Hybrid Tax

I am currently in the market for a very, very cheap used car. I work at a car dealership so my eyes and ears have been open to new vehicles people are trading in to see if one is suitable for me. I live less than two miles from work so something small works just fine. A few days ago I noticed a small 2004 Honda Civic Hybrid was traded in at work. When I talked to the used car manager of the dealership he mentioned that it sounds like it would be a good fit. All my driving is "city" driving so the hybrid would be the best option. As I have been thinking about this decision it was my wife who brought to my attention that many states are instituting hybrid car taxes and that I should check in VA. Well, after a quick Google search I discovered that VA does in fact charge people who own Hybrids $64 per year in extra fees. This is all part of an effort to regain revenue lost by those who drive hybrids because they will not be buying as much gas as a regular gasoline powered vehicle. I must say that this has practically turned me off from buying a Hybrid car. Not only has the state discouraged people from buying hybrids, they are penalizing those who are trying to save money and/or protect the environment. My main motive here is to just save money.

I can understand the motive behind passing the tax, when people buy more fuel efficient cars they buy gas less, which reduces the governments revenue. So in order to recuperate that loss we need to throw in another tax to prevent the drop in revenue. The problem with it is, it is penalizing only one particular type of car. Since this law appears to only apply to hybrid vehicles, if a vehicle were to achieve the same mpg as a hybrid but run on gasoline alone, would that car be taxed too? It seems that there is a sort of discrimination against hybrid vehicles. As an example, my current beater car gets about 40mpg because it's small and has about 90hp. A new Honda Civic Hybrid is rated at 44mpg. So, with this very slight mpg difference, the hybrid owner is subject to an additional tax and I am not. Also, hybrid cars have higher MSRP and have a higher risk because not only is there a gas motor, there is also an electric motor with a battery that is hugely expensive to repair.

This right here is an example of a government going too far. While in one hand they are encouraging people to drive more fuel efficient cars and on the other penalizing those who drive more efficient cars. It is currently in law that by 2025 cars must achieve an average of 54.5 mpg[1], but by driving more fuel efficient cars they lose money so taxes of another sort will follow. When the American public save over $1.7 trillion at the pump, the government will institute additional taxation to recover that lost revenue.

---

[1] http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/08/28/obama-administration-finalizes-historic-545-mpg-fuel-efficiency-standard

Conversation with an Insurance Agent

I wanted to do this blog not because of any news story I've seen, but because of a conversation I had with a health insurance agent. I wasn't aware of some of the changes that were happening because of Obamacare. Since I have changed jobs, I am currently not covered by any health insurance because I have not been in my current job long enough to be eligible for their insurance. As I spoke to people at work they said it would be a good option to try and just buy insurance outright because the plan offered through work was expensive and had services I wouldn't need. I was then given a number of an insurance

agent.

I called to see what sort of rates I would be able to get. I am a healthy and active adult with no preexisting conditions. During the conversation the agent said that under the current system I would need to take a survey of about 100 questions to determine my health. After he laid out two different options he then proceeded to tell me I could only have insurance for 1 year. When I asked why, he responded, Obamacare. Under the new law, if I am to purchase insurance by myself privately right now because it's cheaper and more customizable than my employer, that coverage will disappear after one year and be replaced by new insurance options that conform to the Obamacare rules. What he then proceeded to tell me was that as of right now they do not know how much each plan will cost but enrollment in the government plans will start in the coming months. Also, because I am a young and healthy adult, I will likely have to pay more for  that government insurance plans than the private plan I am looking at now. Because Obamacare no longer allows for questions regarding preexisting conditions, young people like myself will need to subsidize the cost of others with health problems. Also, under the new government plans I will be required to have services I do not want or need.

