$4 + Gas Would Be Good for US Long Term

Danny · 05-28-2008, 10:34 AM

I agree with him.

Thomas Friedman weighs in on $4 gas

I saw the dodge dealer here offering to subsidize ones gas costs if you bought an SUV from them.

Hopeful Obama will start us on the right track towards energy independence

retire@40 · 05-28-2008, 01:39 PM

"...what our mythical candidate would be proposing, argues the energy economist Philip Verleger Jr., is a “price floor” for gasoline: $4 a gallon for regular unleaded, which is still half the going rate in Europe today. Washington would declare that it would never let the price fall below that level. If it does, it would increase the federal gasoline tax on a monthly basis to make up the difference between the pump price and the market price.

To ease the burden on the less well-off, “anyone earning under $80,000 a year would be compensated with a reduction in the payroll taxes,” said Verleger."

Sure, more wealth redistribution. Little by little we would become more like the old USSR.

Wouldn't it be better to let the markets take care of themselves? I already decided not to take a flying vacation this year. That alone will save me more than the increase in gasoline costs. So I won't be going to Argentina this year. There are plenty of fun things to do locally to keep me amused.

chinaco · 06-02-2008, 03:54 AM

I am not for gas subsidies... But I do not care for higher gas prices.

I would prefer a gas guzzler tax on the purchase of any passenger vehicle (including pickup trucks and SUVs) that get less than some level of efficiency. 30 mpg city and 38 mpg highway. Use the money to fund R&D for alternative energy solutions.

It accomplishes the something and encourages the development of more fuel efficient vehicles. A gas subsidy just encourages more use of fuel.

Midpack · 06-02-2008, 05:14 AM

Twenty years ago I would not, but unfortunately I also agree with Freidman on this. We have all known this was inevitable and we all ignored it, automakers and government led by consumers - yes us! As 5% of the population using 25% of the world's oil, a commodity with diminishing supply, and now importing 60% of our oil mostly from countries that are increasingly unfriendly and emboldened - we thought we'd have cheap gas forever? Again, I have been all for personal responsibility and free markets, but we've clearly ignored all the signs. Europe is going to look pretty smart in the end for taxing gas so heavily, and that makes me sad. They've stayed away from gas guzzlers and urban sprawl. I'm afraid we'll be forced to do the same and it will be painful for most. Might as well get started now and lessen the pain.

jambo101 · 06-02-2008, 06:03 AM

I feel sorry for those that never saw the writing on the wall and are now stuck with some gas guzzling behemoth that they cant sell and living in their suburban bungalow 50 miles or more from their place of work.
I can see a future with lots of those small cars they drive in Europe being imported to North America and instead of the 10mpg V8 engine the 70mpg 3cyl turbo diesel will be ruling the road.
I can also see real estate in the suburbs taking a major hit as no one is going to want to live that far from work,centrally located urban property on a city transit grid will definitely be the more desirable option..

StJohnsWood · 06-02-2008, 06:31 AM

I for one would like to see gas at $10 or $20 a gallon. One of two things will happen: The US or China will invade the OPEC nations or someone will invent an alternative that is cost effective. Either way the middle east problem is taken care of.

I would prefer the latter then the middle east is nothing but a desert like it was 100 years ago.

FinanceDude · 06-02-2008, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StJohnsWood

I for one would like to see gas at $10 or $20 a gallon.

let me guess, you don't drive much.........

kcowan · 06-02-2008, 08:38 AM

In Europe the cost of gas is just part of life. No major problems. $8/gal in London.

So the high price is not an issue but the rate of change is. There will be adjustments.

So running out of it - that will be a real problem for everybody. Better conserve the remaining supplies for the most important uses. We can do that by pricing or by government interference. I prefer pricing.

And I drive a lot less than I used to for sure.

Zathras · 06-02-2008, 09:00 AM

I don't like more subsidies, we need less of them.
Remove the subsidies to the oil companies, and add a tax to gasoline.
Those that drive gas guzzlers will end up paying more in taxes, no need for a special gas guzzler tax.

bright eyed · 06-02-2008, 09:54 AM

i saw two tiny smart cars on the freeway this weekend - i'm sure they felt like the cool kids - whereas maybe just 5 years ago people would have laughed at them!

can anyone quickly explain how the gas prices got so high in europe? I thought it was due to gas taxes, not just the "market"...

tightasadrum · 06-02-2008, 10:59 AM

As much as I HATE to spend more money on gasoline, I have come to believe the only way to take care of this problem is a usage tax and an alternative energy credit. But the key is to keep it out of any general fund and put it into solving the problem. The problem? using so much oil we're forced to sell our souls to the devil, middle eastern and Argentinian governments. Even if we somehow figured out a way to take over the middle east, which I believe would cost us much more in goodwill, moral authority and money, than it would save us, the solution would still be temporary. Oil is limited. Sooner or later we'll still need to fix the problem. Might as well get on with it.

One of the issues I've heard about, maybe here, is that alternative energy sources (photo voltaic, wind power, geothermal etc.) require a totally different power grid system, one that delivers energy through the grid at a much lower voltage level. A dedicated tax could help pay for the construction of this grid. Without the grid we would be hampered by additional costs that would either discourage development or set costs higher.

Some of the tax could be used to offer subsidies to individuals to install private alternative energy systems, much like CA does. It would stimulate the market to increase capacity to the point that volume efficiencies could reduce the cost of producing the equipment. Demand would probably drive up prices in the short term until more competition drives it down. (Be very wary of regulating the technology. We need to avoid monopolies and government controlled pricing: think cable tv.) My dream is to put in a system and watch the power meter turn backwards. (Now pay ME Ga Power!) Come to think of it, the electrical companies will lobby this all away without a very strong public demand for it.

I'm against penalizing the oil companies for what they do, discover and deliver energy.

Something will happen to take care of all this anyway eventually. I would just like to see it nudged along a little faster before the whole world starts fighting over oil. Reducing usage is the easiest short-term solution, and taxing the activity you wish to reduce and giving credits to those things you wish to encourage just makes good sense to me.

Texas Proud · 06-02-2008, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bright eyed

i saw two tiny smart cars on the freeway this weekend - i'm sure they felt like the cool kids - whereas maybe just 5 years ago people would have laughed at them!

can anyone quickly explain how the gas prices got so high in europe? I thought it was due to gas taxes, not just the "market"...

Yes... it is taxes....

When I was in London I had read that the actually underlying cost of gas was a few cents cheaper there, but at the time it was about $5 per gallon... and they were tried to increase the taxes... but there were so many truck strikes etc. they changed their mind (or at least that is what I remember)...

ERD50 · 06-02-2008, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chinaco

I would prefer a gas guzzler tax on the purchase of any passenger vehicle (including pickup trucks and SUVs) that get less than some level of efficiency. 30 mpg city and 38 mpg highway. Use the money to fund R&D for alternative energy solutions.

It accomplishes the something and encourages the development of more fuel efficient vehicles. A gas subsidy just encourages more use of fuel.

I don't like the gas guzzler tax idea at all. It does not go to the core of the problem directly enough - conservation.

Why should a guy that drives 5,000 miles/year pay the same one-time gas guzzler tax as the guy that drives 20,000 miles/year? And what if the 5,000 mile guy carpools with a group of 4 people most of the time, and goes easy on the accelerator?

A gas guzzler tax does nothing to encourage car-pooling, reducing the number of trips, driving more conservatively, using public transportation, etc, etc, etc. It can actually do the reverse, by making some people feel they paid for the 'right' to burn as much fuel as they want. It's a one time thing that gets forgotten. Poor approach, IMO.

If we want to try to legislate conservation ( I need to throw in that caveat each time ), eliminating the subsidies and setting an ever-increasing level of taxation (until the goals are met) would be so much more effective than little hodge-podge actions like gas guzzler tax and hybrid incentives, etc.

High gas prices will provide plenty of private incentive to fund R&D for alternative energy solutions.

We must stay focused on the goal. High mpg cars are one thing, but just a tool. Remember that old marketing slogan that goes something like this: ' nobody sets out to buy a drill - what they really want is a hole'. Do you want high mpg cars, or less fuel consumed?

-ERD50

FinanceDude · 06-02-2008, 12:05 PM

20 million Priuses on the road won't change things that much. Fuel cell and electric cars will. The key is affordability.........

ERD50 · 06-02-2008, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FinanceDude

20 million Priuses on the road won't change things that much. Fuel cell and electric cars will. The key is affordability.........

IMO, the key is relative affordability. $10 gas makes electrics look better.

Not sure about fuel cells, seemed like the last time I looked into them it was an extremely inefficient way to get energy from some source to the wheels of your car.

-ERD50

Milton · 06-02-2008, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by retire@40

Wouldn't it be better to let the markets take care of themselves? I already decided not to take a flying vacation this year. That alone will save me more than the increase in gasoline costs.

Apparently you're not alone. See Nine out of ten Americans making lifestyle changes to cope with rising energy costs, RBC survey says: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance: "When asked how their summer vacation plans have been altered, half said they are either staying locally or are not vacationing at all."

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambo101

I feel sorry for those that never saw the writing on the wall and are now stuck with some gas guzzling behemoth that they cant sell and living in their suburban bungalow 50 miles or more from their place of work.

I don't feel any sympathy. As you say, the writing has been on the wall for a long time. If they were too stupid to read it, well ...

