![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The Proximity Credit
Aug. 8th, 2008 04:54 amThis is something I sent to Darcy Burner recently. The trouble is... I can feel it being disjointed. I think the basic idea I'm trying to advocate here is sound, but this is not the best expression of it.
Does it make sense? What do you think needs to be done so it reads better?
I'd like to start shopping it around as an Op-Ed, but this is only a draft, if so.
*^*^*^*
I'd like to share with you some thoughts about a subject that's been
getting wide attention: How to address our dependence on oil,
especially now when it's likely we're seeing the peak of global oil
production.
About 2/3s of America's oil use is for transportation. Of that, a
substantial portion goes to people's daily commute, because of land
use policies that have strongly separated where people live, and where
they work.
What I'd like to propose to you is something clearly in the power of
Congress to do, that would directly address this: A tax credit for
people who live close to where they work. I'm thinking of something
modeled on the tax credit for mortgage interest, which has enabled so
many to afford houses of their own, even in the current credit crisis.
In a similar way, a tax credit for living in a place that makes one's
commute short – which I've come to think of the "proximity credit,"
for lack of a more focus group tested term – could help enormously in
reducing our oil use. I also think the credit should apply to both
the employer and the employee. My intention here is to provide
incentives to as many people as possible to cut oil use.
Such a credit could have many benefits:
* Small business owners talk about how they're "double taxed." That
is, their business is taxed on profit, and their own salary is taxed
as income. While this might make sense for large businesses, it feels
like a disproportionate bite to the small business owner. But since
this credit would apply to both employer and employee, it would be
very small business friendly.
* One sub-group of small businesses, of course, is family farms.
They also would get substantial benefits from this measure.
* Businesses in the retail sector – I'm thinking here not only of
shops, but also of restaurants, banks, etc. – who have many locations
could reap the benefits with intelligent coordination with their
employees.
* Large businesses who also have facilities throughout our region –
Boeing, or Microsoft – could also take advantage.
* Governments – city, state, and federal – could act on this very
quickly. A new president just taking office, for example, could
institute this through executive order for federal employees.
* This measure requires no new technology, and no new infrastructure.
It gets results through a simple matter of policy.
* Any measure that reduces oil consumption for transportation also
definitionally helps in traffic management.
* This could arguably be regarded as a measure that promotes family
values. Time spent in the daily commute is time not spent with one's
family. Reducing that commute also adds free time at home.
*^*^*^*
UPDATED TO ADD: "The P-I welcomes contributed essays of up to 550 words..." Using the Jim Fallows Memorial Word Counter in Word, this piece is currently at 447.
Does it make sense? What do you think needs to be done so it reads better?
I'd like to start shopping it around as an Op-Ed, but this is only a draft, if so.
*^*^*^*
I'd like to share with you some thoughts about a subject that's been
getting wide attention: How to address our dependence on oil,
especially now when it's likely we're seeing the peak of global oil
production.
About 2/3s of America's oil use is for transportation. Of that, a
substantial portion goes to people's daily commute, because of land
use policies that have strongly separated where people live, and where
they work.
What I'd like to propose to you is something clearly in the power of
Congress to do, that would directly address this: A tax credit for
people who live close to where they work. I'm thinking of something
modeled on the tax credit for mortgage interest, which has enabled so
many to afford houses of their own, even in the current credit crisis.
In a similar way, a tax credit for living in a place that makes one's
commute short – which I've come to think of the "proximity credit,"
for lack of a more focus group tested term – could help enormously in
reducing our oil use. I also think the credit should apply to both
the employer and the employee. My intention here is to provide
incentives to as many people as possible to cut oil use.
Such a credit could have many benefits:
* Small business owners talk about how they're "double taxed." That
is, their business is taxed on profit, and their own salary is taxed
as income. While this might make sense for large businesses, it feels
like a disproportionate bite to the small business owner. But since
this credit would apply to both employer and employee, it would be
very small business friendly.
* One sub-group of small businesses, of course, is family farms.
They also would get substantial benefits from this measure.
* Businesses in the retail sector – I'm thinking here not only of
shops, but also of restaurants, banks, etc. – who have many locations
could reap the benefits with intelligent coordination with their
employees.
* Large businesses who also have facilities throughout our region –
Boeing, or Microsoft – could also take advantage.
* Governments – city, state, and federal – could act on this very
quickly. A new president just taking office, for example, could
institute this through executive order for federal employees.
* This measure requires no new technology, and no new infrastructure.
It gets results through a simple matter of policy.
* Any measure that reduces oil consumption for transportation also
definitionally helps in traffic management.
* This could arguably be regarded as a measure that promotes family
values. Time spent in the daily commute is time not spent with one's
family. Reducing that commute also adds free time at home.
*^*^*^*
UPDATED TO ADD: "The P-I welcomes contributed essays of up to 550 words..." Using the Jim Fallows Memorial Word Counter in Word, this piece is currently at 447.
Tags:
