23 Votes

Are You Ready To Raise Gas Taxes To Promote Electric Car Adoption?

Agent009 submitted on 11/10/2009 Official Bell & Ross Timestamp: 3:15:00 PM

72 user comments | Category: Misc News | Source: | SOURCE: gm-volt.com

Electrification of the automobile brings with it some significant tax implications.

For one thing since costs of early models will be high, there is a government $7500 tax credit that buyers of the Volt will be eligible for.

However, some auto executives think even that isn’t enough. Proposed is a gas tax.

The idea is nothing new but the problem is at gas prices below $4 per gallon, electric cars are a hard sell to the mass population.

“Unless gas is $3.50 or $4 a gallon, consumers are not going to want to buy those cars,” said former GM board member Jerry York.

2009 SEMA AUTO SHOW Photo Gallery Now LIVE!

AutoSpies.com Photo Galleries

If you want to see your photos running on our homepage photo ticker, be sure to upload your photos on the go by sending them to Mobile@AutoSpies.com

Share on Facebook

There are photos and then there are AutoSpies.com photos!

AutoSpies.com is ranked number one on Google search for auto shows

Read Article

Are You Ready To Raise Gas Taxes To Promote Electric Car Adoption?

About the Author

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
— Agent009 (View Profile)

User Comments

No it's a stupid idea that will only cost people. It will cost people who don't want to waste their money buying a new car by making them spend more on fuel. It will waste people who want to buy a new car by either buying a gasoline one and still spending more on fuel, or by spending even more and getting an electric car. If they do decide to get an electric car it might not cost them directly as it will cost tax payers as they get a $7500 rebate for it.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 3:19:09 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

it's a great idea. what will cost people is doing nothing. U.S. consumes 25% of all world wide oil, 11% of all world wide oil going to private citizens in their daily commutes in USA

this will bankrupt USA in the next 2-3 decades if nothing changes. price of oil will double at some point (5 years? 10 years?). What will happen to the horribly energy inefficient USA at that point?

total collapse. this society is based on cheap oil and people driving a lot. when oil won't be cheap anymore, USA=finished. Unless, of course, we change.
— DinamoR (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 7:33:06 PM | | Votes: 0

DinamoR, you are one of the few people that actually gets stupider as time goes on.

Let's go with your ideal best case scenario where in the next 5 years the entire population converts over to totally electric or volt spec vehicles.

$7,500*300,000,000ppl*(0.765cars per person)/5years=$344.25 billion a year in government spending in addition to the already skyrocketing budget

The only way this program is going to benefit anyone is if a gas tax is implemented to help ease the burden of a minority of the population that converts over. If the majority does convert those tax dollars are going to have to double or even triple the cost of fuel at which point you are simply forcing people to spend excessive amounts of money if they don't convert and have them also spending excessive amounts of money if they do convert to afford a vehicle that is capable of being qualified for such large rebates. This whole system fights itself.

Next, you are giving the US economy 2-3 decades to become bankrupt? The recession only just started, you cannot extrapolate that far into the future and expect nothing to change. Also, this idea is based on the fact that the more foreign product you purchase the less money a country has. By purchasing brand new electric/hybrid vehicles (so far majorly owned by Japan a foreign company) you counteract a minimal loss to the country of purchasing foreign oil by purchasing a more expensive foreign car... which will drain the money the country has even faster.

DinamoR, I hold hyundaismoke's comments as more valuable to this community then the ignorant trash you spew.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 8:20:43 PM | | Votes: 0

(so far majorly owned by a certain Japanese "foreign company")
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 8:23:38 PM | | Votes: 0

joe, if gm sells 300,000,000 volts i think the cost per unit would decrease enough that a $7500 rebate wouldnt be required.

— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 8:54:53 PM | | Votes: 2

It just goes back to what i have been saying and will be saying as long as American blood runs through my veins: We need to go back to the times when we made almost everything ourselves giving almost anyone who wanted one a job and this includes our very own green tech all the way down to transportation we need to leave as much foreign goods off our shores as possible.
— 1UAW (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 9:31:24 PM | | Votes: 2

Sorry, i don't grow money on trees. Raising gas taxes could resolve the govt problem but i have a fixed salary. where am i supposed to get the extra cash for the gas or the expensive electric car? Also, having a plugin hybrid car is very unpractical where i leave. i park my car on the street, so how am i suppose to recharge my car?
— monster (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 9:39:25 PM | | Votes: 3

Yeah, check out how well Obama's billions in stimulus are helping to create jobs in the USA.

