| Author |
Message |
Matthew Sharpe
Goo Roo
North Island
JZZ31
Posts: 5259
Reg: 10-2005
|
I loved them when I was 10. Now I can think of a vast number of other cars I'd own first in the unlikely event I ever have $400,000 to drop on a car. Actually even if I had $400,000 to drop on a car, I wouldn't. A two year old XKR would do me. |
David Vaughan
Goo Roo
Relaxed
IS300
Posts: 4854
Reg: 07-2005
|
Time for my confession: I never saw a Lambo I really liked since the Miura, and as a car it was a bit of a crock anyway. Still, give me a new Lambo and I promise to drive it at least once before selling it for an Audi or two and pocketing the difference.  |
Don Bagnall
Moderator
New Zealand
SLK 230 Kompressor
Posts: 7502
Reg: 05-2005
|
Miles Baker wrote on Thursday, February 25, 2010 - 12:10 pm:What's a fatist?
An obese terrorist?  |
Miles Baker
Goo Roo
Vic
66 Mustang GT Convertible, 55 Chevy Bel Air, 69 Firebird 455, 69 Nova SS Clone, 65 Mustang Fastback, 67 Mustang Convertible, 67 Camaro RS/SS
Posts: 2289
Reg: 08-2005
|
If I was gonna drop big bucks on a car it would be an Aston Martin or a 911. Those are some beautiful cars. The R8 is pretty nice as well. And for mid dollars.. of course the 2001 Viper. All slightly more subtle than the Stealth Fighter Doorstop. |
Mike Beck
Goo Roo
New Zealand
325i Coupe
Posts: 4275
Reg: 11-2005
|
I would just spend loads restoring older cars in an up spec manner, replacing the engines and what not.....
Instead of buying one expensive car that would have a warranty and service contract made void if I put any tools to it. How boring...
What I fancy making is a Supercharged M5 E39 V8 fitted into a 1995 E34 5 Series body with the 6 Speed manual.
Mmmmmmm. Oh the fun. |
Ali Saeed
Goo Roo
WA
V8 Limited
Posts: 1862
Reg: 09-2007
|
yeh i agree with Miles the Aston and 911, but id get a corvette over the viper for mid dollars. im itching to get a C3 in black. love that shape.
Mike: BUT BEAMERS ARE BORING TOO  |
Matthew Sharpe
Goo Roo
North Island
JZZ31
Posts: 5265
Reg: 10-2005
|
Aston Martin yes - but again, a 5 litre supercharged XKR is just as good and a whole lot cheaper. 911 - not for me, I'm getting too close to middle age for that, and it just cries out "crisis car" to me. The R8 is nice, but the headlights are really naff looking. Guess you can probably do something about that if you have that kind of money though. Of course the mechanicals are very similar to the Gallardo? Have no idea if thats a good or bad thing.
If I was "retirement" rich, I'd probably also spend a lot of time working on older cars, as I do enjoy it, and without the frustrations of a limited budget I'd be able to work with decent tools, a hoist etc, which would remove much of the frustration factor. |
Miles Baker
Goo Roo
Vic
66 Mustang GT Convertible, 55 Chevy Bel Air, 69 Firebird 455, 69 Nova SS Clone, 65 Mustang Fastback, 67 Mustang Convertible, 67 Camaro RS/SS
Posts: 2293
Reg: 08-2005
|
The Aston just becuase it looks better. Nah gotta be the viper Ali. I like vettes plenty but the vipers are just something else. I've got one c3 left in the shed. 69 roadster. Got aaaall the parts - AC, leather, hard and soft tops, side pipes, rack/pinion, everything... Can't be bothered restoring it. Gonna sell as a project. Did two c3s. That was enough. |
Don Bagnall
Moderator
New Zealand
SLK 230 Kompressor
Posts: 7512
Reg: 05-2005
|
I've driven loads of C3's auto & manual..........Not bad as a highway car, but a tad annoying to drive round town in.......But I'd still own one & drive it regularly with a  on my dial.
