How else to explain this grossly obtuse editorial in the Roanoke Times?
Time to raise the gas taxPeople are up in arms like never before about the rising price of gas and some politician is going to propose to raise it even further? That doesn't require guts. It requires a complete detachment from reality. Or a death wish.
State and federal coffers are falling short. To avoid certain shortfalls in transportation funding, the gas tax must be increased.
No lawmaker will win any popularity contests by proposing a gas tax increase at a time when a gallon of regular is averaging $3.22.
But an gas-tax hike [sic] at both the state and federal levels, however unpopular, needs to be seriously considered. Both are weak funding streams destined to become even less reliable if lawmakers don't muscle up the guts to raise them. (link)
To prove how these screwballs don't have the first clue as to what they're talking about, they disgorge this bit of
Now comes the fear that when rising gas prices finally exceed what the market can bear and people begin trading in the gas-guzzlers for more fuel-efficient vehicles, gas consumption will drop and severely deplete the tax that feeds the highway trust fund.Translated: Gas consumption would go down and that would be a bad thing because gas tax revenue would go down.
Are you people that dense?
Besides, statistics support the opposite. Over the last twenty years, as automobiles on the nation's highways have been designed with ever-greater fuel efficiency, allowing consumers to get more miles out of each gallon of gas they use, making their cost-per-mile decline, they've each year driven more miles, not fewer, consuming, in the end, more gas, not less. Thus, consumption, on average, even for those driving smaller vehicles with better gas mileage, has risen every year.
Again: Fuel efficiency has gone up. And so has consumption.
So one of the following is going on here:
1) the editorialists at the Roanoke Times are as ignorant as they here appear
2) the only answer they have to any problem is the default position - raise taxes
3) the Times is hurting for cash and the publisher has decided to sacrifice what little credibility his or her editorial department had left in an attempt to stave off fiscal ruin
or, my choice:
4) All Of The Above.