Jump to content
Server Move In Progress - Read More ×
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    President Obama’s Proposed Budget Includes An Increase In The Tax Credit For Plug-Ins

    William Maley

    Editor/Reporter - CheersandGears.com

    February 16, 2012

    President Obama has a goal of getting a million plug-in vehicles on U.S. roads by 2015. Last year during his State of the Union address, Obama talked about changing the current $7,500 tax credit into a point-of-purchase rebate. That hasn’t happen at the moment, but in the President's proposed budget that was released this week, Obama is trying another way to reach his goal; raising the tax credit to $10,000.

    To go along with this push, the budget calls for cutting more subsidies that Big Oil currently enjoys.

    Opponents of the President disagree with this move, calling it a "campaign document" that would divide America. Others have pushed the PHEV credit to be removed.

    Source: Washington Post

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Boy this will truly be a battle of those with interest in big oil and those that hug their trees pushing for this.

    Course Big Oil has a right to be afraid as this country goes towards plug in auto's / hybrids that sip fuel, their sales and profits could faulter.

    I do think raising the tax credit would help to sell these types of vehicles and there should e a credit for gas companies to install other types of pumps, Natural Gas pump, Propane pumps, biofuel pumps, etc.

    This way business can expand and support alternative fuels and keep their business going as we change direction on what fuels our love affair with the auto.

    Just think, a natural gas or propane powered turbine Hybrid!!!

    :metal:

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Fact is that any incentives come out of my taxes. And, I don't want to pay higher taxes so somebody can buy a plug-in vehicle for $7500 less. I don't want to pay higher taxes to subsidize "green and expensive" energy or companies feeding off public subsidies in their production either.

    One more reason to not only not vote for this guy, but spend some time convincing my friends, colleagues and family members to vote out this socialist regime.

    • Agree 5
    • Disagree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    And the shrill morons that call themselves 'conservative' and 'fiscally responsible' will hammer away at this little subsidy whilst ignoring big-corn which is making us fat, and big-oil which is ruining our health and planet.

    • Agree 3
    • Disagree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    i agree Dwight. more reason why we won't end these deficits anytime soon unless the mentality of our elected changes...(probably requires a wide sweeping out of ~90% of them already there)

    • Agree 4
    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have no problems with companies wanting to market "green" products or people wanting to buy them. I do however have a problem government taking money from me to subsidize such transactions. I have never supported corn or ethanol subsidies either. I have no problems with anyone wanting to have solar panels on their roof or drive an electric car, but I don't want a portion of my taxes to be given to that person or the company selling solar products. Let the free market decide when alternatives to fossil fuel make economic sense and when transitions away from fossil fuel occurs. For now, fossil fuel is the cheapest, most available and most reliable source of energy anf we should continue to use it to the fullest until the market determines otherwise. I'll rather have that subsidy go towards a tax cut or paying down the nation debt. I don't want "green" and exhorbitant energy, I am interested in cheap and plentiful energy. To that end, we should allow oil, gas and coal to be vigorously explored and extracted within the USA.

    I do not believe in the Global Warming Hypothesis because the "science" doesn't add up. It doesn't add up because there is nothing unusual with the climate fluctuations we saw over the last 200 years -- they are perfectly within statistical norm for interglacial periods in the planet's history. It doesn't add up because there was no statistically significant colleration between temperatures and CO2 concentrations in the post industrial period. Fact is that CO2 s a trace gas in the terran atmosphere and 95% of of the green house effect is from water vapor, whereas CO2 and other "green houses gases combined accounts for the remaining 5%. Furthermore, androgyneous CO2 accounts only for a minority fraction of atmospheric CO2 and most practical purpose is inconsequential. For example, global temperatures fell precipitously from the late-40s to the 70s despite a continuous increase in CO2 concentrations in the air. Finally, global temperatures have been falling not increasing since 2007. It's pretty simple... there isn't enough solid, liquid or gaseous fossil fuel on earth for their consumption to significantly or permanently affect the global climate, hence there should be no actions to regulate or reduce CO2 emissions.

