Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Euro diesel reaches the US
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I hate to say it, but the US dependence on dirt-cheap fuel has *got* to
> change, because you are out of step with the rest of the world. And the
> rest of the world is not going to slash its taxes on fuel. You are going
> to have to raise yours.
>
Dunno about the *got*, but it very likely _will_ change, simply because
fuel is no longer dirt cheap. I personally concur, the US will benefit by
a gradual increase in fuel taxes. However, a great deal of capital investment
was made predicated on low transportation costs. Those folks will not readily
agree with our foregone conclusion.
The US enjoyed a hefty advantage by being an oil-exporting country for
close to half a century. The mindset will take some time to adjust.
bob prohaska
The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I hate to say it, but the US dependence on dirt-cheap fuel has *got* to
> change, because you are out of step with the rest of the world. And the
> rest of the world is not going to slash its taxes on fuel. You are going
> to have to raise yours.
>
Dunno about the *got*, but it very likely _will_ change, simply because
fuel is no longer dirt cheap. I personally concur, the US will benefit by
a gradual increase in fuel taxes. However, a great deal of capital investment
was made predicated on low transportation costs. Those folks will not readily
agree with our foregone conclusion.
The US enjoyed a hefty advantage by being an oil-exporting country for
close to half a century. The mindset will take some time to adjust.
bob prohaska
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
bob prohaska's usenet account <bp@www .zefox,net > wrote:
> Dunno about the *got*,
Yes, agreed.
>but it very likely _will_ change, simply because
> fuel is no longer dirt cheap.
True
>I personally concur, the US will benefit by
> a gradual increase in fuel taxes. However, a great deal of capital investment
> was made predicated on low transportation costs. Those folks will not readily
> agree with our foregone conclusion.
I am *sure* you are right.
>
> The US enjoyed a hefty advantage by being an oil-exporting country for
> close to half a century. The mindset will take some time to adjust.
I think you're right again. Although the US has been a net importer
for... what, 30-odd years?
The UK has been a net exporter for some 25-30 years, don't forget. Or as
close to a balance as makes no difference. We have *never* had cheap
fuel, unless you accept that in real purchasing terms, fuel has not got
much pricier. Which it hasn't, over the years.
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
bob prohaska's usenet account <bp@www .zefox,net > wrote:
> Dunno about the *got*,
Yes, agreed.
>but it very likely _will_ change, simply because
> fuel is no longer dirt cheap.
True
>I personally concur, the US will benefit by
> a gradual increase in fuel taxes. However, a great deal of capital investment
> was made predicated on low transportation costs. Those folks will not readily
> agree with our foregone conclusion.
I am *sure* you are right.
>
> The US enjoyed a hefty advantage by being an oil-exporting country for
> close to half a century. The mindset will take some time to adjust.
I think you're right again. Although the US has been a net importer
for... what, 30-odd years?
The UK has been a net exporter for some 25-30 years, don't forget. Or as
close to a balance as makes no difference. We have *never* had cheap
fuel, unless you accept that in real purchasing terms, fuel has not got
much pricier. Which it hasn't, over the years.
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> The UK has been a net exporter for some 25-30 years, don't forget. Or as
> close to a balance as makes no difference. We have *never* had cheap
> fuel, unless you accept that in real purchasing terms, fuel has not got
> much pricier. Which it hasn't, over the years.
>
It seems that mindsets are calcified early and don't change fast. The UK
started as an oil importer and kept that mindset. The US started as an
oil exporter and has reflexively stuck to a "cheaper is better" view.
My father observed long ago that it was profoundly wasteful to burn for
fuel a feedstock so versatile as oil. Much better to make polymers out
of it. He was a rubber chemist. Eventually even us Americans will catch on.
bob prohaska
The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> The UK has been a net exporter for some 25-30 years, don't forget. Or as
> close to a balance as makes no difference. We have *never* had cheap
> fuel, unless you accept that in real purchasing terms, fuel has not got
> much pricier. Which it hasn't, over the years.
>
It seems that mindsets are calcified early and don't change fast. The UK
started as an oil importer and kept that mindset. The US started as an
oil exporter and has reflexively stuck to a "cheaper is better" view.
My father observed long ago that it was profoundly wasteful to burn for
fuel a feedstock so versatile as oil. Much better to make polymers out
of it. He was a rubber chemist. Eventually even us Americans will catch on.
bob prohaska
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
bob prohaska's usenet account <bp@www .zefox,net > wrote:
> My father observed long ago that it was profoundly wasteful to burn for
> fuel a feedstock so versatile as oil.
Wasn't it Mao who said much the same thing? Some demagogue, anyway.
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
bob prohaska's usenet account <bp@www .zefox,net > wrote:
> My father observed long ago that it was profoundly wasteful to burn for
> fuel a feedstock so versatile as oil.
Wasn't it Mao who said much the same thing? Some demagogue, anyway.
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
The Older Gentleman wrote:
> Dieseldes <desmond@orange,net > wrote:
<snip>
> You guys are used to paying peanuts for fuel, because the tax is low and
> your entire infrastructure is built around cheap energy. The price of
> oil doubles and so, damn nearly, does your price of fuel.
True but much more complicated and maybe even a bit more sinister then
that. I don't know what we do currently in California but IIRC at one
time we produced something in the range of 40-80% of the worlds oil
supply. That is, even more then Texas which is known for oil production.
I believe we still produce something like 70% of the oil we consume.
We pay ~the highest price in the nation for gas. => When something
happens in the Middle East, our local oil producers get a bonus that
doesn't reflect the cost of raw materials or production. I seriously
doubt if we see any Middle East oil on the left coast. Matter of fact we
export Alaskan oil to the Far East.
Consumers/nations tend to use the supply closest to them. The price and
availability of Middle East oil has more direct effect on Europe.
>
> OTOH, because 80% of the price of a UK gallon of fuel is tax, the actual
> oil component is fairly small. We are completely used and conditioned to
> working on expensive fuel (one reason why the European, and especially
> UK, haulage industry is about the most efficient in the world).
I'm not a conspiracy nut, just a nut plain and simple. Governments are
in the business of being self perpetuating. They stick the populous with
whatever taxes they can get away with. For example a statement that was
made that seemed to get more press in the UK then the USA:
http :// business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/money/tax/article1996735.ece
UK gets news about how relatively unfair the USA system is. Here, we
hear about your high taxes and terrible<sic> health care system. We
should all really be more pissed off.
Rick
The Older Gentleman wrote:
> Dieseldes <desmond@orange,net > wrote:
<snip>
> You guys are used to paying peanuts for fuel, because the tax is low and
> your entire infrastructure is built around cheap energy. The price of
> oil doubles and so, damn nearly, does your price of fuel.
True but much more complicated and maybe even a bit more sinister then
that. I don't know what we do currently in California but IIRC at one
time we produced something in the range of 40-80% of the worlds oil
supply. That is, even more then Texas which is known for oil production.
I believe we still produce something like 70% of the oil we consume.
We pay ~the highest price in the nation for gas. => When something
happens in the Middle East, our local oil producers get a bonus that
doesn't reflect the cost of raw materials or production. I seriously
doubt if we see any Middle East oil on the left coast. Matter of fact we
export Alaskan oil to the Far East.
Consumers/nations tend to use the supply closest to them. The price and
availability of Middle East oil has more direct effect on Europe.
>
> OTOH, because 80% of the price of a UK gallon of fuel is tax, the actual
> oil component is fairly small. We are completely used and conditioned to
> working on expensive fuel (one reason why the European, and especially
> UK, haulage industry is about the most efficient in the world).
I'm not a conspiracy nut, just a nut plain and simple. Governments are
in the business of being self perpetuating. They stick the populous with
whatever taxes they can get away with. For example a statement that was
made that seemed to get more press in the UK then the USA:
http :// business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/money/tax/article1996735.ece
UK gets news about how relatively unfair the USA system is. Here, we
hear about your high taxes and terrible<sic> health care system. We
should all really be more pissed off.
Rick
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
Rick Cortese <ricortes@earthlink,net > wrote:
> True but much more complicated and maybe even a bit more sinister then
> that. I don't know what we do currently in California but IIRC at one
> time we produced something in the range of 40-80% of the worlds oil
> supply.
Of course. Mind you, that was when your production was at its peak and
world demand was a fraction of today's.
>That is, even more then Texas which is known for oil production.
> I believe we still produce something like 70% of the oil we consume.
Sounds realistic. I don't know the exact figures, but I do know the US
is a net importer now, whereas it used to be a net exporter.
>
<snip>
>
> I'm not a conspiracy nut, just a nut plain and simple. Governments are
> in the business of being self perpetuating. They stick the populous with
> whatever taxes they can get away with.
Agree 100%
>For example a statement that was
> made that seemed to get more press in the UK then the USA:
> http :// business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/money/tax/article1996735.ece
Interesting, that.
>
> UK gets news about how relatively unfair the USA system is. Here, we
> hear about your high taxes and terrible<sic> health care system. We
> should all really be more pissed off.
Heh. Very true.
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
Rick Cortese <ricortes@earthlink,net > wrote:
> True but much more complicated and maybe even a bit more sinister then
> that. I don't know what we do currently in California but IIRC at one
> time we produced something in the range of 40-80% of the worlds oil
> supply.
Of course. Mind you, that was when your production was at its peak and
world demand was a fraction of today's.
>That is, even more then Texas which is known for oil production.
> I believe we still produce something like 70% of the oil we consume.
Sounds realistic. I don't know the exact figures, but I do know the US
is a net importer now, whereas it used to be a net exporter.
>
<snip>
>
> I'm not a conspiracy nut, just a nut plain and simple. Governments are
> in the business of being self perpetuating. They stick the populous with
> whatever taxes they can get away with.
Agree 100%
>For example a statement that was
> made that seemed to get more press in the UK then the USA:
> http :// business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/money/tax/article1996735.ece
Interesting, that.
>
> UK gets news about how relatively unfair the USA system is. Here, we
> hear about your high taxes and terrible<sic> health care system. We
> should all really be more pissed off.
Heh. Very true.
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
"The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1ic4xfp.wcsfqm1m4j27cN%totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk...
> LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
>
>> Due in part, to our more stringent
>> pollution standards,
>
> A dmodern diesel engine, like a European diesel, is less poluting than a
> petrol engine. Less NOX, less CO2 and (with a particulate trap fitted)
> less particulates too.
Correct, but this hasn't been true in the past
>
>> there hasn't been a wide selection of diesel
>> automobiles. Couple that with the lack of government subsidies that
>> exist
>> in the European countries where diesels are the most popular and it isn't
>> economical to buy diesels.
>
> Diesel cars and diesel fuel are *not* subsidised in Europe. Where did
> you get this nonsense from? It *is* slightly cheaper in some countries
due largely to different tax rates for diesel, ergo subsidized. Germany,
Spain and other countries have also allowed tax benefits for diesel owners
until recently, I'm not sure if the same is still true. As to the cost
difference, I read that there was a premiun for diesel Beemers, but not as
great as the typical difference here. However, if economies of scale have
been achieved, then there is no reason why they would charge such a high
premiun here
> than petrol, and it is a fair bit cheaper in a few, but it is definitely
> not subsidised. It presently costs £1.10/litre in the UK, for example,
> and about euro1.20/litre in France and Germany.
>
>> You can't save enough on fuel that costs 20%
>> more than petrol to recoup the $2500 premium for the engine.
>
> Depends how pricey the fuel is to begin with. At our rates, you can.
> Maybe not in the US. And there is no premium for diesel engines in
> Europe, not any more, because we make so many of them. The economies of
> scale are there.
>
>> If someone
>> would offer a package that made economical sense, most of the real or
>> perceived "soft" objections would disappear.
>
> See above.
"The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1ic4xfp.wcsfqm1m4j27cN%totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk...
> LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
>
>> Due in part, to our more stringent
>> pollution standards,
>
> A dmodern diesel engine, like a European diesel, is less poluting than a
> petrol engine. Less NOX, less CO2 and (with a particulate trap fitted)
> less particulates too.
Correct, but this hasn't been true in the past
>
>> there hasn't been a wide selection of diesel
>> automobiles. Couple that with the lack of government subsidies that
>> exist
>> in the European countries where diesels are the most popular and it isn't
>> economical to buy diesels.
>
> Diesel cars and diesel fuel are *not* subsidised in Europe. Where did
> you get this nonsense from? It *is* slightly cheaper in some countries
due largely to different tax rates for diesel, ergo subsidized. Germany,
Spain and other countries have also allowed tax benefits for diesel owners
until recently, I'm not sure if the same is still true. As to the cost
difference, I read that there was a premiun for diesel Beemers, but not as
great as the typical difference here. However, if economies of scale have
been achieved, then there is no reason why they would charge such a high
premiun here
> than petrol, and it is a fair bit cheaper in a few, but it is definitely
> not subsidised. It presently costs £1.10/litre in the UK, for example,
> and about euro1.20/litre in France and Germany.
