02-15-2013, 04:38 PM | #267 | |
Drives: 2012 ZL1 - #670 Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Seminole, Fl.
Posts: 8,009
|
Quote:
Thank you for making my point ... Your right, I don't care if you limit yourself and can't afford the things you want in life. You sound like one of those hippies that wants everything given to them. Not all performance cars are taxed, only those that don't meet standards. Buy yourself a new GT500, no extra tax on that.
__________________
|
|
02-15-2013, 06:10 PM | #268 |
Drives: Jeep Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 269
|
I may sound like a hippie to you, but you sound like an elitist to me. I'm hardly a hippie who wants everything given to me at all. If you could comprehend my posts you'd realize I'm a Libertarian type. I've been employed since the week I turned 16 and was legally able to be employed. I'd have been employed even earlier than that, but the Gov't had mandated I couldn't be.
So if you don't realize how the Gov't is raising the costs of things, why do you then reference how some cars have their prices raised via the Gas Guzzler Tax while others do not? The Founders gave us the right to pursue happiness, not the right to pursue happiness only with things that meet Gov't imposed standards.
__________________
'It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.' -Samuel Adams |
02-15-2013, 06:32 PM | #269 | |
Drives: 2012 ZL1 - #670 Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Seminole, Fl.
Posts: 8,009
|
Quote:
Your opportunities in life are the same as mine and everyone elses. I don't recall anyone guaranteeing the top of the line of any one product. Myself personally when I plan on paying $60k on a car that nobody is forcing me to buy, the GG tax is not gonna break the deal. Call me an elitist if you wish, I just think of it more as just working wisely. Our family just happens to enjoy nice cars and are willing to work hard and pay the price for them. We don't drink, smoke, go out to dinner several times a week. We are self employed, and are responsible for ourselves. Nobody ever said it was gonna be easy.
__________________
|
|
02-15-2013, 06:33 PM | #270 | |
corner barstool sitter
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 19 WRX Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 6,990
|
Quote:
Apparently you don't fully realize that experience in some rather specialized jobs (or even with specific companies) don't always transfer as readily as you'd like to think. Or stopped to consider the potential economics of moving a household and everything in it to a different location where you'd simply move back up the same path a little. Understand that living the life of a "Have Gun, Will Travel" road warrior touching base back at home once or twice a month isn't for everyone - the emotional and potential financial costs there can easily exceed one year's salary. Don't believe me? Then ask anybody who's been divorced over it. Norm |
|
02-15-2013, 06:43 PM | #271 |
corner barstool sitter
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 19 WRX Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 6,990
|
Figured as much, but it wasn't going to be me saying it first.
Understand that not everybody can do that. You'd need way more of a head for business than I'll ever have (and probably way less of some of the skills that I do have). I don't think people begrudge you personally for being able to pull it off, just for the attitude that shines through. Norm |
02-15-2013, 06:54 PM | #272 | |
Drives: 2012 ZL1 - #670 Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Seminole, Fl.
Posts: 8,009
|
Quote:
So I packed things up and moved to Florida. Got a job doing machine work for NASA. While doing machine work, I put myself back through school and got a degree in Computer Science. I did IT work for about 10 years, and shortly after 911 gave that up and went to work with my wife working out of our home. So here we are today being responsible for our own path in life. Guess we will all just have to agree to disagree, because this thing sure hung a left a long time a go.
__________________
|
|
02-15-2013, 08:05 PM | #273 | ||
Drives: Jeep Join Date: May 2011
Location: Tx
Posts: 269
|
Quote:
Quote:
So what you have proven is that if you spent the same amount of money, inflation adjusted, on a Camaro in 1967 you would have gotten an upper trim level Camaro, while in today's world you would only get a base level trim Camaro. Once you make a true apples to apples comparison you will see that car prices have risen faster than inflation between 1967 and now. And it's because of Gov't interference.
__________________
'It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.' -Samuel Adams |
||
02-15-2013, 08:44 PM | #274 |
Drives: 2012 ZL1 - #670 Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Seminole, Fl.