    This doesn't mean I am opposed to alternative energy per say. Fossil fuel is after all finite and will be sufficiently scarce to be uncomfortably expensive within the next 100 years. There will be a transition to something else. But that something else -- I assure you -- will not be wind or solar simply because these cannot generate enough power to provide more than 10~20% of mankind's total energy needs -- there isn't enough windy areas or enough practical real estate for solar collection. These also cannot generate power on demand with complete independence from time of day or the weather. As such, there is only one plausible energy future -- Nuclear. This is why I am opposed to all the green energy initiatives; they are a complete waste of tax dollars to chase after the wrong ball. Instead, we should be focusing on nuclear power generation, upgrading the electrical grid to facilitate distribution and making the diplomatic and military investments to ensure that be can secure access to Uranium and Plutonium 50~100 years from now. Signing a strong mutual defense and fissile materials supply treaty with Australia will be a start. Reinitiaiting rare earth metals exploration and mining in the USA will be another.

    • Agree 4
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    We could cut our debt and cost greatly by making one large change.

    Stop the 1.5 trillion a year spent on rent to other counteries for letting us have a military base and the cost associated with hosting soldiers there.

    Just like Global warming, there is NO SOLID FACTS that support the US being the World Police Force.

    We could pay down debt and focus on rebuilding our own infastructure.

    Bring the troops home and post them on the boarders with orders to shoot to kill anyone trying to sneak across. End result is a large drop in smuggling of drugs, illegals and all other forms of criminal activity. BENEFIT - Safe country and secure boarders.

    Close all overseas military bases, BENEFIT - considerably lower costs to the tax payers, smaller military and funds to focus on core infastrucure needs such as rebuilding our roads better, mass transit, clean water, Power grid, etc. This on top of focusing on growing our education system to be the best in the world again.

    • Agree 1
    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well, I think you have your numbers confused... The US tax revenue is about 2.3 trillion about 17~18% of GDP. The US Defense Budget is ~$680 billion. And, no, we are not spending $1.5 trilion of leases for foreign military bases. I don't have initmate knowledge of that expenditure, but 1.5 billion is more plausible.

    Do you really want to know where I stand politically? Well in Dwight's vision or America we'll have an 16% flat tax, federal spending capped at 15% of GDP with no deficit and borrowing allowed, a 20% reduction in government headcount over the next 10 years will be pursued. I'll phase out Social Security and Medicare over a 50 year period, transitioning to individual retirement saving accounts and a market based heatlhcare system focused on reducing the cost of care not trying to find one group to pick up the tab for another. Wellfare will be minimal and shameful on recipients. I'll not make tax payers pay for the investmen decisions of banks, companies or home owners. Green Energy Initiatives will end and we'll have domestic coal-oii-gas exploitation. A national right to work law will be passed and unions will no longer be able to compell membership or dues as a condition for employment. Education will be completely privatized. Wearing seat belts and helmets will be a decision that is left entirely up to the invidividual. And, yes, every adult that is not a felon, mentally diesease or handicapped will be required to own a firearm and may carry one concealed in public places should they elect to do so. Anyone unable to afford a gun will be issued a sidearm from military surplus stocks.

    And, yes, I'll reduce the size of the US military to roughly 75% its current size and realign it to be able fight and win massive, traditional conflict. We don't need counter insurgency capabilties, all we need to for the world to know that we are willing to employ war in the traditional fashion if they decide to antagonize us. By traditional, I mean WWII style traditional -- if we go to war it will be total war with the total destruction and/or unconditional surrender of the enemy being the only acceptable outcome.

