gas should go up

[mrbike27]

it should be at leat 7 dollars a gallon. that would get more people out of the car and onto the saddle. bike saddle that is. lazy americans

[cerewa]

The price of trolls should go up too?

[wahoonc]

I have long contended that the price of gas needed to be adjusted upward by taxing the crap out of it. Then use the taxes to redevelop mass transit and subsidize rail. And while they are at it, raise the cost and standards for getting a drivers license, might take some of the brain dead idiots off the roads. Also tax vehicles more reasonably on their use patterns. Heavy trucks destroy the roadways but only pay a small fraction of the costs.

Aaron:)

[linux_author]

And while they are at it, raise the cost and standards for getting a drivers license, might take some of the brain dead idiots off the roads.

- and illegals off the streets, too!

(but then it would cost $200 to get your grass cut, eh?)

:-)

[ModoVincere]

it should be at leat 7 dollars a gallon. that would get more people out of the car and onto the saddle. bike saddle that is. lazy americans


While I don't argue with the premise that people will change their driving habits when driving is not economical, I would question where you came up with the $7/gallon figure?
I personnally changed my driving habits drastically when gas hit $2/gallon. Now, I have to admit that I am a rather stingy SOB.

Also, as gas prices go up, so will the cost of goods in stores. Transportation is a major portion of the costs that must be recovered for companies to earn a profit. Without that profit, companies aren't going to stay in business. So you might end up with much more expensive items and fewer places to obtain the items.

[wahoonc]

- and illegals off the streets, too!

(but then it would cost $200 to get your grass cut, eh?)

:-)

Nope...my goats do it for free:D I have never paid anyone to cut my grass or clean my house, I can do it just fine myself thankyou;)

Aaron:)

[wahoonc]

~snip~

Also, as gas prices go up, so will the cost of goods in stores. Transportation is a major portion of the costs that must be recovered for companies to earn a profit. Without that profit, companies aren't going to stay in business. So you might end up with much more expensive items and fewer places to obtain the items.

And this is a problem?:p ;)
People buy entirely too much made in China disposable plastic crap anyway, all it does it create a figment of wealth and clog the landfills. I have some furniture that belonged to my great grandparents...want to guess how much he paid for his "kitchen" table? It is a solid walnut drop leaf that was made in the Amana Colonies back in the 1800's...it cost him almost a month's wages and he was a skilled worker in a iron shop. Imagine someone paying that much for a simple table today.:eek: People today always complain about how much "stuff" costs and will go to great lengths to get the cheapest price they can on anything and everything, hence the Walmart Mentality, the loss of American Manufacturing jobs and the disposable, wasteful society we live in.
One thing that cheap energy has brought this country (and others) is a preponderance of stuff, too much stuff, so much stuff people have to rent storage lockers to keep the stuff in. I don't know what the answer is, but it isn't more stuff!

Aaron:)

[xyz]

Why not tax everything to death? A double cheeseburger should cost 50$, not only will this help with weight loss but then fast food workers would be RICH! TV's should cost 100,000$ and underware should be 400$ a set. Toilet paper should just be outlawed. And why do we need pure, clean water to take a dump in? Each flush should be 50$.

[slagjumper]

While were wishing—
We should elect a benevolent dictator who could bring about the following changes-

People would be encouraged to bike, telecommute, and live in sustainable areas buy getting tax incentives. If you want to live far away from the city, there will be no free road entitlement. If you want to drive a car, the price of gas will reflect the cost of war to secure it.

No car should have a top speed of more than the speed limit.

All new developments will be required to include a parallel, slow speed road.

Every citizen will be given the right to buy 10 gallons of gas a week, which the car free could sell at a premium to the car users.

Anyone who violates these rules should be cut up and used to feed the baby polar bears.

Anyone who threatens the life of the benevolent dictator to revert to old ways would also be used as polar bear food.

[xyz]

http://www.cera.com/aspx/cda/public1/news/pressCoverage/pressCoverageDetails.aspx?CID=8388

Bloomberg

Gasoline in U.S. May Fall to $2.50 on Slow Hurricane Season

September 1, 2006

Gasoline prices across the U.S. are likely to fall this month as demand from motorists slows and the threat of supply disruptions from hurricanes diminishes.

