Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
This isn't progressive taxation, and it isn't taxing for things I don't use. It's forgoing tax revenue. A fuel tax is a great way to capture external costs to driving rather than having society as a whole pay. It's a user tax. So now, instead of the heaviest users paying it, we all have to cover those costs. It also works to dis-incentivize poor choices(like commuting to an office in an F-150) so you get rid of one barrier that costs society more(roads more crowded, large parking spots, tailpipe emissions) and reduce incentive to use good transport, like transit. You've also starved transit funding, which makes transit worse(as do fewer people using it) and puts more people in single person vehicles.
I've provided loads of reasons why this is a dumb idea, and you haven't really offered anything. Even with the full tax, gas is still pretty affordable. Financial relief could be provided in any number of ways. So again, why is this a good choice? If fuel taxes are bad, and high priced fuel is bad, why don't we subsidize the cost of gas? Why stop at cutting the tax? Why is this the right amount to cut?
|
It's good because most people drive, and it's going to save those people money. That's it. There's no more explanation needed. You don't like it because ypu don't benefit, and that's fine. I don't benefit from it much either, but that's just how things work. We all end up paying for things we don't use, don't benefit directly from and instead other people benefit.