"To build demand for hybrid vehicles, the government should implement tax incentives and not let fuel prices drop." - Inspired by General Motors CEO, Rick Wagoner

Sure tax incentives might convince some on-the-fence buyers, but it won't do too well at actually creating a huge influx of new anti-gasoline buyers. The problem comes down to a matter of convenience - what's easier, driving less and waiting for gas prices to fall, or investing in a hybrid that saves you the same amount? We'd all like to think that the current high gas prices will make John and Jane Q. Consumer immediately go out and snag a Prius, but the reality is that people are, simply put, creatures of laziness. It's gonna take a number of years before we start seeing BIG hybrid purchase numbers.

I agree, but I'd rather say give tax incentives to car manufacturers. Gas prices will kill itself soon enough and also penalizing the consumer isn't fare. My argument rises from the fact that 'Joe Soap' average earner can't afford to replace his car right now to get the tax benefit.

So it could be a double incentive, 1) the car manufacturer can get tax incentives and 2) the consumer can get the car at a reduced sale price.

Car companies should make alternative fuel vehicles at an affordable price. Having governments regulate the price of gasoline is a dangerous road. Like it or not, we are a driving society (in North America) and this will not change due to tax policy. If the price of gasoline goes so high that people drive less, great! But, if the economics are not driving the decision, then it needs to be a consumer choice, not a government mandate. If the government spends whatever fantasy dollars Mr. Wagoner is talking about on comprehensive environment education programs, and the car companies market the already available, affordable non-fossil fuel alternatives, there will be a natural, form the roots up change in attitude, which is far more effective than tax policy.

I disagree with this idea. At the core, it is un-American. It goes against free market capitalism and reveals just how out of sync with market dynamics the CEO of one of America's largest corporations happens to be. It's unbelievable that he wants the government to keep fuel prices high just to encourage the sale of their product. I don't see Toyota making the same whiney approch to producing a vehicle that meets the needs of today's consumers. When businesses expect the government to control the market in order for that business to be profitable it is an admission that that business is for all intents and purposes failing to deliver goods and services that meet the current trends. It also is a pretty good indicator of how much in bed they probably are with our lawmakers. There is plenty of demand for hybrid vehicles without the government propping up the price of fuel.

Fair market prices for gasoline + an aggressive public information advertising campaign I think would make a balanced and progressive difference. Public/Private partnering on corporate sales incentives and perhaps innovative niche marketing in automobile design ( innovative design inclusive!)are other ideas that may make progress more widely accepted.

Big auto has had a looong run with the money. Over the last thirty years, technologies have been in place to create cost effective alternatives to the gas fueled cars. But the big auto have failed to seriously drive innovation. In fact, the opposite has been true. Plan obsolescence has been the policy.

If there are any gov tax incentives to be had, it should be given to start-ups and smaller companies that currently are kept from competing fairly in the US marketplace. The big boys have had their day, leaving a rust belt in their wake.

Fuel prices should not be messed with. The let the market dictate price, while alternative technologies and policies are incubated that will unleash new competition and support a healthier economy for its citizens.

Big auto has had a looong run with the money. Over the last thirty years, technologies have been in place to create cost effective alternatives to the gas fueled cars. But the big auto have failed to seriously drive innovation. In fact, the opposite has been true. Plan obsolescence has been the policy.

If there are any gov tax incentives to be had, it should be given to start-ups and smaller companies that currently are kept from competing fairly in the US marketplace. The big boys have had their day, leaving a rust belt in their wake.

Fuel prices should not be messed with. The let the market dictate price, while alternative technologies and policies are incubated that will unleash new competition and support a healthier economy for its citizens.

arent the batteries in these hybrid cars worse for our environment than a gasoline engine? I've heard that the factory where these batteries are made is barren of all life.

The country's best interests would be served by increased conservation and efficiency. Increase gas taxes and decrease income taxes.

In theory, high gas prices should stimulate new alternatives for energy. I believe the government can help quicken this development for new hybrid technology through tax incentives, while creating the much needed growth and development in our economy.

Or, re-introduce leasing but for hybrids only.

Tax incentive that take the form of a reduction in current vehicle-related taxes, stamp duties, and tariffs would be a clear way for governments to provide incentives to consumers to consume greener energy. On this basis, I agree. This is surely preferable to increasing excise/tax on fuel and/or subsidising vehicle manufacturers.

Take the reverse case of Australia, where the federal government gives Toyota a (negligible) $500 million to manufacture hybrids, then proposes a luxury vehicle tax that may well include these very cars.

Fuel prices need to drop or people will have an even tougher time paying for vehicles "in the mid to upper 30's". Personally, I think it's nuts to pay that kind of money for transportation, but I love old things of every kind, including my pickups. Then there's the considerations of how many gadjillion miles will a person have to drive in order to realize any savings after factoring in the cost of higher insurance for a new vehicle, the cost of the loan & principle, & in some states, the increased cost of licensing new vehicles compared to old ones.. Are these vehicles being built to last, or they another effort to waste resources thru planned obsolescence? I'll keep the old vehicles & buy parts. In the long run, I believe it to be far greener environmentally AND in my pocket.

Anyone that proposes the governement get more involved in our lives especially in the form of keeping prices high is insane or extremely narrow minded or is completely out of touch with the real world. It's one of the more stupid statements I have heard from a corporate executive. Let the market dictate the price of fuel. That is what makes this country great. If we allow nuts like this to have their way, we are surely headed for a steep decline in our current way of life.

i can build renewable energy then get every one to drive electric cars yer, i am an inventor

just build electric cars or i see you going broke and your fuel driven cars is a major blame for this mess and drain on our resources, that our future earthlings will say they dug up all them resources and did what with them, that is crazy, go for electric now, i can build you the renewable energy to power any city on earth, put sum money on it.