U.S. gasoline prices, now averaging about $2.80 a gallon, may drop 15 to 20 cents in September, said Tom Knight, director of trading at Truman Arnold Cos., a Texarkana, Texas, fuel wholesaler. Scott Hartman, chief executive officer of CHR Corp., which sells about 100 million gallons a year in Pennsylvania, said $2.50 to $2.60 is possible by December.

Pump prices have declined 7 percent since early August and futures contracts indicate further reductions as the end of summer usually means fewer motorists filling their tanks. U.S. gasoline inventories are 2.6 percent above the five-year average, and forecasts last month said the chances a hurricane will interrupt refining in the Gulf of Mexico are lessening…

Oil rose 23 cents to $70.26 a barrel yesterday after Iran, the world's fourth-biggest oil producer, defied a United Nations deadline for ending uranium enrichment. Iran may face economic sanctions if it continues with its nuclear program.

``A lot depends on what happens in the crude market,'' said Aaron Brady, associate director of global oil research at Cambridge Energy Research Associates in Cambridge, Massachusetts. ``If things heat up with Iran and crude prices start to rise again, that would put a halt to the fall in gasoline prices.''

[donrhummy]

it should be at leat 7 dollars a gallon. that would get more people out of the car and onto the saddle. bike saddle that is. lazy americans

Uh, no it wouldn't. Most people were used to driving $15,000 cars that got about 30 mpg, for about $1.25/gallon yet what became super popular? $50,000 SUVs that people went into huge debt for, that get 10 mpg at $2.50 plus per gallon. Do the math and that's a bigger increase than $7/gallon.

Price doesn't stop use as much as you'd think with ANY product. Two pairs of shoes could be made for the same $2 in labor, $.50 in materials. One might cost $30 and no one buys it, while the other costs $150 and everyone's buying it.

[KnhoJ]

Also, as gas prices go up, so will the cost of goods in stores. Transportation is a major portion of the costs that must be recovered for companies to earn a profit. Without that profit, companies aren't going to stay in business. So you might end up with much more expensive items and fewer places to obtain the items.
That's why I'm rooting for rationing. Shipping, especially transportation of "necessities", tends to get the priority at times like this. I don't care if gasoline is $.01 a truckload, just so long as I get to ha, ha at the mile long line of cars at the gas station.
High fuel costs in the US only seem to work backwards. When it's cheap, gas milage is just a statistical or practical issue. Crank up the price, though, and suddenly rotten gas milage is a display of affluence. All the wacky conservatives can't wait to get a liberal truck, and all the wacky liberals can't wait to react with conservative hybrids. That's all that happens when the price of gas goes up, everyone runs out to buy more cars. I say take the gas away and watch 'em panic. I'll bring the popcorn!

[dynodonn]

Gas is now $3.20 a gallon here in my area, and I'm suddenly no longer the Maytag man of bicycling. Man, its a forest of lime green jackets out there now, it would probably be pandemonium if it went to $7.

[gerv]

Gas is now $3.20 a gallon here in my area, and I'm suddenly no longer the Maytag man of bicycling. Man, its a forest of lime green jackets out there now, it would probably be pandemonium if it went to $7.
The OPEC nations probably don't want it to go to $7. Last time there was a big jump in price, demand fell off sharply, folks started driving much smaller cars and less often. Then the world oil price plummeted and stayed there for a while.

[ModoVincere]

And this is a problem?:p ;)
People buy entirely too much made in China disposable plastic crap anyway, all it does it create a figment of wealth and clog the landfills. I have some furniture that belonged to my great grandparents...want to guess how much he paid for his "kitchen" table? It is a solid walnut drop leaf that was made in the Amana Colonies back in the 1800's...it cost him almost a month's wages and he was a skilled worker in a iron shop. Imagine someone paying that much for a simple table today.:eek: People today always complain about how much "stuff" costs and will go to great lengths to get the cheapest price they can on anything and everything, hence the Walmart Mentality, the loss of American Manufacturing jobs and the disposable, wasteful society we live in.
One thing that cheap energy has brought this country (and others) is a preponderance of stuff, too much stuff, so much stuff people have to rent storage lockers to keep the stuff in. I don't know what the answer is, but it isn't more stuff!

Aaron:)


While I completely agree that most people purchase way to much cheap, gaudy, crappy stuff, I do not wish to see the prices of necessities go up. It is already very difficult for some people in our society to make ends meet. I would hate to see the price of bread, sugar, milk, and eggs double or triple due to increased transportation costs.
I guess the answer to that would be higher production levels closer to the consumer. That would take time to build, and in the mean time, a part of society would suffer.

[wahoonc]

If people only bought the basics I seriously doubt they would go hungry. In addition the truly needy do have at least some recourse via foodstamps and other assistance programs. I have a real problem seeing people standing in line at the local food store/wallymart with $3-400 worth of "groceries" that they are paying for with government assistance, then wheel the stuff to the parking lot and get into a $35,000 SUV.:mad: and in at least one case when the person couldn't get the electronic card to work, she hauls out a big roll of bills and pays cash for the $200+ worth of groceries.:( If food production was brought back on a local level and farmer's paid realistic prices for their wholesale products I think it would be better for everybody. I am still trying to figure out why we need 42 different varieties of any single item in our grocery stores. I am not kidding take a look at the barbeque sauce selection for an example:eek: We always make our own from the basics. I would wager that 90% of what people buy in the stores are not staple goods but convenience foods. Nothing like paying $14 a pound for prepared chicken when you can buy the whole freakin' 3# chicken for $5.:p By only buying the basic staple goods with the occasional splurge and supplementing what we buy with our own gardens our average grocery bill for four adults is around $65 a week on average. We eat very well and don't eat out. But it does take time to prepare, but I think it is much healthier overall and we more control what goes into our food in terms of additives.


Aaron:)

[Roody]

Severe taxes on gas at the pump would harm poor and middle class people more than the wealthy, so I don't support it. I think cars should be taxed based on their gas consumption. If a car gets less than 50 mpg, tax it at a rate of $500 or each mpg under 50. If it gets better than 50 mpg, give a tax rebate worth $500 for each mpg over 50.

[wahoonc]

Severe taxes on gas at the pump would harm poor and middle class people more than the wealthy, so I don't support it. I think cars should be taxed based on their gas consumption. If a car gets less than 50 mpg, tax it at a rate of $500 or each mpg under 50. If it gets better than 50 mpg, give a tax rebate worth $500 for each mpg over 50.

Taxing cars won't help much, it has been tried. And from what I can tell there is not a single car on the market that gets 50 mpg at this time and again you will be penalizing the poor and middle class because they can't "afford" to buy a newer car that gets decent mileage. I have been doing some deep research for a replacement/supplemental vehicle for our use. I would really like to get a pure electric but the availability of them is pretty scarce at the moment. The best average mileage vehicles on the market are all in the low to mid 40 mpg range.

Short of luxury taxes (which I think have been tried) the wealthy seldom pay the same rate of taxes as the middle class and working poor, of which the ranks grow daily. They also made their money on the backs of the working poor (think Walmart) they should carry a heavier burden of taxes. I also think that the poor and middle class need to wake up and take charge of their lives and quit living their lives of illusion. My salary and my wife's salary place us well into the middle class. But we live without all of the "necessities";) :p of middle class. No 3 bedroom home in the 'burbs, no BMW or Hummer, no swimming pool (but I do have a pond that I can share with the ducks if so inclined;) ) no country club membership, no keeping up with the Joneses, we seldom eat out and we save at least 30% of our income for future endeavors. We could both quit work tomorrow if we chose to and not be any worse off for it. We do have goals in mind and are working towards those at this time. I have lived the keeping up with the Joneses lifestyle and hated it (one of the reasons I have an ex-wife)

Aaron:)

[LandLuger]

No. Rising gas prices will not break the back of the car culture in America unless the price reached truly apocalyptic heights. However, I would like to see the price rise and stay at a height sufficient to attract an abundance of venture capital for the development of some kinda serious effort at alternative fuel and/or vehicles. So far the cartels have been able to keep the price just low enough to frighten away the investors.

[funrover]

So....How many of you that want gas prices to go up work or have family that work on a farm/ranch? The gas prices are CRAP...... But don't worry... if gas prices keep going up so will everything else.... but hey you'll be happy right? I mean I want to pay more for my food, cloths and other supplies....... Oh please go up please......I can't stand saving a dollar or two........ There are lazy people..... I agree, but raising gas prices isn't going to make america more healthy...WTF?!?!?!

Having family on the farm really opens a persons eyes to cost.......... Just sit back and give it a look....

[wahoonc]

So....How many of you that want gas prices to go up work or have family that work on a farm/ranch? The gas prices are CRAP...... But don't worry... if gas prices keep going up so will everything else.... but hey you'll be happy right? I mean I want to pay more for my food, cloths and other supplies....... Oh please go up please......I can't stand saving a dollar or two........ There are lazy people..... I agree, but raising gas prices isn't going to make america more healthy...WTF?!?!?!

Having family on the farm really opens a persons eyes to cost.......... Just sit back and give it a look....
Funrover,
See my previous post covering farming. We as a family got out of it a long time ago because we couldn't compete with the big factory farms and the ones hiring illegal immigrants. We are currently going back to small scale "truck gardens" but don't expect to make a living at it at this time. Fuel costs are small part of farming, fertilizers and chemicals (which are oil based btw) are a much larger cost. And currently fuel for agricultural used is not taxed or if taxed is taxed at a much lower rate than OTR fuel. The talk about raising taxes was on consumer use gasoline. Too many things in this country are artificially priced, caused by cheap off shore labor or some type of subsidy.

Aaron:)

[dynodonn]

Gas jumped another 10 cents in 2 days, now $3.30 a gallon. Rising fuel prices are definite traffic calmer, I'm beginning to see a noticable visual reduction in cars on the road in my area, and the ones I do see, seems like they're driving a little slower as well.

[Platy]

Here's the straight dope direct from an industry insider who's sat in on refining & marketing planning meetings at an oil company you've heard of.

"My personal belief is that even though there may be lulls in price, higher gasoline prices will be the norm rather than the exception in upcoming years...

"My advice to all would be to plan for a future in which energy prices are much higher..."

Link (http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/2007/03/why-are-gas-prices-rising.html)

Well, at least the spring cycling season is here and that's totally unaffected by gas prices. Gorgeous day in Austin, just got back from climbing some neighborhood hills.

[wahoonc]

We could save amazing amounts of fuel if they would shift non critical freight to rail and limit the big trucks to 55 mph....I have a hard time believing any item needs to be transported by truck at 80mph from California to NC...:rolleyes:

Aaron:)

[I-Like-To-Bike]

Gas jumped another 10 cents in 2 days, now $3.30 a gallon. Rising fuel prices are definite traffic calmer, I'm beginning to see a noticable visual reduction in cars on the road in my area, and the ones I do see, seems like they're driving a little slower as well.
Let us know what you see when you wake up.

[likeakidagain]

Gas jumped another 10 cents in 2 days, now $3.30 a gallon. Rising fuel prices are definite traffic calmer, I'm beginning to see a noticable visual reduction in cars on the road in my area, and the ones I do see, seems like they're driving a little slower as well.
While I feel for the cars and the poor drivers, when prices are up biking is easier to deal with traffic around the mega stores even!:)

[LandLuger]

Let us know what you see when you wake up.

My observations echo ILTB's; when I drive, I know that I'm doing the speed limit when the cars are stacked up half a dozen deep behind me. Seriously, given the way I see motorists speeding along our residential streets it would be a blood bath if the kids weren't inside playing Nintendo.

[dynodonn]

Let us know what you see when you wake up.

Wide awake, and I should have stated in my last post that I was referring to a 50+ cent increase for a gallon of gas in less than three weeks as had very noticable affect on the traffic in MY area.

[dynodonn]

My observations echo ILTB's; when I drive, I know that I'm doing the speed limit when the cars are stacked up half a dozen deep behind me. Seriously, given the way I see motorists speeding along our residential streets it would be a blood bath if the kids weren't inside playing Nintendo.

Actually, there were several boys playing basketball in the street a few doors down when I pulled up the the house on my bike this afternoon. I understand that all residential streets are not that way, and mine is no exception, especially when it is used by motorists bypassing heavy school traffic in the morning and mid afternoon.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

Wide awake, and I should have stated in my last post that I was referring to a 50+ cent increase for a gallon of gas in less than three weeks as had very noticable affect on the traffic in MY area.
Where IS your area?

[dynodonn]

Where IS your area?

Northern Calif. on the Redwood Coast.

[R.O.P.]

A double cheeseburger should cost 50$, not only will this help with weight loss but then fast food workers would be RICH!
Yeah, it's better we spend billions of dollars fighting wars in the middle east for oil (which somehow don't reallyget factored into gas cost) than letting fast food workers make a living wage. We haven't had to invade Brazil to keep our Quarter Pounder supply in tact.:rolleyes:

[MarkS]

Severe taxes on gas at the pump would harm poor and middle class people more than the wealthy, so I don't support it. I think cars should be taxed based on their gas consumption. If a car gets less than 50 mpg, tax it at a rate of $500 or each mpg under 50. If it gets better than 50 mpg, give a tax rebate worth $500 for each mpg over 50.Piddling around the edges won't change habits. Car taxation is by State -- how would you get all 50 states to agree to the same tax structure? How are the poor going to afford the late-model high mpg vehicles?

By definition, truly poor people don't drive cars (unless they also live in them). Since there's a lot more poor and middle class people than there are rich people, the only practical way to make the substantial changes needed to prevent the melting of the poles and future oil wars is to get a lot of poor and middle class people out of their cars and onto public transit and/or alternate transport systems is to raise the prices now rather than have an even more disastrous natural increase later.

Though this may be economically painful in the short term, in the long term it will mean a higher quality of life for poor and middle class as high speed rail replaces bumper-to-bumper traffic and brown skies give way to blue. If we continue on our current path we will certainly face a series of wars of increasing intensity. And who gets drafted for those wars? The poor and middle class. Not the affluent or well-connected ... like a certain President one can think of.

[hotwheels]

Nobody's going anywhere. Change existing zoning laws and let the human environment become more dense. If you build it they will come. Do all of us need a 2400 sq ft miniranch? What is the matter with having a 50 sq. mi. area of 4-6 story mixed use buildings? I live in San Diego and more people would move here if there were a variety of choices for ownership, not just miniranches and mega apartment complexes. The word does seem to be getting out. In my neck of suburbia I can count 6 construction projects that are 3-5 stories and being built on vacant lots within an existing "city" environment.

[MarkS]

Nobody's going anywhere. Change existing zoning laws and let the human environment become more dense. If you build it they will come. Do all of us need a 2400 sq ft miniranch? What is the matter with having a 50 sq. mi. area of 4-6 story mixed use buildings? I live in San Diego and more people would move here if there were a variety of choices for ownership, not just miniranches and mega apartment complexes. The word does seem to be getting out. In my neck of suburbia I can count 6 construction projects that are 3-5 stories and being built on vacant lots within an existing "city" environment.
CA state laws have recently been passed that supercede prior local restrictions on building height, minimum yard size, etc. Its a boon for developers but a disaster for home owners. In SD it will make the traffic and environmental situation even worse since little is being done to encourage the use of mass transit. Increasing population density without accompanying changes in the transit/commuter situation will make things worse for all commuters -- especially bikers. I bet there's clauses that prevent these same changes from impacting the expensive housing that lines the North I5 corridor.

[huerro]

Gas prices should reflect the cost of gas. The United States spends billions upon billions of dollars securing our pertolem supply through military, diplomatic efforts, and foreign aid. Instead of having petroleum users pay for all that oil protection, we are running up massive debts.

Would our gas taxes go up? Absolutely. However other taxes (or debt) would go down, and the people who use gas (in private vehicles or in products and services) would pay for it. As it is now, a good portion of our "gas tax" is in no way linked to our useage.

[Roody]

Piddling around the edges won't change habits. Car taxation is by State -- how would you get all 50 states to agree to the same tax structure? How are the poor going to afford the late-model high mpg vehicles?
To start with, And of course gas guzzler taxes should be federal, not state.

A tax of $500 per mpg< 50 is not piddling. The tax on a SUV that gets 20 mpg would be $15,000. As I mentioned, I think there should be a tax rebate for cars with mpg > 50. this would be an incentive for auto makers to develop nad build such cars. A mini car that gets 60 mpg would be discounted by $5000. that's how the poor would afford them. If you tax the hell out of gas, middle class people will dump their gas guzzlers, flooding the used car market and lowering prices on used gas guzzlers. Poor people won't be able to afford economical cars, so they'll buy the cheap used gas guzzlers. They won't be able to afford much gas, so they son't be able to get to work. The wealthy will buy economical cars, increasing demand and prices for them.


By definition, truly poor people don't drive cars (unless they also live in them). Since there's a lot more poor and middle class people than there are rich people, the only practical way to make the substantial changes needed to prevent the melting of the poles and future oil wars is to get a lot of poor and middle class people out of their cars and onto public transit and/or alternate transport systems is to raise the prices now rather than have an even more disastrous natural increase later.

I'm not sure what country you live in. Here in the US, most poor people do own cars. I know a woman who's a single mother on disability. She owns a mini-van, even though it costs her almost half of her income. Easy to say the poor should ride buses, but the sad truth is that in many communities in this country, bus service is inadequate or even non-existant. That's especially true in many low-income areas.

All in all, it's a lot fairer--and less disruptive for the economy--to tax cars according to their gas usage, than it is to to tax the fuel itself. If the taxes are high enough, people will purchas more economical vehicles. And I hope that some of the revenues from a gas guzzle tax would be used to improve public transit and the infrastructure for bikes and peds.

[hotwheels]

Good Morning Mark S.,
Which came first the density or the transportation network? The powers that be have funded the Sprinter which runs along the 78. My reaction is that the money would be better spent south of the 8 where population density is greater and demand already exists, or a rail from Temecula to San Diego on the 15. Perhaps the Sprinter will be a complete success with full ridership and competent financing. No doubt with increased choices for aspiring owners, transport choices will have to evolve.

[MarkS]

A tax of $500 per mpg< 50 is not piddling.
Basically your plan would maintain our disturbed, auto-centric world. If you can't get the poor out of their cars, who will you get out? Its a catch 22: The poor need their automobiles because there is no decent
transit service, but there is no decent transit service because the ridership is too low. Once you start getting above 15% ridership the equation changes. Suddenly there is political pressure to have regular, reliable service with reasonably clean busses or light rail.

Back to the original premise. You can point to some individual who absolutely needs her vehicle and can't move, carpool, find some other transportation, etc. but when you have the roads filled with millions of "poor" people who own vehicles that require expensive fuel, maintenance, lodging, and registration there is a disconnect in the definition of poor. Cars are expensive. When you consider the millions of peole on the road today, you can't help but think that at least 10% of them would be car-pooling if the price of gas was just a couple bucks more expensive.

Complicated plans will get the life battered out of them by lobbying auto companies. Even if it passed the way you worded it the law would only impact *new* car sales -- leaving 90% of drivers untouched.

Scientists tell us that we are decade away from losing the poles*. And we appear 5 years away from a war with Iran. The fallout of these dramatic changes will fall most heavily on the poor. Real solutions (like taxing fuel) are going to be painful at first. But not as painful as the consequences if we fail to take serious, immediate actions. Piddling around with new car prices won't make the substantial changes that are require now.

*Note: We'll probably still have the poles in 10 years, but it will be impossible to reverse their loss in the following 50-100 years

[MarkS]

Good Morning Mark S.,
Which came first the density or the transportation network? The powers that be have funded the Sprinter which runs along the 78. My reaction is that the money would be better spent south of the 8 where population density is greater and demand already exists, or a rail from Temecula to San Diego on the 15. Perhaps the Sprinter will be a complete success with full ridership and competent financing. No doubt with increased choices for aspiring owners, transport choices will have to evolve.What would they spend it on? They've already got the trolley lines. High density means that its harder to install more public transit without interrupting businesses and residential areas.

Turning entire swaths of formerly residential areas into apartment ghettos (as the new laws are designed to do) will worsen the traffic and environmental situation in those areas. Nobody is going to build new and improved public transit into poorly funded, low-income areas. In the end, it won't even reduce housing costs (the justification for the new laws) for locals because more people from other parts of the country will move in to take up the new accomodations. Has increasing density anywhere in the world actually improved conditions?

The problem in San Diego is that all the leaders have an auto-centric vision of the future, with public transit viewed as bottom-of-the-barrel transportation for the impoverished and enfeebled -- not part of a cleaner, brighter future.

[hotwheels]

Good Morning Mark S.,Has increasing density anywhere in the world actually improved conditions?

I agree with what you're saying, but I haven't prescribed building apartment ghettos. I don't have to, they already exist in plenty. Western Europe has certainly benefited from density. They have most walkable an beautiful cities on earth. I personally love New York and Chicago. I should be able to have other choices besides megalopolis and megasprawl.

