[bobeau]

What if the U.S. government decided to place a heavy tax on fuel for private vehicle use (bringing it more in line with European prices), and used the tax as subsidies for commercial uses?

[clv101]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bobeau', 'T')he U.S. government decided to place a heavy tax on fuel for private vehicle use (bringing it more in line with European prices), and used the tax as subsidies for commercial uses?

[bobeau]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('clv101', 'Y')ou suggest that personal use should subsidise commercial use, why? Why not just tax all fuel - whilst lower other taxes to keep the total tax take the same.

[smiley]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t would slow down PO thats for sure...but the politicians who did this stunt know that they would probally be out of office next term...thats why they don't...also would cause a recession in the USA...most people MUST drive long distance for near anything there...

[clv101]

Tax shifts don't hurt the economy... according to 2,500 economists including 8 Nobel Prise winners. Former Harvard economics professor N. Gregaory Mankiw, who was nominated to be Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisors in 2003, wrote in Fortune magazine: "Cutting income taxes whilst increasing gasoline taxes would lead to more rapid economic growth, les traffic congestion, safer roads and reduced risk of global warming - all without jeopardizing long-term fiscal solvency. This may be the closest thing to a free lunch economics has to offer".

The Economist has also supported the idea in the past and poles have shown in Europe and the US, 70 of voters support environmental tax reform once it's been explained to them.

[Triffin]

Why does everyone insist on taxing the consumer
for using inefficient vehicles ??? We have no choice in the
matter .. Did any of you ask Detroit to build and
sell us vehicles that get less than 20mpg ??? I sure
didn't .... If the government wants to make the transportation fleet more efficient .. then go to the
source .. Make the manufacturers produce more efficient
vehicles .. period ...

Triff

[clv101]

The manufacturers will only produce what the markets demands - historically the market has demanded 20mpg SUVs. A tax shift could stop the market demanding such vehicle and the manufacture would then stop making them.

[JLK]

This is the kind of idea that makes perfect sense, is good public policy, but will never be implemented because of the political fallout. The voters already upset about high gasoline prices. Can you imagine how they would react if gasoline taxes were raised as well?

The only way that the public would ever accept anything like this is after a major crisis that scares the bejeezes that of them. That will eventually happen, of course, but the question is when.

[clv101]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JLK', 'C')an you imagine how they would react if gasoline taxes were raised as well?

[BigBear]

[quote="Triffin"]Why does everyone insist on taxing the consumer
for using inefficient vehicles ??? We have no choice in the
matter .. Did any of you ask Detroit to build and
sell us vehicles that get less than 20mpg ??? I sure
didn't .... If the government wants to make the transportation fleet more efficient .. then go to the
source .. Make the manufacturers produce more efficient
vehicles .. period ...

It would takes years to get these models designed--manufactured and then replace all the vehicles, numbering in the multi-millions, around the world. We have not got any where near the time or the future needed energy to accomplish this feat. The decreasing of income tax-supplanted by a heavy petroleum tax seems to make the most sence considering the world's present position on oil reserves.

[Zerstuckelung]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JLK', 'T')he only way that the public would ever accept anything like this is after a major crisis that scares the bejeezes that of them. That will eventually happen, of course, but the question is when.

[bobeau]

clv101, the idea of giving income tax breaks while taxing the hell out of private use gas is a great one.

I just can't see another Depression hitting the US like a hammer from one event or a series of small events in rapid succession. There are checks and balances in place that weren't there back then; there's the strongly tied global economy - China may pull out from US investments but I think it would have to be on what is the brink of certain disaster. Without a doubt I believe a guy like Monte has a good grasp of the situation and where we're heading if we continue on our current course; just can't help but feel we'll have a recession/demand destruction cycle first which will give enough time for the public to 'get it' and be accepting of such policy which reduces the demand side drastically.

FWIW, with the methods GM pioneered developing the Pontiac Solstice it appears getting a car from idea to market in 18 months is now doable, as was the case with the new GTO. GM, the one going under right now - the biggest, bloated of them all. The automakers _can_ turn around on a dime if need be.

[Tyler_JC]

There is less profit to be made from building cheaper cars. Toyota makes very little money per Camry. Ford makes a lot more money per Explorer (SUV). The transition to low-profit cars would put the American car makers out of business. The cost to the economy of a bankrupt GM and Ford would out weigh the benefit of more efficient cars.

Or, we could import efficient cars. This would widen the trade deficit and cause the dollar to fall even more. What do the people who currently own SUVs do? The can't sell them to pay back the debt. They can't afford the gas+car loan on the big car. They can't afford to buy another car. They are basically screwed.

[bobeau]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'T')here is less profit to be made from building cheaper cars. Toyota makes very little money per Camry. Ford makes a lot more money per Explorer (SUV). The transition to low-profit cars would put the American car makers out of business.

[Kingcoal]

Shifting taxes from personal per capita income to excise taxes like the ones on fuel is the first step in the restoration of the constitution of the US. The constitution specifically allows excise taxes, but forbids income taxes on residents of the States unless they are engaged in a federally regulated type of activity.

I'm all for it, but it must accompany an elimination of the income tax. Excise taxes allow the individual to change their behavior so as to reduce their tax burden. This is what our founding fathers intended. They didn't intend for the government to tax common laborers and give huge breaks to huge corporations.

[smiley]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')WIW, with the methods GM pioneered developing the Pontiac Solstice it appears getting a car from idea to market in 18 months is now doable, as was the case with the new GTO. GM, the one going under right now - the biggest, bloated of them all. The automakers _can_ turn around on a dime if need be.

[bobeau]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smiley', '
')
The problem is not in designing the car or refitting the production lines. That can be done pretty quickly.

The biggest problem that the American manufacturers are facing is that they do not have the technology to build fuel efficient cars.

[smiley]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he Ecotec engine has been around for awhile in mostly exports and is a fine engine for multiple platforms

[bobeau]

See that link I provided? It was meant to be clicked

In case that is not possible...

Its title is "GM Ecotec engine"

More specifically it says "It was developed by an international team of engineers and technicians from Opel's International Technical Development Center in Rüsselsheim, Germany".

If you mean to point out this powerplant was not designed on GM's home turf, so what? GM owns Opel.