Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

PF_Flyer

*I* cannot spend unlimited amounts of money I don't have. Apparently that simple fact doesn't apply in all situations

snakeweasel

bwia said:

abacomike said:

bwia said:

I want to like the MB GLC 4Matic SUV but although the base price is tantalizing at $40K, however, a reasonably equipped model will set you back $46k +. What's up with that nickle and dime pricing formula.

bwia - you are looking at a MB, not a Honda or a Dodge.  Drive it first - then drive a Honda or a Dodge or a Nissan.  Then decide which is the better vehicle.  You pay a premium to drive a MB or a BMW or an Audi. 

Agreed somewhat. But there is a difference between perceived quality, refinement & handling and reality. Add to that our nature of aspiring to buy what we cannot afford is the secret sauce to aspirational branding. A MB, BMW or Audi may be premium but at double the price of functionally a similar vehicle is hard to justify. Private colleges do it all the time. A Harvard undergraduate education is no better than Umass, but parents swear by it because of the cache and status it projects in the minds of the petit bourgeois.


I have a theory that with car prices as you pay more you get less car per dollar spent. So a $60K car costs 50% more than a $40K car but it's rarely, if ever, 50% more car.

And yes perception does create it's own reality, that's why Beats can charge you over $100 for $20 headphones.

snakeweasel

stever said:

My neighbor claims that autonomous cars that you summon as needed will never catch on because then we'd have nothing in our garage to impress our neighbors with.

That reminds me of a car commercial of several years ago that went something like "A car is a car, it won't do this and that... and if it improves your standing with your neighbors then you live among snobs."

snakeweasel

oldfarmer50 said:

abacomike said:

stever said:

My neighbor claims that autonomous cars that you summon as needed will never catch on because then we'd have nothing in our garage to impress our neighbors with.

To many people, that statement is true.  I drive a Mercedes-Benz, not to impress my neighbors (they drive Camry's and Accords and don't travel much and could care less what other people drive), but rather to enjoy the handling, technology, safety, quality of build, and the tremendous satisfaction I derive from driving a well engineered vehicle that fits with 95% of my personal needs and physical needs. 

I've driven just about everything, but I keep buying Mercedes-Benz automobiles because I have found them to be trouble free, dependable modes of transportation that fit my physical being comfortably.

I think most people buy to suit their own needs and desires but the positive attention of others is a definite bonus. I also enjoy the attention of people who look at some of my vehicles and say "you drive THAT"?


Trust me you might just get that response driving a Yugo.

oldfarmer50

dino001 said:

Gas is still going down. $2.019 for PUG at Costco yesterday. Just please break 2, even if for a day...

It's about $1.90 for RUG and I got PUG for $2.23.

Hey here's a cheap car for the cheap gas. Not bad for under $2k. Yuck, yuck.




https://albany.craigslist.org/cto/5435297855.html

Awwwww, the post got flagged. It was a scammer classic. $1800 for a 2007 Acura. The scammer had such a poor command of English that it was laughable but the kicker was when he listed all the added mods with MOPAR parts.

Mr_Shiftright

"Crawl Ratio"? I thought this only applied to frat houses.

oldfarmer50

qbrozen said:

Are you sure about that, Shifty? I don't have a clue about these things, but I pay a crapload of taxes, if you take them ALL into consideration (federal income + state income + property + sales).

When I made $12,000 a year (not that long ago) I paid 40% of my income in taxes mainly thanks to regressive taxes like property and school taxes. That's pretty sad.

graphicguy

I'm fortunate to be friends with people in other parts of the world, and I still have relatives in Italy. Talking to them, or those who have a VAT, say they naturally don't buy as much because of the VAT.

I know in Brazil, you go to one of their local shopping centers and very few of the goods is quoted as "this is the price of these shoes". It's usually advertised as being "it's only X amount per month to buy these shoes".

Taxes of any kind will never solve infrastructure problems. Committed local governemnt can do it, though. Cut out the rigging of contractors, hold those that do win bids to their agreement regarding time and money. Earmark the funds that are supposed to go for infrastrcture to actually be spent on infrastructure, and you'll find any new taxes are unneeded.

Want to kill any sort of economic robustness? Start rasing taxes. Does it every time.

ab348

qbrozen said:

Are you sure about that, Shifty? I don't have a clue about these things, but I pay a crapload of taxes, if you take them ALL into consideration (federal income + state income + property + sales).