    For the likes of Iran I'll televise a very simple message:-

    "To the government and citizens of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the United States of America brings you this message. The United States has decided that we cannot tolerate the existence of a Nuclear Armed Iran. This decision is not open to negotiation or discussion. We will no longer try to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear materials or refining nuclear fuel. However, if Iran is to assemble and test a nuclear weapon, the following sequence of events will occur. We will verify, beyond a reasonable doubt, the occurence of such a test with all available space, aerial and human intelligence. Upon such a verification an executive order will be issued. Somewhere in the world's oceans, a US Navy Ohio class ballistic missile submarine will receive her orders. 24 Trident II D5 missiles will leave her launch tubes and within 30 minutes, 96 475 kiloton W88 warheads will denoted on all military and population centers within the borders of your nation. Iran will cease to exist as nation and as a habitable plot of land. The human carnage will be horrifying, the environmental toll will be considerable and history will weep her saddest tears. But this outcome is as completely preventable as it will be inevitable. The choice is yours. So you do what you have to do and we'll do what we have to do. May God bless America and have mercy on all our souls."

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    If one looks at the facts of all defense/military spending, the budget for this year is estimated to be down to 1.415 trillion.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States

    The Estimated outlay for OverSeas Military Bases is $250 Billion.

    http://www.fpif.org/reports/the_cost_of_the_global_us_military_presence

    Right here is $250 Billion that can go to strengthan this country and help rebuild the infastructure compaired to putting it in other counteries pockets.

    List of all the bases

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

    Great review of "Cost of an Empire, Can we really afford 1000 bases?"

    http://www.alternet.org/world/130900/the_costs_of_empire:_can_we_really_afford_1,000_overseas_bases/

    Enjoy, :)

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Posts

    • I had never driven an Infiniti Q50 before, let alone ever really looked at them.  I also didn’t know much about these cars. I was supposed to be assigned a medium sized SUV, but remarked I wanted the luggage area to be hidden.  The rental agent told me they could not guarantee the presence of a retractable cover. (Why would they order a car without one or why would someone take one?  eBay?)  They didn’t have any SUVs anyway, and I got put into an Infiniti Q50.  I checked my phone to verify the cost would be covered by my insurance and the credit card parameters.  It came in at around $43,000.  That’s if new.  That said: “no worries.”  However, this unit would be a much-depreciated 3+ year model with 57,000 miles.  I relaxed.  At any rate, I put less than 500 miles on it over a week.  As one walks up to it, you can tell its heritage … and rather quickly.  You can instantly see similarities to the Nissan Altima in the instrument panel’s main cluster and in the switches much the same way that a CT6 by Cadillac and a Cruze by Chevrolet share dials and such.  However, the assembly and detailing are nicer in the Q50.  It had leather seating, which I don’t care for in a warm weather location, that was comfortably contoured and nicely finished.  The same could be said for the doors and other trim and fittings.  Inside, I liked the way that the dash, center stack, and console flowed together.  The scalloped tops of the dash hearken to those of the very last Impala, which had an attractive dashboard on various levels. The center stack is slightly like that of an Olds Aurora.  These comments go along with the often-cited commentary that this car is traditional and old school in a lot of ways, thus not breaking any new ground. The least favorable aspect of the interior is operating the various touch screen and stalk functions.  Some are redundant and confusing.  However, for one, it is possible to pull up a clock that resembles old school chronometer and have it sitting at the top of the center stack. On the interior's plus side, there are perfectly contoured and angled slots to store water bottles at the base of the front doors.  On the minus side, there is a remote latch release for the trunk, but not one for the fuel cap door.  (The fuel cap door remains closed if the car is locked.) I figured that this Infiniti would have a V6.  It was no ordinary V6, but 3.7 liters worth of V6 with twin turbochargers.  Rarely does one need this much power and, in one week, I got aggressive with the throttle in one merging situation and one passing situation.  It is up to the task and kicks out a little torque steer.  Its hum is a rather muted purr.  As would be expected in what is supposed to be a premium car, the automatic transmission is a geared unit.  It has 7 speeds.  The first 2 shifts can be felt while the remaining shifts are not.  However, if in stop and go traffic, and alternating speed, those early shifts can be a little less smooth as the transmission seems to hunt.  (It could also be how many miles were on the unit.) Why 7 speeds?  How about 6 … or 8?  I’m talking even numbers! With the powertrain comes the requirement for premium fuel.  Also, compared to many full-size Japanese cars working with 4 cylinders and turning in commendable gas mileage, this car with its V6 is a little thirsty. Ride, handling, and noise are related, but different enough.  The ride was supple and controlled, but not much more so than that of an uplevel 4-cylinder sedan.  Handling was better and this Infiniti tracked accurately and nimbly.  Also, the Q50 was fairly hushed, but I might have expected a little more isolation and a higher premium "feel" for the price jump from a Nissan to an Infiniti. Its exterior features that extra chrome and trim to make it uplevel within the Nissan family tree, yet the greenhouse is an almost familiar one.  This car delivered on one greenhouse dimension I’m fussy about - rearward vision from the driver’s vantage point is very good. I don’t know how the order sheet was configured when this car was purchased. There was an indicator for forward alerts, but I never got to experience it in action.  Also, whether on the rearview mirrors or inside of the front pillars, there was nothing to warn of side traffic and there weren’t parking assists that kicked in.  Perhaps they were there, but the car was not put in a situation where they’d engage.  On another rental car of a lower price point, those were always at work and perhaps a little too eager.  I almost prefer the latter. I didn’t read any reviews about this car before beginning the rental or during the rental.  I echo what they have to say.  For its niche, it doesn’t drum up much enthusiasm.  The best point is its more premium handling while the negatives are some difficulties in setting it up when first getting in and its slight thirstiness. If something about this overall package is appealing and a person connects with the Q50, then the consumer will probably go for it.  I don’t know how it will hold up and how much it will cost to service over the long haul.  While there are no Toyota and Nissan dealerships in Beverly Hills, California, as an example, there is a Lexus agency there while the Infiniti dealership seems to have closed.  Infiniti seems to want to ride the same wave that Lexus is riding, though I’d think piggybacking onto Toyota might be a more lauded genealogy. This is very much a personal decision and you’re on your own.  I was going to turn in the Q50 after a day to see if I could get something more familiar to me but decided to keep it.  Exchanging cars is a hassle.  Once past the learning curve and adjustments, it’s fairly easy to live with, but it’s neither a remarkable nor compelling vehicle. - - - - - PHOTOS FORTHCOMING
    • The two big things you need to know are How Acidic and how well it drains or not. I took a class last year on how to grow the American Chestnut. American Chestnuts like to be high on hilltops with very well-drained soils. There's a geomapping tool in Pennsylvania that uses known land and altitude data to populate the best places for Chestnut plantings, and my property is one of the best in the county.  What I used was a mix of planter soil and something called Pittmoss, better than Peatmoss. Its manufactured here and is mostly recycled newspaper. It's good for containers because it holds moisture better than peat.  Just put them in some 5-gallon buckets and let them go.  I need to move them around a bit soon. True genetic American Chestnuts are very hard to find. If you find them online, they are most likely crossbred with something else that is blight-resistant. I got my seeds directly from the Pennsylvania Chapter of the American Chestnut Foundation at one of their research centers at Penn State.
    • They look like sticks right now, lol. Their leaves are just starting to come back. But here's what they looked like going in.
    • My wife gets starter trees for landscaping, and we use 5-gallon plant buckets that have the holes already, but you could use a normal 5-gallon bucket and drill some holes and put it in a planter plate to hold water to help with feeding. We always just use miracle grow soil and the trees are doing really well. We have a bunch of Leyland Cypress trees to be planted once I finish the yard retaining wall and new fence.
    • Speaking of growing trees in buckets/pots, did you over-research what type of potting soil/media to use? I think I'm going down a wormhole of too much information and overthinking.  What did you end up using? 
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings