mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: A real spridget solution; WAS: Great American Gas Out

To: "Jeff Boatright" <jboatri@emory.edu>
Subject: Re: A real spridget solution; WAS: Great American Gas Out
From: "Steve Conley" <swconley@foxinternet.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 13:46:34 -0800
Here in Washington "we" just passed a license tab roll-back to a flat $30
excise, whereas it was based on vehicle value previously.  Mostly due to the
Land Yacht SUV owners (insert various SUV rants here) who, after spending
$60,000 on their new toy, discovered that they were also going to have to
pay another $600 a year on tabs!  So, instead of buying a less expensive
vehicle (MG) they decided to lower the tabs.  Now there will probably be
even more 10 mpg guzzlers out there!

Steve Conley
Marysville, WA  USA
'76 MGB Roadster
swconley@foxinternet.net
MGB Online: http://web3.foxinternet.net/swconley

MG Intranet: http://mowog.intranets.com


----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff Boatright <jboatri@emory.edu>
To: <mgs@autox.team.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2000 5:07 AM
Subject: A real spridget solution; WAS: Great American Gas Out


> This was written to the spridgets list in response to a thread about
> a proposed 'gas out' -  I think my plan is better...
> ---
>
> I doubt that the organizers (if such exist) have any delusions that a
> drop in consumption resulting from a gas out would have any effect,
> even at the very local level. My assumption is that the goal is press
> coverage. This would have some effect, though an unpredictable one
> once the affair became political.
>
> Given that my Sprite returns a fairly steady 33 mpg, I think that our
> best bet at effecting true change is to call for a constitutional
> amendment requiring US auto manufacturers to build, market, and sell
> spridgets. They would be allowed to sell other vehicles, but only
> under penalty. The penalties will be linked to the size and fuel
> consumption of the non-spridget products and other indexes that I
> choose (since I will be the car czar). Thus, Ford would be forced to
> sell 123 Sprites for every Incursion...er..Excursion sold. However,
> they would gain points for every Euro-spec Focus sold in the States.
> DaimlerChrysler would be forced to sell 138 Midgets for every
> Mercedes-Benz sold in the States. The extra 15 spridget penalty is
> because we're already tired of Daimler's 'Uber All' attitude. GM
> sucks so badly that they will not be allowed to make or sell
> spridgets. Instead, they will have to take a financial penalty for
> every boring, rainy-day-in-dreary-old-Pimlico car they sell. Since
> this is all they make anyway, these penalties will force the demise
> of GM, and none too soon. Happily, the extra effort that it takes to
> hand-build the spridgets means that all those GM workers will have
> jobs waiting for them in the Ford and Chrysler plants. All auto
> workers would then have interesting jobs that require thinking and
> craftsmanship. Accident rates would drop as people would be driving
> cars that (1) they can handle and (2) they know will not protect them
> if they do hit something. Additionally, serious injury rates would
> plummet: We'd all be driving little cars that make going the speed
> limit fun, so the few accidents that do occur will be fender-benders.
> Finally, our dependence on foreign oil would truly decrease,
> greenhouse gas production would drop, the hole in the ozone would
> fill again, and spotted owls would roam the earth looking to kick
> butt on snail darters.
>
> Now, if we'd all just do as I say...
>
> ---
> On 2/26/00, paul m wrote:
> >mike,
> > this kind of activity is a futile effort and probably would result
> >in a false impression. just consider the stability of oil/fuel prices
> >that
> >is created by the futures markets in crude oil in 3 and 6 month
> >increments.
> >a 3 day boycott at the retail level would be about as significant as a
> >pimple would be on the north end of a south-bound elephant.
> >
> >lbc content: adult elephants usually weigh more than a "stock"
> >spridget!
> >(your tonnage may vary)
> >
> >paul m
>
> Jeffrey H. Boatright, PhD
> Senior Editor, Molecular Vision
> http://www.molvis.org/molvis
> "Seeing the Future in a Very Tiny Way"


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>