From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 25 Jan 93 12:10 PST
Subject: Re: Gas Tax?
Nf-ID: #R:4l!sh3k@santafe.edu:-1402134433:cdp:1678600170:000:2983
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan 25 12:10:00 1993


>A decentralist approach would be to have gas purchasing policy set by each
>individual according to their best judgement and grasp of information
>available to them by their own efforts and those of others without any
>coercive interference by others.
>
>Taxation means (literally) forced exaction.  To support a gas tax is to
>support the exaction of money from an individual such as I've described in
>the above paragraph by force.  Such a policy requires a central authority
>to enforce it.
>
>Either Greens truly support decentralism, in which case they ought to
>oppose taxation, or they merely want central authority which is a little
>less centralized in some vague, unspecified way, or their hypocritical.
>There are probably Greens in all three camps.

You make a good point here, however, I would disagree with your definition
of decentralism.  I don't see decentralism as the ability of each individual
to do whatever they wish subject to market forces, but that the locus for
decision making be at the community level where all members of the community
can participate in the decisions.

This principle could actually provide a solution to the disagreement Chris and
I have been having -- and also point out the difficulty of setting policy at
the national level.  Chris is absolutely correct that the poor would be hit
the hardest in rural areas, especially the west (not LA, SF, etc.).  I am also
right that the poor in my area are hit the hardest by an automobile dependent
society -- and often don't even have cars.  The poor are also the greatest
beneficiaries of mass transit.

IMO, Greens support decentralism for two reasons: (1) it allows local
communities the ability to participate in making decisions which affect
their lives. (2) it allows the ability for the solution to fit the problem
rather than forcing all communities with the same solution (which likely
would create problems of its own) imposed by a central bureaucrat.  (As an
aside, this is the reason I would oppose NAFTA even if there were environmental
and labor standards attached.  From what I understand, this is not the general
opinion of the mainstream enviro and labor community.  It seems that the most
they are hoping for is to put these standards on other countries, which doesn't
sound like empowering the grassroots of those countries or decentralization.)

Regarding gas taxes, we really should be promoting local solutions to our
common problems.  The local solutions I am suggesting might be enacted at
the state level, or perhaps within certain metropolitan areas.  For
instance, in Northern Virginia, a severely automobile strapped area with
insufficient public transportation, there are special regulations for
auto emissions that the rest of Virginia does not need to follow.  Perhaps,
a solution would be for Northern Virginia to add its own gas tax to fund
its own public transportation.  BTW, the special auto emissions reg has
broad consensus support of the public.

Dale