Trump reportedly supports 25 cent gas tax increase

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1FY33T

I tend to believe the story since even the GOP in the room aren’t flatly denying Trump said it, nor will they officially remove the option from the table. Extremely regressive tax. Plus you will pay it twice. Once for your own fill up and again in baked-in transportation cost on every single thing you buy.

Anyone tired of winning yet?

How is it regressive?

If Trump wants his infrastructure plan to go through, he needs a source of revenue to pay for it. An increase in the gas tax makes sense. The problem is that this country is big on driving. We drive everywhere and our public transportation either doesn't exist or is insufficient.

I don't know the entirety of Trump's infrastructure plan but I do support a gas tax as a source of revenue to improve our infrastructure, provided it also improves access and efficiency of public transportation.

The funds raised by the gas tax have not kept pace with the costs of what it funds. If we insist on funding what we currently fund with the tax, it needs to be raised.

Saudi Arabia better be pumping that oil for us then.

I would support this if he didn't just cut taxes. Raising taxes on the poor while cutting them for the rich just isn't defendable.

Problems arise when the taxes end up funding projects outside what they have been mandated for in the first place. Using my state as an example, I don't trust this proposal at all. Our state has the highest state gas tax and rather than roads and bridges as it was intended, it is being used to fund (in some portion) the state police. We all know damn well some of the money (of a proposed increase) will end up in places outside of infrastructure.

Well the roads are shit.

We could move some money earmarked for the wall for infrastructure.

I'm cool with this, it would be nice if there were barriers put in place that make it go down if gas prices get too high though. For example if gas hits $3/per hour the tax decreases. Something like that.

In other words cut the taxes on the rich.......raise them on the working/middle class.

Actually, yeah, I had that thought yesterday as well.

@Serraph105: @LJS9502_basic: A happy side effect of sales taxes/use taxes.

@drunk_pi: You clearly don’t know what regressive taxation means. Look it up, and then talk.

He also apparently brought up toll roads again. He really is the hotel owner President, turning your drive to work to the equivalent of $12 dollar minibar bottles of Seagrams, nickel and dime you the whole way.

@LJS9502_basic: Pretty sure its not a tax increase for one class only.

You really are unhinged aren’t you?

Thanks once again for showing us your limitations.

How about instead of raping the working man even more you cut funding to completely bs programs and such and use that saved money instead.

Your response is vague and pure fluff.

@vfighter: What programs do you propose?

I support the gas tax but I oppose toll roads...

It's a shot at the dumbasses voting for Trump in order to get cheaper taxes. LMAO! How ELSE did they think Trump was going to pay for his Wall, Mexico?

Trump's voters continue to let him **** them with no mercy. They just take it without so much as a reach around.

The useless ass Wall for one. Military as well since it's overkill at this point. Those are just the top of my head as far as big spending goes.

Hmm, and what is the problem?

I thought you liberals loved green so more expensive fuel is good right...

This is normal, if you want a infrastructure that is sustainable you will have to pay it this way, many other country's do this successfully, and it also pushes for more sustainable environmental products forwards which everybody profits off for the longer run.

I will yield the US 35-36 billion dollars each year, as it needs about 4,6 trillion to fix the infrastructure you will need 128 years to complete this on funding.

I would vote for a 1 buck a gallon increase which will fix the infrastructure in the upcoming 31 years. As it's a massive undertake anyway. This is a good movement forwards.

25 cent increase on 1 liter doens't seem to bad.

It will also create a ton of more jobs. And help nature by not burning insane amounts of fuel for the sake of it. Also works for less consuming fuel cars.

Also cut militairy into half = 250 billion right there each year that's 18 years to fix infrastructure with it. But slice that in half to support other stuff also with it, which makes it 36 years. combine it together and you got like ~16 years your whole country is in a far far better state.

The other 125b can be invested into moving into more green energy. Or invest it into electric cars / sun panels / wind mills etc.

If a poorer family has an older car that uses more gas, they are hit harder by it.. Also as a percentage of their income (even if they drive the same car as hypothetical millionaire in this case) they pay more in taxes.

Yeah, there's not really an argument to be made about it not being regressive - nearly all consumption taxes are.

Or we could not give the very wealthy tax reductions and use that money instead.

If a rich family have a gas guzzler, they will get hit just as hard.

Just because they have more money in the bank, does not mean the price is not the same.

the wealthy don't have to get up every day and drive into work which will now cost them more. And it will take money out of their pocket that they need to support their family with. The wealthy also don't have that problem. It's really sad that you cannot see what shit like this means to normal people.

You do know that people who have money also have a job right? it´s not like all of them sit on their behinds all day and have servants cater to their every need.

Sometimes you are not even trying, are you?

@Jacanuk: hahaha. You are really terrible at this. You don’t really think things through do you?

If something is 15% of a persons budget and it becomes 25% of their budget are they hit harder than someone who goes from 2% of their budget to 5%?

LOL, Just because someone earns more, does not mean they pay less. If gas cost $2 it cost $2 for everyone. So perhaps read what I wrote and not try your usual troll BS

I didn't think anyone would fail to acknowledge that consumption taxes are, by and large, regressive but... well, here we are.

I didn´t think anyone would think that someone should be punished twice just because they earn more. That's why we have an income tax.

Not sure what you mean. Feel free to explain.

It´s pretty simple

A price increase on petrol will affect everyone. And just because lower income families have less income, does not mean the increase is bad.

@Jacanuk: solid deflection on not answering the question.

I wouldn’t answer it either. It would destroy your argument.

Having problems understanding?

I did answer the question.

@Jacanuk: everyone talking about apples and you talk about pumpkins thinking you’ve made some grand point.

Typical trump lover deflection and cowardly bullshit.

Good job little man.

Deflections don't make you right.

What did that have to do with your original statement?

@Jacanuk: You have no idea what regressive tax, do you?

@LJS9502_basic: @Jacanuk: Removing the f word for you guys.

I guess some view the amount of dollars paid in taxes and thinks everyone should pay the same amount. Other thinks that those who earn more should pay more in dollars.

That is a pretty dumb assumption considering we are on the internet.

Even if I didn´t already know what it is, it would take about 2½ seconds to look it up and find out.

Yet you didn't answer.

LOL he never does.

Ehmm, sure I did. Not sure how you missed it.

You never wrote yes or no. You said you could look it up. But provided no evidence of doing so. It is a simple yes or no question. How difficult is it to answer it?

I guess I could follow it up with another question. Do you support a regressive tax system? Judging by your posts made earlier in this thread, you do support it.

I wonder.. Does know what it means?

Did not think I have to cut it out in stone. But yes I am aware what it is.

And clearly, i do not support it, since I support an income based system. Which I hope you know what is right?

Also what made you think I would support that? I am not for a system like in your country.