AutoblogGreen

I feel this requires a response.

National Center for Public Policy Research is a conservative think tank and has been well funded by Exxon in the past. Please take this into account when reading this article!

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=59

Reply

Well I am not a conservative and I don't want to pay a higher gas tax. The reason is I pay enough in taxes already. There is this assumption among proponents of higher gas taxes that "everybody" will be able to just pay more or drive less and all will be right with the world. That is, to use a scientific term, just stupid!

Reply

"We need to also ask whether people would still be willing to pay more, given the almost certain futility of it"

They sound pretty darn biased, and most likely gamed the poll to reflect there own viewpoint.

Maybe the question should be more like "If you have to pay $5 a gallon for gasoline, would you want most of that money to go to the government to pay for things like health care, roads, and other public good, or would you want most of that money to be profit for Exxon?" I think you might get very different results.

Reply

The issue here is bigger than just this as a tax to limit consumption. Gas taxes, both state and federal, are the largest financing mechanism for funding new and upgraded infrastructure as well as maintaining existing lane miles.

The federal gas tax has not been raised in 15 years in which time 15 years of inflation, and inflation related to roadbuilding, has been increasing at a faster rate than the overall ~3% inflation.

Of course you can fund roads via other methods like property taxes (think road bonds) and sales taxes but this in inherently unfair as those two activities have no correlation to how much driving a person does.

The road infrastructure in this country is in poor condition overall. I know that in Texas alone their are hundreds of bridges that are deemed "structurally insufficient" or "functionally obsolete."

Raising the gas tax can address these issues and curb consumption. People will drive a little bit less with a $0.50 gas tax increase but this will be more than made up with by the additional revenues (see Texas' recent cigarette tax increase as an example of this usage/revenue equation).

Please remember by and large that gas tax revenues stay within this country whereas since we get almost 70% of our oil from abroad that money goes to other countries.

The argument that this would have minimal global impact is ignoring the fact that the Europeans have been very aggressive in setting tax codes to reduce consumption. Even China is thinking about some very aggressive measures.

As far as regressive taxes I think we should look at all our taxes and decide which ones we want to be flat and which ones should be on a scale. I would rather see some other tax converted to a progressive one and have the gas remain a flat tax since consumption has negative effects environmentally and security-wise.

As far as opposition to this by groups I would like to see the breakdown by how much individuals consume and what kind of vehicles they drive. My hunch is that that guy with the Suburban who commutes 80 miles a day is in opposition because he himself doesn't want to either change his behavior or pay the price for it. The real lesson here is that most Americans don't want to bite the bullet, but would rather have the most convenient solution, regardless of whether or not it is a real one. Kinda reminds me of our current econ. stimulus package.

Reply

The way our government currently spends money is a big impediment to getting Americans to give up more of our money. The assumption that all gas tax revenue increases will go towards infrastructure, is something I think most Americans would not believe will happen. All of the publicity around wasteful spending has the effect of driving down public confidence in any politician who promises how tax money will be spent. Personally I think the farm bill is a classic example of this.

Reply

I don't want to pay the true cost of my lifestyle, either. Get someone else to pay for it!

But really, a straight gas tax is a political no-starter. It needs to be revenue neutral to have a chance. Take all revenues from this tax and divide it up evenly among everyone. Then a lot more people, especially those who drive the least, would be in favor if it.

Reply

US voters have an incredibly low opinion of their elected officials. Common sense should tell them that constitutional organs - defined in the 18th century - are failing in the 21st. The obvious answer is to rewrite the document from scratch, keeping the values but completely revamping everything else. Other countries have done this, though it was usually only possible in the wake of a revolution or a war.

Note that the UK has an even older constitution, but it relies on an indirectly elected prime minister rather than a president. That means governments there have an in-built majority in the legislature. Citizens therefore expect their government to enact a coherent set of laws while the loyal opposition holds it to account and formulates alternatives.

But all that aside, gas taxes should only be considered as a way of forcing individuals to *earn* a net tax break as a result of behavior modification. They should not be used to substantially increase the total tax burden.

Reply

Now just doesnt seem like the time. A suburban for a prius isnt an even trade, and people dont seem to be able to carry the cost of that additional car until it pays for itself because they made to many other poor decisions in the recent past. It would be better and less resentful if they waited a little while in hopes things get better or let people adjust. Or they could set a price floor for gas.

Reply

And why is ABG using fox as a 'news source'? http://store.bravenewfilms.org/ofadvd.php

Reply

"48% of Americans say no"

Oh, no bias there, is there? How about, "52% of American say YES!"?

Reply

Either you pay higher gas taxes or you privatize the roads, then you can pay $3 for each highway and bridge you use daily. Of course Fox "news" is the Aristocratic Movement's Mouthpiece, so naturally they want every 1 cent of revenue to go to the top 1/10th of 1 percent of the population. All Hail the Aristocrats! Who will they crown the new King of America?

Reply

well i don't think anyone has said this yet(which i find a bit odd) but this was on fox news. to say their is no bias would be absurd.

Reply

The UK has a constitution? That's news to me.

Reply

" 48 percent of respondents said that there were unwilling to pay any extra at all in gas taxes"

Let those who want to pay more taxes do it. Don't force those who don't want to pay more to avoid them. Seems fair?

Reply

I think we're missing the bigger picture here; performance per dollar.

Using California as an example, the state legislature already squanders the 18 cents per gallon it receives to fund road maintenance. It's taken a decade of ballot initiatives to stem the tide of funding raids which bankrolled wholly unrelated projects elsewhere within the state.

When the state cannot spend existing funds in accordance with the voters' wishes, why would anyone entrust the legislature with yet more money?

Don't use taxation as a stick to beat consumers into reform.

Instead, let the market continue to innovate and reap the rewards on a commercial and ecological level. When it comes to return on investment, the private sector will always beat the legislature.

http://davidmoll.wordpress.com/2008/03/21/holy-foregone-conclusion-batman/

Reply

Of Course it's better to give the money to the Aristocracy, that need to buy the Hope Diamond.

Reply

How about a survey that asks the question would you rather spend $5 a gallon for gas with the revenue going to provide education, health care and welfare for illegal aliens or to Exxon to employ thousands of Americans. Loaded questions work both ways.

While a consuption based tax has appeal but we tend focus only on commuters, consider the costs to business delivering goods and services. If their gas bills go up, their prices rise, and we face inflation.

Then again it is all a moot point anyway, with the new CAFE numbers total revenue from the gas tax will fall making an increase inevitable. It will just fall in the lap of some future politcian to deal with.

Reply

What a laugh:
How about a survey that asks the question would you rather spend $5 a gallon for gas with the revenue going to provide education, health care and welfare for illegal aliens or to Exxon to employ thousands of Americans.

Check out Gold Plated Retirement Package,
while Exxon cuts Employee Benefits:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/12/AR2006041201844.html

How about a survey "Should we Lynch the Assholes Destroying America?"

Reply

Whether someone will support or oppose any tax depends on how much of that tax they expect to pay, and what benefits they expect to receive from that tax revenue.

Obviously, someone who drives an efficient car very little but wants the potholes fixed would favor an increased fuel tax. Someone driving a big gas guzzler a lot will ignore a lot of potholes to save a bit at the pump!

Tragically, the occasional misuse of tax revenues that arise, makes it much harder to increase taxes for necessary improvements.

Reply

In instituting this or any kind of program that involves some sacrifice, one requires leadership that paints the big picture for people. Just suggesting that a tax will be levied will immediately pull for negative responses. On the other hand, the US has become too used to paying very little in taxes for public benefits. Whether this is a gas tax or another tax, the whole notion of using tax money for the common good needs to be reintroduced into our discourse. Otherwise we are going to gradually sink into being a banana republic with huge disparities in wealth, much corruption and privatization of public services for the rich and a miserable public infrastructure for the suffering majority.

Reply