That's why I propose a proportional income tax cut along with the gas tax hike. The "new tax breaks" would be driving more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Some may say the public is more sensitive to changes in the gas tax than income tax. Got an idea: move Election Day to April 16 (the day after the deadline to file income taxes).

61.5mpg lifetime - 82mpg in recent months

Best Run >
www.cleanmpg.com

"fanatic" is what the lazy call the dedicated

I'm really quite confused about ya'lls comments about your roads. Sure as heck i'll say that Alabama and South Carolina and i'm sure others that i've never actually driven in have much worse roads than Georgia...but were is all the money going from gas taxes? Were i live probably has some of the lowest gas prices due to low taxing and if i'm not mistaken Georgia roads were voted best or second best in the nation. The town I grew up in had a great rec. program and had even recently started a Bus system. Am i just missing something?

Hidden Views Photography

I agree that a jump in fuel price will get people thinking about sustainable transportation a lot quicker than the frog-in-the-pot marginal increases we're seeing, and that it would be a good (and necessary) idea to cut income tax proportionally to compensate for that, but I think it should also come with some re-arrangement of subsidies so that bio-fuels aren't getting subsidized, but also aren't getting this tax applied. We all know progressive policy like this will never come about, but it's still good to discuss it because at some point (hopefully) the monopoly on political power will have to yield to 'we the people' if the country is to have any chance at long term success.

2001 Prius Photos       2005 Prius Photos
1992 Mitsubishi Delica Diesel-WVO Hybrid Photos

NJ is corrupt. We pump tax money down some rat hole in Trenton.

::shuts up fast before his mouth gets him in trouble::

-Charlie...

I do not support behavior modification through tax legislation. If you have a problem with people's behaviors, then legislate it. If you can't legislate it, because it is unpopular, or limits personal freedom, then you can't regulate that behavior. It is that simple. Using the tax code to promote behavior modification is underhanded, dishonest, disrespectful, cunning, crude and un-American. The reason our income tax is so messed up and convoluted is because we have used provisions in the income tax code to promote or discourage behavior.

I just finished a conversation with a co-worker who I don't often communicate with. She lives in a small town a number of miles from our workplace and commutes in. Now, this isn't all that different from the rest of you, however I know her income isn't all that impressive, and her ability to purchase a new fuel efficient hybrid is impossible. Our local economy is in a perpetual state of dysfunction due to a combination of local economic forces and governmental incompetence. So, people take the jobs they can get here. She just had her second child, and her household is one income at this time. There is no public transit from her city into mine, and if there was, it would be poorly operated, stops would occur at the wrong times of the day, at the wrong places and the service would be generally unusable. The point is that for the sake of this individual and millions out there in her situation a tax increase on her fuel costs would put her over the edge financially. Is this what the proponents of this suggested "jumpstart" want to do.

Her situation is not isolated. She is surviving right now, and in time her earning power will increase with increased time on the job, more job experience and her own efforts, but slapping an artificial economic force in place for the sake of what; "jumpstarting" some sort of fuel consumption change, isn't appropriate and totally disrespectful of millions in our economy who are barely making it right now.

With all due respect lars-ss, your comments are that of an urbanite, who is surrounded every day by at least moderately effective mass transit that people could use and a whole lot of folks who drive SUVs with no apparent utility reason, and drive them poorly to boot. Ok, I understand that, but this speaks to the one-size-fits-all concept that has been floated in this thread. Take 5 years and live in a rural city with a population less than 100,000 and you will see a whole different world, bound by entirely different economic activities and rules of engagement.

The reason these thoughts scare me so much is based on what I wrote in an earlier thread, but also the lack of depth of thought regarding how economies work and the effect of artificial activities inside economies. Any knee-jerk artificial economic impact has significant repercussions on other areas of the economy you can't even imagine.

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)

Too true, you can not dictate innovation. And the funny thing about hybrids is that the people who could most benefit can not afford them.

Well, I am currently an urbanite. But I came from rural - grew up from 0 to 18 in a town of 5,000 people. From adulthood to December 1995, I lived in small towns with less than 100,000 people. So I know the deal. I empathize with people who are living on the financial edge - I have done so and even today, if I missed a paycheck, it would cause me a lot of grief and problems - so I definitely understand the "working class" to which I belong.

By saying higher gas prices would "drive people over the edge" financially, that's just showing too little faith in human ingenuity and creativity. People adapt. They survive. They cut corners. We are not animals who cannot adapt to changing realities.

What I want to avoid is what appears unavoidable: The day when panic starts to set it because oil becomes too expensive to get or too scarce to be useful. If we do not plan ahead properly, and invest into alternative research, we will come to that day, and it will be awful.

It will be WAY LESS AWFUL if we start now. Like anything, planning ahead is a good move. Because the Saudis cannot tell us the truth, we are not approaching the future properly as a country and as a people. I want us to make the changes required to smooth the transition into the "low oil or no oil" future which we all know is coming, possibly in your or my lifetime.

I'm not untouched by hearing about the working poor who are without effective mass transit. I still want to address the rest of the population with money - and gas to waste. There are countless observations of people driving vehicles way bigger than what they need. Many of those drive in a way that holds public safety and fuel economny in contempt.

