If only the rich can afford to buy energy why not raise the cost even more to reduce its use?

Question

In Europe gas costs twice as much as it does in the USA so it seems logical just making it cost a lot more would reduce the use and the bad side effects caused by high use. Why not set it price at $11 per gallon everywhere so poor people would stop using it and the few who can afford to can have all they want and still generate less polution. That would save to food supply too.

Answer 1

The group 'poor people' includes the most disadvantaged people in society - the very young, the sick, the disabled, the old. You are suggesting that we deny the most vulnerable people in our society who are on the lowest incomes? Those who are infants or frail, or disabled etc so they have, arguably, the greatest need for an energy supply? Are you going to deny whole communities and towns who are affected by poverty when an entire industry closes down?

Yes, you are correct, this would probably reduce energy demand due to a massive increase in the death rate. The criteria to assess any civilised society is on how they care for their most vulnerable. How do you suggest that we should judge you on this question?

Answer 2

Is this a serious question or sarcasm? I'll pretend that it's serious. Yeah, you'd reduce the use of gasoline if you increased the price to $11/ gallon. You would also send the economy into a tail spin, probably a depression. The increase would affect all transported goods, which is essentially everything, so we'd have instant run-away inflation. Unemployment would increase to levels never seen before, because the private sector would have to reduce costs - the biggest cost is labor. The working poor and lower middle class would be devastated because their jobs would be the fist to go, and necessities like food would double if not triple in price. (Remember, you plant, harvest and transport food with equipment that runs on diesel or gasoline.) You would probably also see a gasoline black market and a steep rise in crime due to increased poverty levels. Europeans pay more for gas because the extra cost is mostly taxes to pay for all of their bloated, failed Socialist programs. Gasoline is already heavily taxed by both State and Federal governments. Do you really want to empower greedy and corrupt politicians with more of your hard earned money? You may want to consider taking economics 101 if you truly think artificially raising the cost of gasoline is a good idea.

Answer 3

It seems like a simple solution but let me give you a perspective as one of those pour souls paying sky-high gas prices in Europe (I'm in the UK, it's $9 a gallon here).

Here we're fortunate to have our own oil and gas reserves so you'd think gas would be quite cheap, it's not due to the hefty tax imposed by the government (approaching 80%).

Since the mid 1970's oil-crisis gas prices have been rising and rising and so too have the number of vehicles on the roads and the average number of miles each person drives per year. People are so dependent on transport that they will pay almost any price to maintain the benefits of it.

Those that are hardest hit are the elderly and others on limited incomes, often the people who need a car the most.

What it has done is to force motor manufacturers to produce more fuel efficient vehicles, one of the primary considerations when buying a car in Europe is the number of miles per gallon it returns. I don't have figures but I suspect the average European vehicle is considerably more fuel efficient than the average US vehicle.

If gas prices in the US were to rise to $11 a gallon (or even $5) I suspect there would be a public outcry which no doubt the government would quell (as happened in the UK following the fuel protests a few years ago, the result now is that the police and military have been given more powers to put down any future protests and the government have stockpiled huge reserves of fuel). Once the outcry had subsided people would drive almost as much as before, the price of goods and services would be increased to cover the additional costs and the US public would start demanding more fuel efficient vehicles.

Answer 4

Instead of setting the price so high, why not ration gas like we did during WWII? Ration depending on need (ie miles driving to work, to school, to buy food, or health care.) Do not ration depending on vehicle type except for business/farm use (eg trucking industry, construction vehicles )

Freeze the price at $2.25 a gallon. But make it a "soft" ration. Anyone who wants to use more than their allotted share of fuel can purchase gas without a ration credit at $12 a gallon.

The poor and working class are not penalized when driving is a necessity.

Those that drive fuel efficient vehicles, avoid excess travel, or seek alternative modes of travel - car pooling, public trans, bike, walk - are not penalized.

Businesses, being exempt from the ration, will not be penalized. Business tax code should be modified to ensure that the most resource-efficient modes are used. This will better address the specific vehicle needs of certain types of businesses rather than a generic fuel tax.

Even petroleum business is not hurt because $2.25 is still a pretty fair price and the difference can be made up with the artificially inflated price.

The people hurt the most are the ones driving more than they really need, in vehicles larger or more powerful than their needs.

I guarantee you that people will be seeking the most efficient cars possible, sharing rides, doing whatever they need to have some ration credits left over to do the funner things in life.

And as an added benefit, those who wouldn't be using their ration credits anyway could "scalp" them for $6 or $7 a pop. A nice incentive to be frugal with gas, but still cost more wasteful driver enough to change his vehicle or driving habits.

Answer 5

Probably because it would have a massive effect on the economy of the world.

How would supermarkets get food?
Where would furniture supplies come from?
What powers the water works and purification stations?
disabling transport- how would commuters get to work?
How would electricity be produced?
How would hospitals stay open?

Reducing its use would be a bad thing for everyone concerned. The real focus should be finding alternate energy sources. Nuclear fission perhaps- or even better the renewable sources.

Answer 6

Brilliant! You should pitch this to Al Gore so he can make millions off another movie!

But seriously if fuel was 5 dollars a gallon the cost of all goods and services would double. Then what?

Answer 7

What about the farming tractors. If you triple gas, you drive the price of produce through the roof. What about rural areas where there is no public transportation. How do people get to work. It would probably create another Great Depression.
Also, since public transportation runs on fossil fuel, the price of a bus ticket will triple as well.
Societal crash and burn.

Answer 8

I really can't see the rich people all wanting to harvest their own lobsters and pick their own oranges. Which is what will happen if everyone else in America dies coz they can't afford to go to work or eat....

Unless you're suggesting only the rich and illegal aliens are allowed to remain alive...?

Answer 9

wow your an idiot, so if you are not rich you should have to get a job within walking distance of your house assuming we will still be allowed to live in houses since we wont be rich enough to heat or cool them, I guess what is the point? quit saying retarded crap and get a job

Answer 10

That sounds like the logic of those carbon offset credits. It lets the rich do as they please while the poor need to make lifestyle changes and sacrifices.