The Drive-a-Toyota Act
in [Toyota]
|
From: Mike Hunter on 6 Jul 2007 17:04 IF a computer dummy like me can, surly an expert searcher like you should be able to find it. ;) mike "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:b4xji.33$z64.28(a)trnddc07... > Mike Hunter wrote: >> Based on that you assume it does not exits, naturally LOL > > No, I did not assume it does not exist. I looked for it on the IRS site > and I looked for it on Google. > > I didn't find it. I have no evidence that such a list exists. > > Now, if you wish to back your claim, please do so. > > Jeff > >> mike >> >> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:0iwji.30$Y_3.21(a)trnddc04... >>> Mike Hunter wrote: >>>> That may be your opinion, but if you think you are correct you had >>>> better notify the IRS. There is no listing of any Toyota holding >>>> company paying any corporate taxes, on the IRS wed site. LOL >>> Can you please tell us the location of the IRS website that lists which >>> companies pay taxes? >>> >>> I haven't found one that lists the taxes that corporations pay or even >>> one the lists all the corporate tax payers. >>> >>> JEff >>> >>>> mike >>>> >>>> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:afeji.8274$7k7.1410(a)trnddc01... >>>>> Mike Hunter wrote: >>>>>> Those if favor of "tax" assistance do not think of the fact they are >>>>>> the ones paying the tax money that is used to "assist," and that is >>>>>> going to a foreign corporation that pays NO US federal corporate >>>>>> income taxes ;) >>>>> But it's US subsidies do. >>>>> >>>>> Jeff >>>>> >>>>>> mike >>>>>> >>>>>> <dold(a)12.usenet.us.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:f6gclb$dij$3(a)blue.rahul.net... >>>>>>> In alt.autos.ford Bill Putney <bptn(a)kinez.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> You can subtract the $787.50 from the savings because *somenone* >>>>>>>> (the >>>>>>>> taxapyer) pays for that. Only if you are a liberal do you ignore >>>>>>>> such >>>>>>>> costs. >>>>>>> Only if there were no hybrids. I would like to thank you for paying >>>>>>> your >>>>>>> portion of my rebate, but the source of it doesn't affect the fit in >>>>>>> my >>>>>>> pocket. I think of it along the same lines as the development cost >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> Velcro, also funded by the taxpayer. >>
From: Jeff on 6 Jul 2007 17:09 Mike Hunter wrote: > Then please show us you know what a trade through means. you response > indicated you do not understand, if you can explain I will take it back ;) > > mike Mike, this isn't a competition. If you want to explain that you only pay the taxes on the difference between the cost of the new vehicle and what you get on the old vehicle, go ahead. If not, don't. I don't care. Jeff > > > "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:B%wji.31$z64.12(a)trnddc07... >> Mike Hunter wrote: >>> You think that because you do not know what at 'trade through' involves, >>> dummy. LOL >>> >>> mike >> Isn't that special, Mike? >> >> What is sad is that you have to call people names. >> >> Jeff > >
From: Jeff on 6 Jul 2007 17:13 Mike Hunter wrote: > IF a computer dummy like me can, surly an expert searcher like you should be > able to find it. ;) > > mike Why do you have to behave like this? Why not act like an intelligent human being, and just tell us the URL? You acted like this when you claimed that the first digit of the VIN meant something about the content, too. You don't need to act like a spoiled brat or a know-it-all or whatever. When I learn I am wrong, I admit it, as I did when I learned that Ford did indeed start with Volvo's technology. Jeff > > "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:b4xji.33$z64.28(a)trnddc07... >> Mike Hunter wrote: >>> Based on that you assume it does not exits, naturally LOL >> No, I did not assume it does not exist. I looked for it on the IRS site >> and I looked for it on Google. >> >> I didn't find it. I have no evidence that such a list exists. >> >> Now, if you wish to back your claim, please do so. >> >> Jeff >> >>> mike >>> >>> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:0iwji.30$Y_3.21(a)trnddc04... >>>> Mike Hunter wrote: >>>>> That may be your opinion, but if you think you are correct you had >>>>> better notify the IRS. There is no listing of any Toyota holding >>>>> company paying any corporate taxes, on the IRS wed site. LOL >>>> Can you please tell us the location of the IRS website that lists which >>>> companies pay taxes? >>>> >>>> I haven't found one that lists the taxes that corporations pay or even >>>> one the lists all the corporate tax payers. >>>> >>>> JEff >>>> >>>>> mike >>>>> >>>>> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:afeji.8274$7k7.1410(a)trnddc01... >>>>>> Mike Hunter wrote: >>>>>>> Those if favor of "tax" assistance do not think of the fact they are >>>>>>> the ones paying the tax money that is used to "assist," and that is >>>>>>> going to a foreign corporation that pays NO US federal corporate >>>>>>> income taxes ;) >>>>>> But it's US subsidies do. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jeff >>>>>> >>>>>>> mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <dold(a)12.usenet.us.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:f6gclb$dij$3(a)blue.rahul.net... >>>>>>>> In alt.autos.ford Bill Putney <bptn(a)kinez.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> You can subtract the $787.50 from the savings because *somenone* >>>>>>>>> (the >>>>>>>>> taxapyer) pays for that. Only if you are a liberal do you ignore >>>>>>>>> such >>>>>>>>> costs. >>>>>>>> Only if there were no hybrids. I would like to thank you for paying >>>>>>>> your >>>>>>>> portion of my rebate, but the source of it doesn't affect the fit in >>>>>>>> my >>>>>>>> pocket. I think of it along the same lines as the development cost >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> Velcro, also funded by the taxpayer. >
From: DH on 6 Jul 2007 17:19 "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2(a)mailcity.com> wrote in message news:X-qdncjAmtomPxPbnZ2dnUVZ_t6qnZ2d(a)ptd.net... > Are you really that slow? Even if what you say was actually true, you > would only save the tax on the amount of the extra tax one pays by not > taking advantage of a trade through, dummy. LOL > > mike I don't plan to worry about it. I'll have an extra $1500 on hand, after the extra tax, by selling the car myself. I'm not upside down on any of them (don't owe anything at all, anyway), I have more reliable cars than I need to get by so I won't miss a set of wheels if I sell the car before picking up a new one, I can take my time and maximize my sale price while taking my time and minimizing my purchase price. Your buddies at the dealership won't be able to ream me six ways from Sunday but that's not my problem; I'm sure they'll just "share the joy" with somebody that drags in a Taurus, Five Hundred or Lincoln just off warranty but blessed with a projected $2000 repair bill > "dh" <dh(a)stargate.com> wrote in message > news:468e68f5$0$16337$88260bb3(a)free.teranews.com... >> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2(a)mailcity.com> wrote in message >> news:W8ydnT_GdabY8RPbnZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d(a)ptd.net... >>> Next time do a trade through. By not doing a trade through, when you >>> sell your old clunker, you are paying higher taxes than needed, dummy >>> >>> mike >> >> A small amount of tax, which is, itself, tax-deductible. >> > > -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: Mike Hunter on 6 Jul 2007 17:33
Get real fuel economy is not the only reason buyers choose to buy the vehicle they buy, if maximum economy was the only reason we would all be buying motorcycles and scooters. Naturally a small car with a small motor can get better gas mileage if one lives in flat country, but buyers prefer larger, safer, cars that can clime a grade at speed without spinning the engine and dropping down a gear of two and effecting the fuel economy. The fact is the most popular vehicles are those that can carry five passengers, or more. and all of the passengers stuff. Even most Toyota buyers do not choose the Pruis or their small and midget cars, they choose the Camry. If one could get a decent size car for around the same size as a Camry that can still get reasonable fuel mileage still have the power to get out of its own way that is what most people buy. Toyotas Camry is the best selling car model in the US but GM actually sells more of its more powerful cars that get good mileage, they simply have more than on brand name on the hood. Chryslers larger safer more powerful RWD 300 sells at a better rate than did its smaller FWD V6 that it replaced. More buyers buy the larger F150 than any vehicle in the country car or truck even though they could buy smaller trucks, like the Ranger the truck that get the best fuel mileage of any truck. People will buy what they want, and need, regardless of fuel economy. The fact is Americans are buying more gas today at $3.00 a gallon than when it was only $1 a gallon. As me personally, if the government forces us into small cars I will simply do what it takes to keep all of my larger safer more powerful V8 vehicles on the road, and stop buying new cars You of course are free to believe whatever you choose mike "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:lOwji.1705$qu4.1127(a)trndny06... > Mike Hunter wrote: >> You are free to believe whatever you choose. A modern V8 will run quite >> efficiently at >> 1,500 RPMs, even on four cylinders, at 60 MPH. Most 4 cy engines need to >> run at nearly twice that number of RPMs at 60 MPH. > > Yet the 4 cyl cars get a lot better fuel mileage. Go figure. > >> You are confusing EPA test highway figures with what I actually said. >> ANY car will get better than the EPA figure, driven strictly at speed on >> the highway. The average is three to four MPG. My V6 Lincoln Zephyr >> with a fuel computer and six speed double OD tranny, had an EPA mileage >> of 29 but will constantly do 34/35 at 1,700 RPMs at 60 MPH on a flat >> road. ;) > > That's true of any engine, regardless of whether it is 4, 6 or 8 > cylinders. |