The standard argument against taxes seems to be: "I can spend more wisely than the government; the government will just fritter money away or hand it to the rich."  But is that true?

I used to drive through an intersection on a quiet country road.  Drivers on the other road had stop signs, but I could go right through.  A new town was developed nearby, and traffic increased, and during busy periods, it became hard for drivers on the other road to get through the stop signs.  Eventually they put in a four stop signs.  But even when there was no traffic, I had to stop.  And during busy periods, people began making up their own rules of precedence.  Sometimes, three or four cars would go through at once.  I knew it was a matter of time, and one day a crew started installing the poles for the traffic lights.  So then, even when there was no traffic, I had to wait for the light.  If people could have been a bit more orderly during busy periods, they wouldn't have had to wait for nothing at 11 PM.

I have come to the conclusion that we invite government regulation when we fail to regulate ourselves.  By living the cheap gas lifestyle, we are failing in a big way.  It would be preferable to find any other way to wean us off gasoline, but I don't think we can wait for the markets.

I can't see any politician backing gasoline taxes, unless it is part of his retirement speech, but some good first steps would be to eliminate special status for SUVs and trucks, and instituting extra taxes on vehicles that fall way outside CAFE standards.

Yes, but quite often there is a solution which is regulated by the government, but also allows individuals to have more control.

Take your intersection example.  The perfect low-tech solution to it would have been a roundabout.  The roundabout right-of-way rules allow traffic to flow without the need for electricity to power the traffic lights.  And you don't need to wait for the green light when there is no other traffic on the roundabout.  But I guess roundabouts are not that popular in America.

You see the roundabout is an example of where a regulated solution does not hinder the users too much but still places a rigid structure that must be adhered to.

We need more 'roundabout' solutions to the coming energy crunch.  Regulated solutions that allow individuals/organisations to innovate to reduce any hindrances.  The best regulations should help to guide us, not force us, down a certain path.

We have a few roundabouts, or circles, lots in DC.  I was sideswiped a few months ago in the one in Towson.  Guy kept driving, and I had to catch him at the next traffic light.

To your point, I like some of the regulation proposed in this thread, much of which is much more rewarding to the thrifty than a gas tax.  If the government simply stopped underwriting inefficient vehicles, that might induce thriftiness as much as any tax.

Roundabouts are more and more popular here.  Personally, I hate them.  People don't know how to use them.  I've actually seen trucks going the wrong way on 'em.  o_O
Actually, the circles around here all have traffic lights anyway.  Some of the ones I've seen in New England do without, but the big one in Keene NH has lights.
Roundabouts aren't rocket science. A little driving re-education might be required, but the pay-off in terms of reduced driver frustration in the long run would be well worth it. Traffic in the UK would grind to a halt without roundabouts. The only one I ever came across that confused anyone was the so-called Magic Roundabout at Hemel Hempstead where there is a large central roundabout surrounded by six mini-roundabouts. That wasn't a nice feature to find on one's driving test.
When I was in college, they showed us a plan for a community in which every intersection was three way instead of four way.  They expected it could all be regulated with yield signs instead of stop signs.  I've never seen it implemented, though.