"Score one for Obama"
By: Chris Guy
Published On: 4/30/2008 11:45:44 AM
No, that quote has nothing to do with any of the superdelegate endorsements that Obama is announcing today. Nor does it have anything to do with yesterday's press conference in which he condemned remarks from his former pastor. That quote comes from Greg Mankiw, formerly head of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, and most economists agree with him. They agree that the Clinton/McCain gas tax holiday is nothing more than an election year stunt that will accomplish nothing (except prove that their concerns for energy independence are total BS).
Reuters:
"You are just going to push up the price of gas by almost the size of the tax cut," said Eric Toder, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center in Washington.
....
"I think it is a very bad idea," said Gilbert Metclaf, a economics professor at Tufts University currently working with the National Bureau of Economic Research.
"If we want people to invest in energy-saving cars, we need some assurance that the higher price paid for these cars is going to pay off through fuel savings," he said. "It is a very short-sighted, counterproductive proposal."
Comments
I heard an economist on Diane Rehm's program on NPR (Catzmaw - 4/30/2008 1:01:28 PM)
explaining why the tax holiday is a really bad idea. He said it will drive up consumption, which will increase demand, which will result in prices comparable to what we would pay WITH the tax, but with the disadvantage of having lost over 10 billion dollars from the transportation budget, which means a loss of even more infrastructure maintenance. Yeah, it's a winner.
It gets worse... (TurnPWBlue - 4/30/2008 2:41:29 PM)
Then, when the election is over (and a Democrat wins) the gas tax "holiday" will expire and a Democrat will be saddled with trying to explain why gas just jumped in price $0.18 per gallon. That will lead to calls in Congress to permanently get rid of any gas tax.
If anything, we should be raising the gas tax (or setting it as a percentage of the price, not a flat price per gallon). Additional revenue generated should be earmarked for R&D on alternative energy, conservation, and tax credits for those going green.
Seems to be all politicians know how to do these days ... (TheGreenMiles - 4/30/2008 2:11:26 PM)
... is pander with giveaways of tax dollars aimed at the lowest common denominator. This, the "economic stimulus" borrowed money giveaway, Virginia's estate tax repeal (a giveaway to the rich cynically sold as small business assistance) ...
When another bridge collapses (Lowell - 4/30/2008 2:44:57 PM)
because we've taken money that would have been used to fix it, who's going to take the blame? John McCain? Others who advocate this pandering idiocy?
Pie in the Sky Syndrome (Alter of Freedom - 4/30/2008 7:19:14 PM)
While not a fan of McCainenomics I can't help but laugh everythime I hear people tell us what revenues, yes our tax dollars, could be used for if we were not in Iraq spending 5K per second. Its laughable. Do people honestly believe that iof we were not in Iraq that these billions would be going to infrastructure (pretty much left to the states) education, poverty, health care programs like Medicare/Medicaid. people are making the assumption that politicians wouold be willing to spend more the funds on such endeavors simply because they have found a way to spend it on Iraq. I think we would see that it be even harder for them to spend it on the real programs that are meaningful like education...you see to them there is no real payoff politically do spend it in such ways but hey aircraft carrier or new fighter jet now were talking payoff.