That's too bad. That it's an isolated event I mean.
When Gareth Groves brought home his massive new Hummer, he knew his environmentally friendly neighbors disapproved. But he didn't expect what happened next. The sport utility vehicle was parked for five days on the street before two masked men smashed the windows, slashed the tires and scratched into the body: "FOR THE ENVIRON."
Police said they see small acts of vandalism in the area from time to time, but they have not seen anything so severe, or with such a clear political message, in recent years.
"This seems to be an isolated event," Cmdr. Andy Solberg said.
With any luck, some green thug will be dispatched you your driveway...
...and with even MORE luck, there won't be any typos in this comment.
"to your driveway."
I notice the author of the linked article is from Detroit, home of a whole bunch of dying car companies that can't seem to make a hybrid of their own. Sour grapes perhaps? I think I've covered it in previous posts but it is true taht some of us don't get quite the milage we are supposed to from our Priuses. Mine is a 2003 rated at 54 mpg and the best I have ever gotten for an extended trip is 50. More typical is about 43 to 48 in the summer. As good as promised? No, but way ahead of the 10 mpg road hogs small men buy to feel big.
I notice the author of the linked article is from Detroit
And I noticed that he opposed a tax break for the rich, rather than the perhaps more satisfying slashing of their tires.
Actually since he writes for the National Review he no doubt opposes tax breaks for the rich the same way the magazine opposes racism, ie only when they think they can score political points by doing so. The other 99 out of 100 times they don't really give a shit. And even the tax break for the rich argument is a crock. Find me another instance when the NR defined household income of $92,000 as being rich. The fact that the typical hybrid buyer has a higher than average income hardly makes a tax break on the cars targeted at the rich. Have you ever driven a Prius? I like mine jsut fine but it is definetly an economy car right down to the plastic interior. It is in no way a car for the rich. I think I paid under $19,000 for it. I'm glad I got it just because I think it was the right thing to do but I do miss my Saab 900 Turbo with the 5-speed.
We're straying off of the topic (viz., "Jambo incites vandalism"), but here goes...
The linked article is from the Daily Standard, not the National Review, and the author works for the Detroit News. But close enough -- equally guilty in your eyes, I guess. Let's leave the ad hominem portion of your argument behind.
I don't know how the NR or the DS defines rich, but I'll take a crack at it: free from financial worry. My household income is well under $92,000, but I'd say I'm nearly there myself, aside from long-range thoughts about retirement and my kids' college.
Now, anybody who buys a tiny, plastic car for $19,000 is either free from financial worry, or free from good sense.
The Prius is just one model, and probably at or near the bottom in price of available hybrid vehicles. Would you say somebody who drives a Lexus or BMW wealthy? Those buyers get the tax break, too.
Woo hoo, I'm rich! Funny, I don't feel particularly wealthy. My other car is twelve years old and it would be a stretch to buy a new one, my vacations are all done on the cheap (thank god the Mrs works for the airlines), and don't even talk to me about the decade I have left to be ready to send twins to college. On the other hand I am debt free (other than the house), have no fear of missing a meal, and tho I don't know the figures offhand would guess that I am in the top half of income in the U.S. I would call myself comfortable, and lucky, but by no means rich.
Maybe I'm deluded but $19k didn't seem like an outrageous amount for a new car (my first by the way, all the others were used). But maybe I would fit your definition of rich because I had the luxury of paying a couple grand more for a car than I otherwise could have jsut because I thought it was a good idea from an environmental standpoint.
I'm not a fan of the big SUV hybrids since the milage is still not all that good. They seem to be adding the electric engine for power rather than fuel efficiency. (Yeah, like that's America's problem, our trucks are underpowered.) Tho as Hammer has pointed out to me, making a Prius get 100 rather than 50 mpg doesn't do as much good as getting an SUV to get 20 rather than 12 so maybe I'm wrong on that one. Still I would be happy to not see any sort of incentive for people to get more SUVs. On the other hand, if that is the price for getting the hybrid fully accepted in the automotive mainstream I might have to live with it.
But maybe I would fit your definition of rich because I had the luxury of paying a couple grand more for a car than I otherwise could have jsut because I thought it was a good idea from an environmental standpoint.
Exactly. Many tens of millions of Americans don't have that luxury.
And if you can and do choose to do it, that's fine, but why should the tax code favor that over, say, a high-mpg diesel?
I'm still going to quibble with your definition of rich since it might imply that half the nation is rich. (Or if only the "Many tens of millions of Americans [who] don't have that luxury" are the non-rich then the vast majority of Americans are rich.) To my way of thinking "rich" implies some small percentage at the top of the scale, whether that means the top 1%, top 20%, or something in between is a topic for another day. In any case there should be more people in the middle than at the top, tho I guess I can envision income distributions such that the poor outnumber those in the middle.
But that said, I would be happy to see the tax breaks go to folks buying high milage cars rather than simply buying hybrids. The goal is the reduction of the use of fossil fuels and I'm in favor just about any reasonable incentive plan that does it.
Funny you should mention top 20% as a potential candidate for "rich." Says here that the top 20% household income in 2005 started at $91,705, which is nearly exactly the median income of Prius buyers. So can we say half of Prius buyers are rich? And more than half of hybrid Accord buyers, and all hybrid Lexus buyers?
And I'm calling BS on this: if only the "Many tens of millions of Americans [who] don't have that luxury" are the non-rich then the vast majority of Americans are rich.
That arithmetic just doesn't add up.