About the mentioned ban on SUVs - I disagree and think
people should be able to drive an SUV if they want to.
If the point is low fuel economy, then there are
better ways to approach this than banning certain
classes of vehicles. Such as simply raising the tax on
gasoline - those with gas-efficient cars would not
suffer nearly so much as those without. Or increasing
the tax or tag fee on all cars with a listed fuel
efficiency under a certain amount (say, +$50 for under
10 mpg, +$25 for under 20 mpg, etc.) Instead of
targetting a culture that you find disagreeable (which
is pretty unethical, btw), you should target the
behavior. It *is* the behavior that bothers you more,
right? Or is it instead just an unrepressable urge to
strike out at those different from how you think they
should be?
[I have advanced this idea.
How about this idea: Sell gas on a sliding scale
basis. This is an excellent idea whose time has come.
An Accura would buy gas for $.80 / gal and a Yukon
would buy gas at $7.00 / gal. Correct thinking is
subsidized by incorrect thinking. Excellent!
My mention on banning vehicles is not as drastic as
you present it. My ban would only disallow these
vehicles in the city. The ban is not entirely centered
on a SUV's capacity to over use gasoline. There are
many reasons to ban them within the city limits.
Safety for smaller correct vehicles is one reason.]
R. Hanson.
St. Paul.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Domains � Claim yours for only $14.70/year
http://smallbusiness.promotions.yahoo.com/offer
_____________________________________________
NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul
Archive Address:
http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
