But, since you started with a used vehicle, then you have basically allowed someone else to 'take the loss' of all the depreciation and costs of that vehicle. You would need to include it to do a true determination of the actual cost of that vehicle...
Charlie
"P E Schoen" is a leftist weenie... no concept of the real world. I usually found that keeping a log of true expenses exceeded the "allowance" approach (*). Just make sure you keep a good log and all receipts.
(*) Though now, at 10 years of service, I take the allowance ;-) ...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
35 MPG? Is that highway MPG? Otherwise, I would question your determination. In think more realistic is 28 MPG - add 2.5 cents per mile.
As for maintenance and repair costs over the 10 years at 10K miles/year, my estimates:
(2) sets of tires, $600, $60/year (1) air conditioning job, $1,100, $110/year (1) water pump, $300, $30/year (3) lube/oil/filter/fluids per year, $40 each, $120/year (3) radiator drain/refills at $30 each, $9/year (2) transmission fluid changes, $40, $4/year (1) minor exhaust system repair, $150, $15/year (2) front brake jobs and (1) rear brake job, $150, $15/year (1) replacement of spark plugs and ignition wires, $60, $6/year (1) pair wiper blades every year - $8/year (1) replacement of tie rods, $150, $15/year (2) batteries, $60 each, $12/year (1) hose repair, $40, $4/year (2) flat tires plugged, $20, $2/year (1) tow after breaking down, $150, $15/year (1) $500 collision insurance deductible after a collision, $50/year (1) set headlight bulbs, $20, $2/year (2) other bulbs @ $2 each, $.40/year (1) either alternator or starter, $180, $18/year (1) ignition coil, $40 if DIY, $4/year (1) other electrical repair, only $20 for most in this newsgroup, $2/year
That's close enough to $550/year, about 1.5 cents per mile more than your estimate.
I would add another 1 cent per mile for whatever else can go wrong that I have yet to run into. This adds 5 cents per mile to your estimate, boosting it from 26 to 31 cents per mile.
As I see it, IRS is subsidizing business use of especially frugal vehicles, while not fully compensating use of piggish ones.
My main quibble with tax law related to vehicles is for expanding "expensing" (deduction of entire expense in 1st year as opposed to depreciating) of vehicles into a weight range that has mostly larger SUVs and "macho" versions of pickup trucks.
However, as much as the Federal government needs to pay its bills, I would favor decreasing this deduction to the true cost/mile of the most frugal new cars driven 12,000 miles/year. My guesstimate is 42-44 cents per mile.
-- - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
Am I actually doing better by only buying used cars? Am I making out by buying someone else's problem or something estimated to be about to show need for major repairs?
So far since early 1997, I have bought 3 Oldsmobiles and a Pontiac from
1992-1995 for $1400-2400, along with an abused 1980's Honda Civic and a 1976 Ford Grenada for $300 each.I only drive about 4,000 miles/year. I commute to my day job primarily by bicycle and secondarily by public mass transit. Sometimes I even do my supermarket shopping by bike.
-- - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
Local weather anomalies have little to do with global warming, or more correctly, climate change. We on the east coast of the US have already shattered several records for warm temperatures, and summer is not even here yet. The cause may or may not be caused by human activity, but the efforts to reduce excessive consumption of fossil fuels and CO2 and other pollutants are prudent in light of the very real phenomenon of peak oil and hidden costs of other energy sources. We are "barreling" toward a global economic crisis much more rapidly than climatic disasters, but earthquakes and severe storms are also putting a strain on our resources. Those who choose to dismiss this reality are either ignorant or apathetic. And that is what the government and big business want, because the truth may cause panic. But the longer we ignore this situation, the more severe the eventual collapse will be. But, hey, let's just eat, drink, and be merry with business as usual.
Paul
------------------------
You do realize that no matter how much you "conserve" that eventually you'll still run out? The real problem is not how much each individual uses but how many individuals there are in the first place.
When all these 3rd world countries start to consume significant amounts of energy then we'll see just how much of an issue it is. Libs want less waste of energy use because its "killing the planet" yet they want all these 3rd world countries to have everything Americans have(which means they will end up using as much as we do). "Spreading the wealth" helps no one in the long run.
