It's all about the green...

http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/18/news...pt=P1&iref=NS1

New York (CNN News) ) -- Washington lawmakers are kicking around a new idea to help raise funds to fix our highways and infrastructure: a national driving tax charging motorists by the mile.

A driving tax could either replace the current 18.4 cent a gallon federal gas tax or, possibly, add to it.

Gas spending and prices by state

Prices at the pump can vary widely among states due to a number of factors. More

Because greater fuel economy is letting motorists drive more miles using less gas, the current gas tax that funds the federal government's efforts to build and maintain highways isn't generating enough money.


This should be a great way to stimulate the economy.

I don't get that logic either. The Ontario Gov't added an 8% tax to gas when our economy was at it's very worst and claimed that it would be good for businesses and therefore good for the economy. I'm still waiting for an explanation on exactly how that works.

When questioned about lowering taxes because of the recent increases in gas prices, the Premier replied that the high prices hurt revenue from gas tax because consumption goes down. I call BS on that answer. No way that consumption goes down enough to offset the revenue.

All of my emails to our Premier come back with a stock letter that basically reads "screw you taxpayer".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn

I'm still waiting for an explanation on exactly how that works.

---

If you get a plausible explanation be sure to pass it on. This is not a sustainable program in the short, mid, or long term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobsticks

http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/18/news...pt=P1&iref=NS1

New York (CNN News) ) -- Washington lawmakers are kicking around a new idea to help raise funds to fix our highways and infrastructure: a national driving tax charging motorists by the mile.

A driving tax could either replace the current 18.4 cent a gallon federal gas tax or, possibly, add to it.

Gas spending and prices by state

Prices at the pump can vary widely among states due to a number of factors. More

Because greater fuel economy is letting motorists drive more miles using less gas, the current gas tax that funds the federal government's efforts to build and maintain highways isn't generating enough money.


This should be a great way to stimulate the economy.

---

From a fairness perspective it's very clear that the current US (and Canadian) gasoline pump prices don't include the total environmental and social purden of using that fuel. If these costs could be imputed and fully add, the cost of gas would double, triple, or more. This is the valid concept behind the notion of a "carbon tax". (Of course an initial carbon tax wouldn't necessarily be so high as to double the pump price of gas.)

Economically a much higher gas tax would have hugh benefits:

• Moderate consumers' non-essential use of motor vehicles, etc.
• Deincentivize environmentally harmful off-shore drilling, etc.
• Fund urgently needed infrastructure renewal
• Fund and incentivize development of "green" energy sources
• Potentially fund various direct enviroment protection measures
• Enhance US (not a problem for Canada) security by reducing dependance on hostile foreign sources and thereby improve balance of payments and boost value of the US$
• And at the same time, provide economic stimulus to the NA economies at a time when private money is sitting unused in corporate bank accounts, being investing aboard, or funding economically unproductive speculation or corporate mergers.

To be clear, I'm saying that the spending by govenment and green energy investment would more than offset the drag on the economy imposed by higher pump prices.

True, contributing to the last objective would also be served by more just, (i.e. higher), taxes on the rich, and yes, in lessor measure, on the middle class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn

I don't get that logic either. The Ontario Gov't added an 8% tax to gas when our economy was at it's very worst and claimed that it would be good for businesses and therefore good for the economy. I'm still waiting for an explanation on exactly how that works.
...

---

See below ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feanor

From a fairness perspective it's very clear that the current US (and Canadian) gasoline pump prices don't include the total environmental and social purden of using that fuel. If these costs could be imputed and fully add, the cost of gas would double, triple, or more. This is the valid concept behind the notion of a "carbon tax". (Of course an initial carbon tax wouldn't necessarily be so high as to double the pump price of gas.)

Economically a much higher gas tax would have hugh benefits:

• Moderate consumers' non-essential use of motor vehicles, etc.
• Deincentivize environmentally harmful off-shore drilling, etc.
• Fund urgently needed infrastructure renewal
• Fund and incentivize development of "green" energy sources
• Potentially fund various direct enviroment protection measures
• Enhance US (not a problem for Canada) security by reducing dependance on hostile foreign sources and thereby improve balance of payments and boost value of the US$
• And at the same time, provide economic stimulus to the NA economies at a time when private money is sitting unused in corporate bank accounts, being investing aboard, or funding economically unproductive speculation or corporate mergers.

To be clear, I'm saying that the spending by govenment and green energy investment would more than offset the drag on the economy imposed by higher pump prices.

True, contributing to the last objective would also be served by more just, (i.e. higher), taxes on the rich, and yes, in lessor measure, on the middle class.

---

No.
--no
--no
--no
--no
--no
--no
--no

Effective, partially but probably not.

Feanor, what do you say to the cab driver and trucker who can't afford to stay on the road? Or the single mom who can't fill her tank to drive her kids to school and get to work? For many people gas is not a luxury and it shouldn't be taxed like one.

I just heard this morning that the stopping of all the tax breaks for big oil companies was overturned because the oil companies said that they would just raise the price at the pump to cover the loss of the tax break.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn

Feanor, what do you say to the cab driver and trucker who can't afford to stay on the road? Or the single mom who can't fill her tank to drive her kids to school and get to work? For many people gas is not a luxury and it shouldn't be taxed like one.

