Should the US government subsidize the cost of hybrids?

Question

If it were possible to do without further taxation, would you be in favor of a subsidy to make hybrids the same price as their traditional counterparts?

If not possible to fund this without more taxes, would you be in favor of adding steep taxes to gas guzzling luxury cars such as large SUVs and sports cars to fund such a subsidy?

mt_zion_crusader, did you even read the question? I specifically asked if it could be done WITHOUT further taxes, would you be in favor?

Answer 1

Question 1: Yes. We don't need further taxes; we need to spend less on the military and use the remainder to pay the subsidies. The subsidies should go to the consumer, not the car company. The answerer who claimed that subsidies don't work because the prices of domestic cars didn't go down didn't take into account that you were talking about subsidies to the consumer, not the car company.

Question 2: Yes, I would support such a measure.

On a general note, it's a good thing we have government in order to be able to implement these types of measures. It seems misinformed that people claim that "I have to pay for your car." One person might pay one whole dollar of their current tax bill to make this work, in order to achieve an enormous benefit to society.

Answer 2

As a hybrid owner/driver of 4 years, let me give you this take:

In theory, yes.

In practice, no.

I've been driving fuel efficient cars for ...well, I don't want to let on exactly how old I am. The hybrid, when driven properly, is the most fuel efficient car I own (I can squeeze out 75 mpg on one of my motorcycles). However, my wife and daughters of differing driving styles and experience, cannot get nearly as good a gas mileage as I can. While I can better the EPA numbers for my car, my family cannot even get in the ballpark. As a matter of fact, I can get better gas mileage driving in a "traditional counterpart" than they can in the hybrid. In addition to the Civic hybrid, I currently own a Civic coupe and I also owned the first model year of the Civic sedan, so I can guarantee that it's an apples to apples comparison.

I'd have to agree with Mr. Walkup, a biodiesel car would probably get better mileage for the majority of drivers.

And no, I wouldn't agree with taxing "gas guzzling" cars and trucks. It's not the owning of that type of vehicle that is so environmentally unfriendly, it's how you use it. If your goal is to tax consumption, then you have to do it at the pump...and there is an equitable way to do it. See my answer to your gas tax question. (Coming soon)

Answer 3

Totally. I see no choice at this point. We can't use fossil fuels forever, and if we are able to leave a few drops of that toxic decay safely in the Earth rather than dispersing it all into our atmosphere, good for us.

It is time to wake up. There is nothing wrong with living in harmony with the only home we have.

And I agree that people who consume the most petrol should be taxed to fund a future where we can all draw solar energy for Free, become independent/interdependent and start working toward a world where we don't seek destruction.

Also (as long as I'm on a tear) anyone who buys an SUV that never leaves the pavement should really be taxed.

Answer 4

In the words of Robert Heinlein, TANSTAAFL.
There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. I don't trust the government to do anything worth doing for 'free'. Besides, the goal here should be to get us OFF of fossil fuels, not stretch out the supply. We can do that if every family buys a couple of acres of land to grow their OWN switchgrass fuel distilled in their own private Revenoor or similar still.IF Big Oil wants to survive into the 22nd Century, they'd better start promoting the use of fossil 'fuels' as feedstocks for plastics, pharmaceuticals, and fertilizers. Oil is too valuable a resource to just burn it off.

Answer 5

Hybrids are currently receiving tax rebates (if they meet certain mileage efficiency criteria), but that rebate is getting cut fast. Back in February when I bought my Prius it had already been cut by 50%. Now it's been cut in half again, and in October it will be eliminated altogether. Even when it was at its maximum level, it was just a $3500 rebate on a Prius, which doesn't make up for the full extra initial cost (though it does take care of a big chunk).

We absolutely should be increasing our hybrid subsidies rather than cutting them. As it is only 1% of new care sales are hybrids, and we should be doing whatever we can to increase this number. I'm all for taxing gas guzzler sales to subsidize more fuel efficient cars. SUVs are harming the environment while hybrids are among the best cars we can drive to have a small environmental impact. Making that choice should have a financial cost/benefit besides paying for gas.

Answer 6

Completely useless! Current hybrid technology is deficient, and much more poluting than any gas powered car! We need to wait for the technology to mature, its why those car companies are aware of the defects of their technology, but they must cover the cost of their R&D so they must used up this technology to peoples naive enough to think it changes anything to the current state of our environment! Those batteries are made with heavy metals and are very difficult to recycles! Also those batteries use polymers made of... PETROL!! And again the batteries capabilities are like 7 to 10 years max, so car makers are even more happy to see that we will need to scrap a whole car from the circulations under such a short life span!!
And finally, the BEST technology for cars that is yet to come, is using fuel cells (Hydrogen, Methanol, Ethanol, VINEGAR, and others), that emit absolutely nothing (as there is no combustions), and can be refill undefinitly!!

Answer 7

No, i do no longer think of so. we could enable time-honored marketplace circumstances shield issues. If human beings get uninterested with gas fees adequate they're going to purchase extra hybrid vehicles. the motor vehicle manufacturers will exchange into extra streamlined to fulfill the call for. hopefully, this could bring about having the hybrids in an analogous funds through fact the different autos. yet otherwise to look at it is if gasoline fees pass even bigger your value decrease cost rates is even extra advantageous utilising a hybrid. nicely...in line with threat.

Answer 8

Actually no because all that happens is the companies adjust their price to grab the subsidy as a bonus. You still pay as much for the car. In the 1970s subsidies were created for car manufacturers to compete with cheaper Japanese imports. US car price rose to match what people would have had taken off by the subsidy. The net result was extra profits that the manufacturers used to invest in Japanese car makers. The price of the American cars never did drop.
Almost every subsidy program I ever saw works the same way.

Answer 9

I would with no added taxes. I would normally not agree because I am very conservative, but in this case it would help many people that can't afford it and provide incentives for the greedy to get vehicles that help us use less foriegn oil and lower the pollution.

I would not limit it to Hybrids, though. Their are good small cars that get close to hybrid mileage and cost much less. The new small diesels they are making are even better. I have researched and it seems Europe and Japan have some that will get better mileage. They will be here soon now that we are beginning to accept them.

Answer 10

Although I think hybrid owners do help the environment, I don't like the idea of any kind of subsidy by the federal government.

Here's why. The government, in an of itself cannot make any money. It gets it's money from taxpayers and by printing money or borrowing money from other countries. So, to give you or anyone any subsidy, the money has to come from taxes, printing extra money, or borrowed money. That means it's bad, double bad, and triple bad. The way the government can help is - *drum-roll* - by removing all kinds of subsidies from everywhere, and possibly by stopping the printing of money, and by stopping the deficit spending, and by reducing income taxes.

By the way, the government should de-subsidize the oil industry to increase tax revenue instead of taxing the people. That is the most effective way to reduce our bad habits as well as give the government the money it needs to maintain the roads and public transportation. Believe me, the oil companies will raise the gasoline prices because they don't have government subsidies anymore, and as a result, more people will buy more fuel efficient cars.

Printing money = inflation
Borrowing money = deficit spending = debt