From: kenj@kambo.esd.sgi.com (Ken Jones)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Driving your car (was Greens vs. Property Rights)
Date: 31 Dec 1992 21:48:24 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: kambo.esd.sgi.com

jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:

>Dean Alaska ends up with:

>     The point is that ownership of land is not a free ticket to
>     do things that harm people or the environment.

>I'm not a private property absolutist and go along with the Stanford
>rule that prevents me from raising hogs on my house lot.  I am
>relieved to discover that the Green program in itself is no more
>restrictive than this.

>Surely, there must be more to it - like not letting me drive my
>car to San Francisco.  Fess up.

Fess up?  What do you think the Greens are hiding? :-)

As far as I know, there is no "Official Green Party Position" that
you should not be allowed to drive your car to San Francisco.  What
the Greens advocate, however, is: 1) if possible, you should have
the option of a more efficient and/or less environmentally damaging
way to get to San Francisco (e.g., convenient mass transit); or 2)
should you drive, you should pay the "true cost" associated with using
your car.

Here's an excerpt from a preliminary California Green Party platform
plank on true cost pricing (I obtained this in late 1991, so it may
have changed by now):

>                TRUE COST PRICING
>  
> Many commonly used products carry hidden environmental costs,
> such as  air and water pollution, toxic waste, etc., caused by
> either their production, use, or disposal. We all pay for these
> byproducts through taxes, health effects, and reduced quality of
> life.
>  
> Polluters hide behind limited corporate liability, and such
> special interest laws as the Price-Anderson Act, which further
> limits the liability of the Nuclear industry in case of
> accidents. We believe that these costs should be paid up front at
> the point of purchase.  This would allow the market place to take
> into account disposal, health and other costs associated with the
> products offered, and it would make environmentally sound
> products more competitive.  We think that product liability
> should be considered a cost of production.  Many hazardous
> products would never be produced if liability for accidents were
> a consideration.

As applied to driving, there are many hidden costs that are currently
not directly paid by the owner (and/or driver) of the car, but by
society in general.  Among them:

* The most obvious effect of operating a car is pollution.
  Cataloging the costs of air pollution alone could take an entire
  article (e.g., increased health-care costs, damage to structures,
  etc.).  Add to it the contamination produced by freon, used motor
  oil, anti-freeze, etc.

* The manufacture of a car produces considerable pollution in its own
  right.  Recent laws have toughened environmental standards (and
  manufacturers have passed along those additional costs to the
  consumer), I'd be _very_ surprised if the true cost of manufacture
  is currently reflected in the price of a car.

* The public infrastructure to support autobile traffic is massive.
  Consider the thousands of miles devoted to raods, bridges, tunnels,
  and parking.  Admittedly, gas taxes help to pay for much of the
  cost of maintaining this infrastructure.  More insiduous, however,
  is the revenue lost by its very existence: governments don't assess
  property taxes on these public properties.

Those are a few examples of hidden costs that I can think of off the
top of my head.  Currently, the operators of autmobiles receive a
substantial subsidy in that many of these costs are shared by the
general public in one form or another.

One way to transfer these costs to the owner/operator of a car would
be to raise our gas tax.  Currently, the United States has one of the
lowest costs for gasoline in the world.  Many European countries levy
taxes that raise the cost to $3-4 per gallon.  The additional
revenues generated by such a tax could go to paying for the costs
listed above.

Just a few thoughts...

- Ken

PS - I am not an official spokesperson for the Green Party; I've
merely registered as a Green.