should the US tax gas more?

[zimv20]

i'm watching (american) football, and have been noting how many car commercials there are during such events, and how BIG these friggin' things are getting. (in particular, the ad w/ the huge Ford pickup truck sitting on top of a rock and growling).

so i did a little fact checking:
- U.S. deliveries from primary storage of motor gasoline in July were 9,099,000 barrels/day (1)
- fed tax on a gallon of gas, 18.4 cents (i think that's a 2001 figure) (2)
- average state tax, 23.6 cents (again, 2001) (2)

i'm gonna combine these stats, a little sloppily, but what we've got:
- using the july 2004 numbers, americans are buying 6,005,340,000 gallons of gas/year (i'm figuring 55 gallons/barrel)
- that works out to roughly $2,522,242,800 tax revenue/yr, $1,104,982,560 of which is federal

check out how other countries tax (2):

Many countries assess higher tax rates and use the revenue for their general fund budget. For example, four countries, the Netherlands, France, Italy and Belgium assess more than $3 in taxes on every gallon of gasoline.

so what if the US did that?

based on the numbers above, a total of $3 fed tax / gallon would get the fed $18,016,020,000 / year, or $49,358,958 / day. with a national debt (http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/) of $7.4 trillion, which increases $1.69 billion each day, we could actually reduce that to a little over a billion each day.

or shore up social security. or stop cutting fire dept and police budgets. or buy body armor for the troops in iraq. or actually fund NCLB. or... or...

the best thing, imo, would be the auto market adjusting and selling higher mileage cars.

(1) link (http://api-ec.api.org/industry/index.cfm?objectid=DAC33528-7704-11D5-BC6A00B0D0E15BFC&method=display_body&er=1&bitmask=001004000000000000)
(2) link (http://api-ep.api.org/industry/index.cfm?objectid=72CA75BD-8DE6-11D5-BC6B00B0D0E15BFC&method=display_body&er=1&bitmask=002007005001000000)

[Mord]

yes. gas guzzlers are evil, the whole mentality of the us car industry sickens me, i cant wait untill the oil runs out, the sooner the better

[Savage Henry]

Vote no.2 for yes.

How much black-liquidy gunk of the planet does the US Govt think there is down there?

So count this also as a vote against short-termist political policies [non-country specific]

[edesignuk]

Yes they should. You guys and gals over the pond get through WAY more than your fair share of the remaining petrol (gas) in the world. If you had to pay real money for it (like we do!) maybe everyone wouldn't be trotting round in cars/trucks with such huge, uneconomic engines.

edit: hehe, all the responces so far are from UK members, and we're all of the same opinion. Anyone would think we're jealous of your "gas" prices :eek: :D :rolleyes:

[sebisworld]

They need to do that. The behaviour of many US citizens is simply not responsible.

What always bugged me though is why so many teenagers drive pick-ups when only few of them actually make real use of them and why is it like impossible to get around the US with public transport systems?

[LethalWolfe]

They need to do that. The behaviour of many US citizens is simply not responsible.

What always bugged me though is why so many teenagers drive pick-ups when only few of them actually make real use of them and why is it like impossible to get around the US with public transport systems?


We, Americans, are a very car-centric society. Having a car is equated to having independence (you are free to go where ever you want to when ever you want to). Especially living in LA I wish there was better public transportation. When I spent a semester in London I loved using the buses and underground so much that I was actually bumbed when I came back home and had to drive everywhere.

If you can create public transportation that can, in most cases, get you from point A to point B faster than driving people will start using it, IMO. Unfortunetly much of the public transportation in the US are buses and they are typically much slower in getting you from point A to point B than driving yourself.

My hat's off to the politician(s) that actually try to raise gas prices. It'll probably be the last thing they do in their political careers.

Lethal

[zimv20]

overall, the public trans system in the US is pretty bad. i'd love to see $1 out of every $3, in my example above, be used to shore up existing and create new public trans systems.

and if people started driving cars w/ 4x the mileage they get now (not an impossibility, there are already such cars in europe), their cost/mile would be about the same.

and imagine the overall health benefits if americans started walking and riding their bikes more.

[Hoef]

(i'm figuring 55 gallons/barrel)

I thought that a barrel was 42 gallon (beside the point, I know) .... In Europe they pay about 1,20 Euro/Liter with is roughly $4/gallon .... That provides enough incentive to drive smaller vehicles.

I noticed in general that American's love to keep their office lights burning during the night, keep the airo at home at around 70 so they can use a comforter when going to bed, rather buy 100 watt bulbs, blow the lawn, etc... Impossible to get the energy usage down here.

