3 ms·

It's crazy how the world is held hostage economically if they aren't paying enough for oil. "Squeeze consumers or the world gets it!" Still, I'd like to see t

by ck2 11y ago

It's crazy how the world is held hostage economically if they aren't paying enough for oil. "Squeeze consumers or the world gets it!" Still, I'd like to see taxes go up on gas in the USA with a specifically funded program based on the excess. Something like holding gas at $2/gallon - if it goes up, then the extra tax ends.

refurb 11y ago
Something like holding gas at $2/gallon - if it goes up, then the extra tax ends. It's an interesting idea, but I think it would cause havoc with gov't budgets. Could you imagine if oil prices went up and suddenly that $0.50/gal tax disappeared overnight? It seems like gov'ts in oil producing countries have a hard enough time budgeting based on the oil royalties they receive. I know Alberta, Canada has gotten hammered again and again when they assumed royalty revenue would stay high and it dropped like a rock.
- koolba 11y ago
  > Could you imagine if oil prices went up and suddenly that $0.50/gal tax disappeared overnight? Great point. This is the same thing that's happening now with tobacco taxes and lottery revenue. Tax money is fungible so the repercussions will cascade beyond the original programs the money would be allocated to.
- ck2 11y ago
  I don't mean the funds should be used for a continuous project that needs continuous funds, like how lottery/cigarette taxes are used to replace other taxes. I mean it should fund something not being funded right now because the money simply doesn't exist and the tax law should be ONLY for that project and not fungible.
  - refurb 11y ago
    That would be a fantastic idea in general (tax money funds a specific project), but you'd still have the problem of the unpredictability of the tax revenue. It would be great to fund a new program using a gas tax like the one you suggested, but could you imagine the blow-back if oil prices went back up and suddenly closed the new program down?

by ck2 11y ago

refurb 11y ago

Something like holding gas at $2/gallon - if it goes up, then the extra tax ends. It's an interesting idea, but I think it would cause havoc with gov't budgets. Could you imagine if oil prices went up and suddenly that $0.50/gal tax disappeared overnight? It seems like gov'ts in oil producing countries have a hard enough time budgeting based on the oil royalties they receive. I know Alberta, Canada has gotten hammered again and again when they assumed royalty revenue would stay high and it dropped like a rock.

koolba 11y ago
> Could you imagine if oil prices went up and suddenly that $0.50/gal tax disappeared overnight? Great point. This is the same thing that's happening now with tobacco taxes and lottery revenue. Tax money is fungible so the repercussions will cascade beyond the original programs the money would be allocated to.
ck2 11y ago
I don't mean the funds should be used for a continuous project that needs continuous funds, like how lottery/cigarette taxes are used to replace other taxes. I mean it should fund something not being funded right now because the money simply doesn't exist and the tax law should be ONLY for that project and not fungible.
- refurb 11y ago
  That would be a fantastic idea in general (tax money funds a specific project), but you'd still have the problem of the unpredictability of the tax revenue. It would be great to fund a new program using a gas tax like the one you suggested, but could you imagine the blow-back if oil prices went back up and suddenly closed the new program down?