Finn d'Abuzz wrote:Oops, mean't Thomas, not Walter.
Well, what I didn't say in that post is that our gas taxes were much higher than yours even before we subsidized our retirement pension system with them. Another reason is that as taxes go, gas taxes are relatively good about not disrupting the economy. If you tax wages and interest, you discourage people from working and saving, which you don't want to discourage. If you tax fossil fuels, you discourage people from wasting gas, which you do want to discourage. Whenever fiscal reality catches up with the majority in Congress, I hope they don't raise the income tax but the gas tax. It's the kind of tax that honest Republicans can like, and I hope they realize it at some point.
Thomas,
Like all value-added taxes, the federal gas tax is an equal tax to all who consume gasoline. However, it is a regressive tax in that it taxes the poor more severely than it does the wealthy.
Perhaps a good republican might find this equitable, but I doubt that most Americans who are squeezed financially by this current Administration would agree.
Interesting, Cavolina. Here in Germany, supporting this tax gives you good left-wing credentials whereas our right wing fiercely opposes them. I guess a lot her is about symbolism, not substance. On a different point, the payroll tax that finances your Social Security program is even more regressive than our gasoline tax, so even by your standards, our solution would seem to be better than yours.
I wouldn't mind paying four or even five dollars a gallon if I felt like my government would take care of me if I got sick or displaced.... the 1300.00 a month I used to pay for health insurance would have covered the difference nicely
Quote:The storm disrupted oil drilling and distribution along the Gulf Coast, and the Senate Energy Committee convened a hearing into the rising cost of gasoline. Republicans and Democrats said they suspect price gouging in the aftermath of the storm, but said the government lacks the ability to adequately investigate or prevent such abuses.
"There are growing concerns that oil companies are making too much in profits at the expense of consumers," said Sen. Pete Domenici (news, bio, voting record), R-N.M., chairman of the committee.
What?
Quote:Grassley, R-Iowa, said he favors loan relief for farmers whose grain harvest may not reach market on schedule because of difficulties at the New Orleans port. Sen. Max Baucus (news, bio, voting record), D-Montana, called for help with Medicaid costs in states that take in storm victims. Sen. Ted Stevens (news, bio, voting record), R-Alaska, said he favors tax relief for airlines hardhit by a spike in fuel costs.
We highly suspect price gouging, we're gonna investigate but likely can't do much about it, so we need to give money to the airlines using public coffers?
Squinney
Careful there, Squinney, only three ooopses a day allowed.
BBB :wink:
Finn, my point was that, from taxes at all levels (state and fed) the tax burden on gas is about 13%NOW. It was as high as 25% because why? GAS WAS CHEAPER.
All the additional 2= bucks per gallon is net profit , since theyve already factored in their costs, and amortized exploration and transmission. Weve been screwed with our eyes open.
As far as EU goes, their position is their position. Weve just been handed,over the last few years, another spike in petroleum costs that is, despite what the oil boys say, is gouging. A barrel of oil in US would net about 1.50 profit before 2002. Now, its gradually creeped up to over 10. These are API numbers and I have no reason to doubt them, they may even be a bit on the conservative side.
farmerman wrote:Finn, my point was that, from taxes at all levels (state and fed) the tax burden on gas is about 13%NOW. It was as high as 25% because why? GAS WAS CHEAPER.
All the additional 2= bucks per gallon is net profit , since theyve already factored in their costs, and amortized exploration and transmission. Weve been screwed with our eyes open.
As far as EU goes, their position is their position. Weve just been handed,over the last few years, another spike in petroleum costs that is, despite what the oil boys say, is gouging. A barrel of oil in US would net about 1.50 profit before 2002. Now, its gradually creeped up to over 10. These are API numbers and I have no reason to doubt them, they may even be a bit on the conservative side.
Is KY a petoleum product?
farmerman wrote:Finn, my point was that, from taxes at all levels (state and fed) the tax burden on gas is about 13%NOW. It was as high as 25% because why? GAS WAS CHEAPER.
All the additional 2= bucks per gallon is net profit , since theyve already factored in their costs, and amortized exploration and transmission. Weve been screwed with our eyes open.
As far as EU goes, their position is their position. Weve just been handed,over the last few years, another spike in petroleum costs that is, despite what the oil boys say, is gouging. A barrel of oil in US would net about 1.50 profit before 2002. Now, its gradually creeped up to over 10. These are API numbers and I have no reason to doubt them, they may even be a bit on the conservative side.
Yeah, but Finn takes any opportunity to jab at Euro-Socialism, Islamo-Fascism, or any other hyphenated -ism at any chance that he gets; it's the American way!
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:farmerman wrote:Finn, my point was that, from taxes at all levels (state and fed) the tax burden on gas is about 13%NOW. It was as high as 25% because why? GAS WAS CHEAPER.
All the additional 2= bucks per gallon is net profit , since theyve already factored in their costs, and amortized exploration and transmission. Weve been screwed with our eyes open.
As far as EU goes, their position is their position. Weve just been handed,over the last few years, another spike in petroleum costs that is, despite what the oil boys say, is gouging. A barrel of oil in US would net about 1.50 profit before 2002. Now, its gradually creeped up to over 10. These are API numbers and I have no reason to doubt them, they may even be a bit on the conservative side.
Yeah, but Finn takes any opportunity to jab at Euro-Socialism, Islamo-Fascism, or any other hyphenated -ism at any chance that he gets; it's the American way!
Cycloptichorn
Geez Cyclo, I'm getting the impression that you don't like me.
Please say it ain't so.
Thomas
I am not sure I agree that Soc. Security is a regressive tax in that it is based on earnings. the more you earn the more you pay. There is a certain bias build into it by the fat-cats. The ceiling on taxable earnings makes it somewhat regressive in that all of the less affluent pay SS taxes on the full amount of their income. The more affluent pay SS taxes only a portion of their income.
Under the current scenario, you are right. But only because government has screwed up again.
I can vouch for what is being written in mutual funds commentary regarding oil and prices. As part of my work I review annual reports and review commentaries. I can't give out details as some of the reports have not been published yet, but at least one fund has a whole section discussing the energy industry and what is currently occurring.
cavolina wrote:I am not sure I agree that Soc. Security is a regressive tax in that it is based on earnings. the more you earn the more you pay.
And the more gasoline you consume, the more you pay too. The same is true for every consumption tax.
While we are on the subject of taxes, I may be in the minority, but I believe that a sound State requires tax revenues to do the most basic of things: protect its citizens.
The current administration seems to have abandoned future generations to one hell of a debt. Almost like a parent who runs up a large credit card debt and passes it on to his child. The net effect is to strangle the child with the debt load precluding the child from maximizing itself.
So too, it will be with the future citizens. They will perhaps be unable to invest in a crumbling infrastructure or even worse a sound national defense.
We are mortgaging the future. No matter your political stripe, this is fiscal insanity. The tax cut need be rescinded. The war in Iraq brought to a conclusion. The current leadership in Washington must be made to act in the interest of all the people or be run of office.
cavolina
cavolina, welcome to A2K, glad to have you here and to read your Newbie thoughts on an important topic.
BBB
North Carolina is looking into price gouging at the pumps.
Anyone else know if their state is doing the same?
