My contracts details:-

Wasim Uddin
51/1 Nobendo Nath Boshak Lane, Nawabpur, Dhaka-1100.
Phone:-008801717212653 Or. 00880152390442
Email:- wasim­­­­­_uddin01@yahoo.com

The whole idea of high taxes on cars “punishing” the poor is ridiculous. If you want to pollute the environment you should pay. It should be difficult and expensive if people want use things that pollute the environment. Tax breaks should be given to environmentally friendly alternatives. That way people would be rewarded for making an environmentally friendly choice. Those cars old or new that pollute more should be taxed higher.

High taxes make it so everybody can’t afford a car. I applaud that. People should use public transportation. Look at the big picture.

You say it’s the poor that suffer because of high car taxes. It’s the whole WORLD everybody that suffers from pollution – rich, poor, fat, ugly, stupid, handsome. If you damage something (via pollution in this case) YOU SHOULD HAVE TO PAY whether you are poor, rich, middle class. If you can’t afford to pay to compensate for the damage then you shouldn’t do it.

“”Certainly not, and I never said it would.”

“So it???s inevitable no matter what we do?”

Pretty much. It’s very hard to find hydrocarbon resources the production of which yields as high an energy profit ratio as the production of conventional crude oil can. The availability of substitutes is such that it can only make the inevitable decline less steep than it would otherwise be. I’m guessing the available substitutes will keep the price of oil from crossing the $200 mark per barrel for the next 10-15 years. It’s not only a question of supply. Demand is also growing because many large developing countries are becoming industrialized rapidly.

The only things that could allow us to continue business as usual would be a crash program of building breeder reactor farms. Too bad it takes liquid metal cooled fast neutron reactors to breed signifigant amounts of fissionable nuclear fuel. Those things are too expensive and unreliable to be introduced as producers of bulk electricity at this point. Commercial fusion power would be cool, but unfortunately, that’s still in the domain of sci-fi.

“Markku, I think you???re avoiding my questions here. Just come on out and say it, it???s okay??¦ ???You???re right Phil, the poor will get railed. But SOMEONE needs to ???take one for the team??? in order to save the global oil reserves.?? C???mon, just say it ”

Of course the poor will get poorer! EVERYBODY will be impoverished. And it’s not my fault or anybody elses fault.

Please try to understand that the infrastructure that we build today will outlast the remaining oil reserves by several DECADES or more. If we fail to anticipate and prepare for this, especially the poor will be really fucked. Not getting to drive is NOTHING compared to the troubles that await us if we misallocate our precious energy capital that we still have on a living arrangement that becomes useless after that capital is spent.

Besides, I’m wondering what gave you such a strong idea that driving is some sort of a human right.

Certainly not, and I never said it would.

So it’s inevitable no matter what we do?

Markku, I think you’re avoiding my questions here. Just come on out and say it, it’s okay… “You’re right Phil, the poor will get railed. But SOMEONE needs to ‘take one for the team’ in order to save the global oil reserves.” C’mon, just say it

And like some tax hike in Finland is going to prevent that?”

Certainly not, and I never said it would.

“”It???s only a matter of smooth vs. abrupt transition.

“Right, so first we transition the poor away from cars, then we transition the middle class away, then the rich. Is that the plan?”

Physical fuel shortages eventually transition all but the richest away from car dependency completely irregardless of what we do. Effectively the car tax lessens the pain of the inevitable transition because it prevents our car addiction from becoming as severe as it would otherwise become. In a typical Finnish city, owning a car is very much optional, whereas in a typical American city not owning a car makes life very difficult. We may in large part thank taxes for making driving less attractive. Thus our living arrangement is already better suited for the future world of very expensive motor fuel than, say, North American socities.

And like some tax hike in Finland is going to prevent that?

It???s only a matter of smooth vs. abrupt transition.

Right, so first we transition the poor away from cars, then we transition the middle class away, then the rich. Is that the plan?

But it???s the poor who suffer.”

You still don’t get it, do you. Mass motoring will soon be a thing of the past regardless of what do about it. It’s only a matter of smooth vs. abrupt transition. The sooner we begin preparations for a world in which driving is prohibitively expensive, the less painful the transition will be when geological constraints really kick in. That is, when the relentless downward slide from the current plateau of production capacity begins.

But it’s the poor who suffer, the middle class just struggle, and the wealthy continue flying around in their SUVs.

“Not at all. I don???t smoke, yet I think smoking should be perfectly legal. I don???t do drugs, yet I think drugs should be perfectly legal etc??¦ – It???s called ???principles”, something the left and right know very little about.”

Diminishing the incentives in place to care about fuel consumption would be sheer idiocy when the world is about to face the peaking of conventional crude oil production capacity. Global oil production capacity already seems to have reached a plateau at slightly below 85 million barrels per day. Despite the recent price hike, not even the Saudis seem to be able to increase their production enough to ease the price. It seems that there is no producer left in the world with signifigant spare capacity.

Encouraging people to increase their car dependency in this situation would be downright criminal!

“”Like a true populist, you spew bogus arguments like the claim that removing the car tax would enable people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles together with demanding that the fuel tax be abolished.”

What???s so ???bogus?? about that?”

It’s at odds with both logic and empiria.

The more expensive fuel is, the more of a factor fuel efficiency becomes for buyers of cars. Economics 101.

Not at all. I don’t smoke, yet I think smoking should be perfectly legal. I don’t do drugs, yet I think drugs should be perfectly legal etc… – It’s called “principles”, something the left and right know very little about.

Like a true populist, you spew bogus arguments like the claim that removing the car tax would enable people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles together with demanding that the fuel tax be abolished.

What’s so “bogus” about that?

Like a true populist, you spew bogus arguments like the claim that removing the car tax would enable people to buy more fuel efficient vehicles together with demanding that the fuel tax be abolished.

Yeah, when a liberal is looking out for the poor and blames the left-wingers – it’s “ignorant populism”. Riiiight.