[takao]

hmm normal petrol is around 1.10 € /liter
(aren't there two different types of gallons ?) diesel is 0.79-0,80 already and still the germans are driving across the border for buying gasoline
around 0.50 cent tax per liter ..(thats how much for a gallon ? 2.5 $ ? )
and even at that prices the people are buying gasoline... our minister responsible for the budget was quite happy about the unexpected _additional_ 200 million € he got this year from the fossile-fuel tax

the best way would be to increase the taxes slowly in that way the people wouldn't really notice

[sethypoo]

We should tax gas guzzlers more, but those who drive Low Emissions Vehicles (LEV) or Ultra Low Emissions Vehicles (ULEV) should get tax breaks.

I'm a poor college student who owns a '02 Civic. I get about 35 MPG and am still running short on gas cash. I live in CA, so I have gas prices of $2.32 per gallon at the moment, and I don't want them to go up again. I ride my bike as much as possible, and mainly use my car for hauling and grocery runs.

The public transportation system around here stinks. I have repeatedly been late to classes when a bus hasn't shown up on time. Also, since so few people actually ride the buses around here (Northern CA), the bus drivers seem to think they can take the "scenic route" or actually make a food break while on route! Ridiculous, I know.

I know we Americans and wasteful. But please realize that there is a large number of us who try to conserve as much as possible. Of course, we're labeled as hippies or "nature-freaks" by conservatives as they roar by in the Cadillac Escalades and other gas guzzling SUV's. Pisses me off.

[LethalWolfe]

I know we Americans and wasteful. But please realize that there is a large number of us who try to conserve as much as possible. Of course, we're labeled as hippies or "nature-freaks" by conservatives as they roar by in the Cadillac Escalades and other gas guzzling SUV's. Pisses me off.


Not to take this OT but those are some pretty broad stereotypes yer painting. I wouldn't call LA a hot-bed of conservatives and I see more gas guzzlers here (SUVs, Hummers, high performance sports cars) than I did in Indiana (a traditionally conservative state). I think it has more to do w/wealth and wanting to fit in than with political affiliation.

I think a mix of a relatively slow increase of gas taxes and offering tax breaks, and other incentives, to purchasing cars that are U/LEV's would be a good combonation to get people to switch. One incentive in LA, or at least a proposed incentive, is that if you buy a U/LEV you get a pass that gets you a year of free parking at city meters/parking lots.


Lethal

[stubeeef]

I would like to see a concentrated effort, man to the moon style, to changing the technology and infrastructure to a fuel cell format. Then a progressive, slow at first gas tax to encourage the move.
Petroleum is a finite resource, while hydrogen is too (theoritically), it is abundant, and the byproduct is water (greenhouse? I don't know).
I stood up and applauded at home during W's speech directing money and resources to the issue, the problem-although it is a good start, it is a drop in the pond.
To tax gasoline when there are no other viable options, is a huge tax on the poor, those and who could least afford it. The rich can buy $10/gal gasoline, they just might have to give up the jet or yacht.

[takao]

I'm a poor college student who owns a '02 Civic. I get about 35 MPG and am still running short on gas cash. I live in CA, so I have gas prices of $2.32 per gallon at the moment, and I don't want them to go up again. I ride my bike as much as possible, and mainly use my car for hauling and grocery runs.

thats how it should be in a urban enviroment ..i only use the car if i have to (hauling,buying lot in the supermarket or driving around with more people) or in the evening when i want to clubs who are further away


The public transportation system around here stinks. I have repeatedly been late to classes when a bus hasn't shown up on time. Also, since so few people actually ride the buses around here (Northern CA), the bus drivers seem to think they can take the "scenic route" or actually make a food break while on route! Ridiculous, I know.

and thats the problem...the us economy is so focused on the automobile since decades that it can't easily switch to something else...and people won't voluntary switch from cheap cars to public transportation (if more people would use it it would offer much better service)

'my' bus in the morning drives to university (a 30 minute trip through the whole town) drives every 5 minutes from 6:30 am to 7:30 pm (the tram only every 7 minutes) and during rush hour they sometimes insert additional ones because of the pupils...
outside of the day times they are coming at longer intervalls (15 min bus, 30 min. tram) and at night they have a so called 'nightliner' every hour, who picks up the people who are partying a bit longer
(it's a 120.000 people town)

heck even here in a town of only 45.000 people they have abus system with >10 lines driving at 15 minutes intervalls which get you around the town pretty good

[takao]

