Pumping gas? (living, price, groceries)

[rhodan653]

All it is is a redistribution of wealth, no different than a tax/welfare. Having paid gas station attendants simply increases the cost of gas which essentialy amounts to an additional tax paid by consumers to fund the "employment" of the attendants. It is ridiculous and I believe only Oregon now does this, I heard NJ changed their laws. Oregon has some of the highest gas prices in the country....why? Because consumers are funding the employment of the attendants. If you take away this state subsidized employment gimmick the real Oregon unemployment is even higher. Ultimately it is one more hidden tax burden in this state.

To do this nationwide is crazy, it amounts to a massive tax increase. It doesn't solve anything. Artificially creating unnecessary unskilled labor positions is akin to adding people to the state or federal government payroll and funding it with a sales tax. Doing that just edges the country closer and closer to full-on socialism and "guranteed" employment.

[PNW-type-gal]

Originally Posted by rhodan653

Oregon has some of the highest gas prices in the country....why? Because consumers are funding the employment of the attendants.

No, that's not why the gas prices are high: it's because Oregon has a high gas tax. Oregon doesn't have a sales tax and chooses to fund that way (the gas tax used to be applied directly to the highway fund until the legislature decided to hijack it). Washington state, which borders Oregon, has similar gas prices because they have a similarly high gas tax, even though they allow self-service gas pumping.

[jrkliny]

The tax rate in Oregon is $0.25/gallon and in Washington the tax rate is $0.375/gallon. So if the pump prices are similar I guess you are paying $0.125/gallon to have mandatory pumping by attendants. It does seem like a horrible waste of human potential.

[Steve Pickering]

Originally Posted by gnab gib

So I'd heard about this before, but I'd forgotten about it until I saw it mentioned in a post on the WA forum.

Why can't you pump your own gas in Oregon? Who came up with that law, and why???

My wife ran into the same thing when she was on a business trip in NJ. She got out of her car to pump gas, and she said the attendant came running out all irrate, telling her to step away from the pumps! That's crazy! Apparently, NJ and OR are the only two states in the country where this is the law.

I just find this really bizarre. Is there any talk of ever changing the law in OR?

To answer the Original Question with the true story (or at least as it was told to me), several years ago a young lady was killed while fueling in Oregon. Her Father was a State Senator. He got the original bill passed and it was never rescinded. It is too late now as it would take thousands out of work, many of whom are not qualified to do anything else. I understood it was at a no longer there Mobile Station next to the Ice Plant, also no longer there, in Eugene and she was a U of O student. This part could be rumor. I thought NJ rescinded their law a few years back.

[juggler]

Originally Posted by Fooseball_Freak

In Oregon and New Jersey it is illegal to pump your own gas. I live in Portland, OR, if I drive 5 minutes over the bridge to Vancouver, WA, I pay $.10 per gallon more to pump my own gas, go figure!
What would happen if the rest of the country adopted this model? Think about this, in Oregon there are 7,600 gas station pump attendants or .2% of the population of the state. Applied to the U.S. Population of 300,000,000 it would amount to 600,000 pump attendants across the country. There are 121,446 gas stations in the U.S. that pump 360,000,000 gallons of gasoline per day, or, 2964 gallons each. If you divided the 600,000 attendants across the 121,446 station each station would have approximately 5 attendants (sounds about right). If each attendant earned $8.40 per hour or $17,472 per year it would cost the station (read taxpayer) $.081 per gallon or about 3% of the current cost per gallon.
Consider that 600,000 newly employed workers would earn a combined income of $10,465,200,000.00 per year and that federal taxes at the rate of 11% would amount to $1,151,172,000.00 in additional revenue to the U.S. Also consider that the average state tax rate for this income level is about 6% and would amount to $627,912,000.00 in additional states revenue. Also consider that the average unemployment check is $293.00 per week or $15236.00 per year and would amount to a $9,141,600,000.00 reduction in benefits nationwide.
Now, add the additional revenue together with the reduced benefits and it comes to $10,920,684,000.00 per year or $29,919,682 per day, divide this by the 360,000,000 gallons used each day and it amounts to $.083 per gallon for a net savings of 2 tenths of a cent per gallon to have it pumped by someone else.
Of course this is a simple exercise that misses some costs and savings, for example; how many people are robbed each year at the pump and at what cost?, approximately 15 fires per year (and growing) occur because of improper use of the pump that would probably be prevented by attendants (one fire alone was estimated to cost $150,000 in damages), local income/employment taxes are not included in this exercise, the positive effects on the economy (other than above) are not included such as increased spending by the newly employed or what about the reduction in gas theft?

Check out OR, NJ and their surrounding states gas prices @
Gas Price Heat Map - Washington Gas Prices

You joined the forum to open an old thread and say THIS?!?

