View Single Post
  #4  
Old August 23rd 05, 02:16 PM
ZombyWoof
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 03:14:48 -0400, "Michael Johnson, PE"
> wrote:

>Sorry Patrick, but the last thing we need to do is give the government
>one more way to yank money from our wallets. They have more ways to do
>it than we can count right now. They need to REDUCE the taxes they
>currently have on gas. Gas tax hurts the people that can least afford
>it the most. The government collects plenty of taxes. They don't need
>more money, they need to make do with less.
>

This is a yes & no proposition. While it does in fact hurt those who
can least afford it (minimum wage burger flippers in an area of no
mass transit). Those whom it doesn't affect would go freakin hog
crazy and stick their noses so far into the damn trough there would be
nothing left.

Already many who need fuel to conduct business (farmers & others) do
not have to pay the taxes on fuel needed to produce certain things in
our economy. Of course the Military which sucks up a tremendous
amount of fuel and the US Postal Service (Number one consumer of fuel)
already don't pay taxes either.

Even though the prices of crude do have an impact there is also the
issue of the capacity to turn raw crude into fuels. There hasn't been
a new refinery built in the US in about 30 years while the demand
curve has steadily increased.

Certain taxes on fuel are supposed to go to pay for the infrastructure
to support the use of vehicles, i.e. roads & bridges. Unfortunately
in many states these taxes go directly into the states general funds
and never do get spent on improving the roads if the roads in my area
are any indicator.

Yes driving a high-performance vehicle to & from work is a royal
blast. However, it simply isn't required. The major problem is no
viable mass transit alternative for the majority of the country to get
anywhere. I can drive the 18 miles to work in 30/40 minutes. If I
was to take the bus it would be more like 2.5 hours in each direction
and I still have to get to the bus stop.

The answer is out there somewhere, but I doubt that anyone in the US
government is going to come up with it.

wrote:
>> Read the following article. Makes you wonder why our government didn't
>> really tax the hell out of fuel during the 90's and use the proceeds to
>> lower other taxes or to fund quality programs.
>>
>>
>> ---
>> At nearly $3 a gallon, gasoline prices have become a nightmare for many
>> Michigan consumers in recent days.
>>
>> But not everyone is ready to start boycotting gas stations. In fact,
>> some residents are far less concerned about the current levels than
>> people who experienced problems such as gas rationing that arose
>> following the oil shocks of the 1970s.
>>
>> "Higher gas prices don't affect me in terms of what I do or where I
>> go," said Curtis Foreman, owner of Foreman Construction LLC in Oak
>> Park.
>>
>> The 34-year-old Foreman, who spends several hours a day on the road for
>> work, has a Ford F-150 and a Ford F-250 Turbo Diesel he uses for work
>> that he fills up regularly. But gas isn't something he worries about
>> too much. And he's not alone.
>>
>> Experts agree that the U.S. economy is far less susceptible to energy
>> shocks, particularly sharp increases in crude oil prices, than it was
>> two decades ago. The advent of fuel economy standards that promote more
>> efficient vehicles that get better gas mileage has helped to temper
>> energy consumption.
>>
>> Even though retail gasoline prices give a lot of people sticker shock,
>> the impact of higher fuel costs is less than it was for a growing
>> number of households and businesses.
>>
>> "I don't even know what gas costs now," Foreman said Friday. "I just
>> paid $75 to fill up one of my trucks, but I don't remember what it cost
>> a gallon. For me, it's the cost of doing business."
>>
>> For the record, regular gasoline is averaging $2.72 a gallon, while
>> diesel fuel costs $2.65 a gallon throughout the state, AAA Michigan
>> reports.
>>
>> The new reality has some economists questioning some old assumptions
>> about the nation's economy.
>>
>> "The basic theme is that the U.S. economy is less sensitive to energy
>> costs than 20 or 30 years ago. We're not independent of energy. We're
>> just less sensitive," said John Silvia, chief economist of Wachovia
>> Securities in Charlotte, N.C. "Why hasn't consumption fallen off? When
>> the price of energy goes up, it does cut into household budgets, but
>> it's less of a cut than 20 years ago, given that incomes have almost
>> tripled since the 1982."
>>
>> For example, American consumers spent a total of about $95 billion for
>> gasoline and other petroleum products in 1984. Last year, that figure
>> jumped to $230.4 billion, or 142% higher. But workers saw their income
>> shoot up 196% from $2.26 trillion to $6.69 trillion last year, the
>> Bureau of Economic Analysis reports.
>>
>> "Looking over the last 20 years it's clear that incomes have grown
>> faster than the price of energy," said Jay Wortley, senior economist
>> with Michigan's Senate Fiscal Agency in Lansing. "But that's not to say
>> that this recent run-up isn't painful."
>>
>> To be sure, many Michigan workers and consumers whose incomes have not
>> kept up with rising energy prices are feeling the pain.
>>
>> The Michigan manufacturing sector, particularly autos, has caught the
>> brunt of higher petroleum prices. The state's unemployment rate of 7%
>> is one of the highest in the country.
>>
>> Higher petroleum costs also have helped push some auto suppliers into
>> bankruptcy and limited hiring in some delivery businesses. And with
>> global uncertainty pumping fear into the markets, price volatility
>> remains a key part of Michigan's energy equation.
>>
>> In fact, crude oil jumped $2.08 to settle at $65.35 per 42-gallon
>> barrel Friday after a week of declines, following a refinery fire in
>> Venezuela and an oil protest in Ecuador.
>>
>> Nevertheless, some Michiganders, while expressing some frustration
>> about pump prices, don't seem as outraged as one might expect if there
>> were a shortage of oil and gasoline.
>>
>> Michelle Marrs, who recently pumped in $61 of premium gasoline at $2.98
>> a gallon to fill up her 2003 Land Rover at a Meijer station at 8 Mile
>> and Haggerty in Novi, seemed pragmatic about rising fuel prices.
>>
>> The Ann Arbor attorney is on the road constantly. But given that she's
>> part of a successful law firm, gas prices aren't as high on her list of
>> priorities as they might be for others.
>>
>> "I travel a lot for work, so it almost doesn't matter for me," she
>> said. "Now, I'd be happier if it was $2.20 or something, but what are
>> you going to do?"
>> ---
>>
>> Patrick
>> '93 Cobra
>>


--

Please Don't Steal - The Government Hates Competition

ZombyWoof
(take the dogs when replying via e-mail)
Ads