Are we still not paying enough for gasoline?

[MrNiceGuy]

Not long ago, the Left in the US - pretty much any socialist or socialist adjacent, along with a hefty portion of the Democrat Party - were telling us that we were not paying enough in gas prices, when compared to the enlightened European countries, and when examined in relation to the "true social cost of transportation."

For example, in January 2015, the average price of regular unleaded gasoline in the US was about $2.50 a gallon at the time. It was argued that this did not represent the true cost of transportation, and that we should have a giant gas tax to increase the price, so that the price we paid for gasoline reflected the true social cost of driving. And that would result in a $4.36 cents gas tax, which would result in Americans paying over $7.00 a gallon. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-americans-don-t-pay-the-true-cost-of-driving

This was a common theme for years, including among the green energy crowd and Democrats in general. We weren't paying too much for gasoline. We were paying too little, and the price should at least double. I'm sure we all remember that.

Democrats have also taken steps to reduce oil production - https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-for-higher-gas-prices-11647042264

Democrats supported higher gas taxes: https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/signs-times/democrats-should-support-increasing-gas-tax

Remember when the Left cheered rising gas prices as "good for the environment?" You won't hear it from Democrats on Capitol Hill, but higher gas prices are a good thing for the environment. Expensive gas should slow the use of cars, and the pollution they emit. But politically savvy environmentalists aren't calling for taxes that would raise the price still further. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5378487

Some Democrats wanted us to pay more for gas to slow the climate crisis: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/opinion/gas-price-climate-change.html - Is that still a good proposal?

Energy prices around the world are too low—far too low. https://www.wri.org/insights/price-...ossil-fuel-prices-reflect-environmental-costs Birdsall highlighted the current U.S. tax on gasoline, which has been at 18 cents since 1993. “Correcting” this tax to account for gasoline’s environmental impact would raise it to about $1.60 -- had that been done in January, 2021, that would have raised the price of a gallon of gas to about $4.00 a gallon, give or take - about what it is now. So, this is what the Left wanted. They like this.

Well, the prices have nearly doubled in the past year and 3 months. Is that a good thing or a bad thing, and why?

 

[Ishm]

When mom is driving a 4cyl Honda/Toyota etc to the supermarket and on the school run instead of an F250 etc, gas prices will be starting to be effective. Historically cheap gas has lead to a lot of unnecessary waste becoming part of the culture. If you could change that without increasing gas prices it would be great, but the reality is that only enough pain in the hip pocket will get people to change wasteful habits.

 

[Loulit01]

When mom is driving a 4cyl Honda/Toyota etc to the supermarket and on the school run instead of an F250 etc, gas prices will be starting to be effective. Historically cheap gas has lead to a lot of unnecessary waste becoming part of the culture. If you could change that without increasing gas prices it would be great, but the reality is that only enough pain in the hip pocket will get people to change wasteful habits.

Yeah! What he said.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

Well don't forget we also subsidize gas.

 

[AGENT J]

Not long ago, the Left in the US - pretty much any socialist or socialist adjacent, along with a hefty portion of the Democrat Party - were telling us that we were not paying enough in gas prices, when compared to the enlightened European countries, and when examined in relation to the "true social cost of transportation."

I stopped reading right there because the rest of the post is guaranteed to be nonsensical partisan bullshit based on false narratives just like any posts that start out "the left" the right" them democrats" the republicans" etc etc etc LOL

jeeez we need to be better than this

Next

 

[MamboDervish]

Not long ago, the Left in the US - pretty much any socialist or socialist adjacent, along with a hefty portion of the Democrat Party - were telling us that we were not paying enough in gas prices, when compared to the enlightened European countries, and when examined in relation to the "true social cost of transportation."

For example, in January 2015, the average price of regular unleaded gasoline in the US was about $2.50 a gallon at the time. It was argued that this did not represent the true cost of transportation, and that we should have a giant gas tax to increase the price, so that the price we paid for gasoline reflected the true social cost of driving. And that would result in a $4.36 cents gas tax, which would result in Americans paying over $7.00 a gallon. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-americans-don-t-pay-the-true-cost-of-driving

This was a common theme for years, including among the green energy crowd and Democrats in general. We weren't paying too much for gasoline. We were paying too little, and the price should at least double. I'm sure we all remember that.

Democrats have also taken steps to reduce oil production - https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-for-higher-gas-prices-11647042264

Democrats supported higher gas taxes: https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/signs-times/democrats-should-support-increasing-gas-tax

Remember when the Left cheered rising gas prices as "good for the environment?" You won't hear it from Democrats on Capitol Hill, but higher gas prices are a good thing for the environment. Expensive gas should slow the use of cars, and the pollution they emit. But politically savvy environmentalists aren't calling for taxes that would raise the price still further. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5378487

Some Democrats wanted us to pay more for gas to slow the climate crisis: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/opinion/gas-price-climate-change.html - Is that still a good proposal?

Energy prices around the world are too low—far too low. https://www.wri.org/insights/price-...ossil-fuel-prices-reflect-environmental-costs Birdsall highlighted the current U.S. tax on gasoline, which has been at 18 cents since 1993. “Correcting” this tax to account for gasoline’s environmental impact would raise it to about $1.60 -- had that been done in January, 2021, that would have raised the price of a gallon of gas to about $4.00 a gallon, give or take - about what it is now. So, this is what the Left wanted. They like this.

Well, the prices have nearly doubled in the past year and 3 months. Is that a good thing or a bad thing, and why?

It makes much more sense to me for us to be paying the full price - the REAL price - for gasoline consumption, and all fossil fuels as well. In the end, we pay much more in the hidden costs, and by paying the real cost, we are less inclined to piss it away recreationally, and in choosing inefficient transportation methods. If people are buying and driving vehicles that get 15-20 mpg, they shouldn't bitch about gas prices. If they had instead chosen vehicles that get 30-40 mpg, they would be paying half as much at the pumps - literally half as much.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

When mom is driving a 4cyl Honda/Toyota etc to the supermarket and on the school run instead of an F250 etc, gas prices will be starting to be effective. Historically cheap gas has lead to a lot of unnecessary waste becoming part of the culture. If you could change that without increasing gas prices it would be great, but the reality is that only enough pain in the hip pocket will get people to change wasteful habits.

Point proved.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Well don't forget we also subsidize gas.

How so? Link?

And you'd want any such subsidies, if they existed, removed right? So we'd pay more for gasoline, yes?

 

[MrNiceGuy]

It makes much more sense to me for us to be paying the full price - the REAL price - for gasoline consumption, and all fossil fuels as well. In the end, we pay much more in the hidden costs, and by paying the real cost, we are less inclined to piss it away recreationally, and in choosing inefficient transportation methods. If people are buying and driving vehicles that get 15-20 mpg, they shouldn't bitch about gas prices. If they had instead chosen vehicles that get 30-40 mpg, they would be paying half as much at the pumps - literally half as much.

You agree, then. Higher prices are needed. How high do you suggest? Are we there, yet?

 

[MrNiceGuy]

I stopped reading right there because the rest of the post is guaranteed to be nonsensical partisan bullshit based on false narratives just like any posts that start out "the left" the right" them democrats" the republicans" etc etc etc LOL

jeeez we need to be better than this

Next

Good for you - but certainly this post is partisan - and that's why it was created in the section expressly dedicated to partisan politics. It's not bullshit, though, and it's not a false narrative. Folks responding are proving the point - the left does want higher gasoline prices, for what they believe is a benevolent purpose.

 

[AGENT J]

It's not bullshit, though, and it's not a false narrative.

facts prove it is

 

[MrNiceGuy]

facts prove it is

How so? Are you saying the left doesn't want higher gas prices? LOL.

Democrats wanted to propose higher gas taxes "for infrastructure," - that's higher prices. They wanted to add a higher tax on oil companies (more higheer prices), and it's a common narrative among rank-and-file left wingers here in the States that we should be paying as much as Europe.

Well, here we are, with $4.30 a gallon average for regular unleaded, and that's not even half what a lot of Europe is paying....