>
>> You can't save enough on fuel that costs 20%
>> more than petrol to recoup the $2500 premium for the engine.
>
> Depends how pricey the fuel is to begin with. At our rates, you can.
> Maybe not in the US. And there is no premium for diesel engines in
> Europe, not any more, because we make so many of them. The economies of
> scale are there.
>
>> If someone
>> would offer a package that made economical sense, most of the real or
>> perceived "soft" objections would disappear.
>
> See above.
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
> > Diesel cars and diesel fuel are *not* subsidised in Europe. Where did
> > you get this nonsense from? It *is* slightly cheaper in some countries
> due largely to different tax rates for diesel, ergo subsidized.
Do you actually know what the word 'subsidy' means? You are still
talking nonsense.
>Germany,
> Spain and other countries have also allowed tax benefits for diesel owners
> until recently, I'm not sure if the same is still true. As to the cost
> difference, I read that there was a premiun for diesel Beemers, but not as
> great as the typical difference here.
It depends how you look at it. Take the Jaguar S-Type (first luxury
diesel car whose UK prices I could find in a hurry). The 3.0 litre V6
petrol is £32085. The 2.7 litre diesel is exactly the same price, but in
a slightly lower spec. So there is a price difference, buit it's very
minor.
> However, if economies of scale have
> been achieved, then there is no reason why they would charge such a high
> premiun here
This is true. The luxury cars still tend to use petrolk more than
diesel. Where you have more mass-market ranges, the percentage of diesel
ownership is far higher. Take Ford, for example - the 1.6 turbodiesel,
again, is actually *cheaper* than the petrol, but again, it's
lower-specced.
If you compare it spec-for-spec, it's about £500 pricier, but then its
performance figures in 'normal' driving (ie: mid-range power and torque,
which is where diesels really score) is better than the petrol. Put it
against the slightly larger 1.8 and there's no price difference.
I strongly suspect that the pricing of diesel engines has more to do
with marketing and selective pricing than the actual build cost. But by
and large, where there is an increase, it's minor.
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
> > Diesel cars and diesel fuel are *not* subsidised in Europe. Where did
> > you get this nonsense from? It *is* slightly cheaper in some countries
> due largely to different tax rates for diesel, ergo subsidized.
Do you actually know what the word 'subsidy' means? You are still
talking nonsense.
>Germany,
> Spain and other countries have also allowed tax benefits for diesel owners
> until recently, I'm not sure if the same is still true. As to the cost
> difference, I read that there was a premiun for diesel Beemers, but not as
> great as the typical difference here.
It depends how you look at it. Take the Jaguar S-Type (first luxury
diesel car whose UK prices I could find in a hurry). The 3.0 litre V6
petrol is £32085. The 2.7 litre diesel is exactly the same price, but in
a slightly lower spec. So there is a price difference, buit it's very
minor.
> However, if economies of scale have
> been achieved, then there is no reason why they would charge such a high
> premiun here
This is true. The luxury cars still tend to use petrolk more than
diesel. Where you have more mass-market ranges, the percentage of diesel
ownership is far higher. Take Ford, for example - the 1.6 turbodiesel,
again, is actually *cheaper* than the petrol, but again, it's
lower-specced.
If you compare it spec-for-spec, it's about £500 pricier, but then its
performance figures in 'normal' driving (ie: mid-range power and torque,
which is where diesels really score) is better than the petrol. Put it
against the slightly larger 1.8 and there's no price difference.
I strongly suspect that the pricing of diesel engines has more to do
with marketing and selective pricing than the actual build cost. But by
and large, where there is an increase, it's minor.
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
"The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1ic6rzg.37em7aye4gtmN%totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk...
> LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
>
>> > Diesel cars and diesel fuel are *not* subsidised in Europe. Where did
>> > you get this nonsense from? It *is* slightly cheaper in some countries
>> due largely to different tax rates for diesel, ergo subsidized.
>
> Do you actually know what the word 'subsidy' means? You are still
> talking nonsense.
>
If you don't understand that a tax differential between diesel and regular
petrol is a form of a government subsidy then I see no reason wasting my
time discussing this with you. You are apparently too dull to understand
the subject at hand. According to some information I found, albeit a few
years old, the tax difference in Germany was 18.5 cents per litre.
