Posted on 11/25/2018 6:13:24 AM PST by Kaslin
historically, when gas prices have been high, presidents did not win reelection- yet under obama, we had massive high gas prices, the economy was terrible, millions out of work, and this country still elected him again- but by golly let gas prices go up even 10 cents, and the fickle country will be apt to turn on trump as the democrats scream about ‘soaring energy prices because of trump-
Sad that the republicans couldn’t make the case for how HORRIBLY affected our country was under obama- all the historical indicators for losing a second term were against obama- but this country unbelievably hired him for another 4 years- It’s like the country was a glutton for punishment- can’t stand success I guess- now that everything is better, we’ll see how this country votes again- IF they choose a democrat- I’m done with believing the country is capable of making common sense decisions!
We already pay a federal tax on gasoline. The United States federal excise tax on gasoline is 18.4 cents per gallon and 24.4 cents per gallon for diesel fuel. In 2014 Federal fuel taxes raised $35.2 billion, with $25.0 billion raised from gasoline taxes and $10.2 billion raised from taxes on diesel and special motor fuels.
The proposal to raise the "gasoline" tax by 30 cents per gallon would increase the federal governments take by over $43 billion per year (based on 2014 data - probably higher using current data). FYI - the 2015 federal transportation budget was 72.4 billion. In addition, there are countless billions of dollars charged by each state to supposedly fund individual state DOT budgets. For example, the highest amount is Pennsylvania, which adds on 58.7 cents per gallon. That's insane. The lowest state is Alaska at 14.65 cents.
For those that work/live in cities that have mass transportation that want to share in the benefits of not using a car, I suggest the bus, train and subway fares be non-subsidized. Fares should be based on the cost to provide the service, including capital expenditures for infrastructure. After all, there are untold millions of people who don't use/benefit from mass transportation. When the city dwellers start paying the actual cost for their transportation, then and only then, can they start discussing how to not contribute to highway infrastructure costs.
Come on Mort, its obviously 30 cents per gallon. The dumb writer co-mingled terms $.30 = 30 cents, no need for the word "cents". Putting both .30 and the word cents does technically mean 3/10 of a cent. Do you honestly believe the democrats are proposing a 3/10 cent increase?
He’s not going to raise the gas tax.
Believe me.
Roads and bridges that need to be built. Takes years and years to complete and always over budget.
“Econ 101 — the Milton Friedman version — suggests that users should pay for roads and bridges — so that the money saved from ending wars can be broadly distributed via tax cuts.”
End users paying for infrastructure is the economically correct way of doing things.
However, you and I both know the Dems lie.
Pass the gas tax and watch them “discover” 500 social programs that need the money more.
Remember the tobacco tax?
You realise that a full accounting of where that money went has never been done.
Any proposed gas tax would end up the same, you and I paying exorbitant bills while the infrastructure remains the same.
California is a prime example of this.
A so called “Peace Dividend” has NEVER been returned to We The People by tax cuts. The socialists in our government funnel some into their pockets and the rest to their favorite social programs.
Papa Bush got us militarily in the ME so there was no real savings after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Clinton did what dems do and funneled money to vote buying social programs.
As Mr Friedman said:
“Only government can take perfectly good paper, cover it with perfectly good ink and make the combination worthless.”
And
“Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it.”
I honestly believe that reporters should understand the language they report in.
Bad idea? Killer idea
“Follow my lips”
That SALT deduction cap was a killer in exactly the districts that were the most vulnerable. I still don’t understand why that crap needed to be in the tax bill, what were they thinking?
It’s a good thing. Once and for all we need to make the high-tax blue states feel the impact LOCALLY of their tax policies.
No state should offload its stupid taxes on ME.
Sorry, no way we shouldn’t have done this sooner. SALT was a great idea and if it costs us some seats, so be it. Eventually-—maybe 10 years-—the citizens of those states will rebel.
I can’t agree giving the democrats a very effective issue (being able to legitimately claim the GOP RAISED taxes on some of their constituents) in our most vulnerable seats, based on some vague hope of sparking “rebellions” at some point in the distant future, was a good idea.
People are not smart, they blamed the GOP Congress for it, not their state governments for having high taxes. And I have little hope they will change their minds about it in 5 years or 10 or 15.
More money in pockets=good. Any policy that takes money from someones pocket will make them mad.
Policy must be tailored to recognize that the American people, even and sometimes especially the “educated” ones, are retarded apes. And above all, selfish (not that being selfish is a bad thing).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.