Senators Clinton and McCain favor Gas Tax Moratorium

[johnlal]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/28/AR2008042802753.html

How insidious is Reaganomics that major candidates from both sides of the aisle are advocating "supply side" responses to a major consumer catastrophe? The GW Bush Administration is the last crumbling remains of Reaganism. We have lived to see that every one of Reagan's dreams have been misguided and dangerous to our country. And certainly the "hands off" approach to the economy should be thoroughly discredited at this point.

Supply side economics always benefits the rich and powerful. In this case, a decrease in the tax leaves room for an increase in the price the oil companies can charge for gasoline. The best tool for lowering the price of gasoline is a price control. Congress can pass a law saying "you can only charge $______ per gallon". And arrest anybody who does not comply.

You can argue that this is antithetical to our "free market economy". But the oil industry is not a paragon of a free market player. First, the oil supply is controlled by a cartel. Secondly, there are not unlimited quantities. Thirdly, the big oil producing corporations are far from competitive in their pricing. Exxon and Mobil were allowed to combine-- thus undoing the breakup of the Standard Oil Company under the Sherman Antitrust Act.

It's not like we don't already have price controls on energy resources. Where municipalities allow one or a few corporations to provide power or heating fuel for the community or region, it's not uncommon to find commissions or officials who monitor and control the price of the energy source.

It's time to stop our religious faith in supply-side economics. While it may have some effectiveness in appropriate situations, it should be viewed as only one tool in the toolbox-- not the one silver bullet.

[Triana]

1. Great! Why don't they run on the same ticket?

Birds of a feather.

[Submariner]

2. Spending more taxpayer money that is not there. Let the grandkids

worry about paying for this purely election-pandering scheme.

[OwnedByFerrets]

3. ...

Farking idiotic!

[notesdev]

4. I favor gas tax repeal altogether

Except maybe for the lottery, which technically isn't a tax even though it functions like one (a tax on being bad at math), there isn't any more regressive method of taxation available than to tax energy, or food.

Taxes should be primarily extracted from those who have the greatest ability to pay them. A regressive tax like the one on gasoline punishes the poor and middle class.

What we really need to be taxing - and taxing HARD - is banking and investment activity. It will discourage dangerous speculation, compensate the nation for the moral hazard imposed by large financial institutions, and, most importantly, will not add to the burdens of people who are already struggling.