Well, all I can say is try living in Canada. The last few years I was working, I made about $140K in income each year, and paid between $50K and $60K each year in income taxes alone. Then add to that a 15% sales tax on everything I bought except groceries, plus about 75 cents per US gallon in gas taxes (which also has the 15% sales tax added on to that), plus the usual property tax, etc and it starts to add up. I don't smoke but a pack of cigarettes here is over $12, most of it tax. A 750ml bottle of vodka that I've seen advertised in the US for as low as $5 or $6 is at least $25 here. A 12-pack of beer is also $25.00.

oldfarmer50

snakeweasel said:

oldfarmer50 said:

abacomike said:

stever said:

My neighbor claims that autonomous cars that you summon as needed will never catch on because then we'd have nothing in our garage to impress our neighbors with.

To many people, that statement is true.  I drive a Mercedes-Benz, not to impress my neighbors (they drive Camry's and Accords and don't travel much and could care less what other people drive), but rather to enjoy the handling, technology, safety, quality of build, and the tremendous satisfaction I derive from driving a well engineered vehicle that fits with 95% of my personal needs and physical needs. 

I've driven just about everything, but I keep buying Mercedes-Benz automobiles because I have found them to be trouble free, dependable modes of transportation that fit my physical being comfortably.

I think most people buy to suit their own needs and desires but the positive attention of others is a definite bonus. I also enjoy the attention of people who look at some of my vehicles and say "you drive THAT"?

Trust me you might just get that response driving a Yugo.

I was thinking of the heads that shake in disbelief when I cruise by in my rusted out old van but I get your point.

On the other extreme I was out in the Mustang today and the sun was shining which makes the special paint shine in multi-shades of red. As I drove down the interstate I noticed a Ford Taurus matching me in the next lane. I finally looked over to see a young guy with a big grin giving me a thumbs up.

That's worth 35 grand, right?

snakeweasel

graphicguy said:

A lot different today. Today's students just have to sign a piece of paper and get "loans" to pay for college. It will come back and bite them in the deriere at some point, but money is no longer a barrier. Most of this age group had to deliver pizzas, wait tables, bar tend (which is what I did, in addition to grunt work in the summer (I loaded Pepsi trucks, outside, in the summer heat, hoisting 100s of cases filled with16 oz "GLASS" bottles of Pepsi).

I worked a full time office job and went to school at night and on Saturdays. I had a bit less than zero social life.

ab348

Mr_Shiftright said:

It depends how they spend it. They can borrow all they want as long as the GDP keeps going up and as long as the money spent has very tangible benefits to the citizens. The only other ways to reduce debt are raising taxes (politically unpopular) printing more money (leads to inflation) or spending less (hasn't happened yet, and in reality no thriving business operates this way). As long as they keep paying in the interest on the debt, and as long as GDP keeps going up every year (which it normally does, and has been), then continuing to spend money you don't have is OK, because the % of debt to GDP remains the same or close.

Given the 2008 recession, there was no chance of spending less or raising taxes--out of the question. And cutting taxes has never shown to have a correlation to rises in GDP.

Well, it's good for those who make their living lending money to the government.

You really can't apply rules about thriving businesses to government spending, because government has no chance of going out of business if they screw up. And your point about the aftermath of 2008 is taken and agreed with. But government borrows money to finance annual operating deficits because they spend more than they take in. If they had taxes set at a comparable level to spending then that would not be necessary. It is really just kicking the can down the road. The tangible benefits are, in the case of the federal government, often nonexistent to regular citizens (thinking of the costs of being the world's policeman here).

roadburner

oldfarmer50 said:

I was thinking of the heads that shake in disbelief when I cruise by in my rusted out old van but I get your point.

On the other extreme I was out in the Mustang today and the sun was shining which makes the special paint shine in multi-shades of red. As I drove down the interstate I noticed a Ford Taurus matching me in the next lane. I finally looked over to see a young guy with a big grin giving me a thumbs up.

That's worth 35 grand, right?

The two vehicles that I received the most complements about were my 2002 and my Triumph bike. Especially the bike.

snakeweasel

driver100 said:

snakeweasel said:

graphicguy said:

Stick...I don't know what those Altimas sell for, but unless they are in Smart Car pricing territory, I wouldn't even consider one. But, you're right. I see a ton of them on the road. I'm surprised most people don't care about the diving dynamics, as they're pretty bad.

