I am deeply saddened and concerned at the attitudes and logic which have been displayed in this thread. I am most disturbed that there is this belief that the government intervention in the oil market in the form of a tax increase on gasoline sales is going to be the magic bullet, or all healing bandage which will bring everything in balance, or accomplish our individualized and idealized goals.

I am amazed at the lack of depth of knowledge of the effect of government intervention in the lives of everyday citizens and its negative impact regarding their quality of life and their personal choice. We live in a nation founded on liberty, but many in our society continually point to legislation and court action to solve or regulate the actions of others which they find objectionable or which differ from their beliefs. I.e.; liberty for ourselves as individuals, but the rest of society needs to get in lockstep with us, or else.

I have always believed that you cannot legislate morality. At the same time if you cannot legislate morality, you cannot impinge the government upon the everyday activities of the common citizen without impacting them in a way which is both social and economic. If you want vehicles which use less fuel, then you go to the source of those vehicle and legislate that. If you want cleaner vehicles, then you go to the source of those vehicles and you legislate that. Increasing taxes, regardless of the intended outcomes, artificially manipulates market conditions in what is usually unexpected ways.

The impact of any tax increase has ripples that roar through the economy. Increase fuel taxes, and you increase the cost of shipping goods. Increase the cost of shipping goods, you increase the cost of those goods and in the end you pay the increased cost of those goods because of the tax increase. Most goods made today require many transportation steps before the final product is constructed and reaches the stores. As such, the final product has had the tax increase incorporated into it many times over. Businesses do not eat tax increases, they pass them along in the product cost to us the final consumer. So, not only do we pay the gas tax increase directly at the pump, we pay it in every item we purchase regardless of how basic that item is. Now, ask yourselves what the effect will be for those living on the edge of the economy just scraping by? I think the answer is pretty obvious. Any increase in consumer goods, the fuel they burn to get to work, can literally break them.

In short, economies are highly dynamic and very sensitive. Natural changes happen slowly, however enforced changes can have serious and quick effects and can effect parts of the economy that even the brightest researchers and economists cannot often predict.

It has been said:
Hybrid drivers come in 3 flavors, greenie, techie and cheapie. Pick any 2.
2005 Prius, Melinium Silver over gray, package 5 (AI)

Hi JeromeP:

___Well said!

___Good Luck

___Wayne R. Gerdes
___Waynegerdes@earthlink.net

As someone who has some experience studying economic issues, I understand your points, Jerome.

However, my opinion is not based on morality at all.

I based my opinion on the following:

1. The condition of our highways is like unto a vacuum. They HOOVER. (and I don't mean Herbert.) We need the money to fix the roads.
2. Petroleum won't last forever. Will it last 5 years. I guess so. 10? 20? 40? Let's start thinking about the alternative now, NOT when the oil pump pulls the last drop of crude out of the earth.
3. The heavier, low MPG vehicles put the most stress on our infrastructure on a per mile basis. Make those vehicles pay.

I would, like to find a way for cargo trucking vehicles to be exempt or have a lessened burden, because that's were the tax becomes regressive. I sure don't want a gallon of milk to cost $8. because of the tax on gasoline. That being said, however, I could see the hummer drivers switching to MACK trucks, even though they are smaller than what they drive now.

-Charlie...

While I support the free market....

• Aren't US taxpayers putting out 386 billion and gas pump taxes for roads? (I could be wrong on this - if so show me the links)
• Is the 1997 tax break for business vehicles that led to a surge of H2s and the largest SUVs free market?
• Is the CAFE loophole that essentially led to the SUV a goverment oversight?
• Is levying a gas tax to cover the road work "socialist"?

...just being the Devil's Advocate

61.5mpg lifetime - 82mpg in recent months

Best Run >
www.cleanmpg.com

"fanatic" is what the lazy call the dedicated

Zad.,

lars-ss started this thread, but I wish to respond to your comments.

With regard to road condition issues, the reason a great deal of our physical infrastructure in this nation is crumbling is because the monies originally collected for road improvements and maintenance have been continually routed into other non-infrastructure activities, ranging from underutilized and poorly planned ground level mass transit, to various and sundry social programs which have nothing to do with ground transport or physical infrastructure.

I live in Washington State. I live in a small city (pop. 80,000) which is surrounded by agricultural land. Considering the total acreage of the land inside the city limits, and the population that lives inside that footprint, we cannot financially justify a bus system. It cannot break even, and never does. However the tax revenues we receive from the state from the gas tax are diverted from paving our city streets into the bus system, parks and rec, a housing authority and other non-infrastructure uses, along with the labor bloat of the city staff. Only a limited amount of that money is left for public works to patch the holes in the streets.

This is a limited example, however it is a general problem with governments across this nation. Pet projects, and feel good programs are funded before basic maintenance. Mayors and council members don't get awards from the Kiwanis and Rotary for paving streets and maintaining water systems, but do if they throw money at programs and projects which don't directly address major infrastructural problems. It seems to me that there is a major disconnect between what a government is in place to do, and what elected and appointed officials allow it to do.

The money to fix the roads is there, but it has been encumbered in other projects which are significantly less important. With regard to state and local government it is an issue of priorities, priorities, priorities.

No, crude won't last forever. There are plenty of energy resources we are avoiding the use of because we are either scared of them, or don't like the tradeoffs. There is always a trade off with regard to energy production. It isn't a zero sum effect, however if you want cheep clean electrical power, you have to build dams. If you want cheep long term power generation with no air pollutants, you have to upgrade and build more nuclear plants. I could go on and on here, however there is no golden egg or silver bullet which is going to give us unlimited energy for no cost and no complications.

The impact of a vehicle on the road surface is a multifaceted factor. The weight of the vehicle is one, but the tire size and tire footprint is another. The impact of a heavy vehicle, resting on a large tire/ground surface area footprint may have less impact on the road than a lighter vehicle resting on a smaller tire/ground surface area footprint. I believe that weight/surface area gives you a factor to compare apples-to-apples with regard to the impact of a vehicle on a road surface.

Another road wear factor is the use of salt/gravel/de-icer and studded tires in the winter. All of these items make a huge mess of the road surface, especially studded tires. If Washington State were to ban the use of studded tires and allow only stud less during the winter we would have a whole lot less winter wear on the roads than we do now. But nobody has taken that step.

So, I understand your concerns, however there are better ways to accomplish these goals than messing around with gas prices.

I think this is time to quote a very old line, "work the problem, not the outcome."

It has been said:
Hybrid drivers come in 3 flavors, greenie, techie and cheapie. Pick any 2.
2005 Prius, Melinium Silver over gray, package 5 (AI)

JeromeP, All well said. But not correct in all areas.

I'm talking about doing something to "jumpstart" the SERIOUS development of alternative energy sources. Can you or I do anything? No. Which entity in the USA has the power to do that? Congress and the President, that's it.

Government intervention into personal lives of the ruled citizens is sometimes REQUIRED in a democracy - that's a fact and unavoidable.

What is one thing that can be done to curb demand in the USA? I can't think of anything else that would work besides a government intervention. All the Sierra Clubs in the world cannot do it. Gas at $67 a barrel cannot do it. 200,000 Hybrids sold in the USA in 2005 cannot do it. Five hundred Greenhybrid.coms cannot do it.

By FORCING people to modify their driving habits, their preferred modes of transportation, and by thus making it economically smart for them to do so, we attack the problem where people listen - in their pocketbooks. Deal with the consequences, but get the ball rolling !!

We could slap a 25% purchase tax on cars that do not get 25 MPG. Or how about a per person tax on vehicles - if it seats 7, tax at 7 times the rate? Nothing else I can think of besides the gas tax looks to be reasonable.

The Saudis are never going to admit that they cannot meet the projected 21 million barrels a day or whatever the Govt has planned for 2015. Technology does not exist right now which would allow them to hit that expected goal.

What's gonna jumpstart the "prepare for life without oil" revolution? Demand MUST be controlled somehow, and the American people are NOT going to VOLUNTARILY do anything about it - we both know that. If so, Hybrids would outsell SUVs by about tenfold.

In NJ, the taxes collected in 2006 will (just) cover the interest on the debt that the NJDOT ran up.

I can't fix that.

The state faced a $3b shortfall this year. I wish I could fix that.

You can't drive an interstate (save the NJ tpke and a part of 78) where there aren't big ruts between the lanes.

I am not suggesting this to manipulate the gas price, just to get something going.

-Charlie...

Well-said, lars-ss!

My points are the US road system is subsidized by the government, not a toll authority. The largest SUVs and trucks also are being subsidized, so who are they if they lecture about the free market?

61.5mpg lifetime - 82mpg in recent months

Best Run >
www.cleanmpg.com

"fanatic" is what the lazy call the dedicated

No elected official is going to vote for a tax increase unless they want to be shown the door at the next election. 99% of Americans would disagree about such a tax since it would hit their pocket books in the here and now. Most Americans hardly save for the day when the money is needed, anyway.


What will happen is any increase/decrease will be market driven. Prices will fluctuate based on supply and demand and if the equilibrium turns out to be $6/gallon then so be it. Without my help, your help or anything else economics will dictate which technology gets used. My Wrangler got a paltry 16 MPG. Gas had to get to a certain level for hybrid technology to look attractive for me.

I'll be the first to agree that higher prices can make building new refineries an attractive thing and that will lower gas costs. Supply/demand.

As for taxes to fix/maintain roads just raise the tax a penny and when people buy less due to higher efficiences figure something else out. There is no 'one size fits all' solution. If everyone one day has a plug in electric SUV with a solar panel on the roof to top off during work we may just see a per axel payment for yearly tags or plates.

This, or a per mile fee (when you get the car inspected or somesuch), it what I fear the most.

I'm sorry but a 5 ton Hummer tears up the road much quicker than my 1 1/4 ton HCH on a mile over mile, or axle over axle basis.

-Charlie...