>>>How to get out out of the coming recesion?
>>>
>>>One of the main strengths of the US is its dynamic business environment which responds quickly to opportunities by organizing new efforts and enterprises, so I suggest throwing it a challenge, namely reducing the US and the world's dependence on oil as national policy. That challenge can provide an engine of growth that also solves a real long term problem.
>>>
>>>I think the way to do it is to announce a petroleum tax to be phased in over a period of a few years. The tax has to be substantial enough to catch people's attention and mobilize efforts and gradual enough not to shock the system. Its purpose is to reduce a huge Government deficit that will bring many problems down the road while preventing the reduced price of oil that we are already witnessing from undermining the petroleum independence program. I think a petroleum tax focuses attention on solving the problem better that incentives which only lead to infighting and corruption by special interests.
>>>
>>>Let the US creative economy figure out how to achieve the goal: conservation, biofuels, nuclear, solar, all kinds of technology, etc.
>>
>>Yes let's tax this creative economy and see how it is going; and if it is still going let's increase the tax a bit more. What? It is still going? Add more again. Ok, died? Now who said that it is creative? Who gave us this dead economy!?
>
>Tracy and Edward,
>
>There is no reason that you can't adjust other taxes to make it revenue neutral if that it is desirable, although I think reducing the yearly deficit is important too..
>
>I don't think 48 cents a gallon is enough to change behavior patters. In Europe taxes are much higher and people do drive smaller cars that get better mileage.
>
>The point is that taxes can reduce oil consumption which I think deserves the highest priority, if only to leave some oil in the ground for our grandchildren. It is also a national security issue for the US and the world.

Did European high taxes make Europe energy independent? What about some other steps that could help too. For example, US nuclear industry was suppressed for 30 years, i.e. no new plants were allowed to build. As it stands now, coal plants will be suppressed in case Obama gets win. Does it have something to do with energy independence? Some things get to stupidly ironic proportions. Firstly, industry is maimed down by restrictions, prohibitions and taxes and then someone comes and says: "Ouch, dear creative industry, I want to make you even more creative. Pick up few more taxes and show how creative you are."
Let me make it clear. Political forces intent on changing "human behavior" always end up with looking for enemies, i.e. those who don't want government to change their behavior when it comes to eating, driving or some other living habits. It is the basic freedom issue. Law-abiding citizens should comply with criminal code. That's quite enough, anything else is plain dangerous. Any government intent to criminalize another area of human activities is dangerous; i.e. it is real national security issue. Government intent on changing human behavior of law-abiding citizens is more dangerous than band of sheikhs selling oil to other countries.