After getting a pie in the face, Thomas Friedman is back to writing regularly for the New York Times. I'm glad to see him back, especially since he's backing up a post I made yesterday:
"Hillary Clinton has decided to line up with John McCain in pushing to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for this summer’s travel season. This is not an energy policy. This is money laundering: we borrow money from China and ship it to Saudi Arabia and take a little cut for ourselves as it goes through our gas tanks. What a way to build our country."
This was disheartening, however:
" ... when Congress passed the 2007 energy bill last December, it failed to extend any stimulus for wind and solar energy production. Oil and gas kept all their credits, but those for wind and solar have been left to expire this December."
Dang.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Friedman's Back!
Labels:
Energy,
Obama,
The Issues
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
I like Tom Friedman a lot. I think his Middle East analysis is usually spot on, and he fairly assigns blame where it is deserved.
However, the suspension of the excise tax is not meant to be an "energy policy" as Friedman calls it, but rather a tax holiday through a summer that will likely see a slowing of the growth rate, or even a slight retraction of the economy.
McCain's idea is directly tied to helping Americans weather the slowing economy. It is not an over-arching energy policy. Deficit spending and tax breaks during a recession is text book Keynesian economics.
CA--
Obama's point, and I think it's a good one, is that on average it will save most Americans $30 over the summer, while cutting 300,000 construction jobs (because the tax money isn't funding summer road construction).
I'd agree it's not really an "energy policy" proposal, but it still doesn't do what McCain and Clinton want it to do.
How does it not accomplish what they want it to do? Obama's fallacy with the gas tax is that it doesn't matter what the savings is to the average American. What it will do is provide relief for those that are hit the hardest-- poorer people who drive less efficient cars and commute further to work. The gas tax is just as regressive as sales tax, and believe it or not there are a lot of people that make or break their budget based on that extra $3 per fill-up.
If I calculate how much it would save me, it obviously is a lot more than what it would save you, based on our driving habits.
The estimate of losing 300,000 jobs is complete speculation. Any loss to the highway fund would not be seen this summer, and both candidates have proposed methods for protecting the highway fund through other measures.
Kudos to Obama for not jumping on an idea if he really doesn't think it is a good one. But don't try to tell me that disagreement on an idea like this is Obama rejecting another "broken Washington policy." His rhetoric is getting really old.
You have Greg Mankiw on your side. Read his blog post dated Tuesday, April 29th, called Score One For Obama.
Also check out Ezra Klein on The American Prospect web page posted today.
"is that on average it will save most Americans $30 over the summer, while cutting 300,000 construction jobs"
These are fair and legitmate questions. My only objection was to Friedman's characterization of the summer gas tax holiday as being some sort of significant long term energy policy. Which it clearly is not.
Post a Comment