ERD50 · 06-02-2008, 03:47 PM

Quote:

jambo101

I feel sorry for those that never saw the writing on the wall and are now stuck with some gas guzzling behemoth that they cant sell and living in their suburban bungalow 50 miles or more from their place of work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milton

I don't feel any sympathy. As you say, the writing has been on the wall for a long time. If they were too stupid to read it, well ...

Yes, while it may be a bitter pill, if they don't learn to look out for themselves the hard way, how will they ever learn?

They chose to buy a gas guzzler. It's not like mpg is some new rocket-science concept. I've always driven cars that get decent mileage. Even when gas was 50 cents/gallon I didn't see the need to buy any more of it than I had to. If people choose to do otherwise, that's their business, but don't expect me to feel sorry for them.

-ERD50

Grizz · 06-02-2008, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tightasadrum

One of the issues I've heard about, maybe here, is that alternative energy sources (photo voltaic, wind power, geothermal etc.) require a totally different power grid system, one that delivers energy through the grid at a much lower voltage level. A dedicated tax could help pay for the construction of this grid. Without the grid we would be hampered by additional costs that would either discourage development or set costs higher.

There is no need for a new grid at all with these technologies. They can, and currently do use the current grid. Raising the voltage at the source is done easily and inexpensively with a transformer. The reason these technologies aren't commonplace is simply that our typical means of producing electricity (coal, nat. gas, water) are still much less expensive than any of these, though I especially much like the idea of geothermal as a growing source.

newguy88 · 06-02-2008, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bright eyed

i saw two tiny smart cars on the freeway this weekend - i'm sure they felt like the cool kids - whereas maybe just 5 years ago people would have laughed at them!

can anyone quickly explain how the gas prices got so high in europe? I thought it was due to gas taxes, not just the "market"...

But in Europe I can get to work either by taking a bus to a train or walking or riding a bike. The high price of fuel in Europe was always a small issue since the rail and bus systems are so good. We here in the states have done nothing to make mass transit appealing.

05-28-2008, 10:34 AM	#1
Danny Thinks s/he gets paid by the post Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Minnehaha Posts: 2,000	$4 + Gas Would Be Good for US Long Term I agree with him. Thomas Friedman weighs in on $4 gas I saw the dodge dealer here offering to subsidize ones gas costs if you bought an SUV from them. Hopeful Obama will start us on the right track towards energy independence __________________ Danny's Waking Up To Another Beautiful Day Danny's American Diners Drive-ins Roadhouses Joints & Dives Waking Up With Nothing To Do...Trying My Very Best To Get It All Done Each and Everyday Golden Rule and Good Actions = Good Results

05-28-2008, 01:39 PM	#2
retire@40 Thinks s/he gets paid by the post Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 2,531	"...what our mythical candidate would be proposing, argues the energy economist Philip Verleger Jr., is a “price floor” for gasoline: $4 a gallon for regular unleaded, which is still half the going rate in Europe today. Washington would declare that it would never let the price fall below that level. If it does, it would increase the federal gasoline tax on a monthly basis to make up the difference between the pump price and the market price. To ease the burden on the less well-off, “anyone earning under $80,000 a year would be compensated with a reduction in the payroll taxes,” said Verleger." Sure, more wealth redistribution. Little by little we would become more like the old USSR. Wouldn't it be better to let the markets take care of themselves? I already decided not to take a flying vacation this year. That alone will save me more than the increase in gasoline costs. So I won't be going to Argentina this year. There are plenty of fun things to do locally to keep me amused. __________________ No man is free who is not master of himself. --- Epictetus Enjoy Yourself (It's Later Than You Think). --- Guy Lombardo

06-02-2008, 03:54 AM	#3
chinaco Thinks s/he gets paid by the post Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2,652	I am not for gas subsidies... But I do not care for higher gas prices. I would prefer a gas guzzler tax on the purchase of any passenger vehicle (including pickup trucks and SUVs) that get less than some level of efficiency. 30 mpg city and 38 mpg highway. Use the money to fund R&D for alternative energy solutions. It accomplishes the something and encourages the development of more fuel efficient vehicles. A gas subsidy just encourages more use of fuel. __________________ Disclaimer: I make no warranty or guarantee about the accuracy or completeness of this information. I am not a financial planner, my comments only represent my opinion.

06-02-2008, 05:14 AM	#4
Midpack Full time employment: Posting here. Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 772	Twenty years ago I would not, but unfortunately I also agree with Freidman on this. We have all known this was inevitable and we all ignored it, automakers and government led by consumers - yes us! As 5% of the population using 25% of the world's oil, a commodity with diminishing supply, and now importing 60% of our oil mostly from countries that are increasingly unfriendly and emboldened - we thought we'd have cheap gas forever? Again, I have been all for personal responsibility and free markets, but we've clearly ignored all the signs. Europe is going to look pretty smart in the end for taxing gas so heavily, and that makes me sad. They've stayed away from gas guzzlers and urban sprawl. I'm afraid we'll be forced to do the same and it will be painful for most. Might as well get started now and lessen the pain. __________________ You only live once...

