Federal Budget 2007

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Maybe not, but campers or boats are hardly "need" items.

Neither is a car.

I'm sure a good 70% in this city would be able to take the train/bus to work. I guess we should just start taxing extra everyone who drives an automobile.

and technically...everyone should drive a little 4cyl instead of v6 car. Afterall...you don't need that extra power. Tax 6 cyl engines too?!

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Neither is a car.

I'm sure a good 70% in this city would be able to take the train/bus to work. I guess we should just start taxing extra everyone who drives an automobile.

And if they can afford to buy a high-consumption vehicle, they can afford the levy, too.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Neither is a car.

I'm sure a good 70% in this city would be able to take the train/bus to work. I guess we should just start taxing extra everyone who drives an automobile.

and technically...everyone should drive a little 4cyl instead of v6 car. Afterall...you don't need that extra power. Tax 6 cyl engines too?!

Everyone who is driving is being taxed. Gas tax?

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by TimSJ

just a fun little thing for those saying Hybrid is the saviour of the world...

Interesting article. But it really only focuses on the nickel as the source of the environmental problem. My understanding is that CO2 is the factor behind global warming, not acid rain. Obviously the Hummer is putting out substantially more CO2 than the Toyota, especially considering that the Hummer is on the road 3 times longer than the Toyota. As an aside I have a hard believing that a GM will last 300,000 miles.

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

And if they can afford to buy a high-consumption vehicle, they can afford the levy, too.

Way to stamp a generalization on things.

I don't even have a camper but i'm speaking for several families that do.

Is it so wrong to want to give your family a bit extra? A lot of families cannot afford the fights/hotels/food/exchange rate conversions/activities to do on vacation...so a legitimate investment would be a trailer to take the kids somewhere...give them a little extra you know? Now i know your going to turn this around and say giving the kids a little extra isn't a "need" or simply say go tenting but thats beside the point.

Bottom line is, you shouldn't be punished for striving for a little extra fun, nor should you be looked at as a person with handfuls of money simply because you own an SUV/trailer, nor should you be faced with extra fines and levys for doing so.

Just another one of those small print extras in this "free" country of ours.

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by Firefly

Everyone who is driving is being taxed. Gas tax?

I'm talking extra

Everyone pays gas tax, but everyone doesn't pay extra taxes because of engine size. My point was, tax automobile drivers even more, on top of gas tax, simply because they drive. Afterall, it's not a "need" in bobbleheads opinion.

[ken0042]

I suppose the one question for you eazyduzzit, what do you think the ratio of SUV owners is to camper trailer owners?

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I suppose the one question for you eazyduzzit, what do you think the ratio of SUV owners is to camper trailer owners?

I'm in favor or extra taxes for those who drive big engine vehicles out of luxory instead of need. Maybe implement a system where you have to prove you need the bigger engine or something.

My argument is those who are driving them out of need, and not for a fun time, are getting thre raw end of the stick.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

I'm talking extra

Everyone pays gas tax, but everyone doesn't pay extra taxes because of engine size. My point was, tax automobile drivers even more, on top of gas tax, simply because they drive. Afterall, it's not a "need" in bobbleheads opinion.

Well a point could be made that because you have a larger engine you inherently would use more gas, creating more of a demand, thus driving up the cost of gas which is then passed down to me, a 4 cylinder gas user.

[ken0042]

Just playing devil's advocate here, but if you have to prove a "need", and a camper would be a need, then most SUV owners would buy a cheap trailer to save themselves the levy. Because you would then have an odd number of trailers being bought, demand would go up and those fixed income travel trailer buyers would end up paying more for the trailer.

As with many taxes, sometimes it isn't 100% perfect for everybody.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Way to stamp a generalization on things.

I don't even have a camper but i'm speaking for several families that do.