C4's on the other hand seem to be a damn fine all round car (apart from the epicly wide sills  , which when you're an obese womble like me, can be a bit of a huff n' puff to get over.
But a piece of piss to work on, and generally tootle around with........The TPI's are damn good on gas too
Haven't driven any newer Vette's, so can't comment on em.
ps; My pic of major buck cars would be the Aston over anything else........Pure beauty in motion  |
Miles Baker
Goo Roo
Vic
66 Mustang GT Convertible, 55 Chevy Bel Air, 69 Firebird 455, 69 Nova SS Clone, 65 Mustang Fastback, 67 Mustang Convertible, 67 Camaro RS/SS
Posts: 2295
Reg: 08-2005
|
The big curvy c3 hood is harder to see over if youre short, but damn it's a good view of the road. Awesome curves. |
Peter Burrett
DieHard
ACT
'97 2.5 VVTi ST, '04 IS200, '94 3 ltr Soarer
Posts: 665
Reg: 07-2005
|
just checked the thermometer outside, and Miles, it's miles warmer than it was last night....should I see my doctor, or just wait for a cool change? |
Miles Baker
Goo Roo
Vic
66 Mustang GT Convertible, 55 Chevy Bel Air, 69 Firebird 455, 69 Nova SS Clone, 65 Mustang Fastback, 67 Mustang Convertible, 67 Camaro RS/SS
Posts: 2298
Reg: 08-2005
|
I'd crack open a beer, watch some TV, and forget the alarmist rubbish-du-jour that is "climate change". |
Murray Lund
TryHard
NSW
V8
Posts: 211
Reg: 07-2005
|
Alternatively, crack open a beer, watch some TV, and stick your head in the sand. That would also work. |
Peter Nitschke
Junk Filterer
South Australia
UZZ30 UZZ31
Posts: 11390
Reg: 11-2004
|
The climate has always been changing, just now it's a trendy and profitable industry.
Remember when it was called Global Warming and then they had very severe winters in Europe and USA - "Whoops, what else can we call it?".
I don't disagree that we are impacting - and probably negatively - on the general atmospheric conditions, I just don't get how a new tax is going to fix the problem.
Too many people running around rolling their eyes shouting "The sky is falling!". |
David Vaughan
Goo Roo
Relaxed
IS300
Posts: 4857
Reg: 07-2005
|
If atmospheric carbon is a principal contributor then a price on carbon is an appropriate market mechanism to manage change in carbon output. That is what the present government proposed, although with a flaw in the caps. If your bent is socialist rather than capitalist then simply regulate carbon emissions (Greens). If you think there is nothing wrong then plant some trees, smile and wave (Liberals) or pay money to farmers because they are such worthy people (Nationals).
More severe weather conditions are predicted by existing climate models, and this includes storm and snow events. Weather becomes more violent because there is more heat in the oceans and atmosphere driving it. |
Miles Baker
Goo Roo
Vic
66 Mustang GT Convertible, 55 Chevy Bel Air, 69 Firebird 455, 69 Nova SS Clone, 65 Mustang Fastback, 67 Mustang Convertible, 67 Camaro RS/SS
Posts: 2299
Reg: 08-2005
|
That's a huge if to start that post David. |
Peter Nitschke
Junk Filterer
South Australia
UZZ30 UZZ31
Posts: 11395
Reg: 11-2004
|
Is that like how high petrol prices have reduced petrol consumption and forced us all to sell our gas guzzling TT's and V8's?
Or like how food prices rising in Australia more than in any other western nation, means nobody is over weight in Australia any more? |
Mike Beck
Goo Roo
New Zealand
325i Coupe
Posts: 4287
Reg: 11-2005
|
David Vaughan wrote on Tuesday, March 02, 2010 - 09:35 am:more heat in the oceans and atmosphere driving it.
Regulated entirely by that big ball of hot gas in the sky, the sun.
Peter Nitschke wrote on Tuesday, March 02, 2010 - 12:37 pm:Is that like how high petrol prices have reduced petrol consumption and forced us all to sell our gas guzzling TT's and V8's?
Exactly. It's merely just another tax that people with HAVE to put up with, it's not going to stop anything. Only solution (although difficult) it to counter it by increasing your yearly income in which ever way possible |
Murray Lund
TryHard
NSW
V8
Posts: 212
Reg: 07-2005
|
Guys, you have obviously made no attempt to understand the concept of a carbon tax or how it is meant to work. To simply sprout the 'big new tax on everything' line is intellectually lazy.
To put it simply, under a carbon tax, big carbon polluters are taxed. With the proceeds the increased cost to consumers is subsidised. That then creates an incentive and opportunity for consumers to change their consumption behaviour, ie. to use less selectricity, to use different means of transport. It also makes it more attractive to develop and use alternative energy sources because carbon intensive sources would then reflect their true cost to the community. Coal is only a cheap energy source because the cost to consumers does not reflect the true cost to the environment.
Can't see it has anything to do with the high price of petrol or food. |
Aaron Mead
Goo Roo
NT
Celsior 1UZ-FE Mines, JZZ30 1.5JZ-GTE To4z
Posts: 2819
Reg: 03-2006
|
Im gonna give you the light hearted version of a response. Im sure you'll be berated shortly after....)
Bloke in 2000 comes into the Supermarket:
"F*ck Aaron, $29.95 for a box of Melbourne stubby's? Get f*cked! Im not buying piss after it goes over $30 a carton, I tell ya."
Blokes missus in 2000 "F*ck Aaron, Im giving up the fags if you're gonna put the winnies up over $10."
Good customers, still are I see! Just on a %50 increase!!!
Fuel could be $3.00/L. Doesn't mean im going to buy a hybrid. |
Murray Lund
TryHard
NSW
V8
Posts: 213
Reg: 07-2005
|
? |
Peter Nitschke
Junk Filterer
South Australia
UZZ30 UZZ31
Posts: 11402
Reg: 11-2004
|
So I will be able to reduce the effect of the tax by opting to use less electricity or by walking to work. That's really great news. Personally I would prefer to still be able to watch TV and choose the mode of transport that is most convenient rather than the only one I can afford.
Bottom line is that the increased cost will be passed on to the consumer - yep, that's a pretty simple tax if you ask me.
And I do understand that you think it's all OK because we have the right to not consume anything if we don't want to pay the new tax. But it's a pretty hollow argument.
Someone will have to pay, does anyone know how much the government will pay in interest just for today? |
Peter Nitschke
Junk Filterer
South Australia
UZZ30 UZZ31
Posts: 11403
Reg: 11-2004
|
Looks like that was too subtle Aaron. |
Murray Lund
TryHard
NSW
V8
Posts: 214
Reg: 07-2005
|
Peter, the point is that the tax that gets charged to polluters is paid to you as a subsidy. The price of carbon intensive energy goes up, but you have more money in your pocket to pay for it if you choose to. You can choose to pay for the petrol that a V8 uses out of your subsidy, but many people will modify their behaviour - opt for smaller cars, use their home air conditioning less etc and keep the subsidy. That's why it is a market driven tool.
I know the big new tax on everything is an easy slogan, but its a bit of an easy scare campaign.
(PS: As for governemnt interest payments, surely you know that government debt in Australia is the lowest in the western world).} |
Peter Nitschke
Junk Filterer
South Australia
UZZ30 UZZ31
Posts: 11405
Reg: 11-2004
|
Murray, you are living in lala land if you think the govt will pass all the proceeds from the tax directly out to consumers.
Murray, please also consider that the population that has to pay that debt is probably also the smallest in the western world. Just because other countries have worse debts, doesn't make ours a good thing.
