[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by gtahvit

The decrease in consumption was less that 5% when gas was that high. Cost vs Reward on a gas tax is in the negative.

Is it?
Compare the Cost v. Reward of this strategy to the Cost v. Reward of requiring companies to make 45, 50, 55mpg cars...cars that won't even make a dent in our consumption for 10 or so years. How would you like to pay 20k + for a bottom-barrel 'Cobalt' (but it gets 50mpg!!).

Like I said...I'm hard pressed to find anybody who agrees with me, but the bottom line is we ARE going to pay, one way or the other...I find this to be the most effective use of our money in terms of reduced oil consumption. That is, untill we electricy, or hydrogenify, or ethanolify our vehicles...then it'll won't really matter....


Anyways...car Czar....I thought that was Bob Lutz?

[Fandango]

The Gas tax would work when the demand elasticity of gas is like a Stretch-Armstong pulled by two 747s. Right now the curve is has proven to move a little but not a lot. And remember, Supply is key. They can stop producing and rise the price on current demand to compensate. Then, the can produce like crazy and tax it and you'll pay 2.10 a gallon with the tax and that's fine by me. But like that will ever happen with OPEC. Gas is not like sigarettes. They are not killing people, just killing wallets. Now, I agree with Dragon on this one. It's proven to curve demand on something, you tax the crap out of it. That's way there's taxes on cigarettes.

I propose, instead of a gas tax, just modify the gas guzzler tax a bit, (I know, bad news for the Top Doggers) however, only tax the MPG over standard and modify it every 5 or so years. In other words. Charge like $500 per MPG under the 25 HW allowable. And give a tax break to the ones that get over 30 MPG. Reward by omission works too Senators, hope you are listening. Never heard of a hybrid tax break? You are going to have to put gas in them as it is.

Example: Chevy Corvette Gets 19 MGP highway. Tax is $3000 Chevy Malibu Hybrid gets 33 Highway? $1500 tax Break. Get it? Huh?? Don't always have to tax it Geniuses, (senators). There is no law that states: If it exists its taxable. If it has a name, it has a tax.

Last time I checked, there will always be a DEMAND for HI-PO, Speed and pleasure in their cars. They cannot stop them from SUPPLING. I've never heard of someone asking to have really shitty gas milage in their car. Oh, except for that city counselman on Robocop that asked for a car from Detroit with really shitty gas milage as one of his demands when he held the mayor hostage.

Performance will evolve. I just hope that the FED/GOV doesn't have unrealistic expectations.

[BigRigMike]

I will agree with Dragon especially since this makes more sense than CAFE.

I think that everyone is thinking in huge numbers with taxing $2 a gallon. What if the tax was $0.50 a gallon and in return all of the money that was then used to spur energy conservation such as the tax credits for more fuel efficient cars. Or divert some money into a more efficient power grid. I know that is not going to happen because tax money never ends up where it is supposed to go.

But the biggest problem with the gas tax is that the less you earn the more you feel it.

And I also like Fandango's idea of tax based on gas consumption.

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Is it?
Compare the Cost v. Reward of this strategy to the Cost v. Reward of requiring companies to make 45, 50, 55mpg cars...cars that won't even make a dent in our consumption for 10 or so years. How would you like to pay 20k + for a bottom-barrel 'Cobalt' (but it gets 50mpg!!).

Like I said...I'm hard pressed to find anybody who agrees with me, but the bottom line is we ARE going to pay, one way or the other...I find this to be the most effective use of our money in terms of reduced oil consumption. That is, untill we electricy, or hydrogenify, or ethanolify our vehicles...then it'll won't really matter....


Anyways...car Czar....I thought that was Bob Lutz?

I should have been more clear, C v R for the consumer at the pump is in the negative. I shouldn't have left that out.

And I do completely agree with you that the Gov setting unrealistic standards to get votes is going to be rediculously to the disadvantage of the car consumer also. I just don't want to compound the problem by adding a gas tax to the cost of high technology cars...

Sorry guys, I'm firmly in the category of cut spending and cut programs first. Get the Gov under control and then see what the revenue needs are.

They don't need any more money.

[Georgie]

considering they demand money at gunpoint (try not paying your taxes), no, they don't need anymore

[BowtieGuy]

Originally Posted by FirstLSK

You are playing a VERY DANGEROUS game when you encourage the government to impose behavior modification through taxation!!!!!!!!!!!!

This country is coming critically close to a nation of government dependency anyway -- we don't need to encourage it.

Every nation in the world depends on its government, whether it knows it or not. Even if it that gpvernment would rather brand you like cattle than provide you food, it is quite a few steps above anarchy.

[stovt001]

I've never much agreed with Alex Taylor before, but he is spot on. The guy does know the industry, unlike a certain NYT writer or documentary film maker.

As an aside, I'm generally a free market, small government guy, but if you want to do behavior modification taxes are the way to do it. Not only do you kill two birds (behavior modification and revenue generation) with one stone, but you keep the market principles of supply and demand intact. Now where I go small government is the amount that I think the government should be modifying behavior. In the end, I agree 100% with Alex Taylor that a higher gasoline tax would be much more beneficial than CAFE laws because automakers could build small, efficient cars consumers were demanding and make a profit rather than being forced to build something consumers just don't want because gas is so cheap.

[str8himalaya]

Here is my .02 cents. Why don't we just have a set gas price? Then demand wouldn't just dictate what the price is, thus, not artificially inflating the market. The oil companies get this much, and the govt. gets this much, and you can budget accordingly. In my opinion, i think the oil crisis is the reason the economy is in the shape it is now. Not only did people not drive as much, and had money taken out of their pockets by gas, but it also drove the prices of products up considerably because of the price of freight. Especially...wait for it...the price of building materials thus the housing market went up in price, and people wouldn't build, even when they could get loans. I would propose either a set price, or a min. cap/max. cap. Then it can be budgeted in homes, as well as with the government. I know it isn't as much of free enterprise, but oil companies are practically a monopoly now days. Something has to be done. In the eyes of controlling what cars people buy, putting a 2 dollar tax is a decent idea, BUT, what about everything else it effects? What about freight for product you buy? How about food? It becomes more than just a question of what car you buy then, it becomes something that isn't in your hands, which is unfair. Now, if you give a tax break and exclude certain industries, that is an idea for thought. Just my .02

[HeatherR]

Originally Posted by str8himalaya

Here is my .02 cents. Why don't we just have a set gas price? Then demand wouldn't just dictate what the price is, thus, not artificially inflating the market. The oil companies get this much, and the govt. gets this much, and you can budget accordingly. In my opinion, i think the oil crisis is the reason the economy is in the shape it is now. Not only did people not drive as much, and had money taken out of their pockets by gas, but it also drove the prices of products up considerably because of the price of freight. Especially...wait for it...the price of building materials thus the housing market went up in price, and people wouldn't build, even when they could get loans. I would propose either a set price, or a min. cap/max. cap. Then it can be budgeted in homes, as well as with the government. I know it isn't as much of free enterprise, but oil companies are practically a monopoly now days. Something has to be done. In the eyes of controlling what cars people buy, putting a 2 dollar tax is a decent idea, BUT, what about everything else it effects? What about freight for product you buy? How about food? It becomes more than just a question of what car you buy then, it becomes something that isn't in your hands, which is unfair. Now, if you give a tax break and exclude certain industries, that is an idea for thought. Just my .02

Our country's current financial situation is due to more than the rise in gas prices....Too many Americans were living way beyond their means for too long. Mortgages taken out that could not be repaid, 2nd mortgages on inflated housing prices to further a lifestyle that was beyond their means, etc. A complete lapse in regulations that should have prevented this. A tax would impact pricing of other things, but not in such a way that it would start a meltdown like we are experiencing now.

[Hylton]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

I have to say, I agree with the gas tax. They do it in Europe, and it's works for a reason.

How much gas did we use when it went to 4.00 a gallon? LESS than the year before. That was unpresidented. If the government truly wants the country to lower it's oil dependancy in the SHORT term, the only proven way to do that is to make it undesireable through taxes...

Interfering in corporate policy and telling companies what to make doesn't work -- because it drives up vehicle costs, and screws with the consumer....either way, WE are going to pay - and frankly, I'd rather have my money used effectively.

Heck, maybe we might pay off some of our debt in the meantime.

That's exactly what is done up here. It certainly gets people thinking when they go car shopping.

[FirstLSK]

Originally Posted by BowtieGuy

Every nation in the world depends on its government, whether it knows it or not. Even if it that gpvernment would rather brand you like cattle than provide you food, it is quite a few steps above anarchy.

Think about government dependency from a financial standpoint. Need a good example of financial dependence on a government? Take a trip to New Orleans.

The only thing that you should DEPEND upon the U.S. government to do, is to defend the rights guaranteed to you by the U.S. Constitution and the bill of rights.

The primary purpose of the U.S. government is defense of the free people, foreign and domestic – NOT to be your counselor in life or manipulate your choices as a free individual.

[str8himalaya]

I never said that was the ONLY reason we are in this situation, but it is a big part of it. Why do you think all the sudden people we living "outside their means"? A lot of that has to do with money going somewhere else other than what it SHOULD goto. Gas is one of those things. My big thing is, why did we give the banks that caused a lot of this problem 700B in money, but can't give a very small fraction of that to the auto industry that needs it as well? If you think gas has no effect on the economy, then you havn't paid much attention to the price of products. Prices for the things we buy have gone up, no doubt about it. Now, is it the only thing that caused this big mess? Of course not, like the man said, it was the perfect storm. I just hope the industry makes it out and better than ever!

Originally Posted by HeatherR

Our country's current financial situation is due to more than the rise in gas prices....Too many Americans were living way beyond their means for too long. Mortgages taken out that could not be repaid, 2nd mortgages on inflated housing prices to further a lifestyle that was beyond their means, etc. A complete lapse in regulations that should have prevented this. A tax would impact pricing of other things, but not in such a way that it would start a meltdown like we are experiencing now.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by gtahvit

I should have been more clear, C v R for the consumer at the pump is in the negative. I shouldn't have left that out.

Ah. I see.

Originally Posted by gtahvit

And I do completely agree with you that the Gov setting unrealistic standards to get votes is going to be rediculously to the disadvantage of the car consumer also. I just don't want to compound the problem by adding a gas tax to the cost of high technology cars...

No, I know, I know....Ideally, the whole tax thing would be in PLACE of CAFE...it would encourage the automakers from all over to make higher mileage vehicles...it wouldn't FORCE them to.

So, this does three things:
1: Increases gov't revenue, 2: decreases demand for gasoline, and therefore curbs consumption, and 3: Gives car companies ample reason to build higher-mileage cars...and it lets them advance their products at a realistic rate.

Originally Posted by gtahvit

Sorry guys, I'm firmly in the category of cut spending and cut programs first. Get the Gov under control and then see what the revenue needs are.

Me too -- and I don't want to sound like I encourage wasteful spending in government. It's just that (and I'm sure you know), when you pitch a proposal, you need to make it sound appealing to the people it would effect. Since this would be to the gov't...more money sounds appealing, does it not?

They talk about bloated, failed car companies...they should look in the mirror...hopefully what you say (^) will occur in some degree over the next years...but that's for another thread...In my perfect world, they'd lower income taxes, and raise the gas tax all while reducing spending and costs, etc. This way they wouldn't really be getting anything more, but it would still provide the consumption-lowering effect of ahigh gas prices. Actually...very similar to the cigarette tax...

Originally Posted by Georgie

(try not paying your taxes)

What advantage would there be to that?
Whether we like it or not, the gov't NEEDS money to run, and whether we like it or not, we NEED the government.
If I listened right in history class...they tried a no-tax policy when the states were formed in the late 1700s. But it failed miserably.

[Captain Awesome]

I was wondering if any of you guys had thoughts or horror stories of what a "Car Czar" would do if put into a position of power over the "Big 3".

I'm terrified of some dope with no auto experience and connections with some of the wacky lobby groups to come along and ruin the industry by "designing" the cars for the big 3.

I can forsee UBER-CAFE standards being dictated.
I can see new laws forcing minimum recycling content being imagined.
I can see new safety mandates like "automatic collision avoidance" being promoted.
I can imagine even bizarre "political correctness" standards killing "performance" cars too.
I can also envision corruption of the "czar" (bribes, etc.) causing unforseen problems.

What do you guys expect to happen (in your worst nightmares)

P.S. I am depressed about this whole situation... feel free to interject some humorous comments here if you'd like!