The Gas Tax

President-elect Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress seem to have a clear vision of the auto industry they think the country needs. It must be financially self-sufficient. It also must be capable of producing highly fuel-efficient, next-generation vehicles that can help the nation cope with climate change and finite supplies of oil.

Yet for all the conditions attached to it, the multi billion-dollar aid package for Detroit’s car makers approved by the White House (with Mr. Obama’s support) fails to address one crucial question: Who will buy all the fuel-efficient cars that Detroit car makers are supposed to make?

The danger is that too few will, especially if gasoline prices remain low. Therefore, it might be time for the president-elect and Congress to think seriously about imposing a gas tax or similar levy to keep gas prices up after the economy recovers from recession.

Americans did not buy enormous gas guzzlers just because Detroit marketed them relentlessly. They bought them because they wanted big cars — and because gas was cheap. If gas stays cheap, Americans would be less inclined to squeeze their families into a lithe fuel-efficient alternative.

Furthermore, even if the government managed to convert General Motors, Chrysler and Ford to the cause of energy efficiency, cheap gas could open the door for a competitor — Toyota, perhaps? — to take over the lucrative market for gas-chuggers, leaving Detroit’s automakers eating dust once again.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/27/opinion/27sat1.html?_r=1 (continued at link)

It is a dumb idea politically and would be VERY unpopular. Bill Clinton and Al Gore tried to impose a "carbon tax" in 1993, and that idea got now where politically because it was so unpopular with voters.

and more tax pressure on energy corps and the ultra wealthy along with rules regarding capitol flight to avoid taxes---but none of that will happen because the dems in washington are shitty whores for the ultra rich and corporations

This tax would be very unfair to the working class

David Dunham

Then you have never been outside the big european City's then?:. If you ever was to visit outside the big City's you could experience that if you do not have a car, you could have a problem..

An example.. My sister have been moving to a rural place where the bus is going twice in the day.. One in the morning, and One in the evening.. And she have not a driver license and a car.. But thankfully he have a boyfriend who have both, so it is not that bad for her as it had been, if she had been alone with two small kids... And she is living a hour driving from where I am living..

I on the other hand, have both train, and bus in 5 to 10 minutes radius from where I am living, so I guess I am pretty lucy there.. But outside the city-es, we have the need for a car we also... And i have grown up in rural parts, so I know very weal how is, when you really need a driver license, and with some luck, also a car....

And in our country we have the tax on petrol, more to the point 70% of the petrol prise is taxes.... But who complain when the petrol is Nkr 13.00 pr Liter, not pr Gallon.. (3,9L) For the moment, the price is nicer, more like 10,10 but still, 10 kr for a liter petrol, but compared to what the petrol cost when the price was kr 13, 10 kroner is rather easy to pay for,.... Not that I drive more than I need..If I can I would rather take the bus or train, just for the fun of it..

It is little how your country have been made over the last 40 year to.. In the 1950-1960s the US had the most advanced public transport service in the world.. BY far more advanced than the european counterpart, who still in the 1960s had to rebuild what was blown to smitternes in the World War Two.. Once in the time the US had a railroad system who European was trying to copy to best of our abilities... You was so far ahead that some believed that Europe could never even get into the same track as you in the US
Today the right opposite is true.. Europe have today a decent train system, and for the most part, even the poorest City have a decent train system.. The speed train in Germany, France, Spain, Italy and such is some of the best in the world - even that the japanese train system is the best in the world.. But still... And with the new EU member in the east I have a feeling that the train system would be better and better. And connecting the whole continent on a stage we have never experienced before - not since the romans ruled the antiqutiy...

What I also hope, is that we god some modern, advanced fast train in Norway too.. The current railroad who is going north from Oslo is rather old - most of it was been layd between 1850 and 1920s... A whole new concept is necessary, and in time, if we made the necessary adjustment, we can have some decent railroad between Oslo-Trondheim-Oslo-Bergen-Oslo-Stavanger and so on,.. It would cost, but I would say, it is wort in in the end... If all the dingles and bungles on the railroad between Oslo and Trondheim was made straight as possible, the current 7-8 hour tour would go down to 3-4 hour.. Then will even I who love to drive the car, because it is More comfortable than the rain, and faster, in the summer I have "clocked" 6.7 hour on a 600km long trip.. At E6, who have max at 80km a hour, maybe deside that I would take the train...

Diclotican

Sorry my bad english, not my native language

maybe there are ways to compensate for the regressive and negative affect high gas taxes have on lower and middle class Americans. I'm not sure how, but it might be possible.

Don't you think it's regressive when our nation, our states and our municipalities cut taxes so much there is no funding for roads and public transportation? If inadequate infrastructure causes Americans to spend an extra time on the road and waste more gas, would a gas tax that helped fund transportation projects save us more in the long run? When inadequate road funding causes states and municipalities to lease roads to private corporations who turn freeways into toll roads is that not a regressive/unfair tax on the lower and middle class?

Of course, it is politically unpopular because most people are too shortsighted to see it that way.

Near the bottom of the article..."fuel taxes could be offset with tax credits to protect vulnerable segments of the population."

Not really difficult.

:eyes:

The editorial has excellent points, but I wonder as do you, in a time of such recession, how a gas tax increase could be done fairly over all income classes. Even 25 cents affects only the poor and middle class. The rich, who do not need to drive or are driven in luxo-barges, could care less and are such a small percentage of the population it would be meaningless to them.

Funds need to be generated to keep those roads usable and functional. What better source for those funds than the actual users of the roads in proportion to their use. The gas tax is the country's purest form of user fee (excepting of course publicly owned utilities such as water and power). As such the gas tax is one of the most universally understood and accepted form of taxation we have.

Fucking with the gas tax to influence public energy policy will destroy the public's confidence in the tax itself. Use the gas tax to build operate maintain and repair our roads.

A big increase in the gas tax will seriously hurt many working class families.

And t should be borne by all users in direct proportion to their use and the road wear they cause. If this is the case it will not be regressive because trucks cause virtually all the damage done to roads by traffic of any kind. One loaded semi truck trailer rig is equivalent in road impact to 96,000 automobiles. Automobile loads are not even considered by highway engineers when designing road surfaces and structural sections.

As long as the gas tax remains a pure user fee it will be fair and non regressive. What it sounds like the NY Times is proposing is some sort of a surcharge designed to influence public policy by an excessive general tax and disguising it as a gas tax.