It is probably also the biggest turn around from surplus to debt in the western world, I don't see that as a good thing either.
1. Care to avoid the spin and answer the actual question?
2. And how will our debt be paid for but with a BIG new tax? |
Miles Baker
Goo Roo
Vic
66 Mustang GT Convertible, 55 Chevy Bel Air, 69 Firebird 455, 69 Nova SS Clone, 65 Mustang Fastback, 67 Mustang Convertible, 67 Camaro RS/SS
Posts: 2301
Reg: 08-2005
|
Wealth redistribution on a grand scale and punishment tax behaviour modification Do Not Work. The socialist in Rudd wants it to work but his ideal tax is already broken by the adjustments he has had to make to fit it to the real world. "Dumb" nations in south east Asia have already shown direct action works while "clever" Australia is getting ready to turn its entire economy upside down. Rudd wants to have the government receive huge amounts of money then decide best who needs what. We all become welfare dependent. Socialism. Meanwhile nothing is really done about putting in a nuclear plant or something that might actually reduce our emissions. Rudd's tax still tells no story about how we would get actual change. Just how he will hold us down with what we have. Stalling our development. Welcome to the USSR. |
Gary Redman
TryHard
NSW
Accord Euro Luxury
Posts: 397
Reg: 09-2005
|
Do we not go to work to earn money so we can have a nice lifestyle and enjoy a few luxuries, or were we meant to just eek out enough income to support a basic survival. So I now have a nice car and home. The home has an airconditioner because we live in one of the hottest countries on earth. But all of a sudden some clown tells me I can't drive around in my car and must find a smaller one, and I must build a smaller house facing north, and I am not to fit an airconditioner or have too much lighting and if I do not conform and resist these demands I will have all my money taken off me so I will not be able to afford these nice things anyway. Am I still in the "lucky country"? |
David Vaughan
Goo Roo
Relaxed
IS300
Posts: 4858
Reg: 07-2005
|
Peter Nitschke wrote on Tuesday, March 02, 2010 - 12:37 pm:Is that like how high petrol prices have reduced petrol consumption and forced us all to sell our gas guzzling TT's and V8's?
This is a car site for TTs and V8s. In the rest of the world (meaning outside this site) behaviour is affected. Have a look at sales patterns.
quote:Or like how food prices rising in Australia more than in any other western nation, means nobody is over weight in Australia any more?
Food is a staple and there are no alternatives to food. If, on the other hand, the price of beef pushes up compared with lamb then expect the market as a whole to buy a bit less beef and a bit more lamb.
No-one is going to tax you out of doing what you want, or to which you are addicted. If other suppliers can provide energy at a competitive cost and that happens to have a lower carbon cost, then you are as well off and carbon output is reduced. That is not so hard.
The nett effect though is that producer-costs for energy will rise because costs previously treated as externalities will now be part of their costs.
Miles, this is precisely not the old USSR because a carbon price leaves adjustments to the market rather than directed or regulated action. The fact that a nuclear plant not currently an option is an example of regulation I would prefer not to have. That is not intrinsic to carbon trading though.
The ETS essentially says:
1. Take money from carbon-intensive producers.
2. Give money to consumers.
3. Let consumers determine where to spend money on energy.
Yes, I am aware it was a big "if" earlier. I am carefully leaving that part of the topic for others to research if and as they please, as I explained at length early in the thread. |
David Vaughan
Goo Roo
Relaxed
IS300
Posts: 4859
Reg: 07-2005
|
Peter Nitschke wrote on Wednesday, March 03, 2010 - 08:56 am:please also consider that the population that has to pay that debt is probably also the smallest in the western world. Just because other countries have worse debts, doesn't make ours a good thing.
Irrelevant. Murray is talking about debt as a proportion of GDP. If our population were one person, our government debt would proportionally still only a small fraction of that person's "GDP". Private debt is more the issue.
quote:It is probably also the biggest turn around from surplus to debt in the western world, I don't see that as a good thing either.