Anyone venture to guess what gas pump prices would be if we drove what we did in the late 1980's? Maybe a gas pump tax is not the best idea. Putting a tax on new vehicles that get bad economy might be the lesser of evils. No solution is perfect, but doing nothing will have consequences as well.

If it were practical, I'd love to throw up my arms, move to another temperate planet, then laugh in 50 years at the suprized and arrogant people that destroyed the Earth racing around in their land barges. As long as everyone else was on another planet watching, I'd be tickled pink watching the nest the Humvee sympathizers made.

61.5mpg lifetime - 82mpg in recent months

Best Run >
www.cleanmpg.com

"fanatic" is what the lazy call the dedicated

First off, I want lars-ss and Delta to know that I'm not trying to be rude. And with the comments they have posted I have greater insight in terms of their personal situation and the outcome they want from our current fuel and oil situation. I'm grateful for that and appreciate your willingness to share.

You know lars-ss, the reason the Toyota, Honda and Ford hybrids exist is because of human ingenuity. Have you had a chance to read The Prius that changed the world? It is the treatise of modern human ingenuity. If not, it is a pretty good read, a little dry and the Japanese to English translation is good, although sentence construction is a little complex in places, but not too bad a read.

The point is that private development of energy solutions is definitely going to bear more fruit than something that is government sponsored, or forced through unnatural economic change. Case in point, the Prius was, at least according to what I have read, mostly a Toyota sponsored project. In fact, it seems that it was created out of Toyota's fear of the future vehicle market going south due to fuel shortages and emissions issues and their shrinking market share at home. I have faith that once the path is made clear, manufacturers will take advantage of it. We have to acknowledge that whatever solutions they come up with need to be economically viable, as Toyota, Honda and Ford have discovered. However, Toyota, Honda and Ford have blazed the path first, and as such they will reap the initial rewards and be the ones consumers look to for future solutions.

If you think that people are not paying attention to gas prices, I would beg to differ. People are keenly aware, however they still have to go to work and get to the store. I know people who have basically limited their personal travel to just that, because fuel prices are squeezing them down so hard. I know others who will not be running around this fall to every one of their kids' games because of this. I know others who have basically decided that home after work is a good thing, rather than out running around every night.

But back to human ingenuity. My coworker is basically at her economic limit, and way over limit if this concept of a fuel tax were created. Creative thinking and individual ingenuity on her part isn't going to help her out with regard to the impact of an increased fuel tax. Her earning power in this job is fixed. Her earning power at other places of employment would probably be less and more limited over time. I agree, that human ingenuity can get us out of many situations, however we have to look at that in terms of the population and society, but when you boil down economic changes to how it impacts a demographic, or a group of individuals, that changes how we should regard the impact we are suggesting.

Delta, I'm not really suggesting that we do nothing. I'm not an environmentalist, and I do not believe that the sky is falling, however I recognize the challenge we have with regard to petroleum. I have commented here or in another forum, I cannot remember, that we need to reduce the fuel consumption of petroleum for other uses, such as materials and chemicals, much smarter uses than burning oil. However the method by which we do that needs to be scrutinized heavily.

Individuals, such as you folks and myself, have made a personal choice. My choice was not a sacrifice by any means. With good marketing by the manufacturers and positive word-of-mouth by us we will be having an impact because we will be the poster children for driving hybrids.

Efficient vehicle technology is here right now. We are driving it. It will continue to improve because the competition for MPG between manufacturers has started. The smart ones are going to continue to push the envelope (Toyota, Honda, Ford). The dumb ones are going to continue to offer huge discounts to move the product they know doesn't meet consumer expectation. If the fed wants to have strong MPG legislation for the less motivated manufacturers, I have no issue with that. But I just cannot support a tax which may or may not change consumption, but definitely will have an impact on the average middle-class citizen in ways we can't even imagine.

Peace!

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,

No, you were not being rude.

My frustrations is with putting the land barge gang in line. While I think the Earth will definitely be able to support life in another 50 years, I think a lot of damage will occur on the current path. While a lot of the land barge gang will be dead by then, maybe they will give a flip about their grandchildren - but maybe not. It may sound strange to hear I've voted Republican in every general election since 1976, but it's getting harder to continue that....I have believed in lean government and the right to make a good living without having it taxed away, but I don't agree with the philosophy of some of the land barge gang. I'm not one of those Republicans that lobby for the government to subsidize my large luxury vehicle, pretend it's a business expense, then drive it with an "in your face - I'm rich and successful" attitude. I wish this administraton was half as serious on alternative fuels as securing oil supply. Some of these policies make a sham of limited (read: truly conservative) government. And I'm one of those Christians that would feel very bad about driving an H2 or Escalade....

I'm just frustrated with the lack of seriousness on an American energy policy.

Yes, I believe we have the technology to solve it - just not the will as of yet, but it may be changing.

I just came back from Colorado and was heartened by the hybrid inquiries....

61.5mpg lifetime - 82mpg in recent months

Best Run >
www.cleanmpg.com

"fanatic" is what the lazy call the dedicated