Sales of big pickup trucks and SUVs went through the roof - doubling from the year before in some cases. Sales of small, fuel efficient cars, meanwhile, remained stagnant. It is as if all that moaning and groaning about price gouging by oil companies never happened.

Actually, it is worse than that. American consumers have reinforced all the stereotypes they are labeled with: short attention spans, lack of social consciousness and thinking with their wallets.

Does anyone seriously believe that having once spiked up to $3 with very little provocation, gasoline prices won't do it again? Have they forgotten about the ongoing instability in the Middle East, where most of our oil comes from? And have they stopped caring about traffic density, scarce resources or global warming? And if they haven't, why aren't they exercising better sense in their vehicle preferences?

http://money.cnn.com/2006/11/01/magazines/fortune/pluggedin_taylor_SUVsales.fortune/index.htm?cnn=yes

And if they haven't, why aren't they exercising better sense in their vehicle preferences?

Americans are selfish, period.

Have they forgotten about the ongoing instability in the Middle East, where most of our oil comes from?

That's just plain wrong. In fact, according to the Department of Energy, only around 22% of our oil comes from the Middle East.

dude what was this article written by Jermey Clarkson?

:lol:sounds like Anti American Propaganda spread by the European Press.

You'd think that the Fortune senior editor would do a little fact checking.

I think this rings true... jesus though seems like there are more SUVs then cars on the roads these days. What is the worst its some soccer mom all alone in the car talking on the cell phone, and I have to be the one that suffers when my car is destoryed by her empty Tank of a car.

Most of the guys at my work all drive trucks (I work in a machine shop). They just don't care what the gas prices are. Although they love to bitch about them. Most of them say they'll never own anything but a truck/SUV.:rolleyes:

That's just plain wrong. In fact, according to the Department of Energy, only around 22% of our oil comes from the Middle East.

22% is HUGE! Do you have any idea how much oil that is or what would happen if we stopped getting it?

22% is HUGE! Do you have any idea how much oil that is or what would happen if we stopped getting it?

GWB will likely launch an attack North of the border, labelling Alberta and its oil sands as the next axle of evil...:lol:

GWB will likely launch an attack North of the border, labelling Alberta and its oil sands as the next axle of evil...:lol:

axis of evil?

i dont think parts of cars can be evil.

anyway, i dont like suv's either. not only for the gas issue, it seems like the only people driving them truly are soccer moms on their cell phones who cant even stay in their own lane.

i wouldn't put it past bush to say "axle of evil"

hehe

Yeah, let's lump all Americans under the same stereotype. I mean everyone of us just went out and bought a V8 SUV, right?

No other country has idiots does it?

Did we really expect sales not to rebound considering people have been holding off new vehicle purchases for the last year to see if gas prices we're going to hit $5-6?

If too many Americans are too clueless, too selfish or simply too irresponsible to drive reasonable vehicles, that is where some kind of gas tax to promote more fuel efficiency needs to be added. It is quickly becoming an issue of national security the amount of oil that we need to import simply because some Americans have completely become energy gluttons - if you can't control your energy consumption, then be prepared to get taxed on it.

...OR another solution is possibly a new level of driver's license needs to be created.

If you "must" drive a behemoth over XXXX pounds, then be prepared to take a more rigorous driver's test to make sure that you can actually handle such a vehicle.... along with an extra fee every time you renew your license.

We already have Commercial Driver's Licenses, for people that need to drive larger commerical trucks - I see some suburbanite soccer mom driving an H2 as no different - she needs a higher-grade license.

axis of evil?

i dont think parts of cars can be evil.You've obviously never tried to remove the front driver-side axle nut on a Subaru.:mad:

It's interesting to note that GM had the biggest increase, and their trucks/SUVs get the best gas mileage in their class. Nissan isn't listed as seeing a big increase and their trucks get the worst gas mileage in their class. So I don't think Americans are completely throwing their worries out the window.

Also, it's easy to have a big increase over last year when sales were so dismal last year.

and their trucks/SUVs get the best gas mileage in their class

And even worse, the "best gas mileage" is a pathetic number. If they were at least getting GOOD fuel economy, it would be one thing, but to brag about the mpg figures cars get these days is just depressing. :( Me hatey the SUVs. I literally can't find my little Protege5 sometimes (a WAGON!) because SUVs will park around it and obscure it 100%!!

