Just say no to elitist gas tax arguments
Economist Robert Samuelson wrote an op-ed for Investors Business Daily (which ran on Monday) in which he called for a steadily increasing tax on gasoline. I sent the following letter to IBD in response:
Robert Samuelson’s call for a gasoline tax because otherwise “Americans might cling to old habits” smacks of the worst sort of Nanny Statism. Americans switched from horse buggies to cars without imposing a buggy tax, from slide rules to calculators to computers without taxes on slide rules, from oil lamps to light bulbs without a lamp tax.
We neither want nor need Big Brother to decide what’s best for us and impose that view through making our lives less convenient or more expensive. The most visible impact of the existing high gasoline taxes in Europe is the tens of thousands of tiny cars on the roads. Americans, whether Samuelson likes it or not, enjoy our larger cars. Indeed, in the Colorado mountains where I live, such a tiny car – which are almost all two-wheel drive – could be a death trap. Under a high gas tax regime, car makers will either be forced to make smaller, lighter, more dangerous (to the occupants) vehicles, or to build much more expensive cars using high-tech materials to enhance safety, but forcing Americans to spend on a vehicle what they might otherwise spend on education, health care, or recreation.
In short, whether due to true shortages or to supply disruptions, the price signals sent by markets are all the economy needs to transition to other fuels. In the meantime, Samuelson did get one thing right: America has a huge problem in terms of government regulation, not just in terms of oil drilling but also in the outrageously long process, generally more than a decade, needed to get approval for a nuclear power plant.
America’s problem is not that our “energy policy” isn’t aggressive enough; it’s that the government has an energy policy. Government needs to get out of the way and allow any and all energy development which does not objectively threaten the health of Americans. Beyond that, Samuelson and his ilk should keep their “I know what’s best for you” egotism out of our lives.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Rossputin on 02/11/11 at 05:50:00 am . Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. |

02/13/11 @ 08:19:58 am
Ross,
Very well said.
This has been a topic of interest to me for some time. But I must add an amendment to your comments. I would be a supporter of a gasoline taxs that supports entirely the maintenance and construction of roads and br I am aftraid I haven't done the research yet, but bridges --- and not more. Furhter, these funds shoudn't be used for rail, bicycles (and I ride) or other projects.
The reson for this is then one when driving feels the econojic cost of that activity v some alternative form of transportation. IF we pay for maintenance and construciotn or roads via slaes taxes, county property taxed and state and federal income taxes, we are not sending the proper price signals to the end-user who makes the dicsion to drive, and more importantly, where they live v. where they work. If they want pay for this, fine, but using someone elses taxes to pay for antohers transportation, well, is similar to any other governmental transfer payment.
I am not aware if the Federal Gas Tax undercollects, but at least at the County and City level, one is paying one form of tax (sales, property) to support roads.
The problem of course is like any other sales or value added tax.. one it is in place the temptation to raid it (socail security) or to raise the tax rate beyond its purpose would be very tempting by the right policial crew for a raft of reasons... just as Mr Samuelson has already pointed out.
Perhaps one could also be eligible for a discount if they lived on a dirt road....