The NYT chimes in: time for a gas tax
Can you hear that? Those are the war drums, and more and more of them are beating the same tune: bring on the gas tax. An editorial in The Gray Lady is the latest and arguably the weightiest to join the shock troops advocating for higher gas prices. The writer proposes a fluctuating consumption tax that would keep gas at least $4 per gallon in 2008 dollars, while an economist suggests a sliding tax on the price of a barrel of oil to achieve the same effect.The NYT admits "a bitter recession is not the most opportune time to ratchet up the price of energy." But it balances that against the coming Obama administration's aims, the government's enviro-friendly suggestions to the U.S. auto industry, and Americans' claims to want to get off of foreign oil.
Although not mentioned specifically in the Times piece, some recommend a gas tax for a reason that has nothing to do with environmental stewardship: state governments need money. States are making enormous budget cuts, trying to sell and lease their lotteries, state parks, roads, bridges, and even their airports, and lining up for federal aid totaling hundreds of billions of dollars, and still saying they won't have enough money. The answer to "Will there be a gas tax?" could be, as Jesse Jackson once said, "The question is moot!" The question is not whether there will be a gas tax, but whether you will pay your additional taxes at the pump, at the toll booth, in your paycheck, etc...
[Source: New York Times]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Sid 1:09PM (12/28/2008)
And the sky is blue
Reply
Charlie 3:19PM (12/28/2008)
Its just simple economics that the number one way to decrease the demand for gasoline is to increase the price.
So do we have a policy imperative to decrease demand for gasoline? I think so, and I don't even believe in man made climate change. I think we need energy security from a strategic standpoint, and sending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas every year to pay for energy to run our economy is not good for us in the long run.
And I think that we should do it sooner rather than later, and we should commit and stick to it. We shouldnt lose the strategic benefits that we've gained from our period of extremely high gas prices to people who see the low prices and will now buy SUVs. The thing about gasoline demand is that it is very inelastic in the short run because people are stuck with the cars that they have for several years and the lifestyle they have around where they live for years. But in the long term, people can drastically reduce their demand for gasoline by living in more urban areas where they can walk and use mass transit, and by having smaller cars.
Those changes take time and the gas taxes necessary to incentivize them are probably painful for millions of people. I say too bad. Its also painful to see these god damn saudis with their $200 million dollar houses and private 747s, all these terrorists with unlimited funding because of their rich friends, and all the pain that the US economy and household went through because this country has no policy mechanisms to decrease gasoline price fluctuations.
Michael 1:18PM (12/28/2008)
And the NYT is ridiculous, once again.
Reply
homunculus 1:21PM (12/28/2008)
^watches fox news
notYou 2:33PM (12/28/2008)
Agreed.
"The oil companies are making record profits!" = Windfall profits tax.
"The price of gas has plummeted to the point where it used to be!" = Consumer tax.
Is there _any_ situation where the government and it's bigger-is-better cheerleader's solution is not a tax? Not even "the worst financial catastrophe in a century"?
Michael 2:50PM (12/28/2008)
Oh wow.
Between TV, the Internet, and radio, I keep up with over fifteen news networks.
homunculus 3:07PM (12/28/2008)
^like sarah palin, reads _all_ the newspapers
Jackson 5:48PM (12/28/2008)
^ doesn't know anything about automobiles.
iCameiSawiConquered 1:18PM (12/28/2008)
It should not be an immediate increase, but gradual. Make it 25 or 30 cents every year, the problem with simply making it $4 overnight is the economic shock this causes--it simply doesn't allow people and businesses to adjust.
Nevertheless, the gas tax (federal) should not be just 18 cents, a figure frozen since 1993, especially when the country depends on that tax for transportation infrastructure.
Reply
zamafir 1:20PM (12/28/2008)
I dunno man, taxes are supposed to go down regardless of whether or not we can pay for a war, that's just the right way.
[/sarcasm]
McLovin 1:24PM (12/28/2008)
Zam,
I'm glad you put in that sarcasm tag. Based on the way many commentators write around here, you could have been dead serious.
zamafir 1:28PM (12/28/2008)
Lol, NP man, I wonder some times how people can ardently demand tax cuts when everything we can measure is crumbling around us, education, health care, civil services, everything. California's already working on a gas tax which the governator is inclined to veto, preferring instead to cut billions more from our children's schools. We've already seen people struggling and coping with ridiculous gas prices above the $4.00 level, I'm not sure state taxes at or below $0.50 are going to be a massive blow to anyone at current gas prices.
It's funny, we spent so long as a country belittling the European way of life, using transit, shopping locally, living healthy lives not insulated by excess and now we're being drug into that life style kicking and screaming outside of our control. Fun times.
McLovin 1:45PM (12/28/2008)
NP man?
zamafir 2:02PM (12/28/2008)
No Problem
Dan 5:17PM (12/28/2008)
The 18c federal gas tax is so far past sufficient that 38% of it is spent on pork projects that aren't roads at all - billion dollar light rail that nobody rides, highway rest stop visitor centers, scenic overlooks, air quality studies, parking lots in the national parks, etc.
If we are raising the gas tax to discourage foreign oil consumption that's a reasonable goal and I agree with it FWIW. But don't lie and pretend that it's an investment in infrastructure when it isn't.
JMC3 1:26PM (12/28/2008)
Well it was just 3 blogs back where I commented that the democrats would use the opportunity of cheap gas prices to ratchet up taxes on gas per/gal. under the guise of 'saving the earth' or some other 'progressive' ruse,and here You have it.The official statement from the liberal leftwing 'progressive(ahem regressive) mouthpiece,The New York Times.
Taxing us into socialism and big government from which there is no return.
Reply
Fatima 1:30PM (12/28/2008)
You act as if socialism is a bad thing. Get your head out of your ass, the red scare ended long ago.
iCameiSawiConquered 1:32PM (12/28/2008)
Yeah we are all going to miss the small government that the Republicans have given us...especially since they have shown such fiscal frugality that they never launched trillion dollar wars, half trillion dollar Medicare expansions, a doubling of the military budget, and a doubling of foreign aid. And all of this without actually paying for it...instead putting it on the National China Platinum Master Card.
We definitely dodged a bullet in 2000...imagine what the world would be like had that happened!
Keep Smiling 1:36PM (12/28/2008)
The question remains: Are you in favor of changing gas/ oil consumption habits? If not, good for you (and bad for America). If yes - how do you think this can be achieved but via higher gas prices?
McLovin 1:43PM (12/28/2008)
@iCame...
Nice. Hopefully that will get JMC3 to shut his yap.
@JMC3
.... or maybe, just maybe that progressive agenda of increasing the gas tax is to catch up with reality. Since the gas tax hasn't increased in 15 YEARS, maybe it is time to simply catch up with the cost of inflation and labor costs.
The federal gas tax mostly goes to keep up the roads and build some public transportation projects. That isn't going to change. I don't think suddenly an increase in the gas tax is going to be paid out to "welfare queens" which I am sure is your worst, right-wing nightmare. You need to stop conspiracy theorizing and look at reality. The reality is that cheap gas isn't really cheap.