Washington Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Evergreen State.
Welcome to Washington Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post 04-08-2009 4:27 PM by redralph68. 376 replies.
Page 10 of 10 (377 items) « First ... < Previous 6 7 8 9 10
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 02-06-2009 12:14 PM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

    This bill is a 2008 Bill and is not currently being discussed in the legislature.

  • 02-06-2009 2:08 PM In reply to

    Re: Next !!!!! Fuel Prices.

     Everyone needs to get a grip and move on because this BILL DIED in the last session and IS NOT BEING CONSIDERED AT THIS TIME. We have bigger problems then a dead bill right now so quit whining and move onto something relevant.

  • 02-08-2009 4:31 AM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

     Great news this bill / law  was trashed.

    So funny how logic is pretty much never applied in thinking up all these new laws and taxes. 

    If this was meant to be part of these new and upcomming enviro/global warming taxes on the so called green house gases.

    Then why is it based on engine displacement ?   WHY WAS IT NOT BASED ON WHAT WAS MEASURED OUT OF THE TAIL PIPE? and WHY WAS THERE GOING TO BE AN EXTRA CHARGE FOR NOT DRIVING 1000 MILES? Or did I just read something wrong ? But if that was the case then, someone is telling me you better drive and pollute or your gona pay more.

    Now how come with something like this tax that was dreamed up, that it was only going to apply to what us average folks drive and transport ourselves and goods with? 

    I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MUCH THE OPERATORS/OWNERS OF TURBINE ENGINES THAT MOST ALL THE COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT USE, AND SOME ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING FACILITIES USE, AS WELL AS SOME SHIPS/BOATS USE, WERE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY? AND HOW THEIR DISPLACEMENT WAS TO BE CALCULATED? As a note MANY OF THESE ENGINES ARE WASTING CLOSE TO A GALLON OR MORE OF FUEL PER SECOND, YES THAT IS ONE SECOND ie 1/60th of a MINUTE OF TIME MEANING 60 GALLONS PER MINUTE OF FUEL BURN. AND THE RESULT OF COURSE IS THE SO CALLED POLLUTANTS FROM THAT CONSUMPTION.  And these engines do not come close to the effciency of certain reciprocating engines so all the more waste and these were not even mentioned. SO WHAT DOES THAT TELL YA?  Yeah kinda like giving 700 billion to the bankers.

     

  • 02-08-2009 10:30 AM In reply to

    • Gen
    • Top 100 Contributor
    • Joined on 02-08-2009

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

    I wish you people would bother to research what you're writing about.  SB 6900 died last year- didn't even get a hearing and the bill HAS NOT been reintroduced this year.  THINK FOR YOURSELF! DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH!

  • 02-10-2009 5:21 PM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

     I could tell that it was nonexistant. And my post says that.  The whole point of posting is to make everyone think real hard and use the matter between the ears, SO WHEN AND IF IT EVER IS REINTRODUCED or something similar, then all can see the nonsense of it.

  • 02-10-2009 6:32 PM In reply to

    Re: OUCH

     

  • 02-10-2009 6:43 PM In reply to

    Re: OUCH

    HANKYPANKY:

     

     

     THIS IS A VERY BAD BILL, WHAT IS UP WITH THIS? I AM GETTING READY TO RETIRE AND BE ON A FIXE INCOME. I HAVE 3 VEHICLES THAT I PAY TO LICENSE EVERY YEAR AND IT WILL BE A REAL BURDEN TO US TAXPAYERS THAT ALL READY PAY THE FEES WS DO. WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE WITH SMALL BUSINESSES THAT NEED VEHICLES TO DO AND RN THERE BUSINESS AND THE AMOUNT THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY TO KEEP THEM GOING. IF YOU WANT TO GENERATE MORE FUNDS MAYBE THEY SHOULDSTART CHARGING THE SENATE THAT COMES UP WITH THIS STUFF MONEY TO EVEN BRING THESE UP AS BAD BILLS AND WHEN THEY ARE VOTED DOWN PAY $ 1000.00 DOLLARS TO THE FUND FOR EACCH PERSON THAT WAS AGAINST IT. NOW THAT  SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA HUH.

    STUPID..............