 

[AGENT J]

How so? Are you saying the left doesn't want higher gas prices? LOL.

it has nothing to do with what "I'm" saying its based on facts and reality
hence why your thread is BS and factually a false narrative

"the left",just like "the right" is not one single borg colective, they are made up of individuals and all those individuals do not agree and have identical thoughts

I could make a post just likes yours and claim :the right is racist" and then quote many INDIVIDUALS on the right doing or saying racist things or bills that are biased against minorities etc etc
but im not dishonest enough to make the moronic claim its actually "the right" because of the fact there are millions of people on the right who are not racist. AGain facts matter . . .🤷‍♂️

 

[Nomad4Ever]

How so? Link?

Conservative estimates put U.S. direct subsidies to the fossil fuel industry at roughly $20 billion per year; with 20 percent currently allocated to coal and 80 percent to natural gas and crude oil.

Fact Sheet | Fossil Fuel Subsidies: A Closer Look at Tax Breaks and Societal Costs (2019) | White Papers | EESI

www.eesi.org

And you'd want any such subsidies, if they existed, removed right? So we'd pay more for gasoline, yes?

Yes, but we are already paying for those subsidies in taxes aren't we, so...

 

[Lloyd Christmas]

Not long ago, the Left in the US - pretty much any socialist or socialist adjacent, along with a hefty portion of the Democrat Party - were telling us that we were not paying enough in gas prices, when compared to the enlightened European countries, and when examined in relation to the "true social cost of transportation."

For example, in January 2015, the average price of regular unleaded gasoline in the US was about $2.50 a gallon at the time. It was argued that this did not represent the true cost of transportation, and that we should have a giant gas tax to increase the price, so that the price we paid for gasoline reflected the true social cost of driving. And that would result in a $4.36 cents gas tax, which would result in Americans paying over $7.00 a gallon. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-americans-don-t-pay-the-true-cost-of-driving

This was a common theme for years, including among the green energy crowd and Democrats in general. We weren't paying too much for gasoline. We were paying too little, and the price should at least double. I'm sure we all remember that.

Democrats have also taken steps to reduce oil production - https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-for-higher-gas-prices-11647042264

Democrats supported higher gas taxes: https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/signs-times/democrats-should-support-increasing-gas-tax

Remember when the Left cheered rising gas prices as "good for the environment?" You won't hear it from Democrats on Capitol Hill, but higher gas prices are a good thing for the environment. Expensive gas should slow the use of cars, and the pollution they emit. But politically savvy environmentalists aren't calling for taxes that would raise the price still further. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5378487

Some Democrats wanted us to pay more for gas to slow the climate crisis: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/opinion/gas-price-climate-change.html - Is that still a good proposal?

Energy prices around the world are too low—far too low. https://www.wri.org/insights/price-...ossil-fuel-prices-reflect-environmental-costs Birdsall highlighted the current U.S. tax on gasoline, which has been at 18 cents since 1993. “Correcting” this tax to account for gasoline’s environmental impact would raise it to about $1.60 -- had that been done in January, 2021, that would have raised the price of a gallon of gas to about $4.00 a gallon, give or take - about what it is now. So, this is what the Left wanted. They like this.

Well, the prices have nearly doubled in the past year and 3 months. Is that a good thing or a bad thing, and why?

Dumb dumb Dumb dumb

The same people who fight green energy, mock hybrids and electric vehicles, mock solar and wind power to suck oil and gas dick, and drive their gas guzzlers, now whining about gas prices. typical right wing moronic bullshit lies you just spread all over the place. Funny, now demand is way high for hybrids and electric vehicles. As usual, conservatives don't listen to anything and remain dumb about everything and are always proven wrong

Stop fighting green energy or stop whining when gas prices are high

 

[Peter]

Just as a sidenote.
Try driving an F-150 in the UK and see how popular you become after a week.

I honestly don't think I've ever seen one here and I'm 45.

 

[phoenix2020]

Not long ago, the Left in the US - pretty much any socialist or socialist adjacent, along with a hefty portion of the Democrat Party - were telling us that we were not paying enough in gas prices, when compared to the enlightened European countries, and when examined in relation to the "true social cost of transportation."

