I find these fuel taxes discussions quite humorous. Not because they won't work (they very well may) but simply because Americans are proposing INCREASING taxes. Didn't your forefathers host the Boston Tea Party because they didn't want to pay tax on tea? Didn't they start the American Revolution because they didn't want to pay a half penny more for stamps? American history is littered with revolts when the government increases taxes, indeed, you (collectively) still complain you're taxed too much.

Yet now you're talking about increasing the fuel taxes to decrease fuel usage. Since when did you guys become London mayors? I think, if the government dramatically increased fuel taxes as suggested here, there would be another revolt. Despite the rational benefits (decreased usage) I think most Americans would be extremely angry, not to mention the poorer people would be broke (especially farmers and those living in rural areas) and the rich, well, they wouldn't care. If anything, it create a larger gap between the rich and the poor.

Let's face it, fuel is a necessity, especially among rural residents where there is little to no public transportation, and everything has to be driven to. If your logic is correct, then why don't we also have a huge food tax to reduce the amount of food consumed by you Americans so Africans can eat. I think you will all disagree about a arbitrarily huge food tax - a similar fuel tax is equally harmful and revolt-causing.

By the way, I'm not going to write to my congressman to support such a harmful idea for two reasons: 1) I don't agree with it, and 2)I live in Ontario, Canada. By the way, we get taxed quite heavily, but we don't complain (at least not as much as you Americans.) We get free health care, our roads are relatively well maintained and always plowed in a timely fashion, we get free elementary and secondary education, and post-secondary education is partially subsidized (and even if student's don't have enough, the government lends us all we need, and gives us great interest rates and timeframes to pay it back.) I would rather be a working class, high-taxed Canadian than a working class, low-taxed American.

"If your logic is correct, then why don't we also have a huge food tax to reduce the amount of food consumed by you Americans so Africans can eat. I think you will all disagree about a arbitrarily huge food tax - a similar fuel tax is equally harmful and revolt-causing."

Actually, the U.S., canada, and EU should all reduce/eliminate their farm subsidies so that third world farmers can actually compete in the world agriculture market, but that's a different subject. It is interesting that the U.S. is using food exports to partially off-set the trade deficit caused by energy imports. If we weren't dumping cheap food on the world market, the dollar would be even worse off (it's already on a par with the loonie and getting it's ass kicked by the euro), another condition that is not sustainable.

"it's already on a par with the loonie "

Actually, as of today (Thursday March 13) the loonie is worth more than the American dollar (1.015 or something like... similar to our gas prices.)

"Actually, as of today (Thursday March 13) the loonie is worth more than the American dollar (1.015 or something like... similar to our gas prices.)"

Yup, it's 1.018 as of a few minutes ago.

The tax system works both ways; Sweden has a "negative income tax" for people who are in low income brackets, in other words, a wage top-up. Canada has various forms of assistance too, I understand.

After hurricane Katrina, gas prices went through the roof; several states inaugurated temporary subsidies for gas over $8/million BTUs.

Isn't that more or less what the U.S. "earned income tax credit" does?

Indiana suspended their gasoline tax temporarily. I'm not sure if they re-instituted it.

Didn't your forefathers host the Boston Tea Party because they didn't want to pay tax on tea?...American history is littered with revolts when the government increases taxes, indeed, you (collectively) still complain you're taxed too much. 

The issue was taxation without representation, eh?

The only affect of this for those who do not want to pay the initial tax is the buyers will transition to the used market.

If you don't like a $6000 gas guzzler tax on a Chevy Tahoe, the alternative is not just a used car, but you could trade "down" to a cheaper and more economical new car as well. People who are used to buying new cars only go to used ones when their financial condition is desperate, such as with job loss, major illnes, etc. If you really need a powerful machine such as towing a large trailer, you could buy a used gas guzzler without incurring the new car surtax. One poster owns a diesel truck to pull his horse trailer. He just bought a new Prius, and will only use his diesel 3000 miles a year. That's intelligent planning !

Going from an overpowered expensive car or SUV to something more sensible does not entail physical or financial suffering. It might mean some loss of ego.

During WW II no new cars were built for the public from mid 1942 till late 1945! Everyone made the old cars last, and gas was rationed a good part of the time as well. Americans coped extremely well and probably lived healthier lives doing so.

Mr. Sanders, I believe you owe us some input here.

I answered some questions above. Is that enough for now, MB? I'm happy to talk with you. But I do have to drive that 30 miles home from work every day before I can talk to you.

Yup, absolutely.

I just didn't want somebody dropping a cherry bomb into the porcelin and then running away. The whole issue of taxation as a method of controlling gas consumption is as hot a topic as can be found. It gets to peoples' core philosophies, their political beliefs, and their perspective on the economy and on world economic issues. It's implementation would affect each individual in a different way, as well as affecting the overall economy.

Admittedly, perhaps sadomasachystically, I enjoy the debate.

"I just didn't want somebody dropping a cherry bomb into the porcelin and then running away."

Do I seem like a shrinking violet to you? ;^)

"The whole issue of taxation as a method of controlling gas consumption is as hot a topic as can be found. It gets to peoples' core philosophies, their political beliefs, and their perspective on the economy and on world economic issues. It's implementation would affect each individual in a different way, as well as affecting the overall economy."

I know. Those are some of the reasons I brought it up.

".... I enjoy the debate."

Me too! Let's discuss this further! BTW, I really am serious about emailing my representatives, and I want to discuss it with you thoughtful folks to gel my opinions.

Absolutely not.. I'm 6'6" tall and have to have a car with real leg and head room. It's entirely unfair and unproductive to tax people based on their heighth. Whats wrong with you people, your answer to everything is more taxes. Do you know that the government gets more money from gas sales than the oil companies make in their EXCESSIVE profits. And thats only the federal take. Include the state and local taxws and the oil profits are small by comparison. Get in your Prius and go to France or some other socialist country.

A VW New Beetle can handle large people. I know someone your height that insistson driving a full size dar when he travels on business yet drives a Corolla to commute. It appears that there are several smaller cars that tall folks could drive.

Just went shopping and parked beside a Scion xB, a very tall and boxy economy car with tons of headroom and legroom. We hear all these knee-jerk complaints from tall people that that they need large cars or trucks. Did you know that Swedes and Norwegians on average are taller than Americans? The tallest people in the world today are......DUTCHMEN, not Americans! Most Dutchmen drive sensible and roomy cars, and are in better physical shape than American males. There is a large choice out there in roomy, economical cars.

Old habits die hard; my wife can't imagine using a front-loading washing machine when her old top loader packs it in! My sister had great difficulty learning to cook with a microwave.

What is it with you guys ?

Are you politicians or something ?

Too much time on your hands, sitting on your a$$es thinking up new taxes, you don't think we pay enough taxes ? Is that it ?

"Too much time on your hands, sitting on your a$$es thinking up new taxes, you don't think we pay enough taxes ? Is that it ? "

Nope. There are two problems. First, there is reliance on foreign oil, whether it's Mexico, Canada or OPEC the money goes out of the country. It's driving the value of the dollar down dramatically and increasing inflation because we live in a global economy. The second issue is the lack of responsibility we citizens take for our government and the way it runs. The deficit was likely about $160 billion last year. But that doesn't include the "off-budget" items like social security. The off budget social security bill was almost $600 billion. That's almost a trillion dollars of borrowing last year alone. But it's off budget, how could it be a problem? It's called off budget because the American public would go nuts if they saw a trillion dollar budget deficit. Does it bother you? Where will the money come from? From you and me. Now, later, whenever, the citizens pay for it. Corporations should pay for it? That's us, too. I suggest we act like responsible, interested adults and take care of business.

What do you do while you're sitting around, Scudder?

We shouldn't be taxing people for the purpose of changing their behavour. If we do then let's tax people for having unprotected sex because it can transmit disease.

We should tax to recover the ACTUAL cost of the behavour. The government takes a lot of your income and other taxes and spends them on road and bridge maintenance. So if you use teh roads and bridges alot (i.e you use a lot of gas) you pay more in tax (because each gallon of gas is taxed). The tax should be high enough to cover all the things the government is doing to support our driving habbits and our income tax should be reduced by the amount that is currently being spent on those things.

Shifting the payment for road and bridge maintenance from the general taxes we pay to a tax on teh gas we use shifts the burden onto those who use the infrastructure more - as it should be. As an added side effect - if we can see the REAL cost of our driving - we will likely find alternate ways that use less fuel.