"The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1ic6rzg.37em7aye4gtmN%totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk...
> LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
>
>> > Diesel cars and diesel fuel are *not* subsidised in Europe. Where did
>> > you get this nonsense from? It *is* slightly cheaper in some countries
>> due largely to different tax rates for diesel, ergo subsidized.
>
> Do you actually know what the word 'subsidy' means? You are still
> talking nonsense.
>
If you don't understand that a tax differential between diesel and regular
petrol is a form of a government subsidy then I see no reason wasting my
time discussing this with you. You are apparently too dull to understand
the subject at hand. According to some information I found, albeit a few
years old, the tax difference in Germany was 18.5 cents per litre.
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
> If you don't understand that a tax differential between diesel and regular
> petrol is a form of a government subsidy then I see no reason wasting my
> time discussing this with you.
*Sigh*. Christ, I dunno why I bother sometimes.
<Slow simple voice>
A subsidy is someone giving you money to do or perform or grow or build
something.
A tax is you giving someone money. The fact that two tax rates are
different does not make the lower tax a subsidy.
</ssv>
Look, check this url:
http :// dictionary.reference,com /browse/subsidy
I trust you have no obhection to what as authoritative a source as this
says?
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
> If you don't understand that a tax differential between diesel and regular
> petrol is a form of a government subsidy then I see no reason wasting my
> time discussing this with you.
*Sigh*. Christ, I dunno why I bother sometimes.
<Slow simple voice>
A subsidy is someone giving you money to do or perform or grow or build
something.
A tax is you giving someone money. The fact that two tax rates are
different does not make the lower tax a subsidy.
</ssv>
Look, check this url:
http :// dictionary.reference,com /browse/subsidy
I trust you have no obhection to what as authoritative a source as this
says?
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
"The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1ic8mvl.3yhm8s6o9ds0N%totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk...
> LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
>
>> If you don't understand that a tax differential between diesel and
>> regular
>> petrol is a form of a government subsidy then I see no reason wasting my
>> time discussing this with you.
>
> *Sigh*. Christ, I dunno why I bother sometimes.
>
> <Slow simple voice>
>
> A subsidy is someone giving you money to do or perform or grow or build
> something.
>
> A tax is you giving someone money. The fact that two tax rates are
> different does not make the lower tax a subsidy.
>
> </ssv>
>
> Look, check this url:
>
> http :// dictionary.reference,com /browse/subsidy
>
> I trust you have no obhection to what as authoritative a source as this
> says?
>
If you don't consider a favorable tax rate used as a financial incentive to
mold public behavior a form of subsidy, then I suggest you google around the
net. I'm confident that you will find numerous articles, not written by me,
that reference taxes used as subsidies.
"The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1ic8mvl.3yhm8s6o9ds0N%totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk...
> LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
>
>> If you don't understand that a tax differential between diesel and
>> regular
>> petrol is a form of a government subsidy then I see no reason wasting my
>> time discussing this with you.
>
> *Sigh*. Christ, I dunno why I bother sometimes.
>
> <Slow simple voice>
>
> A subsidy is someone giving you money to do or perform or grow or build
> something.
>
> A tax is you giving someone money. The fact that two tax rates are
> different does not make the lower tax a subsidy.
>
> </ssv>
>
> Look, check this url:
>
> http :// dictionary.reference,com /browse/subsidy
>
> I trust you have no obhection to what as authoritative a source as this
> says?
>
If you don't consider a favorable tax rate used as a financial incentive to
mold public behavior a form of subsidy, then I suggest you google around the
net. I'm confident that you will find numerous articles, not written by me,
that reference taxes used as subsidies.
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
On 14 Feb, 03:36, "LJ" <laremoDel...@yahoo,com > wrote:
> "The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmail...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in messagenews:1ic8mvl.3yhm8s6o9ds0N%totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk...
>
> > LJ <laremoDel...@yahoo,com > wrote:
>
> >> If you don't understand that a tax differential between diesel and
> >> regular
> >> petrol is a form of a government subsidy then I see no reason wasting my
> >> time discussing this with you.
>
> > *Sigh*. Christ, I dunno why I bother sometimes.
>
> > <Slow simple voice>
>
> > A subsidy is someone giving you money to do or perform or grow or build
> > something.
