Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Is a Higher Gasoline Tax Good Or Bad For America?
849 messages, Last post on Nov 19, 2009 at 2:22 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jun 01, 2009 1:51 pm) ( I wish lobbying tactics were outlawed. Didn't the Messiah promise something like that and then renege? ) How the individual Congress members HANDLE those lobbyists is another issue all together. Once again, you are living and walking around with an incorrect, "past tense" impression of an organization in your 25-year-old story about GreenPeace. Regardless of WHO is doing it, anyone trying to lobby Congress (while it's allowed by law) to reduce fossil fuel waste is doing a good thing for you and your grandkids. Tax it more, use less of it I say. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jun 01, 2009 12:01 pm) The U.S. uses about 25% of the world's oil. So do the math. If the U.S. raises the tax to $1,000/gal and we use no oil at all, 100 years of oil then would ONLY last 133 years! But what would happen if the U.S. used no more oil is that the world price would plummet for oil. What does that mean? Oil and gasoline become much more affordable around the world, and people can afford to buy more oil, or people who formerly couldn't buy oil/gasoline now can buy a little. So oil consumption would never go down 25% just because the U.S. dropped demand 25%. I say let's become more productive as a people and continue to buy as much oil as we want, outbidding the other people of the world. I have no problem with the U.S. consuming 50% or 75% of the world's oil if we can. That's competition, just like a Monopoly game. |
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (May 30, 2009 6:24 am) Wow that's really magnanimous of you to volunteer giving everyone's else retirement away. I'm sure there might be 100M people or so over the age of 40 who might have a problem with having contributed for 20+ years and being told to expect nothing. You may have given me an idea for a book and film - "The 2nd American revolution, 2025".  And if Obama and future administrations continue to expand government and run us deeper into debt, with resultant higher and higher taxes, you may see unprecendented social unrest beyond anything in the 1960's. People are willing to pay for a service, but they're not willing to pay gas taxes to divert it to pay for other programs - like illegals using medical services, or supporting some foreign country.
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Jun 01, 2009 5:03 pm) I've pretty much ruled social security out of my retirement plan. It'll be nice if it's still there when I retire, and when it most likely isn't, I'll be pretty pissed that I got screwed out of all that money, but what can you do to get it back, other than try to overthrow the gov't?  I don't turn 62 until 2032, so that's a ways off, anyway. I'd rather plan for the worst, and invest like it's not gonna be there. Then, if it still turns out that something is left of SS by the time I can collect, I'll look at it as a bonus. But I'm not gonna bet the farm on it.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Jun 01, 2009 5:03 pm) Is this based on some entitlement principle or a lack of proper planning on their part? And if Obama and future administrations continue to expand government and run us deeper into debt, with resultant higher and higher taxes, you may see unprecendented social unrest beyond anything in the 1960's I am somehow not worried. The younger generation was totally apathetic towards politics prior to this election, so heres to hoping we start to assume our roles as leaders. As far as "social unrest," I haven't heard any complaining from anyone under about 50-something, with the majority of the "nation of whiners" over 60. They have the AARP gostapo of they are really worried, but I somehow don't see them picking up arms. People are willing to pay for a service, but they're not willing to pay gas taxes to divert it to pay for other programs - like illegals using medical services, or supporting some foreign country. Yeah doing things like randomly attacking countries because we want their oil or we don't like their president or leader - I wonder how much we could do with the money wasted on the Iraq war.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Jun 01, 2009 5:11 pm) Its quite a bit further out for me, but I am roughly in the same boat. Thats why they do things like IRAs and Roth IRAs and 401ks.
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (Jun 02, 2009 4:09 am) I would not count on those being good pre-tax investments either. You did listen to the rhetoric during the Campaign. The tax break by individuals saving in their 401k pension fund is targeted to raise more tax, by our present administration. You are correct that the younger generation will have to pay for the current spending. Gas tax is not the way to do it. Voting against tax and spend politicians is your only chance at survival. Term limits on a corrupt Congress. Limiting the powers of the Presidency, that seem to be limitless at this juncture. The reason you hear a lot more "Whining" from those of US over 60, is because we went through a similar mess in the late 1970s ala Carter. Massive inflation is just around the corner. Adding fuel tax would just fuel that inflation exponentially. I do think President Obama has gotten good advice on more gas tax and we will not see any significant additions. He knows it would be political suicide when it hits every voter in the pocket.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: euphonium (Jun 01, 2009 10:32 am) The mantra of the wind/global warming folks is to delay any more drilling in our own country under the guise of protecting the environment or we should get away from fossil fuels. So they also complain that it might take 5 years to get the oil. Well, if you delay starting more drilling, it will take longer. Start drilling today so 5 years from now instead of 10 years or 15 we'll have more of our own oil being added to our supply. That's simple economics and science. |
|
|
Replying to: houdini1 (May 30, 2009 11:58 am) No. Have to give people choices. Have numeric keypads at gas pump whereby one could designate any extra tax per gallon they want to donate. Keypad could allow anything from one cent to five dollars. This could be rolled out trialed in pilot program in key greenie regions such as in Oregon. With right promo, could get extra revenue for roads. State DOT must adhere to strictly using the extra funds for roads. |
|
|
Replying to: andre1969 (Jun 01, 2009 5:11 pm) By 2032, the Congress will have already kicked out the early 62 age some amount of years. Maybe no "early" at all and "full" at say 70. Would not have to think about higher gas taxes if our country had not almost totally abandoned planning/building more nuclear about 3 decades ago. The plug-in car from GM and other mfrs could get power from clean source. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Is a Higher Gasoline Tax Good Or Bad For America?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
