Sunday, May 4, 2008

Pander bear

I got an email from Lisa yesterday, nudging me because I hadn't posted on Saturday morning (my usual schedule). It's true, I was a laggard, but I was working. Really.

This was the week of the gas pump pander, with Hillary Clinton staging her ridiculous idea of a gas-tax holiday from the back of a pickup at a North Carolina truck stop. Hillary's playing the slimiest of political ploys, and it appears to be working. She's proposing to suspend the paltry 18 cent a gallon federal gas tax from May Day to Labor Day, to "ease our pain at the pump". She wants us to believe she's doing us a favor, but she's really just helping us fall further and further behind the rest of the developed world. She's betting on Americans being myopic, and it appears from her recent gains in the polls in North Carolina and Indiana that she's making the right bet.

We Americans have gotten ourselves horribly addicted to gasoline, and the last thing we need is a politician to enable us. Over the past 25 years European and the Asian governments have deliberately raised oil & gas taxes about 20 times the measly 18 cents we pay, exacting this price to become nearly three times as energy efficient as we are. We did nothing but guzzle. Our faith-based energy policy rested on the belief that the world oil supply would grow forever. America played the grasshopper to Europe's ant. Three of the four best-selling vehicles in the United States last year were the Ford F-150, the Chevy Silverado and the Dodge Ram - all pickup trucks which get 15-17 MPG. Europe's economy is humming today, as is their currency. When Bush took office in 2001, the dollar was worth 1.15 Euros. Since then the dollar has steadily shriveled, it's now worth 0.65 Euros. What we have to show for 25 years of "head in the sand" energy policies are decrepit mass transit systems, suburban garages full of SUVs and pickup trucks, and trade deficits ballooning because of oil imports. Whose fault is this?

What Americans should be doing is accepting responsibility for our profligate ways, but we'd much rather look for scape goats. The oil companies are easy targets, after all they're making tanker loads of money from the worldwide demand for oil. Hillary's plan combines the suspension of the federal gas tax with a windfall profits tax on those big oil company meanies who forced us to buy all those SUVs and build all those suburbs (Exxon and Shell are probably behind the explosive economic growth in China, too). She knows her tax proposal is a gimmick that's unlikely to ever pass Congress, but what the hey, demagoguery sells. She accuses anyone who disagrees with her gas tax holiday plan of being on the side of the oil companies. Such b*llshit. She's the one proposing to pass our tax dollars over to the oil companies, using us as the middle men. Because the biggest benefactor of her gas tax holiday will be the oil companies.

If we're worried about the oil companies taking too much of our money, what do you think we should do - try to tax their profits or buy less gas? I did a quick calculation this week. A Ford Explorer (one of the most popular SUVs of the past 10 years) gets about 17 MPG, and has a 22.5 gallon gas tank. My 2002 Honda Civic gets 39 MPG and has an 11 gallon gas tank. It takes me $35 today to fill up my tank. It takes the Explorer driver about $80 to fill up her tank. We can both go about 400 miles on that tank of gas. Which one of us is inflating oil company profits?

This spring we're seeing headlines that show that high gas prices are starting to have a beneficial effect. Americans are buying smaller cars and driving less. As Americans buy less gas, oil companies take less of our money. If we cut our driving and gas consumption enough, gas prices might actually drop, but no matter, the important thing is that we'll cut our consumption of and expenditures for gasoline. On the other hand, if Hillary's tax holiday was to pass, this good behavior likely goes on holiday as well. The short-term, symbolic drop in gas prices would motivate Americans to hold off trading in the guzzler for a sipper, at least until the fall. Many of us would change our minds and decide to drive the family to Disneyland after all. Gas consumption would go up! Oil companies would smile, broadly. Even if they had dropped prices at the pump the full 18 cents when the tax was suspended (doubtful) they'd start to raise them again as demand soared over the summer. The oil companies (and their profit margins) will just LOVE Hillary's gas tax holiday. And where will we find ourselves (and gas prices) come Labor Day, when the gas tax will be reimposed? How happy will we be at that point?

The primary reasons that oil companies are making big profits in the US is because we've done nothing to cut our demand, and demand from the rest of the world is growing rapidly. America consumes half of all the world's gasoline supply. We're 1/20th of the world's population and we use 1/2 its gas! What did we think was going to happen, when the rest of the world started to catch up? Worldwide demand for automobiles and gasoline is growing exponentially as newly minted middle class consumers in China and India adopt a western lifestyle. Do any of us honestly believe that this is the oil companies' fault? We all know that we need to become more efficient, and conserve more. The thing is, we didn't mean we wanted to do it right now. Maybe next year, or next decade. We'll change our ways sometime in the not-too-distant future, as soon as we've paid off the Chevy Tahoe and taken that Las Vegas vacation. Hillary's doing us no favors, but you can't really blame her, she's just giving us what we want.

3 comments:

lisajpetrie said...

Thanks for the post, John. I was getting worried.

:)

So, about convserving natural resources....

I've thought a lot lately about human nature, and how it seems we have to be forced, or inspired, to do the right thing. It seems that it takes a crisis to make us act responsibly, and maybe that's nothing new. Maybe that's the way we've always been. But it makes me think back to my own childhood, growing up in a house of eight, watching and learning from my blue-collar parents as they taught us how to save energy, save our allowance, sew our own clothes (I never quite got the hang of that), make our own bread (I do that quite well), save water (they actually encouraged us to pee in pairs), save for the only vacation we took as a family (besides trips to grandma's house), shopping very little, etc. And we really lacked for nothing. Yeah, we were "forced" to eat homemade bread, we only had one car, and didn't have cable TV, but we had plenty to eat, we wore clean clothes (and some were actually cool -- my mom sews very well), we all had private music lessons, we went to a good Catholic school (until it closed), we all played sports, etc. But then I grew up, got a good job, and started to buy into the notion that I somehow deserved more than I could afford -- more travel, expensive food, expensive haircuts, a relatively new car, a rental home that's too big for me, etc. Where did that line of thinking come from...? Was it a personal backlash against growing up "poor"...? Am I insecure because the people around me have "more"...? Is it a change in tone from Washington, encouraging me to live the American Dream, not matter the cost in the long run...?

In the grand scheme of things, I think I'm relatively frugal. I don't shop a lot, I wear lots of fleece in my house in the winter, I combine trips to save on gas, I practically live in the dark in my house, etc. And sometimes I still pee twice before I flush. Old habits die hard. But I could do better. And I've noticed how this current energy crisis, and the global economy in general, has made me look back quite fondly and thankfully on my own upbringing. It makes me realize how foolish we can be, thinking we're entitled to more than we actually deserve. It actually feels good to me to be saving more now (instead of taking monthly trips to NYC or the Cape), driving even less than I used to (even if that means visiting Peterborough only once a month or so!), still eating well but being much more careful at the grocery store, etc. And in light of all of this, I can't believe Hillary's not asking us to step up to the plate. Her line of talk is so 1990's. She sounds like George Bush, encouraging us to go shopping after 9/11. She's doing anything to get what she thinks she deserves -- her rightful place as Commander in Chief. But she's acting like anything but a leader right now! And I'm almost to the point where I can't vote for her should she become the Democratic nominee. I'm not willing to sacrifice just so that she can live her American Dream, watching her shamefully pander to desperate folks living in places where she desperately needs votes, lying to them by refusing to ask them to be responsible. I need to know that our next President will responsibly encourage us to share in each other's dreams, and I can't settle for less than that. I know John thinks that I have to vote for the Democrat, no matter who it is, but I'm not sure I can stand in line behind Hillary.

Christine said...

I usually respond to your posts but I'm having a hard time with this one. I'm so disappointed in Hilary. I've tried throughout this campaign to support her but I just have this feeling that she's a politician instead of an inspired leader. I hoped for more.

Lisa, your childhood sounds so much like ours. We were told that "if it's yellow, let it mellow..." and during our drought here in Georgia, our household lived by that maxim. Our dad was proud that he could fit the week's worth of trash from a family of 8 into 1 grocery sack every week. Our clothes hung on a clothesline to dry (and I still remember the fragence). We had a paper route every Sunday of 150 customers that the oldest 4 plus Dad delivered to every week. My parents used very little credit. And I have fallen out of alot of those habits.

I have been happy to see gas prices rising. It will be good for the environment.

Christine

Cynthia said...

Slightly off-topic: Hillary is acting as we have come to expect ALL politicians to act. Why is it that people keep "trying" to vote for her and why are they "disappointed" in her? She is acting just like a normal politician. (And why shouldn't she....it has worked in the past, thank you.) Why do people start with an assumption that she will somehow be different? Is it strictly because she is a woman? So all the work we have done toward gender equality has led instead to reverse gender in-equality? Women are not equal to men, but are assumed to be superior? NO!! Politicians are politicians, whether male or female. People who are "trying" to vote for Hillary just because she is a woman are being very short-sighted. Vote for the best PERSON. Don't vote for a physical attribute, like being black or female. Vote for the person who has the intelligence AND the objective reasoning necessary to tell the difference between a real issue and a ploy.

On topic: Raising the gas tax is the only intelligent move. Calling us all the step up to the plate, on all issues, is the only intelligent move. However, I have the unfortunate opinion that most of the people in our country are selfish, short-sighted, uninformed, immature, unwilling to act for the good of the group. The only way to influence their behavior is to cause them pain where they live -- someone mentioned that we respond only to crisis. True. Most times that is what causes change. So, bring on a crisis, already! The suspense is killing me!!