Sunday, Feb. 12, 2006 | 12:33 p.m.
I disagree with Thomas Friedman's Feb. 9 column in which he calls for a gasoline tax to encourage energy conservation.
My reasoning: Why penalize the people who are already conserving, along with the gas hoggers? Most of the lower income drivers have smaller, cheaper (what they can afford) four-cylinder cars getting 30 mpg, so why put a heavy tax on them along with their mostly higher income neighbors driving mini-tanks that get maybe 10 mpg on a good day?
You could rectify this unfairness by giving a rebate on all four- or six-cylinder high mpg cars, but that would be a bureaucratic nightmare. A much more simple if slightly autocratic (but justified by the energy crisis) policy, of simply outlawing most personal, individual cars with more than four- or six-cylinders (unless they average at least 25 mpg), is called for.
I know this sounds drastic and raises the old "choice" bugaboo, but drastic times require drastic measures, and until the public is convinced of the seriousness of the energy problem, the bugaboo will probably prevail. My question is why should somebody be allowed to waste a precious commodity with impunity simply because they can afford to do so and because they "want to"? If the government wants more revenue, they should raise the income tax on higher incomes and if they want to conserve gas, get rid of the gas hogs.
Daniel Olivier, Bullhead City, Ariz.
archive
