Comments on: Mileage Requirements: The Wrong Way to Cut Gasoline Use?

By: RenatoWantuck

RenatoWantuck — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 14:44:51 +0000

Dead pent content material, appreciate it for selective information. Bonuses That is really fascinating, You're a very skilled blogger. I've joined your rss feed and look forward to seeking extra of your wonderful post. Additionally, I've shared your website in my social networks!

By: HaywoodStipetich

HaywoodStipetich — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:16:50 +0000

Yeah bookmaking this wasn't a speculative conclusion outstanding post! Discover More Thank you for your website post. JonesBrown|Johnson|Manley|Velupe and I are already saving for our new publication on this theme and your article has made us all to save the money. Your notions really responded all our concerns. In fact, greater than what we had known ahead of the time we found your fantastic blog. My partner and i no longer nurture doubts plus a troubled mind because you have actually|clearly|completely|really|totally|truly attended to the needs in this post. Thanks

By: jvoelcker

jvoelcker — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:13:57 +0000

Here’s a piece from today’s New York Times that argues essentially the same point:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/29/business/29norris.html

By: Samie

Samie — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:21:06 +0000

Increase taxes on cigarettes vs increasing taxes on gasoline are way different my friend. Not sure I follow that one. I still say look at disposable income for all folks.

Glad we put Gulf War 2 on the old Chinese credit card or there would be riots over the taxes. Sorry to my grandchildren about that one. Taxes are high but maybe some relief for the middle class will be here soon....

By: Samie

Samie — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:19:52 +0000

By: Crut

Crut — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:23:12 +0000

I agree that tax is not a solution but not for the reasons you list. Tax is not a solution b/c our government can’t ever keep their hands out of the cookie jar. You start taxing gas at another 50 cents and even though it supposed to go for “green research” it will get siphoned off into all kinds of pet projects and programs. They will get used to it and if consumption really dies off they will come looking to the taxpayers to make up the “shortfall”. Your reason just doesn’t hold water, it’s the same weak excuse I’ve heard for not raising the tax on cigarettes – it will hurt the poor. There’s no mandate that says if you’re at or near minimum wage you’ve got to smoke. Granted the poor do need to drive to work but this excuse is trotted out for everything. Ironically enough, even for raising taxes on the middle clase and wealthy – whom alreaday pay nearly ALL the taxes in America. The top 1% paid 39.9% of the taxes. Now check this out. The top 25% of wage earners in America earned 68% of Americas income yet paid more than four of every dollar collected in personal income taxes. Now don’t tell me that is fair!! As a not for a 68K/year puts your family in the top 25% – - not too rich when youv’e got a mortgate, kids, car payments, etc… Aren’t you glad that most of you are wealthy!!!!

By: Armand

Armand — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:21:05 +0000

Build more public transport for the people who MUST commute….no reason to sit in traffic with a huge SUV…that’s just retarded.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 07:37:10 +0000

These comments seem a little silly. Raising the price of fuel will reduce consumption. That is evident today. But, it will also reduce quality of life, and hurt consumers that MUST commute. The writer suggests that car sales will reduce if we move to higher efficiency vs. higher pricing. This is just inaccurate. If we raise the price of fuel, people drive less, so their vehicles last longer. If the vehicle gets better mileage, then the consumer is more likely to drive, and will purchase more vehicles in their life time. So the solution is to reduce oil consumption without limiting the consumers freedom to travel. Higher mileage vehicles are a good start. Electric is a good future goal.

By: Samie

Samie — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 22:36:41 +0000

Agree thanks Collin Burnell
Many here don't really get it. But I would say new CAFE is starting to make the industry respond to higher MPG mandates. People often fail to see social and political problems in their arguments. Long-term thinking is important and a silly tax would only hinder any real gains that comes from any new long-term CAFE standards. You might as well say hello to Newt and the Carls of the world again if you support the artificial tax on gasoline.

By: Collin Burnell

Collin Burnell — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 22:04:54 +0000

I don’t see how raising the CAFE could hurt! If our politicians in the 70′s and 80′s were a little smarter they would have learned from the crisis in the 70′s and implemented a gradual but steady increase over a span of say 30 years and we could be driving much more efficient vehicles. CAFE has made no difference because (as far as I know) it has not been raised for a VERY long time.