Fuel taxes unfairly hurt the poor. I say octuple the "gas guzzler" tax when purchasing the offending vehicles, add the "gas guzzler" tax for every vehicle registration renewal each year, give huge tax incentives to buyers of fuel-efficient cars, and tax incentives to manufacturers to build them. These things can be done quickly and easily.

It's interesting to note that GM had the biggest increase, and their trucks/SUVs get the best gas mileage in their class. Nissan isn't listed as seeing a big increase and their trucks get the worst gas mileage in their class. So I don't think Americans are completely throwing their worries out the window.


You simply cannot conclude gas mileage was the only determining factor in a truck/SUV purchase. It could be reliability, value, brand loyalty, etc, and yes better MPG is icing on the cake.

If too many Americans are too clueless, too selfish or simply too irresponsible to drive reasonable vehicles, that is where some kind of gas tax to promote more fuel efficiency needs to be added. It is quickly becoming an issue of national security the amount of oil that we need to import simply because some Americans have completely become energy gluttons - if you can't control your energy consumption, then be prepared to get taxed on it.

...OR another solution is possibly a new level of driver's license needs to be created.

If you "must" drive a behemoth over XXXX pounds, then be prepared to take a more rigorous driver's test to make sure that you can actually handle such a vehicle.... along with an extra fee every time you renew your license.

We already have Commercial Driver's Licenses, for people that need to drive larger commerical trucks - I see some suburbanite soccer mom driving an H2 as no different - she needs a higher-grade license.

I agree with you about needing higher gas taxes or simply not subsidizing gas distribution/refining with tax dollars. I don't see why my tax dollars should go towards all these people worthlessly driving SUV's. If you want/need to own one, you should be (mostly) paying for the fuel yourself, not tax payers.

:lol:sounds like Anti American Propaganda spread by the European Press.

There is reason for all the "anti American" around the world.

Not all Amercian are selfish, i am more important than you, fat bastard. But sadly, there are still too many of them.

What if vehicles were taxed per weight. Period. Across the board. I think they should tax displacement. It would cover everything.

The gas situation has not changed. The price is lower now because of the up coming midterm elections. Wait a month or two after November and the gas prices will be back up. Part of Bush's approval rating is related to the gas prices.

What if vehicles were taxed per weight. Period. Across the board. I think they should tax displacement. It would cover everything.

Taxing vehicles mostly on weight is not a bad idea really.

Hell, right now some of the automakers are purposefully making some of their largest SUVs sooo heavy that they don't fall under EPA regulations anymore - those regulations were setup on the assumption that no NON-commercial vehicle would ever need to be above that weight limit.
Well the EPA was short-sighted in thinking that people actually had some kind of common sense or took any responsibility for their waste.

I can understand that a commercial box-truck will weight XXXX pounds simply because it is used to transport cargo. It is inexcusable that any consumer-grade passenger vehicle should be anywhere near the weight of a box truck when at most it is being used to bring the spoiled kids to school. :mad:

OMG they picked a period of time when sales were at the lowest and said OMG Amerikans are still buying SUVs! Idiots no mention of the following

The October sales figure for nearly every manufacturer are out, and as you can see, there's a lot of little green arrows below. The stellar performances this month are most likely due to the fact that last year this time is when the effects of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita combined with the end of big incentives depressed sales across the industry.

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/11/02/by-the-numbers-october-2006/

Also GM was just ending sales of their old big SUVs and replacing them with the new ones so maybe that's another reason why sales of that model are up so much.

since we live in a society of taxation, you might as well have taxation that applies incentives to socially beneficial outcomes.

Taxing a vehicle by weight is a resonable method to encourage some socially beneficial behavior:

It would provide incentives to build lighter, more fuel efficient vehicles, reducing our dependance on oil to an extent

It would reduce demand for vehicles which have greater social costs.

Lighter vehicles will damage the roads less, resulting in better, longer lasting roads.

It would help internalize (make those that create more damage pay for the damage) the social costs of the damage created by large, inefficient vehicles.

Although there are other factors that affect the environment and fuel efficiency, weight is a major factor, and seems to be the primary reason average fuel economy hasn't increased as the level of technology has increased.