Not sure I want diving dynamics in my car.

I had a friend who once said "Why do I need driving dynamics when most of my driving is a 20 MPH average on a straight interstate?"

Maybe if he had a car with "driving dynamics" he could do 70!

Not on the Ike during rush hour.

stickguy

Farmer, usually if a Taurus is pacing you on the Thruway, you are about to see gumballs and get a tickets.

abacomike

My next door neighbor just left after showing me his new Cadillac CTS.  He got the white with a light leather interior and the Cue option and chrome wheels.  He let me drive it onto the turnpike.  Nice car but just a little too tight for me.  He got the standard engine, but it sure was peppy.

There is no doubt that the car was well built and quite luxurious.  The leather was softer than the learher seating in my car.  He is not familiar with the Cue system, but he has an appointment Monday at the dealership for some training on the system.

GG, now I see why you are enthralled with your CTS.  They sure build a nice car.

oldfarmer50

stickguy said:

Farmer, usually if a Taurus is pacing you on the Thruway, you are about to see gumballs and get a tickets.

Nah, the troopers on I-87 have all gone to SUVs (Tahoes I think ) and I'm probably the slowest car on the road, at least in the areas where I know where the speed traps are.

qbrozen

oldfarmer50 said:

qbrozen said:

Are you sure about that, Shifty? I don't have a clue about these things, but I pay a crapload of taxes, if you take them ALL into consideration (federal income + state income + property + sales).

When I made $12,000 a year (not that long ago) I paid 40% of my income in taxes mainly thanks to regressive taxes like property and school taxes. That's pretty sad.

That's what I'm getting at. Can't really just compare one form of tax. That would be akin to comparing asking prices at 2 dealers and neglecting the fact that one charges $2k in fees and the other $200.

qbrozen

ab348 said:

qbrozen said:

Are you sure about that, Shifty? I don't have a clue about these things, but I pay a crapload of taxes, if you take them ALL into consideration (federal income + state income + property + sales).

Well, all I can say is try living in Canada. The last few years I was working, I made about $140K in income each year, and paid between $50K and $60K each year in income taxes alone. Then add to that a 15% sales tax on everything I bought except groceries, plus about 75 cents per US gallon in gas taxes (which also has the 15% sales tax added on to that), plus the usual property tax, etc and it starts to add up. I don't smoke but a pack of cigarettes here is over $12, most of it tax. A 750ml bottle of vodka that I've seen advertised in the US for as low as $5 or $6 is at least $25 here. A 12-pack of beer is also $25.00.

Sounds pretty bad.

In NJ, I believe you'd be looking at $48k on income tax all told, plus 7% sales tax, and then the property tax, which varies GREATLY, but our average was $8161 in 2015. Not sure where Canada falls, but I found an article claiming the highest average for any major city in Canada was Saskatoon at $4440. So it kinda sounds like NJ and Canada are pretty darned close (other than that sales tax, but I believe cost of goods is lower in Canada? Is that still the case? I know it was when I visited a couple of times, but that was long long ago).

dino001

snakeweasel said:

I have a theory that with car prices as you pay more you get less car per dollar spent. So a $60K car costs 50% more than a $40K car but it's rarely, if ever, 50% more car.

And yes perception does create it's own reality, that's why Beats can charge you over $100 for $20 headphones.

That's true with everything. In a price vs. quality curve first part is usually steep, as a little bit of money adds a lot of value, then it gets shallower and shallower. Then there is a parallel world, like Beats, where money is added not to the product, but to the marketing and promotion.

ab348

No, cost of most things here is higher. In fact it became an issue a couple of years ago when governments were starting to notice that identical products were 30% to 50% more here. And now with the C$ worth only 70% of the US$ it has only become worse. A head of cauliflower from California is now $6 here.

oldfarmer50

Ab348, if driver100 has to pay $25 for a 12 pack he must be drunk all the time in Florida where a 12 pack costs $7.99 at any convinence store.

cdnpinhead

roadburner said:

The two vehicles that I received the most complements about were my 2002 and my Triumph bike. Especially the bike.

Back in my motorcycling days (1965-70) my dream bike was either a Triumph or a BSA (I was riding Hondas). Ended up with an MGB -- go figure.

Oil use at its finest, or at least at its most enjoyable.

houdini1

ab348 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

It depends how they spend it. They can borrow all they want as long as the GDP keeps going up and as long as the money spent has very tangible benefits to the citizens. The only other ways to reduce debt are raising taxes (politically unpopular) printing more money (leads to inflation) or spending less (hasn't happened yet, and in reality no thriving business operates this way). As long as they keep paying in the interest on the debt, and as long as GDP keeps going up every year (which it normally does, and has been), then continuing to spend money you don't have is OK, because the % of debt to GDP remains the same or close.

Given the 2008 recession, there was no chance of spending less or raising taxes--out of the question. And cutting taxes has never shown to have a correlation to rises in GDP.

Well, it's good for those who make their living lending money to the government.

You really can't apply rules about thriving businesses to government spending, because government has no chance of going out of business if they screw up. And your point about the aftermath of 2008 is taken and agreed with. But government borrows money to finance annual operating deficits because they spend more than they take in. If they had taxes set at a comparable level to spending then that would not be necessary. It is really just kicking the can down the road. The tangible benefits are, in the case of the federal government, often nonexistent to regular citizens (thinking of the costs of being the world's policeman here).

"But gov. borrows money to finance annual operation deficits because they spend more than they take in. If they had taxes set at a comparable level to spending then that would not be necessary."

Here's a novel idea. How about if they set spending to a comparable level of the current taxes they take in. Or perish the thought, how about spending less than what they take in. Isn't that pretty much the way most of us handle our finances.

houdini1

ab348 said:

No, cost of most things here is higher. In fact it became an issue a couple of years ago when governments were starting to notice that identical products were 30% to 50% more here. And now with the C$ worth only 70% of the US$ it has only become worse. A head of cauliflower from California is now $6 here.

In the U.S., most families would have to have a husband and wife both working, with good jobs, to make $140,000. a year. Median income in the U.S. is about $50,000. I think the median income in Canada is about $75,000.

PF_Flyer

roadburner said:

The two vehicles that I received the most complements about were my 2002 and my Triumph bike. Especially the bike.

Don't know why this just struck me, but there seems to be a marked decrease in the use of the phrase, "this car turns heads". Used to be all over the forums and reviews. A lot a Civic-with-big-exhaust folks used to use it

imidazol97

houdini1 said:

because they spend more than they take in. If they had taxes set at a comparable level to spending then that would not be necessary."

Here's a novel idea. How about if they set spending to a comparable level of the current taxes they take in. Or perish the thought, how about spending less than what they take in. Isn't that pretty much the way most of us handle our finances.

That was my point earlier. Our problem in the US is we have state governments with power to tax and spend on certain things and we have federal government with politicians wanting to increase their power by trying to spend and tax as well as take controls away from the states. In contrast to the fed, don't most states have a balanced budget--Ohio does.

graphicguy

abacomike said:

My next door neighbor just left after showing me his new Cadillac CTS.  He got the white with a light leather interior and the Cue option and chrome wheels.  He let me drive it onto the turnpike.  Nice car but just a little too tight for me.  He got the standard engine, but it sure was peppy.

There is no doubt that the car was well built and quite luxurious.  The leather was softer than the leather seating in my car.  He is not familiar with the Cue system, but he has an appointment Monday at the dealership for some training on the system.

GG, now I see why you are enthralled with your CTS.  They sure build a nice car.

Mike...there aren't any poorly designed/engineered cars in this category (CTS, A6, E350, etc). IF Cadillac and their dealers would just get out of their own way, they might be able to succeed.

You're right. The CTS is a bit smaller inside than the E Class (and A6), but is about on par with the GS350.

I liked the turbo motor better than the v6, which is supposed to be the up market drivetrain. It certainly has more torque than the V6. I could have bought either...chose the turbo.

The updated CUE is worlds better than what I had in the '14, and I love Apple CarPlay.

Sounds like your friend bought the same combo as I have. If the dealer treats him right, he'll love it.

iluvmysephia1

Here's a novel idea. How about if they set spending to a comparable level of the current taxes they take in. Or perish the thought, how about spending less than what they take in. Isn't that pretty much the way most of us handle our finances.


And that is where the question mark comes in. Prudent spending after collection of taxes - that does make sense. Here in Kansas we have a state income tax and a 9.15% tax on purchases. Wow - I asked Mrs. iluvmysephia1 a couple days ago "Whadda we get for that?"

Her reply "Well, we get police and fire protection..." I then brought up roads...Dodge City has some cobblestone streets constructed in 1925. Central Ave. in town was gonna be torn up and paved the modern way in 2015 - we didn't see that happen. I just wonder if a more efficient use or better use of our state, local and Federal taxes could be figured out. I guess you have to be in a government position to understand the "real" spending picture?

Do we need any more fighter jets or aircraft carriers, for instance?

explorerx4

Weather conditions created some interesting snow sculptures on the deck posts.

oldfarmer50

PF_Flyer said:

roadburner said:

The two vehicles that I received the most complements about were my 2002 and my Triumph bike. Especially the bike.

Don't know why this just struck me, but there seems to be a marked decrease in the use of the phrase, "this car turns heads". Used to be all over the forums and reviews. A lot a Civic-with-big-exhaust folks used to use it

A Civic with a garbage can exhaust doesn't turn heads...it makes them spin.

oldfarmer50

imidazol97 said:

houdini1 said:

because they spend more than they take in. If they had taxes set at a comparable level to spending then that would not be necessary."

Here's a novel idea. How about if they set spending to a comparable level of the current taxes they take in. Or perish the thought, how about spending less than what they take in. Isn't that pretty much the way most of us handle our finances.

That was my point earlier. Our problem in the US is we have state governments with power to tax and spend on certain things and we have federal government with politicians wanting to increase their power by trying to spend and tax as well as take controls away from the states. In contrast to the fed, don't most states have a balanced budget--Ohio does.

NY's state constitution requires a balanced budget but crafty politicians have used all sorts of legal slight of hand to put us about $50 billion in debt.

imidazol97

explorerx4 said:

Weather conditions created some interesting snow sculptures on the deck posts.

I am enjoying the snow pictures. Mostly that's because we've not had a large amount of snow here in Western Ohio this winter, knock on wood.

driver100

tyguy said:

Thank you for the kind words and concern, all. The knee is swollen, but I did drive the Audi to my doctor's appointment today. When I told my wife my plans to drive the stick, she gave me the "grand eye roll" and accurately judged me the fool that I am. I seriously love that woman. And I still had a ball driving the Audi.

It's like you get a new car and a grocery cart rams into your new car.

You get a stick and you hurt your knee.

When I had my last manual, 2008 to 2012 bmw 328 I tried to be more careful....broken leg or arm could make it very hard to drive!

driver100

Mr_Shiftright said:

It depends how they spend it. They can borrow all they want as long as the GDP keeps going up and as long as the money spent has very tangible benefits to the citizens. The only other ways to reduce debt are raising taxes (politically unpopular) printing more money (leads to inflation) or spending less (hasn't happened yet, and in reality no thriving business operates this way). As long as they keep paying in the interest on the debt, and as long as GDP keeps going up every year (which it normally does, and has been), then continuing to spend money you don't have is OK, because the % of debt to GDP remains the same or close.

Given the 2008 recession, there was no chance of spending less or raising taxes--out of the question. And cutting taxes has never shown to have a correlation to rises in GDP.

That is the usual argument about debt.....if you think debt is OK.
I think debt is almost always a bad thing....because it is a slippery slope that usually gets worse,
AND
right now we have (in the USA and Canada) very low interest rates, what happens when interest rates go up and the debt is even larger.....I've decided to let future generations worry about that!

driver100

="abacomike"
And when interest rates hit 3, 4 or 5% or more, what happens then?  Interest on the debt will triple or quadruple or quintuple!  

There has to be bi-partisan support for "reducing" the national debt because in the very near future, interest rates will force the diversion of money from social and military programs to paying interest on the debt.

But if we can raise billions of dollars on a $10 per barrel tax on imported/exported oil and those billions go directly to reduce the national debt instead of spending it on new programs, in 5-10 years, we will have made a dent on our national debt.

Mike, I should have read your post first...my concern is when interest rates rise....it will be like buying a new car when you are so far under water you will sink.

