| |
Subject |
Author |
Date Posted |
Forum
|
 |
RE: Zip Code required to buy gas
Travelling all the way from here to Florida, for us Canadians, we enter the 3 numbers of our postal code followed by 00. Hasn't failed me yet anywhere.
X2 Works everytime
|
gitane59
|
04/29/13 04:39am |
General RVing Issues
|
|
RE: New Orleans
Now you guys are making me wan to go back to NO. We spent a week at FQRV and love every minite of it. FQRV wwas excellent. Easy off, easy onto the I10 and we felt very secure walking to the resort from the French Quarter.
Sure would have liked to have a local as a personal escort tot find the back alley out of the way restaurants and short cuts. That would have been cool.
|
gitane59
|
04/29/13 04:34am |
General RVing Issues
|
 |
RE: border-crossing fee for Canadians ?
Tell ya what:
You have us at a disadvantage 'cause Canadians make no contribution to our Federal Government, while Americans contribute substantially to the Canadian Federal Government. We don't have a Federal Sales tax like Canada does, so our Feds can't nick Canadians for five cents on the dollar like yours do to we Foreigners.(This atop provincial taxes, your version of State sales tax) Once upon a time, U.S.Americans could get that money back from Canadian Feds, but no more...
Francesca you make a very good point regarding the differences in federal tax collection processes in Canada and the US.
However I beg to differ regarding your contention that Canadians make NO contribution to your federal government coffers.
We pay the US federal fuel excise tax on every gallon of fuel we buy in the US just like you folks do so while I understand your point regarding sales tax collection I just wanted to point that I do contribute to your federal government in not so small of a way considering the lousy fuel mileage my Ford truck gets:)
|
gitane59
|
04/28/13 05:32pm |
General RVing Issues
|
|
RE: border-crossing fee for Canadians ?
As my avatar indicates, I live in a border State and can actually see Canada from the beach not far from my house. It's a tourist town, too- we even have an "International Airport". I think that qualifies me as an interested and affected Citizen of the Northern Border and of the whole United States to boot.
Here's where Thoughtful Consideration of this matter leads me:
I think it outrageous that Canadians who admittedly cross the border for the sole purpose of saving a LOT of money on goods and services would presume to
a) Object to the payment of a fee for the privilege of entering the CountryWell I suppose you could view yourself as nothing but a supersized Sam's club, but I think your selling your conntry short
and
b)
Presume to enter into political decision-making by any but their own Government.Countries lobby other countries all the time trying to persuade and cajole them to make decisions that affect them. Countries are made up of common citizens like you and I with opinions. I don't see your concern.
On the bright side:
Since according to some, Canadians will be spending all their money in Canada rather than pay a few bucks to save hundreds down here, both merchants and Treasuries on the Canadian side must be jumping for pure glee at the prospect!
Shame on me for not noticing your avatar indicating your location. My apologies.
Yes Canadian merchants are gleefully hoping that your congress passes this fee so they can jack up their prices once again since they will not have to compete as they finally have been forced to in the past year.
Case in point, Due to family commitments we could not cross border shop this weekend.
Results
I had to buy a scrawny little chicken from a Canadian supper market for a beer can chicken dinner I promised to make for $14.50 which I know I would have cost me about $7-8 for a nice plump chicken in the US.
But money isn't everything as according to many Canadian's that refuse to cross border shop your meat is full of hormones and drugs.
|
gitane59
|
04/28/13 02:40pm |
General RVing Issues
|
|
RE: border-crossing fee for Canadians ?
I hope this proposal isn't held hostage by:
a) The protests of foreign Citizens
and/or
b) those few U.S. towns along the Canadian Border that fear losing a few customers (Temporarily, I assure you.)
A few more statistics for us to digress. According to the state of Michigan published numbers only 25% of all dollars Canadians spent last year in Michigan was spent in the counties directly bordering Canada. Therefore the benefit is not limited to "those few US town's", in fact 75% of all dollars was spent away from the border.
While an entry fee may generate a couple billion dollars in 2010 the latest year I can find data for it is estimated that at a very conservative rate that Canadians spent 18-20 billion dollars in the US.
Personally if the fees is around 5 dollars a head that will not stop me from crossing altogether. What will stop me from crossing is any further delays caused by the collection of such fees.
|
gitane59
|
04/28/13 12:53pm |
General RVing Issues
|
|
RE: border-crossing fee for Canadians ?
Say what????? "Our communities????
Since WHEN is "the community of Foreign Nationals" a constituency of U.S. lawmakers???
The statement is the more ludicrous given that to date, every non-border State in The Union pays as much or more for Homeland Security as the border States do- but without any economic benefits at all.
