3 ms·

>gas prices at the pump are still relatively high. Relative to what? Highway user revenue accounted for approximately 48% of the total public expenditure on hi

>gas prices at the pump are still relatively high. Relative to what? Highway user revenue accounted for approximately 48% of the total public expenditure on highways and roads in 2012. In 1970, that number was 70%. Given that the people using the roads aren't making up the cost at the pump -- not even by half -- I'd say the gas prices are very low relative to the cost of maintainence. This has negative effects elsewhere: because we're basically subsidizing the use of cars, we're also inducing demand for roads that require federal bailouts to maintain. This, in turn, reduces the demand for more economically viable forms of transportion.

WillPostForFood 11y ago
Gas prices are relatively high compared to the price of oil, and the reason the are high is that the taxes on gas have already been raised multiple times, just not at the federal level. You are ignoring both state taxes, and state expenditures on roads. A federal gas tax is a regressive tax on urban poor to pay for rural highways. States like California take more money in on gas taxes than they spend on roads, so force states to maintain roads instead of funneling the money through Washington DC.
- intopieces 11y ago
  >Gas prices are relatively high compared to the price of oil. There are many costs associated with the use of gasoline, and the price of oil itself is a small portion of that. By this same simplification, the cost of a loaf of bread ($2.50 for 1.25 lbs) is relatively high compared to the price of wheat ($4.77 for 60lbs). But we know that there are many hidden costs to get us from wheat to bread. Add to our gasoline usage the external effects of Co2, safety, and the influence on the housing architecture -- the price of oil doesn't seem to be a particularly accurate measure of true cost. >You are ignoring both state taxes I ignored state tax hikes on fuel because they haven't haven't been particularly active. • Twenty states have gone a decade or more without an increase in their gas tax rate. • Fifteen states have gone two decades or more without a gas tax increase. • Among the thirty-one states levying a “fixed-rate” gas tax, the average length of time since the last gas tax increase is sixteen years. [0] >and state expenditures on roads. State expenditure on roads is precisely what I'm attempting to draw attention to -- the states don't make enough in gas taxes, they have to spend from their general budgets and raise bonds. Several states have now reached the point where the cost of servicing debt for past projects now soaks up nearly all current revenues from gasoline taxes.[1] >A federal gas tax is a regressive tax on urban poor to pay for rural highways. Absolutely it is. But subsidizing the urban poor's use of cars doesn't help their situation either -- it just leads to more roads and less investment in public transportation. Public transportation is more efficient and benefits the poor and middle class, and makes roads less congested and safer for people who can afford to drive. Additionally, mandated parking takes up valuable real estate in urban areas, driving up the cost of living. This negatives effects the working poor. [2] >States like California take more money in on gas taxes than they spend on roads, so force states to maintain roads instead of funneling the money through Washington DC. Current revenue from California's 42.35-cent gas tax covers only a fraction of the state's annual highway repair needs. This is why the Senate panel passed a recommendation for a 12.5 cent tax hike [3] [0]http://www.itep.org/pdf/gastaxincreases0515.pdf http://www.itep.org/pdf/gastaxincreases0515.pdf [1]http://www.uspirg.org/sites/pirg/files/reports/Who%20Pays%20for%20Roads%20vUS.pdf http://www.uspirg.org/sites/pirg/files/reports/Who%20Pays%20... [PDF page 9] [2]http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/driving-true-costs/412237/ http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/driving-... [3]http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_28668276/senate-panel-votes-raise-californias-gas-tax-12 http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_28668276/senate-pan...

WillPostForFood 11y ago

Gas prices are relatively high compared to the price of oil, and the reason the are high is that the taxes on gas have already been raised multiple times, just not at the federal level. You are ignoring both state taxes, and state expenditures on roads. A federal gas tax is a regressive tax on urban poor to pay for rural highways. States like California take more money in on gas taxes than they spend on roads, so force states to maintain roads instead of funneling the money through Washington DC.

intopieces 11y ago
>Gas prices are relatively high compared to the price of oil. There are many costs associated with the use of gasoline, and the price of oil itself is a small portion of that. By this same simplification, the cost of a loaf of bread ($2.50 for 1.25 lbs) is relatively high compared to the price of wheat ($4.77 for 60lbs). But we know that there are many hidden costs to get us from wheat to bread. Add to our gasoline usage the external effects of Co2, safety, and the influence on the housing architecture -- the price of oil doesn't seem to be a particularly accurate measure of true cost. >You are ignoring both state taxes I ignored state tax hikes on fuel because they haven't haven't been particularly active. • Twenty states have gone a decade or more without an increase in their gas tax rate. • Fifteen states have gone two decades or more without a gas tax increase. • Among the thirty-one states levying a “fixed-rate” gas tax, the average length of time since the last gas tax increase is sixteen years. [0] >and state expenditures on roads. State expenditure on roads is precisely what I'm attempting to draw attention to -- the states don't make enough in gas taxes, they have to spend from their general budgets and raise bonds. Several states have now reached the point where the cost of servicing debt for past projects now soaks up nearly all current revenues from gasoline taxes.[1] >A federal gas tax is a regressive tax on urban poor to pay for rural highways. Absolutely it is. But subsidizing the urban poor's use of cars doesn't help their situation either -- it just leads to more roads and less investment in public transportation. Public transportation is more efficient and benefits the poor and middle class, and makes roads less congested and safer for people who can afford to drive. Additionally, mandated parking takes up valuable real estate in urban areas, driving up the cost of living. This negatives effects the working poor. [2] >States like California take more money in on gas taxes than they spend on roads, so force states to maintain roads instead of funneling the money through Washington DC. Current revenue from California's 42.35-cent gas tax covers only a fraction of the state's annual highway repair needs. This is why the Senate panel passed a recommendation for a 12.5 cent tax hike [3] [0]http://www.itep.org/pdf/gastaxincreases0515.pdf http://www.itep.org/pdf/gastaxincreases0515.pdf [1]http://www.uspirg.org/sites/pirg/files/reports/Who%20Pays%20for%20Roads%20vUS.pdf http://www.uspirg.org/sites/pirg/files/reports/Who%20Pays%20... [PDF page 9] [2]http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/driving-true-costs/412237/ http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/driving-... [3]http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_28668276/senate-panel-votes-raise-californias-gas-tax-12 http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_28668276/senate-pan...