Obama and higher oil prices

Originally posted by Eladar
I'm sure that if it can be proven in the court of law that my pollution led to the destruction, then I could be held accountable.

You don't think that the use of petrol is damaging to the environment? Seriously?

Originally posted by FMF
You don't think that the use of petrol is damaging to the environment? Seriously?

I'm sure that the environment would be better if we did away with petrol, but that isn't going to happen. Higher gas prices in Europe and the US are not helping the environment.

The rest of the world more than destroys what little higher gas prices are doing in the US and Europe.

Originally posted by Eladar
I'm sure that the environment would be better if we did away with petrol, but that isn't going to happen.

Do away with petrol? Wow. Strawman Of The Week, I reckon. Anyway. Back to our discussion: You don't want to pay something closer to the real cost of using petrol. Somebody else should pay. That's your "ideology"?

Originally posted by FMF
Do away with petrol? Wow. Strawman Of The Week, I reckon. Anyway. Back to our discussion: You don't want to pay something closer to the real cost of using petrol. Somebody else should pay. That's your "ideology"?

The real cost is how much someone is willing to sell it for. Trying to say anything else is your agenda or ideology.

Originally posted by Eladar
The real cost is how much someone is willing to sell it for.

Pollution is not real?

Originally posted by FMF
Pollution is not real?

Increasing the price of fuel does not pay for pollution. I've already pointed this out.

Originally posted by Eladar
Increasing the price of fuel does not pay for pollution. I've already pointed this out.

It can, if the tax revenues generated are pumped into alternative energy research and research into ways to mitigate the effects of the pollution.

Originally posted by Eladar
Increasing the price of fuel does not pay for pollution.

Well it does in Europe, to a degree. And the imperfections of that 'degree' are at least in the sphere of democratic and technocratic mechanisms. It's got to be more joined-up than your as long as I don't pay approach to the consequences of your actions, surely?

Originally posted by sh76
It can, if the tax revenues generated are pumped into alternative energy research and research into ways to mitigate the effects of the pollution.

You can tax anything, then anything can be used to pump money into research and development of alternative fuels. The question is, who do you tax?

Imposing higher taxes on fuel places a huge amount of the tax burden on the poor. It is very regressive.

Originally posted by Eladar
Imposing higher taxes on fuel places a huge amount of the tax burden on the poor.

So you are - for all intents and purposes - advocating fuel subsidies? Surely there are more effective ways of helping "the poor" than that? Goodness me. All those well healed and reasonably well off people benefitting from the artificially low cost too. Talk about a blunt instrument.

Originally posted by Eladar
You can tax anything, then anything can be used to pump money into research and development of alternative fuels. The question is, who do you tax?

Imposing higher taxes on fuel places a huge amount of the tax burden on the poor. It is very regressive.

Well, if that is your objection you can combine a petrol tax with a highly progressive income tax. As is the case in most of western Europe.

Originally posted by Eladar
The question is, who do you tax?

Well, the people who pollute. In order to combat, reduce or clear up the pollution, as best as one can.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Well, if that is your objection you can combine a petrol tax with a highly progressive income tax. As is the case in most of western Europe.

Why have the high petrol tax at all? Why put the burden on the poor?

If you want fuel efficient cars, then have government mandates. All cars of certain types must have certain minumum fuel efficiency. You don't need to force the poor out of owning cars and operating cars.

All you are doing is lowering your standard of living. I do not see why people would put up with this.

Originally posted by Eladar
You can tax anything, then anything can be used to pump money into research and development of alternative fuels. The question is, who do you tax?

Imposing higher taxes on fuel places a huge amount of the tax burden on the poor. It is very regressive.

Regressive or not, it makes sense to tax the people who consume a good to pay to offset the harm caused by said consumption.

Originally posted by Eladar
Why have the high petrol tax at all? Why put the burden on the poor?

If you want fuel efficient cars, then have government mandates. All cars of certain types must have certain minumum fuel efficiency. You don't need to force the poor out of owning cars and operating cars.

All you are doing is lowering your standard of living. I do not see why people would put up with this.

You want the government mandating fuel efficiency?

Let the market decide. Tax the gas guzzlers to pay for solutions to the harms that they cause and let people buy whatever car they like... as long as they're willing to pay to compensate for the externalities they cause.