.......A massive, 600 megawatt wind farm is being built in Texas.

So far, so good.

And it's being built, in part, with Federal Stimulus funds.

Also nice.

And the wind mills and the 2000 manufacturing jobs have been contracted out to...........China.

The number of permanent American jobs created by the 1.5 billion dollar project?

30.........

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/11/4/800647/-2000-More-Green-Jobs-Sent-to-China-On-Our-Stimulus-Dollar
— Invisible (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 10:33:26 AM | | Votes: 3

that's only because we have let the chinese LEAPFROG US IN GREEN TECH. for now.

we DO NEED to develop our own windmill factories.
— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2009 6:25:26 AM | | Votes: 0

So invisable whats your plan to generate jobs?
— 1UAW (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2009 11:03:24 AM | | Votes: 1

nothing creative.
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2009 3:53:45 PM | | Votes: 1

Yes, ee need to reduce our reliance on foreign oil.
— thstone (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 3:41:08 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

Brilliant response. Cripple the consumer even more. Goes to show economics and environmentalism go together like oil and water.
— 100tnega (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 5:59:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 6

a moderate gas tax will be far from crippling. and environmentalism is going to play a significant role in the recovery of our economy.
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 6:56:32 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3

Cripple the consumer?

Average American household living in a city spends 18 cents of every dollar on transporation.

Average European household living in a city spends 8 cents of every dollar on transportation.

when price of oil will double, Europeans won't feel it as much because they don't depend on oil as much. So their costs could go to 12 cents of every dollar compared to 8. In USA? Costs will probably go to around 30 cents of every dollar compared to 18.

Who is crippling consumers? Are you retarded??? This inefficiency will DESTROY America. Bank on it.
— DinamoR (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 7:36:03 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -4

DinamoR, I'd like to see some links!
— Invisible (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 10:35:29 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

How many of you hippies ride a bike to work?

Tell you what, those worried about fuel usage should ride to work unless you are lucky enough to be an elitist. Once you ride your bike to work, you will realize that fuel is basically a 100% tax as it is.

As a cycle commuter and tax payer, why should I help some fat sack of shit buy an electric car?
Tell me!

I drive my cars for pleasure or emergency. Quadruple the cost of gas and my driving will not change. An electric car won't work for me as batteries need to be tended. Can't leave one sit for months at a time, then expect the car to work immediately when I need it to. Perhaps I could change my lifestyle to be more sedentary (read: more lazy), so the electric car can win for democrats. Hmmmm.
— Shredmo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 2:29:54 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

NO and an emphatic no for that matter. Raising the price of oil deliberately will put a hurting on young adults and college students already struggling with a soft job market and a limping U.S economy.
— 1UAW (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 4:41:18 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 4

Exactly, likely part of the reason the economy tanked was the spike in fuel prices. Common sense says the economy will suffer if people's money goes to fuel instead of consumer goods.
— commander104 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 6:28:02 PM | | Votes: 4

it was the SPIKE that was harmful. do you think a gradual increase would have had such effect?
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 6:51:08 PM | | Votes: -1

Yes
— 1UAW (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 9:16:20 PM | | Votes: 3

based on what?
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 9:25:00 PM | | Votes: -1

Lets see it took about a year and a half for gas to go from low to high. I dont know if this is a spike in your eyes or gradual?
— 1UAW (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 12:19:37 AM | | Votes: 3

hold on, just to make sure we're on the same page, are you saying you consider current prices high? i personally do not.

i considered them high in summer 08', and that was mostly due to the rate at which prices were increased. i think $3.50/gal for premium is reasonable (while at the high end).
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 9:07:06 AM | | Votes: -1

Prices are high if they are artificial. OK smart guy, we add $1 in tax to the fuel from where it is now. What happens if Oil goes to $250 a barrel over the next 3 months based on speculation?
Is gas expensive then?
Based on what. Go ride your damn bike... unless you are lucky enough to afford exactly, but no more than you propose, but are unwilling to do without govt. intervention. You all think it is EVERYONE ELSE that is the problem. Look in the mirror. God damn, unless you don't believe in god and are offended by the mere mention. If you are a Christian, no one cares if you are offended ;)
— Shredmo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 2:35:03 PM | | Votes: -1

everyone else IS the problem. and so am i. it would be hypocritical of me to preclude myself from blame.

and prices are already artificial. how many things do you buy on a daily basis have a REAL, unadulterated market price. some prices are artificially high (alcohol), and some are artificially low (beef).

the actual cost of goods is rarely reflected on by the market value...

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/JubaksJournal/time-for-capitalism-to-pay-its-way.aspx
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 9:11:23 PM | | Votes: 0

Why the heck would you raise taxes? Just stop buying from foreign manufacturers, and start doing your own manufacturing and selling in-country. You'll see the prices go blowing through the roof.

You'll be able to kill 3 birds with one stone:
-Wake Americans up to the fact that we need to buy oil from overseas because it's cheaper.
-Push people to buy up as many electric vehicles as they can when they see the prices climb to astronomical levels.
-And lastly, you'll rid yourself of the dependence on foreign oil, or not.
— Bmw8ter (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 5:26:05 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -4

Not sure why this is deboosted so much. In theory, it is dead on nuts accurate. +1.
— Shredmo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 2:37:06 PM | | Votes: 3

the deboosts are in recognition of his 'brilliance!'

yes, let's stop IMPORTING oil and MANUFACTURE OUR OWN!
— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2009 6:33:42 AM | | Votes: 2

This is a foreign auto lovers site based in California what do you expect.

"Not sure why this is deboosted so much. In theory, it is dead on nuts accurate. +1."
— 1UAW (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2009 11:08:21 AM | | Votes: 3

+1s for everyone.
— Bmw8ter (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2009 1:50:39 PM | | Votes: 2

selfish people who want to burn all the gas they can in their gas hogs love to bash california.

BUT... california now burns the LEAST amount of carbon fuels per dollar spent in the general economy. AND, if that state were a country, it would be FOURTH LARGEST in the world, by GDP.

california led the way in anti-smog, and later fuel efficiency initiatives. largely out of NECESSITY, because it was also the first to SUFFER FROM lung burning smog blanketing whole cities.

guess the retarded motorheads on this site (vs. INTELLIGENT motorheads) will never take fuel efficiency seriously until they start suffering more lung cancers and other pollution aggravated health problems.
— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 11/20/2009 6:15:01 AM | | Votes: 0

I want to oppose a gas tax, but honestly i think it would do some good if done correctly. I think that the higher price of gas in Europe has pushed European manufacturers to make more efficient engines, which I think results in an overall design philosophy and expertise that produces more thoughtful and refined auto designs. The tax shouldn't be too high, like it is in Europe. Last year, we saw that Americans will continue to buy gasoline at about the same rate up to the price point of $4-$4.50 per gallon.
I personally wouldn't mind paying a small gas tax IF the money is used to improve the highway infrastructure. The roads and interstate system need a lot of work and maintenance now. This is America, not India or China, we shouldn't ever have collapsing interstate bridges or pieces falling off of bridges.
I think a small gas tax would force some more technical innovation from the American car companies, and the money needs to be used to improve and maintain our roads and other vital transportation infrastructure.
— pushrod27 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 5:53:31 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5

canada and europe seem to be doing well, follow the leaders
— commander104 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 6:30:21 PM | | Votes: -3

"canada and europe seem to be doing well, follow the leaders"

Does thar inclued universal health care and free college?
— 1UAW (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 6:45:49 PM | | Votes: 5

"Does thar inclued universal health care and free college?"

It should.
— DinamoR (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 7:38:11 PM | | Votes: -1

I want free beer. That is it. But let us get real. I don't care if we have the smartest individuals in the world, if there is no incentive for people to apply themselves once educated, they will still be worthless.
— Shredmo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 4:21:12 PM | | Votes: 1

i strongly support it. ive been advocating this for years.

gas prices will rise regardless. the money can either be spent on domestic r&d or it can further line the pockets of oil barons. you choose. we are faced with the opportunity of shaving profits from OPEC, its as simple as that.

i believe there are 2 major factors that contributed to the fall of gm and chrysler motors: health care costs, and the profitability of large suvs. we are seeing CAFE standards dictate the direction of automobiles world wide. rather than CAFE standards dictating automotive design, i'd like to see higher gas prices doing so. lets not even pretend that "neither" is an option.

the european auto manufacturers seem to be less vulnerable (though not invincible) in the current economic climate. either socialized medicine is far greater than even they are letting on, or the ramifications of the gm suv blitzkrieg are far more reaching than we've realized. i tend to think its a mix of both.

it is my assertion that we would not be bailing out auto manufacturers right now if gas was more expensive over the past 15 years. designs would have been more efficient, and american manufacturers would have greater global market presence.

"but i dont feel like paying more"

well boo hoo. higher gas prices are on the way. we might as well get accustomed to it; have it be less of a shock, and stick it to OPEC in the mean time.

45,000,000 barrels of oil consumed in united states daily.

23 gallons of gasoline per barrel.

my proposed gas tax of a modest $0.05/gal yields...

$18,888,750,000 every year.

i think we need to be open to ways by which we generate deficit shrinking government revenue while having minimal effects on every day americans.
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 6:47:40 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

purely coincidence, i swear. i just stumbled upon this brief article.

http://2010.newsweek.com/top-10/tactical-blunders/gm-suv-mistake.html

— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 7:26:04 PM | | Votes: 0

That modest gas tax will only cover the $7500 tax credit for 1% of the population.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 8:29:15 PM | | Votes: 0

the $0.05 was just an example. i picked it as a rate that i thought would be nearly unnoticeable just to show what it would produce.

as well, i'm not married to the notion of the tax revenues going towards electric cars. as long as it goes towards increasing accessibility of modern energy or paying down deficit.
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 8:40:36 PM | | Votes: 1

joe,

i dont think we'd actually sell 3,000,000 volts every year in the states, though. so there would be excess in my example.

the top 10 selling cars of 2009 (not the best example sales year, i know) only amass 1.2 million units.

but i get your point.
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 8:48:30 PM | | Votes: 1

How about a fluctuating gas tax that changes every month or quarter (3 months) the is dictated by some sort of control/gauge like the US average of unemployment.
— 1UAW (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 9:23:36 PM | | Votes: 0

Not that I favor the tax which I dont but if it was a changing tax that would not hurt the alraedy troubled economy.

— 1UAW (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 9:26:55 PM | | Votes: 1

i'm open to ideas. i think gas could be free right now and it would have a marginal effect on unemployment.

— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 9:29:15 PM | | Votes: 0

Dumb Idea.
— LexSucks (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 6:52:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

this country needs to start preparing for high oil/gas prices. europe already has $6 a gallon gas, and their economy is not hurt because of it. that's because the average european household living in a city spends 8 cents of every dollar on transportation, compared to 18 cents for the average american household in a city.

this will mean a disaster for the U.S. economy if nothing is changed, when oil prices rise (and the will). U.S. has to become much more energy efficient, or simply lose it's economic competitiveness in the next 2 decades.
— DinamoR (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 7:30:07 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

You are a fear monger. Do you think everyone else has your same concern?
How 'bout we prepare for the situation, when it begins?
I could prepare for my wife's untimely death by killing her, but I don't see how that is a solution to anything. Go ride your bike. Prepare yourself. This doesn't need to be a group hand-holding event.
— Shredmo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 3:39:17 PM | | Votes: 0

preparing for a situation when it begins is hardly a strategy.

if the pilgrims prepared for winter weather in december, they wouldnt have lasted a single winter.
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 9:23:17 PM | | Votes: 2

True, but your solution to the fuel problem would be like the pilgrims starving themselves to prepare for winter, without stockpiling food.
— Shredmo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2009 2:21:07 PM | | Votes: 0

so what dollar amount (per gallon) is the line between starving ourselves and preparing for leaner times?

i wasnt proclaiming to know exactly where the line should be drawn. just that a line needed to be drawn.

we have established that preparations must be made. what is your proposal, if mine is so preposterous?
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/12/2009 4:06:18 PM | | Votes: 3

Think for a second, do you think we consumers are the only one using fuel what about airlines, shipping companies, and trasportation companies.

They would be the ones getting hurt the most. We need to put the electric cars out there like we are doing the volt, give incentives, make sure it does not fall apart, have a infrastructure to support and wait until everyone adpots it, just like they are with hybrids.

We dont need to playing with fuel cost or taxes.
— achiles (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 8:31:23 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

Please stop posting till you turn on your brain. Let's see if I get this right: give incentives....but don't tax. These magic incentives that come out of the air......interesting concept. Wait a sec...incentives are paid for by taxes.... ya can't have one without the other. If you tax gas....it is an INCENTIVE to buy a more fuel efficient vehicle. The more fuel efficient vehicle you buy....the less tax you pay. You think it's a coincidence that people by Corollas and Civics when the price of gas goes up? It's a joke that people can't see the relationship between the two. Gas is a luxury brother. And it's going fast.
— 800over (View Profile)

Posted on 11/10/2009 11:10:41 PM | | Votes: 5

And more crack for HyundaiSmoke!
— 1UAW (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 12:15:36 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

HyundaiSmoke, why won't you die?
— pushrod27 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 3:00:23 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3

Not sure if Hyundai is joking or if he is serious. Look all, now that Obama is in office, you don't have to try and destroy America anymore. I would think you want things to look up, now that your guy is in.
— Shredmo (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 4:18:40 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

shrewmoe--

you think america is on the way to destruction with obama? what a fool!

it was ALREADY ON A FAST TRACK to it, because we had a village idiot and a warmonger running --make that RUINING-- the economy over 8 years. obama is only doing damage control, and HOPEFULLY can work on FIXING things eventually.

so we went to war to destroy bin Laden? and purported nukes? both turned out to be phantom objectives. we HAVE however gone quite a ways to DESTROYING OURSELVES under the Dumbya administration.
— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 11/20/2009 6:30:38 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

So people here are advocating paying fuel surcharges for shipping, airplane flights, mass groung transportation (buses, trains, etc.). Not everyone wants, or needs an electric car so why should we all pay?

How about we tap our resources in Texas, or drill more up in Alaska, or in the Gulf or off California. Everyone thinks that we would suddenly have a coastline littered with rigs, which is BS. Technology in drilling has become very advanced. They can drill sideways for miles to avoid disrupting environments directly above the oil, they have made viable the shale oil that we have loads of here. Spur an industry and growth in the manufacturing sector of energy production with these ideas and you can keep prices the same or lower them even.

But far left crazies think we should be FORCED into buying cars we don't want. Statistics prove that people in a majority don't want electric or hybrid cars. When gas went up over $4 a gallon people bought the cars, gas goes down and sales drop sharply. It's a very noticeable correlation which says people are buying the cars based on necessity instead of actually wanting them.

It's not a good policy to punish everybody for a fake climate change that is NOT happening. I'm a firm non-believer that we have global warming. The Earth goes in cycles and we are in one of them, that is all. It was actually just released today that even though we put more emissions into the air, the plants and trees of the Earth actually absorb more than half of it. Seems like they are loving it as they use CO2 to survive and thrive.

I'll plant a tree, buy a cow and drive a truck, thanks!
— Whelan (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 11:04:37 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

Whether or not global warming is factual has nothing to do with the fact the world is producing less and less oil each year, and consuming more and more. NOTHING will stop the price of gas from going up. You can blame it on whomever you like.....but people who are "forced" to buy the fuel efficient cars are going to do so again and in greater numbers. Of course people are driving the biggest cars they can. Everybody would be shitting in Gold toilet bowls if they could. The price of gas determines the size of cars people drive. (see Europe vs Saudi Arabia). It's not a conspiracy....it's supply and demand.
— 800over (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 3:44:05 PM | | Votes: 3

you can be forced into buying cars by the far left crazies today, or be on foot in a few decades.

a little planning ahead might keep our society mobile.
— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 9:20:46 PM | | Votes: 3

Thank you HyundaiSmoke, your opinion is helping to further broaden my conventional stereotype of ecomentalists.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 10:28:41 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

2012 will be the year, I am making my bunker in the Rockies.
— truckman (View Profile)

Posted on 11/13/2009 4:27:11 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

"2012 will be the year, I am making my bunker in the Rockies."

- Just like Y2K? LOL!!!

— LexSucks (View Profile)

Posted on 11/13/2009 12:31:25 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

F No!
— supermoto (View Profile)

Posted on 11/11/2009 3:29:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

sez another Pushrod Pinhead...
— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 11/20/2009 6:38:33 AM | | Votes: 1

pushrod:
"I think a small gas tax would force some more technical innovation from the American car companies, and the money needs to be used to improve and maintain our roads and other vital transportation infrastructure."

a smart statement. my apologies pushrod, for the comment above (more directed at my ole pinhead pal who thinks pushrod motors are as efficient as ohc types).

but you DO NEED to face the reality of global warming. it's REAL. and the further north you go, the more people recognize this.
— XYZZ (View Profile)

Posted on 11/20/2009 6:46:23 AM | | Votes: 2

You don't even have a clue.....You think ANWAR is the solution? ANWAR would be like strapping on a parachute with 1 square foot of material.....it'll slow you down, but it won't make a difference.
— 800over (View Profile)

Posted on 11/13/2009 8:33:07 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

Add your Comments

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters): [img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent001.myautospies.com/images/sample.jpg[/img]

Email Me When Someone Replies To My Message

Are You Ready To Raise Gas Taxes To Promote Electric Car Adoption?

About the Author

User Comments

Add your Comments

Submit an article

Photo Galleries

Cars

Autoshows

Latest Articles