The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Gun Dog Broker
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36

Thread: Costco remove plug-ins for electric cars-No usage

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by charly_t View Post
    Thank you, Blackstone. Interesting how these things work. So it does help someone buy a car that falls in the correct list of car models.
    I'm sure some of the people buying an electric car would not be able to afford it otherwise, but there will be buyers that could afford to buy one without a tax credit. The Fed. has offered tax credits for years on purchases of energy efficient products (home appliances, windows, insulation, etc.). If you install a solar panel or geothermal heat pump in your home, you can get a tax credit of up to 30% of the purchase price. This tax credit just happens to be for electric cars. There was a similar credit for hybrid cars and vehicles that ran on CNG or LPG.

    Energy efficient products usually do cost more than less efficient products. The idea of the tax credit is to give people incentive to purchase the more efficient product, which helps conserve resources down the road. In the long run, they save everyone money. I'm not saying the tax credit is right or wrong. I'm just pointing out how they work.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sandyg View Post
    So the government takes in $7000 less than it ordinarily would have, effectively subsidizing your buying an electric car. Semantics...

    Kind of like saying they were going to spend 10% more, but due to spending cuts we're only going to spend 8% more.

    LMAO through the tears for the future of our country...
    Itís not just semantics. There is a very real difference between a tax credit and a tax subsidy. An example of a tax subsidy is a subsidized student loan where the Gov. pays the tax on a student loan the entire time the student is in school. Six months after they graduate, or are no longer eligible for the loan, they have to start paying the loan back. However, they do not pay any interest that was charged on the loan while they were in school. So, in effect, taxpayers pay the interest on those loans, and we are subsidizing that studentís education.

    That is not how a tax credit or tax deduction works. The Gov. doesnít pay $7,000 to the person that bought the car. They just do not collect as much in taxes from that person. If the person doesnít owe $7,000 in taxes, the Gov. doesnít give them the difference. So, there is no subsidy.

    So, unless I misunderstand what youíre saying, your logic dictates that every tax deduction or tax credit becomes a subsidy because they cause the Gov. to take in less in taxes. So, as a taxpayer, I subsidize the buying of homes for everyone that claims mortgage interest or points they paid on the mortgage. I subsidize the purchases of people that install an energy efficient dishwasher, refrigerator, furnace or windows in their home, if they claim their tax credit. And, I also subsidize every family that has children and claims them on their taxes.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,427

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackstone View Post
    Itís not just semantics. There is a very real difference between a tax credit and a tax subsidy. An example of a tax subsidy is a subsidized student loan where the Gov. pays the tax on a student loan the entire time the student is in school. Six months after they graduate, or are no longer eligible for the loan, they have to start paying the loan back. However, they do not pay any interest that was charged on the loan while they were in school. So, in effect, taxpayers pay the interest on those loans, and we are subsidizing that studentís education.

    That is not how a tax credit or tax deduction works. The Gov. doesnít pay $7,000 to the person that bought the car. They just do not collect as much in taxes from that person. If the person doesnít owe $7,000 in taxes, the Gov. doesnít give them the difference. So, there is no subsidy.

    So, unless I misunderstand what youíre saying, your logic dictates that every tax deduction or tax credit becomes a subsidy because they cause the Gov. to take in less in taxes. So, as a taxpayer, I subsidize the buying of homes for everyone that claims mortgage interest or points they paid on the mortgage. I subsidize the purchases of people that install an energy efficient dishwasher, refrigerator, furnace or windows in their home, if they claim their tax credit. And, I also subsidize every family that has children and claims them on their taxes.
    FINALLY. I wondered if you understood. If you understand your own last paragraph, then you do. Those who can't or choose not to take advantage of these deductions and credits MUST MAKE UP THE LOSS BY PAYING HIGHER TAXES. Those 70,000 pages of tax codes does exactly that. Oil depletion allowances, home mortages, child deductions, farm credits,deductions or subsities, ect. those you like you call deductions. those you don't like you call subsities or loopholes but in reality they are all the same.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caryalsobrook View Post
    FINALLY. I wondered if you understood. If you understand your own last paragraph, then you do. Those who can't or choose not to take advantage of these deductions and credits MUST MAKE UP THE LOSS BY PAYING HIGHER TAXES. Those 70,000 pages of tax codes does exactly that. Oil depletion allowances, home mortages, child deductions, farm credits,deductions or subsities, ect. those you like you call deductions. those you don't like you call subsities or loopholes but in reality they are all the same.
    The definitions of a deduction, tax credit, or subsidy does not change based on whether or not I like them. There are differences between them, and that is why their definitions differ. While I understand your hypothesis, I have never seen anything indicating that taxes are raised to compensate for tax deductions or tax credits. Perhaps there is a way to form a premise to support that, but I can almost guarantee there would be one that appeared to disprove it as well. But, that is a question for Economists to debate.

    So, conversely, do you believe your taxes would be lowered if tax credits and deductions were eliminated? I remember the tax reform act of 1986. It eliminated the deduction for interest paid on credit cards, car loans, and other personal items. It also took away a lot of other middle-income tax deductions. All it did for me was take away deduction I previously qualified for. At that point in my life, those were the only kinds of deductions I qualified for, so all it did was increase my tax burden.

    I am not arguing for or against tax credits or tax deductions. I am just pointing out they are being inaccurately portrayed as subsidies.

  5. #25
    Senior Member huntinman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,198

    Default

    It's a moot point. They don't sell enough of them to worry about whether it is a subsidy, deduction, rebate or just a plain old waste of money.
    Bill Davis

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by huntinman View Post
    It's a moot point. They don't sell enough of them to worry about whether it is a subsidy, deduction, rebate or just a plain old waste of money.
    Thank you for your input, ole great soothsayer!

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,427

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackstone View Post
    The definitions of a deduction, tax credit, or subsidy does not change based on whether or not I like them. There are differences between them, and that is why their definitions differ. While I understand your hypothesis, I have never seen anything indicating that taxes are raised to compensate for tax deductions or tax credits. Perhaps there is a way to form a premise to support that, but I can almost guarantee there would be one that appeared to disprove it as well. But, that is a question for Economists to debate.

    So, conversely, do you believe your taxes would be lowered if tax credits and deductions were eliminated? I remember the tax reform act of 1986. It eliminated the deduction for interest paid on credit cards, car loans, and other personal items. It also took away a lot of other middle-income tax deductions. All it did for me was take away deduction I previously qualified for. At that point in my life, those were the only kinds of deductions I qualified for, so all it did was increase my tax burden.

    I am not arguing for or against tax credits or tax deductions. I am just pointing out they are being inaccurately portrayed as subsidies.
    OOps, I was wrong. You don't get it. I don't borrow to buy cars, never did. I don't ever owd on a credit card at the end of the month, never did. So your taxes went up and mine didn't. You think it didn't make a difference? Well then raising the income tax on the rich would not make a difference then would it?. So then why do the dems want to raise it on them????????

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,129

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caryalsobrook View Post
    OOps, I was wrong. You don't get it. I don't borrow to buy cars, never did. I don't ever owd on a credit card at the end of the month, never did. So your taxes went up and mine didn't. You think it didn't make a difference? Well then raising the income tax on the rich would not make a difference then would it?. So then why do the dems want to raise it on them????????
    Actually, I do get it. You want the opportunity to rant about what you perceive as unfair tax deductions and credits that cost you money. In order to do that, you try to portray them as subsidies that affect you as a tax payer. If you want to continue believing that, itís okay with me. The last line of my post that you quoted said it all for me. I pointed out the inaccuracies, and Iím done with it.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,427

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackstone View Post
    Actually, I do get it. You want the opportunity to rant about what you perceive as unfair tax deductions and credits that cost you money. In order to do that, you try to portray them as subsidies that affect you as a tax payer. If you want to continue believing that, itís okay with me. The last line of my post that you quoted said it all for me. I pointed out the inaccuracies, and Iím done with it.
    No, my "RANTING" was that if one liked the tax benefits, they were called tax credits or deductions. If one doesn't like the tax benefits, then they are called subsities or tax loopholes. Like progressives, liberals, socialists, and Marxists, Subsities, loopholes, tax deductions, and tax credits are different breeds but the same species.

    I will just rant a little more. As my father used to say, "you can't fix stupid".

  10. #30
    Junior Member krmont22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackstone View Post
    It appears Cosco was ahead of their time. Iím surprised they installed them 15 years ago. There couldnít have been many electric vehicles on the road. Iím sure their charging stations were obsolete, and wouldnít work with new electric vehicle technology very well. On the other side, Cracker Barrel is installing charging stations at their restaurants. They are starting to roll them out at 24 locations in TN. I guess time will tell if that is successful.
    no matter what time these vehicles or charger were institutionalized, the problem Getting the power on the road itself is a problem. To date, no one has created a lightweight, compact battery capable of covering average driving distances without recharging from a stationary source. In plainer words an electric car can do the job but it won't get you far...!
    The hybrid car guy, sailing in his yacht found a better world right here i this world...!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •