I HATE to say it, but I thought it was a good idea when Ross Perot thought of the gas tax when he was running for president years ago. Now that Americans have experienced paying more than $4.00 per gallon at the pumps, our ears might be open a little wider now and more receptive to new or old ideas.
Also, at one point, there was a big push for solar energy, but the contractors didn’t make enough money because the people who paid for the solar panels didn’t need to keep making future purchases. I think that the only way this country is going to become energy independent (and I HATE to say this too because people don’t like the government in charge of things) if if the government’s Department of Energy actually becomes in charge of energy. That agency actually needs to come up with ways the government can lead an example to the public. I don’t mean that they should tell the public what to do, but lead by example so the public will want to conserve energy as well. For instance, solar power was a big idea in the 70s, but only a few private individuals actually seemed to be able to afford it. Because it wasn’t “big business” for private contractors to make a lot of money, that idea didn’t catch on with the public. However, if the federal government actually lead the way and made conversions to their own buildings to become solar paneled or use windmills or things like that, to show the public how energy efficient it could be, than maybe the public would than follow that example.
Ray gets my vote for the Nobel Prize in Gasanomics. Seriously, this is the smartest thing I’ve heard either of those brothers ever say. Frankly, I don’t think 50 cents is enough. I think it should be 1 or 2 bucks, but it makes sense to start at 50 cents and publicize the projected increase to people (and car companies) can plan for it. Ray is spot on for his use of the funds too: refurbish and enhance our public transport infrastructure (trains in Europe are clean, reliable, on-time, cheap, and train stations are nice places to be), fund alternative energy creation (wind, solar, geothermal, tidal, hydro, biofuels, nuclear, fuel cell), fund energy storage technology ( batteries, rotational inertia, air pressure, water storage etc), and restore our existing roads and bridges, let’s not have a repeat of the Minneapolis bridge collapse.
If Obama doesn’t jump all over this, Ray is going to have to run for president in 3 years.
Keep up the good work guys!
50 Cents a gallon is just a beginning Ray. Anyone notice our national debt is beyond out-of-control? Gasoline should cost no less than $3.50 per gallon anywhere in the US. Diesel should cost the same. And that cost should rise with inflation. Not only will public facilities benefit, new fuel efficiencies arise and a new direction for GM occur as Ray has outlined, the national debt could actually be addressed!
Ray’s heart is in the right place, but the tax is in the wrong place. In nearly eight years in public transportation, anything that smacks of a gas tax gets beaten on two sides of its head. Right side says, “It’s not my fault people can’t afford cars. Why should I pay for them to take the !!@*** bus!” Left side says, “People who can’t afford to live in town close enough to transit can’t afford to pay another 50 cents (30% more) for gas! It’s a cruel, regressive tax!”
I suggest a behavior modification tax: Buy a car that gets less than 15 (or 17 or whatever) MPG Highway and pay a penalty based on the purchase price of the vehicle (they used to call this a gas guzzler tax). LAND ROVER / H1 BUYERS BEWARE. These vehicles are heavier, less likely to be used in a carpool and the people who buy them can afford (and might brag about paying) the Public Infrastructure Surcharge. (Yes, it makes a frightening acronym.)
During the 1980s I felt we needed to tax our gas so the selling price would be $5/gallon. My reasons were very similar to Ray’s Rant. Now I’d like to see it taxed to an even higher level. We need to get serious about lowering demand and developing efficient autos, eliminating gas guzzlers and building mass transit systems.
I think 50 cents (I just realized there is no cents symbol on my keyboard) is too little. I think the tax should be 3 or 4 dollars per gallon with lots of safeguards to make sure the money goes to public transportation/infrastructure.
I would pay the tax if the money, indeed, went towards sustainable transportation. I commute 42 miles to work so it would have an impact on my finances, but I’m willing.
Your gas tax proposal is another variation of the old and failed, but won’t die, scheme called a “boondoggle.” A boondoggle is characterized by an altruistic brilliant idea for stealing other peoples’ money to fund pet projects which are turned over to the government in order to make the theft legal.
There are many problems with boondoggles – among the worst is the fact that the government doesn’t spend our money carefully. Instead of the grand results you envision, history says we will end up with another expensive failure, like the New Deal, the War on Poverty, and, I’m sure the upcoming government plan to spend our way out of the credit collapse.
Ray, it has to be done, BUT, the first change in your rant is that it CAN NEVER BE CALLED A TAX, PERIOD. IT CANNOT BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE HATED ARROGANT ENERGY PRODUCERS. ESPECIALLY, TO BE REMINDED OF THEM EVERY TIME YOU PURCHASED A GALLON OF GAS.