I agree a bit of pain like a $10 a barrel charge to pay down the debt would be wonderful, we can afford since gas is so low....and what a fairly easy way to get our finances under some kind of control.

driver100

ab348 said:

No, cost of most things here is higher. In fact it became an issue a couple of years ago when governments were starting to notice that identical products were 30% to 50% more here. And now with the C$ worth only 70% of the US$ it has only become worse. A head of cauliflower from California is now $6 here.

I read it was $8 in Saskatchewan. We bought a humongous cauliflower...the largest I have seen, at Sam's for $2.99 which would still be under $4 in Cdn,

Almost nothing is cheaper in Canada, even things like toilet paper and the pulp & paper to make it comes from Canada.

driver100

oldfarmer50 said:

Ab348, if driver100 has to pay $25 for a 12 pack he must be drunk all the time in Florida where a 12 pack costs $7.99 at any convinence store.

I don't drink a lot, but if I lived down here I could easily become an alcoholic......at least here I can afford to be!

driver100

houdini1 said:

ab348 said:

No, cost of most things here is higher. In fact it became an issue a couple of years ago when governments were starting to notice that identical products were 30% to 50% more here. And now with the C$ worth only 70% of the US$ it has only become worse. A head of cauliflower from California is now $6 here.

In the U.S., most families would have to have a husband and wife both working, with good jobs, to make $140,000. a year. Median income in the U.S. is about $50,000. I think the median income in Canada is about $75,000.

You may be right but I don't know. Got this from the internet:
It shows that the median family income in Canada is $76,000 — generally higher in the west than the east — while the median individual income is just $27,600. That means just as many individuals earn less than $27,600 as earn more. The richest 10 per cent of individuals are making more than $80,400

How can the median family income be $76k and individual be $27600....wouldn't that add up to $55k with 2 people working, unless they count kids income as well, or do married people tend to make more?????????

Cost of cars is 20% more in Canada and set to rise as there is now a 30 - 40% difference in currency, house prices are at least double for some unknown reason. Compared to Florida we need brick construction for the most part and basements. We have summer clothing but need an equal amount of more expensive winter clothing. Plus costs of doing business in a huge area with sparse population.

But what is better. Ride to work on a bike like they do in Denmark? No worries, government will pay for your healthcare, education, pension...........but, tax rate is 75%!

oldfarmer50

imidazol97 said:

explorerx4 said:

Weather conditions created some interesting snow sculptures on the deck posts.

I am enjoying the snow pictures. Mostly that's because we've not had a large amount of snow here in Western Ohio this winter, knock on wood.

You won't be seeing any snow pictures from my area this year.

2014-15



2015-16

driver100

oldfarmer50 said:

imidazol97 said:

explorerx4 said:

Weather conditions created some interesting snow sculptures on the deck posts.

I am enjoying the snow pictures. Mostly that's because we've not had a large amount of snow here in Western Ohio this winter, knock on wood.

You won't be seeing any snow pictures from my area this year.

Hope those won't become famous last words!

[Deleted User]

driver100 said:

It's like you get a new car and a grocery cart rams into your new car.

You get a stick and you hurt your knee.

When I had my last manual, 2008 to 2012 bmw 328 I tried to be more careful....broken leg or arm could make it very hard to drive!

Ha! Too true. I was sweating in the middle of winter while waiting in the surgeon's examination room. Visions of an ACL replacement, starting rehab over, missing out on a full summer of lake time, what to do with the Audi, and worst of all, our family vacation to Florida next month to make up for spending our 20-year wedding anniversary high on pain killers and resting in bed from the knee implant. I didn't sleep well until after the diagnosis came back in my favor. Horrible week.

snakeweasel

driver100 said:

="abacomike"
And when interest rates hit 3, 4 or 5% or more, what happens then?  Interest on the debt will triple or quadruple or quintuple!  

There has to be bi-partisan support for "reducing" the national debt because in the very near future, interest rates will force the diversion of money from social and military programs to paying interest on the debt.

But if we can raise billions of dollars on a $10 per barrel tax on imported/exported oil and those billions go directly to reduce the national debt instead of spending it on new programs, in 5-10 years, we will have made a dent on our national debt.

Mike, I should have read your post first...my concern is when interest rates rise....it will be like buying a new car when you are so far under water you will sink.

I agree a bit of pain like a $10 a barrel charge to pay down the debt would be wonderful, we can afford since gas is so low....and what a fairly easy way to get our finances under some kind of control.

With the current debt $10 a barrel tax going to retire the debt would take 475 years to retire the debt presuming no defect spending and no interest on the debt.

In short $10 a barrel tax to pay down the debt is like throwing snowballs at a tank.

snakeweasel

Just received some bad news, my cousin just passed away. She was just 53 and it makes me think about things.

Mr_Shiftright

graphicguy said:

I'm fortunate to be friends with people in other parts of the world, and I still have relatives in Italy. Talking to them, or those who have a VAT, say they naturally don't buy as much because of the VAT.

I know in Brazil, you go to one of their local shopping centers and very few of the goods is quoted as "this is the price of these shoes". It's usually advertised as being "it's only X amount per month to buy these shoes".

Taxes of any kind will never solve infrastructure problems. Committed local governemnt can do it, though. Cut out the rigging of contractors, hold those that do win bids to their agreement regarding time and money. Earmark the funds that are supposed to go for infrastrcture to actually be spent on infrastructure, and you'll find any new taxes are unneeded.

Want to kill any sort of economic robustness? Start rasing taxes. Does it every time.

A dubious conclusion. The economic system is so complex that one could easily find data to support completely opposing points of view about that. For instance, if you tried to show that higher corporate tax rates have historically had a negative impact economic growth, you'd come up empty-handed. On the other hand, if you did an analysis of individual tax rates on savings, you might find a negative impact.

houdini1

driver100 said:

houdini1 said:

ab348 said:

No, cost of most things here is higher. In fact it became an issue a couple of years ago when governments were starting to notice that identical products were 30% to 50% more here. And now with the C$ worth only 70% of the US$ it has only become worse. A head of cauliflower from California is now $6 here.

In the U.S., most families would have to have a husband and wife both working, with good jobs, to make $140,000. a year. Median income in the U.S. is about $50,000. I think the median income in Canada is about $75,000.

You may be right but I don't know. Got this from the internet:
It shows that the median family income in Canada is $76,000 — generally higher in the west than the east — while the median individual income is just $27,600. That means just as many individuals earn less than $27,600 as earn more. The richest 10 per cent of individuals are making more than $80,400

How can the median family income be $76k and individual be $27600....wouldn't that add up to $55k with 2 people working, unless they count kids income as well, or do married people tend to make more?????????

Cost of cars is 20% more in Canada and set to rise as there is now a 30 - 40% difference in currency, house prices are at least double for some unknown reason. Compared to Florida we need brick construction for the most part and basements. We have summer clothing but need an equal amount of more expensive winter clothing. Plus costs of doing business in a huge area with sparse population.

But what is better. Ride to work on a bike like they do in Denmark? No worries, government will pay for your healthcare, education, pension...........but, tax rate is 75%!

The numbers do look a bit screwy. I got my numbers from the internet too. Maybe in Canada there is a lot of people making very little and a lot of people making a lot. Kind of like the U.S

I was trying to find the average income in the U.S. and Canada to compare, but I could not find an average salary for Canada. They showed an average income for various occupations and average income in each province, but I could not find an overall average. Average income per worker in the U.S. was $44,000.

Driver, one other thing I am curious about. In spite of the U.S. rather high income tax, many politicians claim that almost 50% of the people on our tax roles pay no income tax. Is this true in Canada also? With this many people paying no income tax, and probably even receiving money from the government (other taxpayers) maybe this is one of the reasons why we have such a large national debt.

berri

A little debt leverage isn't a bad thing and (in normal times at least) inflation will offset part of it. The problem is debt that keeps rolling over. The same principle as why you end up paying 2-3X the original amount of your mortgage by the time you pay it off.

oldfarmer50

snakeweasel said:

Just received some bad news, my cousin just passed away. She was just 53 and it makes me think about things.

Sorry to hear that. 53 is too young.

stever

berri said:

The problem is debt that keeps rolling over.

Now you're describing people who never get off the leasing or payment rollercoaster. Hush your mouth, we need that mindset to keep paying the bills around here.

abacomike

snakeweasel said:

Just received some bad news, my cousin just passed away. She was just 53 and it makes me think about things.

That IS awfully young.  My condolences, snake.  It sure does make one think about life!  When I had my hear attack a few months ago, it reminds you of mortality and how fragile it really is.