Is it so wrong to want to give your family a bit extra? A lot of families cannot afford the fights/hotels/food/exchange rate conversions/activities to do on vacation...so a legitimate investment would be a trailer to take the kids somewhere...give them a little extra you know? Now i know your going to turn this around and say giving the kids a little extra isn't a "need" or simply say go tenting but thats beside the point.

Bottom line is, you shouldn't be punished for striving for a little extra fun, nor should you be looked at as a person with handfuls of money simply because you own an SUV/trailer, nor should you be faced with extra fines and levys for doing so.

Just another one of those small print extras in this "free" country of ours.

But an SUV isn't a need if you're only going to go camping 5 times a year. You could rent an SUV for that weekend and it would be much cheaper than paying for the gas guzzling it does year round. So you've bought an SUV instead of a car, AND a trailer for a few weekends a year? Methinks you can afford more than you're letting on if that's the case. (Not you, but your friends.) Shrink the size of your vehicle, shrink your payments, your gas, etc, and use that money to rent your SUV and trailer twice a year, in addition to saving the environment all those emissions from driving a pig all year.

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Just playing devil's advocate here, but if you have to prove a "need", and a camper would be a need, then most SUV owners would buy a cheap trailer to save themselves the levy. Because you would then have an odd number of trailers being bought, demand would go up and those fixed income travel trailer buyers would end up paying more for the trailer.

As with many taxes, sometimes it isn't 100% perfect for everybody.

Your saying the majority of those who buy SUVs would go out and pay 3+k to save a 4k levy?

I don't think there are many trailers that demand a v8 due to weight out there for less than 4k.

Not to mention...you would be paying extra for the tow package...it would more than likely calculate out to be more than the levy it's self. lol

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

I don't think there are many trailers that demand a v8 due to weight out there for less than 4k.

True. However my new arguement is that somebody who had considered maybe buying a $10K used trailer might be more inclined to do so if they knew it would save them $4K on the SUV.

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by FireFly

But an SUV isn't a need if you're only going to go camping 5 times a year. You could rent an SUV for that weekend and it would be much cheaper than paying for the gas guzzling it does year round. So you've bought an SUV instead of a car, AND a trailer for a few weekends a year? Methinks you can afford more than you're letting on if that's the case. (Not you, but your friends.) Shrink the size of your vehicle, shrink your payments, your gas, etc, and use that money to rent your SUV and trailer twice a year, in addition to saving the environment all those emissions from driving a pig all year.

I'm not claiming I'm poor, nor am i claiming i'm rich. I'm not making myself out not to be able to afford a 4k levy. I just think it's ridiculous whether i can pay it or not.

Again, your generalizing things.

When you buy a camper...your buying it for long term... 10+ years. I know people who have had trailers some 20+ years. Renting a truck or SUV to haul it every single time when you could be leaving the country in a good chunk of those and racking up serious miles is just not relistic. It's quite clear either you don't have a family, never rented a vehicle or really have none of this in prespective..not that these are bad things...

I highly doubt it would be cheaper.

Originally Posted by ken0042

True. However my new arguement is that somebody who had considered maybe buying a $10K used trailer might be more inclined to do so if they knew it would save them $4K on the SUV.

Fine, i'll give you that.

But the amount of people who would do this would be very minimal so it shouldn't warrent out my idea

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

Bottom line is, you shouldn't be punished for striving for a little extra fun, nor should you be looked at as a person with handfuls of money simply because you own an SUV/trailer, nor should you be faced with extra fines and levys for doing so.

What makes campers so special? If I want to fly to Victoria and stay in a hotel room, I'm going to be paying lots of extra taxes (all the things tacked onto my ticket) and both PST and GST for my hotel room. Shouldn't I get a break?

You can apply the "you shouldn't be punished for striving for a little extra fun" to pretty much everything. Like booze, for example. Some people like some booze to have a little extra fun, but they are punished for it.

Boats and campers are luxury items like everything. They shouldn't be exempt for the Fun Factor.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

I know trucks are exempt, but you can't really fit a family into a truck anyway.

