I rarely read about the great benefits to individual states that this increase has been.

This from the AP this morning.

"California, which has the highest gas tax in the nation according to a survey by the American Petroleum Institute, would rake in $5 billion this year if the price at the pump remains at $4 a gallon. That's more than double the $2.1 billion the state took in gasoline tax revenue in 2003, state revenue officials said".


Link

If the states are reaping such benefits does it sound logical that they would want to reduce their income?

I guess there are more people making a bunch from all this then we think.

Me thinks there is a "Plan" afoot and a "Goal" but I can't seem to figure out exactly what or who is at the helm.

What state, in their right mind, would reject $5 BILLION dollars of income, to be spread among their cronies, and oh yes, the people.

If only we knew what our "elected officials" think and about their constituents. I think we are but "Sheep" to them.
Look how easily we are lead. It feels so good when I stop.

quote:

MtManLee wrote:
IMHO what you are saying is nothing more than fear or a scare tactic.

I must have missed something, or don't quite see the angle at which you read my post, I don't see nor did I intend any kind of "fear or scare tactic"? Admittedly, my "simple supply and demand" statement is over simplyfied, there are lots of issues and numerous factors affecting the price of oil, supply being only one. The largest factor seems to be speculation, speculation that world demand will continue to outpace world supply. It's a bubble, just like any other boom, it will bust. Increasing supply by drilling our own will help to burst that bubble sooner than later and serve a portion of our economy in the process (corporate profits as well as employee salaries). Lack of refining capacity is another problem here in the US, and we need to reign in the environmentalists a bit so that we can get back up to speed as a nation. Going green is great, but it's not going to happen overnight, we have to keep the country rolling until the replacement, whatever that may be, can be developed and put in place. Now, capped wells? I had never heard of that one, but there are many things I've never heard of, doesn't make them any less true. Probably a result of some legislation preventing them from selling it overseas? If not, I don't see why they'd be sitting on it, it certainly does not cost $140 a barrel to pull if out of the ground, so why not sell it internationally if we don't have the refining capacity to deal with it. Just my thoughts, I'm certainly no expert on the issue. Just seems if we have the energy sources domestically, why do we continue to depend on foreign sources, especially when there are environmentally responsible ways (other than doing nothing) to go about it.

quote:

$5 billion this year if the price at the pump remains at $4 a gallon.

Why would they rake in more just because the price is $4? As the article quoted states, the gas tax is based on "per gal" not a percentage of sales. All over the U.S. gas usage is being reported as down due to folks not filling up as often, and public transportation is on the rise.

This would indicate less gallons being sold which means less money for the states.

From the link;

quote:

The roughly three dozen states that use only a flat tax on gas may face declining revenues as motorists pinched by high fuel prices try to drive less.

In the dozen or so states where the tax is tied, at least in part, to the price at the pump, the skyrocketing of gas prices has meant an unexpected windfall.

California, which has the highest gas tax in the nation according to a survey by the American Petroleum Institute, would rake in $5 billion this year if the price at the pump remains at $4 a gallon. That's more than double the $2.1 billion the state took in gasoline tax revenue in 2003, state revenue officials said.

You gotta love California! Oh, wait, I live here!! @*$&!!

quote:

Originally posted by lwmuddy:

What state, in their right mind, would reject $5 BILLION dollars of income, to be spread among their cronies, and oh yes, the people.

Most state fuel/gas taxes go directly to highway construction/maintenance.

-Tom

So how come so many road are so bad? OR,
why aren't the roads better.

They're are just too many ideas floating around as to why, who is responsibe for this mess.
Just filled up (13 Gallons) for $50.10. (Malibu 38 mpg Highway)
We will try to make this last 2 weeks.

quote:

Originally posted by lwmuddy:
So how come so many road are so bad? OR,
why aren't the roads better.

Not enough money for proper maintenance. Costs are astronomical. Coincidently, most of the highway wear and damage is caused by tractor trailer trucks. Move freight to the railroads will save oil and $$s for everyone.

We went through this in the 70s until the oil companies were allowed to drill in Alaska. Now "our" Alaskan oil is sent to the Pacific Rim countries because Alaska was crying the blues during the early 90s. ($10/barrel in 1992) The high price of oil has not stopped our shipments overseas. I drew this to the attention of my Congressman, Dick Shamkus, and he blew me off. Oil wells in my neighborhood are not being pumped until the price of oil goes up. The high oil prices also justify the pipe line for the tar sands in Canada. I do not worry about a recession but a depression.

Check this out http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/06/news/economy/birger_shale.fortune/index.htm