Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:


I now pay $35-$50 per month for electricity. I'd pay $100-$150
before
I'd
write my senators and ask for an explanation. Keep in mind, however,
that
ANY number you choose, and any comment about whether the poor can
afford
clean power are 100% irrelevant, since you have NO clue as to how
much a
typical electric generating plant in Ohio would pay for cleaner
equipment,
and for how many years it would affect their balance sheet in a
major
way.

But suffice to say that it WILL cost more than nothing at all. What
that
exact figure is, is not important. The fact that everyone's electric
bill WILL go up as a result, is.

Dave



Are you saying that you are willing to pay no increase of any kind, to
provide your children with a cleaner world? Zero? Zip? Yes or no
question.

Certainly I am willing to kick in a little more. But not nearly what was
proposed by the kyoto summit, when the subject of global warming and
other environmental impact was discussed, and proposals along the line
of increasing fuel costs as a method to "dissuade" people from using
fossil fuels.

The effect on the economy would be widespread and devestating....

Not if it were focused on areas where ELECTIVE use was predominant. You DO
know what that means, right? Or do you need help?

Spare me the condescending attitude, and I might enlighten you with a
combination of human nature and free market logic.

Any time you artificially raise the cost of an item (Through a tax or
tariff) you essentially remove it, or reduce its availability, to people
of lesser financial means. So a tax on fuel will become effective at
controlling fuel usage, but based along socio- economic lines. The rich
will just dig a little deeper in their pockets and pay a little more to
continue their lavish lifestyles. While those not so financially well
off, will be forced to abandon or radically change their lifestyles.
This will only add to the rift between the socio-economic classes.

This whole country, and our culture of consumerism, means that a very
big part of our economy is based on elective use (Assuming your context
of the term "elective" means usage which is not necessary). A tax on
fuel would just about put an end to the RV industry, put a damper on
vacations, travel, tourism, etc. Many states (like Florida) raise much
of their working budgets through proceeds from tourism. I'm sure you can
see what would happen if this source was curtailed to any great degree.

Then of course, since the costs to operate a business, and to
manufacture goods, will increase due to taxes on fuel, the obvious
reaction will be a further push to relocate businesses offshore. Surely
you are not in favor of that?

These are only some examples. How many more do you need?

Dave