"Rising gasoline prices? Terrific!" ..opinion piece from today's SFChron.

[pinto]

Rising gasoline prices? Terrific! Let's raise them some more

- Dave Richards
Sunday, August 14, 2005

OK, I realize everyone is worried about rising oil prices, and the painful news you get at the gas pump every time you fill up that 24-gallon behemoth you use to go shopping and pick up your kids. Heck, even filling up your Prius these days can be a harrowing experience.

But let's stop for a moment amid our fear and embrace it. Let's stand still and wonder how we can turn this oil-mad conundrum on its ear and use it to our benefit.

What if we, as Californians, put a huge tax on gasoline, and the federal government followed suit, and so did all the other states? I mean a significant tax, say $6 or $7 a gallon. Make gasoline cost $10 a gallon at the pump. Ouch. Suddenly that SUV costs 240 bucks to fill up. Scary to think about, and what a horrible thing that would be, right?

<snip>

But not being a macro-economist, I am more interested in the cultural and anthropological changes such a tax would bring to our lives. With the price of gas skyrocketing like that, most people will be forced to take public transportation: light rail, BART, trains and buses. Granted, in the early moments of such a tax, the price of gas would cause some hearts to flutter in the city's maintenance yards where they fill the buses up. Obviously there would need to be money flowing from the state to the cities to subsidize that effort, but with increased ridership -- not a slight increase, but a huge increase -- bus and train revenues would also skyrocket, leading to increased services, more buses and trains, and improved routes and schedules. With better security and increased police patrols, along with better maintenance and lighting at the stations, we end up with more jobs and better public-transit systems.

<more>

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/08/14/EDGSHDTTGG1.DTL&type=printable

[geomon666]

1. Faulty logic

Yeah you'll get more people on buses and trains, but the prices of those services will soar also. Plus, imagine the tremendous food shortage as truckers lose their jobs by the handful and less fishing ships leave the docks. It would be a horrendous nightmare.

[pinto]

7. Yeah, he overlooks the ripple effect gas pricing has across the economy.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

2. "Dave Richards owns a small high-tech business and lives in San Francisco"

Hard to tell if the guy is trying to be a prick or just simply believes that he's written a very witty opinion piece.

I'm gonna roll the dice and go with "prick."

I also doubt that he's walking to the corner store. Just my gut feeling, I could be wrong.

[DBoon]

3. Maybe a hefty gas tax phased in over 20 years

as mass transit is built up, housing patterns change, etc.

Most people have NO mass transit option to get to work. It's the suburb-to-suburb commute.

As is, this would just shut our economy down.

[etherealtruth]

4. I'm with you, except ...

... in order for this to work it should have been begun in the 1970's. We knew oil supplies were finite, we knew human population was increasing exponentially ...

Our response ...

Was to engineer and purchase SUV's and rapidly increase urban sprawl.

I truly fear that this is a death knoll for the American middle class.

[Skink]

5. Just think once Toyota has had time to build a few million Hybrids

everybody else will have to pay more so the oil companies can maintain their profits.

[opihimoimoi]

10. A Death Knoll for much of Humanity...sad ..because of a few greedy selfish

assholes, all of us will suffer.

Its always a few assholes who fuck things up for the rest of us...

History will confirm this...over and over...and over... we are such fools to allow fools to rule us with asshole plans to fulfiull their greed and ambitions..

Such is Bush...he leads America to ruin...maybe not quickly...but over time, the realization of what we did with our remaining fuel...that could have prepared us better to prolong Famine/War/Misery...was spent foolishly....Bush is not known to promote efficency/conservation...instead, he foolishly expidites the waste with Fatal Rationalization...

Auwe Auwe, our land is possessed by LOLOs...now we see a lolo end to good times, and to embrace bad times

[etherealtruth]

11. Touche` n/t

[Boomer]

6. Works for urban yuppies, maybe

But it would be catastrophic for those of us who do not have any public transportation.

There are no buses, subways or light rail systems where I live in rural West Virginia. And the jobs are ALL at least 30 miles away, with 60 or 90 mile commutes not being uncommon for some folks because it's only by living this far into the hinterlands that they can find affordable housing.