  • 02-11-2009 5:26 PM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

    I think this is a great bill! Just think the revenue it will create when the police have to start pulling people over for expired tabs? Even more better when you have been pulled over a few more times and they suspend your drivers license and then even more revenue is created when the police have to pull everyone over for suspended licenses. This is a fantastic way to cut down traffic on our roads and help the ozone out at the same time! I give it a two thumbs up!!!!!

  • 02-11-2009 6:47 PM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

    US and Canada are the only western countries were apparently there is a huge need to drive huge v8 powered cars-

    It's high time for the legislator to discourage this ridicolous, short term, wasteful 'choice' - I hope that the bill gets reintroduced as soon as possible-

    While I hope there will provisions for older vehicles-  But going forward people need to be careful before getting a huge engine when they could do just fine with a smaller one-  Getting hit in a wallet will be a wake up call-

    Again THE REST OF THE WORLD is living perfectly happy with smaller engines-  The wasteful 'bigger is better' mentality needs to stop-

     

  • 02-11-2009 10:26 PM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

    I have a 1 ton truck. In the last year people in 4 or 5,000 + square foot homes have said I should not have a truck because they do not have or need one. After the state forced a fracture into non union and forcing me to work with two fractured feet until I was hobbled and homeless for 2 years. I bought a RV in 95. I have moved my RV twice for a total of 50 miles. Twice I have hooked up and been ready to get out when puyallup river was about to flood. I average between 10 to 12 tanks of gas in my truck a year. I do 90% of my travel on my motorcycle.  In around a year, I will move to the Moses lake area. How could I move my RV without my truck? How do I move 12,000 pounds down the road with a 4 cylinder truck that is rated for towing 1/4 of my RV,s weight? 

  • 02-11-2009 11:19 PM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

    Hey this is great. Setting the stage to place an "energy surcharge" on everyone living in 3000+ square foot houses. Nevermind the number of people living in the house, whether it be 2 or 9.

    It is obvious the sponsors of this bill have nothing of the people's interest in mind; it places an undue burden on working class people and the others who require large displacement vehicles for pratical purposes. Think about that the next time you want to remodel your house or have your monoculture mowed.

    All you people who pass judgement onto others that you see driving the big truck/SUV/luxuary sedan with one person in there, I have one question for you: How can you possibly come to a conclusion about a person's family size or needs with a 10 second encounter on the freeway?

    This bill is absolutely not in the best interest of the people. Build the darn trains!

  • 02-12-2009 3:11 PM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

     redralph68: If this bill passed, it looks like you would have to make a different choice.

    You would have to sell your RV (which is a gas-hog as well of course), if anyone would buy it which under this bill is doubtful, and move into a homeless shelter or just pitch a tent somewhere.

    That is the purpose of these kinds of bills. Create a new class of poor who are dependent on the government.

    And remember, there are two classes of people. The ones who are wealthy and establish the laws that others are required to follow and the ones who are not wealthy and do have to follow the laws.

     

  • 02-20-2009 3:14 PM In reply to

    • tj
    • Top 500 Contributor
    • Joined on 02-20-2009

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

    Is it now a requirement to be completely out of touch with your constituents in order to run for state Senate?  Why, when times are already tough, would this even be considered?  Is there anyone, with even average intelligence, who is in favor of this?

  • 03-04-2009 12:34 PM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

     People are you observing that each one of these idiot proposals I.E. Income tax, Engine displacement surcharge, Homeless encampment at the church in your neighborhood etc. etc. are coming from Democrats ? These are not people they are politicians ! They seek to extract every ounce of your life blood so they can feel good about the good they think they're doing.....with your money.

     

  • 03-11-2009 10:29 AM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

    I propose a new bill. 

    Bill 1111 - Thou Shalt Archive or Close All Threads for Last Years Bills.

    No sunset date.

     

  • 04-07-2009 3:16 PM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

    This is excellent legislative action.  I'd prefer to outlaw all passenger vehicles with engine displacements over 120ci and impose 10X annual excise tax for pickup trucks and vans with engines exceeding 120ci.

    There's absolutely no need for greater engine displacements - other than as a compensation for some peoples physical and mental shortcomings.

