Should the US add a surtax of $23.95 per barrel of imported oil?

Question

The US imports 10,400,000 barrels of oil per day
http://www.nationmaster.com/country/us-united-states/ene-energy
The cost of the Iraq war is $363.7 billion over 4 years (1460 days)
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182
The average military subsidy is thus approximately $23.95 per barrel of imported oil. If consumers paid this price at the gas pump rather than through taxes, alternative energy sources would be more competitive. Should consumers pay the true cost for oil?

The total cost to the consumer is the same. Pay more at the pump, but reduce your income tax by the same amount. Let the market determine the best energy source without subsidies.

Answer 1

No! The consumers should not have to pay for the true cost for oils but hopefully the government should helps to pay the cost and thus reduce the cost increase for oil. In here, Malaysia, the government do support the cost for oil to the consumers. It is a wise ideas. The business here runs better and smooth.

Answer 2

absolutely. If the price at the pump gets to 3.50 a gallon all alternative fuel types become a good investment. We should pump up the price to the max possible and force our economy to go oilless. But I can promise you this the price of gas will always be cheaper than say Biofuel etc. Just enough to make alternative fuels a likely money loser. America goes with the pocketbook everytime.

Answer 3

That may be the worst idea I have ever heard.Tha cascade effect across the economy would result in double digit inflation,double digit unemployment,and 20% interest rates across the board.In other words a Jimmy Carter type economy.So no.

Answer 4

The loony left sure lives up to their name.

Answer 5

Yes. And everyone should drive electric cars, smoke pot and drink starbucks.

Answer 6

No thanks. The problem is that there currently is no viable alternative energy for fuel at the pump.