Gas prices hit the wealthy

[colorado thinker]

Just heard a story - a friend of a friend has a large boat (lakes, not sea) and filled up the tank this week. 675 gallons of diesel at $5.00 per gallon equaled $3,375.

I can't think of anything to say about that. I'm just astounded that anyone would actually spend that much to run a pleasure boat at this point in our history . . . I realize that is just chump change to some but good god.

[bahrbearian]

1. I'm sure that is plenty to get him through the Summer

[Clear Blue Sky]

2. But a year ago, the price was half what it is now.

Going forward though, high gas prices will hurt sales of large boats, SUVs and the like.

[MadMaddie]

5. Don't forget the big travel RVs? That industry is going to

take a beating too.

The impacts of the high gas priceses is starting to spiral and the * administration is sitting with their collective thumbs up their asses.

No this is just the beginning.

[shraby]

8. The prices are just where Bushco wants em that's

why they are sitting on their thumbs.

[alfredo]

32. They could make affordable housing units from some of the used ones.

[eleny]

34. Winnebago is temporarily closing a plant in Iowa

It's in response to diminishing sales. I posted about that the other day in the Labor forum.

[depakid]

3. Damn!

an I thought that women who threw down (count 'em) SEVEN $20 bills to fill her hulking SUV (and got a few $1's and coins back) was grimacing.

[Breeze54]

4. Imagine what devastation this is doing to the fishing industry then....

:(

[MadMaddie]

9. Grocery prices going up even more $$$$$$

but don't worry * $600 checks will save the economy!!:sarcasm:

[Breeze54]

15. Except not everyone gets a check... and I get your drift.

;)

[stevedeshazer]

10. We don't HAVE a fishing industry anymore

The collapse of salmon runs seems complete.

Fuel costs plus no salmon equals economic disaster in the Northwest, from the Sacramento River north to Anchorage.

[Breeze54]

14. In the NE Atlantic there is a fishing industry, limited and flailing as it is....

Lobster and scallop, etc. fishermen struggling between the 200 mile limit and the
Fed. Gov. restraints and limits on catches and now these high diesel fuel prices. :(

[stevedeshazer]

16. Yeah, that stinks.

More working folks going under.

[Breeze54]

21. Yup... my brother and his sons worked on lobster boats and it's rough work

but hard to make any money anymore. At least they have other ways to earn money, not like most fishermen
who depend on it for everything. I think they did it as more of an experience and extra money sometimes.

[RaleighNCDUer]

19. Well, that's not such a bad thing.

Maybe it will give the fishing stocks a chance to replenish themselves.

[Breeze54]

23. Baloney! People whom have families are going under....

and that's a bad thing. Your beef is with the Japanese fishing freighters and other countries
parked off shore, with *'s approval sweeping up all the fish onto their onboard factories!!
And * has the small USA fisherman paying for that! :grr:

[RaleighNCDUer]

31. My solution would be to average out the value of the catches over

the past five years, and have the government pay the fishermen that amount to NOT fish.

The fisheries have been collapsing for years, and they are on the brink of not recovering. That means NOBODY fishes. Blaming it on the Japanese or federal regulations is just plain stupid. You CANNOT exhaust a resource.

A one year moratorium on fishing would help a lot. A three year moratorium would guarantee recovery. A five year moratorium would save the fisheries for the next generation.

The expense for paying fishermen not to fish would be a fraction of the loss of the fisheries altogether.

[Breeze54]

33. The bans on fishing have NOT rejuvenated the fish populations.

Did you read the extra post I posted? See # 28

You are off base and ill informed.

[RaleighNCDUer]

36. I did read it, and there is no ban. There are restrictions on

fishing grounds and time on the water, but that just means that there will be more aggressive catching in the time allowed in the areas permitted, which will of course continue to deplete the fishing stocks.

I'm talking about a total moratorium - an absolute ban on fishing.

Fishing is an extraction industry like logging - you have to take care of the resource or it will cease to be a resource. A total ban is drastic, but the situation is desperate. Collapse of the fisheries is more than just a loss of some fish - it is a total ecological collapse that can and will affect the entire aquatic web.

As recently as 30 years ago a fishery collapse was inconceivable - the ocean is just too big, too full of life to be threatened. Now we know better, but continue to deal with it as if we didn't.

It isn't magic - it's basic biology. Halfway measures will not save the fisheries.

[Breeze54]

38. There have been many sanctions put in place in NE... that wasn't the only one

and they didn't change a thing... off shore fishing is also part of the problem.

[Breeze54]

28. MA fishing fleet have suffered unduly from federal fishing restrictions

State to distribute aid to suffering fleet and communities

Mon Mar 24, 2008, 04:45 PM EDT

http://www.wickedlocal.com/georgetown/archive/x125177841

snip-->

“The Massachusetts groundfishing fleet, and the communities that depend on the fleet for their economic vitality, have suffered unduly from federal fishing restrictions that have also failed to achieve the goal of reviving fish stocks,” said Secretary Bowles. “Working with Governor Patrick and our state legislators, our congressional delegation passed budget amendments to provide some financial relief in the short term. But the federal regulatory system needs to be fixed for the long term. The time is ripe to develop a regulatory regime and infrastructure that protects the fishing economy along with the natural resource in collaboration with our federal partners.”

In Feb. 2007, Governor Deval Patrick wrote to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez asking him to declare a “fishery resource disaster” in the Massachusetts groundfish industry due to federal regulatory restrictions. In April, Governor Patrick submitted documentation from the Division of Marine Fisheries in support of that request, citing regional economic losses of $22 million due to recent changes in federal commercial fishing regulations.

A series of regulations imposed under the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan since 1994 have reduced the area and the number of days Massachusetts vessels are allowed to fish. The fishery management plan’s most recent revision, Framework 42, which went into effect Nov. 22, 2006, further reduced the fishing days available to the inshore groundfishing fleet by 50 percent.

In Oct. 2007, Secretary Gutierrez denied the governor’s request for a disaster declaration, but in December, Senators Edward Kennedy and John Kerry and the rest of the Massachusetts congressional delegation succeeded in obtaining a federal appropriation of $13.4 million to aid the struggling Massachusetts groundfishing industry.

“I welcome this stepped-up involvement in fishery issues on the part of state government,” said U.S. Rep. Barney Frank. “In particular, the Governor’s efforts in support of a fishery disaster declaration were very important, and helped pave the way for Congressional approval of the federal emergency financial assistance now being provided to the state. As efforts to improve the management of our fisheries move forward, we must make it clear that appropriately flexible policies can keep fisheries sustainable without inflicting undue economic harm on fishing communities. Fishermen are among the strongest advocates of sustainable fisheries, because they don’t plan on going out of business. It is essential that they be fully involved in these state discussions and any future deliberations on reforming fishery management in New England.”

In each of his letters, Governor Patrick also stressed the need to work with federal regulators “toward our shared goals of conserving our natural resources and preserving our fishing communities.” Toward that end, EEA and DFG are launching an initiative to coordinate the Commonwealth’s representation at fisheries councils and facilitate development of innovative alternatives to the Days At Sea method of fishing regulation that would better support commercial fishing and better manage groundfish stocks. Stakeholder involvement, collaboration with state and Congressional legislators, collaboration with other states, and engagement of scientists will allow the Commonwealth to speak in a more coherent and focused voice at the New England Fisheries Management Council.

There is widespread agreement among fishermen, environmental organizations, and other stakeholders that the current federal regulatory scheme has been unsuccessful in protecting fishing communities or fish stocks. Days At Sea has been an inflexible system that focuses on time fishing vessels can be on the water, not the resource that is ultimately being regulated: the amount of fish caught.

more...

[pscot]

22. Not to worry

There are no fish left. So that works out just fine.

[Breeze54]

24. Have you been 200 miles off the shore and seen the foreign fishing factory/freighters?

Sure, blame the little guys! :grr:

[Breeze54]

27. MA groundfishing fleet have suffered unduly from federal fishing restrictions...

State to distribute aid to suffering fleet and communities

Mon Mar 24, 2008, 04:45 PM EDT

http://www.wickedlocal.com/georgetown/archive/x125177841

snip-->

“The Massachusetts groundfishing fleet, and the communities that depend on the fleet for their economic vitality, have suffered unduly from federal fishing restrictions that have also failed to achieve the goal of reviving fish stocks,” said Secretary Bowles. “Working with Governor Patrick and our state legislators, our congressional delegation passed budget amendments to provide some financial relief in the short term. But the federal regulatory system needs to be fixed for the long term. The time is ripe to develop a regulatory regime and infrastructure that protects the fishing economy along with the natural resource in collaboration with our federal partners.”

In Feb. 2007, Governor Deval Patrick wrote to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez asking him to declare a “fishery resource disaster” in the Massachusetts groundfish industry due to federal regulatory restrictions. In April, Governor Patrick submitted documentation from the Division of Marine Fisheries in support of that request, citing regional economic losses of $22 million due to recent changes in federal commercial fishing regulations.

A series of regulations imposed under the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan since 1994 have reduced the area and the number of days Massachusetts vessels are allowed to fish. The fishery management plan’s most recent revision, Framework 42, which went into effect Nov. 22, 2006, further reduced the fishing days available to the inshore groundfishing fleet by 50 percent.

In Oct. 2007, Secretary Gutierrez denied the governor’s request for a disaster declaration, but in December, Senators Edward Kennedy and John Kerry and the rest of the Massachusetts congressional delegation succeeded in obtaining a federal appropriation of $13.4 million to aid the struggling Massachusetts groundfishing industry.

“I welcome this stepped-up involvement in fishery issues on the part of state government,” said U.S. Rep. Barney Frank. “In particular, the Governor’s efforts in support of a fishery disaster declaration were very important, and helped pave the way for Congressional approval of the federal emergency financial assistance now being provided to the state. As efforts to improve the management of our fisheries move forward, we must make it clear that appropriately flexible policies can keep fisheries sustainable without inflicting undue economic harm on fishing communities. Fishermen are among the strongest advocates of sustainable fisheries, because they don’t plan on going out of business. It is essential that they be fully involved in these state discussions and any future deliberations on reforming fishery management in New England.”

In each of his letters, Governor Patrick also stressed the need to work with federal regulators “toward our shared goals of conserving our natural resources and preserving our fishing communities.” Toward that end, EEA and DFG are launching an initiative to coordinate the Commonwealth’s representation at fisheries councils and facilitate development of innovative alternatives to the Days At Sea method of fishing regulation that would better support commercial fishing and better manage groundfish stocks. Stakeholder involvement, collaboration with state and Congressional legislators, collaboration with other states, and engagement of scientists will allow the Commonwealth to speak in a more coherent and focused voice at the New England Fisheries Management Council.

There is widespread agreement among fishermen, environmental organizations, and other stakeholders that the current federal regulatory scheme has been unsuccessful in protecting fishing communities or fish stocks. Days At Sea has been an inflexible system that focuses on time fishing vessels can be on the water, not the resource that is ultimately being regulated: the amount of fish caught.

more...

[Arctic Dave]

26. Most of the flatfish fishermen in Alaska are sitting at the dock.

Diesel is too expensive.

[Breeze54]

29. That's awful.... for them and their families that depend on that catch.

:(

[Selatius]

6. I don't believe the rich are being hurt at all by high gas prices.

If a person ranks among the top 1 percent in terms of either income or net worth, the person will likely never feel any pain even if gas was 8.00/gallon. Everybody else below that is either middle class or working poor.

[progressoid]

13. Yeah, I can't say I'm feeling very sorry for those that can afford a recreational vehicle that holds

675 gallons to begin with. :nopity:

[havocmom]

7. Bet their gardners and house staff are having a worse time of it

just getting to fucking work.

[liberal N proud]

11. Brings all new meaning of "A boat is a hole in the water to pour your money"

[Liberal Gramma]

12. I know I'm a socialist at heart, but that is obscene

Children are going to bed hungry in this country, and someone can spend over 3 grand to gas up his boat?

[CRF450]

30. I dont see a problem with someone being able to afford it.

If I was making $100k or more per year I'd keep a good chunk of it too for spending. Just not on a mcmanshion or multiple huge SUV's/cars.

[madamesilverspurs]

35. And you just know

that he'll shake his head and complain about the terrible expense to his chums at the yacht club, as they all agree and whimper into their Dom Perignon. He must really be feeling the pinch. After all, the poor dear had to pump his own gas!

[Jack Sprat]

17. Isn't this why we attacked Iraq?

We needed to keep the world oil supplies safe from tyrants like Saddam, so that tyrants like BushCo could make a decent profit.

[Wilms]

18. If you got money for a boat that large...

...you probably enjoy a tax break that DWARFS the additional expenditure. Your friends friend might complain...but it's an illness.


Just discussed this today.

[Lint Head]

20. If you care what something costs you are not rich.

:dem:

[limit18]

25. If you have to ask the price you can't afford it

:thumbsup:

[Bigmack]

37. I boat...

My trawler-type gets about 8 miles to the gallon. That is very good mileage for a 32 foot boat. We use about 200 gallons per boating season.

I have friends with gas sportfishing boats that get less than one mile per gallon. Marina fuel is always more expensive than road fuel... even if there is less tax. A big, fast, diesel motor yacht uses about 20 gallons per hour, moving about 25 knots.

We noticed last year that a lot of marinas and anchorages in the Gulf Islands (Near Vancouver Island in British Columbia) contained a lot fewer US boats.

This year should be very interesting.