Turning entire swaths of formerly residential areas into apartment ghettos (as the new laws are designed to do) will worsen the traffic and environmental situation in those areas. Nobody is going to build new and improved public transit into poorly funded, low-income areas. Could you give some references to the laws and what you feel they're designed to do. Until this morning I hadn't heard of this legislation. I'm proposing options for people like myself who want to own a condo/ apartment/ townhouse and raise their family in a community with amenities such as walkability, bikeability and good public transportation. Why that has to mean "poorly funded low income," I'm not sure. The condos going up in my area start at $399,000. How can increasing density on existing vacant lots destroy the environment any more than unbridled suburbia has? Do you mean destroy the suburban environment?

[oldguy52]

I have long contended that the price of gas needed to be adjusted upward by taxing the crap out of it. Then use the taxes to redevelop mass transit and subsidize rail. And while they are at it, raise the cost and standards for getting a drivers license, might take some of the brain dead idiots off the roads. Also tax vehicles more reasonably on their use patterns. Heavy trucks destroy the roadways but only pay a small fraction of the costs.

Aaron:)

You are obviously an expert on who pays rosd use taxes. Perhaps you could give us a course on who pays road taxes and who doesn't and how much. I've got a hunch that sticking your head up and looking around a little bit might be an awakening for you.

You better understand something. When the trucks in this country stop rolling, it'll take about a week for EVERY one of us in this country to be literally starving to death. Another thing you might want to consider is, the end user is going to pay your extra little taxes everytime they go to the grocery store.

I'm all for more sensible use of automobiles, and I applaud those of you who chose not to use one, but we all might want to think about how we get fed before we pick on the trucking industry too much.

If you're eating something and you didn't pick it out of the garden in your back yard, it probably came to you on a truck. Even if you did pick it out of your own garden, a truck probably brought you the seed.

[Roody]

You are obviously an expert on who pays rosd use taxes. Perhaps you could give us a course on who pays road taxes and who doesn't and how much. I've got a hunch that sticking your head up and looking around a little bit might be an awakening for you.

You better understand something. When the trucks in this country stop rolling, it'll take about a week for EVERY one of us in this country to be literally starving to death. Another thing you might want to consider is, the end user is going to pay your extra little taxes everytime they go to the grocery store.

I'm all for more sensible use of automobiles, and I applaud those of you who chose not to use one, but we all might want to think about how we get fed before we pick on the trucking industry too much.

If you're eating something and you didn't pick it out of the garden in your back yard, it probably came to you on a truck. Even if you did pick it out of your own garden, a truck probably brought you the seed.
Well you're talking about how things really are, and this thread was more about how things should be. Diesel trucks are not the most efficient way to haul cargo, or the cleanest way. Trains would be a better immediate choice, and we need to develop alternative cargo transit as soon as possible. Buying more locally produced products is another way to go, in order to encourage decentralized industry and agriculture.

You bring up a critical point. Our entire way of life is subsidized by cheap oil. In order to eat cheap food, for example, we are deferring payment on the pollution bill, caused by using diesel fuel for cheap transport. Our children and grandchildren will have to pay these costs, and the "interest" penalties will be very high. We go to war in order to secure supplies of cheap oil, so part of the actual price of California lettuce is transferred to the defense budget. Again, somebody is paying the real price, and it isn't the salad eaters. If eney prices reflected the true costs, I guarantee that we would quickly find ways to conserve and develop cheaper alternatives.

[wahoonc]

You are obviously an expert on who pays rosd use taxes. Perhaps you could give us a course on who pays road taxes and who doesn't and how much. I've got a hunch that sticking your head up and looking around a little bit might be an awakening for you.
A 60-80k# truck causes as much damage in one pass over a given piece of roadway as 5,000 cars, does that truck pay as much road tax as 5000 drivers? I doubt it! We all pay taxes for the building and upkeep of roads it is called property taxes, tolls, excise taxes, fuel taxes, sales taxes and special bond projects...did I leave any out? And BTW did you see where they want to tax economy cars at a higher rate? It seems that by people driving less and using higher efficiency cars the local governments were losing tax revenue, now they want to base tax on annual mileage rather than gallons of fuel.

You better understand something. When the trucks in this country stop rolling, it'll take about a week for EVERY one of us in this country to be literally starving to death. Another thing you might want to consider is, the end user is going to pay your extra little taxes everytime they go to the grocery store.
I won't be starving, I buy as much of my food that was raised as close to home as possible, I do grow my own vegetables, raise my own chickens and can provide my own goats milk. I realize I am in the minority. But everybody is already subsiding the roadway infrastructure whether they utilize it or not. Yes I may have to do without many things, but is the destruction of OUR environment worth a cheap head of lettuce or 52 different kinds of barbeque sauce? Food prices are at historical lows compared to only 75 years ago. But it has been subsidized by cheap fuel. Small farmers are disappearing at an alarming rate, because they can't compete with the factory farms that truck stuff across the country. Do you think the current crop of food born illnesses would have been as wide spread and hard to track down if we were still buying from our local farmers...I think not.

I'm all for more sensible use of automobiles, and I applaud those of you who chose not to use one, but we all might want to think about how we get fed before we pick on the trucking industry too much. I don't think anybody was picking on the trucking industry in particular we were talking about raising gas taxes over all. Freight can be moved a helluva lot more efficiently that packing it in a truck and driving it across country.

If you're eating something and you didn't pick it out of the garden in your back yard, it probably came to you on a truck. Even if you did pick it out of your own garden, a truck probably brought you the seed. The seeds may have come by truck, but I promise you a lot more seed is going to fit on a truck than the fully grown product.

Aaron:)

[gerv]

Gas prices should reflect the cost of gas. The United States spends billions upon billions of dollars securing our pertolem supply through military, diplomatic efforts, and foreign aid. Instead of having petroleum users pay for all that oil protection, we are running up massive debts.

Would our gas taxes go up? Absolutely. However other taxes (or debt) would go down, and the people who use gas (in private vehicles or in products and services) would pay for it. As it is now, a good portion of our "gas tax" is in no way linked to our useage.

Good point, but I don't think you have many friends in Washington. If the price of gasoline factored in these costs, we might see a lot more bicycles on our morning commutes. But our current leadership sees higher gas prices with great trepidation, probably because they and their funders would be the biggest losers.

[pedalpedal]

I've read some books on the topic that I think some of you would find interesting.

Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream by Andres Duany

Asphalt Nation: How the Automobile Took Over America and How We Can Take It Back by Jane Holtz Kay

America's car based culture is just killing us. We are prisoners of our own desire for convenience. we need to promote smart development, create communites that don't require a car trip for every need. we need to buy locally.

I grew up on a vegetable farm which my parents still operate. My dad is on the farmland preservation board for our county as well as the planning board for the township that is threatened by urban sprawl. I have been living car free for two years in philadelphia. I've seen alot of aspects of this debate. There's a large list of improvements that need to be made.

read those books. good stuff.

[MarkS]

The seeds may have come by truck, but I promise you a lot more seed is going to fit on a truck than the fully grown product.
++ Lots of good points.

We may need trucks, but we don't need lone indivduals driving around in 6000 pound urban assault vehicles. If we want to continue getting things by truck, then we need to start conserving now so that there will be fuel left to run them profitably. I notice that although there is some buzz about hybrid and electric cars, no one is talking about alternatives to heavy freight hauling trucks.

One thing that would help is to require a truck driver's license to operate any vehicle over 4000 pounds or 220 horsepower.

[wahoonc]

One thing that would help is to require a truck driver's license to operate any vehicle over 4000 pounds or 220 horsepower.

Requiring a DRIVER'S LICENSE to operate any motor vehicle would be a big plus, face it what we have in this country is little more than a form of ID. People take a short course in driving, then go and take a fairly simple written test and bingo they are a driver. IIRC in Europe the standard is much higher, you have to prove you understand the way a car operates, as well as prove you can actually operate one correctly. To include basic knowledge of the way it operates and why, and be able to change a tire, etc. I also think retesting should be required periodically, especially if you have multiple moving violations. The last driving test I took was over 30 years ago, last written test 24 years ago....

Aaron:)

[ranger39000]

wait a sec mrbike! R u not American?

[mwrobe1]

The only problem with the price of gas going up is....

eventually the price of pie will go up too.

We can't have that. :D