Buzzard <Buzzard@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> It would be nice if some people *could* get off the
> road, but in many places, that isn't an option.
> Many just can't afford housing in places that are near
> where the jobs are, and that pretty much forces a
> daily commute.
When they can't afford the commute either, then what? One possibility is
for big businesses to set up cheap dormitories for their workers onsite.
They can easily enough get the zoning changed to allow that.
Another possibility is to move the jobs to where the cheap people arem.
> Other solutions that would reduce fuel demand are:
> *carpooling*
> and for those who can't carpool,
> smaller and more efficient vehicles,
> like econo-box cars, motorcycles and scooters,
> and (if the distances aren't too much) bikes.
Yes. And buses.
> One thing that irks me is people that buy those
> $50,000 luxury SUV's that get 12 miles a gallon,
> and then commute to their distant jobs all alone,
> without carpooling at all.
The simple solution is a tax on gasoline, say about $3/gallon. The
government collects the money and every month they split it up and
distribute it evenly among voters.
So if you use the average amount of gasoline then you get your gas tax
money back and it doesn't actually cost you anything. If you use less
than average then you get a reward. Use no gasoline and you have a nice
little bonus you can spend on whatever you want. And if you commute with
a gas-guzzling vehicle then maybe you can afford to subsidise the people
who use less.
And if Texas secedes over it, no big problem. The main thing is get the
nukes out of there on the way out.
|
