Plan B Forum

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-much ... ear-2011-6

If "good"= being less vulnerable to foreign manipulation then high gas prices are good. Higher gas prices help maintain US freedom and autonomy.

If "good"= having a better balance of payments then higher gas prices are good.

If "good"= less pollution then high gas prices are good.

If "good"= driving innovation to make transportation more efficient then high gas prices are good.

These are some of the reasons that Norway and Scotland with huge oil surpluses have ... higher gas prices.

There is some short-term pain when prices rise but people's behavior adjusts, they buy fewer 'dopemobiles'; 5,000-6,000lb SUVs and more 2,700 - 3,000lb vehicles so the pain goes away. But the benefits of the change in behavior remain.



yrs,
rubato

Norway and Scotland do not have higher gas prices; they have higher taxes on gasoline, which taxes are used for a variety of purposes including funding public transportation systems. Yes, it does increase the price consumers pay at the pump, but the increase is due to the taxes, not the price of the gasoline.

In country like the US which is many times the size of either of those countries, and which does not have any viable public transport systems except in big cities, the pain of such taxes would not be short term; it would be extended and fall primarily on the poorer Americans who cannot afford to buy the newer fuel efficient cars and drive bigger, more affordable, used cars. The buyers of the big luxury SUVs are in a better position to absorb any increases in price and will continue to drive what they want.

Of course, because petroleum products are also used to power the trucks that deliver the vast majority of products throughout the country, the poor are also affected by higher food and necessity prices due to increased delivery costs.

Let's get some investment in public transportation and rail delivery first, and then talk about raising gas taxes for the benefits you described. Anything less will just drag the poor and working class down further, while having little effect on the habits of the more affluent.

More proof needed that rubato DESPISES the poor and working class of the United States?

If "good"= having a better balance of payments then higher gas prices are good.

What do you mean by this?
Higher gas prices will fluctuate just as middle and lower gas prices do. Are you talking about a fluctuating tax that keeps prices at a certain level? I've never seen that scheme utilized.

rube thinks that the U.S. is a net exporter of oil.

Apparently.

And leaded rice.

No, we import leaded rice.

Those rice burning cars are the worst polluters.

Big RR wrote:Norway and Scotland do not have higher gas prices; they have higher taxes on gasoline, which taxes are used for a variety of purposes including funding public transportation systems. Yes, it does increase the price consumers pay at the pump, but the increase is due to the taxes, not the price of the gasoline.

... "

Energy prices are the prices paid by the consumer of energy. This is the price which conditions the consumers choices about how much energy to consume and in what form. It makes no difference if some fraction is paid to the government or if that same fraction is paid in higher profits to the producer. Their choices about what car to buy and how they will use it depend on how much they are paying per gallon no matter if more or less is in the form of tax.

Norway, Scotland, and Canada are all oil exporters and all of them use taxes to increase the cost of energy because in the intermediate and long term it is more beneficial to the citizens of Canada overall.

China and India both sell electricity too cheaply* with catastrophic results in both cases. In China it leads to higher pollution from burning ever-more coal and in India it has led to the rapid exhaustion of aquifers because farmers pump and use water wastefully.

yrs,
rubato

*By using price caps.

dales wrote:More proof needed that rubato DESPISES the poor and working class of the United States?

Someone who gives them a dollar a day more to spend and then kills their children with higher levels of pollution despises poor people more.


yrs,
rubato

And to take a different example ... housing has been TOO CHEAP in Detroit for 50 years which has driven the city into perpetual decline. Housing is worth so little that people abandon homes rather than pay the property tax on them and only a mug would waste money maintaining their homes when they will never be able to sell them and recoup the investment. Making something too cheap appears to hurt more than help people in Detroit, even poor people.

yrs,
rubato

again rubato doubles down on a stupid statement.

You are amazingly stupid.

Use Zillow to search home prices in Detroit you complete ignorant jackass.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4399- ... 4410_zpid/



yrs,
rubato

Or anything else:

http://www.trulia.com/MI/Detroit/

No one is paying for a bathroom remodel, a new roof, or new plumbing in a house selling for < $30,000


yrs,
rubato

How the fuck do you think this happened?




http://www.andrewwillner.com/wordpress/ ... etroit.jpg


A continual population decline led to a continual housing surplus which led to depressed housing prices which led to homes not being maintained which led to more slums and which led to more population decline which led to more surplus housing &c.





yrs,
rubato

that started almost 20 years after you claim it started moron.

The population peaked in the 1950s and the decline started then. And that is when I said it started.



yrs,
rubato

population decline does not equal housing surplus especially when you're leveling houses to make room for three interstates and associated feeders/interchanges.

rubato wrote:And to take a different example ... housing has been TOO CHEAP in Detroit for 50 years which has driven the city into perpetual decline. Housing is worth so little that people abandon homes rather than pay the property tax on them and only a mug would waste money maintaining their homes when they will never be able to sell them and recoup the investment. Making something too cheap appears to hurt more than help people in Detroit, even poor people.

yrs,
rubato

rubato wrote:The population peaked in the 1950s and the decline started then. And that is when I said it started.



yrs,
rubato

1963 =/= 1950