>
> > A tax is you giving someone money. The fact that two tax rates are
> > different does not make the lower tax a subsidy.
>
> > </ssv>
>
> > Look, check this url:
>
> > http :// dictionary.reference,com /browse/subsidy
>
> > I trust you have no obhection to what as authoritative a source as this
> > says?
>
> If you don't consider a favorable tax rate used as a financial incentive to
> mold public behavior a form of subsidy, then I suggest you google around the
> net. I'm confident that you will find numerous articles, not written by me,
> that reference taxes used as subsidies.
"It's on the internet so it must be true".
It's still *not* a subsidy, numbnuts. Now, I've explained the
difference between a very high and a not-so-high tax, and I've given
you a dictionary definition of a subsidy, and I've pointed out that
when you pay a tax to a government, that is emphatically *not* a
subsidy to you. I don't care what you or any other fantasist thinks.
It just isn't.
God gave you a brain and the manual dexterity to operate a keyboard,
but evidently not the intelligence to use both together. Goodbye and
thanks for playing.
On 14 Feb, 03:36, "LJ" <laremoDel...@yahoo,com > wrote:
> "The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmail...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in messagenews:1ic8mvl.3yhm8s6o9ds0N%totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk...
>
> > LJ <laremoDel...@yahoo,com > wrote:
>
> >> If you don't understand that a tax differential between diesel and
> >> regular
> >> petrol is a form of a government subsidy then I see no reason wasting my
> >> time discussing this with you.
>
> > *Sigh*. Christ, I dunno why I bother sometimes.
>
> > <Slow simple voice>
>
> > A subsidy is someone giving you money to do or perform or grow or build
> > something.
>
> > A tax is you giving someone money. The fact that two tax rates are
> > different does not make the lower tax a subsidy.
>
> > </ssv>
>
> > Look, check this url:
>
> > http :// dictionary.reference,com /browse/subsidy
>
> > I trust you have no obhection to what as authoritative a source as this
> > says?
>
> If you don't consider a favorable tax rate used as a financial incentive to
> mold public behavior a form of subsidy, then I suggest you google around the
> net. I'm confident that you will find numerous articles, not written by me,
> that reference taxes used as subsidies.
"It's on the internet so it must be true".
It's still *not* a subsidy, numbnuts. Now, I've explained the
difference between a very high and a not-so-high tax, and I've given
you a dictionary definition of a subsidy, and I've pointed out that
when you pay a tax to a government, that is emphatically *not* a
subsidy to you. I don't care what you or any other fantasist thinks.
It just isn't.
God gave you a brain and the manual dexterity to operate a keyboard,
but evidently not the intelligence to use both together. Goodbye and
thanks for playing.
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
"TOG@Toil" <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1d37714a-a7b1-4e3f-8e97-d2eabe505c16@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups,com ...
On 14 Feb, 03:36, "LJ" <laremoDel...@yahoo,com > wrote:
> "The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmail...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
> messagenews:1ic8mvl.3yhm8s6o9ds0N%totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk...
>
> > LJ <laremoDel...@yahoo,com > wrote:
>
> >> If you don't understand that a tax differential between diesel and
> >> regular
> >> petrol is a form of a government subsidy then I see no reason wasting
> >> my
> >> time discussing this with you.
>
> > *Sigh*. Christ, I dunno why I bother sometimes.
>
> > <Slow simple voice>
>
> > A subsidy is someone giving you money to do or perform or grow or build
> > something.
>
> > A tax is you giving someone money. The fact that two tax rates are
> > different does not make the lower tax a subsidy.
>
> > </ssv>
>
> > Look, check this url:
>
> > http :// dictionary.reference,com /browse/subsidy
>
> > I trust you have no obhection to what as authoritative a source as this
> > says?
>
> If you don't consider a favorable tax rate used as a financial incentive
> to
> mold public behavior a form of subsidy, then I suggest you google around
> the
> net. I'm confident that you will find numerous articles, not written by
> me,
> that reference taxes used as subsidies.
"It's on the internet so it must be true".
It's still *not* a subsidy, numbnuts. Now, I've explained the
difference between a very high and a not-so-high tax, and I've given
you a dictionary definition of a subsidy, and I've pointed out that
when you pay a tax to a government, that is emphatically *not* a
subsidy to you. I don't care what you or any other fantasist thinks.
It just isn't.
