Andrew Sullivan supports $1 a gallon tax on gas

[Hamlette]

to pay for the war on terror (ne: in Iraq).

Freaks me when I start agreeing with Mr. Sullivan.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040419-610080,00.html

Gas prices are too low. There. I said it. Even when they peak this summer, as most analysts predict, they will be too low. And they're too low in large part because gas is woefully undertaxed in this countrya state of affairs that is bad for the economy, bad for drivers and bad for our foreign policy. In fact, one of the simplest and best things any Administration could do right now would be to add a buck per gallon to the federal gas tax, which is currently just 18.4¢. Now that I have alienated almost every reader of this column, allow me to defend myself.

The worst knock against a gas tax is that it is, well, a tax. Who likes that? But with soaring deficits and a war to pay for, taxes are not an option — they're a necessity. The only relevant question is, Which taxes? The case for a gas tax is a straightforward one. Gas prices are strikingly lower in America than anywhere else in the world; such taxes are relatively easy to collect; since an overwhelming majority of Americans drive, few avoid the tax; and by adding a cost to the wanton consumption of gasoline, you actually encourage conservation, accelerate fuel efficiency, reduce pollution, cut traffic and help wean Americans off the oil that requires the U.S. to be so intimately involved in that wonderful cesspool of rival hatreds, the Middle East. So what's not to like?

snip
Some conservatives say it's antithetical to the American Dream. Hooey. Conservatism in America rightly emphasizes personal responsibility alongside freedom. You can't have one without the other. And using a car affects not just you but many others. When your driving habits lead to higher levels of pollution, when your ownership of a gas-inhaling 2-ton SUV puts others on the road at risk, when traffic jams drastically reduce the country's productivity (as well as make radio shock jocks into millionaires), don't you think you might give a little back in return? To paraphrase the President, can't we shift from a philosophy of "If it feels good, do it" to one of responsibility?

[maggrwaggr]

1. sure, as long as only rich people pay it.

If you drive a Hummer you should pay $10 a gallon

If you have an American flag on the Hummer you should pay $20 a gallon.

If you have a "Nuke Iraq" sticker on your hummer you should pay $50 a gallon.

[strategery blunder]

2. It would be a regressive tax

Poor people, especially those in cities without extensive mass transit systems, pay a far higher proportion of their income for gas than rich people do.

[GreenPartyVoter]

7. Yep, people will be punished for driving to work. :(

[kodi]

31. at least randy andy is consistent, he like regressive taxation

instead of higher gas taxes, why not demand better gas milage from auto manufacturers.

a check of what sullivan says about the state dictating private sector actions shows his hypocrisy.

[w4rma]

3. Raise amount on the uppermost tier of the income tax, instead, imho. (nt)

[Hamlette]

4. hmmmm. Not sure I get these responses.

you're not convinced by any of his arguments? Sure, its regressive but most taxes are. Why not make adjustments elsewhere and do the gas tax for the many advantages it offers?

[erformc]

5. What about...

the guy making $30,000 a year who has to drive 30 miles to work every day in a place that has no mass transit system? I see people like that every day and a lot of their take home that's now used for clothes, bills, kids, etc. would be eaten up by the gas tax. Also raising the gas prices that high is going to raise the price of just about everything, including food, clothes, and other necessities.

[Skittles]

6. um

so - what about the amount they are paying for gas NOW???

[erformc]

10. It's insanely high..

but what is raising the price going to do? You and that Rose (REd) person are pretty good at replying to me.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

11. I am a moderate Democrat-RED? BWAHAHAHAHA

Your type labels anyone who disagrees with them a commie. Can't you come up with anything more creative? :eyes:

[erformc]

13. Please find one post where...

I called you or anyone else a commie. Such statements would be ridiculous. I label people who disagree w/ me "wrong" but there are some people I disagree w/ whom I respect and some that I don't. I think you know where you fit in.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

15. You put RED in parentheses

*Saw your post-edited*

And do you REALLY think people give two shits about what someone with 30-something posts has to say, especially when all you spout are reiterations of corporate media talking points? Why would ANYONE want to earn your respect? :eyes:

[erformc]

14. And the (Red) ..

was because I didn't remember what came after "Rose". I was either thinking of the drink "Rose Red Iced Tea" or the Stephen King novel. But I can see where you came up with that assumption, and I'm sorry for the mix up. That was an honest error.

[fujiyama]

8. I would support

a higher gas tax (maybe a few cents per gallon), but the more important thing is raising CAFE fuel effeciency standards.

The thing is, raising the gas tax may seem regressive, but if a person making around $50,000 a year is buying a $30,000 SUV, he can sure as hell afford to pay high gas prices. Otherwise, he's an idiot.

Smaller cars are not only more fuel effecient, but cheaper as well. It's not my fault that people are making reckless decisions and are helping fund terrorists through their gluttony.

[strategery blunder]

18. Collective punishment

Raising the gas tax would punish everyone, including those who can least afford gas price increases, for the sins of rich snobs.

What about the working poor who drive 10-year old cars, can't afford a Prius, and who live in cities with little or no mass transit?

It's easy to rail against SUV owners. Tax the crud out of the SUV, not the gas. It would target waste more efficiently without punishing those who do not have the resources to adapt to gas price shocks.

[UTUSN]

9. AND Andrew Sullivan Suports Sex with AIDS

So this person's opinion about ANYTHING should carry some weight?

On edit: Am bracing.

[foreigncorrespondent]

19. So are you saying...

...that people with AIDS can't have sex? If you are, then I might suggest you extend your knowledge of AIDS, and read up about it.

[UTUSN]

21. Well, You and I Have Had Our Conflicts, Moreso from You Than Me

But, to detail my shorthand, I believe that anybody who threatens somebody else in whatever form should spell it out to that other person and let that person have a say-so.

