Auto Execs Urge Government to Tax Fuel up to $8/Gallon to Increase Fuel Efficiency

Panameno718

Potential Star
Registered
Should the government tax gas up to as much as $8/gallon? A growing number of auto executives think so and are urging government action. (Source: The Energy Collective)CEO at leading parts supplier: "Energy independence...ultimately means that fuel has to be more expensive"

It's no secret that when gas prices dropped early in the year and with the recession in full swing, hybrid sales saw their first drop in years. Faced with tough new fuel economy restrictions, auto executives had come up with all sorts of unusual suggestions -- such as cutting crash testing -- but now had to puzzle over a new dilemma; what if consumers don't want the higher-priced electric vehicles that they plan to start flooding the market with in less that a year?

At a special Reuters summit in Detroit, numerous auto industry executives are cited as suggesting that the government raise taxes on gasoline substantially to spur the adoption of fuel efficient vehicles. States Tim Leuliette, chief executive of privately held parts supplier Dura Automotive, "In the United States, we're afraid to touch the fuel price. We've got to continue to raise taxes in the United States so that, by the end of the next decade, gas is about $8 a gallon in today's terms."

He adds, "What you have to do is do it in a manner that is slow enough and predictable enough that vehicle selection and choices by people over the cycle can be made in a logical way."

Eight dollars-per-gallon gas? The idea certainly sounds absurd. However, the idea of the government pouring over $100B USD into the auto industry and partially nationalizing GM and Chrysler might have sounded ridiculous a decade ago too.

Mike Jackson, chief executive of AutoNation Inc., offered similar sentiments, complaining, "The U.S. allows the price of gasoline to go back and forth across this line where the consumers don't care about fuel efficiency and where consumers do care about fuel efficiency."

He suggests a near term fix of taxing gas to around $4 or $5 a gallon to help vehicles like GM's 2011 Chevy Volt EV grab marketshare. Jerry York, a former GM board member and an adviser to billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian, concurred. He states, "Unless gas is $3.50 or $4 a gallon, consumers are not going to want to buy those cars."

Hearing such pleas for government intervention and taxation certainly seems a strange one coming from the business sector, which normally argues and lobbies for minimal government involvement. However, a growing number of industry executives feel that a $25B USD advanced technologies loan program and the expensive cash-for-clunkers program just aren't doing enough to boost the sales of clean autos. The solution, they argue, is for the government to hit consumers where it hurts -- in the wallet.

Some are suggesting tax rebates at the end of the year for customers with hybrids and a food-stamp-like subsidy for poor citizens. But at the end of the day the general message is the same; tax fuel. Concludes Dura's Leuliette, "Energy independence in this country ultimately means that fuel has to be more expensive."


http://www.dailytech.com/Auto+Execs...+to+Increase+Fuel+Efficiency/article16727.htm
 
Re: Auto Execs Urge Government to Tax Fuel up to $8/Gallon to Increase Fuel Efficienc

It never ends.

Whenever BIG business has to compete, they run to the government for protection.

Capitalism is a sham.
 
Re: Auto Execs Urge Government to Tax Fuel up to $8/Gallon to Increase Fuel Efficienc

It never ends.

Whenever BIG business has to compete, they run to the government for protection.

Capitalism is a sham.

c'mon man! The statements made in this article are rooted in facism. Think about it: corporations colluding with govt with the purpose of stifling the people and offering a 'false' choice. In a free market, companies wouldn't need the help of the govt because the product would be accepted or rejected based on consumer opinion.

How much more obvious does it have to be?
 
Re: Auto Execs Urge Government to Tax Fuel up to $8/Gallon to Increase Fuel Efficienc

The majority of Americans do not understand the difference between facism and capitalism :confused:.
c'mon man! The statements made in this article are rooted in facism. Think about it: corporations colluding with govt with the purpose of stifling the people and offering a 'false' choice. In a free market, companies wouldn't need the help of the govt because the product would be accepted or rejected based on consumer opinion.

How much more obvious does it have to be?
 
Re: Auto Execs Urge Government to Tax Fuel up to $8/Gallon to Increase Fuel Efficienc

c'mon man! The statements made in this article are rooted in facism. Think about it: corporations colluding with govt with the purpose of stifling the people and offering a 'false' choice. In a free market, companies wouldn't need the help of the govt because the product would be accepted or rejected based on consumer opinion.

How much more obvious does it have to be?

Fascism, as I see it, is when the GOVERNMENT tells CORPORATIONS what to do (produce, hire, invest). That is not happening here.

In this case, the CORPORATIONS tell the GOVERNMENT what to do (tax, regulate, control).

Hitler and Mussolini told BIG BUSINESS what to do. In exchange, Der Fuhrer and Il Duce protected BIG BUSINESS.

In the case of the United States, BIG BUSINESS tells Obama and Congress what to do. In exchange, they get campaign contributions and get to stay in power.

The United States flips the fascist relationship, in my view. It has been that way since the country was founded.

You can't have a strong central government and capitalism. They are incompatible.
 