So, for families who are barely getting by -- if they made more money, they could afford to live closer to their jobs -- even a dollar or two rise for a gallon of gas is catastrophic. The gas will eat up all their salary, cutting into budgets for food, medical care and clothing.

[pinto]

8. Real good point. The guy is stating an oft repeated, urban, middle class

take on gas pricing as an environmental tool. Thanks for your take.

[Boomer]

12. I understand his point

and even agree with the basic concept that a society organized around mass transportation and local community resources would be a big improvement.

Problem is that you can't create that kind of infrastructure overnight in rural areas, where the local resources have been driven out of business by megaWalmarts and there isn't enough local employment to support the entire town's population. And there definitely isn't enough tax base to fund expensive public transport. We can barely keep the schools and the hospital open as it is.

Sure, I would LOVE to have a job here in town, which means I could probably walk there since I live very close to our business district (such as it is). Or to walk to the local pharmacy and shop at the local grocery store -- if we had them. Most of them went out of business years ago, or moved to areas less easily accessible by foot.

I still support my local hardware store (median age of employees is about 65), but the owner is finally retiring and looking for a new buyer. Who knows whether it will still be around a year from now. Then, of course, Loew's is the only alternative. And, you guessed it, you can only get there by car.

[DavidDvorkin]

9. I drive 37 miles each way to work

Before I got this (very good) job, I was unemployed. The previous job, the distance was about the same. Before that, I was unemployed. In both cases, there was no public-transportation alternative. I don't drive an SUV.

He's a prick.

[Skittles]

13. I have to agree with DavidD

as much as I would like to see mass transit tourted, the fact is right now it simply don't exist for large portions of the US population. This writer clearly has not done much research or he would understand this.

[Fovea]

14. Click click

choose one future, one is about what we can afford.

While it may be argued that a combination of these solutions is ideal, we may not be able to afford the ideal after 8 years of living the Grover Norquist wet dream that is the ** administration.

1. We do nothing about the current paradigm and just require crushing expenditures in gas as we slowly bear the cost of converting to cars with better gas milage. Eventually the cost rises to the point where coal gasification and bitumen catalizing are economically viable.

The down stream effects: Ever greater dependency on foreign energy suppliers, today Saudi Arabia, tommorow, Canada. The destruction of the middle class, and little no chance of resurrecting an industrial base.
Instead, we cultivate a world empire dedicated to a secure oil supply at the cost of PermaWar.


2. We encourage the extensive development of mass transit, and ween ourselves away from the personal automobile.

the downstream effects: We require more human effort in the final mile of the daily commute, more use of electric neighborhood vehicles, communities have to be retrofitted with rail right of way, and much of our highway system will atrophy.

3. We move work out to the suburbs as much as possible.

the downstream effects: There is still a problem with rising fixed transportation costs of raw materials and finished goods over the road. Petrochemicals are still going to be expensive, because 70% of our goods are already shipped OTR. The suburbs and bedroom communities are not designed to handle having production facilities, nor is population density, or concentration of skilled employees currently adequate for all activities.

4. We re-urbanize, and plow the suburbs under for the nearby agricultural areas the cities will require in an era of transportation cost constraints.

the downstream effects: widespread economic dislocation, greater social strife as the NIMBY suburbanites are packed densely in with Brown and Yellow people.

[rfkrfk]

15. the ripple effect skews the economy, in Europe, for example...

if people in Europe could buy sugar at
'world sugar price', they could easily make fuel alcohol.
for much cheaper than they pay for gasoline.

European reaction to this dilemma,
is the typical 'screw the poor' kneejerk European response,
--> redicolous agricultural subsidies for sugar farmers -->
consumers pay triple the price, because imports ar restricted.

[Fovea]

16. Actually, Europe is dumping sugar on the world market

so low as to inhibit sugar production in poorer producers.

Agricultural subsidies also prevent farmers in developed countries from haveing to compete directly with 3rd world farmers who are often little more than subsisting. So if you are against farmers living like serfs, suggest a better solution.

Far from 'screwing the poor' Europe has seen the walmartization of America, and does not think it a smart idea. Would that we had that degree of wisdom. We might have universal healthcare, instead of a race to the bottom versus Mexico.