Seriously Todd, is there any aspect of your life you don't utilize in an attempt to be superior to somebody else?
How does that make me superior to anyone else, could be that he was the nicest person in the world and makes me look like a complete d bag.
His sales pitch for those slippers reminded me of ZUMIEZ which in turn reminded me of a funny story.
No superiority issues here, like I mentioned other than not knowing his product he may have been superior in every which way to me, IT WAS JUST A FUNY STORY.
You're the one being a turd.
So you are saying that if you walked into a new Best Buy Instrument section as a guitarist. When all of a sudden the manager came up to you and asked if you were into FERDEN Guitars and then started talking about how great they are etc...YOU WOULD NOT THINK THAT WAS FUNNY AND A LITTLE SAD?????
....and out of nowhere comes Lanark's crude opinion on someone else's personality. Unsolicited of course.
Why has nobody thought of giving more subsidized money to "professional" drivers to keep cost of living down? You take some away from "standard" drivers and put it to an extra discount for professionals. That might spur on some demand for alternative fuel/transportation possibilities. If nothing else, people might drive less when it's higher.
Help juiceTIME recover from his cancer surgery:
CLICK TO DONATE
(Being unable to work and insurance deductibles = no $)
Topher: ....and out of nowhere comes Lanark's crude opinion on someone else's personality. Unsolicited of course. Why has nobody thought of giving more subsidized money to "professional" drivers to keep cost of living down? You take some away from "standard" drivers and put it to an extra discount for professionals. That might spur on some demand for alternative fuel/transportation possibilities. If nothing else, people might drive less when it's higher.
I totally agree.
Like an instant tax savings on gas for truck drivers, delivery drivers, cab drivers etc.....but the rest of us pay more to mke up the difference?
I LIKE IT
You're being sarcastic, right? I mean, you're basically proposing giving cake to a fat kid.
EDIT: I'm sorry, I misunderstood/misread. Subsidizing commercial drivers would:
1). Create a black market for commercial licenses same way that farm subsidies are given to a some people living in NYC, buying a really large truck gets you small business rebates, etc. Just creates another loophole.
2). It gives no incentives to research alternative fuels or at least lessens it. Since businesses will not be heavily affected, there's less demand. Consumers will adjust their driving patterns faster and easier than businesses. Alt energy will come around much faster if businesses suffer.
Overall, it's not a horrible idea but I'm not a huge fan of it. I think we should just leave this particular one alone.
rost0031: Topher: ....and out of nowhere comes Lanark's crude opinion on someone else's personality. Unsolicited of course. Why has nobody thought of giving more subsidized money to "professional" drivers to keep cost of living down? You take some away from "standard" drivers and put it to an extra discount for professionals. That might spur on some demand for alternative fuel/transportation possibilities. If nothing else, people might drive less when it's higher. You're being sarcastic, right? I mean, you're basically proposing giving cake to a fat kid. EDIT: I'm sorry, I misunderstood/misread. Subsidizing commercial drivers would: I TOTALLY AGREE 1). Create a black market for commercial licenses same way that farm subsidies are given to a some people living in NYC, buying a really large truck gets you small business rebates, etc. Just creates another loophole. 2). It gives no incentives to research alternative fuels or at least lessens it. Since businesses will not be heavily affected, there's less demand. Consumers will adjust their driving patterns faster and easier than businesses. Alt energy will come around much faster if businesses suffer. Overall, it's not a horrible idea but I'm not a huge fan of it. I think we should just leave this particular one alone. What about larger deductions for these businesses at tax time. That way all you would have to do is change a percentage on their fuel deductions for the year thus eliminating the overhead of a huge revamping project. Also, they will still feel the initial hit, like having a mail in rebate versus a instant one as earlier described. We could also then raise the taxes on fuel to fund research for alternatives, but not enough to eliminate the new savings for the professionals.
I TOTALLY AGREE
What about larger deductions for these businesses at tax time. That way all you would have to do is change a percentage on their fuel deductions for the year thus eliminating the overhead of a huge revamping project. Also, they will still feel the initial hit, like having a mail in rebate versus a instant one as earlier described. We could also then raise the taxes on fuel to fund research for alternatives, but not enough to eliminate the new savings for the professionals.
Rost, you have a good point. I forget how the corporations, not the people, run this country now. MAYBE the opposite would work? I was thinking that there would be no rational reason for food/clothing/goods to go up with gas prices if we were to do something like that. However, that's probably more a Reaganish, trickle-down theory where the corps. would take the cut, but still raise prices. They're really not in the business of "good of the people".
As far as the Scobbs/Lance debate.......I don't think their respective ideas contradict one another. We need to use less and show them we're not going to put up with this bullshit. We, as consumers have to show that we are willing to try/buy alternative energies. FOR EXAMPLE: you can call up the electric co. and pay a little more to use wind-power to supplement your energy in your house. Right now, it costs more, but I think it's worth piece of mind. I do it and don't really notice much difference.
Topher: Rost, you have a good point. I forget how the corporations, not the people, run this country now. MAYBE the opposite would work? I was thinking that there would be no rational reason for food/clothing/goods to go up with gas prices if we were to do something like that. However, that's probably more a Reaganish, trickle-down theory where the corps. would take the cut, but still raise prices. They're really not in the business of "good of the people".
I was going to start arguing but looks like you already made my point. Remember, they pass the savings on to you!