Yeah they already have that. It's called the "you're addicted so let's gouge you for all you're worth because you're gonna buy them anyway" tax. It's supposed to pay for smoking prevention, but they use it for all kinds of fun things.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hummers why?
- Thread starter Fearless Leader
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah they already have that. It's called the "you're addicted so let's gouge you for all you're worth because you're gonna buy them anyway" tax. It's supposed to pay for smoking prevention, but they use it for all kinds of fun things.
that would be great, however completely unrealistic. who's gonna bring home the bacon if you don't work huh?
I didn't say I felt bad about it, just that sometimes it feels bad... in a good way.
Snow's snow. It's dangerous to drive in.
And it's even more dangerous to drive in if the driver is arrogant enough to think that because they're driving a 4X4 the laws of physics don't apply to them.
I'll turn the question back at you: who's going to pay the bills if you crash and spend a month in hospital? Or worse?
Have you ever tried to drive a small car in a snow storm. Not that easy.
Im not talking a few inches that you might get in St Louis but a foot.
it's easier/ safer to drive a bigger car in the snow than a smaller car. second. it reduces the chance of an accident. third. while most people like to take time off, they can't afford to. it's a globalized world out there, at least 1000 people can do your job for better, less $$. you don't need to give your boss another reason to think you're not worthy. And yes, at $100/ hr, its better for you to go to work than not.
Rubbish. If the driver's crap they'll crash no matter what they're driving! And that is a fact.
If my employer would pay me £200 an hour I'd run through walls for them!
Then again, who am I kidding? I'm like 99% of workers out there - I do just enough so that I don't get caught!
I beg to differ, If you are driving a smaller car you have a better chance of spinning out and losing traction then in a bigger heavier car.
that's true... but it helps the regularly decent driver get by. trust me i've drive in 4 inches of powder (cuz no one plows my sub) in a Civic and in a Range... big difference!
...$100 /hr is like the entry rate for Intellectual Property Lawyers.... iBankers make like $180k a year, but those jobs are pretty demanding about whether you go to work or not.
Not if, as I've witnessed enough times to worry me, the driver believes that you drive in the snow using first or second gear.
but i mean honestly, I wouldn't drive anything else in the world except the range. I wish I had the overfinch model.... their defiantly show stoppers/ attention getters anywhere.You're supposed to ski in snow that deep, not drive!
I agree. And if you do get into a skid you have 4wd/awd which you pull you out much better than 2 wheel drive.
4WD won't save you from a skid in the snow.
It'll get you moving easier that 2WD, but it will make no difference in slowing/stopping in snow and ice.
Which brings us back to the overcompensation issue...It's a mode of transportation, not something to use to make up for a lack of intelligence, personality or manhood/womanhood.
something thats fun to drive
to the whole size issue. I'm rather large..... 6'3" to be exact and I fit in most cars as a passenger and there hasn't been a driver's seat I haven't fit in. Now the person behind me isn't so lucky but what ever.
(man this forum exploded)