Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok here we go. A gas tax of 3 additional dollars would do the following:
1. Reduce the amount of harmful drilling and oilsand mining currently going on.
2. Ensure more of our easily accessible oil sources are preserved for the future
3. Reduce the need for political intervention abroad to secure oil
4. Reduce urban sprawl, which would make cities much nicer and significantly reduce the amount of time the average american spends in congestion.
5. Allow us to develop more rail transportation and less highway transportation
6. We wouldn't have to subsidize bio fuels anymore, which are wrecking our soil and killing our food prices.
So, will this have a negative effect on GDP growth, sure, in the short run. The cost of everything will go up because everything depends on transportation. In the long run however, we will benefit due to more efficient cities and transportation methods, less military spending, less amounts land destroyed by oilsand harvesting in Canada, and easier accessible sources for the future, and better soil for our future farmers.
What do you think? To me, this is the best and most effective environmental move the US could do for sustainability. Also, it would help balance our budget by increasing tax revenue and decreasing expenditures due to subsidization of green energy.
Ok here we go. A gas tax of 3 additional dollars would do the following:
1. Reduce the amount of harmful drilling and oilsand mining currently going on.
2. Ensure more of our easily accessible oil sources are preserved for the future
3. Reduce the need for political intervention abroad to secure oil
4. Reduce urban sprawl, which would make cities much nicer and significantly reduce the amount of time the average american spends in congestion.
5. Allow us to develop more rail transportation and less highway transportation
6. We wouldn't have to subsidize bio fuels anymore, which are wrecking our soil and killing our food prices.
So, will this have a negative effect on GDP growth, sure, in the short run. The cost of everything will go up because everything depends on transportation. In the long run however, we will benefit due to more efficient cities and transportation methods, less military spending, less amounts land destroyed by oilsand harvesting in Canada, and easier accessible sources for the future, and better soil for our future farmers.
What do you think? To me, this is the best and most effective environmental move the US could do for sustainability. Also, it would help balance our budget by increasing tax revenue and decreasing expenditures due to subsidization of green energy.
Absolutely wrong.
Rail will continue to expand regardless of price of gas.
Biofuel is a waste of time and money and farmland.
All these renewables are in their infancy and trying to push the technological boundaries will cost more.
More and more oil is being discovered and other oil finds are now commercially viable for extraction than before.
North America needs to keep what it finds for itself and stop importing oil. Then watch our economy take off. All our revenue that is used to buy foreign oil will stay here.
Rail will continue to expand regardless of price of gas.
Biofuel is a waste of time and money and farmland.
All these renewables are in their infancy and trying to push the technological boundaries will cost more.
More and more oil is being discovered and other oil finds are now commercially viable for extraction than before.
North America needs to keep what it finds for itself and stop importing oil. Then watch our economy take off. All our revenue that is used to buy foreign oil will stay here.
Rail is heavily subsidized at the moment and does not work to full capacity because people are too used to driving. Why do we not have an inter-rail system that is heavily used like our interstate system. Let me ask you that?
Correct on bio fuels
only certain renewable, like solar or geothermal will ever be functional and feasible. And these only work in a small number of locations and could only account for a small percentage of the current energy use. Wind is destined to fail. And these can't be used for transportation anyhow because most Americans don't have electric cars. They could work for rail though. Thorium nuclear reactors is the answer to our electric needs but that's off topic.
It still stands however that the easiest oil sources will be used first, so if we reduce demand we will have those for later.
And if you are worried about the economy crashing, The gas tax won't crash it, it will just slow down growth. Anyways, the revinue from gas tax could be given back to the american citizen in tax breaks or checks from the government. In that sense, it wouldn't be a tax at all, but a redistribution of money. And how much does the average person spend on gas anyways?
We all know that unlimited debt will crash our economy though, so what we are currently doing isn't working.
1. Reduce the amount of harmful drilling and oilsand mining currently going on. --There isn't any real "harmful drilling" going on. There is drilling going on, and if it is harming you or anyone else, sue the people drilling and get paid.
2. Ensure more of our easily accessible oil sources are preserved for the future --Why would we truly care about maintaining the easy to access oil unless we are actually using it? We don't truly even need oil, we can actually create oil from organic material. Thats how they make synthetic oil.
3. Reduce the need for political intervention abroad to secure oil --We don't need to intervene to secure oil. We do it because the government doesn't mind spending trillions to stabilize our economy. What you should be wishing for is the government to stop protecting our oil supplies. If the price of oil became unstable because of some war with Iran or some other middle-east episode. People would start buying high MPG cars and alternative fuel vehicles in droves.
4. Reduce urban sprawl, which would make cities much nicer and significantly reduce the amount of time the average american spends in congestion. --This actually isn't remotely accurate. The most densely populated major city in the United States is New York City. New York city has the longest commute time in the entire country. Secondly, the average cost of renting an apartment in New York City is now $3,000 a month.
5. Allow us to develop more rail transportation and less highway transportation --I used to work for BNSF railroad. BNSF has absolutely no interest whatsoever in building commuter rail. It only tolerates Amtrak because it has to. All the money in rail is in freight. And in order to pay the ridiculously high wages of railroad workers, BNSF is only interested in the highest payouts.
6. We wouldn't have to subsidize bio fuels anymore, which are wrecking our soil and killing our food prices. --We don't need to subsidize bio-fuels or any other fuels to begin with. Not only do the consumers not want these subsidies, but even the fuel manufacturers don't want these subsidies. Ethanol is the dumbest idea anyone ever thought up.
What do you think? To me, this is the best and most effective environmental move the US could do for sustainability. Also, it would help balance our budget by increasing tax revenue and decreasing expenditures due to subsidization of green energy.
I am after the same thing you are after. But I think you are going about it all wrong.
If it were up to me, the first thing I would do is to completely abolish all EPA and DOT regulations and restrictions on Compressed natural gas cars. Right now it costs about $10,000 to convert a gasoline car to CNG. When the cost of conversion materials is only about $2,000. Most of the expense goes to trying to get the conversion kits certified. And the installer has to be licensed through the government. I have heard you can get a car converted in places like Argentina for like $600.
That change alone would practically make us energy-independent. And would significantly cut down on emissions(natural gas is much cleaner than gasoline/diesel).
Secondly, to address "urban sprawl". The first thing that needs to be done is to deregulate housing. Basically, to abolish building codes and zoning laws. The effect of this would be to allow far more people to work and live in much higher density without increasing costs. And by allowing businesses to operate closer to, or within housing additions. The distance one would need to travel to buy whatever they wanted/needed would be greatly shortened(think New York City, and how apartments sit on top of businesses, so people can just walk to where they need to go).
Also, to combat urban sprawl you need to have practical means of mass transportation. In a major city, this generally would mean "light-rail". Well, in order to expand light-rail without having to spend billions of dollars in taxpayer money. What you'll have to do is basically deregulate railroads, and allow the building of more rail lines. Abolish any sort of "NIMBA" regulatory schemes which would prevent the creation of rail services. As well as the abolition of "public roads" altogether(or at least require a more appropriate user-fee system). That way, rail and roads can compete on a level playing field.
If you did that. Housing density would shoot through the roof, even in relatively sparse cities. The number of new rail lines being built would skyrocket. The amount of fuel being consumed would drop significantly. And what fuel we did use, would mostly be compressed natural gas.
We would most likely end up an energy exporting nation again. All without the government having to tell everyone what to do and how to live their lives. Its a win win win win win.
HMMMM, so the GOP shut down of the government cutting 1.4% from next years GDP is bad, but this proposal cutting GDP is good.
1. Reduce the amount of harmful drilling and oilsand mining currently going on.
There may be a reduction, but another country would probably pick up the unused demand and drilling here would continue, it would just be shipped out. How many are aware, from both sides of the political spectrum that the Keystone XL pipline investor conditions require that all NO oil transported via the pipeline be utilized domestically. This was a Goldman Sachs requirement as a condition for underwriting to investor prospectus. Demand for oil is already dropping in the US, has been for years, I have read that many major oil companies have decided that the US has already passed peak consumption.
2. Ensure more of our easily accessible oil sources are preserved for the future
See above, won't happen unless the govt nationalizes all oil production
3. Reduce the need for political intervention abroad to secure oil
The US will always find a way to get involved anyway
4. Reduce urban sprawl, which would make cities much nicer and significantly reduce the amount of time the average american spends in congestion.
This is the United States, the last I looked this should be an individual choice controlled by the free market, not something dictated by the government. I live out in BF nowhere in CA, and I lived out by Harper's Ferry WV during desert storm, if you did this, I would figure that most of my neighbors would have a still set up within 2 weeks to make shine to run their newly acquired 30 year old inefficient, polluting car that could run off of it. Yes, it is highly illegal but when DS broke out in 1991, and gas in DC went from 99 cents to 1.61, half my neighbors broke out grandpa's still took the tarp off the 1960 F150, made their own shine and drove that to work. Don't think it won't happen again, even my 1992 Caddy can run on shine.
5. Allow us to develop more rail transportation and less highway transportation
Maybe
6. We wouldn't have to subsidize bio fuels anymore, which are wrecking our soil and killing our food prices
Do you really think Monsanto and Scamagra will allow congress to cease subsidies after they were no longer needed, they are addicted to the revenue. Neither party would end subsidies to big AG, both parties have too many connections to big AG outside of government.
4. Reduce urban sprawl, which would make cities much nicer and significantly reduce the amount of time the average american spends in congestion.
This is the United States, the last I looked this should be an individual choice controlled by the free market, not something dictated by the government. I live out in BF nowhere in CA, and I lived out by Harper's Ferry WV during desert storm, if you did this, I would figure that most of my neighbors would have a still set up within 2 weeks to make shine to run their newly acquired 30 year old inefficient, polluting car that could run off of it. Yes, it is highly illegal but when DS broke out in 1991, and gas in DC went from 99 cents to 1.61, half my neighbors broke out grandpa's still took the tarp off the 1960 F150, made their own shine and drove that to work. Don't think it won't happen again, even my 1992 Caddy can run on shine.
Well, I think you need to understand that current laws and policies in the United States most certainly affects urban sprawl.
Take away interstate highways, would we have the same amount of urban sprawl? Convert practically all roads to toll roads, would we have the same amount of urban sprawl? Abolish zoning laws and building codes, would we have the same amount of urban sprawl?
Even anti-discrimination laws, which lead to "white flight", have been a huge driver of urban sprawl.
To believe that urban sprawl is a natural condition of a free market, I think is ignoring the facts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Thorium nuclear reactors is the answer to our electric needs but that's off topic. 