God gave you a brain and the manual dexterity to operate a keyboard,
but evidently not the intelligence to use both together. Goodbye and
thanks for playing.
Nice. Resort to insults when it would be just as easy to admit you're
wrong. Maybe you didn't read all of the definitions you linked. You can
read, right.
Good day
"TOG@Toil" <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1d37714a-a7b1-4e3f-8e97-d2eabe505c16@v46g2000hsv.googlegroups,com ...
On 14 Feb, 03:36, "LJ" <laremoDel...@yahoo,com > wrote:
> "The Older Gentleman" <totallydeadmail...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
> messagenews:1ic8mvl.3yhm8s6o9ds0N%totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk...
>
> > LJ <laremoDel...@yahoo,com > wrote:
>
> >> If you don't understand that a tax differential between diesel and
> >> regular
> >> petrol is a form of a government subsidy then I see no reason wasting
> >> my
> >> time discussing this with you.
>
> > *Sigh*. Christ, I dunno why I bother sometimes.
>
> > <Slow simple voice>
>
> > A subsidy is someone giving you money to do or perform or grow or build
> > something.
>
> > A tax is you giving someone money. The fact that two tax rates are
> > different does not make the lower tax a subsidy.
>
> > </ssv>
>
> > Look, check this url:
>
> > http :// dictionary.reference,com /browse/subsidy
>
> > I trust you have no obhection to what as authoritative a source as this
> > says?
>
> If you don't consider a favorable tax rate used as a financial incentive
> to
> mold public behavior a form of subsidy, then I suggest you google around
> the
> net. I'm confident that you will find numerous articles, not written by
> me,
> that reference taxes used as subsidies.
"It's on the internet so it must be true".
It's still *not* a subsidy, numbnuts. Now, I've explained the
difference between a very high and a not-so-high tax, and I've given
you a dictionary definition of a subsidy, and I've pointed out that
when you pay a tax to a government, that is emphatically *not* a
subsidy to you. I don't care what you or any other fantasist thinks.
It just isn't.
God gave you a brain and the manual dexterity to operate a keyboard,
but evidently not the intelligence to use both together. Goodbye and
thanks for playing.
Nice. Resort to insults when it would be just as easy to admit you're
wrong. Maybe you didn't read all of the definitions you linked. You can
read, right.
Good day
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
> Nice. Resort to insults when it would be just as easy to admit you're
> wrong. Maybe you didn't read all of the definitions you linked. You can
> read, right.
*All* the definitions? I linked the dictionary definition. You can read,
right?
And you're still wrong and looking more stupid by the posting.
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
LJ <laremoDelete@yahoo,com > wrote:
> Nice. Resort to insults when it would be just as easy to admit you're
> wrong. Maybe you didn't read all of the definitions you linked. You can
> read, right.
*All* the definitions? I linked the dictionary definition. You can read,
right?
And you're still wrong and looking more stupid by the posting.
--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F & SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
Re: Euro diesel reaches the US
The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I strongly suspect that the pricing of diesel engines has more to do
> with marketing and selective pricing than the actual build cost. But by
> and large, where there is an increase, it's minor.
>
Seems to me the build cost of a Diesel is guaranteed to be significantly
higher than an Otto-cycle engine. Developing a few hundred atmospheres
on a volume a few cubic millimeters repeatably and controllably ten times
per second or faster poses a severe problem for the injection designer.
Reliably generating a few tens of atmospheres compression with acceptable
angular momentum changes argues strongly for a very elaborate vibration
control scheme or a relatively heavy engine.
It may well be that Diesels, at least in the US, are overpriced. Still,
they present real physical challenges not matched by Otto designs.
bob prohaska
The Older Gentleman <totallydeadmailbox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I strongly suspect that the pricing of diesel engines has more to do
> with marketing and selective pricing than the actual build cost. But by
> and large, where there is an increase, it's minor.
>
Seems to me the build cost of a Diesel is guaranteed to be significantly
higher than an Otto-cycle engine. Developing a few hundred atmospheres
on a volume a few cubic millimeters repeatably and controllably ten times
per second or faster poses a severe problem for the injection designer.
Reliably generating a few tens of atmospheres compression with acceptable
angular momentum changes argues strongly for a very elaborate vibration
control scheme or a relatively heavy engine.
It may well be that Diesels, at least in the US, are overpriced. Still,
they present real physical challenges not matched by Otto designs.
bob prohaska
