Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-24-2014, 03:20 AM   #11 (permalink)
Member
 
Hummer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 32
Default

That is rediculous, bigger vehicles should get tax breaks, they cost the most to own and generate the most fuel tax revenue.*

small cars need to be taxed based on the continued decrease in tax income as a result of improving fuel economy.



Single parents may choose a pickup simply because they make the most sense for all around use.



A "simple" footprint is what killed the small pickup and the RC mid size pickup.



Require a ladder frame, and offer a tax break to those that go this route.
Hummer is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-25-2014, 05:28 AM   #12 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
niky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5
Default

Light trucks died for many reasons, but a simple footprint calculation wasn't one of them.*

Intricate CAFE exemptions for "working trucks", with easier CAFE targets for bigger trucks, helped hasten their demise.

If people need the truck for work, they can claim the (registration/fuel) tax deduction by showing the trucks are used for work. But if you're buying it as a luxury, no reason you should get a tax deduction for that.
niky is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-25-2014, 03:46 PM   #13 (permalink)
Member
 
Hummer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 32
Default

I'm not talking about compact trucks but rather midsize standard cab shortbed most definately killed by the new rules.

why is a truck being used for work a prerequisite of buying a truck to you? Theyre much better people/family movers then any sedan offered today, sales prove it.



Since when are trucks luxury items, I can buy a new truck today for the price of a new Camry, problem is no one offers a car that appeals to the 1+m truck buyers every year.



I was only trying to be a smart~~~ about your rediculous desire to see people forced into crap they don't want as a result of your complications which these people. I don't see the need to tax or subsidize and to override the free market system creating winners and losers to support your fantasies or anyone else's for that matter. CAFE does just this, people want a product, which isnt produced as a result of said regulations, therefore they are limited to buying trucks.*
Hummer is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2014, 06:15 PM   #14 (permalink)
Les
Junior Member
 
Les's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2
Default

I've kinda thought myself that a new designation for utility vehicles may be in order, not necessarily scrapping the old 'light-trucks' category but adding a new sub-set.

Living out here in the rural wilds of Oklahoma I see a mighty market niche being underserviced.* This niche used to be owned by Jeep CJs and IH Scouts and 'The Toyota' pickups, then came the S-10s and Rangers and Broncos and Sidekicks and Trackers 'Oh My'.

Now everything in that segment (and there's not much there to begin with) is either over-sized or overpriced, if not both, and generally over-featured and over-complicated for what this market needs anyway.* The need not only for something recreationally to take you out to your favorite hunting/fishing/camping spot if not just bomb-around the back-40 for it's own sake but also to patrol the fence-line with a bucket full of staples and wire-clips looking for something to mend, for heading out into the open pasture where the grass hides deep holes and mud-pits looking for that lost calf, for heading out into the woods to load-up a half-a-rick for the fireplace and so-forth.

The niche I describe is currently being serviced by side-by-side ATVs like the Gator, badly, since these UTVs being disallowed from use on public roads greatly harms their Utility.* Oh how I wish we'd have our own little classification that could make something like a Mahindra Bolero or Thar a going concern in small-town dealerships, but how to make such cheep and 'cute' little truks not end up smogging-up the big cities?* Hmmm, maybe mandate the only transmission available for LUV certification are 5-speed manuals?*
Les is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-27-2014, 04:38 AM   #15 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
niky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5
Default

Hummer said why is a truck being used for work a prerequisite of buying a truck to you? Theyre much better people/family movers then any sedan offered today, sales prove it. * Since when are trucks luxury items, I can buy a new truck today for the price of a new Camry, problem is no one offers a car that appeals to the 1+m truck buyers every year. * I was only trying to be a smart~~~ about your rediculous desire to see people forced into crap they don't want as a result of your complications which these people. I don't see the need to tax or subsidize and to override the free market system creating winners and losers to support your fantasies or anyone else's for that matter. CAFE does just this, people want a product, which isnt produced as a result of said regulations, therefore they are limited to buying trucks.* * 1. It's not. The exemptions and classifications of CAFE are made on the presumption that large BOF vehicles will be used for work. Ergo, the fuel economy requirements for large trucks are not as strict as they could be. Creating an artificial penalty for large cars that could serve the same purpose if classified in the same manner. I was simply pointing out that if the purpose was to give breaks to those who supposedly NEED trucks for work, you simply give exemptions to those who use them for work (as it is, you can claim a vehicle as a tax deduction for business, anyway). IF you implement a tax that is supposed to curb oil imports, CAFE's ridiculous tiered system with its artificial classes (which is either slightly more ridiculous or slightly less ridiculous than what other governments are using, depending on who you ask) isn't the best way to do it. A direct tax on oil imports is. 2. Thanks to tax structures.* 3. I don't actually care what people buy with their own money. If a housewife wants a 5,000 pound SUV, that's none of my beeswax. I pretty much want the same thing you seem to want... have taxes done fairly, remove any artificial barriers or tarriffs that favor one vehicular body style or powertrain over another regardless of efficiency, and let the buyers decide with their wallets.
niky is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-27-2014, 05:22 AM   #16 (permalink)
Member
 
Hummer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 32
Default

My apologies, I did get worked up, I prefer BOF (obviously) and I fear (perhaps unrationally) that the crop of CUVs will cause a change in laws that will hurt BOF SUVs.



I don't believe taxes need to be distributed anyway but evenly not choosing winners and losers, and while I believe this I understand govt has their own agenda, so at the very least I'd rather see loopholes than destruction.



granted the list of BOF SUVs I would take from showroom today as is onto rutted fields consists of an entire 1 vehicle
Hummer is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-26-2014, 08:25 AM   #17 (permalink)
Member
 
educatordan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 64
Send a message via AIM to educatordan
Default

https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/01/fiction-the-cafe-continuum/

I'm sure you've all read that. I've always been fascinated with the piece as counter-factual history of what might have happened with a different approach to raising fuel economy. Rather than drive Suburbans or Expeditions I'd love a 1984 Oldsmobile 98 with a 300hp DI V6 and 6 speed trans.*

Though the 4 door pick up truck has become the default bread and butter sedan of the modern day.*
__________________
Owner 1967 Ford Mustang Convertible: 289V8, Cruise-o-matic transmission, vintage burgundy exterior, black interior and top, MSD Ignition, true dual 2.5 in exhaust system, Ford 9in rear. Owned since July 2013, in family since 1967.


DD: 2004 Ford F150 Heritage, single cab, bench, crank windows, 4.6V8, automatic, aftermarket flatbed, Dynomax cat back dual exhaust. Owned since 2006. 2010 Toyota Highlander, V6 AWD, three row, family truckster *
educatordan is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Forum - The Truth About Cars forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Need suggestions for a replacement vehicle castint Used Car Discussion 0 08-08-2014 03:05 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
Garage Plus vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.