INTERACT FORUM

$0

I have a credit card, the company I work for pays for it.

Depending on the day, It ranges from .65 a liter to .79, This can all happen in the span of a day...

Toronto Canada

Looks like we Canucks are really getting the short end of the stick here on prices.  Does NY have any pollution control policies in place?  I know that ours are a little more stringent than those in place in Calif.   Have seen a lot more Hummers here, too, especially since all those movie types started coming here more often.  Used to be a lot more small cars.  then came the Mini Vans and now the SUV's.  We don't have a huge pop. base and transit isn't all that great - but we're tryin'! .  Have seen more than a few hybrids here, too. Victoria is the hot spot for  the ecology minded.  Still wearing our love beads, birks and tye dyes!  

You only pay up to .79 in TO???!!!  Guess someone really, really doesn't like us here on the West Coast!

IMHO though, it should be $5.00.  That way people would think twice about buying hummers and we'd see a LOT more interest in hybrids and other energy conservation / renewable energy solutions.  The oil ain't gonna last forever people, and we're going to start seeing some really tangeable consequences of global warming real soon...

I agree, Tim.  Thanks for pointing this out.

well that depends on which car I take . . . . one gets much better gas milage    







_{just kdding folks}
 

As cjdshaw point out gas (or fuel as we brits call it) is REALLY expensive in the UK. And its basically all tax - the UK has the highest tax on gas in the developed world. As a result almost everyone drives compacts or diesel cars.

I think ive seen 1 or 2 hummers ever in london, when i used to live there. not many SUV's either (i think some farmers may use them).

Now i live in NYC and see several hummers a day and im lucky if i see anything 'other' than a SUV....

John Kerry

don't have a hummer

I hope not, at least for the sake of his political career. Look what it did to Clinton!

crow

Does Switzerland have an army? (Just curious)

Every (male) Swiss has to go to the army. Everyone between 18 and 42 has his complete equipment at home. This includes an automatic assault rifle with ammo (no joke). So we are ready .

Otherwise we could retire all Logitech mices. It's a Swiss firm.

So be careful!

Rizlaw..if you don't mind me asking...where is Westchester County?

Helsinki, Finland.

About  EURO 1.10 / liter =  USD 1.31 / liter =  USD 5.95 / gallon

It's not enough that gas is heavily taxed here. When I read cjdshaw's and pipsqueak's comments I also have to make a conclusion that we are not included in the developed world.  

Xen -  Yup, I was talking water - water is good, yes, it can do bad things...like floods, but you shouldn't build on a flood plain...and one should  try to avoid living in a trailer park if you are in a tornado zone! The output is very minor (from what I've read).  As for erosion...if we didn't clear cut the forests for more houses, roads and lawns there wouldn't be as much of a problem. Erosion is, after all, a natural phenomenon.   I built a house in an area where leaving a covenent zone of natural vegetation is mandatory, designed house to leave as many trees as I possible could...have no lawn (they are an ecological desert).  Have small garden and pond - the  rest is planted with indigenous species of flora.  

Suppose smoking is expensive too in Helsinki, Finland.
Not talking about alcoholics.

It works in every case...

A pack of cigarettes? About EURO 3.50 - 3.70, I think.  

..... Look what it did to Clinton!

That was low. But I do get it. Very subtle.

Around $1.75 / gal in Tennessee.

I think those H2O producing engines are called fuel cells. They can use ANY hydrocarbon ... canola oil, peanut oil, diesel or gasoline ... and still produce water and electricity. I can't help but think that with any of the fuels used, there would eventually be some sort of ooey-gooey residue left over after all the volatiles were used up. At least it wouldn't be going into the air.

CVIII

Thanks GHammer, that was indeed a good read.  Orbital solar power sounds interesting, but also sounds like one would need one heck of a sunscreen.

Lunch, do you have other types of fish farmed down in Oz?  We have salmon farms up island - different taste than wild salmon, but slapped on a cedar plank on the barbie with a generous slather of lemon-dill sauce they sure are tasty.    How's the weather your way?  Having an unusually warm and dry spring up here in the Pacific Northwest.

I'm currently paying $1.53 per gallon for gasoline here in NJ, and cigarettes are around $4.85 a pack, though I haven't bought any of those in over 9 years now...

I run a petrol station.  Today the prices per litre are:

Regular unleaded (95): 78.9p

Super unleaded (98): 80.9p

Diesel: 79.9p

Lead replacement (4*): 79.9p

Of this, about 21p represents the cost, including delivery and a profit margin of about 2.5p.  The rest is taxes.  However, the Government (who of course set and collect the taxes) are the first to accuse the oil companies of greed and profiteering if they dare to raise the pump price by a penny.

