
>> lot
>> more than green lawns.
>
> We need food pretty much as much as we need water. Taxing fertilizer
> also taxes corn and broccoli.
Depends what fertiliser, how much and where it is used. Sure, dumping loads
of nitrogen-fixing fertliser on the fields will increase the yield, but the
run-off will cause all kinds of havoc to downstream users and ecosystems.
Fishermen tend not to appreciate your fine crop of broccoli if your
fertiliser kills all the fish in the lake ...
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
"Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> We don't tax them enough.
This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
--
Please take off your pants or I won't read your e-mail.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.
In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
"Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> We don't tax them enough.
This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
--
Please take off your pants or I won't read your e-mail.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
"Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
> In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> We don't tax them enough.
>
> This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
"Giving money (power) to Congress is like giving whiskey and car keys to
teenaged boys!". -- P.J. O'Rourke
"Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
> In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> We don't tax them enough.
>
> This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
"Giving money (power) to Congress is like giving whiskey and car keys to
teenaged boys!". -- P.J. O'Rourke
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
"Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
> In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> We don't tax them enough.
>
> This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
;-)
One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas. Think
COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a massive
health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
drivers.
"Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
> In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> We don't tax them enough.
>
> This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
;-)
One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas. Think
COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a massive
health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
drivers.
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
In article <65ppbgF2h6g9oU1@mid.individual,net >,
"Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> "Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
> news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
> > In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
> > "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >> We don't tax them enough.
> > This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
> Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
> ;-)
>
> One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas. Think
> COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
> these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a massive
> health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
> drivers.
Speaking of cogent arguments -- yeah, so...?
Taxation is not the solution to any of the problems you list.
--
Please take off your pants or I won't read your e-mail.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.
In article <65ppbgF2h6g9oU1@mid.individual,net >,
"Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> "Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
> news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
> > In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
> > "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >> We don't tax them enough.
> > This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
> Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
> ;-)
>
> One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas. Think
> COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
> these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a massive
> health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
> drivers.
Speaking of cogent arguments -- yeah, so...?
Taxation is not the solution to any of the problems you list.
--
Please take off your pants or I won't read your e-mail.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
Miss Elaine Eos <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote:
>In article <65ppbgF2h6g9oU1@mid.individual,net >,
> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> "Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
>> news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
>> > In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
>> > "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> We don't tax them enough.
>
>> > This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
>
>> Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
>> ;-)
>>
>> One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas. Think
>> COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
>> these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a massive
>> health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
>> drivers.
>
>Speaking of cogent arguments -- yeah, so...?
>
>Taxation is not the solution to any of the problems you list.
Taxation should not be punitive, neither should it be used for "crowd
control".
Miss Elaine Eos <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote:
>In article <65ppbgF2h6g9oU1@mid.individual,net >,
> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> "Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
>> news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
>> > In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
>> > "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> We don't tax them enough.
>
>> > This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
>
>> Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
>> ;-)
>>
>> One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas. Think
>> COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
>> these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a massive
>> health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
>> drivers.
>
>Speaking of cogent arguments -- yeah, so...?
>
>Taxation is not the solution to any of the problems you list.
Taxation should not be punitive, neither should it be used for "crowd
control".
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
"Mickey" <Mickey@NOSPAMFatHounds,com > wrote in message
news:5qkfv3tfj2popk0q4otenfjcna60qi53nk@4ax,com ...
> Miss Elaine Eos <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote:
>
>>In article <65ppbgF2h6g9oU1@mid.individual,net >,
>> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> "Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
>>> news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
>>> > In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
>>> > "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> >> We don't tax them enough.
>>
>>> > This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
>>
>>> Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>> One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas.
>>> Think
>>> COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
>>> these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a
>>> massive
>>> health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
>>> drivers.
>>
>>Speaking of cogent arguments -- yeah, so...?
>>
>>Taxation is not the solution to any of the problems you list.
>
> Taxation should not be punitive, neither should it be used for "crowd
> control".
That's like saying if you jump off the roof, you shouldn't _necessarily_
fall down. :~)
"Mickey" <Mickey@NOSPAMFatHounds,com > wrote in message
news:5qkfv3tfj2popk0q4otenfjcna60qi53nk@4ax,com ...
> Miss Elaine Eos <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote:
>
>>In article <65ppbgF2h6g9oU1@mid.individual,net >,
>> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> "Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
>>> news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
>>> > In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
>>> > "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> >> We don't tax them enough.
>>
>>> > This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
>>
>>> Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>> One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas.
>>> Think
>>> COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
>>> these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a
>>> massive
>>> health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
>>> drivers.
>>
>>Speaking of cogent arguments -- yeah, so...?
>>
>>Taxation is not the solution to any of the problems you list.