Posts: 8,009
|
You really can't make an apples to apples comparison from 1967 to now. Even with and without the different government standards the cars are worlds apart. Like it or not, technology and safety cost more. To be honest I'm grateful for where cars are today, because back in 1967 the cars were built like crap and you didn't get the warranty's that you get today. Granted nothing is for free, and we pay for those extras but most of us don't complain if we get into a wreck or have something break.
__________________
|
02-15-2013, 08:47 PM | #275 |
Drives: 2013 2SS LS3 Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: California
Posts: 170
|
maybe the 4-cylinder cars will be for the European markets. I heard that over there, cars with big engines would get taxed heavily.
|
02-15-2013, 08:47 PM | #276 | ||
Hail to the King baby!
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,169
|
Quote:
Quote:
Also consider that many of these safety technologies would be customer driven. I'll give you the example of door beams. Developed for side impact, they were designed to "meet the specific govenment standard". The beams themselves weren't mandated. Long story short the Japanese OEMs were puttng these door beams on cars here in the U.S. and NOT in Japan. It wasn't mandated. The Japanese complained about why the U.S. go safer cars and the rest is history. With the price of oil, I would argue this would take care of itself over time. But the government feels it's involvement will improve the situation. So I'm not trying to disagree, but many of the advancements that have driven car prices up are technology based. Brakes are better, tires are better, seats are better (with mandated head restraints ) structure is better, ride is better, car is quieter. On and on. Now if you wan't to compare the flipside of the anti vibration car CD player I bought many many years ago that played the CD through a cassette player for $400 in "back in the day" dollars and can now be bought for under $20, well that's another story.
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
|
||
02-15-2013, 08:49 PM | #277 |
I used to be Dragoneye...
|
I know the conversation has drifted a little, but in my opinion...most who'd be into a Turbo 4 Camaro (I doubt you'll see anything less than that in a car called "Camaro") would be those looking for a "sporty" coupe with looks, a low price, and everyday practicality (fuel economy, maintenance, etc) that most of us here normally sacrifice when we opt for the V8s.
Not lame...just different strokes for different folks. And there's nothing wrong with that, so long as they're driving a Camaro. |
02-15-2013, 09:43 PM | #278 | |
Account Suspended
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
|
Quote:
We have to get you on CNN ASAP!!!! Finally someone has the solution for climate change: "Change is a good thing and should be embraced." As part of embracing it, the EPA is hereby dissolved, and CAFE eliminated. There will be no size, weight, or horsepower limit on cars from this day forward! "EMBRACE THE CHANGE!" "CHANGE IS GOOD!" YYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHOOOOOOOO OOOO!!! |
|
02-15-2013, 09:50 PM | #279 |
Hail to the King baby!
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,169
|
Ok so the 82 Camaro had a 350 cu in V8 that made 150 hp and if you upped the anty you get get the 165 hp Cross Fire injected fire breathing beast. All government sponsored circa early 1970's emissions requlations (not fuel economy).
So the new 2.5 L I4 makes 200 hp and the 2.0L Turbo makes 270. Don't get hung up on what the Camaro is based on what it was. History says the 2.5L would smoke the 82 V8. And we've already referenced the awesome Iron Duke earlier in this thread. Yikes!!!! Just sayin'
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
|
02-15-2013, 09:59 PM | #280 | |||
Account Suspended
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 3,746
|
Quote:
Quote:
But that's only a small part of my disagreement. The biggest part of it is that there are people on here who knowingly put aside their own common sense to take the side that CAFE standards are a good thing and that it won't hurt the Camaro to have them. The 4 cylinder camaro can be attributed to the CAFE standards and I believe that to meet those goals that the I4 will be nowehere near the performer people dream of. It wouldn't surprise me if they put something like CAGS or AFM on the I-4 (or worse), because they "have" to. Meanwhile the V8 will be reduced to a limited production car that only Jay Leno and Rick Hendrick will be able to afford. Quote:
|
|||
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
|