posted
Did any of you hear about a column in the NY Times by Thomas Friedman who proposed something that can be done right now to curtail oil consumption: create a tax that fixes the pump price at $3.50 to $4.00 a gallon no matter where the OPEC price goes?
A friend of mine mentioned this to me and I got to thinking that while no-one likes a new tax, the idea might provide additonal revenue. If for instance the current price is actually $2.25 a gallon and the set price is $3.50, the additional $1.25 per gallon could be placed into a dedicated transportation fund that can then be divided up each year amongst air, rail, and road transportation.
It seemd to me an interesting thought! What do you all think?
Posts: 171 | From: Aurora, Illinois | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
While this may have certain possibilities I do think it would create undue hardship on low income people who need their cars to get to work. Also jobs like taxi drivers have already raised their fares to cover the cost of gas. Lawn services were hard hit here with gas prices well over $3,school bus costs etc. ditto. It seems to me, and I may be wrong, that more people drive in their daily lives than vacation.
Posts: 1577 | From: virginia | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
Sure, the economy will go into an immediate recession. NO ONE, either an individual or business, can handle an immediate jump to $3.50 or $4.
However, since we're apparantly "past peak" http://www.princeton.edu/hubbert/current-events.html we'll be at $3, then $4 per gallon of gas before we know it. I feel sorry for all those yuppies sipping their starbucks in their Expedition/H2. They will have to foreclose and we as a country will have to pick up the tab.
We have NO efficient, mainstream transportation modes in this country. Every city has now adapted to the single person tooling around in their own personal car. That is at least a ton of metal (2+ tons for an SUV) for one person. Basically we're screwed any way you look at it.
Posts: 286 | From: Knee deep in the retention tank | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oil needs competition. Bio-fuel will be available in a few years. This will bring the price down a bit.
Posts: 562 | From: Beaumont Texas | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What happens when to much to many farms are tilled for ethenol instead of food? Well I hope all those tabacco farmers can fuel plants?
Posts: 516 | From: New Haven, CT USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
To curtail consumption we need to make more means of public transportation available instead of more roads,get people to use car pools when possible, encourage employers to make more use of working at home via computer and for the average citizen to do errands all in one shot rather than many trips to do the necessary things. We lineup all the things we need to do,bank, grocery, etc then do it all in one trip ending up at home. We have saved quite a bit on gas doing this,
Posts: 1577 | From: virginia | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course the NYTimes would suggest such a thing in their insular world of the 50 mile or less circle around lower Manhattan, public transportation is plentiful. It is not the yuppies in their SUV's that will hurt, although they will be noisy about it. The real hurt belongs to people that are struggling to keep the bottom of their gas tank wet so they can get their clunker back and forth to work where there is no alternative method of getting there.
Yes there are a lot of things that need to be done to reduce teh use of gasoline but presenting people with the choice of buy gas or food should not be one of them.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I saw the Friedman column a few days ago. I think he's right that gas taxes need to be increased, but not nearly by the amount he suggests.
The last time the federal gasoline tax was increased was in 1993, when it went to 18.3 cents per gallon. Since it has not changed in 13 years, inflation has caused the value of the tax to decrease over time. According to this site: http://www.cts.umn.edu/events/oberstarforum/2005/2005oberstarspeech.html#gastax the tax would need to be increased by 5.5 cents to adjust for inflation since 1993.
That site also indicates that every cent in gas taxes generates between $1.3-1.5 billion per year. One cent increase in the gas tax would cover Amtrak's current level of funding, and I doubt anyone would notice.
So I don't think we need to raise gas taxes anywhere near $2.00 per gallon to provide effective funding for alternate transportation. $2.00 would generate a whopping $260 billion, which would be overkill.
An extra 20 cents per gallon might be more realistic. That would generate $26 billion per year for alternative transportation. It would be just enough to make people think twice before buying an SUV, but not enough to significantly break anyone's budget. After all, the price of gas this last year increased and decreased by almost 50 cents in the course of a few months, and civilization did not crumble.
Posts: 2649 | From: California's Monterey Peninsula | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
At one point there was a discussion in some parts of the government to make the gas tax a percentage of the commodity price of oil instead of a cents per gallon. Seemed to go no where. Yes, it probably should be higher, but only if some of can be used other than on highways. At this point to increase the gas tax would actually make the problem worse because it would permit and encourage greater spending on roads.
Speaking of cars: Right now you can get a good deal on a used car in a lot of the Southeast and Texas, but if you take one you are likely to find you have got one that has been flooded. I can tell you from the experience of several people, once a car has been underwater to the point that water has gotten into the engine and controls, paticular if under salt water or very dirty water, it will NEVER run right again for very long no matter what you do.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Have we forgotten already the "earmarking" in the recently passed Transportation Legislation. Friends, the money is there, We must insist that it be spent more wisely.
To raise taxes in proportion to the CPI or some other index would just give those wanting to buy their reelection additional opportunities.
Term limits is becoming more appealing to me. To those who say we would loose experience with term limits I suggest that we need very very few new laws, perphaps we need to repeal several we now have.
I am encouraged, a little, that there are some in Congress and the Senate that are speaking up about the appropriations for questionable items. Lets see the media get after this, but I doubt it as they also have agendas that benefit from more "special interest" spending.
Posts: 467 | From: Prescott, AZ USA | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
A number of years ago my father saw a bumper sticker that said "Don't re-elect anybody" Still sounds like a pretty good idea when you look at a lot of the clowns in elected offices.
Posts: 2808 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr Toy: You might have forgotten that all of that 4.3 cent per gallon tax enacted by democrats in 1993 went to the general fund. None of it stayed in transportation. Getting that 4.3 cents back in tansportation would help the situation, especially if Amtrak could get 2 cents of that tax money.
Write your congress critter.
Posts: 1418 | From: Houston, Republic of Texas | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
A little additional research has resulted in this last years data: Number of EARMARKS 13,997 with a total cost of $27.3 billion.
Two of the most significant (guilty) elected participants are Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska and Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W. Virginia. But there are many others, both Republican & Democrat, and we who pay the bill seem to be the only resource to correct this when we vote. Especially when the violators, and the only folks currently who have the power to bring justice to the budget process, are the same people.
Those of us who are registered Independents may find it easier to criticize both Democrats and Republicans, but the most effective criticism should come from those who will critize those of their own party. We are all Americans first.
Posts: 467 | From: Prescott, AZ USA | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
