MyDD :: questions

questions

by rocky, Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:17:36 PM EST

So much has been said about the gas tax but there are of couple of questions still not dealt with. The reader can answer those for himself and decide whether the gas tax holiday made sense
What is the purpose of the federal gas tax? is it meant to lower the usage of gas or for road construction? Is it important whether the buyer(us) or the seller(gas companies) pay the tax? Would holding the gas price at this price or twenty cents lower lead to increased usage?
If it is ok for richardson , Deval ,susan rice, robert reich to disregard their loyalty to the clintons in campaigning against Hillary in the name of the country then why would it not be ok for the clintons or their supporters not to actively support Obama if they felt it was in the larger interest of the country? In other words loyalty for the country good for some but not good enough for Clinton supporters?

Tags: gas tax, electability (all tags)

Permalink :: 19 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: questions (2.00 / 1)

It exists because it is a great source of revenue for the gov't. Because demand for gas is so inelastic, the tax does not significantly reduce the demand for gas, which makes it a perfect good to be taxed.

If the tax were supposed to lower consumption, it would be much, much higher. Look at the taxes on cigarettes in some states.

The consumers will always pay for the tax. All similar taxes are passed on to the consumer, its basic economics. Lowering the tax or eliminating it might increase demand slightly, but demand is pretty much stable.

As for your second topic, there's a huge difference between Clinton loyalists campaigning for another Democrat and campaigning for a Republican against Obama. There really isn't a comparison.

by KevinT on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:28:07 PM EST

I agree. (none / 0)

It really should be higher but as you said the demand is inelastic, especially over the short term. Over the long term, people can replace their gas guzzlers.

Also, trying to get elected by saying 'I'll raise the tax on gasoline' is futile.

No Way, No How, No McCain!

by GFORD on Sun May 11, 2008 at 01:50:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Gas tax is to pay for roads & mass transit (none / 0)

infrastructure [& other road-related stuff like bridges]; all of which is in terrible shape in this country-mass-transit needs to be vastly expanded now so people can ride it instead of getting hit by gas.

Hillary's gas tax thing is pointless. Even Paul Krugman admits that.

As for the general election, do you honestly think it's better for the country if 100 years in Iraq virulently anti-choice sell-the-country-off-to-China with unaffordable tax positions John McCain were to win?

If so, support him, but I don't know why you'd have supported Hillary, since she totally disagrees with him on all major issues.

by bobdoleisevil on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:29:56 PM EST

Re: questions (2.00 / 1)

I have a question too: Why can we talk about who will or will not get the black vote, but we can't talk about who will or will not get the white working class vote? Why is it an honorable and necessary question in one case, but an incendiary reference in the other?

by Susan in Oregon on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:32:07 PM EST

You have touched (none / 0)

the Democratic Party 'third rail' with a very good question.

by Coldblue on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:39:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Who's been talking about the black vote? (none / 0)

by bobdoleisevil on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:39:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who's been talking about the black vote? (none / 0)

Obama supporters and TV pundits talk about it all the time. They talk about disaffecting the black vote if Obama doesn't get the nomination, they talk about how Obama is winning blacks by high percentages, they talk about how it's given him advantages in states with significant AA populations... the discussion is constant.

by Susan in Oregon on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:43:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Which, by the way (none / 0)

I have no problem with. Facts are facts and voting trends are very important to understand.

by Susan in Oregon on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:46:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

More pundits than anyone (none / 0)

Team Obama usually just says "We expect to do very well" and leave it at that when going into a state with a large black population.

Really, it's fine to talk about the white vote, but I think we put too much importance on it, and Clinton certainly went off the rails when she started specifically talking about "hard working white americans." If it wasn't intentional, then she tried to combine statistics with pandering, which is somewhat problematic.

You can talk about hard working Americans. You can talk about white Americans. And yes you CAN talk about "hard working Americans, white Americans," but you have to expect someone's ears to pick up and say, "What the heck does that mean?"