I would like to see a concentrated effort, man to the moon style, to changing the technology and infrastructure to a fuel cell format. Then a progressive, slow at first gas tax to encourage the move.
Petroleum is a finite resource, while hydrogen is too (theoritically), it is abundant, and the byproduct is water (greenhouse? I don't know).
I stood up and applauded at home during W's speech directing money and resources to the issue, the problem-although it is a good start, it is a drop in the pond.
theoretically the fuel cell is a good idea _but_ only if you combine it directly with renewable electricity sources...hydrogen is very power effective etc. but after all you need electricity to produce it ... you know burning fossile fuels to produce hydrogen isn't really helping much ;)
sooner or later renewable energy sources are the key: wind, water,thermal,sun and (often forgotten) _plants_
it's easy to build an engine running with vegetable oils (some modified cars/tractors are driving around here already)


To tax gasoline when there are no other viable options, is a huge tax on the poor, those and who could least afford it. The rich can buy $10/gal gasoline, they just might have to give up the jet or yacht.

really ? it's a tax on those who buy/bought cars with huge gasoline milages...people won't stop driving cars because of it
just like the _huge_ taxes on car purchases doesn't stop them buying them

after all 50 dollar-cent tax increase on gasoline for a whole galone over a period of 3-4 years wouldn't kill people..perhaps some will walk more often (which would help in a different case)

[pseudobrit]

Just to clear it up:

Drum = 55 gallons
Barrel = 42 gallons (all in US petroleum units, of course)

And I'm kinda wary of raising gas tax too much. Simply speaking from a socioeconomic standpoint (as opposed to a prudent conservative [as in conservation] standpoint), it hits the poorer classes disproportionately.

If we had a fair income tax system that didn't so heavily favor the rich, we wouldn't need to be talking about squeezing money out of gasoline use.

[yuc7zhd2]

Several very important things
1.) A higher tax per gallon of gasoline is regressive. The poor would pay a higher percentage of real income than rich people, who are more likely to not care about the tax anyways. The fair way to do it would be to place a higher sales or yearly licensure tax on vehicles that consume more gas. The current tax actually is quite high and regressive anyways, but its almost bareable.
2.) Although arguments of the US being wasteful are valid, comparisons to other regions are really invalid. This nation is very spread out. Population is much more dense in other nations. I walk when I can, but I can't walk 25 miles to university in the morning, and there is no public transportation option (not just no option that I like because the buses or trains are dirty, there IS NO PUBLIC TRANSPORT).
We need to come up with a decent public transportation option, make gas affordable for the lower classes, or there will be a nationwide economic shutdown when people can't go to work, and tax those with ego's so big that they need an equally big SUV to contain it.
Edit: forgot to mention, the US doesn't have a public transport system for a resoundingly simple reason... GM and Ford bought out all of the trolley lines in the early 20th century and destroyed them, literally. The only town mayor that wouldn't give in... the mayor of san fran. Foreign countries aren't the only ones that get screwed by US corporations.

[zimv20]

some good point about the regressive nature of a gas tax. perhaps we could try a multi-pronged approach:

1. gradually raise gas taxes, over the period of the lifetime of a vehicle, giving drivers and manufacturers time to adjust

2. give tax breaks to buyers of efficient cars

3. increase the gas tax on inefficient vehicles

4. legislate higher mileage vehicles

5. increase subsidies on public trans

6. develop more bike lanes and carpool lanes

7. give tax breaks to companies that subsidize public trans for their employees and/or arrange their own carpooling/bussing solutions

any otheres?

[stubeeef]

theoretically the fuel cell is a good idea _but_ only if you combine it directly with renewable electricity sources...hydrogen is very power effective etc. but after all you need electricity to produce it ... you know burning fossile fuels to produce hydrogen isn't really helping much

Takao, you answered your own rebutal, use solar, geothermal, wind, etc....to produce the electricity to make the H. :eek:

[takao]

Takao, you answered your own rebutal, use solar, geothermal, wind, etc....to produce the electricity to make the H. :eek:

yes that was my point..it doesn't make sense to burn oil for producing hydrogen...
how about starting building a few hydrogen powerplants instead of saying 'we will support developing new energy sources' (for me that sounds like 'we will support development of flying vehicles')
the technologies are there 'ready to use' in some cases

[pseudobrit]

some good point about the regressive nature of a gas tax. perhaps we could try a multi-pronged approach:

1. gradually raise gas taxes, over the period of the lifetime of a vehicle, giving drivers and manufacturers time to adjust

2. give tax breaks to buyers of efficient cars

3. increase the gas tax on inefficient vehicles

4. legislate higher mileage vehicles

5. increase subsidies on public trans

6. develop more bike lanes and carpool lanes

7. give tax breaks to companies that subsidize public trans for their employees and/or arrange their own carpooling/bussing solutions

any otheres?