For example, in January 2015, the average price of regular unleaded gasoline in the US was about $2.50 a gallon at the time. It was argued that this did not represent the true cost of transportation, and that we should have a giant gas tax to increase the price, so that the price we paid for gasoline reflected the true social cost of driving. And that would result in a $4.36 cents gas tax, which would result in Americans paying over $7.00 a gallon. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-americans-don-t-pay-the-true-cost-of-driving

This was a common theme for years, including among the green energy crowd and Democrats in general. We weren't paying too much for gasoline. We were paying too little, and the price should at least double. I'm sure we all remember that.

Democrats have also taken steps to reduce oil production - https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-for-higher-gas-prices-11647042264

Democrats supported higher gas taxes: https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/signs-times/democrats-should-support-increasing-gas-tax

Remember when the Left cheered rising gas prices as "good for the environment?" You won't hear it from Democrats on Capitol Hill, but higher gas prices are a good thing for the environment. Expensive gas should slow the use of cars, and the pollution they emit. But politically savvy environmentalists aren't calling for taxes that would raise the price still further. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5378487

Some Democrats wanted us to pay more for gas to slow the climate crisis: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/opinion/gas-price-climate-change.html - Is that still a good proposal?

Energy prices around the world are too low—far too low. https://www.wri.org/insights/price-...ossil-fuel-prices-reflect-environmental-costs Birdsall highlighted the current U.S. tax on gasoline, which has been at 18 cents since 1993. “Correcting” this tax to account for gasoline’s environmental impact would raise it to about $1.60 -- had that been done in January, 2021, that would have raised the price of a gallon of gas to about $4.00 a gallon, give or take - about what it is now. So, this is what the Left wanted. They like this.

Well, the prices have nearly doubled in the past year and 3 months. Is that a good thing or a bad thing, and why?

I don’t really care how much gasoline costs ever since I stopped needing it. It’s a nice feeling. I do stop by gas stations for the mini marts every now and then, I do love me a Diet Coke.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Not long ago, the Left in the US - pretty much any socialist or socialist adjacent, along with a hefty portion of the Democrat Party - were telling us that we were not paying enough in gas prices, when compared to the enlightened European countries, and when examined in relation to the "true social cost of transportation."

For example, in January 2015, the average price of regular unleaded gasoline in the US was about $2.50 a gallon at the time. It was argued that this did not represent the true cost of transportation, and that we should have a giant gas tax to increase the price, so that the price we paid for gasoline reflected the true social cost of driving. And that would result in a $4.36 cents gas tax, which would result in Americans paying over $7.00 a gallon. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-americans-don-t-pay-the-true-cost-of-driving

This was a common theme for years, including among the green energy crowd and Democrats in general. We weren't paying too much for gasoline. We were paying too little, and the price should at least double. I'm sure we all remember that.

Democrats have also taken steps to reduce oil production - https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-for-higher-gas-prices-11647042264

Democrats supported higher gas taxes: https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/signs-times/democrats-should-support-increasing-gas-tax

Remember when the Left cheered rising gas prices as "good for the environment?" You won't hear it from Democrats on Capitol Hill, but higher gas prices are a good thing for the environment. Expensive gas should slow the use of cars, and the pollution they emit. But politically savvy environmentalists aren't calling for taxes that would raise the price still further. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5378487

Some Democrats wanted us to pay more for gas to slow the climate crisis: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/opinion/gas-price-climate-change.html - Is that still a good proposal?

Energy prices around the world are too low—far too low. https://www.wri.org/insights/price-...ossil-fuel-prices-reflect-environmental-costs Birdsall highlighted the current U.S. tax on gasoline, which has been at 18 cents since 1993. “Correcting” this tax to account for gasoline’s environmental impact would raise it to about $1.60 -- had that been done in January, 2021, that would have raised the price of a gallon of gas to about $4.00 a gallon, give or take - about what it is now. So, this is what the Left wanted. They like this.

Well, the prices have nearly doubled in the past year and 3 months. Is that a good thing or a bad thing, and why?

Another industry that should be nationalized IMO.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Another industry that should be nationalized IMO.

Why? What would you have the National Oil Company monopoly do?

 

[MrNiceGuy]

I don’t really care how much gasoline costs ever since I stopped needing it. It’s a nice feeling. I do stop by gas stations for the mini marts every now and then, I do love me a Diet Coke.