If Sec. Napolitano was proposing a fee imposed on the beneficiary STATES, I could see a reason for Lawmakers to protest. But the collection of an entry fee from non-Citizens is so obviously correct, I'm surprised it hasn't been in effect for at least as long as entry fees for National Parks.
I'll say again:
In what universe is it O.K. to charge U.S. Citizens ten bucks (a day!) to enter the National Parks we pay for already, and NOTHING to foreign Nationals to enter the whole Country????
Francesca:
The communities referred to in the letter are the US communities/cities along the northern border from the east to west coasts that will suffer with the lose of jobs, businesses and tax revenue from the reduction in cross border visits from Canadians, and there will be a major reduction and it will be borne by these northern US border states.
I do not know from where you hail, but I can tell you that the citizens who live along both sides of the northern border of our two great countries for the most part understand that it is a mutually beneficial relationship and anything that is done to impede or damage that relationship should be considered with great thought to the consequences.
I also wonder how the US border patrol agents will feel about the possibility of becoming cashiers and having there attention and focus taken away from their first responsibility of security
|
gitane59
|
04/28/13 11:51am |
General RVing Issues
|
|
RE: border-crossing fee for Canadians ?
I am inserting the Letter addressed to Janet Napolitano from 19 US Congress representatives expressing their concerns with this proposed fee.
"The Honorable Janet Napolitano
Secretary of Homeland Security
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Dear Secretary Napolitano:
We write to convey our strong opposition to a proposal in the Department of Homeland Security’s Fiscal Year 2014 budget request, to study whether fees should be assessed on passengers and pedestrians at land border crossings.
This proposal would harm our border communities that depend on cross border travel and commerce. We urge you to reject it.
The economic integration of the United States and Canada and the facilitation of ease of access between the two countries should be a high priority for our federal government. Canada is our largest trading partner and the economic impact of Canadians on northern border communities -- and the benefit that Americans receive from traveling to Canada -- is significant. These economic and social traditions have solidified over centuries and should be promoted, not hindered. The future shared prosperity of communities on both sides of the border depends on it.
Further, such a fee would abrogate the spirit of the recent “Beyond the Border” agreement between the United States and Canada, a historic accord to facilitate cross border commerce on the Northern Border.
Given this, we were shocked to see that the Fiscal Year 2014 budget request proposed a study for a new toll on all passengers and pedestrians crossing the border from Canada into the United States. The imposition of such a toll would act as a barrier to the greater economic integration that we seek, and is the absolute last thing we should be doing to grow our economy. It would be a waste of government resources to even study the flawed idea.
Some have suggested that the toll could be used to offset the cost of increased security measures necessary to remain vigilant in a dangerous world. However homeland security and border protection are national priorities that benefit the entire country. Their cost should not be disproportionately borne by our communities, which should not be singled out and asked to do so.
We will actively oppose new fees for land border crossings and we urge you to reconsider this misguided proposal. At a time when we are looking to increase economic activity at our Northern Border, we should not be proposing policies that would do the reverse.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Rep. Dan Benishek (MI-01)
Rep. Chris Collins (NY-27)
Rep. John Conyers (MI-13)
Rep. Kevin Cramer (ND-At Large)
Rep. Suzan DelBene (WA-01)
Rep. John Dingell (MI-12)
Rep. Richard Hanna (NY-22)
Rep. Brian Higgins (NY-26)
Rep. Derek Kilmer (WA-06)
Rep. Ann Kuster (NH-02)
Rep. Rick Larsen (WA-02)
Rep. Dan Maffei (NY-24)
Rep. Betty McCollum (MN-04)
Rep. Mike Michaud (ME-02)
Rep. Candice Miller (MI-10)
Rep. Bill Owens (NY-21)
Rep. Gary Peters (MI-14)
Rep. Louise Slaughter (NY-25)
Rep. Peter Welch (VT-At Large)"
|
gitane59
|
04/28/13 09:15am |
General RVing Issues
|
|
RE: border-crossing fee for Canadians ?
Ok some statistics on the cross border trips across the northern border for context. Before 911 Canadians made 90 some odd million same day trips yearly across the US/Can border
2012 Canadian's made 62 million same day trips into the US. The numbers are already down 1/3 since 911.
Many Canadians enjoy shopping weekly in the US for many reasons, selection, price, customer service.
I have been crossing the border for 50 plus years and have never felt unwelcome. I do not consider my crossing of the border to be "using" the US in fact.
I understand the user pay concept but as I said in a email to the mayor of Port Huron this week my wife and I are spending about $1000 monthly on groceries and fuel that we purchase in the Port Huron area. We use none of the social services, we pay the tax Michigan sales tax and we use none of the services.
I personally know of many local people who weekly purchase fuel and groceries in the US.
Over the year we are spending over 10,000 in Michigan on day trips which will be the ones most heavy curtailed by this proposed fee.
I can assure my American friends that implementing this will have a very chilling affect on the number of day trip that Canadians for shopping purposes.
The entire Western New York congressional delegation is up in arms over this proposal and are firmly against it as they understand it will cost American businesses and jobs if implemented as it will likely become the straw that breaks the camel's back for same day cross border shopping trips.
Even my wife and I who have crossed weekly for many years doubt whether we would continue to cross as we do know.
I have spoken to many Michigan business owners and have specifically asked them how much business Canadian's provide and many have stated that without Canadian dollars they simply could not stay in business.
I have read articles in the Port Huron media announcing store openings in which the business owners have stated that they are opening in part to draw the Canadian shoppers.
Implementing a US land border crossing fee for border crossings will unfairly tax people coming from Canada who will be subsidizing the intensive border crossing efforts and the associated costs of securing the southern US border.
I am trying to express me opinion by email directly to the governor of Michigan and the Michigan congressional representatives but their webpages will only accept comments from US addresses.
I would ask all of my American RV'ing friends that live along the Can/US border to express to their congressional representatives that this proposal should be dead in the water before it debate even starts.
|
gitane59
|
04/28/13 07:05am |
General RVing Issues
|
|
RE: I-77 from Charlotte to Akron
Just apssed through there a couple weeks ago along that route. Very campgrounds along that route if you need to overnight.
|
gitane59
|
04/16/13 04:14am |
Roads and Routes
|
|
RE: Merging onto an Interstate
I have yet to see a yield sign on an on ramp.
I was thinking this but was not confident to say anything. I will now be looking for yield signs at the end of freeway on-ramps, but I too don't think I will see many.
|
gitane59
|
04/13/13 06:46pm |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Merging onto an Interstate
Remember the key word is merge. Spend some time watching, you will see most drivers don't know how to merge in a BMW, let alone a truck and camper.
I agree with GMT830
What I try to do is when I am comming up the ramp especially if it is a clover leaf, I will start looking for the oncomming traffic even before I get to the accelleration lane. Plus just like a car it is good to know how fast you CAN accellerate, which makes it easier to judge a safe merge.:h
Plan ahead, have your blinkers on well before you actually merge, look for your opening well before you need to move into it and as others have said PUNCH IT.
I even look back up the expressway as I am coming up to a clover leaf before turing onto merge access road if sightlines allow to gauge traffic flow and my merging plans.
Only problem is when you come up behind a driver that decides to come a full stop in the merge lane in a four-wheeler looking for a open aircraft carrier deck to merge onto. :M
I've actually passed stop vehicles on merge lanes when I have not been towing with a big chuckle.:B
|
gitane59
|
04/13/13 06:21am |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Merging onto an Interstate
Remember the key word is merge. Spend some time watching, you will see most drivers don't know how to merge in a BMW, let alone a truck and camper.
I agree with GMT830
What I try to do is when I am comming up the ramp especially if it is a clover leaf, I will start looking for the oncomming traffic even before I get to the accelleration lane. Plus just like a car it is good to know how fast you CAN accellerate, which makes it easier to judge a safe merge.:h
Plan ahead, look for your opening well before you need to move into it and as others have said PUNCH IT.
I even look back up the expressway as I am coming up to a clover leaf before turing onto merge access road if sightlines allow to gauge traffic flow and my chance merging plans
Only problem is when you come up behind a driver that decides to come a full stop in the merge lane in a four-wheeler looking for a open aircraft carrier deck to merge onto. :M
I've actually passed stop vehicles on merge lanes when I have not been towing with a big chuckle.:B
|
gitane59
|
04/13/13 06:15am |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Crossing International border -- Canada to US
BTW --- I found out some years ago that people drive like they are INSANE on the QEW. A great road to avoid during "Rush Hour".
No different than the insane drivers I'ved experienced in Indianapolis, Atlanta, Detroit.
But nobody tops Montreal drivers from my experience for insanity.:B
|
gitane59
|
04/12/13 06:50pm |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Crossing International border -- Canada to US
hone eagle How about giving your fellow Canadians (GPG52) a break. I could read their message about travel, just fine.
Happy tolerant camping.
Lakeside
Sorry but I never even tried to read the entire post other than the first sentence. My eyes started hurting and my brain starting spinning trying to read that one continuous mass of letter and words.
|
gitane59
|
04/12/13 06:45pm |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Different Tires
Many times settlements are unable to be disclosed due to non-disclosure agreements. In addition parties who have a judgement against them have a tendency not to brag about it on the Internet.
