WSJ Retirement Section 12/11/06

[dumpster56]

Why would you want this? You've saved your money and paid taxes on the income. Now you want to pay taxes again when you spend it?

I would like to see a Federal $5 a gallon gas tax though. That would start a conservation movement like you've never seen. Get the SUVs off the highways too. Good for the planet and we'd have plenty of gas for years to come!

Maybe if we had railroads in this country that actually worked.

 

[donheff]

I would like to see a Federal $5 a gallon gas tax though.

I just spit my coffee all over the computer screen. Where are the paper towels?

A lot of people freak out at the thought but if we had instituted a gas tax back in the 70s after the first OPEC crisis we would all be driving fuel efficient vehicles and we would not be as dependant on the middle east as we are now. Small, fuel efficient cars were in huge demand in the late 70s but they went the way of the Dodo when gas became cheaper than soda pop. National security minded folks should have championed this.

 

[CCdaCE]

Why would you want this? You've saved your money and paid taxes on the income. Now you want to pay taxes again when you spend it?

I would like to see a Federal $5 a gallon gas tax though. That would start a conservation movement like you've never seen. Get the SUVs off the highways too. Good for the planet and we'd have plenty of gas for years to come!

I wouldn't WANT a flat sales tax, but I'd prefer it to high property taxes, high income taxes and the like. I'd rather punish someone tax-wise for wanting a big screen/expensive vehicle/etc. vs. owning a house or making a decent income. That'd be my preference.

-CC

 

[Nords]

A lot of people freak out at the thought but if we had instituted a gas tax back in the 70s after the first OPEC crisis we would all be driving fuel efficient vehicles and we would not be as dependant on the middle east as we are now.

Well, that certainly would have eliminated the gas lines-- and brought what little was left of the economy to a screeching crash!

Have we all forgotten what it was like during November 1973 - February 74? I was only 13 years old then but it left a pretty clear impression on me, and I don't think a $5/gallon gas tax would have been the sort of economic stimulus that was needed.

We're already less dependent on foreign oil today than we were 33 years ago, and the trend will continue (despite the multi-ton V8 Armada that almost ran me over today). Give it time.

 

[Cut-Throat]

We're already less dependent on foreign oil today than we were 33 years ago, and the trend will continue (despite the multi-ton V8 Armada that almost ran me over today). Give it time.

Say What? - This is contrary to everything I've ever heard on the subject! - Do you have any graphs that illustrate your point?

The only trend I've ever heard about is we are more dependent on oil.


US Foreign Oil Dependency on Increase, say Experts
Michael Bowman
VOA, Washington
16 Oct 2003, 16:03 UTC

Thirty years ago, the United States faced an energy crisis as mostly-Muslim, oil-producing nations imposed an oil embargo, hoping to force a halt of U.S. support for Israel. Today, U.S. dependence on foreign oil is far greater than it was in the early 1970s. Panel of experts recently gathered in Washington to examine America's energy situation and its choices for the future.

Former Energy Secretary James Schlesinger says the 1973 oil embargo had a devastating short term effect on the United States, but an even costlier long term effect on OPEC nations that conspired to withhold fuel. In the years that followed, the United States built more fuel-efficient cars and sought alternate sources for oil. OPEC's market share fell and, by the mid-1980s, world oil prices collapsed.

"The Saudis did learn in that period that there was a need for stable prices, that there was a need to show that they were the dependable sources of supply," said Mr. Schlesinger, speaking at the Washington-based Heritage Foundation. "If they were not, other places in the world were discovered that could produce oil: the North Sea, West Africa. Not only that, but the world's appetite for oil could be curbed if prices were high enough."

But Mr. Schlesinger and other analysts contend that any progress the United States made in the 1970s and 80s towards stable energy supplies at reasonable prices is at risk.

"Our dependence [on foreign oil] has almost doubled since 1973," added Gal Luft, co-director of the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security. "In 1972, the United States imported 28 percent of its oil; today it imports 55 percent, and projections show that 25 years from now it will import 70 percent of its oil," he continued. "Our dependency is growing, and our dependency on Middle East oil is also growing. We will import 50 percent of our oil from the Middle East by 2025."

 

[Cut-Throat]

Well, that certainly would have eliminated the gas lines-- and brought what little was left of the economy to a screeching crash!

Have we all forgotten what it was like during November 1973 - February 74? I was only 13 years old then but it left a pretty clear impression on me, and I don't think a $5/gallon gas tax would have been the sort of economic stimulus that was needed.

We're already less dependent on foreign oil today than we were 33 years ago, and the trend will continue (despite the multi-ton V8 Armada that almost ran me over today). Give it time.

You don't know the inventions that this would have fueled (pun intended) - I think we would have been much better off. We need to move our economy from an oil dependent one to a renewable energy one.

 

[mb]

We're already less dependent on foreign oil today than we were 33 years ago, and the trend will continue (despite the multi-ton V8 Armada that almost ran me over today). Give it time.

You are usually pretty reliable Nords, but the above is completely wrong.

Since the mid-70s oil imports as a percent of consumption have increased by about 50% and oil imports in bbl/day have increased by about 100%.

And it is unlikely that the trend to a greater dependence on foreign oil will reverse. Even when the North Slope came on line it was only a small blip in the trend.

The recent Gulf discoveries will help some but more oil exporation in the US in not the answer.

MB

 

[Nords]

Say What? - This is contrary to everything I've ever heard on the subject! - Do you have any graphs that illustrate your point?

You are usually pretty reliable Nords, but the above is completely wrong.

OK, guys, I'll go digging (so to speak). I'm sure there's enough weasel words on the subject to prove that we're all correct.

My point is that in 1973-4 the situation would've been helped by fiscal stimulus. The last thing we needed was the government stepping in with Smoot-Hawley tariffs higher taxes.

EDIT--
OK, I'm back. Here's one: http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/mar2003/nf2003037_6285.htm?chan=search

"The history of oil spikes is a poor guide, in part because the country is less dependent on oil than it used to be. The U.S. uses only about half as much oil per dollar of inflation-adjusted output as it did in the early 1970s. Even since the last Gulf War, the economy's energy dependence has shrunk."

Of course the article also goes on thusly:
"If the conflict with Iraq is resolved within a few months -- a big if, to be sure -- oil prices are likely to drop below $30 a barrel by summer. Some experts even think an oil glut is possible. Oil-company analyst Frederick P. Leuffer of Bear, Stearns & Co. predicts oil will average $18 a barrel in the second half of 2003."

BTW, how 'bout if the next one of you armchair economists who wants to punish us with gas taxes decides to buy a photovoltaic array instead? Electricity bills at the Nords house have been running reliably under $40 (as low as $15) and I'm looking for another kilowatt or two of PV cells at under $4/watt (including shipping).

 

[unclemick]

Hmmmm

The way I heard it (no handy sources either) was that we import a lot more oil BUT the price has less of an immediate effect because of changes in the structure/mix of our economy since the 1970's.

heh heh heh heh - and no I can't remember where I read that??

 

[mb]

I would like to see a Federal $5 a gallon gas tax though. That would start a conservation movement like you've never seen. Get the SUVs off the highways too. Good for the planet and we'd have plenty of gas for years to come!

Agree with C-T. A gas tax would:

- reduce oil imports
- reduce CO2 emissions
- encourage development of mass transit options
- encourage development of walkable\liveable neighborhoods rather than the drive to the mall culture

I would like to see something on the order of $3/gallon phased in at the rate of say $0.50 increase every 6 months.

MB

 

[mb]

OK, guys, I'll go digging (so to speak). I'm sure there's enough weasel words on the subject to prove that we're all correct.

I will grant you that gas costs/energy costs as a percent of income/GDP declined from the 70s up until recently. That is because oil was so cheap for so long. That is also why imports increased so much.

MB

 

[donheff]

Nords. It isn't just a comparison of gross national product with total cost of oil. The absolute amount and the source of supply are huge issues. We are heavily dependant on areas of the world where we are hated. We could have ramped up gas taxes to push ourselves more towards energy independance over the last 30 years. It seems like a security issue, not just a simple dollars and cents question.

In terms of impact on the economy, f we raised the gas tax we could (theoretically) lower some other tax. An imagine, if we had substantially reduced our dependance on the mideast maybe Bush & Co wouldn't have invaded Iraq and we would currently be saving hundreds of billions.

A final note: I heard on the news last night that 80% of Americans favor imposing requirements on auto makers for increased fuel efficiency. Wouldn't a gas tax make that happen through the market by changing the demand instead of trying to change the supply?

 

[dumpster56]

the real problem is that you MUST buy gasoline to get to work. There are really no alternatives in many suburban areas of the country. Look at Vegas, the desert southwest, denver, atlanta gwinitt county the areas of Northern NJ Chicago all the 40 50 mile commutes. IN CARS! Now the Stupid american who still buys the SUV or the 6 cyl vehicle is well dumb as you know what. Gasoline is gonna hit 4 dollars a gallon next summer, just wait and see. Yes the scum in the middle east hate us and we still buy the oil it is a national security issue. BUT the OIL COMPANIES are the most POWERFUL companies in america, And we have a dummie in the white house who is still in bed with the SAUDI royals!!