06-02-2008, 06:03 AM	#5
jambo101 Recycles dryer sheets Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Montreal Posts: 472	I feel sorry for those that never saw the writing on the wall and are now stuck with some gas guzzling behemoth that they cant sell and living in their suburban bungalow 50 miles or more from their place of work. I can see a future with lots of those small cars they drive in Europe being imported to North America and instead of the 10mpg V8 engine the 70mpg 3cyl turbo diesel will be ruling the road. I can also see real estate in the suburbs taking a major hit as no one is going to want to live that far from work,centrally located urban property on a city transit grid will definitely be the more desirable option.. __________________ "Second star to the right and straight on till morning"

06-02-2008, 06:31 AM	#6
StJohnsWood Recycles dryer sheets Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 137	I for one would like to see gas at $10 or $20 a gallon. One of two things will happen: The US or China will invade the OPEC nations or someone will invent an alternative that is cost effective. Either way the middle east problem is taken care of. I would prefer the latter then the middle east is nothing but a desert like it was 100 years ago.

06-02-2008, 08:38 AM	#8
kcowan Thinks s/he gets paid by the post Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Pacific latitude 20/49 Posts: 1,522	In Europe the cost of gas is just part of life. No major problems. $8/gal in London. So the high price is not an issue but the rate of change is. There will be adjustments. So running out of it - that will be a real problem for everybody. Better conserve the remaining supplies for the most important uses. We can do that by pricing or by government interference. I prefer pricing. And I drive a lot less than I used to for sure. __________________ For the fun of it...Keith - My profile - Mi casa es su casa

06-02-2008, 09:00 AM	#9
Zathras Full time employment: Posting here. Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 548	I don't like more subsidies, we need less of them. Remove the subsidies to the oil companies, and add a tax to gasoline. Those that drive gas guzzlers will end up paying more in taxes, no need for a special gas guzzler tax. __________________ "We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children. (Ancient Indian Proverb)"

06-02-2008, 09:54 AM	#10
bright eyed Thinks s/he gets paid by the post Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,494	i saw two tiny smart cars on the freeway this weekend - i'm sure they felt like the cool kids - whereas maybe just 5 years ago people would have laughed at them! can anyone quickly explain how the gas prices got so high in europe? I thought it was due to gas taxes, not just the "market"... __________________ If i think of something clever to say, i'll put it here...

06-02-2008, 10:59 AM	#11
tightasadrum Recycles dryer sheets Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: athens Posts: 436	As much as I HATE to spend more money on gasoline, I have come to believe the only way to take care of this problem is a usage tax and an alternative energy credit. But the key is to keep it out of any general fund and put it into solving the problem. The problem? using so much oil we're forced to sell our souls to the devil, middle eastern and Argentinian governments. Even if we somehow figured out a way to take over the middle east, which I believe would cost us much more in goodwill, moral authority and money, than it would save us, the solution would still be temporary. Oil is limited. Sooner or later we'll still need to fix the problem. Might as well get on with it. One of the issues I've heard about, maybe here, is that alternative energy sources (photo voltaic, wind power, geothermal etc.) require a totally different power grid system, one that delivers energy through the grid at a much lower voltage level. A dedicated tax could help pay for the construction of this grid. Without the grid we would be hampered by additional costs that would either discourage development or set costs higher. Some of the tax could be used to offer subsidies to individuals to install private alternative energy systems, much like CA does. It would stimulate the market to increase capacity to the point that volume efficiencies could reduce the cost of producing the equipment. Demand would probably drive up prices in the short term until more competition drives it down. (Be very wary of regulating the technology. We need to avoid monopolies and government controlled pricing: think cable tv.) My dream is to put in a system and watch the power meter turn backwards. (Now pay ME Ga Power!) Come to think of it, the electrical companies will lobby this all away without a very strong public demand for it. I'm against penalizing the oil companies for what they do, discover and deliver energy. Something will happen to take care of all this anyway eventually. I would just like to see it nudged along a little faster before the whole world starts fighting over oil. Reducing usage is the easiest short-term solution, and taxing the activity you wish to reduce and giving credits to those things you wish to encourage just makes good sense to me. __________________ Can't you see yourself in the nursing home saying, " Darn! Wish I'd spent more time at the office instead of wasting time with family and friends."

06-02-2008, 12:05 PM	#14
FinanceDude Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ... Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,732	20 million Priuses on the road won't change things that much. Fuel cell and electric cars will. The key is affordability......... __________________ Consult with your own advisor or representative. My thoughts should not be construed as investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results (love that one).......:) I am so conservative I make Reagan look like a liberal........:)