Americans have a deep and understandable aversion to gasoline taxes. In a culture more single-mindedly devoted to individual freedom than any other, tampering with access to the open road is met with visceral opposition. That's why earnest efforts to alter American driving habits take the form of regulation of the auto companies--the better to hide the hand of government and protect politicians from the inevitable popular backlash.
But it's not ...
Full Story »
An interesting proposal, which given the current economics, probably doesn’t stand much of a chance. Too complicated for most voters, who don’t like complications. Economic conditions must be worse than I thought (and I'm not exactly on the sanguine side of this mess) when someone like Krauthammer actually starts making sense.
Krauthammer makes an significant, overlooked point: distances in Europe vs distances in America abrogate travel comparisons. When it’s possible to drive across an entire large European country in ten hours or less vs five-six days required to drive across America; given that American trains and mass transit are largely fantasy; and with the only viable alternative being expensive air travel; our penchant for large cars and concern about $4 gas is understandable.
I can't believe it! Krauthammer is writing in FAVOR of a social-engineering tax! It would actually be a good idea to heavily tax gasoline, and perhaps refund part of the proceeds across the board (e.g. by increasing the personal income tax deduction). This would have the result of decreasing consumption and rewarding those who use less gas. Krauthammer advocates instead for a decrease of the FICA tax. What is happening to Krauthammer? "One nice detail is that the $14 rebate is mildly progressive." Did someone spike his beer? Does he think it is April First?
Help, please! Krauthammer, the bastion of the Doctrine of the Free Market according to Ayn Rand and Alan Greenspan, is reinventing himself as a liberal! Please wake me up!
The reasons for a higher gas tax are compelling, but the Krauthammer packages his recommendation with a lot of other garbage about drilling and nukes, and demonizing other countries.
Krauthammer is going against (conservative) type here by advocating a large increase in the gas tax, but then offsetting it by lowering the payroll tax an equivalent amount. The idea is clever, and has the benefit of making the payroll tax more progressive while encouraging energy conservation. That in turn will lower the price of crude and the financial windfall that accrues to exporting nations, some of whom -- Krauthammer would say, many of whom -- do not wish us well. While Krauthammer emphasizes the geopolitical advantages of conserving oil, he goes very lightly over the fact that world oil production either has peaked or is about to peak. A post-petroleum world is likely to be very nasty; anything we can do to ... More »
A tax at the pump is the most efficient way to achieve conservation but should be combined with a broader program of conservation and transition to a post-petroleum world.
Retrieving Comments
