86% Oppose Hiking Gas Tax

[DOGS THAT BARK]

---anyone here agree with Dems tax hike proposal?

From Rassmusan polling

86% Oppose Hiking Gas Tax
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Advertisment
Eighty-six percent (86%) of Americans oppose a proposal to increase gasoline taxes by 50 cents a gallon. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that just 8% favor such a tax hike.

Just 17% of Americans believe that such a gasoline tax hike would have a positive impact on the economy. Seventy-nine percent (79%) believe it would have a negative impact, including 64% who believe the impact would be Very Negative.

Those figures are similar to the generic belief that tax hikes are bad for the economy. Generally speaking, just 13% of Americans believe that tax hikes help the economy. Sixty-three percent (63%) believe they hurt the economy. That view is strongly held and has changed little since Election 2004.

The possibility of a substantial gasoline tax increase was raised last week on C-Span by House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.). Dingell, a Congressman from Michigan and longtime ally of that state?s auto industry, did not expect a warm reaction from the general public. During the interview he said ?I sincerely doubt that the American people are willing to pay what this is really going to cost them.?

Dingell opposes a proposal that recently passed the Senate mandating an increase in fuel efficiency over the next decade. That energy bill passed the Senate with virtually no public notice as it was voted on during the midst of the struggle over immigration reform. Polling at the time found most Americans support the concept of requiring auto manufacturers to build cars with better gas mileage.

One reason hiking the gas tax generates such strong opposition is that consumers would react to higher gas prices by cutting back on entertainment expenses, vacations, and major purchases. An earlier survey found that half would cut back on groceries if the price of gas jumps a dollar a gallon.

While public opposition to hiking the gas tax is overwhelming, and the underlying belief that tax hikes are bad for the economy is strong, there is some support for increasing taxes on Americans earning more than $200,000 a year. Fifty-three percent (53%) of Americans favor that approach while 33% are opposed. Sixty-three percent (63%) believe that such a tax would have a positive impact on the economy while 29% believe it would have a negative impact.

Unlike the gas tax, there is a clear partisan divide when it comes to taxing high-income Americans. The proposal is favored by 65% of Democrats, 39% of Republicans, and 53% of those not affiliated with either major political party.

However, public skepticism about politics and politicians makes it challenging for those who want to raise taxes on the wealthy. An earlier survey found that 58% of Americans believe that their own taxes go up even if politicians promise that only the wealthy will pay. Rasmussen Reports measures and reports public opinion on the issues of the day. Latest updates are available on the Rasmussen Reports home page.

 

[bryanz]

What do you think most Americans think about this so called republican administrations plan to redistribute our wealth to rebuild Iraq. I thought the pres & vp said that most of this conflict would be paid for with Iraq oil ????? What's the difference ? The left and the right transfer American wealth out of this country and shift it to their comrades state side every chance they get. What the F--k is your point ?

 

[Chadman]

I am not blissfully supportive of tax increases...I tend to stray from the liberal line a bit in many of these instances - this one included. I have not read the logic in the raise that the public would be paying, so knee-jerk reaction is that I am not for it. Not sure what it's going for.

What I am totally against is tax reductions when our spending (for whatever reasons) is out of control, especially during a time of war. That is both unheard of, and unpatriotic, in my view.

What I note from your article is that a majority of Americans are against a gas tax hike, but are for raising taxes on the upper crust. I'm not even necessarily for the latter off the top of my head, except a repeal of cuts during war seems to be a more accurate way to put it - and something I think might have merit as long as the administration wants to continue the war in Iraq.

 

[Chadman]

I often wonder if Joe Average would be for extra tax cuts if they could see exactly what other things suffer and have to be cut that would really affect their standard of living and way of life. And I doubt that many understand that 1/3 of their tax money goes directly to paying down debt. Think what that could do for the economy and the more "elective" programs in this country, if we didn't have that concern...heck, we could even think of lowering taxes realistically...

 

[The Sponge]

I often wonder if Joe Average would be for extra tax cuts if they could see exactly what other things suffer and have to be cut that would really affect their standard of living and way of life. And I doubt that many understand that 1/3 of their tax money goes directly to paying down debt. Think what that could do for the economy and the more "elective" programs in this country, if we didn't have that concern...heck, we could even think of lowering taxes realistically...

You mean that hugeeeeeeee debt Dogs conservative cough cough buddies created? You want to talk about wasted money besides Iraq (another wonderful waste of money created by Dogs buddies) You hit a big one there Chad. Why i always say it would be nice to see in our checks, what the taxes are going paying for. I wonder if this would wake up these phony so called conservatives? 1000 gross. 100 to the beloated waste of money defense budget, 200 to the deficit with nothing in return, 100 for social programs that actually help your own people sure some abuse it but what can you do? Be nice to see something like this in our checks. Show you who the real phonies are. Defense budget is more than every other nation combine. Whole lot of people are getting rich off of those billion dollar planes and those tanks that can't handle a bomb.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

I am not blissfully supportive of tax increases...I tend to stray from the liberal line a bit in many of these instances - this one included. I have not read the logic in the raise that the public would be paying, so knee-jerk reaction is that I am not for it. Not sure what it's going for.

What I am totally against is tax reductions when our spending (for whatever reasons) is out of control, especially during a time of war. That is both unheard of, and unpatriotic, in my view.

What I note from your article is that a majority of Americans are against a gas tax hike, but are for raising taxes on the upper crust. I'm not even necessarily for the latter off the top of my head, except a repeal of cuts during war seems to be a more accurate way to put it - and something I think might have merit as long as the administration wants to continue the war in Iraq.

You have about same % of those wanting to increase taxes on tax payors as % of those that pay no taxes in U.S.

Who in their wildest imagination would think that people who pay no taxes would want those that do to pay more and benefit them--right?

back to the gas tax--would it be accurate to say they who support party in favor of gas tax--should never complain about price of gas?

 

[bryanz]

I am not blissfully supportive of tax increases...I tend to stray from the liberal line a bit in many of these instances - this one included. I have not read the logic in the raise that the public would be paying, so knee-jerk reaction is that I am not for it. Not sure what it's going for.

What I am totally against is tax reductions when our spending (for whatever reasons) is out of control, especially during a time of war. That is both unheard of, and unpatriotic, in my view.

What I note from your article is that a majority of Americans are against a gas tax hike, but are for raising taxes on the upper crust. I'm not even necessarily for the latter off the top of my head, except a repeal of cuts during war seems to be a more accurate way to put it - and something I think might have merit as long as the administration wants to continue the war in Iraq.

You sound confused and stupid. All tax reductions are good. End of story. Why would you give your and my money to a system that is spending out of control ( for whatever reasons ) ????? If you want to give your money away go for it. Leave mine alone !!!

 

[djv]

It's not enough to do what we need it to. Ad another 50 cents. And while were at it 50 cents more for a bottle of booze. Leave beer alone. And those cig's that help kill so many. Hit them with another dollar. Lets get serious.

 

[Spytheweb]

How about the US government printing and issue

How about the US government printing and issue

it's own interest free money, and use that money to help rebuild our cities, improve education, healthcare, roadways and etc. War is the biggest debt creator of debt because the government has to borrow money with interest it can never repay. It is in the best interest for banks like the federal reserve to keep the war going. Print interest free money and you will see taxes for everyone go down, instead of adding to the bottom line of banks.

 

[Chadman]

You have about same % of those wanting to increase taxes on tax payors as % of those that pay no taxes in U.S.

True. A lot of percentages are equal if you compare them.

Who in their wildest imagination would think that people who pay no taxes would want those that do to pay more and benefit them--right?

Some truth in this, but the fact remains that those that don't make as much money don't have as much ability to pay as those that do. Or if they do, they have to do without other important things. Not everyone who is a low earner has the same abilities and capabilities of earning a high wage, no matter how hard you try and insinuate that. And those that don't cannot take advantage of the very tax system and benefits of high incomes that those that do, creating a smaller percentage of tax burden than those that make much less. Middle to lower high income earners, that is. I think you'll find plenty of those people that favor at least keeping the high earners paying the same, and not getting their taxes cut. Especially when we are at war, spending trillions that aren't figured into the deficits our country faces. It's obviously not a wash, as you are portraying.

Still waiting to see some evidence that the overburdened high earners are being hindered in making an increasing percentage of the money made in this country under the former, or current tax rates. They simply are making more money, with or without the tax cuts.

back to the gas tax--would it be accurate to say they who support party in favor of gas tax--should never complain about price of gas?

No, it would not. There are plenty of reasons the price of gas is high, and plenty of reasons to be upset at why we are paying such high prices - and who benefits from that. I don't favor a gas tax, but I certainly don't favor the party that has done everything in their power to help the companies that are charging us exhorbitant prices for gas. Pretty undeniable, considering their profits, so, I think it appropriate to complain about the current prices of gas. I can certainly think of some worthwhile programs that I'd rather 50 cents of my money go to than in oil company executives pockets. The people I feel sorry for are the ones that have to make tough choices every day/week because of the current environment.

 

[Chadman]

You sound confused and stupid. All tax reductions are good. End of story. Why would you give your and my money to a system that is spending out of control ( for whatever reasons ) ????? If you want to give your money away go for it. Leave mine alone !!!

I'm confused and stupid? Coming from you?!? Can I get a ruling on this?

Wondering how you got your one green card, by the way. Did you pay Jack for it?

I give my money to a system that allows me a wonderful way of life, safety, security, beauty, freedom and happiness. Of course I prefer spending to match intake - as it was in the Clinton years, for instance - and I hold the current administration to the fire for that. I'm furious that this administration is taking money for some at the expense of my kids later. Taxes allow for many things, and we don't all agree about which ones are good/bad. But we all have a say-so in what happens. The scenario you favor really does not allow for much of any of that.

I certainly don't mind sharing some of the money I make to ensure that the country we live in remains one of the best places to live in this world - if not the best. I hear there are some other ones that are pretty terrific, but this one works well for me. Taxes and all. You could always take all your money and your stuff and head for a dark, quiet country somewhere and not pay taxes. I doubt it's going to look very nice, or you'll feel very safe, but hey...you'll have all your money, until somebody kills you and takes it away.

"All tax reductions are good." I think you'd be hard pressed to find many economists that would agree to that black/white blanket statement. I understand the principle...but it's just not that simple. Just like "all tax increases are good" is not a true statement.

 

[kosar]

This borders on shocking and interesting that most Americans would not want a fiddy cent increase in gas taxes.

I couldn't find it in this article where the 'dems' are proposing any such thing.

It said some 'substantial' increase was 'brought up' by some congressman from Michigan.

More interestingly in this article (it's a sliding scale) is that this same guy is against regulations for better mileage efficiency. Big shocker there.

2/03 - gas at 1.10-1.15 (one month before the abortion that we call an occupation-errrrr, war)

7/07 - gas at 3.03 - national average as of today

Record profits for ANY industry recorded since then by oil companies.

Yeah, let's whine about some vague 'proposal' by some congressman. That's the gas price problem. Taxes. :142smilie

Maybe this one is like the supposed Kerry '50 cent increase' thing that was smashed into pieces by snopes and by facts.

 

[djv]

Is 50 cents really that bad. Make it a buck lets get serious. I remember in 1956 when I got by license to drive. One car sat in our driveway. Three people shared it. Mom, Dad, Me when lucky. Up and down the street you saw one car per house. Now you see two, three, maybe more. Nice that it's possible. But just maybe some waist might be covered by that extra buck. Not saying I like taxes anymore then you. But when I see all these people driving around just one person in each one. We are not being to smart. That study in Calf about year back. 86% of the cars had a person in each one. But yet we get mad at gas prices.
tax not answer. But can be part of one. Forsure don't give more money back to oil companies that's nuts.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

http://www.factcheck.org/taxing_social_security_gasoline_bush_attack.html

Taxing Gasoline?

Kerry's support for a 50-cent-per-gallon increase in the federal tax on gasoline was so brief and lukewarm that it was barely noted at the time -- a decade ago. One Boston Globe news story from 1994 quotes Kerry as complaining that the Concord Coalition's scorecard had not rated him highly enough as a deficit-cutter: "It doesn?t reflect my $43 billion package of cuts or my support for a 50-cent increase in the gas tax," the Globe quoted Kerry as saying. But neither the Bush-Cheney campaign nor FactCheck.org turned up any direct report of how and when Kerry had actually backed the 50-cent increase. Kerry sponsored no such bill in the Senate, and did not add his name to a bill offered by Sen. Charles Robb in 1993, to increase the gasoline tax 10 cents per gallon each year for five years.

 

[Chadman]

Thanks for clearing that up for us, Kosar. And apparently, Wayne has backed up your assessment about the supposed Kerry tax increase support with a reference from Factcheck stating no support could be verified. Although he missed the proper bolding in his post, I'm glad he pointed it out for us.

 

[bryanz]

I'm confused and stupid? Coming from you?!? Can I get a ruling on this?

Wondering how you got your one green card, by the way. Did you pay Jack for it?

I give my money to a system that allows me a wonderful way of life, safety, security, beauty, freedom and happiness. Of course I prefer spending to match intake - as it was in the Clinton years, for instance - and I hold the current administration to the fire for that. I'm furious that this administration is taking money for some at the expense of my kids later. Taxes allow for many things, and we don't all agree about which ones are good/bad. But we all have a say-so in what happens. The scenario you favor really does not allow for much of any of that.

I certainly don't mind sharing some of the money I make to ensure that the country we live in remains one of the best places to live in this world - if not the best. I hear there are some other ones that are pretty terrific, but this one works well for me. Taxes and all. You could always take all your money and your stuff and head for a dark, quiet country somewhere and not pay taxes. I doubt it's going to look very nice, or you'll feel very safe, but hey...you'll have all your money, until somebody kills you and takes it away.

"All tax reductions are good." I think you'd be hard pressed to find many economists that would agree to that black/white blanket statement. I understand the principle...but it's just not that simple. Just like "all tax increases are good" is not a true statement.

The waste in gov spending is out of control . I don't know how anyone can think that we are not over taxed. It would be one thing if we had a sound education system, infrastructure that doesn't blow up, like it did in one of the most important cities in this country the other day. I don't post for approval rating from sheep like you. and the rest. Think about it, look at the the # of cases we have yr after yr of fraud and deception when it comes to how our government spends our money. There are thousands of stories, on the local, state and federal levels, day after day. You talk about safety, how does a country spend billions on intelligence and allow a plot that took yrs to happen in NYC. NYC is a major target. If they couldn't protect NYC, you better hope where you live never becomes a target. Our country spent Billions during the Clinton yrs on intelligence and defense, history will show those were the yrs that threw his administrations negligence & incompetence terrorist were given a grace period. The biggest threat to our country was terrorism, the Clinton administration, never understood that. 911 didn't just happen, the American people didn't get what they payed for. That's been documented.

 

[smurphy]

I don't post for approval rating from sheep like you. and the rest.

Yeah, we get it. You're a rebel, an outlaw, don't follow the shephard, don't work and play well with others, you step to the beat of your own drummer, your dangerous, a bad influence, don't follow the rule book, don't take the recommended dosage, don't call the doctor when it makes contact with your eyes or open wounds, you swim before waiting 20 minutes after eating, your like Riggs from Lethal Weapon, you operate in a very intense manner. So STFU about it already.

 

[Agent 0659]

Yeah, we get it. You're a rebel, an outlaw, don't follow the shephard, don't work and play well with others, you step to the beat of your own drummer, your dangerous, a bad influence, don't follow the rule book, don't take the recommended dosage, don't call the doctor when it makes contact with your eyes or open wounds, you swim before waiting 20 minutes after eating, your like Riggs from Lethal Weapon, you operate in a very intense manner. So STFU about it already.

Smurph-Y, don't forget he thinks outside the box too!

 

[smurphy]

Smurph-Y, don't forget he thinks outside the box too!

Slow down pardner - that might be considered offensive.:SIB

Sincerely,
S-Murph-Y

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Thanks for clearing that up for us, Kosar. And apparently, Wayne has backed up your assessment about the supposed Kerry tax increase support with a reference from Factcheck stating no support could be verified. Although he missed the proper bolding in his post, I'm glad he pointed it out for us.

You got a point Chad--should know better than to take Kerry's word for it that he was for 50 cent gas hike--but thought he might be telling the truth for a change as I didn't see any:nono: