from the comments

"Demand for gasoline, in economics jargon, is inelastic"

Completely untrue. Haven't you been following the news? SUV sales are down, Americans are for the first time in years driving fewer totals miles, etc. As gas prices rise, people use less gas - and oil companies and companies in general have an incentive to find oil replacements.

burndtdan: Completely untrue. Haven't you been following the news? SUV sales are down, Americans are for the first time in years driving fewer totals miles, etc. As gas prices rise, people use less gas - and oil companies and companies in general have an incentive to find oil replacements.

You forgot the rest: meaning that a change in price is not rapidly followed by a change in demand. In other words, the working mother who has to commute 10 miles to work each day cannot in short order switch to a job closer to home or buy a Prius, and so she is forced simply to pay the higher prices and reduce spending in other parts of her budget.

sepuku2: meaning that a change in price is not rapidly followed by a change in demand.

but that's exactly what the comment was refuting. the working mother can take the bus to work. she can carpool. she could ride a bicycle if she wanted to (though obviously a 10 mile trek would be a long one).

and she probably could get a closer job, too. if she's making so little that she can't afford to sell her car and get a new one, then she probably isn't working at the type of job where she honestly has to travel 10 miles to get there.

Both sides are just after your pocket book. Why can't anyone see that?

Lord, I hate "cliques".

GaryPDX: Both sides are just after your pocket book. Why can't anyone see that?

Only in a roundabout way. They need those taxes so that they can pay for things that get them the votes they need to stay in power. At least you have your choice between expensive social programs that keep the poor poor, or expensive wars that don't do much to further U.S. interests.

burndtdan: sepuku2: meaning that a change in price is not rapidly followed by a change in demand.

but that's exactly what the comment was refuting. the working mother can take the bus to work. she can carpool. she could ride a bicycle if she wanted to (though obviously a 10 mile trek would be a long one).

and she probably could get a closer job, too. if she's making so little that she can't afford to sell her car and get a new one, then she probably isn't working at the type of job where she honestly has to travel 10 miles to get there.

Are you joking? You must be joking. Because that is one of the most riduculous string of assumptions I have ever seen posted. Go have another cup of coffee and think about what you just typed right there.

nekom: GaryPDX: Both sides are just after your pocket book. Why can't anyone see that?

Only in a roundabout way. They need those taxes so that they can pay for things that get them the votes they need to stay in power. At least you have your choice between expensive social programs that keep the poor poor, or expensive wars that don't do much to further U.S. interests.

Zactly. I like option C, I'll do my own thing. With just a little tiny bit of research, folks don't have to be led down one of two choices either.

/baaaahhhh sheep..bahhhh

The poor are the ones who should be (and actually are) using mass transit. Plus most of the cars they do own are sitting up on blocks in their front yards.

GaryPDX: With just a little tiny bit of research, folks don't have to be led down one of two choices either.

A tiny bit of research is just too much to ask for the average voter, unfortunately.

oldebayer: The poor are the ones who should be (and actually are) using mass transit. Plus most of the cars they do own are sitting up on blocks in their front yards.

Give me metals..all I need is fire and metal..:)

Republicans, many of whom have made a career out of pissing(sorry, "trickling down") on poor people, are the last people who should be throwing stones about regressive taxation.

patrick767: Republicans, many of whom have made a career out of pissing(sorry, "trickling down") on poor people, are the last people who should be throwing stones about regressive taxation.

People also have figured out they don't have to be poor if they just get off their lazy asses and make something of themselves. But, alas, it's far easier to just sign up for government checks.

If every single poor person on government assistance did everything they could to get off of it and earn their existence, your Utopian plan might work. It only works if those government entitlements are just a failsafe and nobody really uses them And when they do, it's only a very short time.

But the world doesn't spin that way.

Nabb1: Are you joking? You must be joking. Because that is one of the most riduculous string of assumptions I have ever seen posted. Go have another cup of coffee and think about what you just typed right there.

i ride my motorcycle 17.5 miles to work every morning. a coworker rides her bicycle 3 miles to work every morning. another coworker carpools to work every morning. i don't have any coworkers that ride the bus, but the option is obviously there.

what exact assumptions was i making?

On the other side, a person comes up with a decent plan for some application and the parts are out there but you can't buy something assembled the way you want. Capitalists led you down a certain path to maximize profits. With energy, it's been going on for a century. We're not facing the end of the world by a long short, we are facing an end of an era.

My whole point is choose Option C. Think outside the box. Use pieces of both. Don't pay attention to "cliques" and think for yourselves.

But hey, that's just me.

burndtdan: i ride my motorcycle 17.5 miles to work every morning. a coworker rides her bicycle 3 miles to work every morning. another coworker carpools to work every morning. i don't have any coworkers that ride the bus, but the option is obviously there.

what exact assumptions was i making?

That a single mother commuting ten miles or more can suddenly switch to carpooling, or ride the bus, or switch jobs, or get a new car.

Normally, I'd agree... however, gas is only going to go higher. Moving away from a gasoline economy is an investment in the future of the country, and should be done ASAP. As such, the gas tax provides a financial incentive to make changes that need to be made now, rather than waiting until it's too late.

GaryPDX
People also have figured out they don't have to be poor if they just get off their lazy asses and make something of themselves. But, alas, it's far easier to just sign up for government checks.

If every single poor person on government assistance did everything they could to get off of it and earn their existence, your Utopian plan might work. It only works if those government entitlements are just a failsafe and nobody really uses them And when they do, it's only a very short time.


I have a Utopian plan? Wow! That's news to me!

Of course welfare is flawed and there may be ways we can improve it, but trashing it and throwing poor people out on the street is not one of those improvements... and we were talking about tax rates anyway. yes, I happen to believe that the progressive tax system is a good thing and that Republican giveaways to the wealthiest Americans are farking stupid. They somehow resold Reagan's deeply flawed trickle down economics to a sufficient number of Americans to get themselves elected.

Blogfight!

Nabb1: That a single mother commuting ten miles or more can suddenly switch to carpooling, or ride the bus, or switch jobs, or get a new car.

ok let's see.

carpooling would require someone living near her. that's something she can't necessarily do, but it's definitely a possibility. riding the bus? that's absolutely possible, and it doesn't require much more than finding your local bus stop and putting some change for bus fare in your pocket. getting a new car? since the premise of the argument is that she already has a car, that is something she can trade in to offset the cost of a car with better gas mileage. it doesn't have to be a new car, she could get a pretty cheap (smaller) used car for better mileage. switch jobs? well, if she can't afford to trade in her car and get another used car, then she isn't making that much money, which means there's absolutely no reason for her to travel 10 miles to work. if she's just working part time somewhere, there are probably grocery stores, diners, whatever around her that she could get a job at.

honestly, i can't even believe you're trying to argue that she can't ride the farking bus if she needed to.

and that whole argument is one that is being made in the face of contradictions from real world data. i heard last night on the news that americans are collectively driving something like 80,000 less miles because of gas prices. demand IS reacting to the price of gas, which is the point of the comment i quoted. the demand is not inelastic, and there is real world data to prove it.

/but seriously... she can't ride the bus? huh?

This: Normally, I'd agree... however, gas is only going to go higher. Moving away from a gasoline economy is an investment in the future of the country, and should be done ASAP. As such, the gas tax provides a financial incentive to make changes that need to be made now, rather than waiting until it's too late.

I'm building a different kind of generator, all the parts are out there but you can't buy one this way. I'm looking at kicking up 40kw (120amp) off a 22 HP diesel engine for under 7k. With a screw press, I go straight to plant source making biodiesel, doesn't matter which, there are about 20 oil bearing plants that are usable. That's where I'm headed. It's a wash selling the power to the utility but I can sure bang out a great foundry with induction melting methods and power my communications and transportation. To buy this from the utility? forget it..tooo expensive.

It all works for me and when the grid goes silent, I'll still be smithing and people will still need tools to eat their grubs (grin).

burndtdan: she can't ride the bus? huh?

Buses are for teenagers, hobos, and retards.

oldebayer: The poor are the ones who should be (and actually are) using mass transit.

Public transportation ridership is up 20% here in Utah overall, and 36% on light rail.

patrick767: I have a Utopian plan? Wow! That's news to me!

Sorry, I was generalizing. Not directed you personally.

burndtdan: /but seriously... she can't ride the bus? huh?

If she takes kids to school? Not an option, is it? And if her kids are in aftercare, the school bus doesn't run for that, so she can't rely on the bus to get them to school.

And in case you are wondering, I ran your solutions by my secretary, who fits the description of a working single mother who commutes more than ten miles, and she asked me if I was being serious. So, your solutions failed an admittedly unscientific poll with a small sample size. But, she commutes in from ten miles because secretarial jobs downtown pay more than other areas, but living closer would cost much more. And just about every person on staff in any firm I've worked at in the past decade has commuted in more than ten miles to the downtown area for that very reason. You're assumptions don't fit everyone.

burndtdan: but seriously... she can't ride the bus? huh?