Re: Auto Execs Urge Government to Tax Fuel up to $8/Gallon to Increase Fuel Efficienc

Fascism, as I see it, is when the GOVERNMENT tells CORPORATIONS what to do (produce, hire, invest). That is not happening here.

In this case, the CORPORATIONS tell the GOVERNMENT what to do (tax, regulate, control).

Hitler and Mussolini told BIG BUSINESS what to do. In exchange, Der Fuhrer and Il Duce protected BIG BUSINESS.

In the case of the United States, BIG BUSINESS tells Obama and Congress what to do. In exchange, they get campaign contributions and get to stay in power.

The United States flips the fascist relationship, in my view. It has been that way since the country was founded.

You can't have a strong central government and capitalism. They are incompatible.

Well....I'd agree but I'd make the following observation: whether govt instucts corps or corps instruct govts, the outcome is still the same! The 'people' are given an inferior product which couldn't survive in a capitalistic environment. In this case, if the cars s*ck, let the companies fail, another business-model will emerge! Failure is necessary for continuous improvement.

What we've seen the last couple of years is govt intervention to not allow failure to occur (this isn't capitalism). Hence, we get the term; TOO BIG TO FAIL
 
Re: Auto Execs Urge Government to Tax Fuel up to $8/Gallon to Increase Fuel Efficienc

Well....I'd agree but I'd make the following observation: whether govt instucts corps or corps instruct govts, the outcome is still the same! The 'people' are given an inferior product which couldn't survive in a capitalistic environment. In this case, if the cars s*ck, let the companies fail, another business-model will emerge! Failure is necessary for continuous improvement.

You do not want a fascist society. There is a big difference between who gives the orders.

In fascist societies, the government tells BIG BUSINESS how much steel they get, or wood, or plastic, or silicon.

Government engages in massive price fixing. There is a price for bread, for milk, for cars, for computers, for fuel.

On the flip side, in a capitalist society like the United States (since the government is a tool of BIG BUSINESS)...

BIG BUSINESS decides everything. They tell the people what to buy, drink, wear, eat, or think. But, since there is more than one BIG BUSINESS, at least there is some choice.

But, it could VERY EASILY become fascist. All you have to do is take away the power of the courts.

What we've seen the last couple of years is govt intervention to not allow failure to occur (this isn't capitalism). Hence, we get the term; TOO BIG TO FAIL

How about this?

I was reading some Federal Reserve documents, and they were talking about TBTF (too big to fail) back in the 1980s when the largest failure of the time occurred, Continental Illinois.

The concept has probably been around since the 19th century. So, this is nothing new. It's just new to the public. But, bankers have always been aware of this.

This is just the way the United States works and has always worked.

Bailouts, stimulus, TBTF, monetizing debt, inflation/deflation, easy credit, debt financing, and real estate bubbles happen to a new generation, and it seems like it's the first time it's ever happened.

But, these are cycles that have been happening since before the country was founded, due to paper currency or banks.
 
Re: Auto Execs Urge Government to Tax Fuel up to $8/Gallon to Increase Fuel Efficienc

and As Soon As They Do This. The Russians Would Be Laughing All The Way To The Bank.with A Cheese Smile
 
Re: Auto Execs Urge Government to Tax Fuel up to $8/Gallon to Increase Fuel Efficienc

How much productivity is lost with carbon monoxide related illnesses? How are the costs of polluted fishing and seashores calculated in the costs of oil? How are the costs of cancers and other illness in areas such as cancer ally in Louisiana, learning disabilities in poor areas surrounding oil processing facilities and the increased military costs both human and economic involved in acquiring and defending oil sources? You may think you are not paying for it with cheap gasoline prices, but you are paying for it.
 
Re: Auto Execs Urge Government to Tax Fuel up to $8/Gallon to Increase Fuel Efficienc

On the flip side, in a capitalist society like the United States (since the government is a tool of BIG BUSINESS)...

Govt is being used, no doubt. My only 'minor' disagreement surfaces when you label us as a capitalist society. IMO, capitalism died when the banks got that 800bn last fall. We are morphing into another society as we speak / type. "Change" is happening :confused: However one chooses to label our present society is subject to interpretation. Capitalism thrives under failure but the govt is simply not allowing that to happen.

But, it could VERY EASILY become fascist. All you have to do is take away the power of the courts.

yep! But even now, most "laws" are selectively enforced

How about this?

I was reading some Federal Reserve documents, and they were talking about TBTF (too big to fail) back in the 1980s when the largest failure of the time occurred, Continental Illinois.

The concept has probably been around since the 19th century. So, this is nothing new. It's just new to the public. But, bankers have always been aware of this.

This is just the way the United States works and has always worked.

Bailouts, stimulus, TBTF, monetizing debt, inflation/deflation, easy credit, debt financing, and real estate bubbles happen to a new generation, and it seems like it's the first time it's ever happened.

But, these are cycles that have been happening since before the country was founded, due to paper currency or banks.

good point, never thought about past instances when TBTF has been used. This period is just different. I just see the country morphing into something else; I can't say Facism, Communism, Socialism but definately not Capitalism
 
Back
Top