Page 11 of 19 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 365
  1. #201  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    American consumers would increasingly value $8 dollar or $12 dollar or even $100 dollar gas as well because as you said, there is no alternative is no gasoline.

    But certainly you are not saying that we should just stand by and accept whatever price and whatever profit margin comes our way.
    I certainly am. Find me evidence of wrongdoing, and I'll listen. Until then, people will learn to either live with higher prices, or, more likely, find ways to reduce its use. Oil and a finite commodity, and the day will come when we will need to move on. Whether that day is today is unclear, but the best mechanism to spur innovation is not government mandates or charity on the part of corporations. It is the desire of consumers to maximize the power of their dollar, and as gasoline prices rise, that means using less of it.
    The alternative to "standing by" is not government action. It is consumer action.
  2. #202  
    As UK shows,there is still a whole lot more elasticity in the price of fuel, and USA residents are on average a whole lot more richer than Brits.

    You are just accustomed to the low price, but you could easily afford paying more. Just buy one less x-box game

    Surur
  3. #203  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    As UK shows,there is still a whole lot more elasticity in the price of fuel, and USA residents are on average a whole lot more richer than Brits.

    You are just accustomed to the low price, but you could easily afford paying more. Just buy one less x-box game

    Surur
    How much of the UK price is tax?
  4. #204  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    How much of the UK price is tax?
    According to a WSJ opinion piece, 66%.
  5. #205  
    64%, of which 17.5% is VAT, and 47% is fuel duty.

    Surur
  6. #206  
    IMO, the problem is being made into a political issue by Democrats who want to take back some seats. I also don't think public transportation, carpooling, or moving to a house closer to your work works for many, though some will do those things when they reach their individual breaking points.

    Moving is an especially bad suggestion, IMO, because jobs aren't secure anymore, and you may live close to work today but not a year from now.

    I think tax breaks on more fuel efficient cars is a good idea, combined with auto makers following the natural course and building more attractive and more less expensive fuel efficient cars. There was a sizable premium associated with hybrids a year ago, but high-MPG (hybrid or otherwise) are coming down in price and getting better looking.

    Supply and demand is a biggie. Here's an idea: let's stop fueling (no pun intended) India and China's economic growth. Stop outsourcing jobs and get more manufacturing going in the US again and they won't be competing with us for all that oil. Plus it will have the side benefit of causing working/middle class wages to start moving upward again.

    Exploring/funding alternative energy (wind or whatever) sounds like a good idea, too, so I'm all for that. Probably more useful for home/business electrical needs than for cars, but it's all good.
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  7. #207  
    Oh, another good idea that was mentioned...telecommuting. For jobs (like mine) where almost everything is done via computer and phone calls and without face to face contact, why make people like me waste office space and commuting time/gas by driving into the office at all?
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  8. #208  
    Surely instead of doing a lot of hybrid research etc, why not just tax SUV's heavily and cross subside more fuel efficient cars. This will have an effect sooner, and by getting big SUV's of the road, people would feel safer to drive much smaller cars with much smaller engines.

    Surur
  9. #209  
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott R
    Here's an idea: let's stop fueling (no pun intended) India and China's economic growth. Stop outsourcing jobs and get more manufacturing going in the US again and they won't be competing with us for all that oil.
    I'm not sure how well that would work. There would still be a demand for the oil, it will just be ours, not someone else's. And since our economy is less labor intensive, presumably any additional manufacturing will be more mechanized, and thus may actually increase the demand for oil. What you see here is a rational move from high cost inputs (oil in the U.S.) to lower cost inputs (workers in other countries). Forcing a reversal of this tide would be illadvised and potentially impossible.,
  10. #210  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Surely instead of doing a lot of hybrid research etc, why not just tax SUV's heavily and cross subside more fuel efficient cars. This will have an effect sooner, and by getting big SUV's of the road, people would feel safer to drive much smaller cars with much smaller engines.

    Surur
    There are social costs for all carbon emissions, and I think if we internalize those by blending them into the gas price (say, through a 10 cent per year hike in the gasoline tax for 15 years), that may be extremely beneficial in the long run without severely changing things in the short run. Transportation choices are extremely maleable in the long run, but almost 100% fixed in the short run.
  11. #211  
    Apparently the real cost of gasoline, with all external costs added, is around $9-11 per gallon. At 10 cents per year it will take 60 years for the real costs to be met.

    Surur
  12. #212  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Surely instead of doing a lot of hybrid research etc, why not just tax SUV's heavily and cross subside more fuel efficient cars. This will have an effect sooner, and by getting big SUV's of the road, people would feel safer to drive much smaller cars with much smaller engines.

    Surur
    The government shouldn't be in the business of social engineering.
  13. #213  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Apparently the real cost of gasoline, with all external costs added, is around $9-11 per gallon. At 10 cents per year it will take 60 years for the real costs to be met.

    Surur
    Better late than never. :-) Please support that number.
  14. #214  
    hoovs, are you a libertarian? So are you against all taxes directed at specific products (e.g., gas taxes, sin taxes) as well as similarly-directed tax incentives and subsidies (whether directed at individuals or companies)? What of stiffer jail sentences for possession of one type of drug vs another? Couldn't all of these be construed as a form of "social engineering"?
    Now THIS is the future of smartphones.
  15. #215  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    Better late than never. :-) Please support that number.
    I said apparently so that I would not have to Anyways, here's the quote.