Really? Show me the comparative figures to support your claim. I suspect you are choosing a high surplus as an arbitrary starting point and dismissing lower starts or indebted starts. Countries take a long time to recover when debt to GDP ratio exceeds 80%-90%. Our government debt ratio is around 15% give or take a bit. Yesterday's interest rate rise and expectations of another 1% in the next twelve months, to typical long term levels, show we do not have a current problem.
I leave aside whether you think not having an different government is a problem . That is politics and I am not getting into it.  |
Aaron Mead
Goo Roo
NT
Celsior 1UZ-FE Mines, JZZ30 1.5JZ-GTE To4z
Posts: 2824
Reg: 03-2006
|
C'mon, it was relevant Pen! |
David Vaughan
Goo Roo
Relaxed
IS300
Posts: 4860
Reg: 07-2005
|
Gary Redman wrote on Wednesday, March 03, 2010 - 12:12 pm:Do we not go to work to earn money so we can have a nice lifestyle and enjoy a few luxuries, or were we meant to just eek out enough income to support a basic survival. So I now have a nice car and home. The home has an airconditioner because we live in one of the hottest countries on earth. But all of a sudden some clown tells me I can't drive around in my car and must find a smaller one, and I must build a smaller house facing north, and I am not to fit an airconditioner or have too much lighting and if I do not conform and resist these demands I will have all my money taken off me so I will not be able to afford these nice things anyway. Am I still in the "lucky country"?
No, looks more like fairyland to me. |
David Vaughan
Goo Roo
Relaxed
IS300
Posts: 4861
Reg: 07-2005
|
I think he was agreeing with you Aaron.
I won't be back until tomorrow, so here is something to entertain. If you do not have access to Apple's App Store, then there is no use trying to click this.
If the link fails, look for "Skeptical Science" in the Weather section.
|
Peter Nitschke
Junk Filterer
South Australia
UZZ30 UZZ31
Posts: 11411
Reg: 11-2004
|
Aaron, relevance wasn't the issue. She was obviously distressed about the photo, and I can respect that.
Plus she looked a bit red, so it looked like there was plenty of hot water at play. |
Peter Nitschke
Junk Filterer
South Australia
UZZ30 UZZ31
Posts: 11412
Reg: 11-2004
|
David Vaughan wrote on Wednesday, March 03, 2010 - 12:25 pm:The ETS essentially says:
1. Take money from carbon-intensive producers.
2. Give money to consumers.
A problem I see, is the missing lines, eg.
1a. Subtract administration cost - say 50%
1b. Subtract a contribution for general revenue - say 25%.
Leaving 25% (if we are lucky) to be distributed to the masses.
Cynical - yes, but who isn't? |
Miles Baker
Goo Roo
Vic
66 Mustang GT Convertible, 55 Chevy Bel Air, 69 Firebird 455, 69 Nova SS Clone, 65 Mustang Fastback, 67 Mustang Convertible, 67 Camaro RS/SS
Posts: 2304
Reg: 08-2005
|
David
The parallel I was drawing with the USSR was twofold:
1. The socialist redistribution of wealth to decide who should be able to afford what, and to shape social change.
2. Limiting society to using current resources instead of finding direct ways to expand. We're looking at Russian bread line style electricity.
For example, we could be spending $10B on nuclear plants (which is normal spending anyway - coal plants don't last forever). This would meet our "target" and also potentially give us more power to burn having fun. But instead we will probably blow $10B administrating a huge tax to stall or shrink our use of electricity.
Being an engineer, direct action makes sense to me. Got a problem? Build stuff to fix it. Don't go about the problem sideways. And SE Asia has shown us it works. History tells us it does. Need to reduce dirty power? Don't just tell people to use less power. Build more clean power. Socialism doesn't work. It costs more that way. Just spend the money to build what's needed. |
|
Previous
