Letters to the Editor
-
incoherent, irresponsible, and ignorant
Normally I wouldn't say something so strong writing under a pseudonym, but there's a reason that Mr Strong's credentials don't mention anything about economics, which is that he doesn't know what he is talking about. Every economist across the spectrum laughs at the gas tax.
Here's the first incoherency. If $30 to $50 is a lot of money to many Americans (over the course of a summer!?), then it can not be true that the cut, if passed on to consumers, will not stimulate demand. Either the amount of money is economically significant to consumer behavior or it isn't. Not one of each.
Even trucking associations know that the cut (little of which will end up in their pocket, because the analysis of why it will be passed on to consumers is faulty) is bogus. They don't support it.
I'll believe in the corresponding Windfall Profits Tax when I see it. Everyone knows that part of the Clinton proposal is DOA. So talking about a gas tax cut paired with a Windfall Profits Tax is just more of the Find A Magic Pony drivel we've gotten from the Bush Clown Show. On the other hand, Clinton has no alternative means for replenishing the Highway Trust Fund.
In summary, this article is to economics as Creationism is to evolution.