Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Money Talk$' started by Rufus_1611, Aug 9, 2007.
[ Emphasis added ]
First of all, Europe is losing about 3000 people a week. The Dutch are leading the whole pack, but folks in Euroweenie land appear to be fed up.
And they have socialized medicine, should we follow their lead here, as well ?
I would like to follow their lead & get us more nuclear power plants in the U.S., but a gas tax isn't needed. The government gets enough of my gas $ anyways. And I would think you would take an anti-tax stance as well.
Oh, I certainly do. Please do not think that because I posted this article that I am in favor of this socialists opinions, quite the contrary.
That's what I thought.
I don't think giving the government more money has ever helped anything, 'cept maybe the war bonds sold during WWII. I know raising my taxes hasn't ended poverty, like they said it would.
If U.S. policy is that we want to cut the use of gasoline(I am not saying that it should be) then a much higher gasoline tax is the most efficient way to go about it instead of all of this nonsense in the Congress and that President Bush is pushing to mandate the use of ethanol to reduce the usage of gasoline.
That would also be the most efficient way of destroying our economy and putting one of the final nails in the coffin of the middle class.
Under current federal government policies, the middle class is doomed regardless.
No arguing that.
Does this Ford exec. know what he is saying? Gas prices in the $7-$8 range would mean that people would drive less. When people drive less, there is less wear and tear on their car. Which means there will be much lower demand for new vehicles. Which means auto makers like Ford will be crushed. They can't even make money when demand is solid, let alone in a scenario where gas prices are that high.
People on the left have been trumpeting high gas prices for years as a way to (1) Break the backs of oil companies (2) Increase the speed at which we move towards alternatives (3) Curb gas consumption.
Truthfully, given the commuter nature of our society, I don't know how well it would work. Our society has moved (irreversably?) towards being commuter based. People drive on avg 24 miles one way to work according to some numbers I've seen. Given the lack of residential properties in major industrial cities, I just don't think this is the answer. Durables and consumer goods would nosedive. People have been predicting that the rise in gas prices would stem consumption. It hasn't. Our economy just won't bear gas prices in that kind of range.
Think about the mentality: we want to modify behavior, thus we tax it. Incentives are not bad per se, but taxation as behavior control is a fetish of Washington. It will not get any better until we move to a Flat Tax or the Fair Tax.
Exactly. Even if you live in an area with existing housing near commercial/industrial areas, a tremendous spike in gas prices would simply drive up the value of these properties in response to demand. At that point, it might not make any sense to relocate. The gas taxes vs. the higher real estate costs might just be a wash.
The only thing it might reduce is unnecessary leisure driving, but that's only going to affect a certain segment of the population. Rich Americans are still going to drive their Hummers wherever. Gas prices won't stop that.
Raise the gas tax by $2.00/gal. and consumption will definitely go down.
Flat Tax maybe, Fair Tax, I don't think so.