Sorry I am sick of the policies of our country. I waited on those gasoline lines back in the 70s I have ALWAYS owned a 4 cyl vehicle for 35 years always drive a small car, Oh guess what when the children were still in the house THEY FIT JUST FINE IN THE BACK OF THE HONDA CIVIC and their stuff FIT IN THE TRUNK! Trips if it did not fit IT DID NOT GO WITH US!!!

American parents and their I NEED THE SUV OR MINIVAN BECAUSE OF THE KIDZ STUFF! $hit what a bunch of moronic parents. Do they know 15 of the 19 hijackers were SAUDIS on 9/11

 

[mathjak107]

i just saw an article that said opec owns 105 billion right now in us treasuries. man am i glad i gave them all those gas profits so they can buy our treasuries. i hate to see our interest rates if they didnt buy them.

see using gas is a good thing

 

[mathjak107]

who ever thought 33 years ago when we were on all those gas lines that by today almost nothing changed. geesh in 33 years i thought we would be like the jetsons.

 

[dumpster56]

who ever thought 33 years ago when we were on all those gas lines that by today almost nothing changed. geesh in 33 years i thought we would be like the jetsons.

The real problem is the people who DIDN'T wait on those gas lines, the ones who were not born yet or were too young to remember. They think its their god given right to drive wasteful suvs and sit on lines to buy a biscuit at bojangles!!

 

[mathjak107]

some suv's are more efficiant than some cars so you cant generalize. i love and need mine being an avid hunter and camper but its a smaller bmw x3. what i find dis-tasteful is all these soccor moms with one kid and a quart of milk in a navigator or suburbon. .

 

[Zipper]

So what do you shoot mathjak?

Or more important?

WHY do you shoot it??

 

[dumpster56]

some suv's are more efficiant than some cars so you cant generalize. i love and need mine being an avid hunter and camper but its a smaller bmw x3. what i find dis-tasteful is all these soccor moms with one kid and a quart of milk in a navigator or suburbon. .

I need mine. Uh what did people do 20 years ago??

Come on a BMW?? Please you are rationalizing.

You LIKE THE 3!! Which is fine but the vehicle should get 40mpg!! Or better.

 

[Goonie]

When I FIRE (in a very short time!) I'll be able to live comfortably on about 25% of my current net income.....the only major exception to that will be for vacationing, which will probably boost that percentage to about 30-35%...ocassionally!

As for cost of gas....I can walk from one end of town to the other in a matter of about 1 hour (leisurely walk...NOT brisk), or I can bike it in about 20 minutes (if I obey the traffic signals). If it's cold/rainy/snowy/etc, I'll wait till the weather co-operates. Plus, I'm going to be picking up a scoot in the spring, that will go a zillion miles on a fill-up....well, OK, maybe not QUITE a zillion, but at least a bunch!!!

If our thoughtful politicians decide to dig deeper into my pockets while they're picking them, I may activate my 'alternative retirement plan'....and go 'ex-pat' to Mexico or Costa Rica!! VIVA!!! 8)

 

[mathjak107]

I need mine. Uh what did people do 20 years ago??

Come on a BMW?? Please you are rationalizing.

You LIKE THE 3!! Which is fine but the vehicle should get 40mpg!! Or better.

years ago there were station wagons , except for a few models they are long gone.

 

[donheff]

There is no reason why we can't develop SUVs that get 40mpg. There has simply been no incentive to do so since gas is cheap. Our enemies have seduced us with cheap fire water

 

[mathjak107]

ill drive anything that suits my lifestyle, give me an suv that gets 40 miles to the gallon, dosnt depreciate many times faster than a conventional car because thousands in batteries will be needed as well as parts that are difficult to get or obsoleted in very short times and ill consider it.

 

[sgeeeee]

There is no reason why we can't develop SUVs that get 40mpg. There has simply been no incentive to do so since gas is cheap. Our enemies have seduced us with cheap fire water

To first order, gas mileage is inversely proportional to vehicle weight.

Unfortunately, to first order, safety is directly proportional to vehicle weight.

 

[CCdaCE]

To first order, gas mileage is inversely proportional to vehicle weight.

Unfortunately, to first order, safety is directly proportional to vehicle weight.

Safety = weight? Haven't you ever seen one roll over? ... which SUVs tend to do alot, apparently.

Maybe a little less weight, or center of gravity adjustment, or SOMETHING, and then they'd be safer because they'd rollover less.

-CC