This has been discussed in previous threads.....
If you watered your sidewalk before you had invited guests over, and one slipped and broke an ankle(because YOU water the walkway) and then got a fat judgement against you and your insurance company - would you post on here for all to see? Hardly!
Although criminal and civil cases are treated very differently, many people often fail to recognize that the same conduct can result in both criminal and civil liability. Perhaps one of the most famous examples of this is the OJ Simpson trial. The same conduct led to a murder trial (criminal) and a wrongful death trial (civil). In part because of the different standards of proof, there was not enough evidence for a jury to decide that OJ Simpson was guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" in the criminal murder case. In the civil trial, however, the jury found enough evidence to conclude that OJ Simpson wrongfully caused his wife's death by a "preponderance of the evidence".
While you do provide a sliver of plausible fact in your wide ranging opinion of very unrelated circumstances and you could be correct that civil suits would likely not be made public what you neglect to acknowledge is that any judgment against any RV'er would not be made for simply having LT tires in place of ST tires.
There would be other facts such as grossly overloaded tow vehicle weight, grossly overload trailer weight, incorrect braking, driver recklessness.
There simply is not a law in either of our countries that anyones has produced that arbitrarily prohibits installing LT tires on a towed trailer after the initial sale as long as the sum of the replacement tires are equal to or greater than the axles rating. Period.
I"m still waiting
|
gitane59
|
03/21/13 09:32pm |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Different Tires
See this thread-
http://forums.trailerlife.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/26517705.cfm
If your trailer placard lists ST tires and you are running LT you are going to have issues in an event of a tire related accident.
There is nothing in that thread that proves a darn thing. It is simply one persons opinion, and in fact that one person is of the mind set that all ST tire failures are user caused events of one type or another.
This totally discount individuals who have experienced multiple ST tires failure prior to switching to LT tires and then never having another failure inspite of doing nothing different with their maintenance routines or driving behaviours.
Once again 2 words PROVE IT
Show us case law or a first hand report of a person being held responsible solely for installing LT tires on appropriate rated axles against a placard stating ST tires as original equipment after first sale.
I'm waiting:Z
|
gitane59
|
03/21/13 07:11pm |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Different Tires
I am new to the RV world, so bear with me. I just bought a Fuzion with ST 235 80 Grand Ride Power Touring tires. It says "for trailer use only on them". Aren't LT tires for light trucks? Is there a down side to using LT tires on a 5th wheel? I typically tow at 65 or less anyway. Am I likely to have an issue with these tires?
One of the downsides (which those LT advocates seem never to point out) is that if they trailer is speced for ST tires you could be held liable in a civil case if your in an accident involving the tires.
2 Words PROVE IT!
|
gitane59
|
03/21/13 11:51am |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Different Tires
PLEASE PROVIDE A LINK SHOWING THE NEW STR TIRES ARE A BAD DESIGN. NOT THE OLD ONES-----THE NEW ONES!!
Only time will tell whether this new design is any better than their previous disastrous tire. Google searches show a number of discussions about failed STR tires with separations but not enough information or proof to really conclude any trends.
People should keep in kind that bottom line do you trust the RV manufacturer to provide you a quality long life tire in a lowest cost bid process. Keep in mind everything is riding on your tires.
CKNSLS I know your position that RV manufacturers and tire manufacturers are all to be trusted that they the consumers best interest at heart. I'm not quite so trusting.
|
gitane59
|
03/21/13 07:14am |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Different Tires
I traveled for two years on OEM tires supplied by the manufacturer without issue.
The airplanes you fly in also contain parts supplied by the lowest bidder. FYI.
Please give me a break. Are you seriously asking me to accept that airplane and RV specifications and design guidelines are even remotely comparable.
The quantity and quality of dynamic physical and computer modeling testing of airplane parts and RV parts is galaxies apart and to compare lowest cost bidder in such technically and regulatorily different industries is a very naive comment.
|
gitane59
|
03/20/13 07:06am |
Fifth-Wheels
|
|
RE: Different Tires
Your trailers Tow Max tires are a product of the lowest cost bidding process that allows or causes companies like Tredit to submit bids to the trailers manufacturers for the lowest cost wheel and tire combinations that meet the minimum specifications required to get the trailers moved from the factory to the dealer.
These wheel and tire suppliers don't care how long or how short the tire life is after the dealer sells the trailer nor do the manufacturers. they just need the tire to survive until it leaves the dealers lot.
Question is, if this is the quality of tire you want on your unit while travelling on vacation with your family and all your possessions?
|
gitane59
|
03/19/13 07:00pm |
Fifth-Wheels
|
