Quote of the Day: New York Times on Gas Tax Pandering
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 05. 1.08
From the lead editorial in today's New York Times:
::New York Times
Senators John McCain and Hillary Rodham Clinton have hit on a new way to pander to American voters: a temporary suspension of the federal gasoline tax between Memorial Day and Labor Day. The proposal may draw applause and votes from Americans feeling the pain of nearly $4-a-gallon gasoline. But it is an expensive and environmentally unsound policy that would do nothing to help American drivers.
« Survey: Are You Sacrificing Food Quality for Savings? |
Jaime Lerner: Innovation is Just Starting Something New »
Well I am glad that at least some news media outlets are calling out these prospectives on how stupid this all is. They are correct in saying that it's nothing but a token feel good promise. It makes voters feel warm and fuzzy and gives them an excuse to do business as usual when really, it's only going to destroy the already fragile economy and infarstructure by pulling away funding.
In effect, this suspension of tax will do nothing for the end user. Great. You just saved enough money to buy yourself a starbucks coffee (assuming you drive a 27 gallon tanked SUV)... the sad realiity is that most people would do JUST THAT. Spend the savings on some other junk that they don't need. In other words.. you are not going to put your kids through college on the savings.
Driving my car, it would save me a whopping dollar per fill. I don't even care that gas is expensive. Gas could be (and should be) double what it is currently. even at that rate, I wouldn't feel the pinch at the pump with my Honda Fit (although I would see it in other living costs).
The best thing that Americans could do is just consume less. Drive smaller cars and realize that the difference between wants ane needs. Maybe thats what McCain and Clinton should be saying. "So you want lower gas prices? Buy smaller cars."
In all likeliness, creating a budget gap for transportation could be funded by another part of our taxes, making it seem like we saved a little on gas only to spend it later from income, property, or sales taxes.
Reducing the price of gas now doesn't solve the issue of depleting oil reserves. What we need is a higher gas tax that is restricted to funding more sustainable options. Whether it's trains, buses, rental bicycles, better walkways and bike paths - any of these. Just stop trying to help personal vehicles. That age will soon be over, and if we aren't preparing for the changes now, we will be screwed when we decide between buying food and getting to work.
-Andy
Bravo! to the NY Times for this editorial--and to TreeHugger for spreading the word...
The sad truth is that we will NOT change our consuming habits until we HAVE to. Pandering is exactly what these two candidates are doing. Almost as infuriating as the President's call to start drilling in the Artic Wildlife Refuge...
It's nothing but pandering, pure and simple. In fact, all of the candidates are promising bread-and-circuses in the form of more spending or tax cuts, while doing little to actually SOLVE the problems at hand.
Why not just stand in front of the polls and hand out $100 bills? If nothing else it would be honest.