Maybe the bus route takes 40 minutes rather than the 20 it takes her to drive. Maybe she has children and needs to wait for a babysitter to arrive before she can leave for work. Maybe she works late and the bus doesn't run when she's finished with her shift, or she's scared to stand at a bus stop by herself late at night.

I'm sure there are other possible reasons.

Three Crooked Squirrels: oldebayer: The poor are the ones who should be (and actually are) using mass transit.

Public transportation ridership is up 20% here in Utah overall, and 36% on light rail.

It's climbing in Portland too and we have a pretty good system. But if the wave is too big switching over, it will swamp the system quickly. Anywhere for that matter. If you look at the percentage of population the public transportation system can handle, it's a very small percentage.

We're navigating uncertain waters.

Nabb1: burndtdan: /but seriously... she can't ride the bus? huh?

If she takes kids to school? Not an option, is it? And if her kids are in aftercare, the school bus doesn't run for that, so she can't rely on the bus to get them to school.

And in case you are wondering, I ran your solutions by my secretary, who fits the description of a working single mother who commutes more than ten miles, and she asked me if I was being serious. So, your solutions failed an admittedly unscientific poll with a small sample size. But, she commutes in from ten miles because secretarial jobs downtown pay more than other areas, but living closer would cost much more. And just about every person on staff in any firm I've worked at in the past decade has commuted in more than ten miles to the downtown area for that very reason. You're assumptions don't fit everyone.

If it's that kind of downtown destination, it will have very good public transit. If she doesn't live close to the school, she can drop her kids off and take the bus to work afterwards.

Quit making excuses. I bike to work, even in winter. In Ontario.

GaryPDX: It's climbing in Portland too and we have a pretty good system. But if the wave is too big switching over, it will swamp the system quickly. Anywhere for that matter. If you look at the percentage of population the public transportation system can handle, it's a very small percentage.

Anybody know a good publicly-traded public transportation company?

submitter: But don't you favor regressive higher gas taxes, which hit the poor the hardest?

The poor don't drive 60 mile round trip commutes from their McMansion in the suburbs, Sparky. They ride public transportation. And pee on it.

This: Anybody know a good publicly-traded public transportation company?

lol..a government entity that's publically traded?..say wut?

Nabb1: And just about every person on staff in any firm I've worked at in the past decade has commuted in more than ten miles to the downtown area for that very reason.

So, we should feel bad for all of the poverty-level folks working in a law firm?

/don't forget to tip your cleaning lady, Nabb.

Nabb1: If she takes kids to school? Not an option, is it?

that's what school buses are for.

Yanks_RSJ: Maybe the bus route takes 40 minutes rather than the 20 it takes her to drive.

and? she finds the bus that would get her to work on time.


you guys do realize that you're trying to find the most unlucky woman on the face of the planet, with the stars aligning in just such a way that she can't take a bus to work, in order to prove that the demand for gas is inelastic, which is a matter that must necessarily be representative of the population at large, right?

what if she had no legs and couldn't climb the stairs onto the bus? what if she were deathly afraid of buses because she saw the movie speed?

GaryPDX: It's climbing in Portland too and we have a pretty good system. But if the wave is too big switching over, it will swamp the system quickly. Anywhere for that matter. If you look at the percentage of population the public transportation system can handle, it's a very small percentage.

This is true. When I ride the bus, my route is rarely more than 20% full since it goes mainly through nice neighborhoods, so it could handle a lot more (of course, not if 50% of the population decided to ride). The routes that go through the poorer neighborhoods are often about 75% full. They can't handle much more. But the system should be bring in a lot more cash and maybe could expand. Sure, their gas prices are higher, too, but with ridership soaring, increased income should outpace increased costs.

This: If it's that kind of downtown destination, it will have very good public transit.

In New Orleans? That's a laugh.

If she doesn't live close to the school, she can drop her kids off and take the bus to work afterwards.

You don't have kids, do you? Kids have to be at school by eight, so what is she supposed to do, drop them off at 6:30 a.m. and then catch a bus that takes close to an hour to get her downtown to be at work by 8:30?

Quit making excuses. I bike to work, even in winter. In Ontario.

Well, good for you. Quit being smugly superior because you ride a bike.

GaryPDX: lol..a government entity that's publically traded?..say wut?

Somebody's gotta manufacture the busses and trains and whatnot.

burndtdan: riding the bus? that's absolutely possible, and it doesn't require much more than finding your local bus stop and putting some change for bus fare in your pocket....
/but seriously... she can't ride the bus? huh?

Not if she lives in a rural/semi rural area that doesn't have bus service.

Around here there is bus service, however essentially all the routes lead into the urban center of the metro area. From that hub they go back out in different directions to the suburbs. There is little/no lateral bus routes between the suburban areas.