Subsidise (clean) coal and coal technology. We have so much of it that doesn't get mined/used because foreign oil is subsidised to a cheaper price.

Then again, I am from Pennsylvania, so I could be biased. ;)

Perhaps the return of steam cars could give us a boost ;)

[Hoef]

CAFE was not yet raised during this discussion .... Since 50% of the population seems to be driving pickup truck based cars (a country of farmers as we are :rolleyes: ) , bump the CAFE up to say 30 mpg.

[stubeeef]

takao,
Very good, very well. Also look into MHD, magneto hydro-dynamics. Did work on it in college.


For those interested in alternate energy, there are a billion places on the web, (please don't audit me to prove a billion, just, there are a lot), to get good info.

Here (http://www.homepower.com/) is one of my favorites.
Notice the article this month on the Prius.

[takao]

takao,
Very good, very well. Also look into MHD, magneto hydro-dynamics. Did work on it in college.


For those interested in alternate energy, there are a billion places on the web, (please don't audit me to prove a billion, just, there are a lot), to get good info.

Here (http://www.homepower.com/) is one of my favorites.
Notice the article this month on the Prius.

i just recognized that i messed upo hydrogen and hydro electric power plant in my previous post
you know what i find interesting: i've got a bunch of 'new technology' kinda magazines around (called 'hobby') from my uncle from the years 1968-75 or something like that....i liked the article about gas saving city vehicles powered by a 'hybrid system' (yes that phrase was used)..and the concept paintings were by...GM... surprising that it took 30 years, isn't it ?

[sorryiwasdreami]

They should tax the living $#!+ out of gas here in the US and spend the tax money on passenger trains and buses (that don't cost more than it takes a car to travel!!!)

But if our government did that, then we couldn't go to war in Iraq. Oh shoot.

I love the public transportation systems in Italy. You can go from the largest cities to the tiniest villages on public trans. Cheap. Fast. It is SO efficient and so cost effective that it is just plain stupid to spend 4-5 euros/gallon on petrol.

They also have energy efficient cars down pat. The biggest vehicles (even cargo vans and large capacity trucks) aren't even as big as our SUV's. Many ride motorini (vespa-motor bikes), or drive tiny, little cars.

The result is a healthy, bustling street life, clean cities, and cheap transportation. Why haven't we, the richest and only superpower in the world, caught onto these simple concepts?

Well, because we are the richest and only superpower in the world.

[makisushi]

I vote no on more taxes on Gas. It already costs me a fortune to fill up my Hummer H2 and Porsche 911 Turbo.

[Don't panic]

i'd rather see a progressively increasing annual tax based on engine size/mpg.

[Chip NoVaMac]

Yes they should. You guys and gals over the pond get through WAY more than your fair share of the remaining petrol (gas) in the world. If you had to pay real money for it (like we do!) maybe everyone wouldn't be trotting round in cars/trucks with such huge, uneconomic engines.

edit: hehe, all the responces so far are from UK members, and we're all of the same opinion. Anyone would think we're jealous of your "gas" prices :eek: :D :rolleyes:

I was going to make light of the observations from across the Big Pond.

The problem I see it is that when the price of oil spikes as it has, the US oil companies enjoy big profits. To me there is a balance between capitalism and socialism. Meaning that during a run up in oil prices, the "excess" profits should be a "tax" that benefits the US transportation and energy sector as a whole.

Here in the US we are just now seeing the diesel engine start to see the light of day. In Europe it is 40 to 50 % of the market from what I have heard.

Here in the DC area we have been looking for a link from the city (DC) to Dulles Airport (a hot area of residential and commercial development). One figure I have heard is that 10% of what we spent in Iraq would have fully funded the Metro Rail extension to Dulles Airport. This would also have benefited the general work force along the right of way.

Outside of the Washington to Boston area, railroad is more of a dream than reality. Even look at the aircraft industry, and Boeing suffers to Airbus over the subsidies that are given to Airbus.

It is funny that during the "communist" threat of the 60's and early 70's; I was taught in US schools that certain "basics" should be protected for the "American way of life". They being electricity, telephone, and "energy (meaning gas and oil)"; in no particular order.

In answer to the main question. Yes, we should tax more; BUT IT SHOULD NOT BE ON THE BACK OF THE USERS. It should be on those that profit the most.