I just wish she hadn't said that she doesn't listen to pollsters back in Pennsylvania. It makes her sound silly now.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:18:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More pundits than anyone (none / 0)

"You can talk about hard working Americans. You can talk about white Americans. And yes you CAN talk about "hard working Americans, white Americans," but you have to expect someone's ears to pick up and say, "What the heck does that mean?"

It means that she was talking about the white working class, obviously. The black working class is going for Obama, so to just refer to "hard working Americans" is too general and doesn't make the point. In fact, if she'd said it without specifying she was talking about whites, it would have come off as though she thinks all hard working Americans are white, for heavens sake. It would have been a much more problematic statement without adding the ethnic specificity.

by Susan in Oregon on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:25:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We have a word for that. (none / 0)

She could have said "working-class white Americans" and there would have been no trouble.

Though suggesting that non-college-educated working-class white Americans is a "broader base" to build a general election campaign on is slightly problematic to me.

Even if it's a huge demographic, one thing that goes wrong with it and she's finished. You can't deny that Obama's base is currently more varied and flexible.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:33:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We have a word for that. (none / 0)

"She could have said "working-class white Americans" and there would have been no trouble."

But that is what she said, just less economically.

by Susan in Oregon on Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:46:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary Clinton is not a racist. (none / 0)

But she is an attorney (as is Obama) and attorneys understand words, that is their stock in trade.

However, even attorneys when asked a question on the fly can inadvertently make a comment that didn't come out quite the way they meant it.

Examples:

Obama's 'bitter' comment. It caused an uproar and Hillary used it extensively against him in speeches. She may even still be using it. Fair game in politics.

He has since explained what he meant by it and apologized for the unintended way it came out. Totally believable since why would a candidate deliberately offend a portion of the electorate during an election year?

Hillary's 'white, working class voters' comment. Obama hasn't used it against her himself but it's been picked up elsewhere and probably won't die for at least a few more days. Once again, fair game in politics.

I haven't seen where Hillary has come out and explained what she meant or apologized but if she hasn't, it would be a good idea.

No Way, No How, No McCain!

by GFORD on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:18:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

White working class (none / 0)

is not an ethnic group, and it's not a voting block. I'd guess a majority of the country falls into the category of white working class.

Hillary gets votes from some people in the white working class, Obama gets votes from some people in the white working class, the republicans get votes from some people in the white working class.

It's not particularly helpful to slice and dice the electorate into smaller and smaller demographic group.

Who gets the Asian American astronomer vote? Who gets the Native American college professor vote? Who gets the white lesbian hearing impaired high school teacher vote?

I know the campaigns do this kind of analysis internally but it's not for public consumption because it gets misinterpreted and misused. The worst offenders being the talking heads who have a peck of knowledge and a bushel of opinion they love to call news.

No Way, No How, No McCain!

by GFORD on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:05:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: questions (none / 0)

Herbert's rant today is an admission that obama cant win and he wants to preemptively blame Hillary.Also onthe gas ax try not to rely on the opinions of "authorities" but answer for yourself "what is the difference between either the consumer or the seller paying the tax?" what actually is Hillary's plan?

by rocky on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:48:56 PM EST

Ugh (2.00 / 1)

Obama can win. Any assertion otherwise is ridiculous.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:19:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: questions (none / 0)

"Also onthe gas ax try not to rely on the opinions of "authorities" but answer for yourself"

lol. You sound just like Hillary. Heaven forbid we actually listen to economists and people that understand economics when it comes to economic issues.

I'll tell you what, I will volunteer to do your taxes for you next year. I'll do them by hand. I know next to nothing about our tax system, but I promise I can make it so you don't have to pay taxes. Deal?

by KevinT on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:25:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: questions (none / 0)

"Also onthe gas ax try not to rely on the opinions of "authorities" but answer for yourself"

lol. You sound just like Hillary. Heaven forbid we actually listen to economists and people that understand economics when it comes to economic issues.

by KevinT on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:25:25 PM EST

Re: questions (none / 0)

oops. ignore that.

by KevinT on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:26:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.