Maybe this explains it:
From the American Astronomical Society:
/quote
Currently, the sun is in the midst of the period designated as Cycle
24 and is ramping up toward the cycle's period of maximum activity. However, the recent findings indicate that the activity in the next 11-year solar cycle, Cycle 25, could be greatly reduced. In fact, some scientists are questioning whether this drop in activity could lead to a second Maunder Minimum, which was a 70-year period from 1645 to 1715 when the sun showed virtually no sunspots./end quote
My actual average varies from 31 to 38 MPG, and it's better in the = summer. I=20 recently found my tires needed inflating and I am now averaging close to =
40=20 MPG with a combination of country roads and 55mph roads and some = Interstate.=20 My total automotive expenses for this car and my 1989 Toyota 4WD pickup=20 (which gets about 22 MPG), was:$1416 for tags, insurance, and repairs $335 gasoline =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D $1751 / 5000 miles (approx) =3D $0.35
I had a virtually identical Saturn SL-1, with 5-speed manual tranny and = no=20 power steering, and I averaged about 37 MPG and I got almost 46 MPG on a =
trip to the Outer Banks of NC. That was from 8/5/04, when I purchased it = for=20 about $3500, to 2/22/07, when my drunk neighbor veered off the road into = my=20 driveway and totaled it, for a total of 31000 miles. I got about $2800=20 compensation.
My 1997 Saturn SW-1 station wagon, with power steering, purchased in=20
10/30/02 for $3000, averaged about 32 MPG and about 38 MPG peak. It was = also=20 totaled in my driveway around 5/28/04. I received about $2400 = compensation=20 from his insurance company, and I had also received about $900 for = another=20 accident where a coworker hit the door on the parking lot. I kept the=20 vehicle until December 2008 when I junked it for $50. So I actually made =money on the purchase price.
The point is that there are many low cost options for personal=20 transportation. And I can only claim a mileage deduction for business = use of=20 my vehicle, but my personal taxes are used to reward those who choose=20 ever-larger and less-efficient means of transportation.
China has developed a 70 MPG diesel but it can't be sold in the US. = Probably=20 because it would be no match for an accident with a semi. But we really = need=20 to get big trucks off the road except for short trips from a rail depot = to=20 the final destination or from the source. Transportation is the major = use of=20 energy, and the most difficult to control in regards to efficiency and=20 pollution. Railways will be the future, as they are in Europe and = elsewhere=20 that have a more realistic cost of fuel.
Paul=20
Generally, yes. Of course it's possible any particular car will be a lemon. The depreciation of a car is steep in the first three or four years. After that it levels off. These "rules" are changing, though, with the economy (and cash for clunker, clunkers).
It's even cheaper to not own a car. In your case a cab might be cheaper. ;-)
For you, you probably come out ahead. Yes, you will have higher maintanance costs for a used vehicle, but you have saved thousands from having bought new. The original discussion was in total cost of ownership for a vehicle vs. the milieage deduction allowed on your taxes...
Charlie
As soon as you assume that everything should be taxed, and assume that any missed opportunity to tax is equivalent to a subsidy, the government must control all choices. If a company buys too-nice chairs for its employees, or too big a milling machine, government must decide to deny expensing the costs, to prevent subsidy. The next logical step is to demand that all companies make some quota of taxable profits, and not expense anything.
The whole idea of a tax on corporate profit is insane. What it's doing is killing US jobs, and making more and more companies shift their profits to foreign affiliates, keeping the money and the jobs out of the USA. I could hire another employee or two with the money my company spends on taxes, and I would. And grow a lot faster, which would make us hire even more longterm.
John
The discussion (now far from the Snow topic) is business use of a = personal=20 vehicle. A company may certainly deduct expenses of purchasing and=20 maintaining a vehicle for business purposes. That still leaves open the=20 option for a more frugal company to choose more efficient vehicles and = means=20 of transportation and other things needed for the business, and then be = able=20 to lower costs in a fair competition.
But I maintain that taxation is a better way to encourage efficient use = of=20 energy. I do not agree with banning filament type lamps, or requiring=20 automobiles to meet some sort of CAF=C9 standard as now imposed. = Instead, fuel=20 costs should reflect all costs, which includes environmental damage from =
combustion, and the cost of securing the source of supply in foreign=20 countries. The oil companies should hire their own mercenaries to = protect=20 them when they are operating in hostile countries, and they would then = be=20 the more understandable target of anger and terrorism.
US jobs are in peril for many reasons. In a global economy, companies = will=20 naturally hire the best educated and most productive employees possible, = and=20 many foreigners fit that paradigm while demanding only half of what US=20 workers feel they are entitled to. Unions have pushed the wages of = workers=20 to ridiculous levels, and at the same time place arbitrary limits on = what=20 workers may be required to do. High school and even college graduates = are=20 deficient in language and math and science skills, and their work ethic = is=20 often marginal.
The industrial age promised to relieve us from the burden of long hours = of=20 difficult labor, and promised a future life of leisure. But now we have = to=20 make jobs so that young people will not hang out on street corners and = get=20 in trouble, and we have to provide cell phones and electronic gadgets so =
that people can always be yapping away or playing games rather than=20 appreciating nature. And we have been subsidizing an ever increasing = portion=20 of the population who do not have the education, intelligence, and/or = work=20 ethic to be truly productive, so the government proposes having people=20 retire at 75 or 80. Where are those jobs going to come from?
The reality is that the concept of continued and accelerated growth is = no=20 longer valid, and it was only sustainable while there were still many=20 untapped sources of natural resources, and most of the world lived in=20 poverty. But third world nations are growing and rightly demanding a = fair=20 share of what the earth has to offer, and there's just not enough to go=20 around and support the model of growth that much of the economy is based =
upon. The earth can just barely support the population as it is, and=20 resources are becoming scarce, hard to extract, and polluted by our = excess.=20 A sustainable economy is possible, but it will require a great reduction = of=20 conspicuous consumption and selfish amassing of personal wealth. Like it = or=20 not, we will need to start living a more cooperative lifestyle and use=20 resources sensibly.
We can try to draw people toward a healthier and happier lifestyle, but = I=20 think too many are convinced that they need to, and will be able to,=20 continue with "business as usual", and some great new technological = marvel=20 will overcome the limitations we can see. Ain't gonna happen. It may = already=20 be too late, and we may just be eradicated from the earth's fragile=20 ecosphere by natural disasters and those that we have set in motion by = our=20 short-sighted and greedy rush to build our little empires of isolation = and=20 materialism. High technology and consumerism are not prerequisites for=20 happiness, and indeed the reverse is often true.
Paul=20
Fine: tax energy.
I do not agree with banning filament type lamps, or requiring
Not in the US. It is valid in China.
John
Yawn. Some businesses have to haul more that what that Saturn weighs from site to site. I used a Chevy stepvan that got around 20 MPG for my business vehicle. It had a 14' long cargo area, and I hauled over 9,000 pounds in one trip, at 18 MPG. That was 14'*7'*7' of cargo. How many dozen trips would it take you with that Saturn? How would you haul something that was 27 feet long?
-- It's easy to think outside the box, when you have a cutting torch.
I might use my other vehicle, a 1989 Toyota 4WD pickup, as I do when I=20 really need to haul something that is not appropriate for the Saturn. Or = I=20 might just rent a vehicle that is right for the job. My point is that a=20 "personal" vehicle used for business purposes generally would be = something=20 appropriate for personal use, which a car like the Saturn is perfect = for.=20 Your business vehicle was a reasonable choice and quite efficient for = the=20 job. But some people's personal vehicles are overpowered SUVs and = pickups=20 that they use as a primary means of transportation, and get 12-15 MPG=20 hauling only their fat asses.
A business that regularly needs to haul big loads would logically = purchase=20 or rent an appropriate vehicle, and the actual costs would rightly be = passed=20 on to the customer. In a free economy where there are no punitive = subsidies=20 or unfair taxes, alternate forms of transportation would possibly = determine=20 the success of a business. It should not be determined by government=20 intervention and favoritism toward, say, the Teamsters and trucks, where =
railroads are much more efficient and less damaging to the environment, = the=20 infrastructure (highways), and people (fatal car/truck accidents).
Speaking of government meddling, I vehemently oppose Obama's move to dip =
into the strategic oil reserves in an attempt to further lower fuel = prices=20 even while they are already adjusting nicely. It was an appropriate = response=20 to the loss of refining capacity due to Katrina, but this move smacks of = a=20 desperate political action to garner public support, rather than a true=20 emergency. Possibly disturbing enough to consider voting for someone = else.
Paul=20
Rent? How are you going to rent a truck at 3:00AM laod it and get it to a customr's site in under an hour? They wouldn't be happy if you bolted things to their rental trucks, either. Some businesses are on call 24/7 for safety reasons, to work at night when there are few employees are on a customer's site, or to get them back into production.
-- It's easy to think outside the box, when you have a cutting torch.
How about July?
ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/July_4_Bikini.jpg
ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/July_4_Gear.jpg
ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/July_4_Lift.jpg
ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/July_4_Skiiers.jpg
ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/July_4_Mud.jpg
ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/July_4_Steep.jpg
ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/July_4_Ticket.jpg
John
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.