[takao]

Here in the US we are just now seeing the diesel engine start to see the light of day. In Europe it is 40 to 50 % of the market from what I have heard.

depends on country..ireland and greece have very low diesel percentages around 10%, germany has finally made around 40-50%,france more than 60& (around 63%), belgium nearly 70% and austria more than 70% (i forgot the actual number it could be even around 75-78%) and percentages are on a steady rise
selling a used car who isn't a diesel runs you into problems ...
example: whenthe PT Cruiser was released it had only a gasoline engine...sales were lousy...then a diesel version was released and sales skyrocketed


In answer to the main question. Yes, we should tax more; BUT IT SHOULD NOT BE ON THE BACK OF THE USERS. It should be on those that profit the most.

if you tax the companies they will just increase the prices and you will have exactly the same effect...;)

[pseudobrit]

Yes, we should tax more; BUT IT SHOULD NOT BE ON THE BACK OF THE USERS. It should be on those that profit the most.

Standard retort for such reasonable arguments:

How can you say that? If Exxon makes only eleventy bazillion dollars a quarter in profits instead of umpteen gazillion because you choke them down with taxes, there'll be no incentive for them to do business 'cause you'll take all their profit and motivation for working so hard! That's just like communism!

[pseudobrit]

example: whenthe PT Cruiser was released it had only a gasoline engine...sales were lousy...then a diesel version was released and sales skyrocketed

When Porsche was readying the SUV Cayenne for release in Europe, they were asked so often by the press and the public about a diesel version, and so often met with disappointment when they dismissed the idea, that they finally just started having to say it was a possibility.

[Chip NoVaMac]

depends on country..ireland and greece have very low diesel percentages around 10%, germany has finally made around 40-50%,france more than 60& (around 63%), belgium nearly 70% and austria more than 70% (i forgot the actual number it could be even around 75-78%) and percentages are on a steady rise
selling a used car who isn't a diesel runs you into problems ...
example: whenthe PT Cruiser was released it had only a gasoline engine...sales were lousy...then a diesel version was released and sales skyrocketed



if you tax the companies they will just increase the prices and you will have exactly the same effect...;)

It is called "regulation", something that was lost under Reagan and Clinton of the basic services that people should expect.

[takao]

When Porsche was readying the SUV Cayenne for release in Europe, they were asked so often by the press and the public about a diesel version, and so often met with disappointment when they dismissed the idea, that they finally just started having to say it was a possibility.

haha yeah i heard that multiple times...after all it's just a porsche version of the VW tuareg who is selling very good in his diesel version...i've already seen 2 porsche chayennes and even one turbo but i've seen perhaps 7 tuaregs and all were diesel
last saturday i've even saw an older ford f-150 (not a pickup) sitting in front of a supermarket and i was like...."noooooooooooooooo" ;) luckily it had a swiss license plate

[Chip NoVaMac]

Standard retort for such reasonable arguments:

How can you say that? If Exxon makes only eleventy bazillion dollars a quarter in profits instead of umpteen gazillion because you choke them down with taxes, there'll be no incentive for them to do business 'cause you'll take all their profit and motivation for working so hard! That's just like communism!

Total BS. It goes back to "do unto others, as you would have others do unto you". Too sad that they feel it means to screw the basic consumer. Otherwise lets tax those that don't get over 25mph a gallon highway a tax of $2 a gallon then. Then it would fit the Republican model of putting the taxes to those that could least afford it.

the point being is that we offer no incentives to REDUCE our dependancy on oil. At least with the taxes across the Big Pond, they have something to show for it. All we have is fat wallets of overly fat wallets already.

The past mantra of "greed is good" should and will be replaced by one of "greed is bad". Unless you have you big fat hand in the back pocket of the Republicans.

[takao]

the point being is that we offer no incentives to REDUCE our dependancy on oil. At least with the taxes across the Big Pond, they have something to show for it. All we have is fat wallets of overly fat wallets already.

the problem is that in the US the government doesn't really have the possibility to use their public transportation system as 'shining demonstration example'
here in some cities the buses already use bio diesel..in another town they use 'natural gas' etc. some local companies already switched to it as well...there are quite a few taxis around who are driving with biodiesel ...

[makisushi]

When Porsche was readying the SUV Cayenne for release in Europe, they were asked so often by the press and the public about a diesel version, and so often met with disappointment when they dismissed the idea, that they finally just started having to say it was a possibility.

That is interesting. VW, Porsche's parent company, recently put a diesel enigne in their Toureg. That maybe a start for the Cayenne.