In Boston we're paying around $1.79 for regular gas. Cigs are about $5 a pack, but fortunately I don't smoke, and a six pack of Stella Artois is $7.99, which hurts, but it's worth it.

I'm considering getting a Toyota Prius. I love my Passat's V6, but it's a gas monster.

Wow - Dihydrogen monoxide is scary stuff.  And yet it seems it's all around us - so common you'd think it comes out of a tap.

It reminds me of a clue in The Times crossword many years ago: "Neither A to G, nor P to Z (5)"

I agree that price isn't always as strong a factor as we might think in terms of whether or not people buy gas guzzlers vs fuel-efficient vehicles.  That said, everyone has a threshold for pain, and if gas were two to three times the price, I think SOME people would actually wake up and realize how much money they are spending.  Like with hiking the price of cigarettes, you're not going to necessarily stop everyone from consuming, but you do add an additional incentive to do so.  In addition, the increased tax revenue won't just go to 'someone who won't work' but rather would be channeled into research and development of energy efficient and/or renewable energy research.

I'll bet you a $5 gallon of gas the extra tax revenue WILL go to people who who won't work.

And then the so called "poor" will demand their "entitlement" and get more welfare to help them pay for their gasoline.

The price of electricity/natural gas went up drastically in my town this winter.  So the govt set up a program to help the "needy" pay their increased heating bills.

The son of one of my co-workers got some of this welfare, and he also has a house full of the latest video games.

It is not the function of our govt to manipulate us (no matter now noble anyone thinks the cause may be), show me where it says that in our Constitution.

Now I really am convinced that we islanders are being taken advantage of in the way fo prices. It could be worse, though, we don't have the cold winters so we pay less for heating.  And having had to accept help in the way of "welfare" long ago, I must say this:  not everyone on welfare is a loser who doesn't want to work.  There are women who have left abusive relationships with nothing but the clothes on their backs, there are persons with disabilities that prevent them from getting a job and some of the disabilities were occurred on the job.  There are good, hardworking people who have been "downsized" in a world where you need two incomes just to afford a home.  What about those whose workers whose companies folded and took their pensions along with them? Through no fault of their own, they were left in a financial jam. Yes, there are those that abuse the welfare system.  But it gave me a hand up when I needed it.  I wanted a job, and finally got a job, and then a better job and now pay huge amounts of taxes.  I, personally, would rather pay a tax that goes to help those truly in need than one that fills the already overflowing poekets of a few.  My intention, however,  wasn't to start an arguement about welfare, but to  see just what range of differences we pay across the board.  

Quote

I agree that price isn't always as strong a factor as we might think in terms of whether or not people buy gas guzzlers vs fuel-efficient vehicles.  That said, everyone has a threshold for pain, and if gas were two to three times the price, I think SOME people would actually wake up and realize how much money they are spending.  Like with hiking the price of cigarettes, you're not going to necessarily stop everyone from consuming, but you do add an additional incentive to do so.  In addition, the increased tax revenue won't just go to 'someone who won't work' but rather would be channeled into research and development of energy efficient and/or renewable energy research.

I'll bet you a $5 gallon of gas the extra tax revenue WILL go to people who who won't work.

And then the so called "poor" will demand their "entitlement" and get more welfare to help them pay for their gasoline.

The price of electricity/natural gas went up drastically in my town this winter.  So the govt set up a program to help the "needy" pay their increased heating bills.

The son of one of my co-workers got some of this welfare, and he also has a house full of the latest video games.

It is not the function of our govt to manipulate us (no matter now noble anyone thinks the cause may be), show me where it says that in our Constitution.

Oh No! Somebody getting something for 'free'! Alert the press. Yeah, everyone I know who receives welfare is living the cush life. How I envy them...

As for the government's role in life, I believe it says somewhere in Section 8, The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States

I guess 'general welfare' can be whatever Congress decides.

I guess 'general welfare' can be whatever Congress decides.

Hear Hear.  If anyone doesn't believe that preventing global warming falls under protecting the general welfare, you should read a recent Pentagon report depicting one scenario of how Global Warming could have a profound impact on US National Security.  

http://www.ems.org/climate/pentagon_climate_change.html

So yes, our government DOES have the right, or even the moral and constitutional responsability to reduce emissions in the interest of protecting our "general welfare", and increasing taxes is definitely an accepted way to go about doing it.  But of course, that's just my opinion.

--Tim

P.S.  Sorry to go so far off topic on this - I realize that this isn't a political debate forum.