Deval Patrick is right that a gas tax would be a good way to raise additional revenue against budget shortfalls. Demand is pretty strong, but even so, a reduction in demand for gasoline has other positive public policy outcomes. A reduction in pollution is the biggest.
But, not to worry all you frothing anti-tax teabaggers: He doesn't have the votes, not even close, at least not in the House. It takes 81. Fifty would be a miracle.
Oregon and, allegedly, Congress and other states are considering a tax on miles driven. Democrats are interested. This is dumber than a bag of door knobs.
"It doesn't seem fair," said Paul Niedergang of Portland, that a hybrid would be taxed as much as his Dodge pickup. "I just think the gas tax needs to be updated."The tax is not going to be easier to sell to taxpayers just because it's totally insanely 70 IQ stupid.
How can CNN ignore price gouging as a source of price spikes! It's almost as if they're willfully closing their eyes. Instead, it's us nutty consumers who are to blame.
At least blood 'n' guts McCain is consistent on the foolish gas tax holiday. It's something he hasn't flip-flopped on lately, which is something of a miracle. But even this is a transparent pander to people who can't think of a more intelligent way to vote themselves $25.
It's hard to imagine how McCain ever got a reputation for straight talk.
For $300, Duhbya bought assent from the Reagan Democrats for his ridiculously plutocratic 2001 tax cuts. Now, John McCain and Hillary Clinton are trying the same stupid, pandering sort of back-handed insult at a $30 price point.
Insult? Isn't Obama the elitist? No, Clinton and McCain are insulting the intelligence of the voters. Of course, sad truth be told, the voters in the past have deserved this insult. They haven't been able to tell the difference between real populism and the fake kind that Republicans - and now Hillary - are so keen on.
Here's a hint:
When someone says something like this that makes you go "huh?", bullshit is probably one of the top ingredients. My interpretation: "I'm not going to listen to smart people. I'm too smart to do that." Sheesh, smart people are often wrong even in consensus. So make an argument why they're wrong. But no. Then the second paragraph opposes her point if taken literally. It looks like a Freudian slip."I'm not going to put my lot in with economists, because I know if we did it right . . . it would be implemented effectively," said Clinton, who was asked during an hourlong television appearance to name a credible economist who backed her plan to lift the 18.5-cent federal tax on gasoline for the summer.
In a barely veiled attack on Obama, Clinton added, "We've got to get out of this mind-set where somehow elite opinion is always on the side of doing things that really disadvantage the vast majority of Americans."
The New York Times Business section tells us that the refiners are trying so darn hard to keep up with demand for gasoline that they're breaking their plants, which limits supply and drives up prices. Reporter Jad Mouawad manages not to quote one single skeptic about the oil industry's claims. The closest he gets is anonymous:
Some critics of the industry have theorized on Internet blogs that the squeeze on gasoline and other refined products points to a deliberate effort among oil companies to bolster profits by keeping supplies tight. But experts point out that the companies have little incentive right now to hold back on fuel supplies.The common assumption of business writers everywhere is that the myth of the invisible hand keeps industries from manipulating prices. No one remembers the scandalous conspiratorial theft by deregulated electricity producers in California (obligatory disclaimer: alleged). That was yet another reason that Enron was a terrible rapacious company that demanded, but didn't get, rational regulation.
