350htrr

Well I disagree, I'm sure lot's of people in the world throughout time had a great life without "energy"... Controlling energy certainly is part of controlling people/nations today, but education, or lack of... is the prime reason people are poor throughout the world... I suspect poor people in N America would still be poor ten years from now, even if the price of oil drops to $20 per barrel and stays there for the next 10 years to 20 years... JMO

EDIT; Now there's a different kind of education needed here as compared to a third world country versus first world, but education it is...

Dave Cutter

Maybe you're right. Even most of early mans food gathering is.... even if only human-energy... energy related. Early man learned to capitalize on energy with inventions like teamwork, nets, and sail powered boats. And learned to harness animals for their power. So you could say it was creativity, invention, or "education" combined with available natural resources that "enriched" early man.

But the cost of an apple (or any food product) today... is dependent on the cost of fuel... not the cost of seeds. Getting that apple from orchard to the market down the street... or in Japan (they love American apples there) can amount to much more of the cost than the apple itself. And energy using refrigeration preservers many of those apples too.

350htrr

Yes, I agree, it's "energy" that keeps the wheels turning for a country, the lower middle class, the middle class, the upper middle class, and the rich... But the poor, not so much, I suspect most poor people's lives will not change one iota whether oil is at $100+ or $20- for a barrel of oil... JMO

Roody

You might be right about many countries. In the US, most people own cars, regardless of income levels. For most poor people, car expenses--especially fuel__are proportionately greater expenses.

In my state, the legislature just voted to discontinue the per-gallon gasoline tax. They will replace it with a wholesale fuel tax that will be passed along to consumers. They also increased the state sales tax from 6% to 7% on all goods, not just gas. The additional 1% sales tax revenues will be used exclusively for highway maintenance. Since the sales tax is regressive, poor people will be paying a larger share for road expenses. Carfree people will also be paying a bigger share for road maintenance.

For better or worse, many politicians will probably use cheap gas as an opportunity to raise revenue for highway maintenance.

I-Like-To-Bike

A bigger share than whom?

Do you really believe that car-free people do not derive benefits from an adequately maintained road network? Do they all live on nuts and berries that they pick up around their tree house, receive no services or goods that use the road network?

Roody

Carfree people will pay a bigger share than they themselves now pay.

Of course I realize that carfree people also benefit from the roads, so your snarky rudeness is (as usual) unnecessary and misplaced.

I don't mind paying more for good roads. All of society benefits from a good transportation system, and that doesn't come cheap. Roads are a sensible investment in the local and state economies.

I do want as much as five percent of highway funds to pay for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Maybe that's asking for too much?