The http://www.treehugger.com/file…..e_is_h.php

Are there any alternatives that can provide an incentive? How about a 1000$ credit for every mpg over 35 (capped at 50 mpg) and a 1000$ penalty for every mpg under 35 (capped at 35000$). How about instead of cutting the Solar Tax credit in half (as done by the Republicans), we double it?

Taxes are used for two purposes. The first is to raise money for the government. The second is to implement policy. Are there any other ways to accomplish the same thing without punishing the people who have to choose between putting fuel in their car and food on the table?

But, now that the Dems finally have control — do you think there’s a snowball’s chance they would support such a thing? It will be demogogued to death, and the GOP will say: “see, he had a secret plan to tax the middle class after all, just like we said.”

Anyone remember the last time the Dems passed a tax increase that lead to the last time the budget was ever balanced? It was 1993, and the Dems were thrown out of Congress in 1994. If we don’t remember, you can bet Congress-critters remember it. They’ve been scared to raise a tax ever since.

My motorcycle weighs more than 500 pounds. It gets about 45 mpg. Lighter bikes with higher gas mileage do exist, but 100 mpg is a stretch even for motorcycles that would be useful for anything other then limited local transportation.

you seem to have some ideal vehicle in mind. Since you climbed on the soapbox maybe you can describe the materials, drivetrain, etc used in this ideal vehicle.

Car buyers, especially ones who have been in acidents, want heavier bigger cars for protection. Consequently everyone drives around in bigger and bigger cars. This is how tanks got so huge. So we need to remove the war from our city streets and highways. We need to fight the new war of global warming.

This is a direct impact on mile per gallon.

So do we worry about the few and not all the population?

The legislation I would like passed would be to eliminate all cars not meeting a standard of maximum 500 pound cars and a 100 mile per gallon minimum.

this would not mean that a car could not be big .. or beautiful… It would just be light and efficient. The parts that make a carcompfortable aren’t the parts that weight the most. the seating and electronics required would weight less than 50 pounds. Air craft engineers could probably make them lighter. and stronger and more .. expensive.. which is the part that would make things O K for the bottom line.

Five years moratorium to remove all cars not meeting this standard off the road.

Pickups are another worry and I don’t know how to deal with that. Big longhaul trucking versus using the railroad is very wasteful.

This is the opportunity of a lifetime. By imposing these standards evryone is in the same ball park and the planet wins!

Instead of bailing out the auto makers simply take over the pensions and obligations of the auto makers it would have to be cheaper and more money into the economy except us retiree s don’t spend much.

so with all these proposals enacted everyone can now return to the game

I reposted from the previous thread I just wanted to get my point in and I will probably get up on this same soapbox every once in a while .
I just hope I don’t get Jodyed .

Perhaps in order to fund 50-75% of that revenue benchmark we depend on a tax on imported crude. It’s critical this can be done without injuring our exports. IIRC, we pay around $600 billion annually for foreign crude. IMHO, that’s the low hanging fruit. Considering all the investment the GOP has made in scapegoating illegal aliens and foreigners, that’s a tax the GOP would have a tougher time fighting. Another limitation of this idea is that as a tax on foreign oil reduces imports, you need to look for that revenue from somewhere else.

How much of that dollar-a-gallon gas tax can we get from a system of rationing that segregates consumers into the kind of auto they own? For example if I am a sole proprietor who uses my vehicle for hauling, that could be a different class of rationing than a passenger vehicle. UPS, Fed-X and all the trucking companies would be another huge class of diesel consumption that would require unique solutions. Since truckers haul our food, they have a direct impact on the local, organic food production you so rightly suggested. Unfortunately, the more complex the rationing, I am afraid the more difficult and costly it becomes to fairly administer.

If in the early years we could just get the equivalent of a quarter a gallon from rationing, now you’re down to a much more manageable twenty-five cents a gallon hike on gasoline.

I think gradually, we’re going to have to migrate towards the dollar-a-gallon tax. FWIW, there will be minimal support from some neo-cons, because as a I am sure you’re aware, TFriedman has long been a proponent of this.