[foreigncorrespondent]

22. I agree...

...I also happen to know that in the LGBT community, it is quite common to ask your partner when they last had an AIDS test done.

BTW, you do realize that AIDS isn't just a gay disease, right? I have known plenty of straight people with the disease and willing to hide that little bit of information.

And please, you wouldn't get a reaction from me, unless you have said something that I really don't agree with, so I would say we are on a pretty equal parr in regards to conflicts with have had.

[UTUSN]

23. Sweets...

1) I *do* realize ....lots of things; I'm a Dem in the social justice/consciousness sense.

2) I have never sucker-punched other DUers, although I have been sucker-punched on quite a few occasions, not always by you.

3) You're not alone in getting/giving a reaction to my obnoxious posts. I have been accused of being anti-IRISH fer-gudness-sakes (& I'm 1/16th), among MANY other things, which I'm not.

Clue: I'm an old fart, something like a TRUMAN cuss. However, I seem to get on your nerves more than most, no?


On Edit: It's late, am not copping out. Nighty night.

[foreigncorrespondent]

25. No, not at all.

However, I seem to get on your nerves more than most, no?

There are a couple of posters here who really get on my nerves every single time they post something. You are not one of them.

[UTUSN]

26. O.K., I Stayed Up Late Just to Hear from You

And I love you. Night. (blm and dolstein, don't be jealous, O.K.?)

[theboss]

12. Christ, I'd have to get a new job and would never see my folks

There are ways to change our energy consumptuion without causing a freaking Depression.

[Hamlette]

16. we tried voluntary, it didn't work

as long as we consume oil we will never have the kind of ME we want. Democracy is impossible when there are huge sums of money going to the government. (Why worry about the consent of the governed when you can just buy a huge army and get "consent" by force?)

We need fuel efficient cars and we won't get them while gas prices are reasonable. Yeah, $2 a gallon are reasonable by world standards.

Go to Europe. The cars are tiny and get 50 miles to the gallon. Gas costs $4-5 per gallon.

It used to be that liberals supported gas taxes to protect the environment. Must not be an issue anymore?

[erformc]

17. And Nixon..

tried price controls and look what that got us. There are fuel efficient cars out there if one chooses to get one,like I did (Ford Taurus - about 25 MPG, and cheap). And what politician in their right mind would support a gas tax hike, their political career would have the life span of a Hamas leader.

I for one don't want to drive cars as tiny as they have in Europe where a stiff wind could blow me off the road. And they have much better public transportation there than we do here.

Teh only reason I would want to ban SUV's is to get all those insane suburban women who drive them off the road. They think they're indestructible so they don't pay attention, put their lipstick on and talk on their phone all at the same time.

[muriel_volestrangler]

28. You seem to regard a car as a penis substitute

you have a unnatural fear of having a small one, and despise women who have control of a large one.

25 mpg is not fuel efficent.

Look at it this way: it is better to tax something bad (using up a finite resource like oil, producing pollution, and causing global warming), than something good (people working). You could gradually increase tax on fuel, while decreasing income tax for lower earners.

[Muddleoftheroad]

29. Taxing gas IS taxing people who work

It's a regressive tax as well.

[erformc]

30. Half of your post...

is drivel. But I agree w/ the half about lowering the taxes on wage earners. I've always thought a consumption tax (not for food or clothes or other necessities) would be a far better way of doing things. This way, people could choose to pay the tax in exchange for something they want. I'd have no problem putting a higher tax on such vehicles if the overall income tax rates were lowered or eliminated.

[theHandpuppet]

33. I agree....

It's all fine and dandy to say that automakers should be responsible and manufacture more fuel-efficient vehicles, but let's face it -- this industry, along with all the others we have, is "fueled" by one thing and one thing alone -- supply and demand. As long as folks keep gobbling up those gas hogs because fuel prices are so low, automakers have no incentive to retool and customers have no incentive to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles.

As far as low-income families go, we need to become creative in solving the problem of unduly burdening low-income families with higher gas prices, whether it be via tax breaks or govt sponsored low/no interest rates for families wishing to purchase more fuel-efficient models.

There ARE alternatives and solutions. I have little sympathy for the hue and cry about commuters every time I espy the virtual rivers of SUVs clogging the interstates, with the vast majority of them carrying ONE passenger. Do people really need SUVs or monster pickups to drive to the mall? Perhaps if fuel prices climb high enough people will rethink buying those homes in the burb 20 miles from anywhere and demand decent mass transportation systems.

My partner and I have a modest income and our used, four-cylinder station wagon serves our needs very well. Until we can afford to buy a Prius (hopefully in the next couple of years) or replace my 20 year-old truck with a Ram hybrid, I think we'd bite the bullet and pay the tax if that's what it takes to help change American's mind about gas hogging. Our insatiable appetite for the world's resources is, in any number of ways, creating a hell on earth.

[Egalitarian]

20. Yes and No

Obviously, the price we currently pay for gas does not reflect the true cost to the world(including the environment and us humans and our relationships). To the degree that any tax would be used to transform our ways and move us towards sustainability I would support it.

[FrustratedDem]

24. Why don't you donate your $1.00 / gallon wish to the government?

The rest of us just trying to survive will abstain.

[BradCKY]

27. No

Instead of hurting people who can least afford the increase, lets instead continue working to alternative fuels such as hydrogen fuel cells.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

32. In response to 27:

BradCKY said: Instead of hurting people who can least afford the increase, lets instead continue working to alternative fuels such as hydrogen fuel cells.

I agree. In fact, I'd be willing to pay HIGHER fuel taxes NOW, if all of that money went into a special fund to develop alternative fuel systems/production.