---

It's possible that some categories of users could be exempted from the tax -- this is the case now for farmers for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobsticks

No.
--no
--no
--no
--no
--no
--no
--no

Effective, partially but probably not.

---

I say yes - yes - yes.

'Sticks, I credit you with understanding the government spending works just like consumers spending to stimulate the economy -- there is no difference. Well, unless that you count that spending by the former on, e.g., infrastructure, education, healthcare, green energy, etc., in the domestic economy, might have a higher multiplier effect than consumers spending it on made-in-China gadgets.

The big problem in the current NA economies is that the large corporations and super rich individuals aren't spending their money -- or if they are, it isn't by investing in the domestic economy which is the only rational justification of keeping their taxes low. (There are a few right-wing pundits who say that this is so because the rich are afraid on higher taxation; this is totally disingenuous nonsense -- the really reason is that they fear the consumers won't have money to buy their wares. And they strategies could be self-fulfilling; the trend of real middle class incomes has been downward for the last 30 years.)

If there is a criticism of a carbon tax, it is that it's a regressive tax, i.e. one that hits the poorest hardest. But note that this hasn't kept "socialist" European governments from keeping gasoline taxes very high. (Let's not get going on the failures of a few EU counties to control deficits: more than profligate spending, their problems are due to their failure to collect fair taxes -- in this respect they are no different than the US.)

I read about this more than three years ago. It went absolutely no where because it would prevent the poor and elderly from driving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible

I read about this more than three years ago. It went absolutely no where because it would prevent the poor and elderly from driving.

---

That's the problem, T. Ideas that were rightly rejected in the past are coming back with fancy new labels and are being presented as new ideas. It's happening in state legislatures, too, where parties that were once minorities are now in control.

Who at your state house or in Congress actually gives a damn about the poor and elderly now? Those that do are certainly not in the majority.

Oh, and can't you Canadians a/k/a Canadiens just call for a new election? : )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dean_martin

...
Who at your state house or in Congress actually gives a damn about the poor and elderly now? Those that do are certainly not in the majority.
...

---

Right on, Dean. Damned few politicians who oppose higher gas taxes actually do so because they give a damn about the poor. But politicians are a disingenuous lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dean_martin

...
Oh, and can't you Canadians a/k/a Canadiens just call for a new election? : )

---

The election has come and gone. Apparently most Americans are blissfully unaware it happened -- but they can't be blamed because it happened in same week as the Royal Wedding and the Killing of Bin Laden. I didn't hear a single word about in CNN for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dean_martin

Oh, and can't you Canadians a/k/a Canadiens just call for a new election? : )

---

You'd think so wouldn't you? The election that Feanor mentions resulted in a majority gov't so, for better or worse, we're stuck with the current gov't for the next four years.

However, the villian who taxed gas by an additional 8% is Provincial, and Ontario's next provincial election is in October. So he could be history by the end of the year. But it won't matter...the damage is done. No gov't in it's right mind is going to reverse an 8% cash cow. :frown2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feanor

The election has come and gone. Apparently most Americans are blissfully unaware it happened -- but they can't be blamed because it happened in same week as the Royal Wedding and the Killing of Bin Laden. I didn't hear a single word about in CNN for example.

---

Yes, I saw the Canadian Royal Wedding. I was horrified when the Royal Pudding tipped over and the Princess was beamed away in some isometric cube. It was certainly a break from tradition. But everything turned out ok in the end. Ultimately, it was a great day for Canada and therefore the world.

<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/97hSfkcEyn8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dean_martin

Yes, I saw the Canadian Royal Wedding. I was horrified when the Royal Pudding tipped over and the Princess was beamed away in some isometric cube. It was certainly a break from tradition. But everything turned out ok in the end. Ultimately, it was a great day for Canada and therefore the world.

<IFRAME height=349 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/97hSfkcEyn8" frameBorder=0 width=560 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

---

Well, I think perhaps you watch the wrong Royal Wedding, but, hey, close enough. Of course either of the Royal Weddings was watched by more Americans than Canadians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feanor

Well, I think perhaps you watch the wrong Royal Wedding, but, hey, close enough. Of course either of the Royal Weddings was watched by more Americans than Canadians.

---

The off-the-wall randomness of the first ceremony touched off my funny bone for some reason. The ceremony after the princess was rescued didn't quite cut it. Anyhow, I didn't post it to offend my Canadian friends. It just appealed to my sometimes juvenile sense of humor.

HOWEVER, I do believe I watched the RIGHT Royal Wedding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dean_martin

The off-the-wall randomness of the first ceremony touched off my funny bone for some reason. The ceremony after the princess was rescued didn't quite cut it. Anyhow, I didn't post it to offend my Canadian friends. It just appealed to my sometimes juvenile sense of humor.

HOWEVER, I do believe I watched the RIGHT Royal Wedding.

---

Don't worry. No more offence take than is usual for any Southpark clip.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feanor

Don't worry. No more offence take than is usual for any Southpark clip.

---

It's been a while since they've taken a shot at southerners. My time is coming.