🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jun02.143903.16188@dogface.austin.tx.us> bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg) writes:
>In article <73205@ut-emx.uucp> chipmunk@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Matt Monks) writes:
>>
>># $4/gallon gas is an excellent idea.
>>
>That's a terrible idea.  You don't drive, so the fiscal impact of your plan
>will not reach you.  Why is the solution to your problem going to cost me
>money, and not you?
>

Actually $4/gallon gas is not a bad idea at all. It would encourage some 
serious fuel efficiency. The problem right now is that gas is just *too* darn
cheap. For all the talk we hear about fuel efficient cars, people just
have no incentive to buy them when gas is so cheap. An increase in the price
of gas would boost the demand for more fuel-efficient cars. And despite all the 
squealing from the auto manufacturers we know it can easily be done. European
cars average almost twice the mileage of American cars. The basic
reason for this is the high cost of gas in Europe.
If you're worried about hurting industry you could always set special 
industrial rates (Although some serious belt-tightening there woudn't hurt 
either. US industry consumes twice as much energy as Japanese industry to 
produce the same product)

>P.S.  I know that it's not just *your* problem.  If it's a group problem,

Its precisely because its everyone's problem that something needs to be done. 
If it were just the gas-guzzlers problem then gas could be a penny a gallon!
However the ramifications of a gas tax are broader than simply how often you
might decide to drive.
Improved fuel efficiency would reduce tailpipe emissions; And dependence
on foreign oil without having to go drilling into the wilderness areas of 
Alaska. (Which would be pointless anyway since one estimate of the size of the
oil reserves there puts the amount at about 6months to one year's supply of
oil. Big deal!). And don't forget the real cost of oil: The billions of $ 
and the 100,000 lives spent on the Gulf War.

--s;