  • 04-08-2009 4:27 PM In reply to

    Re: 2008 Senate Bill 6900 (Establishing vehicle engine displacement and emissions fees)

     I have to respond to this narrow minded perspective and offer a challenge to you. I have previously posted earlier. After the state forced me to work with multiple broken bones and being homeless for two years I bought a RV and truck in 95. So I heat and cool my RV wich is around 200 to 220  square feet. My RV has consumed less than 5 gallons of gas since march 1995. I use between 15 and 40 gallons of gas a month. My gas habit is between 1/2 gallon to 1.5 gallons a day on the average over the year.   In my truck I have only used two tanks of gas since newyears eve and it will be late April or May when I get my third tank of gas whick should last me from july to August.. I do the majority of my transportation on my motorcycle.  I would use my truck less but I am not going to ride my motorcycle on a sheet of ice to pick up my 63 year old mother and drive her to the hospital to pick up my obease stepfather and have the three of us ride on a sheet of ice on my motorcycle.

    My best friends (Greg) Deisel truck gets 20 MPG. In the last couple years he used his truck to pick up enough fence posts and chain link fence to surround his 1.08 acres. We picked up over 150 Arbor Vitae trees and will be around 200 when done. 50 + oher small shrubs and trees, fill dirt, top soil, gravel, around 15 cords of firewood, driving lawnmower, cement mixer, bags of cement ( for all fence posts and gate),  around 300 retaining wall bricks to built a retaining wall. He picked my KLR 650 up and I picked his harley up when we were broke down on the side of the road in 2008.  His truck gets 600 miles plus on a tank of gas. He did not use a tank of gas in his truck last year. Should he pay up to $600 a year in fines when he only uses one or two tank of gas a year. 98% of the people that I know who have a truck do not use it as a daily driver. And the ones that do have desiel trucks that get 19 or 20 mpg  or they can't afford a deisel truck but it is a necessity for their work, horses, farm ect...... Deisel trucks cost $10,000 more to  to purchase and double or quadripple any repairs. Thats why gas fills my minimum need. Now most American auto companies make gas trucks that get 20 to 21 mpg in a full size  1/2 ton truck. But who can afford to go out and buy a 2009 truck, and this type of legistation would keep people from buying a more fuel effecient truck. Ford sells the most trucks, they are the only company not bankrupt now. This could help bankrupt Ford.

    My second best friend has a portable welding business. He has paid $50,000 a year in taxes but he should be penalized because he has a job. He also has a truck that he build from the frame up in the late 80's. That truck has sat in his garage for 20 years because it is a show truck I doubt he has used 20 gallons of gas in 18 years. He wanted to use his truck as a tool to help keep his kid from the wrong crowd and out of trouble, as a reward forkeeping his nose clean, complete school and give as a reward or will it to his son. If this kind of thing passes he will have to pay $7,000 for his truck to sit in his garage until his son is old enough to go to a single show with the truck.

    You say the only reason I  and others have a truck is to compensate for physical and mental shortcommings.  It is a common part of many peoples independence. Without a truck there is all of the above and thousands of other tasks that can't be done.  

    I bet you consider yourself a  liberal democrat?   Who helps you when you move, people with trucks?

    Here is the challenge. I will happily go anywhere with you that computes a persons carbon footprint. I gaurantee that my footprint is less than half of your footprint and most likely under 20%. If you have children my footprint is only 10% of yours . Come to my RV park please and I will show you lots of trucks that only sit there. The vast majority of people in my RV park have a tow rig. And almost everyone of them have an increadibly fuel efficient car. It is common for a guy to ride a motorcycle while his wife drives a 30+ mpg car. And only uses the truck when there is snow or ice. In RV parks you are only allowed 2 vehicles ( He does not count motorcycles as a vehicle because they do not take up a parking space). Many have said they wish they could have a third vehicle for commuting, but they have to work within the standard RV park regulations.  A full 1/4 of the trucks in my RV park, pull the RV in and sit there for one to 5 years until they tow their RV to a different location.  There are many trucks that do not use a tank of gas a year. Some guys just start it every couple months. and they might drive it one or two times a year. Many live in a RV until they can afford a home.     But you think that makes them trying to compensate for physical and mental shortcomings. Would them not having a truck so when the river floods their RV is washed into the river, would that make them enviromentally intelligent because they could not save their residence and polluted the river? That would be enviromentally irresponsable and make them buy another RV and consume more resources.  This would effect a huge number of retired people. Massive amounts of elderly live in a RV.

    my footpring

    1/2  to 1.5 gallons of gas a day.

    I heat and cool 200 square feet. Plus, I use propane which is clean burning

    I buy as much produce from a local roadside produce stand a mile or so down the road because the produce is grown locally.

    I consume as little as possible. I recycle computer hardware, paper/ junk mail print cartridges, batteries ect. I recycle plastic and aluminum. I buy as little packaged food as possible. When I go on my motorcycle trips (usaually up in the mountains) I have a 40 oz  camel pack of water which I have been using for a couple years. I bring water in aluminum containers from the Venom energy drink because it is a thick durable aluminum and I will use the same containers hundreds of times. If water is available I get it out of a faucet because I do not want to contribute to a product that uses plastic to hold water and may have been shipped thousands of miles. Several times when water was not available I would buy a gallon of water and fill up my camel pack and all of my 16.9 oz containers and right there on the spot. I place the one or two plastic 1 gallon bottles in the recycle bin that was located at the stores where I bought the water.

    My RV took less than 10% of the resources than the average home consumes to be built.

    Since I heat and cool 200 square feet, I only consume 10% of the energy that a 2,000 square foot consumes.

    Instead of getting a sub prime mortgage on a house that I couldn't afford. That takes 10 times more resources to build and 10 times more resources to maintain. I choose to live enviromentally friendly, pay off my debt and save money. In 12 to 18 months I will buy land and possibly move my RV on it and live for a while until I save a little more so I could buy a Fleetwood Mobile home. I am planning on buying the lakeview series wich is only 543 square feet. I chose that model because the insulation is R40, R21, R33. I chose the lakeview because it  is only 543 square feet and has a higher insulation standard than any other model I have found. Plus the factory built homes consume less and waste far less resources than a standard built home. So I am planning on buying a small well insulated home that is more energy effecient than any other domicile. I have investigated and have chose to get a solar power water heater and a grid tied solar power system. I plan on buying a system that will provide 100% plus of my homes needs. I want to have enough of a surplus of energy to sell back to the grid to cover 100% of my other utilities like garbage, water, sewer. The second I buy  the trailer I planned on putting my RV and truck up for sale. I wanted to use the money to pay for the majority of my solar system. This type of bill will cut the value of my RV and truck in half. I know of at least 20 4x4 and truck specialty shops. business is tight nationwide. This could put at least 1,000 truck/ 4x4 specialty shops out of business. There are hundreds but more likely over 1,000 American business that specialize in manufacturing aftermarket parts for trucks and 4x4's. In a short time it could put a coupls thousand businesses out of business and loose tens of thousands of jobs. In turn loose billions of tax revenue and increase unemployment rate.

    How is wanting to have as close to a zero carbon footprint as possible and retain a little independence, make me mentally deficient or trying to compensate for my physical and mental shortcomings?

     04/13/09 I was woke up by Greg calling me. His friend is in construction. Greg was getting 5 yard dumptrucks of fill dirt for the cost of gas ($10) to delivered to his house. He rented a bobcat to move fill dirt to the sloped land behind his shop and make room for more loads. The bob cat was stuck on a slight hillside in the muck. I rode up to his house and as soon as I got there I jumped in his truck while he ran the bobcat and I pulled him out. It was very mucky, so I stayed to help him if needed. A few hours later the bobcat basically fell in a soft whole at the back corner of his property and was burried a couple feet in the mud. In just a few minutes I backed his truck up he pulled the chains out of the bed, hooked up the bobcat and I pulled him out. Since we had a truck we were able to use the bobcat for the full day of rental. Without it we would have to had called a tow truck and lost half or the rest of the day.  There are millions of tasks accomplished with trucks daily. This would unfair burden on blue collar workers in the construction or trade fields. Their work has almost dried up and most can not make their bills now. But people want to charge them or take away the one tool they need have to run thier business or provide for their family.

Page 10 of 10 (377 items) « First ... < Previous 6 7 8 9 10
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems