[Dreamtwister]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joeltrout', 'I')f Obama gets elected he has already said he will raise taxes.

So vote McCain.

joeltrout

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dreamtwister', 'H')ow will that help? If McCain gets elected, he will just perpetuate the inflationary spiral with increased war spending.

What difference does it make which pocket they pick?

[MrBill]

I believe in general that taxes as a percentage of income will rise, while total tax receipts will fall due to a stagnant economy that is squeezed by higher food and fuel prices as well as lower corporate profits. Globally lower current account surpluses - less trade - will diminish government's ability to borrow, so they will have to pay more for capital and/or raise taxes instead of running deficits. Another reason the economy will grow more slowly. Expensive imports of energy will also be a drain on existing wealth and its creation. Average living standards will therefore decline and there will be less disposable income.

[frankthetank]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25751775/

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ASHINGTON - The political vision of a summer gas tax holiday died a quick death in Congress, losing to a view that federal excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel will have to go up if they go anywhere.

Despite calls from the presidential campaign trail for a Memorial Day-to-Labor Day tax freeze, lawmakers quickly concluded — with a prod from the construction industry — that having $9 billion less to spend on highways could create a pre-election specter of thousands of lost jobs.

Now, lawmakers quietly are talking about raising fuel taxes by a dime from the current 18.4 cents a gallon on gasoline and 24.3 cents on diesel fuel.

[Cog]

Can't see this happening before the election in November. Can you imagine what an opponent in a House race could do with a vote to raise the gas tax right now?

[Fishman]

Not even possible until 2009, election upcoming, silly to even mention it at present. There is a possibility of the 55 speed limit however

[heroineworshipper]

The deficit was from transportation funds being diverted to Bear Stearns's CEO & $225 billion for bank loan auctions. 3 years ago, interest was 5% so of course there was less money chasing building materials. There's nothing a $0.24 tax will fix that an $0.18 tax couldn't.

[idiom]

It will encourage ppl away from gas. .18c has failed at that.

[joewp]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('idiom', 'I')t will encourage ppl away from gas. .18c has failed at that.

[idiom]

Oh true. Walking brings out allergies.

[Buggy]

Big media just stirring the ignorant masses with the "could" and "might" stories. Oil climbing is a non-story right now so lets keep everybody worked up in a frenzied lather over the unlikely chance that the gov "might" stick a tax on gas. So stupid.

[Byron100]

What most people don't realize is that Federal gas taxes are far too low as a percentage of price of a gallon of gasoline. Back when gas sold for a dollar a gallon, the federal tax was close to 20% of a gallon of gasoline. To maintain that same ratio at $4 a gallon, the tax would need to be quadrupled, to approx 74 cents a gallon. I say make it a dollar....and cut highway spending by HALF. Rest of the money needs to go towards mass transit, trains, etc.

And while we're at it, let's bring back the Gas Guzzler tax on ALL low-mileage vehicles sold in the US, no exceptions whatsoever. And make this tax so onerous that the gas hogs will be all but extinct even if gas prices level off or go down in the near future.

[aahala2]

Until 2005 or 2006, the ethanol subsidy came from the highway
trust fund, the gas tax. That didn't amount to much in the earliest
years, but added up over the years, particularily as the ethanol
volume increased.

It's never been indexed to inflation and the gas tax should be.
Everything goes up due to inflation, including the cost of building
and repairing roads. Increasing the gas tax is one of the biggest
no-no's on the federal level, so it's usually years between the
increases.

[lawnchair]

US fuel taxes at 45-50c/gal (including fed and state) didn't pay for road costs even when asphalt, diesel, and steel were at their cheapest. 50c/gal doesn't even begin to pay, now. Of course, the Dept of Transportation plays games with the fund (transit and tourism costs out of the fuel-tax fund), but far more is spent on road projects out of general revenue.

Any road spending that is not paid for out of fuel tax means that people who drive less subsidize people who drive more. Of course, most of the world subsidizes driving in one way or another.

I am still quite curious how we're going to pay for roads with more electric cars showing up. Most of them don't weigh much, but thousands of them do push the need for more lanes, bypasses, etc. GPS trackers? Specially metered electric? Shift to general revenue/debt?

[ROCKMAN]

I read a report a while back (sorry...didn't save the link) that clearly made the point that commercial truck traffic caused a very large percentage of the road damage. Even though the trucking companies pay a big vehicle tax along with the diesel tax it didn’t come close to paying for what one might call their share of the system. The conclusion was that the trucking industry was thus effectively receiving a huge subsidy. But back to the chicken and egg situation: raise trucking fees quickly and inflation jumps even more.

[yesplease]

Yup. It seems that damage increases faster than weight...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')verweight vehicles pay less for the deterioration they cause to the highways than motorcycles, automobiles and light trucks. Studies conducted by the U. S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) have compared the cost of the wear and tear to the highway caused by the operation of motorcycles, automobiles, light trucks, vans and heavy trucks with the revenue these vehicles generated from fuel taxes and registration fees. The results of the studies disclosed that heavy trucks cause more damage but pay for a smaller share of this damage than automobiles, motorcycles, pickups and vans.[3] Pavement cost analyses conducted for the Heavy Vehicle Cost Responsibility Study demonstrated a sharp increase in pavement costs when axle loads exceed the federal limits. In fact, pavement damage was found to increase exponentially with axle loads, resulting in significant damage by vehicles with heavy axle loads.[4] In addition, results of the Texas Highway Cost Allocation Study indicated that certain truck types contribute only half of their assigned costs of building and maintaining the highway system, whereas passenger cars contribute more than their assigned cost.[5]

[emersonbiggins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '
')I've seen info stating that one truck at 80,000lbs causes as much damage as nearly 10,000 cars, but nothing in the way of proof.

[yesplease]

Here's something (scotty rocks btw). According to it one 18,000lb truck axle load is equivalent to 1,850 3,000lb Cadillac axle loads and 34,100 1,500lb matador axle loads. I bet concrete roads would last for as long as the climate allowed w/ small EVs.

[lawnchair]

Agreed that trucks do far more damage. However, damage occurs no matter whether *anyone* drives the road (weather and rust). And, 10,000 lightweight electric cars added to a road still require additional lanes, traffic signals, bypasses, etc, so it is reasonable to assign them a fairly hefty part of the road cost, too.

[yesplease]

Depends what ya mean by hefty. Should they pay for their share of infrastructure? Sure. Although they don't in certain places, likely because the local emissions reduction is deemed more advantageous than their relatively small share of infrastructure costs. Should they pay for road resurfacing and the like, which is mostly caused by larger vehicles, and thanks to oil's price run-ups is much higher recently? Not IMO.