[pseudobrit]

That is interesting. VW, Porsche's parent company, recently put a diesel enigne in their Toureg. That maybe a start for the Cayenne.

They've since changed it to "we currently have no plans to add a diesel engine."

I don't know why; from what I've see that V10 can whomp some ass. I imagine Porsche could massage about 700 ft-lbs out of it, but the higher you go with it, the more robust your transmission needs to be, and there aren't many that can take more than the 500 the TDI Touareg puts out already.

[stubeeef]

NO TAX, cause no gas!

zoom in hydrogen (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=581&e=1&u=/nm/20040923/tc_nm/autoshow_bmw_hydrogen_dc)

[vniow]

Edit: forgot to mention, the US doesn't have a public transport system for a resoundingly simple reason... GM and Ford bought out all of the trolley lines in the early 20th century and destroyed them, literally. The only town mayor that wouldn't give in... the mayor of san fran. Foreign countries aren't the only ones that get screwed by US corporations.

And its a damn shame too, SF's transit system is excellent. Good thing as well since there's hardly a place to park there, I drove my dad's truck up there one day and it was a real pain in the ass trying to find a spot that would fit the shortbed extended cab Chevy, I don't even understand it how people can actually drive a full size SUV up there and get away with it!

[Chip NoVaMac]

And its a damn shame too, SF's transit system is excellent. Good thing as well since there's hardly a place to park there, I drove my dad's truck up there one day and it was a real pain in the ass trying to find a spot that would fit the shortbed extended cab Chevy, I don't even understand it how people can actually drive a full size SUV up there and get away with it!

That is all well and good, but their are many areas of the country that urban transit does not work. DC is a case in point. In the last 10 years many of the jobs do not meet the suburb to city model. They are suburb to suburb commutes.

In those cases of sub to sub commutes, it is a chicken and the egg situation. Until there is sub to sub transit that is time and cost effective; people will stay in their cars.

For me i could take mass transit to my job. But I am looking at 2 to 3 hours depending on the situation. Or just 35 to 45 minutes if I take my car. EACH ONE WAY TRIP! . So why should I not take my car? Unless the state is willing to pay me for the extra time (I know that my employer is not), why should I pay the price?

[IJ Reilly]

Edit: forgot to mention, the US doesn't have a public transport system for a resoundingly simple reason... GM and Ford bought out all of the trolley lines in the early 20th century and destroyed them, literally. The only town mayor that wouldn't give in... the mayor of san fran. Foreign countries aren't the only ones that get screwed by US corporations.

Actually, this is something of a myth built up around the demise of the Red Car lines in Los Angeles during the 1940s and 1950s. In reality these systems (privately owned) had been unprofitable since the 1920s. Cars and busses had already taken over from streetcars long before the systems were dismantled.

[HeWhoSpitsFire]

If we could have public transport like in Portland, San Fran, and the such everywhere. The use of public transport would flourish. The problem is that most places don't. In my case I'm south of Portland in Eugene, and the bus would take at least twice as long than to drive. In the case of bicycles, Eugene sports(I think) the most bike paths in miles in the US. But in a place where people drive like they're from Cali, biking isn't exactly the safest of things.

In the instance of the CAFE rating, the only reason the damn stats say we drive 50% trucks, is because companies like Chrysler take little neons and put a different body thats roof meets or surpasses the "truck" specification, this vehicle is the PT. Mitsu, Ford, GM etc.. are all guilty, but none more so than the Daimler/Chrysler Corp.

As for the original point, as much as it would hurt, I think a gas tax would work towards improving the overall publics outlook on pedestrian and public transportation.

[Chip NoVaMac]

Standard retort for such reasonable arguments:

How can you say that? If Exxon makes only eleventy bazillion dollars a quarter in profits instead of umpteen gazillion because you choke them down with taxes, there'll be no incentive for them to do business 'cause you'll take all their profit and motivation for working so hard! That's just like communism!

The issue is that Exxon should only see a s certain "profit: in giving to to the "basic: needs. Otherwise they are nothing more than money changers.

But that seems to fit to those that have and those that have not. Just greed in "Christian" clothing. As some have asked me, who is going to burn in Hell.

[mda01aqt]

i think a tax increase wud be a good thing. it shud in theory increase the number of people using public transport. which is better for the environment. it would also reafirm what the scientists are saying that petrol is not going to be here forever and is gonna run out.......time to move on toanother fuel......ethanol?

by the way petrol is america has been dirt cheap for ages. try bying some is europe....far more.

[SPG]

I would love to see everyone driving cars with better MPG, even better using mass transit, and living closer to their jobs, and less suburban sprawl.
I live 3 miles from work and I give someone else a ride there too. In the summer, sometimes I'll ride my bike since it's downhill to work so I don't show up all sweaty. My cost for living this way? I live in a small house that costs the same as something twice it's size 20 miles away. The benefits? I don't sit in a car for an hour a day, I don't spend a ton on gas, I can walk to a lot of good stuff, and I can get to all the fun stuff downtown by cab so I don't drink and drive.
I've lived far from work before, I've lived in the big suburban house, I can't say I miss it. Everytime I do go out and visit friends in the 'burbs I'm amazed at how many single occupant SUVs can sit idling on a road at once.It's not normal and it ain't right.
If we just raise the gas tax, there will be bigger consequences than some people buying smaller cars. The costs of goods and services will go up because of increases in the delivery expense. Taxi fares will go up too. So what can be done to get people to use less gas? Increase the CAFE standards that set what mileage the auto manufacturers must meet...but bush didn't like guvmint telling his buddies how much oil they can use, so that's been scrapped. Tax the gas guzzlers as a disincentive to buy them? Nope, bush thinks people should be given massive tax breaks for buying SUVs so he let slide a loophole that gives doctors and lawyers the ability to write off entirely luxury SUVs over 6000lbs.
what would I do if I were running the show? A modest tax increase on gasoline, but not diesel, with the proceeds to fund mass transit projects...jobs! A big jump in the CAFE standards so that carmakers would need to start making some more effecient cars. A big ass tax on gas guzzling SUVs with an exemption for working farmers, and those in the trades.

[stubeeef]

I agree to most of that, I drive an 89 crx HF with 260,000 miles, it is not in a junk yard yet because I still get over 45mpg on a tank of reqular.
The problem with higher taxes is stupid government, it is heroin for the addict. Which is why I want smaller/less government.
Going after cigarettes was a boon for education, right? Wrong, most of the states that took the money spent it on everything but what they promised to. Just like the lottery.
Get another/alternate system in place such as H, then slowly crank the tax, or as is presently available, give a credit for the switch. I think there is a 2000 tax benefit for going to the likes of hybrid cars, there is a positive incentive, unlike a gas tax which is regressive and negative-all at the same time.

[slughead]

They should tax the living $#!+ out of gas here in the US and spend the tax money on passenger trains and buses (that don't cost more than it takes a car to travel!!!)

In phoenix they're building the award winning light rail system.

It will cost $15 per passenger per day if it's full to capacity (which it wont be). The existing Bus system, though much more efficient, is $5 per person per day ($3.5 of that is subsidized) at full capacity, $10 at the regular capacity.

Some situations don't call for more mass transit. How wasteful is it to have empty 10-ton cars driving 100 miles back and forth all day?

In phoenix, we're a 4 million person city sprawled out for ~2000 square miles. Mass transit is a joke.

[SPG]

In phoenix they're building the award winning light rail system.

It will cost $15 per passenger per day if it's full to capacity (which it wont be). The existing Bus system, though much more efficient, is $5 per person per day ($3.5 of that is subsidized) at full capacity, $10 at the regular capacity.

Some situations don't call for more mass transit. How wasteful is it to have empty 10-ton cars driving 100 miles back and forth all day?

In phoenix, we're a 4 million person city sprawled out for ~2000 square miles. Mass transit is a joke.

Just wait untill that joke isn't funny anymore. What happens to a city that sprawls out like that? When do you run out of room to pave new roads? Eventually a city will hit a point where you just can't fit the cars anymore and the traffic gets so bad you can't get anywhere, and then the economy of that area will really start to hurt. In the case of Phoenix, maybe light rail isn't the best solution...I don't know enough about it to say one way or the other, but it sounds like it's too late for the other problem of sprawl. Cheap land outside the urban core is hard to resist until you see the other costs involved, like traffic and infrastructure costs.

[pseudobrit]

That is interesting. VW, Porsche's parent company, recently put a diesel enigne in their Toureg. That maybe a start for the Cayenne.

Don't know how I missed it the first time, but to clarify, VW does not own Porsche at all. On many occasions they have cooperated in design and construciton efforts (such as VW with the Touareg and Audi with the 944), and early Porsches shared many part with VW, but neither VW nor any other company owns Porsche.

BTW, after experiencing the pretty solid and fast mass transit rail systems in New Orleans and Montréal, and most recently in Philadelphia this weekend, I'm currently appalled by the lack of any real mass transit system in L.A., of all places.

[makisushi]

Don't know how I missed it the first time, but to clarify, VW does not own Porsche at all. On many occasions they have cooperated in design and construciton efforts (such as VW with the Touareg and Audi with the 944), and early Porsches shared many part with VW, but neither VW nor any other company owns Porsche.

You are right. It was an assumption on my part, I can find no indication what so ever that VW owns Porsche.

[mactastic]

Just wait till you start seeing these (http://www.click2houston.com/automotive/3738487/detail.html) on the road!

[Dont Hurt Me]

some good point about the regressive nature of a gas tax. perhaps we could try a multi-pronged approach:

1. gradually raise gas taxes, over the period of the lifetime of a vehicle, giving drivers and manufacturers time to adjust

2. give tax breaks to buyers of efficient cars

3. increase the gas tax on inefficient vehicles

4. legislate higher mileage vehicles

5. increase subsidies on public trans

6. develop more bike lanes and carpool lanes

7. give tax breaks to companies that subsidize public trans for their employees and/or arrange their own carpooling/bussing solutions

any otheres?zimv20 i agree 100% BUT THE REPUBLICANS WILL NOT GO WITH ANY OF THIS. The bush administration just isnt interested. they are simply pushing for more supply. another reason to get rid of george.

[zimv20]

Just wait till you start seeing these (http://www.click2houston.com/automotive/3738487/detail.html) on the road!
can't wait to see the grill of one of those filling up my rearview mirror. or getting stuck behind one trying to make a turn on one of the many small chicago streets.

i've seen expeditions et. al. have to do a 3-point turn just to hang a louie.

[takao]

can't wait to see the grill of one of those filling up my rearview mirror. or getting stuck behind one trying to make a turn on one of the many small chicago streets.

i've seen expeditions et. al. have to do a 3-point turn just to hang a louie.


argh...the H2 with it's 3,2 tons (when empty) were already close to the weight regulation where you need a special (trucker) license (3,5 tons)...so try to tow a boat with a H2 but without a trucker license and wait till the police stop you...

but _this_ ugly thing has already 7,something tons ... have fun with making a 3.500+ € trucker license....

[pseudobrit]

Just wait till you start seeing these (http://www.click2houston.com/automotive/3738487/detail.html) on the road!

I saw that before, and immediately remembered this from years ago at:

http://poseur.4x4.org/futuresuv.html

it's sad social commentary parody has become obsolete because it's become reality (soon see: 1984).

[pseudobrit]

zimv20 i agree 100% BUT THE REPUBLICANS WILL NOT GO WITH ANY OF THIS. The bush administration just isnt interested. they are simply pushing for more supply. another reason to get rid of george.

Welcome back Dont Hurt Me, it's been awhile since I've seen you around.

[IJ Reilly]

it's sad social commentary parody has become obsolete because it's become reality (soon see: 1984).

That's the problem with satire -- it's always in danger of becoming reality.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Welcome back Dont Hurt Me, it's been awhile since I've seen you around.Thanks psuedorbit ,long long story- lightning strike and this and that but anyways its good to be up and running on this new machine.

As far as increasing taxes i feel we are taxed enough but govt should be doing something on the energy war. it is the 70s all over again and with that cheap gas we have forgotten that oil is a finite source. So everyone gave up their V8 cars from the 70s and now have V8 larger SUVs. Sometimes Govt hast to force free markets into something they dont want.
I thought we would have 50 mpg cars in the year 2000 not 16 mpg SUVs :(

[IJ Reilly]

Funny how that works. I buy a new car on average every seven years. When I bought the car previous to current one (in 1995), I figured by 2002-03 when I was ready to buy my next car, I'd be looking at some serious options for fuel-efficient or alternate fuel vehicles. What happened instead during the period was just the opposite -- the SUV boom. The hybrids were just coming onto the market when I was making my decision, but they looked pretty unappealing (and still do).

[SPG]

When I read that story about the IH megaSUV, I thought it was a joke. Really, what the hell are you compensating for that you would even think of driving down the street in one of those?
Another note on mass transit. Without it, the only people who can work or shop outside of their own neighborhood are the ones with cars. If you don't have a car how do you get a good enough job or go to school to get qualified to get a job to get a car?

[Zaid]

Looks like US light crude broke $50 a barrel in early Asian trading this morning. Analysts are blaming the rise on the problems in Nigeria as well as the damage done in the gulf of Mexico.

Crude oil breaches $50 a barrel [BBC] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3695820.stm)

OPEC has said that they will not be reviewing quotas, as they do not believe that this is a supply problem.

Zim, i think your petrol tax idea (which i agree with) is going to become even less popular if crude prices remain at this level.