Good for you. It's good for consumers to vote with their feet and their wallets.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

Why? What would you have the National Oil Company monopoly do?

Produce the petroleum products as they do, and then through tight regulation have the products available to Americans at a non-profit type price, or a small profit, like we do for most utilities. The taxpayer is already subsidizing these monolithic shit-bombs.
Prolly should go ahead and do the Corporate Run for-profit medical industry as well.
I'd support it.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

I don’t really care how much gasoline costs ever since I stopped needing it. It’s a nice feeling. I do stop by gas stations for the mini marts every now and then, I do love me a Diet Coke.

OK. What do you do for transportation? When you have to take a trip? Commute to work etc?

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Just as a sidenote.
Try driving an F-150 in the UK and see how popular you become after a week.

I honestly don't think I've ever seen one here and I'm 45.

A lot of people need an F-150 for their jobs, and some folks have larger properties and the flatbed has multiple uses.

What would be so wrong with having an F-150 in the UK? Well, I mean, other than perhaps UK lifestyles result in consumers having less of a need for a pick-up truck...?

And, I mean, an F-150 gets like 25 MPH City driving, whereas a MiniCooper gets like 25 to 30. It's not like the British miniature golf-cart like car is blowing anybody away mileage-wise.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Produce the petroleum products as they do, and then through tight regulation have the products available to Americans at a non-profit type price, or a small profit, like we do for most utilities. The taxpayer is already subsidizing these monolithic shit-bombs.
Prolly should go ahead and do the Corporate Run for-profit medical industry as well.
I'd support it.

That doesn't generally result in lower prices and better service.

The taxpayers are not "subsidizing" oil companies. That's a myth.

There seems to be some notion out there that a government monopoly running entire industries results in lower overhead and lower prices. There is absolutely no evidence for this in real life. The real life experience of nationalized industries is perhaps short term success to a point, and then collapse. Nationalization produces adverse effects, such as reducing competition in the marketplace, which reduces incentives to innovation and maintains high prices. Nationalization results in high prices, and there is no incentive to cut costs, as there is only one seller - just raise prices and go home at 5pm. In the short run, nationalization can provide a larger revenue stream for government, but can cause the industry to falter in the longer run. History has taught us that nationalised industries are costly and inefficient while also placing a “massive burden on taxpayers as they equire a huge amount of state support and typically provide terrible services. Not only do government-owned businesses distort markets, but the money tied up in government-owned businesses would be far more useful in the hands of the taxpayers to whom it actually belongs,

Governments are motivated by political pressures rather than sound economic and business sense. An example of this would be a government hiring too many workers for publicly owned firms, boosting employment but increasing the cost to the taxpayer and lowering efficiency. The vaunted Nordic countries, for example, have been privatizing for decades, not nationalizing.

Things are worse under nationalized industries.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

That doesn't generally result in lower prices and better service.

The taxpayers are not "subsidizing" oil companies. That's a myth.

There seems to be some notion out there that a government monopoly running entire industries results in lower overhead and lower prices. There is absolutely no evidence for this in real life. The real life experience of nationalized industries is perhaps short term success to a point, and then collapse. Nationalization produces adverse effects, such as reducing competition in the marketplace, which reduces incentives to innovation and maintains high prices. Nationalization results in high prices, and there is no incentive to cut costs, as there is only one seller - just raise prices and go home at 5pm. In the short run, nationalization can provide a larger revenue stream for government, but can cause the industry to falter in the longer run. History has taught us that nationalised industries are costly and inefficient while also placing a “massive burden on taxpayers as they equire a huge amount of state support and typically provide terrible services. Not only do government-owned businesses distort markets, but the money tied up in government-owned businesses would be far more useful in the hands of the taxpayers to whom it actually belongs,

Governments are motivated by political pressures rather than sound economic and business sense. An example of this would be a government hiring too many workers for publicly owned firms, boosting employment but increasing the cost to the taxpayer and lowering efficiency. The vaunted Nordic countries, for example, have been privatizing for decades, not nationalizing.

Things are worse under nationalized industries.

Disagree*