BIKE: (no subject)

[alan_drake]

I disagree.

Shortages (we never had rationing) did impact behavior short term.

But look @ liquid fuel consumption by  nation:

http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/emis/tre_tp20.htm

You will see a drop in most nations from 1974 to ~1977.  This is entirely due to price elasticity of demand, since the US was uniquely severe in shortages (due to our price controls, etc.) and shortages disappeared everywhere in 1974.

Now, there is stable price increase in demand of ~2%/year, and demand elasticity is quite low short term, so high prices will result in minimal reduction in demand.

Alan



-- "Michael Zakes" <watcyc> wrote:
there was a story I saw a while back that said that most of the changes in
driving habits (i.e. smaller fuel efficient cars, more cycling/mass transit
use/walking, etc.) during the oil crunch of the 70s was due to the
rationing, moreso than the price increases.
Chances are someone who drops ~$30-40k or more(unfortunately heavily
subsidized by the current tax code if self employed and "used for business
use") isn't going to do much in behavior modification to save an extra
couple bucks at the pump, more likely they'll squawk to get gas taxes
dropped

Michael F Zakes, prop.
Waterloo Cycles
2815 Fruth
Austin TX 78705
512.472.9253

"I think the burden is on those people who think he didn't have weapons of
mass
destruction to tell the world where they are."

Ari Fleischer, on July 9, 2003.


mail


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <alan_drake>
To: <watcyc>
Cc: <forum>
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 12:39 PM
Subject: Re: BIKE: Taxing cars by the miles


>
> Given that oil consumption is a social, environmental & economic negative
(see Greenspan comments today, projections of Artic warming last week,
etc.), I think that shifting the tax burden from gasoline is a policy
mistake.
>
> *IF* the price of gasoline was ~30¢ cheaper today, even more Hummers.
Escalades, etc. would be sold.  They travel the same miles as less
objectionable vehicles.
>
> OTOH, mileage based liability & casuality insurance premiums would be a
great social positive.  One could own a car and use it for bulky purchases,
going to places far from public transport, etc. and pay far less than the
daily commuter.
>
> Alan Drake
>
> "If you want less of something, tax it.
>
> If you want more of something, subsidize it".




_______________________________________________
Get on or off this list here:  ht