The Real Patriot Act (Friedman Suggests $1/Gallon Gas Tax To Pay For Iraq)

[Khephra]

In case you missed it, OPEC just decided to slash its oil production to keep gasoline prices high. I guess it would be foolhardy to expect that maybe Saudi Arabia or Kuwait would use its influence in OPEC to hold down prices at a time when Western economies are struggling to climb out of recession. Everybody's just looking out for themselves. So why don't we?

There's all sorts of talk now about how to finance the $87 billion price tag for the reconstruction of Iraq. I say, let's make OPEC pay — indirectly. Let's have a $1 a gallon gasoline tax and call it the "Patriot Tax." We could use the revenue it would raise — about $110 billion a year — to finance the entire reconstruction of Iraq, with plenty left for other good works.

Here's the logic: The two things OPEC hates most are falling oil prices and gasoline taxes — and the Patriot Tax would promote both. The reason that OPEC hates gasoline taxes is that if anyone is going to benefit from higher prices at the pump, OPEC wants it to be OPEC, not the consuming countries. It drives OPEC crazy that the Europeans pay roughly twice as much per gallon as Americans do, because their governments slap on so many taxes.

A $1 a gallon gasoline tax, phased in, would not only be a huge revenue generator (even with tax rebates to ease the burden on low-income people, farmers and truckers) but also a huge driver of conservation and reduced oil imports. Not only would it mean less money for Saudi Arabia to transfer to Wahhabi clerics to spread their intolerant brand of Islam around the world, but it would radically improve America's standing in Europe, where we are resented for being the world's energy hog.

more.............

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/05/opinion/05FRIE.html


Oops....I meant to post this in Editorials.

Since it got in GD by mistake, let it be known that I think the guy is crazy. Wouldn't this hit the middleclass and poor the hardest? IMO, this would wreck our economy. However, economics are my weakest suit, so I'll leave it to someone else to fill-in-the-blanks.

[wuushew]

1. Someone tell me exactly when Friedman went of the deep end

The man is clearly nuttier than a fruit cake

[Paschall]

3. And since when did he care about...

..."America's standing in Europe." It was only 10 days ago he declared we were at war with France. :shrug:

[dkf]

2. Sounds like the real purpose would be to make everyone

dislike the fact that we went into Iraq.

People only want things that they feel they don't have to pay for.

[thebigidea]

4. I suggest a tax on Thomas Friedman articles

he owes the human race more than a dollar a page for his role in the RELENTLESS MARCH TO MEANINGLESS WAR.

curse you and your conniving, friedman - go chew on your moustache!

[Zhade]

5. This is the same guy who sees France as America's enemy.

No offense, Friedman, but you're a fucking moron.

[E_Zapata]

6. I will one up him.....

Anyone with a vehicle that gets less than 15 mpg and who does not use such a vehicle in their trade/farm/whathaveyou*, has to pay $3/gallon for tax on gas.

$2 for Iraq
$1 for US schools

**and no f'ing loopholes. You personally have to use it in your trade; not have 100 illegals working their butts off while you cruise around town in your Dodge f'ing Ram.

[qwertyMike]

7. Great Idea

The war would be over in weeks.
The Repug patriots would have to put their money where their mouth is and while it's OK to send kids there to die for free, when it comes to gassing up the SUV, well that's serious stuff. Not a chance of actually being out of pocket . . . . .
Like I said great idea (stole from my playbook)
:(

[femmecahors]

8. I think he's coming to his senses . . .

Gasoline is too cheap in the United States (I'm American)when you consider all the harm it does. Believe me, as I'm in Europe right now, when the gasoline is expensive, you walk a lot more . . . and so with higher gasoline prices, the U.S. might also tackle it's obesity problem.

End obesity.
End the deficit.
End the war.

Finally, Friedman has written an editorial that is worthwhile.

[quaker bill]

9. Not all that bad of an idea

You would need to do something to cure the regressive nature of such a tax, but generally higher gas prices would encourage conservation and be a good thing over the long haul.

I also agree with other posters that Friedman went over the edge some time ago. There is no limit to the wacky logic he will try to apply to rationalize his pro-war stance.

[BlueCollar]

14. I agree

that something would have to be done about the regressive nature. Perhaps a "gasoline credit" for lower-income...say...a deduction of some sort on the income teaxes paid ...

Driving my cherokee would cost me more, and I wouldn't be able to benefit from a tax credit because, thankfully, I earn a decent income.

But it would encourage conservation, and eventually it would potentially lead to increased transit infrastructure development.

The only downside I see is that since I work in the airline industry, the effect might be to destroy two or three of the larger carriers since fuel prices, after labor costs, are a major issue.

I just went through one round of concessions...I'm not sure my employer would be able to get me to sign onto another 17% reduction in pay, another increase in my medical premiums..and a further elimination of benefits.

The idea has some merit though...

[Zynx]

10. The late 1970s and early 1980s teach us...

that there is little variable fuel consumption in the system, meaning that people on average need to fuel up to a certain amount every day and that won't go down no matter the price. Gas consumption only went down in the late '70s and early '80s because of shortages. Putting in place such a massive gas tax would only send our economy into a tailspin, hurt the middle class, and not reduce oil imports. Good move Tom.

[newyawker99]

11. Hi Zynx!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Zynx]

12. Thank you!

:-)

[captain_crunch]

13. This is the stupidest idea I have heard in a long time.

The people who would suffer the most from this tax is the working man (Democrats). So the people who oppose the war already would be hardest hit in paying for it.

[KG]

15. hey, tom, how about a 100% tax on assholeprowarcheeleader columnists

like you, ya chicken-hawk, bush-parroting bastard?!?! :grr: