Sales tax is a regressive tax because it disproportionately impacts the lowest earners the highest due to their need to spend most of what they earn in order to live. Flat federal sales tax is a billionaire's wet dream.
My mom actually believes in flat federal income tax, it drives me batty. The one flat tax I really favor is a high gasoline tax. While this would penalize the poor so to speak, they're the ones burning all the gasoline and causing global warming.
My mom actually believes in flat federal income tax, it drives me batty. The one flat tax I really favor is a high gasoline tax. While this would penalize the poor so to speak, they're the ones burning all the gasoline and causing global warming.
I don't think we can afford a regressive gasoline tax until we have a functioning, national public transit system.
You're going to need a regressive gasoline tax to fund that. I would pay $6 a gallon if it got me a bullet train to NYC.
I think we need $6 a gallon just to show people we drive large, wasteful vehicles entirely too much. My roommate uses his car to go the grocery store across the street.
Speaking as someone who lives in a state without even the stub of a functional mass transit system: you'll wreck the economy trying to get this plan going.
Part of the regressive gas tax should be spent on Barack Obama hiring scary ex-gang members from Chicago's Taylor Homes with names like "Big Reese" and "Mouthshot Pete" to tune up wasteful assholes like your roommate.
Connecticut will NEVER have competent public transit. Never. Not ever. The gas tax could be $5 a gallon and unemployment could double as a result, and it would STILL not happen. People would be siphoning gas from their neighbors in the dead of night, every night.
Connecticut will NEVER have competent public transit. Never. Not ever. The gas tax could be $5 a gallon and unemployment could double as a result, and it would STILL not happen. People would be siphoning gas from their neighbors in the dead of night, every night.
And that's because suburban sprawl is completely unsustainable.
The suburbs aren't actually the problem. It's the heavy commercial and industrial areas that will never be eminent domained to allow competent rail or bus lines. Typical urban nonsense doctrine. :-) NYC is not sustainable. It works ONLY because of a MASSIVE, DAILY expenditure of fossil fuel from just about every other point on the globe. NYC imports necessities and exports waste. It's an ecological blight.
Concentrating it in a big pile requiring a massive logistical network is not sustainable.
Disagree, I think it's no better or worse than having it all spread out. I mean if you go to the southern states they've never even heard of recycling.
Also, logistics allow for efficient waste management and disposal. It's easy to centralize and recycle the entire plastic output of a city, compared to the output of backwater Montana towns hundreds of miles apart.
If gas jumped to $6 a gallon my mother's home business would fail due to shipping costs and I wouldn't be able to afford my commute to school. There would be no public transportation built where I live by 2016 because I live in a small town/rural area. Fuck that idea.
If gas jumped to $6 a gallon my mother's home business would fail due to shipping costs and I wouldn't be able to afford my commute to school. There would be no public transportation built where I live by 2016 because I live in a small town/rural area. Fuck that idea.
Well $6 gallon is coming just because of market forces. You best prepare yourself.
Comments
That would give states time to develop the framework of public transit systems without immediately bankrupting the public.