HAHAHAHAHA!! Sounds like the old Kombi I used to own. Regularly dropping bits of bodywork on the highways sure wasn't environmentally friendly!

JK2 wrote:

Antho_man wrote:

Kazmeistyr wrote: All good policies so far.

by introducing a "luxury" car tax. But this is not focussed enough, it's on anything above 60k, methinks - you can still buy plenty of gas guzzling bricks for well short of 40k.

but i like my 100,000 merc that not fair

luxy cars run cleaner and are safer. there should be a tax for shitty vans with green party stickers that haven't been tuned since 1982 and spew black smoke

im with u on this 1

JK2 wrote:luxy cars run cleaner and are safer. there should be a tax for shitty vans with green party stickers that haven't been tuned since 1982 and spew black smoke

Agreed. Regrettably you is right.

Apart from the "luxury cars run better" bit - Newer cars in general run better. Luxury cars might be "better" still in terms of emissions, but they're usually bigger and all the bells and whistles on the insides have an environmental impact too.

Tax vehicles over a certain engine size, and introduce strict emissions testing standards to keep the shitty bombs off the road. Introduce incentives to buy cleaner cars and bicycles.

(Idea: They should remove GST on bikes and bike parts )

Why? tax is paid per litre. If you have a v8 rangey you pay more tax. If you have a 1 litrel polo you pay less. Emissions trading will also be reflected on a per litre basis.
why would you make it more complicated?
besides I could have a 2 litre EVo and drive with my foot flat on the floor and use more gas than a 3 litre car.

JK2 wrote: Why? tax is paid per litre. If you have a v8 rangey you pay more tax. If you have a 1 litrel polo you pay less. Emissions trading will also be reflected on a per litre basis.
why would you make it more complicated?
besides I could have a 2 litre EVo and drive with my foot flat on the floor and use more gas than a 3 litre car.

Because I think it would be good to do more to encourage people to drive smaller cars (and to ride bikes). Safer for all, betterer for the environment, reduces our dependence on oil.

Newer cars don't necessarily run better or have less harmful emissions. Emissions depend most upon how well the vehicle is maintained.

An emissions testing scheme chould be based upon how close the engine emissions are to the original emission specs of the engine type, size and year.

PenguinJam wrote: Newer cars don't necessarily run better or have less harmful emissions. Emissions depend most upon how well the vehicle is maintained.

An emissions testing scheme chould be based upon how close the engine emissions are to the original emission specs of the engine type, size and year.

In Japan the standards are raised pretty much every 2 years, and there is rules here that prevent any cars older than I think 10 years old being imported. This year the 20 year old "classic car" exemption was closed up, just in time to stop r32 skylines too the bastards!

I dont really agree with your second part either, a slightly out of tune corolla is probably highly preferable to a massive great holden that even in proper tune is worse than the out of tune corolla.

The amount of pollution caused by manufacturing cars pretty big also, one of the best things you can do is buy second hand.

F.T.G.P

Points noted: I should have written it as an apples for apples comparison - comparing a well serviced early 80's corolla with late 90's corolla with cobwebs under the bonnet.

Yeah the standards are the frontal impact standards (FIS) which effectively precluding importation of vehicles older than about 10yrs as you mentioned. Interestingly a lot of 4wd SUV vehicles were excempt from the FIS and so were imported en-masse - another loophole

JK2 wrote:

Antho_man wrote:

Kazmeistyr wrote: All good policies so far.

by introducing a "luxury" car tax. But this is not focussed enough, it's on anything above 60k, methinks - you can still buy plenty of gas guzzling bricks for well short of 40k.

but i like my 100,000 merc that not fair

luxy cars run cleaner and are safer. there should be a tax for shitty vans with green party stickers that haven't been tuned since 1982 and spew black smoke

I have to giggle at the 30 year old Alfa's, rusting to bits spewing out blue smoke and dribbling oil all over the show, only to see a green's sticker on the back

JK2 wrote: Why? tax is paid per litre. If you have a v8 rangey you pay more tax. If you have a 1 litrel polo you pay less. Emissions trading will also be reflected on a per litre basis.
why would you make it more complicated?
besides I could have a 2 litre EVo and drive with my foot flat on the floor and use more gas than a 3 litre car.

Good luck trying to get an EVO to be fuel efficient - hell, my one used more gas than my 1970's 350 worked Chev

Man, a lot of people seem to want an envy tax

[insert inaccurate stereotype here]

michael wrote: [insert inaccurate stereotype here greens are really reds ]

like that?

thorg wrote: Man, a lot of people seem to want an envy tax

Excuse me, we will have none of this democracy carry on thank you very much, phunk knows whats best for us.