[jaws]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nero', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'I')f you want to do something good, work at abolishing the regulations.

[Tyler_JC]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nero', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'I')f you want to do something good, work at abolishing the regulations.

[strider3700]

I don't support a gas tax. I'd much rather they just drop the subsidies they give to the corporations both directly and indirectly. Paying what oil really costs should be more then enough to lower demand.

[jato]

I support lowering taxes and services. I want smaller government.

[Pete_Doyle]

Well said Jaws.

I'd add the condition that since they are already in the public domain they would be more like privately managed transportation corridors. The greenies couldnt complain about this as there would be no environmental destruction (you cant really environmentally destroy concrete slab more than it already is) Whoever rents them pays for the maintainance 100%. If we'd done it this way from the start all the highway megaprojects of the last 10 years would never have been built. Who would invest billions on concrete without doing a real hard honest check on future oil supply and stability. Also private transportation corporations would get to take another real good hard look at the viability of the alternatives. Currently and since 1920 all they do is spray lobby money then get the taxpayer to pay the bills for the construction and maintainance contracts seemingly forever.

Tha gas tax would be a great way to continue this status quo. dub_scratch good analagy with the jeans tax. In most states tax on gas is legally bound to hwy infrastructure. I cant believe how many "well meaning" people can think that taxing to fund highway infrastructure somehow is going to lead to less people driving around.

Its like taxing bullets and redistributing the money to gun manufacturers with the idea that this will reduce the number of loaded guns. Net result on infrastructure zero minus the beaurocratic overhead, net result to taxpayer, poorer.

If transportation was privatized across the board highways and rail would compete financially on an even playingfield. US freight rail gets 400 mpg per ton and gets minimal government funding. Trucking gets under 30mpg per ton and gets lavish roads for free. Highways would get real expensive really fast and the benefits of alternatives would be self evident.

[dbuckley]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Daryl', '.').. is too peg gas at $3 per gallon (its post Katrina high, since it has fallen back to $2.) The wholesale price would fluctuate, so the tax revenue would be variable.

[aahala]

I would not be in favor of a big gas tax in the US. That would create
the problem you are trying to avoid -- economic.

I would be in favor of a modest tax, say 10 cents a gallon, the revenues
devoted to the more important energy means, electricity. Over time you
could increase renewables for electrical production. It's what can be saved
after fossils are deleted. Personal transporation is a dead horse, let it die.

[Curlew]

Hi all, a newbie here.

Had a good search but this is the only thread I could find on fuel tax. If there's a recent one please point me to it.

I was surprised to see that most of you are against a tax on fuel. I look around me and I think it's bizarre that in these days of potential PO people are travelling more, in bigger inefficient cars and basically wasting petrol like it'll last forever.

Why not start an incremental tax (gradually) to increase the price of private car fuel and to start to make the cost of bio-fuels more attractive.

The tax revenue could go 100% to research into alternative fuels thus bringing down the price of these.

If you wait until the core price of gas brings down consumption - it's already too late.

If you don't trust your government to use the tax as defined then get rid of your government. There must be checks and balances - why aren't they being scrutinized?

Curlew

[dinopello]

We already have gas tax, so I suppose the question is whether to raise it. I wouldn't mind that so much. Better, would be what an earlier poster suggested and reduce regulation and more specifically - subsidies that support cheap gas and encourage delocalization. This would include much of he operational costs of the military since its there to protect access to oil in many places, road building, tax breaks related to vehicles, ethanol subsidies etc.

[Curlew]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', ' ')reduce regulation and more specifically - subsidies that support cheap gas and encourage delocalization. This would include much of he operational costs of the military since its there to protect access to oil in many places, road building, tax breaks related to vehicles, ethanol subsidies etc.

[dinopello]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Curlew', ' ') Not sure what you meant about the military. Could you explain a bit more to this Brit ?

[Curlew]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', ' ')One could send troops in to stabilize the situation and protect the distilleries, and this might keep the flows going and the prices lower, but in effect you would be subsidizing the whiskey for the consumer through military outlays.

[Smudger]

Petrol in the UK costs c.$8 a gallon a lot of it is composed of tax.

Petrol in the US is c. $3 a gallon most of it is not tax.

Seems to me there is a loooong way to go in raising taxes in the US on petrol.

Clearly it should not go into roads (our motor taxes were but don't)

To my mind:

Motor tax/Tax disc: more focused on mpg/co2 levels: i.e. zero at one level £500+ at the top level. not to "hunt" very low mpg in a politcal sense. (some people want to slap a big tax on bid expensive cars out of jealousy -which to my mind simply shows insecurity i.e the you cant have what I can't have brigade - and they are using the PO/climate change issue as a reason)
petrol tax: increase by double inflation pa for next five years and then pegging to inflation +1%
Congestion Charging: applied to all towns over 50,000.

Where do the taxes go: over 50% to public transport, including the breaking of any existing agreements with rialway companies who will not add carriages to trains simply for profit. Big focus on new infrastructure projects which will compete with roads eg fast cross country train systems.
Improved car traffic management to reduce further traffic jams
Avoidance/reduction in regressive nature of petrol taxes: reduce income tax thresholds or unlike Mr Brown in the UK actually create a large tax free income base.

on this basis the cost of car travel gradually increase each year towards its real Present value cost and public transport improvements are actually made at the same time so you don't get this mad situation where people try and get onto public transport but cant becuase its full - as is starting to happen at rush hour in the UK.

however main point of post is the US has to bite the bullet and move their petrol taxes up to more normal levels seen in other developed countries.

[dinopello]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Curlew', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', ' ')One could send troops in to stabilize the situation and protect the distilleries, and this might keep the flows going and the prices lower, but in effect you would be subsidizing the whiskey for the consumer through military outlays.

[keehah]

IMO "all getting along" Involves carbon 'per-capita' rationing, either in use of fossil fuels or CO2 emmisions credits.

A gas or carbon tax (often called carbon credits, but is fundamentally a tax from what I see proposed) means the rich will hardly notice, the poor will suffer.

[Curlew]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('keehah', 'A') gas or carbon tax (often called carbon credits, but is fundamentally a tax from what I see proposed) means the rich will hardly notice, the poor will suffer.

[MrBill]

I would whole heartedly support both higher consumption taxes and steeper carbon taxes IF those taxes went directly to fund research into alternatives and towards public transport improvements.

However, if the taxes simply go into the general operating revenues of the government and get passed on as wealth transfers from those who create wealth to those that consume it then, no, I do not support higher taxes (in any form actually), and would sooner see smaller government.

And carbon credits of 8 or 10 euros handed out for free to industry are a farce. Real change will come when those companies are forced to cut pollution or buy carbon credits for 200-300 euros per tonne. At the moment it is all just window dressing.

Of course, no one is asking me! ; - )

[bshirt]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jack', 'W')e can get along nicely - so long as we enjoy abundance. Scarcity makes less agreeable companions.

I can assure you that not all Peak Oilers favor a gas tax. I, for one, don't care for additional taxes. Giving certain elected officials more money is like giving a drunk more whiskey. It's just wrong.