So your hypothetical single mother would have to spend an extra hour or two per day riding the bus around. That extra hour or two of baby sitting easily offsets the extra $1/day it costs her to commute (20mpg car, 10 miles each way to work). Driving is cheaper.

Theaetetus: So, we should feel bad for all of the poverty-level folks working in a law firm?

/don't forget to tip your cleaning lady, Nabb.

No one said they were poverty-level, but gas prices hit everyone hard.

And I pay my cleaning lady very well.

burndtdan: Nabb1: If she takes kids to school? Not an option, is it?

that's what school buses are for./i>

Buses don't run from after-care. I said that in the post if you'd bothered to read it fully before responding.

Three Crooked Squirrels: This is true. When I ride the bus, my route is rarely more than 20% full since it goes mainly through nice neighborhoods, so it could handle a lot more (of course, not if 50% of the population decided to ride). The routes that go through the poorer neighborhoods are often about 75% full. They can't handle much more. But the system should be bring in a lot more cash and maybe could expand. Sure, their gas prices are higher, too, but with ridership soaring, increased income should outpace increased costs.

Here, the system is already jammed for sporting events and commuter traffic hours. It's already stressed out.

GaryPDX:

Here, the system is already jammed for sporting events and commuter traffic hours. It's already stressed out.

Any plans to expand? They are expanding here like crazy, especially light rail.

Yanks_RSJ: I'm sure there are other possible reasons.

Like living in a largely rural state with few job opportunities and no public transportation. The assumption is that everybody lives in big cities and has the options available. Moving is not an option when your living paycheck to paycheck in most cases either.

Recoil Therapy: Not if she lives in a rural/semi rural area that doesn't have bus service.

Well, at that point it doesn't matter how we frame the argument: those people are screwed.

You chose to value having an acre of backyard and not being able to see your neighbors over proximity to the places you travel to frequently, there's not really any work-around for the rise in travel costs.

What government solution DOESN'T involve taking more of the consumer's hard earned money?

Here's a way to look at it -- the government should have to justify to you WHY they are taking your money. When you operate under the assumption that the individual has to justify to the government why he should be able to keep X% of his paycheck, you've already lost the battle.

This: GaryPDX: lol..a government entity that's publically traded?..say wut?

Somebody's gotta manufacture the busses and trains and whatnot.

There ya go..:) Were are going to see a comeback of heavy train use. Everywhere. Coast to coast bullet trains and shiat. After a century of oil energy civilization, there will be HUGE changes in just about everything. Most commodities will be localized, it won't be painless no matter who gets elected. The problem is too big.

GaryPDX: People also have figured out they don't have to be poor if they just get off their lazy asses and make something of themselves. But, alas, it's far easier to just sign up for government checks.

Ahhh yes. The classic "all poor people are lazy" argument.

That one never fails to make an appearance, no matter how hilariously wrong it is.

Nabb1: No one said they were poverty-level, but gas prices hit everyone hard.

Yes, but gas prices hit poverty-level people who take public transportation less.

Three Crooked Squirrels: GaryPDX:

Here, the system is already jammed for sporting events and commuter traffic hours. It's already stressed out.

Any plans to expand? They are expanding here like crazy, especially light rail.

Oh yea..there are 3 light rail projects in the development over the next 10 years. It still won't be enough. Centralization is a biatch.

Theaetetus: Yes, but gas prices hit poverty-level people who take public transportation less.

... until bus fare goes up to cover the increased cost of gas with, you know, this extra tax that is being talked about in the article.

Theaetetus: Nabb1: No one said they were poverty-level, but gas prices hit everyone hard.

Yes, but gas prices hit poverty-level people who take public transportation less.

True, but only to those poverty-level people who have access to such transportation. Many rural and semi-rural areas do not have public transportation.

absoluteparanoia: GaryPDX: People also have figured out they don't have to be poor if they just get off their lazy asses and make something of themselves. But, alas, it's far easier to just sign up for government checks.

Ahhh yes. The classic "all poor people are lazy" argument.

That one never fails to make an appearance, no matter how hilariously wrong it is.

I never said "all". I go with "most". It's a "path of least resistance" thing. Pesky human nature.

KaponoFor3: Here's a way to look at it -- the government should have to justify to you WHY they are taking your money.

That's not how government works. There's a social contract.

Say you go to a restaurant and start ordering but they gave you a menu that didn't list the prices. At the end you could end up paying a lot or a little.

They don't need to justify why, they've provided a service that you've used. You also don't have to justify why your going to pay. You can whine that you didn't know and you want to pay less.

But tough titties. Pay your taxes.