dagblog - Comments for "To Bail or not to Bail"

the $5 a gallon tax will

mar3ie — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 00:46:51 +0000

the $5 a gallon tax will never happen it is political suicide the more you harp on it the more insane you sound and it turns reasonable people off to other solutions.

Mar3ie

tell the millions of people

Deadman — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 04:57:00 +0000

In reply to Here are my responses to

tell the millions of people in taiwan and s. korea and china who have seen their incomes and standards of living increase immensely because of world trade and globalization that the costs are way too high. obviously, there are winners and losers and clearly blue collar/factory laborers probably have been slight negative losers (but America likely has been an aggregate winner - i'd much rather deploy our resources as efficiently as possible and THEN try to correct any resulting wealth imbalances then to erect aribitrary barriers to sustain dying industries)

small is beautiful in some things for sure but in car manufacturing?? seems to me like scale is much more valuable that flexibility. there's a reason you haven't seen upstart companies challenge the incumbeents like you have in the airline industry - the cost of entry to play is just too high.

your gas tax proposal is the farthest thing from capitalistic. you're advocating government intervention to pursue non-market-based goals, which is fine as far as it goes since it's done everyday in a million different ways, but rarely as dramatically as you suggest.

you assume you can somehow figure out the true cost of a gallon of gas - if you truly believe our current consumption is going to result in the destruction of the planet and that that impact should be included in the price at the pump, then you could probably justify unlimited taxes. obviously, everyone in this country would stop driving and oil consumption would plummet. So would a large portion of the nation's economic activity (at least until an alternative green solution could be brought to market). Yet not much would change with oil consumption throughout the rest of the world and from a practical standpoint you probably wouldn't have accomplished much.

Again, a much better solution would be to incentivize alternative energy investments through direct funding and subsidies. still can run into problems with misdirected investments such as our disastrous corn-based ethanol subsidies, but even poorly allocated investments would have a much smaller economic impact than a huge increase in gas taxes.

Hey Hal, buddy.... two out of

Billy Sunshine — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 04:56:13 +0000

In reply to To Bail or not to Bail

Hey Hal, buddy.... two out of four ain't bad. Your timing stinks on #4.

Here are my responses to

HSG — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 03:33:46 +0000

In reply to while i appreciate the

Here are my responses to Deadman's points:

2) The cost of globalization is way too f'ing high. We should give up on globalization since a disproportionate amount of its benefits flow to a few and its costs are spread among the many. Think globally baby, but act locally. BTW - our neighbors are beggared. Life sucks in the third world for most people. What studies have shown is that some places and some people have benefited greatly from globalization while others have seen their incomes stagnate or ebb. Quite simply, why can't we reach back in time to sensible trade policies that meant a higher standard of living for most Americans.

3) Small is beautiful. Small companies are more nimble and more able to specialize and thereby take advantage of niche markets - like hyper economy vehicles. The Big Three succeeded in squeezing everybody else out through aggressive marketing, buying out rivals, predatory pricing, and exclusive contracts with suppliers - not by producing the best cars.

4) There can be no legitimate dispute that the true cost of a gallon of gas is many times greater than the under $2 that we currently pay at the pump in most of the country. Those who disagree are neither smart nor rational. The best way to reduce the consumption of any good is to raise its price. I am a capitalist and I believe and love the elegance of the supply and demand curves. If you raise the price of a good - through a tax, the demand at any given price - set by the producer - will drop. Moreover, by raising the price of gasoline through taxes, we will be providing a huge boost to green energy entrepeneurs who will have a far higher price ceiling.

Deadman - I believe I owe you

HSG — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 03:15:00 +0000

In reply to btw, i love that we have two

Deadman - I believe I owe you a debt for the Hamlet reference. Before I started this thread, I read your earlier blog entry which obviously subliminally put into my mind the "To bail or not to bail" line.

btw, i love that we have two

Deadman — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 01:18:38 +0000

In reply to To Bail or not to Bail

btw, i love that we have two Hamlet-inspired posts this week!

while i appreciate the

Deadman — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 01:17:53 +0000

In reply to To Bail or not to Bail

while i appreciate the creativity of the ideas, i'm not a fan of any of these suggestions, except for no. 1. the benefits of universal health care would certainly help make U.S. carmakers' cost structure more competitive. and the benefits would extend far beyond the Rust Belt. There's plenty of complexity with such a plan and a lot of costs, but i think a country as wealthy as ours should make universal health a priority, and if it helps the automakers, then great.

2 is way too protectionist for my tastes. if we can't compete in manufacturing automobiles because the labor cost structure is too high here, then that is the price of globalization (from which we derive MANY benefits), and we should focus on industries where we can add value. beggar thy neighbors NEVER work. not saying we shouldnt insist on fair trade and reasonable labor and environmental protections from our trade partners, but we can't go back in time and pretend that the low-cost Asian labor markets don't exist.

3. this makes very little sense to me. needs to be MORE consolidation in the U.S. auto industry, not the other way around.

4. you're getting into some very gray areas when you suggest that the costs of our energy consumption far outweigh the current price of the commodity and need to be factored in our energy tax policies. i agree with you that ideally gas consumption would be taxed more like liquor or cigarettes, given the comparable negative effects and long-term costs on society, but there are plenty of smart, rational people who do not see it the same way.

not to mention, a big gas tax increase is totally infeasible for reasons genghis has already stated. It'd be political suicide, plain and simple. I'd much rather see a worldwide carbon cap and trade program implemented, which could generate some serious tax revenues and do more to help the environment than a punishing gas tax in this country would do.

Donal - I hear you. I

HSG — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 22:02:51 +0000

In reply to Drop the attitude if you want

Donal - I hear you. I acknowledge that I get a little worked up on environmental issues - well all issues - and I will strive to adopt a more respectful tone. But . . . I stand by my apocalyptic language. I am completely convinced that we are embarked on a course that is rendering the earth incapable of sustaining complex organisms by at the latest mid-century if we do not immediately and drastically cut back on the consumption of carbon- based fuels.

I'm for a higher gas tax. I

Michael Wolraich — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 21:37:00 +0000

In reply to I am sick and tired of people

I'm for a higher gas tax. I just say that it's got to be done gradually for humanitarian and economic reasons. Many working class people have health care benefits and so would not see a lot of cost savings from universal health care (not saying that we shouldn't do it, just that it wouldn't represent much cost saving to many people). Another thing to consider is that the cost of food would go up because of increased transportation costs.

It is critical that we act as quickly as possible to stop global warming; it's just not our only obligation.

Drop the attitude if you want

Donal — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 21:35:00 +0000

In reply to 2. I don't get the "we'll

Drop the attitude if you want a serious discussion.