Taxing a vehicle by weight is a resonable method to encourage some socially beneficial behavior:


Why would you tax by weight? Why not tax by mpg and emissions? For example, high-end supercars don't weight much at all, but get horrendous mpg. Taxing by mpg would punish the monstrous SUVs as well as the supercars, taxing by weight would not. I would rather tax the **** out of a 3000 pound supercar that gets 8 mpg and spews poison everywhere than a 5000 pound SULEV SUV that got 50 mpg.

Why would you tax by weight? Why not tax by mpg and emissions? For example, high-end supercars don't weight much at all, but get horrendous mpg. Taxing by mpg would punish the monstrous SUVs as well as the supercars, taxing by weight would not. I would rather tax the **** out of a 3000 pound supercar that gets 8 mpg and spews poison everywhere than a 5000 pound SULEV SUV that got 50 mpg.

You could tax by mpg, but the gov't already does this. It's the gasoline tax. You get taxed by how much fuel you use. There's also the gas guzzler tax, which taxes vehicles such as the supercar you mentioned. Taxing fringe cars which are lightweight but also get poor mpg will not generate much tax revenue due to the limited demand for these vehicles anyway. It will also not discourage the purchase of these vehicles due to inelastic demand of vehicles in this category. They're also not contributing significantly to the problems that are mentioned due to their small portion of the overall auto market.

The majority of vehicles that get poor mpg do so because of their weight.

Also, there is no 5000 pound SUV that gets 50 mpg. And even if there were, why not lower the weight of the vehicle and get even better mpg? Also, this vehicle will damage roads more than a lighter vehicle, resulting in increased road maintenance costs

Oh, that sounds great guys. Taxing to cause social change. You can count me out.

Also, there is no 5000 pound SUV that gets 50 mpg.

Thus my proposal to increase tax incentives to manufacturers and buyers for such a vehicle. Also, my modifications to the gas guzzler taxes above I still think are much better than taxing merely by weight.

Oh, that sounds great guys. Taxing to cause social change. You can count me out.

Me too. Social engineering scares me.

Man, this board is liberal. Always wanting to tell other people how to live their lives and spend their money.

True the gas guzzler tax does need reformed so that it includes light trucks and SUVs as well

Taxes exist for two purposes:

1. to generate revenue
2. to discourage behavior

Sometimes they're needed to discourage behavior with negative externalities

Fourdegrees is right we don't need the govermnent to tax us just to get us to stop buying large SUV's. DO you want Uncle Sam to wipe your a** too? Less goverment=better for everyone.

People are stupid there is no getting around this fact. Taxing the rest of us for this is not the right solution.

I think a lot of the big SUV buying has been from families that want spacious vehicles and see $10,000 off MSRP on the largest trucks and SUVs so they jump up.

A co-worker of mine bought an Expedition for less that an Explorer (still don't know why you would want either :confused:)

Less government is better, you guys are right. I didn't mean to come off as such a proponent of taxation. Excessive taxation often creates more problems that outweigh any benefits the taxes create. Just about any government "solution" will probably end up creating more and more problems.

The best solution would be for people to educate themselves about the true consequences of their actions. Then the demand would naturally decrease for items that cause harm to other individuals and society as a whole. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen.

If people are too stupid on their own to figure out that gas guzzlers are bad for our nation as a whole, then damn straight the government should step in and tax the hell out of them. (still give them the opportunity to actually buy them, but they should most definitely pay a high price for it)

It's for the 'common good' - if some people are too selfish/arrogant/greedy then they should be punished accordingly.

The 'common good.' Really? There have been a lot of things done by governments in the past in the name of the 'common good.' This is a slippery slope that you are going down. If we allow them to regulate this, it just opens inroads to other more scary things.

Back on the topic of cars, is there any reason you or I need a car capable of going over 70mph? That's about the highest speed limit out there right now.

Is it in the common good for you to own a car that can exceed a speed limit of 70mph?

Tax based on weight instead of MPG? Hybrids are much heavier.

I can understand that a commercial box-truck will weight XXXX pounds simply because it is used to transport cargo. It is inexcusable that any consumer-grade passenger vehicle should be anywhere near the weight of a box truck when at most it is being used to bring the spoiled kids to school. :mad:

Dude, have you seen the average american schoolchild lately? You really do need a commercial-rated box truck to haul those mountains of flesh around.