Nice job throwing some numbers around but there are a few things I'd like to point out: First, the federal/state tax contributions by these gas station attendants do not result in reduced taxes for the drivers who are filling up. Where, pray tell, did you get this idea? The government would just find some new way to squander the money.
Secondly, unemployment checks are only a temporary thing. You can make the argument that if we're not paying an attendant to pump our gas, we'd be paying (indirectly, via our employers) his/her unemployment, but that is only until the checks stop or he/she gets a real job.
Finally, what about all the lost productivity by folks who have to wait several minutes extra because attendants take forever to start or complete the fill-up?

[jrkliny]

".......what about all the lost productivity by folks who have to wait several minutes extra because attendants take forever to start or complete the fill-up?"

Unfortunately, I never noticed that Portlanders were in any hurry to do anything. The slooowness was hard to take. I had not seen that since many years ago when I lived in Arkansas.

[PNW-type-gal]

Originally Posted by jrkliny

Unfortunately, I never noticed that Portlanders were in any hurry to do anything. The slooowness was hard to take. I had not seen that since many years ago when I lived in Arkansas.

Which is why many of us like living in Oregon - that whole "Hurry up! Now, now now! Me, me me!" attitude is why I detested living in New York (and, to be fair, several other large cities), despite the many amenities.

I've been in Los Angeles the last couple weeks, where, for instance, putting on your signal to change lanes simply prompts the person in that lane to speed up and block you. Life is too short for this nonsense.

[jrkliny]

Yup, life is short. It is time to get moving and do things. I do agree there can be a downside. Some highly active people are also self centered and that is a bad combination.

[tiffela74]

I talked to a young lady the other day while getting gas.....she said she was doing that job while doing online school and raising her little boy as a single parent....like she said, "better to be pumping gas then to be on welfare!"
I think shes awesome for doing that. Nowdays, theres not a whole lot of jobs around for the choosing. Not all gas station attendents are drop outs/druggies/losers. And besides, each one who IS working, is one less thats on welfare, right?
I love not pumping my own gas, i get to stay inside my warm dry car, and it gives me a few min. to take a breather. whats so bad about that?

[Fooseball_Freak]

Originally Posted by juggler

You joined the forum to open an old thread and say THIS?!?

Yep I joined just to upset people like you, that was my only intention!

Obviously my excercise was by no means scientific, it was however intended to show that what "some" think is an added cost is actually offest (partially, if not completely) by an economic engine that even Alan Greenspan doesn't quite fully understand.

You wrote "The government would just find some new way to squander the money." this is the best point you could offer? You may or may not be correct but it's far from an educated guess, I said that it would result in additional revenue and implied that it would lower the burden for the rest of us, the truth is it's up to the citizens to see to it that the elected officials use our tax dollars wisely. That I'm afraid will have to wait for your next post (see below).

You are absolutely correct that unemployment is temporary, having a 10% unemployment rate however means that 10% of the available workforce is non-productive and supported by the productive part in one way or another. Whether by unemployment, welfare, charity or illegal activities the people with "real jobs" support those without.

And about the lost productivity you claim, you really should stop getting your gas at the am/pm station Honestly I don't see it, I've been to half of the states in the lower 48 and lived in several of them, honestly, I spend less time at the pump in Oregon. In other states you first have to wait for a spot at the pump to open up while waiting for someone to collect the change because they couldnt quite fit in the whole $40. Then wait while they buy a weeks worth of grocerys, then you need to go inside and wait in line so that you can pay first. Next you go back outside only to find out that the idiot didn't turn on the pump, then you pump your gas and if your like most idiots you need to go back inside to collect your change. In Oregon at least the idiots are shopping while the gas is being pumped for them.

So the point is, you made none! My exercise was intended to bring up some intelligent disscussion about a subject that way too many people seem to be way too emotional about. Let me ask you one question, where are the jobs going to come from that will miraculously take people off the unemployment? Ronald Reagans chief economist David Stockton who coined the term "trickle down" economics admits that it just hasn't proven to work the way it was supposed to, but, even George Bush admits that there must be something to the "trickle up" theory by sponsoring the first economic stimulus prior to leaving office.

With all the global outsourcing and factory automation we have become (resorted to) a service economy, where are people going to work when there is nobody that can afford to be serviced anymore? And please, do yourself a favor, if you insist on offering counter points to a post you shold try to offer something a little more intelligent than "The government would just find some new way to squander the money." maybe you can try to offer a new idea that would solve the worlds problems, or, rid us of corrupt polititians, or, cure a disease or show us a way that would prevent the government from finding new ways to squander our money.


Hoping for an intelligent reply!