>
> Taxation should not be punitive, neither should it be used for "crowd
> control".
That's like saying if you jump off the roof, you shouldn't _necessarily_
fall down. :~)
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
In article <X4SJj.53180$097.20942@newsfe21.lga>,
"Tom S." <t.m.s.work@cox,net > wrote:
> That's like saying if you jump off the roof, you shouldn't _necessarily_
> fall down. :~)
Well, not if you're in Australia... ;)
--
Please take off your pants or I won't read your e-mail.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.
In article <X4SJj.53180$097.20942@newsfe21.lga>,
"Tom S." <t.m.s.work@cox,net > wrote:
> That's like saying if you jump off the roof, you shouldn't _necessarily_
> fall down. :~)
Well, not if you're in Australia... ;)
--
Please take off your pants or I won't read your e-mail.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
"Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
news:Misc-FA7916.14373605042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
> In article <X4SJj.53180$097.20942@newsfe21.lga>,
> "Tom S." <t.m.s.work@cox,net > wrote:
>
>> That's like saying if you jump off the roof, you shouldn't _necessarily_
>> fall down. :~)
>
> Well, not if you're in Australia... ;)
Yes, and you'll corkscrew in the opposite direction as you fall. ;~o
"Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
news:Misc-FA7916.14373605042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
> In article <X4SJj.53180$097.20942@newsfe21.lga>,
> "Tom S." <t.m.s.work@cox,net > wrote:
>
>> That's like saying if you jump off the roof, you shouldn't _necessarily_
>> fall down. :~)
>
> Well, not if you're in Australia... ;)
Yes, and you'll corkscrew in the opposite direction as you fall. ;~o
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
On Apr 5, 9:18=EF=BF=BDpm, "Tom S." <t.m.s.w...@cox,net > wrote:
> "Miss Elaine Eos" <M...@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in messagenews:Mis=
c-FA7916.14373605042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
>
> > In article <X4SJj.53180$097.20...@newsfe21.lga>,
> > "Tom S." <t.m.s.w...@cox,net > wrote:
>
> >> That's like saying if you jump off the roof, you shouldn't _necessarily=
_
> >> fall down. :~)
>
> > Well, not if you're in Australia... =EF=BF=BD ;)
>
> Yes, and you'll corkscrew in the opposite direction as you fall. ;~o
Well D'oh ... like we didn't know that! <G>! heheheh (still love the
bathtub drain demo)
On Apr 5, 9:18=EF=BF=BDpm, "Tom S." <t.m.s.w...@cox,net > wrote:
> "Miss Elaine Eos" <M...@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in messagenews:Mis=
c-FA7916.14373605042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
>
> > In article <X4SJj.53180$097.20...@newsfe21.lga>,
> > "Tom S." <t.m.s.w...@cox,net > wrote:
>
> >> That's like saying if you jump off the roof, you shouldn't _necessarily=
_
> >> fall down. :~)
>
> > Well, not if you're in Australia... =EF=BF=BD ;)
>
> Yes, and you'll corkscrew in the opposite direction as you fall. ;~o
Well D'oh ... like we didn't know that! <G>! heheheh (still love the
bathtub drain demo)
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
"Mickey" <Mickey@NOSPAMFatHounds,com > wrote in message
news:5qkfv3tfj2popk0q4otenfjcna60qi53nk@4ax,com ...
> Miss Elaine Eos <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote:
>
>>In article <65ppbgF2h6g9oU1@mid.individual,net >,
>> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> "Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
>>> news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
>>> > In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
>>> > "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> >> We don't tax them enough.
>>
>>> > This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
>>
>>> Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>> One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas.
>>> Think
>>> COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
>>> these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a
>>> massive
>>> health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
>>> drivers.
>>
>>Speaking of cogent arguments -- yeah, so...?
>>
>>Taxation is not the solution to any of the problems you list.
>
> Taxation should not be punitive, neither should it be used for "crowd
> control".
So what is the solution? The environmental impact of hydrocarbon pollution
is diffuse -- if you get emphysema, can you point to any one driver and
prove that his exhaust fumes were responsible for your lungs crapping out on
you? Or should we simply talk at people and go on our wheezing way when
they tell us to sod off? Like it or not, price increases do change
behaviour, and if your annual petrol cost jumps from $2,000 to $3,000 you
will think very carefully about buying a more efficient car next time round,
even if you would rather buy that SRT-8 ...
"Mickey" <Mickey@NOSPAMFatHounds,com > wrote in message
news:5qkfv3tfj2popk0q4otenfjcna60qi53nk@4ax,com ...
> Miss Elaine Eos <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote:
>
>>In article <65ppbgF2h6g9oU1@mid.individual,net >,
>> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> "Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
>>> news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
>>> > In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
>>> > "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> >> We don't tax them enough.
>>
>>> > This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
>>
>>> Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>> One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas.
>>> Think
>>> COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
>>> these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a
>>> massive
>>> health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
>>> drivers.
>>
>>Speaking of cogent arguments -- yeah, so...?
>>
>>Taxation is not the solution to any of the problems you list.
>
> Taxation should not be punitive, neither should it be used for "crowd
> control".
So what is the solution? The environmental impact of hydrocarbon pollution
is diffuse -- if you get emphysema, can you point to any one driver and
prove that his exhaust fumes were responsible for your lungs crapping out on
you? Or should we simply talk at people and go on our wheezing way when
they tell us to sod off? Like it or not, price increases do change
behaviour, and if your annual petrol cost jumps from $2,000 to $3,000 you
will think very carefully about buying a more efficient car next time round,
even if you would rather buy that SRT-8 ...
Re: Taxing for your own good... enough already!
"Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"Mickey" <Mickey@NOSPAMFatHounds,com > wrote in message
>news:5qkfv3tfj2popk0q4otenfjcna60qi53nk@4ax,com ...
>> Miss Elaine Eos <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote:
>>
>>>In article <65ppbgF2h6g9oU1@mid.individual,net >,
>>> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
>>>> news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
>>>> > In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
>>>> > "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> >> We don't tax them enough.
>>>
>>>> > This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
>>>
>>>> Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
>>>> ;-)
>>>>
>>>> One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas.
>>>> Think
>>>> COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
>>>> these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a
>>>> massive
>>>> health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
>>>> drivers.
>>>
>>>Speaking of cogent arguments -- yeah, so...?
>>>
>>>Taxation is not the solution to any of the problems you list.
>>
>> Taxation should not be punitive, neither should it be used for "crowd
>> control".
>
>So what is the solution? The environmental impact of hydrocarbon pollution
>is diffuse -- if you get emphysema, can you point to any one driver and
>prove that his exhaust fumes were responsible for your lungs crapping out on
>you?
No. You got emphysema. Bad luck, sucks to be you, at least it's not
cancer. It's no one's fault, Litigea.
> Or should we simply talk at people and go on our wheezing way when
>they tell us to sod off? Like it or not, price increases do change
>behaviour, and if your annual petrol cost jumps from $2,000 to $3,000 you
>will think very carefully about buying a more efficient car next time round,
>even if you would rather buy that SRT-8 ...
Of course it does, and that's why they do it. My point was that they
shouldn't. Taxes are supposed to fund the government, not be used to
control the herd. We are not supposed to be a fucking herd.
Punitive taxation is wrong.
"Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"Mickey" <Mickey@NOSPAMFatHounds,com > wrote in message
>news:5qkfv3tfj2popk0q4otenfjcna60qi53nk@4ax,com ...
>> Miss Elaine Eos <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote:
>>
>>>In article <65ppbgF2h6g9oU1@mid.individual,net >,
>>> "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Miss Elaine Eos" <Misc@your-pants.PlayNaked,com > wrote in message
>>>> news:Misc-C3050C.09122105042008@news.sf.sbcglobal,net ...
>>>> > In article <65pfjbF2gioedU1@mid.individual,net >,
>>>> > "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> >> We don't tax them enough.
>>>
>>>> > This statement is wrong, no matter how it's applied.
>>>
>>>> Snappy comeback, but not exactly a cogent argument ...
>>>> ;-)
>>>>
>>>> One big negative externality: respiratory diseases in urban areas.
>>>> Think
>>>> COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, asthma. Even if only one in ten of
>>>> these are caused by internal combustion pollution, that is still a
>>>> massive
>>>> health care bill which is currently not footed by the industry or by the
>>>> drivers.
>>>
>>>Speaking of cogent arguments -- yeah, so...?
>>>
>>>Taxation is not the solution to any of the problems you list.
>>
>> Taxation should not be punitive, neither should it be used for "crowd
>> control".
>
>So what is the solution? The environmental impact of hydrocarbon pollution
>is diffuse -- if you get emphysema, can you point to any one driver and
>prove that his exhaust fumes were responsible for your lungs crapping out on
>you?
No. You got emphysema. Bad luck, sucks to be you, at least it's not
cancer. It's no one's fault, Litigea.
> Or should we simply talk at people and go on our wheezing way when
>they tell us to sod off? Like it or not, price increases do change
>behaviour, and if your annual petrol cost jumps from $2,000 to $3,000 you
>will think very carefully about buying a more efficient car next time round,
>even if you would rather buy that SRT-8 ...
Of course it does, and that's why they do it. My point was that they
shouldn't. Taxes are supposed to fund the government, not be used to
control the herd. We are not supposed to be a fucking herd.
Punitive taxation is wrong.
