2 ms·
It’s a neat idea, but is this really true? > motor fuel consumption is proportional to income so it is naturally progressive Counterpoints: - Older, cheaper
by noahtallen 4y ago
It’s a neat idea, but is this really true?
> motor fuel consumption is proportional to income so it is naturally progressive
Counterpoints:
- Older, cheaper cars are less fuel efficient and use more gas.
- Rent is cheaper further from job centers, meaning long commutes.
- Places where rent is cheaper tend to have less investment in walkability and public transit, meaning cars are used more often.
- jeffbee 4y agoI don’t know why you are posting these suppositions when the government measures this directly. The spread between the lowest and highest income quintiles in terms of motor fuel consumption is 300%. “ The highest income quintile (making at least $95,000 per year) spent slightly more than $4,000 on gasoline in 2013, while the lowest income quintile (making under $18,000 per year) spent about $1,200 on gasoline. Higher-income households also have more vehicles: 2.8 per household for the highest quintile compared with 0.9 per household for the lowest quintile.” https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=20772 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=20772