A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Sold out by IFR



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 9th 04, 06:47 PM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John" wrote in message
om...
My wife goes to the grocery store (12 miles each way) almost everyday

to
get something that she forgot the previous day, so she could certainly
improve her trip planning. As a result of cheap gasoline, people are

living
great distances from their workplace with commutes of over an hour being
common in many parts of the country. If gasoline was $5/gallon you

would
see commute distances shorten, more telecommuting, smaller vehicles,

better
trip planning.

The economic costs of doing all this are tiny and probably there is

actually
a benefit. If there was simply a $4 tax on gasoline and an equivenenat

tax
credit (transferable) for income taxes, there would be no net economic

cost
and a huge incentive to use energy more efficiently. There would be
casualties in businesses catering to people traveling by auto but that

is
about it.

Mike
MU-2




Mike - I don't agree with your statement that there are no economic
costs. The government bureacracy to administer a $4 dollar fuel tax
and process a $4 income tax credit would be enormous.

Also, I presume you would be in favor of refunding your $4 fuel tax to
lower income people who don't pay income tax or pay it at low marginal
rates? If not, then you are really looking at an additional tax on
middle/lower income people at $4 per gallon. If you are interested
in refunding the tax irrespective of taxable income, then you haven't
really caused anyone to change their driving habits - you've just
created a new government department to collect money and refund it to
the same people.

I like a lot of your ideas on this newsgroup. This one, though,
doesn't seem to be as practical as many of your other ones. John


The topic started out as a way to end our dependence on imported oil. The
whole gas tax idea is simply a way to provide an incentive to conserve. My
only point is that it would be relatively easy to end our dependence on
imported oil if we really wanted to do it. Collecting such a tax would be
fairly easy since there is already a federal tax on gasoline, only the
amount would be changed. I agree that the refunding portion would be
problematic.

Mike
MU-2


  #2  
Old February 9th 04, 06:49 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
hlink.net...

I like a lot of your ideas on this newsgroup. This one, though,
doesn't seem to be as practical as many of your other ones. John


The topic started out as a way to end our dependence on imported oil. The
whole gas tax idea is simply a way to provide an incentive to conserve.

My
only point is that it would be relatively easy to end our dependence on
imported oil if we really wanted to do it. Collecting such a tax would be
fairly easy since there is already a federal tax on gasoline, only the
amount would be changed. I agree that the refunding portion would be
problematic.


What you suggest was tried in '93, but North Easterners are not about to
have their fuel oil taxed. The economic impact is basicly a cash transfer
from everone else into New England.


  #3  
Old February 9th 04, 10:47 PM
Tom Sixkiller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
hlink.net...
The topic started out as a way to end our dependence on imported oil. The
whole gas tax idea is simply a way to provide an incentive to conserve.


A better and much more efficient way would be to encourge PRODUCTION. What's
more, encouragement to conserve has many pitfalls when under a bureaucratic
blanket.

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions".

My
only point is that it would be relatively easy to end our dependence on
imported oil if we really wanted to do it.


It would be if the MARKET made that determination, rather than bureaucrats
and politicians and their cronies.

Collecting such a tax would be
fairly easy since there is already a federal tax on gasoline, only the
amount would be changed. I agree that the refunding portion would be
problematic.


That's the problem: Collection is easy, the subsequent portions ALWAYS bogs
down. A good example is the state lotteries -- after a year or two the funds
mainly go into the general fund where the looting commences.




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CAAC in China had approved below 116kg aircraft sold in China without airworthiness cetificate Luo Zheng Home Built 0 June 27th 04 03:50 AM
Donald Campbell Bluebird helmet sold Aerophotos Military Aviation 1 May 3rd 04 05:11 PM
Japanese firm sold Libya uranium conversion plant Dav1936531 Military Aviation 2 March 17th 04 03:47 PM
Sold out by IFR Mike Rapoport Instrument Flight Rules 129 February 9th 04 10:47 PM
SOLD Becker ATC-4401-175 and SigmaTek ARC EA-401A Servoed Encoding Alt Juan E Jimenez Home Built 0 August 11th 03 05:03 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.