I sat in a Nissan Titan a couple of weeks ago. Those things are monsters! Comfortably sit five people, or four people and a dog. It was four separate doors, it is practically an SUV. I would say that it would fit the average family fine. But if you have more than three kids, it would be a problem. But trucks are getting pretty huge these days.

[eazyduzzit]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

What makes campers so special? If I want to fly to Victoria and stay in a hotel room, I'm going to be paying lots of extra taxes (all the things tacked onto my ticket) and both PST and GST for my hotel room. Shouldn't I get a break?

Your examples always make me laugh

I payed GST on my SUV, i payed GST on my trailer (if i had one) and i payed GST on my boat (althought i bought it in Florida)

I payed GST on the gas it took to get to the destination, and i too payed GST on all booze in between.

I just substituted an airplane for a camper.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

I'm not claiming I'm poor, nor am i claiming i'm rich. I'm not making myself out not to be able to afford a 4k levy. I just think it's ridiculous whether i can pay it or not.

Again, your generalizing things.

Actually, I think this is the first time I've commented to you, so no, I'm not generalizing AGAIN.

When you buy a camper...your buying it for long term... 10+ years. I know people who have had trailers some 20+ years.

Duh. I didn't say don't buy the camper. Campers don't require gas so there's no levy on a camper, unless you're buying a motorhome.

Renting a truck or SUV to haul it every single time when you could be leaving the country in a good chunk of those and racking up serious miles is just not relistic. It's quite clear either you don't have a family, never rented a vehicle or really have none of this in prespective..not that these are bad things...

I highly doubt it would be cheaper.

Thanks for generalizing. There are places you can rent vehicles from that do not charge by the mile or kilometre. Maybe check one of those places out. In addition, even if you do decide to rent by milage, do you drive out of the country every time you camp, or are you more likely to camp more often in an area close by? For a person who goes camping every weekend, absolutely, buy your SUV, buy your camper. Go nuts even. But for your imaginary family (I did read that part, you must've missed when I said "Not you"), you wanted them to have "a bit extra", as you put it. A bit extra is not owning a camper as well as the suv to tow it every weekend. A bit extra would be camping once or twice a year. Go buy a tent. A bit extra is not an extra $50/week in gas and $100/month in car payments. That's a lot extra.

If you don't like the levy, don't pay it. I'm sure there are more cost effective ways to have your vacation if you want to... as I said, buy a tent. Then you don't need a vehicle to tow a camper.

[Lurch]

The whole budget reeks of complicated measures, with the tax/levy just one example, and people seem to want to make them more complicated. I despise directed tax breaks such as the ridiculous transit commuter tax break from last year, and this newest measure follows it up nicely. If you want to penalize SUV and other gas guzzlers, tax the gas. If you want to give more money to the provinces, give them internal taxing rights and stop screwing around with ever more complicated transfers. If you want to get more people on transit, pay for it to be built and subsidize it directly if necessary. All else equal, simpler is better.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by eazyduzzit

and technically...everyone should drive a little 4cyl instead of v6 car. Afterall...you don't need that extra power. Tax 6 cyl engines too?!

It's a lot more complicated than just 4cyl vs V6.

Take the fuel consumption of a Toyota Rav4.. not a huge vehicle by any means.

Fuel Consumption Rating: L/100 Km (mpg) - City/Highway
4 Cyl: 10.1 / 7.8 (28 / 36)
V6: 11.1 / 7.7 (25 / 37)

The gas consumption is very similar in both the city and on the highway.

IMO, the way that the gov't has attacked fuel efficiency is the right way, as long as it doesn't push people towards Diesel. The next step should be to introduce emissions monitoring (ie: yearly measuring of tailpipe emissions) of ALL vehicles (not just personal ones) and tying the requirement to the registration the vehicle. Have pollution problems? Get it serviced or get a cleaner vehicle.