GM CEO calls for $1 hike in gas prices..

CEO Dan Akerson said his company and his industry would be helped, not hurt, if consumers paid higher gas taxes.

In an interview published in Tuesday's Detroit News, Akerson floated the idea of a $1 a gallon increase in the gas tax as a way to encourage buyers to purchase smaller, more fuel efficient cars. Greg Martin, spokesman for GM's Washington office, confirmed that the quotes reflect Akerson's and GM's view.

News Source:www.chicagotribune.com...

His logic: if people can't afford gas, they will have to buy a new car from GM!
Reality: people who can't afford gas can't afford a new car!
Hurt MILLIONS of peoples pockets to make his bigger?

The reason i am pissed because of higher gas prices:
If price of gas goes up the cost to transport any and all goods/exports/imports increases.
Everything goes up in price nation-wide.

This doesn't affect only drivers, but the entire country's economy.

Where's my chainsaw?!

That is ridiculous...make gas more expensive so I have to buy one of your cars?

Sorry to disappoint mr. high power, completely out of touch with reality GM, but if I cant afford gas, the last thing on my mind will be a new bleepin car.

This is B.S.!!! It's time for alternate sorces to this matter!

reply to post by smartbuddy

One only have to look at norway to see this is a bad idea. We got such gasoline taxes as well as taxes on new cars ages ago and as a result we have one of the oldest car parks in europe even though we are one of the richest countries.

A car here costs twice as much as it does in for example sweden, even though sweden is one if not the most expensive country in EU when it comes to cars.

WOW... its been a while since I have seen economic logic THIS FAIL!!!

I think we found the weak link in GM's chain, THAT GUY!!!

Time for the man full of fail to resign me thinks.

Yes!! This guy makes perfect sense.



Wow I was just thinking that this morning, "Man I would love to pay $5 a gallon"

As stated above, If you can't afford gas how can you afford a new car?

I can see that perhaps he also owns stocks in the Fuel Industry?

Of course he does, why wouldn't he? Where else does he spend all of his bonuses that were given to him from the bailouts received from the tax payers he's trying to swindle again?

And round and round it goes.....

Theres no wayi could afford that i already ride my bike 6 miles to work and back , ends up saving me about a gallon a day, plus maintenence like oil and tires so ends up being about $200+ a month, idk what everone else would do if it went up a dollar, thats crazy im hurting,

Its going to be very hard for those who were struggling before, worst logic ive ever heard. most people cant afford the cars they have now let alone go out and buy a new one. This would be like the begining to the end it would equate to highe prices all around food , commodities, everything were to dependent on oil and this proves. anyways at the end o the article it said that it was not likely to happen

how about he lowers the price of his cars so people can afford gas for it.

There seems to be a bit more to it than simply "wanting higher gasoline taxes". If you read a bit further in the article:

Akerson said he would support a jump in the gas tax if it came instead of tighter fuel economy regulations that GM and other automakers will have to meet in coming years. By the year 2025, automakers could be forced to hit fuel economy averages of as much as 62 mpg.

"There ought to be a discussion on the cost versus the benefits," Akerson told the paper. "What we are going to do is tax production here, and that will cost us jobs."

It looks like he's saying why not raise gasoline taxes as a way to deter people's driving as opposed to mandating yet another overreaching and failed government policy, which will result in lost jobs since GM would have to raise production costs to satisfy the government regulations.

How about neither option? Cue the Rand Paul toilet video. Produce some fuel efficient cars and let the consumer decide whats best for him or her. Is there one single federal government program that has not resulted in failure? They destroy everything they touch from Social Security to ethanol subsidies. Enough of a giant bloated central government which thinks it knows better or has the right to control our lives. All of these issues should be handled on a more local level by the states and the people.