Re: BEFORE Trying To Simply Hike the Fuel Tax . . .

The Trucker wrote:
> On Sat, 03 May 2008 08:11:40 -0700, BretCahill wrote:
> 
>> The deal needs to include a revenue neutral IRS rebate to cover the
>> increase in federal fuel taxes.
>>
>> The overall effect is drivers would be paid to use less fuel.
> 
> That is correct.  Revenue neutrality is the key to this.  The increase
or
> decrease in overall taxation is a different matter.
> 
>> Anyone who ****fts away from driving or at least from driving low mpg
>> vehicles would come out ahead economically and anyone who really
>> needed to drive to work or drive a truck to work would still be able
>> to afford it.
> 
> That is true in the most cases.  But a person that actually drives a
truck
> (long haul) for a living is going to lose no matter what.  

I've thought about whether, instead of a "windfall profits tax" on oil 
companies, we could provide a "windfall tax credit" to such small 
businesses to compensate them for the declining purchasing power of the 
dollar.  That is, if the dollar declines 20%, then the price of their 
fuel has risen 20% in dollars.  That should be deductible or credited as 
a business expense.

After all, it's not THEIR fault that the dollar is declining.  That's 
due to deliberate Federal Reserve policy.  Why should private business 
be penalized?


-- 
Steven L.
Email:  sdlitvin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 the NOSPAM before replying to me.