Minstrel makes some excellent points in his post. Heating oil should not be taxed! To me that is a little rediculous because we end up subsidizing for the poor, etc... and we probably wouldn't have to if the taxes were pulled from heating oil. I understand road tax on gasoline, you use the road = you help pay for it. I find it interesting how many people drive these huge pickups and SUVs that appear to be designed to hold one person but only get maybe 10mpg - (how many SUV, trucks do you see with more than 1 person in them?) I get a laugh out of the contractors (subs) that actually don't even use the truck for hauling anything but still HAVE to have one. (I guess they get to write more off if it is over a 1 ton or something.- Shawn did you check that out for a business write-off - I'm sure he did.)
I can accept that, too, but 36+ cents per litre? (that's like $1.44 per gallon in tax alone) The Canadian government jacked up the gasoline taxes in the 70s oil crisis, purportedly to encourage conservation and to fund the purchase of PetroCanada and incentives to mine the tar sands and other petroleum sources in Canadian territories -- it never went down, of course, and that money disappears into the general coffers where it is wasted with as little attention as all the other tax money -- now, the government has sold all its shares in PetroCanada: will they reduce the gasoline tax? not a chance...
Anytime government gets a hand in something it costs tons of money just to run the new program! Then if it isn't needed anymore, we still seem to pay for it anyways. Kind of like funds allocated to the schools here - if a school had 2 million but really only needed 1.5 that year they would hurry up and spend the remainder on anything and everything - I even know of a state college teacher who had a very expensive gaming computer build to use up the funds alloted. That way the next year they can say they need more.
Temporary taxes always become permanent. Take income tax for example. I'm not sure that reducing taxes on fuel is the solution to current high prices. Today the U.S. Senate passed a bill that (among other things) reduces taxes for oil companies. Just another example of how the current administration is making the oil industry more profitable. I think fear does have a major factor in high oil prices right now. Maybe we should look for solutions in other places other than lowering gas taxes. Cars are a major source of pollution. We should tax things that are bad for us and offer incentives for things that are good (like fuel efficient vehicles). In many jurisdictions there are actually incentives for buying large vehicles instead of smaller ones.
If all that tax money were being used to fund research into non-petroleum fuels and cleaner running vehicles, I could buy it. You and I and everyone else knows that isn't happening. Governments have no idea how to manage money -- they are experts at spending it but that's about where the buck stops. Give us our money back and industry its money back and I suspect all those dollars would be far better spent...
While most of that money is going into general revenue, the feds (in Canada) are promising to implement Kyoto. This will cost money--including money that is raised from taxing oil and gas. I'm not sure that I trust the oil industry to spend money in a way that reduces demand for their products. In the U.S., the government let the tobacco industry make anti-smoking ads for themselves and these ended up being a great way for them to advertize their products to teens more than they had before. (look for their "Tobacco is whacko" campaign) I guess it comes down to who you trust to act in society's best interest. While government has let us down many times, they're the best we've got.
I already posted my opinion... I have more faith in ordinary human beings than in politicians (or businessmen for that matter).
Our government should NOT have been able to become the big business it is - since no one has to be held accountable for the loss, waste or management - then to top it off if you are a manager of sorts in the gov't you really can't even fire a complete flake! I have had friends who worked in different departments and some that still do. From the local DMV to the postal service or schools, all the same; much, much waste.
Also - back to the OIL crisis: get a smaller car, motorcycle or electric car. (Even if you buy a second $400 old toyota corolla that gets 40mpg. I did that a few years ago.
If you could get governments to give people back some of their own money, they might be in a better position to do this... if you are driving an old V8 and are unemployed, $400 for an old Toyota may not be much of an option...
I agree that we are all individually responsible to make change happen. But what's the incentive to do this? I think this is where government can help. As I said, there are often incentives for buying SUVs rather than smaller cars. Car companies love what SUVs have done for their bottom line and are advertizing them like crazy. High gas prices are making people think twice about whether they really need a GMC Yukon to get to work every day.
Well, you're worrying about it, aren't you? Do you need the government to tell you to be concerned? or to take and waste so much of your money and make it more difficult for you to act on your concerns?
There are a lot of things I don't need the government to tell me to be worried about but that it nevertheless regulates on my behalf. Crime is one example of this. We can all do our bit to prevent crime, but we still need the government to act on our behalf in this matter. Some people don't worry at all about crime, yet still benefit from what the government does in this area. Just because the government wastes money in the course of regulating crime doesn't mean it should get out of the crime regulation business.
Now I never said we didn't need governments for anything or that they shouldn't be fighting crime... you're starting to sound like Mel... I just said they should get out of things that are better left to human beings and then maybe they can concentrate on things they should be looking after...
I think everybody will agree with that statement. Where people can't agree is what things are best left only to human beings. Should the government not be looking after the environment? btw: who's mel?
I suppose you're right... Mel is another member who has a penchant (here and on other forums) for telling you why you're wrong about something you never said in the first place...