I'd be quite happy, personally, if the taxes I pay for licensing my car, my driver's license, the gasoline taxes I pay, etc., all went directly to the maintenance of the roads and infrastructure I utilize on a daily basis and if that meant a more "user pay" formulae, I'd be all for it, with one proviso. Not a single cent of the taxes I pay for all these things car related will be used to fund public transit. Right now, all my taxes go into the government black hole and precious little of it comes back out in the form of roads, bridges, highway maintenance, etc. but a good chunk of it goes to fund public transit.
If it's going to be "user pay", then the people who ride the buses and subways and LRTs etc. better start ponying up the actual cost of their rides.
Studded tires should be heavily taxed because of how hard they are on the roads, or illegal.If all vehicles had the same degree of fuel efficiency, tracking by miles might make some sense. What, with the larger vehicles using the most gas AND causing the most wear on the highways, such a law isn't fair by basic design.
Studded tires should be heavily taxed because of how hard they are on the roads, or illegal.
Yep.
I hear that telltale little crunching sound all the time all through winter here despite the fact that the roads are wet rather than icy 99% of the time. I'm sure they come in handy for those trips to Hoodoo or Bachelor, but how often do people do that?
I carry chains for when they are needed.
There are parts of I70 where you will be ordered to chain up or lrave the freeway, during a storm warning without any actual snow on the ground.It really is a state issue what should be legal or illegal.....certainly not the federal government's business with their one size fits all mentality. I personally find chains hard to use. If I'm planning a trip where winters are harsh like Michigan's UP, there are such things as rubber studded tires.
I am primarily libertarian, but I do agree with a moderate amount of sharing our wealth for the public good.
Off topic, I am upset that bicyclists are allowed to disregard driving laws, and get preferential treatment. At a minimum, I want them to be required to pay for yearly registration and have a license plate like cars must have, and carry insurance if they ride on the streets.
I think enough is said on this topic for people reading our disagreement to make up their own minds.
If the goal is to raise money for road repairs then yes, usage tax in the only fair way.
BUT there is no way in hell the driving public is ever going to agree to carry around these black boxes, and seriously suggesting it would probably be political suicide, so don't look for it to even come to a legislative vote.
I had no idea about these things. I am not sure the fact that they are already there would reduce the political stink of turning them on.They already have them in cars and have for certainly a decade if not more. All that is needed is the manufacturer access code. They are required in all new cars.
OP asks only what the fairest way would be, not how likely it is the politicians will do what they are supposed to do.Why would you believe they would use the money for road repair? The 50 to 70 cents per gallon on gasoline and diesel also was promised to be used for roads. Just for gasoline that is over $70,000,000,000 per year. Add another $60,000,000,000 in taxes collected on diesel. $130 BILLION dollars ROAD TAXES COLLECTED PER YEAR for road maintenance and repairs - and that does NOT include the THOUSANDS of dollars per year each semi and commercial truck pays. Instead, it just now goes into the general fund - though was justified as going to be used for roads.
So, now they say "believe us THIS time. We PROMISE will use THIS NEW TAX for roads." And people will believe them because people tend to be stupid and gullible.
Ever get around to buying an electrified ice box, pappy?
Odd isn't it... they want others to pay for your medical care, but when it comes to cars it's a matter of personal usage.A black box in your car? Some see a source of tax revenue
The devices would track every mile you drive —possibly including your location — and the government would use the data to draw up a tax bill.
WASHINGTON — As America's road planners struggle to find the cash to mend a crumbling highway system, many are beginning to see a solution in a little black box that fits neatly by the dashboard of your car.
The devices, which track every mile a motorist drives and transmit that information to bureaucrats, are at the center of a controversial attempt in Washington and state planning offices to overhaul the outdated system for funding America's major roads.
A black box in your car? Some see a source of tax revenue - latimes.com
Here's an example of how all these fees and taxes hit working people. The list of taxes and fees almost endless.
A person needs a car to get to work or will lose his/her job - which would cause his/her family to be evicted. He makes a deal for an old tote-the-note car at $70 per week - or $280 every 4 weeks, and only needs $100 down to get the car. So, for $100 plus $140 (first and last week) he has a car: $240.00. That is an amount s/he can just barely scrape out of the next paycheck...
... WAIT, what about the government's take!? Well, there is the $225.00 "new registration" fee, $57.64 registration fee, $28.00 new plate fee and $180.00 sales tax.
So a work single parent buying a $3000 old car has to FIRST give the government $490.64. To which the pro-tax crowd will explain "Yes and rich people like that should pay even more. The private sector is doing GREAT. It's the government sector that's hurting." (Exactly quoting Harry Reid)
ALL THE TALK ALWAYS ABOUT MAKING THE RICH PAY MORE is always a diversion from the reality that really who they are making pay more to the government is the working people, poor people and elderly.
I think that they do. I just got done going on a trip in Ohio to Kentucky and was held up with numerous road projects.These guys don't need MORE money they need to spend the money they got on what its supposed to go to in the first place.
I trust that sheds light on the actual situation. Believe me commercial trucking more than pays for the roads. The problem comes from the government using the funds not as intended. Our roads and bridges should be in excellent shape if they where actually allocated the funds they were supposed to have in the first place.
Are you using the "If private businesses are doing it then its okay for the government to do it" excuse?
My cellphone is a cheap 5 year old Samsung cricket phone which stays at home and I know how to read a map and street signs.
But the chance of such a thing happening (nil), is highly relevant to the topic at hand.OP asks only what the fairest way would be, not how likely it is the politicians will do what they are supposed to do.
It is not relevant to the identity of the fairest form of road-use tax.But the chance of such a thing happening (nil), is highly relevant to the topic at hand.
Is it not?It is not relevant to the identity of the fairest form of road-use tax.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?