Now, for many the preexisting conditions exception sounds wonderful. But it will make millions of people like me have to pay more. I will be penalized for living a healthy lifestyle and taking care of myself. Also, when talking to the agent he laid out a scenario for me. There are 3 versions of me, identical in almost every single way. One is me, healthy and active. The second is exactly like me but does heroin. The third is exactly like number one, but smokes cigarettes.  Under the current system, me and the heroin addict will pay the same for health insurance but the smoker will pay 1.5 times more than me. For a law that removes preexisting conditions, this seems to be a problem. Insurance agents are not allowed to ask any questions other than your basic info (name, address, SSN..etc) and "do you smoke." Now if we are eliminating questions regarding obesity or drug use, why do smokers get penalized? Also, why am I getting penalized? I am healthy, I am active, I eat organic foods, but when it comes to my insurance I will pay the same amount as an overweight drug addict. Insane.

The Syria Mistake part 2

Ever since the reported gassing of Syrian civilians, President Obama has been mulling over the idea of military intervention. After the speech about the 'red-line' crossed by the Assad regime from a few months ago, Syria was sort of put on the back burner. Now, it's back to being front page news.

Now, Secretary of State John Kerry has come out and said that Sarin gas was in fact used in the chemical attack[1]. Since this revelation, members of congress and the President have been advocating for strategic military strikes to deter Assad from using chemical weapons again. One major issue with this assessment is the assumption that it was in fact Assad who used the gas. There have been reports that it was actually the rebels who used the gas, as well as having committed other horrific atrocities.  According to some at the UN involved in the investigation of the sarin gas attack, it was the rebels who used the nerve agent[2]. Given the ties between the rebels and Al-Nusra Front it wouldn't be surprising that the rebels are the ones behind the attack. It's unclear what sort of evidence the President has that contradicts the UN and affirms that it is Assad using chemical weapons.

Since the President is sure it is the Assad regime, he has been threatening force over the past few days. As usual, he went to the UN to find support, but Russia and China voted against military action in Syria and have warned the US to not get involved in the region[3].  Now that the UN has been essentially ruled out, the US was looking to its closest ally, Britain. A few days ago, Britain held a vote on joining the US in action against Syria, which was struck down[4]. Once the reports came from Britain that they would not strike Syria, the President started thinking about taking action alone. The President led on that he would strike even if he didn't have support from congress and other nations. Now, Obama is saying that congressional authority is something he wants to carry out their strikes.

Since this sort of flip on the issue, war hawks like Senator McCain are blasting his decision and saying that Assad is "Euphoric" about the President's decision. Many of the war hungry representatives are unhappy with the president's decision. They are seeing it as a sign of weakness that will make the US look like it is now unable to commit to military action.

While it does make the US seem unwilling to strike, it's the right decision. When making the choice to fly planes to a foreign country and destroy targets as well as kill people, Congress needs to be consulted. The authority of "Commander-in-Chief" has gone WAY overboard in the modern era. We have become to comfortable with war presidents. War is something that shouldn't be decided to easily. With the advanced technologies we possess and the ability to separate the personal experience of war we seem to make the decision more lightly than usual. For the US, sending boots on the ground is hard, a drone is easy because it poses almost no risk to us. But to the people of Syria, it's still the same outcome. They still will see it as the big policeman of the world, the US, has bombed innocent people who were never a threat in the first place.

Another issue with the proposed intervention is Syria is that there is no real end goal. The President claims that the strikes will make it so Assad will not use chemical weapons again. But can some strategic strikes really prevent anything indefinitely?  Even if the gassing stops, the Assad regime will still be in control and there will still be a war raging between the government and the rebels. We will only be adding to the destruction.

Now that the president has decided to seek the approval of congress, let's hope they listen to the people and vote against furthering the destruction Syria is experiencing.

---

[1] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2408405/Assad-joined-Hitler-Hussein-John-Kerry-says-Syrian-president-used-deadly-sarin-nerve-gas-Damascus-attack.html

[2] http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/6/syrian-rebels-used-sarin-nerve-gas-not-assads-regi/

[3] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23845800

[4] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/british-parliament-syria-vote_n_3839067.html