    Thus, the real cost of smoking cigarettes is $7.18 per pack. The full cost of burning a gallon of gasoline is around $9 when you include oil-supply protection costs, industry subsidies and respiratory health-care costs. We have forced those costs back on the cigarette companies fairly successfully with taxes and fines. We have yet to do it with gasoline.

    Others are out ahead of us. Europeans pay $6 a gallon for gas, and most of that is taxes. Singapore, Oslo, Melbourne and, most recently, London impose stiff charges per trip into the city. The per visit charge in London was increased last year from $9 to $14. Victoria in British Columbia imposed a tax of $1.20 per bag on garbage, and trash flow went down 18 percent within a year.
    http://www.ldnews.com/columns/ci_3735636

    Surur
  16. #216  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    As UK shows,there is still a whole lot more elasticity in the price of fuel, and USA residents are on average a whole lot more richer than Brits.

    You are just accustomed to the low price, but you could easily afford paying more. Just buy one less x-box game

    Surur
    Brits are not that much poorer than the US: the per capita Gross Domestic Product is US$39500 in the US (ranked 7th) and US$34500 in Great Britain (ranked 12th) (I guess on a Purchasing Power Parity-basis, the trend would be about the same).

    It is true that e.g. gas costs more than twice as much in Great Britain when compared to the US, but Americans have overcompensated this by using more than twice as much fossil fuels when compared to the British (or French, Germans, Swiss, Italians), so it hurts more in the end (Stats from www.nationmaster.com).
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  17. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #217  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur
    Surely instead of doing a lot of hybrid research etc, why not just tax SUV's heavily and cross subside more fuel efficient cars. This will have an effect sooner, and by getting big SUV's of the road, people would feel safer to drive much smaller cars with much smaller engines.

    Surur
    I drive one of the "big SUVs" and average 17 MPG. If I used 2 Toyota corolla's to transport the 7 individuals that are normally in the big SUV my total MPG would drop to something like 15 MPG (30 MPG each, but 2 vehicles needed). I would also incur two pay tolls instead of one, I would need to pay for two parking spots instead of, I would have to pay upkeep costs on 2 vehicles instead of 1. In my case smaller cars are not more efficient.

    I know a lot of people drive around in the vehicle alone, but not all.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  18. #218  
    A collection of people is about society, and government spontaneously forms to manage common interests. It could be said that government should be guided by people's behavior (therefore drugs should be legal and pirating movies and software unencumbered) but I tend to see the behavior of criminals as the Id, the behavior of society in general as the Ego, and government as the Superego. Sometimes we have to guided to do things against our desire in our own best interest. In that way government is all about shaping and controlling society. Why do you think certain financial crimes carry heavier penalties than stealing the same amount of money?

    Surur
  19. #219  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    There are social costs for all carbon emissions, and I think if we internalize those by blending them into the gas price (say, through a 10 cent per year hike in the gasoline tax for 15 years), that may be extremely beneficial in the long run without severely changing things in the short run. Transportation choices are extremely maleable in the long run, but almost 100% fixed in the short run.
    Exactly! This is the one and only way to go. Numbers may vary, the basic idea counts.

    Don't even try to see this as a new form of tax. The money collected can be redistributed on a per capita basis, so there is no increase in taxes, the effect will still be the same.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  20. #220  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    I drive one of the "big SUVs" and average 17 MPG. If I used 2 Toyota corolla's to transport the 7 individuals that are normally in the big SUV my total MPG would drop to something like 15 MPG (30 MPG each, but 2 vehicles needed). I would also incur two pay tolls instead of one, I would need to pay for two parking spots instead of, I would have to pay upkeep costs on 2 vehicles instead of 1. In my case smaller cars are not more efficient.

    I know a lot of people drive around in the vehicle alone, but not all.
    Unfortunately taxes are a relatively blunt object. It can only work in aggregate, and without means testing and individual assessment can not take account of everybody's circumstances. However if it is so much cheaper to use one vehicle than two it will still be cheaper to continue what you are doing, just not as much as before.

    In UK they have a yearly car tax. In the most recent budget they declared that very small cars (e.g. the diesel Smart car) would not pay ANY road tax, while larger cars with a certain engine size would pay double the limit (about $350) . The outcry that followed was about tax on larger cars being too low, and that it should rather have been in the range of $1000.

    Of course this is where the argument comes in that instead of taxing large vehicles its better to tax the fuel, which will automatically mean larger vehicles pay more. This has its own downsides unfortunately, and does not take into account the other problems with larger vehicles e.g. intimidating other smaller vehicles on the road, leading to a roadwars arms race.

    The main message is really that the things postulated are not experimental, but have been done in many other countries over many years, so its really just a question of picking and choosing which strategy to follow. The problem is that America want to go its own route, which results in doubts about its practicality (e.g. corn ethanol).

    Surur
Page 11 of 19 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions