Cover You in Oil
David Weigel | June 9, 2008, 2:58pm
Gas is still expensive and
John McCain is still tied or narrowly behind Obama, so the "gas tax holiday" is back.
Before a fundraiser in Richmond, Virginia on Monday, McCain mentioned the gas tax holiday in remarks to a smaller event for about 40 high-dollar donors. "That was derided by Sen. Obama and others as a gimmick," McCain said, but added that working people and truckers would appreciate it.
It's not a gimmick!
"I don't pretend that it's an answer to our energy problems," he said.
Still not a gimmick!
McCain has repeatedly said he does not believe the proposal would be a panacea for America’s energy woes. Instead, McCain argued, low-income families could save some extra cash to pay for their children’s school supplies this fall, or perhaps treat themselves to a nice dinner.
OK, it's a gimmick.
Steve Verdon | June 9, 2008, 4:17pm | #
TallDave,
Maybe, maybe not. If gas prices keep going up, there might be huge pressure to make the tax cut permanent and larger rather than letting it end (Repubs always call the end of tax cuts "tax hikes").
Can't hurt to get a foot in the door.
And you don't think the revenue shortfall will be made up with higher taxes eventually? Really?
Nevermind that wear and tear on the roads is a function of the number of people using the road, which is correlated with the number of miles people drive, thus making the gasoline tax not a bad user fee.
Some public goods would be difficult to provide in an anarcho-capitalist society, and even if you did get them you'd be replacing the gas tax with a toll.
Seriously, do you think there is a free pony in the libertarian tent somewhere?
And we'll skip all the potential problems due to sub-additive costs and natural monopolies, limit pricing, etc.
So, you're in favor of raising taxes until the deficit is zero? What do you think will happen to spending at that point?
No, as I noted earlier, I'm in favor or reducing the size and scope of government so we can get the fiscal picture under control. Without, said reductions then we will eventually have to raise taxes. Alot. Social Security, Medicare alone require about $85 trillion right now if we are to run them into the future indefinitely as they are currently set up.
x,y,
It might be unlikely, but there's no guarantee we (or future generations) will have to pay that money back in the future.
Channelling Dick Cheney with that deficits don't matter stuff eh?
If we get the country on a more libertarian track, maybe there will be spending offsets in the future. Hell, getting us out of Iraq alone would constitute a huge spending offset.
IIRC, Iraq is off budget.
Second, roads and highways are one of the few legitimate areas of government for most libertarians...yet you want to cut that spending? Okay, so much for principles...oh wait, sorry forgot who you were channelling.
x,y | June 9, 2008, 8:29pm | #
NNG -
I don't think it excludes you from the libertarian club. I just happen to be a more radical libertarian than most (philosophically, not personally). IMO, anarchy is the logical extension of the minimal state. But we can definitely agree that the more local the government, the better. At least then you have the opportunity to move to a more favorable location. The federalization of damn-near everything has consumed, well, damn-near everything.
As to Rural Route 345, I imagine there would be less roads like that in AC society precisely because they would be expensive to maintain.
John-David -
Thanks for the tip. Those were just hypothetical numbers. My school debt interest rate is lower than yours, even.
josephdietrich -
I would imagine a toll, yes. And yes, I understand that I would still pay for the road -- directly when I use it and indirectly when goods I consume are delivered through it. The critical differences are twofold. First, I'm only paying for what I use. Second, the transaction is voluntary and not imposed on me be force or threat of force. This is precisely the difference between living in a free society and one wholly or partially totalitarian.
Chris Potter -
The debt problem, the Iraq war, farm subsidies, and on and on are all problems. They're all partially my problem because I'm being taxed against my will and the proceeds of my labor are, in large part, funding these debacles. But I disown any moral responsibility for the problems created by these programs. Likewise, I disown any moral responsibility for the problems that might arise when these programs are finally put to bed (ha!). Unfortunately, the state's guns are bigger than mine and too many people think the government is one, giant benevolent entity. If the shit hits the fan in my lifetime, I'll probably get splattered. But I'll also crack a smile.
josephdietrich | June 10, 2008, 6:13am | #
First, I'm only paying for what I use.
Well, with a gas tax you are only paying for what you use. Unless you plan on driving off-road all the time, when you buy gas you are also going to use the roads that the gas tax pays for. The gas tax is effectively a toll with (in theory) zero profit built in for the maintainer. This is qualitatively different than, say, a general tax on income to pay for the roads, in which you definitely are not paying per usage. Which is why, as mentioned by commenters above, the gas tax is just about as libertarian a tax as they come.
Second, the transaction is voluntary and not imposed on me be force or threat of force.
The transaction of buying gas is voluntary and not imposed on you by force. Paying a gas tax to use the roads in lieu of a toll works out to the same thing. Unless, that is, you plan on drinking the gas, or burning it for warmth, or otherwise using it in ways that don't use the roads paid for by the tax. In that case you might have an argument, but it's pretty weak tea.
So your alternatives are:
* No roads (bad).
* Roads maintained by the state payed out of general income tax (not good).
* Roads maintained by a private company out of tolls (okay, but since this one has a hard time imagining competition keeping the price down in this area, probably not the most efficient. After all, a company will charge fees based on maintenance costs + profit).
* Roads maintained by the state through tolls (okay, but a pain in the ass to have to pay all the time)
* Roads maintained by the state through gas taxes (good
for all of the reasons Mo mentioned.)
Apologies in advance if I left out any options. Of course, this is all IMHO; YMMV.
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSS
