[kscoyote]

Charles Krauthammer - At $4, Everybody Gets Rational - washingtonpost.com

Unfortunately, instead of hiking the price ourselves by means of a gasoline tax that could be instantly refunded to the American people in the form of lower payroll taxes, we let the Saudis, Venezuelans, Russians and Iranians do the taxing for us -- and pocket the money that the tax would have recycled back to the American worker.

This is insanity. For 25 years and with utter futility (starting with "The Oil-Bust Panic," the New Republic, February 1983), I have been advocating the cure: a U.S. energy tax as a way to curtail consumption and keep the money at home. On this page in May 2004 (and again in November 2005), I called for "the government -- through a tax -- to establish a new floor for gasoline," by fully taxing any drop in price below a certain benchmark. The point was to suppress demand and to keep the savings (from any subsequent world price drop) at home in the U.S. Treasury rather than going abroad. At the time, oil was $41 a barrel. It is now $123.

But instead of doing the obvious -- tax the damn thing -- we go through spasms of destructive alternatives, such as efficiency standards, ethanol mandates and now a crazy carbon cap-and-trade system the Senate is debating this week. These are infinitely complex mandates for inefficiency and invitations to corruption. But they have a singular virtue: They hide the cost to the American consumer.

_________________________________





Seems the idea was originally a conservative one . . .

[tripleblack]

I doubt Charlie is trying to grab this and claim it as his original concept - it predates him by a LONG time - but its also one of those issues that define the difference between him (and most Republicans) and me:

He still likes to play games with the income taxes to seek to control social behavior - JUST like most Democrats.

I really like Charlie's take on most international issues - he's darn good on strategy and his campaign analysis is usually very insightful.

But this is one of those DEFINING differences.

NRST (FairTax) you all.

Now, if Charlie would get behind the FairTax, we could agree on the role of taxes in affecting social change!

Until then, its just more of the same old dirty game, and not one I have any respect for.

In a Realpolitik universe, he's doubtless correct - ASSUMING we are stuck with using taxes to control people (vs just funding the cost of government), what he suggest IS "better" than what we DID do...

Set up a suicide pact between anti-capitalist environmental goals AND our economy, then make sufficient bonehead mistakes to the point where the tax-dodge actually is a superior choice to continuing to make the same old bonehead mistakes forever.

LOL, its my old story about the Democrats and the Republicans and the train all over again...

What was it Yogi once said, something about:

"If we don't stop shooting ourselves in the foot we're going to really hurt ourselves?"

Originally Posted by kscoyote

Charles Krauthammer - At $4, Everybody Gets Rational - washingtonpost.com

Unfortunately, instead of hiking the price ourselves by means of a gasoline tax that could be instantly refunded to the American people in the form of lower payroll taxes, we let the Saudis, Venezuelans, Russians and Iranians do the taxing for us -- and pocket the money that the tax would have recycled back to the American worker.

This is insanity. For 25 years and with utter futility (starting with "The Oil-Bust Panic," the New Republic, February 1983), I have been advocating the cure: a U.S. energy tax as a way to curtail consumption and keep the money at home. On this page in May 2004 (and again in November 2005), I called for "the government -- through a tax -- to establish a new floor for gasoline," by fully taxing any drop in price below a certain benchmark. The point was to suppress demand and to keep the savings (from any subsequent world price drop) at home in the U.S. Treasury rather than going abroad. At the time, oil was $41 a barrel. It is now $123.

But instead of doing the obvious -- tax the damn thing -- we go through spasms of destructive alternatives, such as efficiency standards, ethanol mandates and now a crazy carbon cap-and-trade system the Senate is debating this week. These are infinitely complex mandates for inefficiency and invitations to corruption. But they have a singular virtue: They hide the cost to the American consumer.

_________________________________





Seems the idea was originally a conservative one . . .

[napalmbomb]

Rather see a FLAT TAX. you don't have to tinker with the constitution.
And yes I agree, Charles is wrong on this one but I like him about 90% of the time.

[kscoyote]

Originally Posted by napalmbomb

In 1983 Charles was still a liberal he had his awakining in the mid 80's.
Rather see a FLAT TAX. you don't have to tinker with the constitution.

Then why is he still proposing it?

[napalmbomb]

Originally Posted by kscoyote

Then why is he still proposing it?

I misread the date, but yes he was very liberal until the mid 80's.

[tripleblack]

Originally Posted by napalmbomb

I misread the date, but yes he was very liberal until the mid 80's.

Having read a lot of the man's recent work (last 6 or 7 years) I can say that I do not see him as a neo-con, but as one who was converted by Reagan.

More nearly does the man fit the famous quote from Winston Churchill:

"A young man who is not a Liberal has no heart, and an old man who is not a Conservative has no brain".

As for the Flat Tax, I would prefer that to what we have, but it is DOA and not even supported anymore in any form of bill or political platform. I would vote for it, given the chance, as a worthy intermediate step if nothing else.

Right now there are over a hundred Congressmen from both parties who are supporters of the FairTax. If all one does is check his personal Representative or Senators to see how they fall on this one issue, even absent any other homework (which I would suggest, of course), it would give many people a valuable means of determining who they should vote for.