I am 4 score years, and have been howling into the darkness since the gas debacle of the 1970s. An excellent example was before WWII, when lots of money was needed, and we were just beginning to come off of “The greatest depression in our history”. A number of “incentives” were instituted to bring the Citizen into the struggle. However, the real results of gathering financial, and other support, was bringing the citizen into the solution, by deliberately developing programs where everyone had a part to play in the fighting of the depression and then the war.
On the financial front the citizen could buy “Defense Bonds”, that had an interest rate that was reasonable at maturity. Big promotions with well known persons trumped the patriotism of “Supporting, and profiting” by purchasing bonds. The children were not left out of helping in the financing and patriotism by buying “Defense Stamps” of 25 cents to one dollar, that were pasted into booklets until they had enough to buy a bond. Smallest Bond was $18.75 and matured at $25.00. Sold as $25.00 “Defense” Bonds. During WW1 they were called “Liberty bonds”.
The other devices that were put in place was “Rationing” of commodities such as Gasoline, Tires, Butter, Meat, Aluminum and other scrap metals etc.
Each of these were legitimate endeavors, but their most value was that it made the struggle everyones struggle. Sure, there were some taxes that were also garnered for the effort, and there were Fat Cats doing their worst, but the greatest result was in the enlisting of the citizen in the solving of the needs by everyone, for every one.
Ask yourself if GWB approval rating would be so low if the Citizen was included in his efforts after 9/11?
The wife and I have a 2005 Prius, 52000+ miles @ 46 MPG Avge for the whole mileage.
New tires @ 46000 Miles and a New bulb in the running light, $1.00, + routine filters. I bring this up because We have put our money where our mouth is. Believe me when you are fortunate to be alive in your eighties and you definitely are on thin ice for your retirement income, we still believe that we are doing our part to solve this ecological mess.
Ray, you are on the only track we can take, but get off the “TAX” word, even if it is truly the same as, call it something that lets us feel positive about what we need to do.
Ray is out of his ever loving mind! I cannot possible afford a gas tax when I have 4 cars that I need to repair and upgrade. I also have no faith in the government spending money where they say they will considering the social security money being spent to run the government and the lottery money nevery being spent to help education even though the government said the money would help education.
Ray’s idea is right on, and it is something that I have been supporting for several years. We would have been much better off if gas had been more expensive all along. It isn’t just the additional money that could be invested in alternative energy, but also the disincentive to drive cars. Europe taxes their gas to much higher levels than we would even think of and the consequence of that is that they provide and use public transportation such as trains, streetcars, and buses, buy smaller cars, and ride bicycles. This is the direction that we need to go!
THIS IS AN ADDENDUM.
I wish to point out that the purchasing of the Defense Bonds and the stamps were bought at the POST OFFICE. Which incidentally introduced the young people to a Government that was not a threat to their future. Ben Franklin is still spinning in his grave from turning the Postal SERVICE into something other than what it was intended to be, a SERVICE. They also used to to be able to save money, in small amounts at a time, quarters & such, called POSTAL SAVINGS, a SERVICE. SERVICES THAT DID NOT GIVE A BANKER A CUT OF YOUR SAVINGS.
I agree completely. I have always thought if we did like other countries and forced gas to cost more, then people would drive smarter and less. By adding the .50 gas tax will help to encourage conservation and fund the needed infrastructure work that is so desperately needed in our country. Plus, it would create construction jobs which would help the country. At least the money would stay in this country and not go overseas.
I applaud Ray for his good intentions but I think his DNA has been damaged due to the liberal radiation from his part of the country. Increasing the cost of getting to and from work and other essential travel would not help the ones who can?t afford to go out and buy a new vehicle with better MPG. I guess retired folks like grandma could cut down on trips to visit friends and stay home alone in her cold house
Instead of a negative approach how about a positive one. Tax BREAKS for folks who do get a high MPG vehicle or for manufactures who manage to lower the thirst for more oil derived fuel in their lineup. The bigger the cut in oil derived fuel the bigger the tax break. I guess you could tax folks who buy snow mobiles, boats, atvs, horse owners who need a pickup to haul hay & trailers like me, and other planet destroying cretins. When they tried the high luxury tax a few years ago the rich didn?t care they just went out of the country to buy their yachts putting a lot of ?regular? folks out of business. The upper middle class folks who can drive a Cadillac SUV probably wouldn?t run out and buy Volkswagens unless the tax was so high regular folks couldn?t afford to drive at all.
RIGHT ON, RAY!!!
I completely agree with everything you’ve said, and I’ve done loads of thinking on this issue. Way to stick your neck out there, and speak up for what you believe in…I love your and Tom’s show even more now!